m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting

6 November 2012, 5:00pm

Please note a site inspection will be held at 3pm for panel members only

 


Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Panel Members,

 

Notice is given of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting, to be held in the Council Chambers, Lane Cove Council, 48 Longueville Rd Lane Cove on Tuesday 6 November 2012 commencing at 5:00pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

IHAP Meeting Procedures

 

The Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) meeting is chaired by The Hon David Lloyd QC.  The meetings and other procedures of the Panel will be undertaken in accordance with the Lane Cove Independent Hearing & Assessment Panel Charter and any guidelines issued by the General Manager. 

 

The order of business is listed in the Agenda on the next page. That order will be followed unless the Panel 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 address the Panel for a maximum of 3 minutes during the public forum which is held at the beginning of the meeting.  All persons wishing to address the Panel must register prior to the meeting by contacting Council’s Office Manager – Environmental Services on 9911 3611.  Speakers must address the Chair and speakers and Panel Members will not enter into general debate or ask questions during this forum.  Where there are a large number of objectors with a common interest, the Panel may, in its absolute discretion, hear a representative of those persons.

 

Following the conclusion of public forum the Panel will convene in closed session to conduct deliberations and make decisions. The Panel will announce each decision separately after deliberations on that item have concluded.  Furthermore the Panel may close part of a meeting to the public in order to protect commercial information of a confidential nature. 

 

Minutes of IHAP meetings are published on Council’s website www.lanecove.nsw.gov.au by 5pm of the Friday following the meeting. If you have any enquiries or wish to obtain information in relation to IHAP, please contact Council’s Office Manager – Environmental Services on 9911 3611.

Please note meetings held in the Council Chambers are Webcast.  Webcasting allows the community to view proceedings from a computer without the need to attend the meeting.  The webcast will include vision and audio of members of the public that speak during the Public Forum.  Please ensure while speaking to the Panel that you are respectful to other people and use appropriate language.  Lane Cove Council accepts no liability for any defamatory or offensive remarks made during the course of these meetings.

The audio from these meetings is also recorded for the purposes of verifying the accuracy of minutes and the recordings are not disclosed to any third party under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, 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.


Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel 6 November 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

 

public forum

 

Members of the public may address the Panel to make a submission.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING - 2 OCTOBER 2012

 

 

 

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Reports

 

2.       9A Gamma Road, Lane Cove.................................................................................. 5

 

3.       16 Private Road, Northwood........................................................................... 31

 

 

 

 

 

 


Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting 6 November 2012

9A Gamma Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          9A Gamma Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA12/80-01 - 48219/12

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Stan Raymont 

 

 

Property:                                 9A Gamma Road

 

DA No:                                                D80/12

 

Date Lodged:                          Original plans 25 May 2012

                                                Amended plans 22 August 2012

 

Cost of Work:                          $450,000

 

Owner:                                                G.E. & R.A. Walker

 

Applicant:                                Tullipan Homes Pty Ltd

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Construction of a part one and part two storey dwelling house

ZONE

R2 (low density residential)

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

IS THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BUSHLAND?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a

STOP THE CLOCK USED

Yes, from 17 July 2012 to 22 August 2012

NOTIFICATION

 

Notified of original and amended proposal

Neighbours      5, 7, 9, 11 Gamma Road; 6, 8, 10 Alpha Road; 5, 5A, 7, 9, 11, 13 Beta Road and 1, 2 Delta Road

Ward Councillors                    East Ward and The Mayor

Progress Association  Osborne Park Residents Association inc

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The application has been referred to IHAP due to previous history and neighbour concerns about impact of the development.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

·          The site was created by the subdivision of 9 Gamma and 10 Alpha Roads.

 

·          The subdivision was approved by the Land and Environment Court on 13 September 2007 subject to a number of conditions including the retention of two large Sydney Blue Gum trees.

Development Application 70/11 was submitted on the 29.4.11 to construct a dwelling house.  The original plans were unsatisfactory.

 

·          The applicant submitted amended plans on 17 July 2011.  The amended proposal was to construct a part one, part two storey four bedroom brick veneer dwelling house on the site.  The two large trees were shown to remain and the dwelling house has been moved down the site and be 6m from the trees.  The setbacks to the side boundaries complied and was 1.5m to the south boundary.  The overall height had been reduced by 785mm to 8.8m.

 

·          Seven submissions were received in respect of the amended proposal.  Reasons for objection included:-

 

o    Non-compliance with Court’s conditions regarding the retention of trees;

o    Design and location of dwelling house and loss of amenity and privacy; and

o    Lack of solar access.

 

Council at its meeting of the 7 November 2011 resolved that the amended application be refused on the grounds that it was non-complying in a number of areas, the impact on solar access of 9 Gamma Road and its detrimental impacts on 7, 9, 11 Gamma Road and 7 and 9 Beta Road including loss of amenity, privacy and overshadowing.

 

An application was lodged and approval granted for the removal of one of the two large trees and this tree has been removed.

 

Development Application 80/12 was submitted on the 22 May 2012 to construct a dwelling house.

 

The original plans were unsatisfactory.


The applicant submitted amended plans on 22 August 2012.

 

The amended proposal is to construct a part one, part two storey, four bedroom brick veneer dwelling house on the site.  The large tree is shown to remain and the dwelling has been moved down the site to be 6m from the tree.  The setbacks to side boundaries comply and is 2.25m from the southern boundary.  The height of the roof at the front has also been lowered by 700mm and the design changed to a hipped roof at the front, in lieu of a gable roof, from the previously disapproved application (D70/11).


Four submissions have been received in respect of the amended proposal.  Reasons for objection include:-

 

·          Non-compliance with Court’s conditions regarding the retention of the tree;

·          Design and location of the dwelling house and loss of amenity and privacy; and

·          Loss of solar access.

 

Subject to draft conditions requiring highlights at the first floor level of the western elevation, a reduction of the deck length and inclusion of a 1.8m high solid privacy screen at the southern end, dense screen planting on the southern boundary and a 1.5m high fixed diagonal slat privacy screen along the eastern side of the first floor deck, the amended proposal is recommended for approval subject to draft conditions.

 

 

SITE

 

The subject site is a battleaxe lot located on the northern side of Gamma Road at the rear of 9 Gamma Road.  The land rises from the street and has a retaining wall  9m from the rear boundary.  There is a right-of-carriageway over the battleaxe handle in favour of 9 Gamma Road.  The land is vacant and has one large tree towards the rear on the eastern side.  Copies of the Site Plan and Notification Plan are attached as AT1 and AT2.

 

PROPOSAL

 

The amended proposal is to construct a part one, part two storey, four bedroom brick veneer dwelling house.  There is a double garage proposed at the front and a 2.95m wide deck at first floor level with a 1.8m high proposed privacy screen at the southern end.  The roof has a maximum 15o pitch and is covered with colorbond metal decking.

 

The large tree at the rear of the site is shown to remain and the dwelling house has been moved down the site to be 6m from the trees with the exception of a small set of stairs which has a point of intrusion into the 6m tree protection area.  The dwelling house is shown to be set back 1.5m from the western boundary, a minimum of 2.68m from the eastern boundary, a minimum of 2.25m from the southern boundary and a minimum of 6m from the northern (rear) boundary.

 

The overall height has been reduced to 7.75m, which is less than the 9.5m maximum. 

 

Nolan Planning Consultation on behalf of the applicant states that, in summary, the amended plans provide for the following:

           

·          Relocation of the dwelling towards the southwest corner of the site.

·          Reduced the depth of the entry by pushing garage/bed 2.75m towards the north.

·          Reduced depth of upper level family room and deck by 750mm.

·          Provided setback of 2.25m to the south and 1.5m to the western side boundary.

·          Provided a hipped roof form over the upper level family room.

·          Redesigned Bed 4/study.”

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

Council at its meeting of the 4 September 2006 refused consent to subdivide two lots into three lots at 9 Gamma Road and 10 Alpha Road.


A Section 82A review was submitted and Council at its meeting of the 6 August 2007 resolved to reaffirm the original refusal.


The applicants appealed to the Land and Environment Court and the Appeal was upheld, subject to conditions (attached AT3).


Development Application 70/11 was submitted on the 29 April 2011 to construct a part one, part two storey four bedroom house.  There was an attached double garage at the front on the eastern side with a 2.75m wide verandah over.  One of the two large trees was shown to be removed and a future pool to separate DA was shown in the location of the other large tree.

 

The applicant was advised on the 7 June 2011 that the plans were unsatisfactory and amended plans were submitted on the 11 July 2011.

 

The amended plans showed the dwelling house moved down the site to 1.5m from the southern boundary and the two large trees retained.

There were seven submissions objecting to this proposal.

 

Council at its meeting of the 7 November 2011 considered the amended proposal and resolved that the application be refused on the grounds that it is non-complying in a number of areas, its impact on solar access to 9 Gamma Road, and its detrimental impacts on 7, 9, 11 Gamma Road and 7 and 9 Beta Road including loss of amenity, privacy and overshadowing.


An application was lodged with Council and approval was granted to the removal of one of the two large trees (tree 6) subject to a replacement tree being planted and this tree has been removed.


Development Application 80/12 was submitted on the 22 May 2012 to construct a part one, part two storey four bedroom house.  There was an attached double garage at the front on the eastern side with a 2.75m wide verandah over.  A future pool to separate DA was shown in the location of the other large tree.

 

The applicant was advised on the 17 July 2012 that the plans were unsatisfactory and amended plans were submitted on the 22 August 2012.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE

 

LEP 2009

 

Zoning:           R2                   Site area:  550m2 (excluding access)

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies?

Floor Space Ratio

0.41:1

0.5:1

yes

Height of Buildings

7.75m

9.5m

yes

 

Comprehensive DCP

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies?

Front setback (min)

>30m (battleaxe lot)

Consistent with area or 7.5m

yes

Side setback (min)

1500mm

1200mm/1500mm

yes

Rear setback (min)

6m

<1000m2: 8m

no

Wall Height (max)

6.25m

7.0m

yes

Subfloor height (max)

2.3m

1m

no

Number of Storeys (max)

2

2

yes

Landscaped area (min)

46%

35%

yes

Solar Access

3 hrs to north facing windows

3 hrs to north facing windows

yes

Deck/Balcony depth (max)

2.95m

3m

yes

Private open space

>24m2

>4m minimum depth

24m2 (min)

4m minimum depth

yes

Cut and fill

2.26m

1m (max)

no*

 

* The additional cut is considered reasonable as it would enable the proposed structure to reduce perceived bulk and scale impacts to adjoining properties.

 

Car Parking

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies?

Off-street spaces (min)

2

2

yes

 

 


REFERRALS

 

Development Engineer

 

The Development Engineer does not object to the development and has provided draft conditions of consent in the recommendation in this report.

 

Tree Assessment Officer

 

The comments of the Tree Assessment Officer were requested on the amended proposal and he advised that the amended plans comply with the Court Orders and he has no objection to the proposed development on the site.  Tree protection measures would be required for the mature Sydney Blue Gum tree located towards the rear of the allotment.  Draft conditions of consent have been provided and are included in the recommendation in this report.

 

Lane Cove LOCAL Environmental Plan 2009 (Section 79c(1)(a))

 

The proposal is permissible within the R2 (low density residential) zoning under the Lane Cove LEP 2009 with Council’s consent.

 

Other Planning Instruments

 

SEPP No.55 – Contaminated Land – Clause 7 of the SEPP requires Council to consider whether the land is contaminated.  Notwithstanding the fact that site investigations have not been carried out, the current and previous use of the site and adjoining sites for residential uses would substantially reduce the possibilities of contamination.  Accordingly, there is considered to be no contamination issue given the circumstances of the case.

 

Variations to Council’s Codes/PolicIes (seCTIONS 79c(1)(a), (1)(b), and (1)(c))

 

The preceding policy assessment table identifies those controls that the proposal does not comply with. Each of the departures is discussed below.

 

1. Rear Setback – Council’s DCP 2009 specifies a minimum rear setback for dwelling houses of 8m or 25% of the site depth (whichever is greater) is to be provided for sites up to 1000m2The existing predominant rear setback and site constraints, especially for irregular sites, may be taken into account.


The walls of the rear single storey section of the dwelling house on the western side are shown to be set back 6m from the rear boundary.


In support of the rear setback Nolan Planning Consultants on behalf of the applicant state:

 

‘The DCP requires a setback of 8.0m.  This application seeks to vary this control.  It is considered that this variation is justified in this instance for the following reasons:-

 

·          This elevation is single storey only and provides for only a bedroom and ensuite and as such does not result in a loss of privacy to the adjoining properties.

·          The setback provided is sufficient to enable landscaping, an appropriate area of private open space and the setback ensures appropriate visual separation.

·          The setback also ensures the retention of Tree 7 as detailed in the information provided by Mr Kyle Hill.

·          There is sufficient area on site for the provision of private open space.  The private open space is located predominantly in the rear yard which receives good solar access throughout the year.

·          Given the orientation of the allotment and the appropriate design, the non-compliance with the rear setback controls does not result in any loss of solar access to the surrounding properties.”

 

Comment

 

The objective of rear setbacks is to provide building separation, sunlight, landscaping, ventilation for the dwelling house and its neighbours.

The setback of the single storey section of the dwelling house 6m from the rear boundary in lieu of 8m is brought about by the need to retain the large tree and to keep at least 6m from the trunk thus allowing a large landscaped area in the northeast corner of the site. 

The neighbour to the rear does not object to the proposed rear setback.  However, there is an objection to the proposed setback from the owners of 9 Beta Road located on the western side of the site.

The setback of the single storey section from the rear boundary is considered satisfactory having regard to the constraints on this site.

2.  Subfloor Height – Council’s DCP 2009 indicates that the maximum height to the underside of a basement floor or undercroft areas or subfloor above ground level (existing) is to be no greater than 1m. 

Comment

This site has a retaining wall and a raised section of land at the rear.  The proposed dwelling house is single storey at the rear on the western side and where the dwelling house changes from two storeys to single storey there is an undercroft area which varies from a minimum of 300mm to a maximum of 2.3m.  This is due to the change in the levels and the proposed dwelling is only a maximum of two storeys at any point.  The undercroft area as proposed is considered to be satisfactory.

3.         Cut – Council’s DCP 2009 specifies that:-

·          Development is limited to a maximum depth of excavation or fill of 1m at any point on the site.

Nolan Planning Consultants on behalf of the applicant state that a maximum cut of 2.26m is proposed and on the eastern side of the dwelling house, part of the rear of the ground floor level is being set into the site.

Comment

The maximum cut as proposed allows the rear of the ground floor level of the dwelling house to be set into the site and reduces its impact on the adjoining sites.  The cut as proposed is considered satisfactory.

Court Conditions

This subdivision was approved by the Land and Environment Court on the 13 September 2007 subject to a number of conditions.

The conditions included:-

9.         No excavation or trenches are to be undertaken within six (6) metres of any tree trunk for any future developments.

 

 


Comment

The amended plans show the proposed dwelling house to be set back at least 6m from the tree which is shown to be retained with the exception of a small point intrusion of part of a small stair into the 6m zone.   The Tree Assessment Officer has no objections to the proposal.

10.       To ensure that there are minimal impacts on the existing Sydney Blue Gum tree located on the upper level of proposed Lot 2, the following measures are required to be fulfilled prior to any development occurring on Lot 2, namely:

              i)        That the existing retaining wall which bisects the proposed Lot 2 is to be retained and no excavation or disturbance of soil levels are to occur on the upper level other than opening in the retaining wall to enable steps to the upper level; and the demolition of the swimming pool.  (The swimming pool has been filled in).

              ii)       That the existing soil levels in the northwest corner of the lower level adjacent to the retaining wall not be changed or disturbed through excavation for a radius of six (6) metres measured from the outside of the trunk of the Sydney Blue Gum tree identified as tree 6 on the Plan of survey prepared by Robert Moore & Associates Pty Limited dated 31 August 2005.  (Tree 6 has been removed with the approval of Council).

Comment

In support of the dwelling location as now proposed it is stated by Nolan Planning Consultants on behalf of the applicant as follows:

 

            “To address the Tree concerns raised by Council, additional supplementary information has been prepared by Mr Kyle Hill of ‘Growing My Way’, dated 6 August 2012.  In summary it is considered that the proposed development is appropriately sited to ensure the retention and health of the existing Blue Gum located towards the rear northeast corner of the site.  Further it is considered that the proposal achieves the intention of the conditions imposed on the previous Development Consent issued by the Land and Environment Court.

 

            It is noted that the amended plans ensures that there is no excavation proposed within the 6.0m of the tree trunk.

 

            In relation to the removal of the existing retaining wall it is noted that the proposal only seeks to remove a portion of the retaining wall.  This retaining wall does not have any heritage significance and is not thought to be required for the structural integrity of Tree 7.  Further the retaining wall is considered to be in need of repair.  The portion of the retaining wall to be removed is outside the 6.0m radial distance from Tree 7.  As such the removal of this portion of the wall is not considered to have any detrimental impact on Tree 7 and the intentions of the previous conditions of consent are considered to be met.”

 

A single storey section of the proposed dwelling house on the western side is shown to be constructed 3.5m to the north of the retaining wall, as is a small set of stairs.  The only protrusion into the 6m zone from the tree is a point intrusion of part of the stairs from the deck.  The Tree Assessment Officer has no objections to the proposal.

As the portion of the existing retaining wall to be removed is outside the 6m radius of the two trees to be retained, there is no objection to its removal.

11.       Existing soil levels are to be maintained on lot 2 after subdivision to protect tree roots.


Comment

This is considered should only be applied within the 6m radius zone of the trees to be retained.

12.       This approval does not extend to any tree removal, nor pruning lopping or damaging of any trees on the site or in adjoining lands.

Comment

The large tree is to be retained and no excavation or trenches are to be undertaken within 6 metres of the trunk of the large tree except for the point intrusion of part of the stairs.

19.       It should be noted that any future dwelling house should be sited such that it is away from the mature trees in the northern east corner of Lot 2 and the south-eastern corner of Lot 1.

Comment

The amended plans are considered to comply with the abovementioned condition.

 

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

 

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

 

·          Two submissions object as the proposal does not comply with the Court conditions regarding the retention of trees.

 

Officer’s Comment

 

The Tree Assessment Officer has advised that the amended plans comply with the Court’s Orders and subject to the draft conditions in his comment of 25 September 2012 he has no objections to the proposed development on the site.

 

·          Design and location of proposed dwelling house and loss of amenity and privacy.

 

(i)         The owners of 7 Beta Road say that the current application has:-

 

·                 no set-backs in the Western wall.

·                 has INCREASED the number of overlooking windows/doors to 6 (the previously rejected one had 3)

·                 is not in sympathy with the local Environment

·                 does not minimize the impact of others amenity (a complying development has SIGNIFICANTLY less impact)

·                 does not minimize the impact upon solar access

·                 does not minimize the loss of privacy

 

          It is clear that with this current application, little or no effort has been made to reduce the impact of the proposed dwelling on the adjoining properties or the local environment.  Many of the Lane Cove Council performance measures have been ignored.

 

Officer’s Comment

 

The proposed dwelling house is two storeys at the front and single storey at the rear.  It is considered to prevent loss of privacy that the windows at first floor level of the western elevation should be highlights with their sills at least 1.7m above the first floor level.  Subject to this draft condition the amended plans are considered a reasonable development of this site having regard to the constraints on the site particularly having to retain the large tree.  (See draft condition 2).

 

The solar access proposed complies with the requirements of Council’s DCP.

 

(ii)      The owners of 9 Beta Road are concerned at the 6m rear boundary setback as they will look at a brick wall only 1.5m away from their side boundary.  They want an 8m setback as the DCP requires.

         

            They say the Proposed Development Plan places the dwelling too deep into the block.  The DCP requires a rear setback of 8.0 metres.  The applicant seeks to reduce this to a mere 6m.  This is insufficient to allow privacy between adjacent rear yards.

            It is insufficient and impacts on the privacy levels, amenity and outlook at 9 Beta Road.  This block in question is already situated at a higher level than our block.  By requesting to build further into the block, our amenity is disturbed.

 

            The proposed dwelling rises 5 metres from the existing ground level at the rear of 9 Beta Road, to the gutter level of proposed dwelling (RL 65.36).  The peak of the roof is a further 2.3 metre higher.  Hence, what has been a private, open, leafy outlook will become 7.3m of brick and tile, 1.5m from our back fence.  This property will overshadow and overlook our backyard.  This is an unacceptable impact on amenity and privacy.  Council should reject this application as it does not comply with the required Set Back.

 

Officer’s Comment

 

The proposed dwelling house is mostly single storey at the rear where it adjoins 9 Beta Road.  Subject to the windows in the west elevation of the upper floor level of the proposed dwelling house being highlights with a minimum sill height of 1.7m above the upper floor level and having regard to the constraints on this site particularly having to retain the large tree, the amended proposal is considered satisfactory.

 

(iii)  The owners of 9 Beta Road are also concerned that the double doors off the main bedroom are indicating further plans to add a possible deck and hence cause further disturbing of the soil in this upper area.

 

Officer’s Comment

 

The bedroom doors are 500mm above ground level and on the plan view it is stated “steps by owner”.  (No deck is shown).

 

(iv)  The owners of 9 Gamma Road have the following concerns:-

      

            The latest submission is fundamentally the same design as proposed in an earlier submission, one that was rejected by Council following numerous site visits, meetings and discussions.

 

            The proposed Two Storey residence dominates our north facing rear garden.  It is reasonable to expect that any development on the subject site would be that of a single storey or a split level residence that works with the land and not against it.

 

            The impact and bulk of the Southern Elevation to our North facing rear Private Open Space is too significant and has a major negative impact on the visual outlook, outdoor lifestyle and amenity.  If the application is to be accepted it should be with a number of conditions:

 

1.    The subject Southern boundary of 9a is the front boundary to that site and a typical front boundary setback of at least 5m should be adhered to.

 

2.    Alternatively the Garage floor level and ground floor level is lowered by 0.5m.  (this has a positive effect on all elevations) and that the first floor southern façade is set back 5m from the Southern Boundary.

 

3.    The first floor Balcony which is a primary outdoor entertaining area is located some 4m above our Private Open Space area and is positioned directly in line with our only Living Space.  Even though there is provision of a privacy screen this will not stop the noise be generated from that area and this will impact our amenity of both our Private Open Space area and Internal Living Space greatly.  At a minimum the first floor south facing Balcony should be in line with the southern façade and not protrude past.  The roof line of the garage will then be extended across.

 

4.    Regardless of any proposal on the site a Condition of Consent in relation to Landscaping should be imposed and state that Mature Planting (Min of 2.0m) be planted on the Southern Boundary reaching a mature height of 5.0m to maintain privacy, minimise visual bulk and scale and allow for an acoustic buffer.

 

5.    The increased hard surface landscaping will significantly increase the water flowing from the top property at 9a Gamma to our property at 9 Gamma.  We have obtained an independent landscape report checking water flow and soil condition which has concluded a significant amount of water runoff is occurring already which will be significantly increased without adequate drainage.  The design should incorporate a raised, upturned drain that will channel water away from our back fence to adequate drains and channels for stormwater run off.

 

                   We look forward to Council’s attention to the privacy and design elements of the submission.

 

Officer’s Comment


The main differences between the previous Development Application D70/11 which was refused by Council and the present Development Application D80/12 are as follows:

 

1.         The wall of the garage in D70/11 was set back 1.5m from the southern boundary with 9 Gamma Road and the wall of the first floor dwelling house was set back 2.7m from the southern boundary.

 

The wall of the garage in D80/12 is set back 2.25m from the southern boundary with 9 Gamma Road and the wall of the first floor dwelling house is set back 3.46m from the southern boundary.

 

2.         The roof of the upper level of the dwelling house in D70/11 was a 15o skillion running from west to east, had a gable end at the front with a maximum height at the front of 8.4m.

 

The roof of the upper level of the dwelling house in D80./12 has been lowered at the front by 700mm and is now a conventional 15o pitched roof with the maximum height of the roof at the front of the dwelling house being 7m.

 

Whilst there would be less impact if the proposed dwelling house was single storey at the front, the proposed garage is single storey at the front, the windows to the garage have a sill height of 1.4m and the windows to the front of the family living room have a sill height of 1.6m.

 

Regarding the suggested conditions the following comments are made:-

 

1.         Having regard to the constraints on the site, the suggested setback to the walls of the dwelling house of at least 5m is not considered practical and the proposed setback to the walls of the living areas of the dwelling house of 3.46m is considered reasonable.

 

2.         Lowering the dwelling house by 0.5m is also considered not to be practical as the eastern side of the dwelling house is already set well into the ground.

3.         It is agreed that the first floor deck should be set back in line with the walls of the family living room and a 1.8m high solid privacy screen provided on the southern side.  See draft condition 3.

 

4.         It is agreed that a screen of mature planting (minimum height of 2m) should be planted on the southern boundary reaching a mature  height of 5m to maintain privacy, minimise bulk and scale and provide an acoustic buffer.   See draft condition 5.

 

5.         The comments of the Development Engineer were requested on the drainage issue and are as follows:-

 

“Engineering conditions cover stormwater concerns.”

 

v.         The owners of 7 Gamma Road have the following concerns:-

 

            The Court’s ruling pointed out that an “overly careful design” would be required on that particular site.  We do not believe the design has been sufficiently careful to minimise loss of privacy.  Of particular concern to us is the balcony area on the eastern side of the proposed dwelling.  That balcony, part of the main entertaining area of the home, will look directly over the backyard at 7 Gamma Road and into the main living area which has walls made entirely of glass.  We acknowledge that this balcony is set back behind a driveway entrance, but as the site is sloped this will sit up very high and look down into our yard, and through our back glass walls into our house.  A small privacy screen has been added to the plans on the south-eastern corner of the house, presumably to prevent overlooking into a bedroom on the north western corner of our home.  For reasons of noise and privacy we request similar screening of the entertainment area balcony.

 

            We also consider the house too large for such a sloping block, and it will sit up too high above surrounding homes.  An additional 0.5-1m cut would lower the house and make it appear less bulky.

 

            We welcome your attention to this matter and anticipate further design changes that will ensure the privacy of the residence at 7 Gamma Road.

 

            Should these or any future plans be approved we make two requests regarding the construction period.  Firstly this house is to be built on a battle-axe block, and as such will impact neighbours more than a standard street frontage during the building period due to the entrance and egress from the site passing within close proximity to numbers 7 and 9 Gamma Road, up the full length of both homes.  We therefore request that no weekend work occur on the site during construction of external or internal portions of the house, including painting and landscaping.  It would be a very unwelcome intrusion to have tradespeople entering and exiting the site on weekends at any stage during construction.  Secondly we must insist that any damage to the nature strips is repaired, with replacement of the same variety of grass that is currently planted.  The driveway is narrow and damage to some extent is probably unavoidable.  Restoration costs and inconvenience must be born by the owner.

 

Officer’s Comment

 

It is considered that the 2.95m wide first floor deck at the front should be set back in line with the walls of the family/living room and be provided with a 1.8m solid privacy screen at the front.  See draft condition 3.

 

Whilst the edge of the proposed 2.95m wide first floor deck is shown to be set back 8.5m from the boundary with 7 Gamma Road it is considered that there will be overlooking of the rear of 7 Gamma Road from the deck and the family/living room behind and that a 1.5m high fixed diagonal slat privacy screen, with the slats set to prevent overlooking of 7 Gamma Road should be provided along the eastern side of the proposed first floor deck.  See draft condition 4.

 

It is not considered practical to lower the dwelling further into the site as the eastern side of the dwelling house at the rear is set well into the site.

Regarding working hours the normal working hours including of a Saturday have been applied.


The comments of the Development Engineer regarding damage to Council’s property were requested and are as follows:-

 

            “Driveway and nature strip concerns have been conditioned.  No further action required.”

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in the DOPI Guidelines in relation to Section 79C considerations have been satisfied.

The subject site has a number of constraints for the construction of a dwelling house, particularly the retention of the large tree.  Subject to the conditions in the recommendation, the amended proposal is considered a reasonable development of this site and not to adversely impact on the amenity of the area or the streetscape.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to Section 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, approval be granted for Development Application D80/12 for the construction of a dwelling house on Lot 2, DP 1155797 and known as 9A Gamma Road, Lane Cove subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.         (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing numbers BT-31-13-C-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 dated 3.8.12 by Tullipan Homes Pty. Ltd. except as amended by the following conditions.

 

2.         To prevent loss of privacy all the windows at first floor level of the western elevation of the proposed dwelling house being highlights with their sills at least 1.7m above the first floor level.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

3.         To help provide privacy for 7 and 9 Gamma Road, the southern end of the proposed deck at first floor level at the southeastern corner of the proposed dwelling house being set back in line with the southern wall of the family/living room and a solid 1.8m high privacy screen being provided to the southern end of the proposed deck.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

4.         To help provide privacy for 7 Gamma Road, the east side of the proposed first floor deck being provided with a 1.5m high fixed diagonal slat privacy screen with the slats fixed to prevent overlooking of 7 Gamma Road.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

5.         A dense screen of mature planting (minimum height of 2m) being planted on the southern boundary reaching a mature height of 5m to maintain privacy, minimise bulk and scale and provide an acoustic buffer for 9 Gamma Road.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

6.         (1) The submission of a Construction Certificate and its issue by Council or Private Certifier PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION WORK commencing.

 

7.         (2) All building works are required to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

8.         (137)  Lane Cove Council charges a fee of $36 for the registration of any Part 4A Certificates (compliance, construction, occupation or subdivision certificates) issued by an accredited certifier under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

9.         (11) The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Check agent or Customer Centre to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met.  Plans will be appropriately stamped.  For Quick Check agent details please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au see Your Business then Building & Developing then Building & Renovating or telephone 13 20 92.

 

            The consent authority or a private accredited certifier must:-

 

·          Ensure that a Quick Check agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before the issue of any Construction Certificate.

 

10.       (12) Approval is subject to the condition that the builder or person who does the residential building work complies with the applicable requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 whereby a person must not contract to do any residential building work unless a contract of insurance that complies with this Act is in force in relation to the proposed work.  It is the responsibility of the builder or person who is to do the work to satisfy Council or the PCA that they have complied with the applicable requirements of Part 6.  Council as the PCA will not release the Construction Certificate until evidence of Home Owners Warranty Insurance or an owner builder permit is submitted. THE ABOVE CONDITION DOES NOT APPLY TO COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION, OWNER BUILDER WORKS LESS THAN $5000 OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS LESS THAN $20,000.

 

11.       (17)  An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the building.

 

Tree Conditions

 

12.       No excavation or trenches are to be undertaken within six (6) metres of the trunk of the existing Blue Gum tree which is to be retained.

 

13.       (300)  Lane Cove Council regulates the Preservation of Trees and Vegetation in the Lane Cove local government area. Clause 5.9(3) of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 [the "LEP"], states that a person must not ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, injure or wilfully destroy any tree or other vegetation to which any such development control plan applies without the authority conferred by development consent or a permit granted by the Council. Removal of trees or vegetation protected by the regulation is an offence against the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW). The maximum penalty that may be imposed in respect to any such offence is $1,100,000 or a penalty infringement notice can be issued in respect of the offence, the prescribed penalty being $1,500.00 for an individual and $3,000.00 for a corporation.  The co-operation of all residents is sought in the preservation of trees in the urban environment and protection of the bushland character of the Municipality.  All enquiries concerning the Preservation of Trees and Vegetation must be made at the Council Chambers, Lane Cove.

 

14.       (302)  The applicant must obtain written authority prior to pruning or removal of any trees greater than 4m in height, located on the property or in neighbouring properties including the cutting of any tree roots greater than 40mm in diameter.

 

15.       (303)  There must be no stockpiling of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or any other construction material or building rubbish on any nature strip, footpath, road or public open space park or reserve.

 

16.       (317) The Sydney blue gum located at the rear of the allotment must be retained and protected for the duration of the development. A 1.8m high chain mesh fence shall be erected a radial distance of not less than 6m from the trunk of this tree. The tree protection area shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and soil levels within the tree protection area shall remain undisturbed.

 

17.       A waterproof sign must be placed on the tree protection zone stating ‘NO ENTRY TREE PROTECTION ZONE – this fence and sign are not to be removed or relocated for the work duration.’  Minimum size of the sign is to be A4 portrait with NO ENTRY TREE PROTECTION ZONE in capital Arial Font size 100, and the rest of the text in Arial font size 65.

 

18.       All tree protection measures and signage must be erected PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE OR THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORKS, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. This includes demolition or site preparation works, and tree protection measures must remain in place for the duration of the development, including construction of the driveway crossing and all landscape works.

 

19.       The site is to be property fenced to prevent access of unauthorised persons outside of working hours.

 

20.       (35)  All demolition, building construction work, including earthworks, deliveries of building materials to and from the site to be restricted to the following hours:-

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)              7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                                         7.00am to 4.00pm

No work to be carried out on Sundays or any public holidays.

 

21.       (37) The development shall be conducted in such a manner so as not to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood in respect of noise, vibration, smell, dust, waste water, waste products or otherwise.

 

22.       (48) Depositing or storage of builder's materials on the footpath or roadways within the Municipality without first obtaining approval of Council is PROHIBITED.

 

Separate approval must be obtained from Council's Works and Urban Services Department PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT of any building waste container ("Skip") in a public place.

 

23.       Standard Condition (56) Where Lane Cove Council is appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority, it will be necessary to book an inspection for each of the following stages during the construction process.  Forty eight (48) hours notice must be given prior to the inspection being required:-

 

a)         The pier holes/pads before filling with concrete.

b)         All reinforcement prior to filling with concrete.

c)         The dampcourse level, ant capping, anchorage and floor framing before the floor material is laid.

d)         Framework including roof and floor members when completed and prior to covering.

e)         Installation of steel beams and columns prior to covering

f)          Waterproofing of wet areas

i)          Stormwater drainage lines prior to backfilling

k)         Completion.

 

24.       Standard Condition (57) Structural Engineer's details being submitted PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE for the following:-

 

b)         retaining walls;

c)         footings;

d)         reinforced concrete work;

e)         structural steelwork;

f)          upper level floor framing.

 

25.       (67) 

(a)        The use of mechanical rock pick machines on building sites is prohibited due to the potential for damage to adjoining properties.

 

(b)        Notwithstanding the prohibition under condition (a), the principal certifying authority may approve the use of rock pick machines providing that:-

 

(1)        A Geotechnical Engineer's Report that indicates that the rock pick machine can be used without causing damage to the adjoining properties.

 

(2)        The report details the procedure to be followed in the use of the rock pick machine and all precautions to be taken to ensure damage does not occur to adjoining properties.

 

(3)        With the permission of the adjoining owners and occupiers comprehensive internal and external photographs are to be taken of the adjoining premises for evidence of any cracking and the general state of the premises PRIOR TO ANY WORK COMMENCING.  Where approval of the owners/occupiers is refused they be advised of their possible diminished ability to seek damages (if any) from the developers and where such permission is still refused Council may exercise its discretion to grant approval.

 

(4)        The Geotechnical Engineer supervises the work and the work has been carried out in terms of the procedure laid down.

 

            COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CONDITION MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION             CERTIFICATE.

 

26.       (68) An automatic fire detection and alarm system, designed to ensure the occupants are given adequate warning so they can evacuate the building in an emergency, must be installed in the dwelling.

 

            This requirement is satisfied by:-

 

(a)        Smoke alarms installed in—

                        (i)         Class 1a buildings in accordance with 3.7.2.3 of the Building Code of Australia; and

(b)                    Smoke alarms complying with AS 3786.

(c)                    Smoke alarms connected to the consumer mains power where consumer power is supplied to the building.

 

 

 

Location – Class 1a buildings (dwellings)

 

Smoke alarms must be installed in a Class 1a building on or near the ceiling in—

 

(a)        any storey containing bedrooms—

                        (i)         between each part of the dwelling containing bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling; and

                        (ii)        where bedrooms are served by a hallway, in that hallway; and

(b)                    any other storey not containing bedrooms.

 

27.       (130)  Compliance with the Waste Management Plan submitted with this application.

 

28.       (141) Long Service Levy Compliance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; payment of the Long Service Levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or, where such a levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) – All building works in excess of $25,000 are subject to the payment of a Long Service Levy at the rate of 0.35%.

 

COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CONDITION MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

29.       (142) BASIX - Compliance with all the conditions of the BASIX Certificate lodged with Council as part of this application.

 

General Engineering Conditions

30.       (A1) Design and Construction Standards:  All engineering plans and work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s standards and relevant development control plans except as amended by other conditions.

31.       (A2) Materials on Roads and Footpaths: Where the applicant requires the use of Council land for placement of building waste, skips or storing materials a “Building waste containers or materials in a public place” application form is to be lodged. Council land is not to be occupied or used for storage until such application is approved. 

32.       (A3) Works on Council Property: Separate application shall be made to Council's Urban Services Division for approval to complete, any associated works on Council property.  This shall include vehicular crossings, footpaths, drainage works, kerb and guttering, brick    paving, restorations and any miscellaneous works. Applications shall be submitted prior to the start of any works on Council property.

33.       (A4) Permit to Stand Plant: Where the applicant requires the use of construction plant on the public road reservation, an “Application for Standing Plant Permit” shall be made to Council. Applications shall be submitted and approved prior to the start of any related works. Note: allow 2 working days for approval.

34.       (A5) Restoration: Public areas must be maintained in a safe condition at all times. Restoration of disturbed Council land is the responsibility of the applicant. All costs associated with restoration of public land will be borne by the applicant.

35.       (A6) Public Utility Relocation: If any public services are to be adjusted, as a result of the development, the applicant is to arrange with the relevant public utility authority the alteration or removal of those affected services. All costs associated with the relocation or removal of services shall be borne by the applicant.

36.       (A7) Pedestrian Access Maintained: Pedestrian access, including disabled and pram access, is to be maintained throughout the course of the construction as per AS-1742.3, ’Part 3 - Traffic control devices for works on roads’.

37.       (A8) Council Drainage Infrastructure: The proposed construction shall not encroach onto any existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement. If a Council stormwater line is located on the property during construction, Council is to be immediately notified. Where necessary the stormwater line is to be relocated to be clear of the proposed building works. All costs associated with the relocation of the stormwater line are to be borne by the applicant.

38.       (A9) Services: Prior to any excavation works, the location and depth of all services must be ascertained. All costs associated with adjustment of the public utility will be borne by the applicant.

39.       (V8) Car Parking: All parking and associated facilities are to be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 2890 Series.

            The following plans shall be prepared and certified by a suitably qualified engineer demonstrating:-

·               Longitudinal section along the extreme wheel paths of the driveway/right of way at a scale of 1:20 demonstrating compliance with the scaping provisions of AS2890.1. It shall include all levels and grades, including those levels stipulated at boundary levels, both existing and proposed. It shall extend from the centre line of the roadway through to the parking area.

40.       (F1) Overland Flow around Buildings: To prevent stormwater from entering the building the finished habitable ground floor level of the building must be a minimum of 150mm above the adjacent finished ground level.

 

41.       (R2) Rainwater Reuse Tanks: The applicant is to install a rainwater reuse system with a minimum effective capacity of 10,000 Litres. Rainwater tanks are to be installed in accordance with Council’s rainwater tank policy and relevant Australian standards. The plumbing requirements are as follows:-

·               Rainwater draining to the reuse tanks is to drain from the roof surfaces only. No “on - ground” surfaces are to drain to the reuse tank.  “On - ground” surfaces are to drain via a separate system.

·               Mosquito protection & first flush device shall be fitted to the reuse tank.

·               The overflow from the rainwater reuse tank is to drain by gravity to the receiving system.

·               Rainwater tank is to be connected to all new toilets, one cold water washing machine tap and one outside tap within the development.

 

42.       (S1) Stormwater Requirement: Stormwater runoff from all impervious areas shall be collected and disposed of using the following mechanism

 

·                      All roof areas are to drain to the reuse system with overflow to the street

·                      All other areas to drain to the street 

·                      Environmental pollution control pit is to be installed just prior to the connection to the street system

 

The design and construction of the drainage system is to fully comply with, AS-3500 and Part O, Council's DCP-Stormwater Management. The design shall ensure that the development, either during construction or upon completion, does not impede or divert natural surface water so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties.

 

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to Construction Certificate

 

43.       (D1) Drainage Plans New: A stormwater drainage plan prepared and certified by a suitably qualified engineer is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The design is to be certified that it fully complies with, AS-3500 and Part O, Council's DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

44.       (E1) Proposed Use of a Drainage Easement: Documentation demonstrating that the inter-allotment drainage easement exists and the property benefits from the drainage easement is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

45.       (V2) Replacement of Vehicular Crossing: The vehicular crossing servicing the property shall be reconstructed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate as it does not meet Council’s current standards. The vehicular crossing shall be constructed to the specifications and levels issued by Council. A ‘Construction of Residential Vehicular Footpath Crossing’ application shall be submitted to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. All works associated with the construction of the crossing shall be completed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

46.       (D1) Excavation Greater Than 1m: Where there are structures on adjoining properties including all Council infrastructures, located within 5 metres of the proposed excavation.

 

The applicant shall:-

 

(a)        seek independent advice from a suitably qualified engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

 

(b)        detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining  during construction

 

(c)        provide Council with a certificate from the engineer on the necessity and adequacy of  support for the adjoining properties

 

The above matters are to be completed and documentation submitted to principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

(d)        Provide a dilapidation report of the adjoining properties and Council infrastructure. The dilapidation survey must be conducted prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The extent of the survey must cover the likely “zone of influence” that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. The dilapidation report must be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer.

 

A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed shall be submitted to the principle certifying authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

All recommendations of the suitably qualified engineer are to be carried out during the course of excavation. The applicant must give at least seven (7) days notice to the owner and occupiers of the adjoining allotments before the excavation works commence.

 

47.       (T1) Design of Retaining Structures: All retaining structures greater than 1m in height are to be designed and certified for construction by a suitably qualified engineer. The structural design is to comply with, all relevant design codes and Australian Standards. The design and certification shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate

 

48.       (B1) Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $1000.00 cash bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets as a result of the development. The bond will be released upon issuing of the Occupation Certificate. If Council determines that damage has occurred as a result of the development, the applicant will be required to repair the damage. Repairs are to be carried out within 14 days from the notice. All repairs are to be carried in accordance with Council’s requirements. The full bond will be retained if Council’s requirements are not satisfied. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

Engineering condition to be complied with prior to commencement of construction

 

49.       (C2) Erosion and Sediment Control: The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to the start of any works on the site. The devices are to be installed in accordance with the plan numbered 10421 E1-E3 prepared by EZE Hydraulics and dated 30-03-11. The devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced when necessary.

 

Engineering condition to be complied with prior to Occupation Certificate

 

50.       (M2) Certificate of Satisfactory Completion:  Certificates from a registered and licensed Plumber or a suitably qualified Engineer must be obtained for the following matters. The plumber is to provide a copy of their registration papers with the certificate. The relevant Certificates are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

·                      Confirming that the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Location Plans

3 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

Land & Environment Court Conditions of Consent

3 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Site Location Plans

 




ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 


ATTACHMENT 3

Land & Environment Court Conditions of Consent

 





Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting 6 November 2012

16 Private Road, Northwood

 

 

Subject:          16 Private Road, Northwood    

Record No:    DA05/357-01 - 52643/12

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Andrew Thomas 

 

 

Property:                     16 Private Road, Northwood

 

DA No:                                    357/05

 

Date Lodged:              9 August 2012

 

Cost of Work:              N/a: Section 96 Amendment

 

Owner:                                    R and C Webber

 

Applicant:                    Russell and Carol Webber

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Section 96 amendment that seeks changes to the interior, exterior and roof of the dwelling house; changes to the height and floor level of the garage; and the removal of a tree required to be retained by conditions.

ZONE

R2   Low Density Residential

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

 

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

IS THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BUSHLAND?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a; 10a; and 10b

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

 

The current s.96 application has been notified as per the original development application and the previous s.96 application.

Neighbours                              7, 10, 12, 13 and 14 Private Road; 51, 53, 74, 74A, 76, 78, 79, 80, 80A, 81, 82, 82A, 94, 101A and 1/103-105 Northwood Road; 49 and 53 Cliff Road; and 4 James Street.

Ward Councillors                    East (NB: when the development application was submitted, the site was in Central Ward and those Ward Councillors were notified).

Progress Association              Northwood Action Group

Other Interest Groups             N/a

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

Councillor Brooks–Horn has flagged this application, which was originally approved by the Council. It is referred to the IHAP for determination due to its previous history and neighbour concerns about the impact of the development.

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

·         The subject site was created by the subdivision of part of the rear yard of 76 Northwood Road and part of the western yard of 14 Private Road. The higher part of the site is located at its north end and the lower part at its south end.  

 

·    The subdivision was approved by Council in November 2001 subject to conditions that included the retention of certain trees on the site. The subdivision certificate was registered in June 2002.

 

·    In November 2005 the current owners submitted D357/05 which proposed a 2 storey dwelling house, detached double garage and a swimming pool on the site. This proposal drew 19 objections, including a number from adjoining owners. After numerous design changes Council resolved to approve the development in February 2008. The dwelling house was approved on the lower part of the site, and both the garage and swimming pool were approved on the higher part. 

 

·    The current owners submitted the first of their two subsequent applications seeking modifications to the development consent under s.96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, in June 2011. Seven objections were received to this application, which was withdrawn in March 2012.

 

·    The modifications proposed to the dwelling house and garage under the current and second s.96 application are the same as those that were proposed under the first s.96 application.

 

·    Eight objections have been received to the current s.96 application. Concerns raised include overshadowing; overlooking; loss of amenity; bulk and scale; the proposed removal of a palm tree; and whether the proposal is an amendment of the development consent.

 

·    Most of the eight responses have been submitted by owners of properties that adjoin the subject site. Despite the concerns raised, the proposal would have a relatively minor impact on adjoining property owners. As there are generally sufficient existing conditions to protect the amenity of adjoining owners to a reasonable level, the s.96 application is recommended for approval subject to matters that include the following:

 

retention of a palm tree already required to be retained under condition 12; and

inclusion of three additional conditions to address potential overlooking to three adjoining properties at 14 Private Road; 53 Cliff Road; and 80A Northwood Road, (condition 12a), and potential overlooking of the latter of these properties from a TV room and its rear stairs, and a relocated bedroom (conditions 12b and 12c).

 

·    As no approved works on site have commenced the development consent is due to lapse in February 2013.

 

SITE

 

The subject site is an irregular – shaped lot with a total area of 653.5m2. The site includes an access handle almost 6.1m wide and close to 17m in length located on the south side of a public right of way that links Private Road to the east with Northwood Road to the west. The access handle has an area of 101.5 m2, and the main battle – axe body of the site has an area of 552m2

 

The site has a maximum fall from the access handle to its rear boundary of 7.5m. Within the site are a number of mature trees, including a Brushbox tree approximately 16m high located at the south end of the access handle, a Canary Island Date Palm tree approximately 12m high at the base of a centrally located rock outcrop, and a number of other trees concentrated along part of the rear and the eastern boundaries of the site. There is a smaller rock outcrop located in the north east corner of the battle – axe portion of the site.

 

The site is vacant, and has 7 adjoining dwelling houses that are either single or 2 storeys. Still remaining on the site are height poles erected by the owner in 2007 that were requested by Council in relation to an Inspection Committee meeting.

 

The locality is residential and includes a mix of generally single and two storey dwelling houses of various designs, styles and sizes. The subdivision of residential land in the vicinity of the site has created considerable variation in terms of lot arrangements, shapes and sizes, including some close to the site that also have an access handle.

 

Copies of the Site Plans and Notification Plan are attached as AT1 and AT2 respectively.

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

The two development applications relating to the site are summarised below.  

 

1.   D193/00 (Subdivision)

 

·    This development application proposed the subdivision of part of the western yard of 14 Private Road, and part of the rear yard of 76 Northwood Road. Although the application drew 13 objections it was approved by Council in November 2001. The subdivided portions were consolidated to create the subject site. The subdivision certificate was released by Council in March 2002, and the subdivision was registered in June 2002. The legal description of the site is Lot 2 DP1041458.

 

2.   D357/05 (Dwelling house) 

 

·    After numerous design changes and reports to Council, and an attempt at mediation between interested parties, Council, at its meeting on 4 February 2008, approved D375/05 for a 2 storey dwelling house, a detached double garage and a swimming pool subject to 99 conditions that are contained in the development consent dated 14 February 2008 (attached at AT3).

 

·    In July 2011 the applicant/owners submitted their first s.96 application for a revised design to the approved 2 storey dwelling house, as well as changes to the approved garage.

 

A criticism of this application was the accuracy of its submitted shadow plans. Although revised shadow plans were submitted and the application renotified during December 2011, criticism of the shadow plans continued and the application was withdrawn in March 2012.

 

·    No works have commenced on the site which remains vacant. A construction certificate has not been issued for the approved works.    

 

PROPOSAL

 

The current, and second, s.96 application seeks the same design modifications to the dwelling house and garage proposed under the first s.96 application. The only noticeable change is a modification to the roof pitch at the rear of the dwelling house; this has been proposed so as to reduce the extent of shadow that would affect the single storey dwelling house that adjoins the site’s rear (southern) boundary at 80A Northwood Road (Squirrel Lodge). 

 

The following main changes are proposed to the approved development:-

 

·    relatively minor increases, and even more minor reductions, in floor space;

·    replacing the pitched roof with a series of skillion roofs;

·    alterations to the size of a number of windows: these changes do not raise overlooking concerns;

·    deletion of some windows;

·    proposed windows: of these, only the windows for Bedroom 2 on the south side of the lower ground floor level need to be treated to reduce potential overlooking;

·    lowering the garage floor level and increasing its height; and

·    removing a Canary Island Date Palm tree required to be retained by condition 12 of the original consent.

 

Details of the changes proposed to the approved development are described below.

 

Dwelling House

 

(i)         Ground/Upper Floor Level

 

(a)  Floor Space

 

The following alterations and additions are proposed to the approved floor space:

 

·    a 595mm wide extension on the east side, and another 790mm wide extension on the rear south side, of the living room; and a 400mm reduction on the north side of this room – the net change in its floor area would be about 5m2; in addition, its wrap – around balcony would be increased by up to 440mm at the front, and up to 290mm on its east side;

·    an 850mm wide extension along part of  the rear south side of the kitchen, and a minor reduction of about 0.5m2 on this same side – the net change in its floor area would be about 3m2 ; in addition, an approved planter box that had been deleted on the first s.96 application would be reinstated on the south side of the balcony adjoining this room, and the planter box extended 1m to the edge of the balcony on its west side;

·    an extension of about 1m2 at the front north side of the centrally located main entry; and

·    the front porch (balcony) adjoining the kitchen would be squared off by almost 3m2 at its northwest corner. 

 

The overall net change in the approved floor space as a result of these proposed changes on this   level would be an increase of about 9m2.

 

(b) Windows

 

The following main changes are proposed to the approved windows:-

 

·    the kitchen window on the west side would be deleted;

·    a staircase window is proposed at the front; and

·    some windows on the front (north), south and east elevations would be altered; some would be increased, and others reduced, in area.

 

The changes proposed to the windows at this level, including the new window, would not raise concerns in relation to overlooking. 

 

(ii)        Lower Ground Floor Level (and store)

 

(a)  Floor Space

 

The following alterations and additions are proposed to the approved floor space:-

 

·    a 570mm wide extension to the front north side of the main bedroom, and another 560mm wide extension at the southeast corner of this rooms’ ensuite – the increase in this room’s floor space would be about 4.2m2

·    an extension 1.1m wide to the rear south side, and another extension 545mm wide on the west side, of the TV room – the increase in this room’s floor area would be about 7.5m2;

·    an extension 660mm wide to the front north side of the guest room which would increase its floor area by about 3.3m2; and

·    a marginal increase in floor area along the rear south side of bedroom 2 of about 0.75m2.

 

The following two marginal reductions are proposed to the approved floor space:-

 

·    one along the front north side of bedroom 3 of about 0.5m2; and

·    the other of about 0.75m2 along the front north side of the study.

 

 The proposed store under the main stairs would add another 2.5m2 of floor area. Consequently, the overall net change compared to the approved floor space as a result of the proposed changes on this level would be an increase of about 17m2 (i.e.14.5m2  for the changes to the approved floor area and 2.5m2 for the proposed store). The overall net increase in the proposed floor space on both levels and including the proposed store, compared to that approved, would be about 26m2

 

(b) Windows

 

The following main changes are proposed to the approved windows:-

 

·    the three glass brick windows of the main bedroom on the rear south elevation would be deleted and replaced with brick;

·    a window is proposed to the relocated Bedroom 2 on the rear elevation; and an ensuite window to the main bedroom on the east elevation; and

·    the windows to the TV room and the adjoining bathroom on the west side would be significantly reduced, and some windows on the other three other elevations would be altered; some would be increased, and others reduced, in area.

 

The changes proposed to all of the windows at this level except the proposed windows to Bedroom 2, would not raise concerns in relation to overlooking. 

 

(iii)       Other 

 

In addition to the changes to the floor levels described above, the following other changes are proposed.

 

The approved 960mm wide rear external stairs to the TV room would be relocated to the rear of the proposed addition to this room; these stairs would be setback 2.509m from the rear boundary. A 1.08m deep deck is proposed on the east side of the main bedroom.

 

A front bedroom (bedroom 2) would be relocated to the rear and replaced with a study.

 

Some internal reconfiguration of some rooms is also proposed.

 

A 2.5m2 store room is proposed under the internal front stairs between the guest room and bedroom 3. This room would be accessed by doors about 1.1m high located on its front north side that would replace a low level window.

 


Roof

 

The approved hipped roof with a pitch of about 350 would be replaced by three main skillion roof sections: the one on the east side would have a pitch of 50 and would fall to the centre; and one of  20 in the centre, and another of 50 on the west side, would both fall to the rear. The skillion roof at the rear would be split into two sections with one section having a 100 pitch and the other a 120 pitch to the rear.

 

As shown on all of the elevations, although the maximum height of the main approved roof (RL 44.8) would not change, the proposed change to the approved roof would reduce its general overall height by about 635mm.

 

As shown on both the roof plan and both side elevations, the eave at the front of the east section would be increased to 1.15m, and the eave at the front of the other two main sections would be reduced by up to 575mm in the centre, and 225mm on the west side.

 

As shown on both the roof plan and both the north and south elevations, the eaves of the main roof on both sides would be 400mm wide. As shown on the roof plan and both side elevations, the main roof would be between 150mm and 400mm wide immediately above some of the ground floor rooms along the rear, and that the roof over the lower ground floor level would have no eave.

 

Garage

 

The following changes are proposed to the approved garage:-

 

·    the wall height would be raised by 200mm at the front;

·    the parapet height would be increased by 290mm at the front and 150mm at the rear; 

·    the floor level would be reduced by 200mm; and

·    as shown on the ground floor plan (plan 04) the door towards the rear on its south side would be relocated towards the front, and the approved access stairs on this same side would be deleted.

 

At the front the garage would have an overall height of 2.89m, and 2.6m at the rear. The position of the approved garage in the front northeast corner of the main battle axe section would not change.

 

Canary Island Date Palm

 

This tree is required to be retained by condition 12 of the development consent. The proposed extension to the front of the lower ground floor level guest room and the porch above would necessitate its removal. An Arborist’s report was submitted with the first s.96 application which described it as appearing to be in good health with good structure, but gave no justification for its removal other than the proposed extensions and, perhaps, an opinion that this species is usually considered by bushland officers to be a “weed”.

 

Swimming Pool

 

The concourse level of the swimming pool would be lowered by 85mm. This is in response to the lowering of the garage floor level and therefore the link bridge to the front of the dwelling house. No other changes are proposed to the approved swimming pool, which would remain in its approved location along the east side boundary of the main battle axe section of the site located between the front of the dwelling house and the south side of the garage.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE: the Lane Cove LEP 2009 and the DCP 2009

 

Site area: 635.5m2 (including access handle of 101.5m2)

 

1.  The LEP 2009 (u/c= unchanged)

 

 

Approved

Proposed

Standard

Complies

Floor space ratio (FSR) (max.)

0.44:1*

0.37:1**

0.5:1***

Yes   Yes

Height (max. to ridge)

7.7m

u/c

9.5m

Yes

* Based, as required at the time, on the net site area under the previous Council control i.e. the Dwelling House Code of August 2002 and including the thickness of all external walls.

** Based, as required, on the gross site area under the LEP 2009 and excluding the thickness of all external walls.  The proposed changes to the approved floor space would result in a net increase in floor space of about 26m2.

*** The access handle serving the subject site has a FSR of 0.6:1 and the remainder of the site has a FSR of 0.5:1 under the LEP 2009. Despite this inconsistency, the FSR of the proposal has been calculated as if the whole site was subject to a FSR standard of 0.5:1 being the standard that would apply to a site within an R2 zone with an area of 550m2 or more. 

 

2.  The DCP 2009

 

 Table 1: the dwelling house (u/c = unchanged)

 

Approved

Proposed

Control

Complies

Wall height (max.)

6.9m

7.4m

7m

No, in part

Front setback (min.)

>17m – battle axe lot

u/c

Consistent with area, or 7.5m

Not an issue

Side setback (min.)

East: 1.637m

West: 1.5m

East:1.5m

West:1.589m

1.2 : 1.2m: single storey, and

1.5m: 2 storeys

Yes

Rear setback (min.) – based on the average depth of the net site area of about 31m, of which 25% would be 7.75m

2.484m

2.348m

<1000m²: 8m or 25%, whichever is the greater; the former is the greater.

No, but the site’s primary open space is located at the front.

Subfloor height (max.)

Not proposed

About 1m

1m

Yes

Number of storeys (max.)

2

2 + store

2

Yes

Landscaped area (min.)

36%

u/c

35%

Yes

Cut and fill (max.)

Dwelling house: <1m

(Pool 2m)

u/c

1m

No, but u/c

Solar access (min.)

Reasonable

Minor variations

3 hrs to north - facing habitable windows

Minor variations are reasonable

Deck/balcony depth (max.)

1.15m

1.5m

3m

Yes

Private open space (min.)

Not a consideration

Areas u/c and both exceeded

24m²

4m depth

Yes

BASIX Certificate

Supplied

Revised

Required

Yes

 

 

Table 2: the detached double garage (as an outbuilding)

 

 

Approved

Proposed

Code

Complies

Overall height (max.)

2.45m

2.89m (parapet)

3.6m

Yes

External wall height (max.)

2.1m

2.4m

2.4m

Yes

Floor space (max.)

42m2

u/c

50m²

Yes

No of storeys (max.)

1

u/c

1

Yes

Setback of windows from boundaries (min.)

Not included

 u/c

900mm

Yes

 

REFERRALS

 

Development Engineer

 

Does not raise any objections to the revised plans, and does not require any new conditions.

 

Tree Assessment Officer

 

Confirms the following:-

 

·    that the Canary Island Date Palm tree provides screening between neighbouring properties; and the changes to the porch should be deleted so as to retain this tree;

·    the lowering of the garage floor by 200mm would require 70mm of excavation over a distance of 3.5m from the garage to the Brushbox tree at the south end of the access handle; this proposed level of excavation is minor and would not have a significant impact on the root system of this tree; and

·    does not require changes to the existing conditions, or additional conditions.

 

 

ASSESSMENT

 

SECTION 96 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 (the Act)

 

The proposal has been assessed in relation to the relevant matters under s.96(2) and (3) of the Act as discussed below.

 

S.96(2)(a) Is the modified development substantially the same?

 

Yes: the s.96 application proposes alterations and additions to a 2 storey dwelling house and detached double garage that were approved by Council.

 

S.96(2)(b) Consultation with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body

 

There is no requirement to consult with any Minister, public authority or approval body as a result of the proposed modifications.

 

S.96(2)(c) Notification of application to modify consent

 

The original DA was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy and the relevant Regulation.  There were 19 submissions.

 

Both the first, and the current second, s.96 applications have been notified to the same property owners; and persons who objected at any time to the original proposal, or its revision(s), and/or to the same address of a previous objector who may have since moved away; the local residents’ association; and Ward Councillors, as were notified of the original application.

 

 

 

S.96(2)(d) Considerations of submissions

 

Eight submissions have been received, of which 6 are from owners of properties that adjoin the site. The owners of most of these adjoining properties raised concerns to the original DA.

 

S.96(3) Assessment of the proposed modification

 

An assessment of the proposal is required in relation to s.79C (1) of the Act.  This assessment follows.

 

SECTION 79C(1) OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 (the Act)

 

S.79C(1)(a)(i) The provisions of any environmental planning instrument

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 (the LEP)

 

The proposed amendments to the approved development are permissible with consent. Although the proposed works would result in a change to the floor space ratio under the LEP, the revised proposal complies with this development standard and the height standard.

 

This report will show that the proposed changes satisfy two of the relevant objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zone because:-

 

·    subject to additional conditions 12a, 12b and 12c, it would retain, and in some instances improve (by preventing overlooking with the deletion of some windows) the amenity of neighbouring properties; and

·    it would maintain the approved landscaping and, subject to the retention of condition 12, it would retain a major tree. 

 

SEPP 55: Remediation of Land

 

This Policy was addressed under the original DA assessment.

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

The location of the site, and the extent of the proposed works, would mean that the proposed development would not raise any issues in relation to this Sydney Regional Plan (SREP).

 

As the site is located outside of the Foreshores and Waterways Area as defined in the SREP, the DCP that accompanies the SREP is not relevant to the assessment of the proposal.

 

S.79C(1)(a)(ii) The provisions of any draft environmental planning instrument

 

Not applicable.

 

S.79C(1)(a)(iii) The provisions of any development control plan

 

The Lane Cove Residential Development Control Plan 2009 (the DCP)

 

The proposal complies with all of the numerical provisions of the DCP except the dwelling house wall height and rear setback. Both non – compliances are discussed below.

 


(i)         Wall Height

 

Although the approved dwelling house wall height was 6.9m the proposed change to a skillion roof over the east side of the dwelling house would create a wall up to 7.4m in height for the width of the living room on its south elevation (about 6m) and for a shorter section (about 3m) on its east side.

 

An extract of the Building Design clause under the DCP follows.

 

1.7 Building Design

Objectives

The objectives are to:

1    Ensure new dwellings and alterations and additions to existing dwellings reinforce the typical bulk and scale of existing dwellings within the street and the area.

2    Ensure that alterations and additions to existing dwellings maintain the integrity of the design and style of the existing building.

3    Ensure elevations to the street and public domain are well proportioned and designed.

4    Minimise impact in terms of overshadowing, loss of privacy, light spillage to adjoining properties, loss of views and amenity.

 

 

Provisions

 

1.7.1 Height

a)   The maximum wall height to the underside of eaves for any floor above ground level (existing) is 7.0m to minimise the bulk and massing.

 

The proposed wall height is supported for the following reasons:-

 

·    the proposal would satisfy both relevant Building Design objectives (i.e. the first and last objectives stated above) because notwithstanding that there is a range in the bulk and scale of dwelling houses that adjoin, or are adjacent to the site, the proposed dwelling house would be consistent with the bulk and scale of some neighbouring dwelling houses, as well as others in the vicinity of the site; and, the impact in terms of overshadowing would  be marginal or indistinguishable, whilst the amenity of the adjoining neighbour to the south at 80A Northwood Road would be maintained by the proposed reduction in the size of both living room windows, and improved privacy and reduced light spillage due to the proposed deletion of the three bedroom windows on the floor below; whilst the overall impact on the other adjoining owner to the east, at 53 Cliff Road, would be negligible as the only change would be an increase in the area of external wall;   

·    numerically the non - compliance is relatively minor;

·    with the retention of the three trees along the rear boundary, the visual impact on the adjoining neighbour to the south would be relatively modest; and

·    an overall reduction in the height of the proposed compared to the approved dwelling house would satisfy the intent of the numerical provision stated above.

 


(ii)        Rear Setback

 

Although the minimum rear setback that was approved would be reduced, the amount (136mm) is relatively minor and would affect the closest part of the dwelling house (bedroom 2).

 

However, a concern raised by some neighbours relates to the proposed 1.1m wide extension to the lower ground floor level TV room, and the relocation of the approved stairs to this room such that these would be 960mm closer to the rear boundary.

 

An extract of the Setbacks clause under the DCP follows.

1.3 Setbacks

Objectives

The objectives of setbacks are to:

1    Maintain the predominant street setback.

2    To enhance and maintain vegetation corridors through landscaping within front and rear gardens and side boundaries.

3    Side and rear setbacks are to provide building separation, sunlight, landscaping, ventilation, public views (if appropriate) for the dwelling and its neighbours.

 

1.3.4    Rear Setbacks

a)   A minimum rear setback for dwelling houses of 8m or 25% of the site depth (whichever is greater) is to be provided for sites up to 1000m2 (refer to Diagram 2). The existing predominant rear setback and site constraints, especially for irregular sites, may be taken into account.

b)   N/a

Rear Setback.jpg

Diagram No. 2 -  Rear setbacks

In relation to bedroom 2, the proposed reduced rear setback is supported for the following reasons:-

 

·    the proposal would satisfy both relevant setback objectives (i.e. the second and third objectives stated above) as there would be sufficient space for future landscaping as well as sufficient separation between neighbouring dwelling houses for each to have reasonable sunlight and ventilation;

·    numerically, the proposed reduction is relatively minor;

·    subject to the treatment of both bedroom windows (condition 12b), the impact on the adjoining neighbour to the south would be relatively modest; and

·    in relation to Diagram No. 2 provided above, the site’s rear yard is not the development’s  primary area of private open space which is located, instead, on the north side of the dwelling house in and around the approved swimming pool.

 

However, the proposed extension of the approved TV room, and its attached exterior stairs, are not supported as both would increase the visual impact of the approved dwelling house.

 

S.79C(1)(b)  The likely impacts of the development

 

The amended proposal would have no adverse impact on Private Road.

 

Subject to the retention of conditions that address potential overlooking, and/or seek to retain the existing amenity of some adjoining owners, in conjunction with two additional conditions that seek to preserve the privacy of three properties that adjoin the subject site (condition 12a) and one of these three properties at the rear (condition 12b), and one condition that seeks to reduce its visual impact on this same property (condition 12c), the proposal would have an acceptable impact on adjoining property owners.


S.79C(1)(c) The suitability of the site for the development

 

The proposed modifications are consistent with the original development consent and the site remains suitable for the proposed works.

 

S.79C(1)(d) Any submissions made

 

Eight submissions have been received in response to Council’s notification of the second s.96 application. All submissions raise concerns, and these are summarised and discussed below.

 

1.  Background

 

In their submission, the owners of 80 Northwood Road state:-

 

·    “…we think it important that The Decision Makers are also cognisant of the fact that after approval …..the land was subsequently put up for sale ……and was on the market for over 2 years.”; 

·    it is “…. an affront to all those involved in the long drawn out process, including the Council, that the applicant should now try to change the very conditions that were attached to the approval without which the Development application would not have been granted by the Council “ ;

·    “….no changes to the original conditions or the footprint of the dwelling should be countenanced by Council. To do otherwise would make a complete mockery of Lane Cove Council’s planning process.”

 

In their submission, the owners of 80A Northwood Road state:-

 

·    “ As part of the compromise negotiated, the Applicant agreed to a very limited set back of the development from the boundary of our property, to retain the Canary Island Palm, and to install planter boxes at the edge of the second floor balcony, to remove the roof viewing platform and to lower the roof by 500mm.”

·    “The few compromises were hard – won and were incorporated into the final conditions of consent to satisfy some of the concerns of adjoining neighbours and leave those properties with some level of amenity”.

·    “The new proposal seeks to dispense with one of these agreements, namely the retention of the Canary Island Palm, and the amenity of the adjoining properties stands to be further compromised. Since, the Canary Island Palm is a visually significant and mature specimen which provides a great deal of amenity to the neighbouring residences and should therefore be retained as per the original condition.”

 

In their submission, the owners of 78 Northwood Road, request that the proposal should:-

 

·    “Fully comply with Council’s current Development Guidelines

·    At a minimum maintain the specific conditions and intent of the original Consent; and

·    Seek to further mitigate the significant and contentious issues raised during this process."

 

Planter boxes have been reinstated (they were deleted from the first s.96 application); request that these be conditioned.

 

The proposal has not addressed previous concerns, and indeed, believe further detriment would result.

Original issues concerning position, design, bulk, height, scale and size remain, and resulting issues of loss of privacy, amenity, solar access and visual/environmental impediments to neighbours are further exacerbated by the increase in size of the building’s footprint.

 

Statement appears to be legally incorrect in that it applies the superseded DCP 2002; this fundamental flaw in the application must mean that it is not in a form where it can legitimately be assessed by Council.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

The applicant is entitled to seek change to the development consent conditions, including changes to the approved plans. Council is required to assess those changes having regard to its own controls; the concerns raised by residents; and their overall impact.

 

The proposed removal of a palm tree; the reinstatement of a planter box; and the impact of a proposed increase in the size of the footprint of the dwelling house, is required to be considered in Council’s assessment of the changes proposed in the current s.96 application.

 

A reference to the DCP 2002 is taken to be a reference to those Council controls that applied at the time the development application was lodged (namely its Code For Dwelling Houses, August 2002) and determined, and no weight is given to this previous document. 

 

The majority of the changes are supported. However, the proposed removal of the Canary Island Date Palm, and the main encroachment into the rear setback, are not supported as both would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining owners of 74A and 80A Northwood Road respectively. 

 

2. New DA

 

Object to the many alterations proposed; the number of changes are so significant that it is not substantially the same development, and a new development application should be sought.

 

The cumulative effect of a proposed increase in the building footprint; moving the lounge closer to the rear boundary; removing planter boxes and the palm tree; and increasing the size of the balcony, amount to a material and substantial change and warrant a fresh application.

 

It is clear that as the footprint would be expanded, and as most adjoining neighbours have objected on the basis of reduced privacy and amenity, the proposal would have a great impact and it is not a simple change. Even moving the walls should require a new application.

 

Condition 3 required all 3 windows of the master bedroom to be in glass brick so as to improve the privacy of 80A Northwood Road; it is proposed to remove this condition. Surely a condition cannot be removed by a s.96 application?

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

On the contrary, a s.96 application is usually the approach sought to the removal of a condition of development consent.

 

Neither any individual change, nor the cumulative changes, that are proposed under this s.96 application would require a new development application. Council approved a two storey dwelling house, a detached garage and a swimming pool on the site, and this is what is still proposed. The applicant’s request is, correctly, submitted as a s.96 application. The development as proposed is substantially the same development.

   

3. Shadow

 

Creates more overshadowing than the approved development.

 

Although proposed changes have resolved some of the shadow issues (affecting Squirrel Lodge, at 80A Northwood Road), shadow remains a contentious issue; moving the building closer to the rear boundary adds to our discontent.

 

Although the applicant confirms that:-

 

·    the proposal would have no more adverse impact on the shadows on the north facing windows of 80A Northwood Road than the approved dwelling house; and

·    the additional shadow is acceptable, and not significantly outside the approved shadows,

shadow plans should be checked by Council/reviewed independently as they have a major impact on this residence.

 

Whereas, the revised shadow plans confirm that additional shadow would occur at 11am in right – hand window; at 11.30am in middle window; and at 12.30pm, 1pm, 2pm and 2.30pm in the left – hand window of those north facing windows at 80A Northwood Road, and contrary to the applicant’s Statement, this does not satisfy the planning principles in the Land and Environment Court (NSW) decision concerning The Benevolent Society v Waverly Council because:-

 

·    the amount of sunlight lost should be taken into account as well as the amount retained;

·    the design is of poor quality; and

·    the windows affected are not large, and further, the situation is not acceptable to neighbours.

 

Plans show the proposed additional overshadowing of neighbouring properties, but as individual houses are not shown, the affected property owners cannot make an assessment of the impact.

 

Applicant states kitchen windows of 80A Northwood Road would receive the required sunlight, but in fact the windows that would comply are those for a verandah; the kitchen windows receive limited sunlight which is important as this is also our dining room. Under the proposal:-

 

·    one kitchen window would be totally in shadow at 9am;

·    two kitchen windows would be totally in shadow at 12 noon;

·    the kitchen would not receive any sunlight, and the verandah would only have one of its 3 windows in sunlight at 3pm;and

·    our outdoor table and chairs will now be overshadowed for most of the morning.

 

In our shadow consultant’s report it was stated that the morning shadow that would be caused by the original development would have a devastating impact on our amenity.         

The additional overshadowing will be devastating, and our amenity will be compromised.

Our shadow consultant’s opinion in relation to the original development suggests that further overshadowing must be considered wholly unreasonable.

 

The proposed flat roof involves a 400mm increase in the eave; the west eave is shown and the greater eave overhang on the southern side takes the building closer to 80A Northwood Road; object to the proposed eaves, and the resulting overshadowing.

 

Removal of some trees on the eastern and southern boundaries – as suggested in earlier discussions - would reduce overshadowing of 80A Northwood Road, and should be included as a  condition of consent.

 

12 Northwood Road will be overshadowed by the garage, which will also block all sunlight entering the dining room of this residence.

 

Assessment Officer’s comments

 

The objectives and provisions for Amenity, including solar access, under clause 1.8 of the DCP 2009 are:

 

1.8 Amenity

Objectives

The objectives for amenity are to:

1    To provide reasonable solar access to habitable rooms and recreational areas of new and existing developments.

2    To provide reasonable acoustic and visual privacy for neighbouring properties.

3    Minimise overlooking between adjoining dwellings and their private open spaces.

Provisions

Solar access and overshadowing

a)   Dwellings or additions shall be so designed and orientated so as to give reasonable sunlight to the habitable rooms and recreational areas of the subject site and adjoining premises between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21st June. In particular, dwellings are to be so located and designed that a portion of windows of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours of sun between 9am and 3pm on 21st June.

b)   Council may accept reduction in solar access for the subject site and adjacent development if the topography and lot orientation is such that the 3 hour standard is considered unachievable.

c)   Where adjacent dwellings and their open space already receive less than 2 hours of sun then new development should seek to maintain this solar access where practicable.

 

As the open space areas of the adjoining property at 80A Northwood Road would not be adversely affected by the proposed shadow, only the shadow cast on the north facing habitable windows of this dwelling house needs to be assessed. From the shadow plans that were submitted for Council’s consideration as part of the original approval, the two north facing bedroom windows and the adjoining north facing courtyard that is covered by a clear polycarbonate (or similar) roof, with some sections affected by leaf litter, were not included in that assessment.

 

Shadow plans have been submitted with the second s.96 application. These plans have been prepared by the Architect who designed the approved dwelling house and who prepared the shadow plans submitted in relation to that original application, the accuracy of which were not criticised by the shadow consultant acting for the owners of 80A Northwood Road.

 

The shadow plans compare the shadow of the approved dwelling house with that cast as a result of the proposed design changes. Indeed, as a result of the applicants’ engaging their original Architect certain modifications have been proposed to the rear skillion roof in order to reduce the overall shadow impact on this adjoining dwelling house.

 

As the horizontal shadow plans assume that there is no dwelling house on the adjoining site these show a seemingly greater extent of shadow than the 3D shadow plans which confirm the following:

 

·    the 3 kitchen/dining room/verandah windows and the 3 skylights above this area would be in shadow from 9am until after 9.30am; 

·    there would be a marginal improvement in the sun affecting one of the skylights at 10am; and

·    the amount of sun received by windows and skylights from 10.30am through until 3pm would either be marginal or else indistinguishable compared to that received by these same features under the approved dwelling house.

 

Overall the shadow cast by the approved dwelling house and the proposed dwelling house would be so alike that the possible change in shadow is not considered an issue. As the shadow cast by the proposal would not affect any other adjoining or neighbouring dwelling house for less than a period of 3 hours on June 21, no purpose would be served by providing the footprint of any other dwelling house.

 

Under condition 53 all major trees on the site are required to be protected and retained. The development consent did not include a condition that allowed the removal of trees along the south side of the site. The retention of the three main trees along this boundary (as submitted plans have consistently shown) would help to screen either the approved, or the proposed, dwelling house.

 

As the dwelling house at 12 Northwood Road is located to the north of the site, the proposed garage would not overshadow any part of this adjoining property.

 

As the proposed changes to the approved dwelling house would also overshadow the adjoining dwelling house at 80A Northwood Road in an almost identical way, nearly all of the changes are recommended for approval.   

 

4. Trees

 

(i) Canary Island Phoenix Date Palm (the palm tree)

 

Object to the removal of this tree: in the first s.96 application the town planning consultant’s report stated that the removal of this tree is supported in an accompanying Arborist’s report. However, the Arborist’s report states that the palm tree    “…is about 12 meters in height and in good health and structure”, and it does not suggest that it should be removed only that it is a weed.

 

Condition 12 requires this tree to be retained because it provides important privacy for at least 4 neighbours/the tree provides privacy for 12 Northwood Road, and the rear yards of 76 and 78 Northwood Road, and the main living area of 74A Northwood Road.

 

The tree is required to be removed because of the proposed changes to the dwelling house.

 

This species of tree is part of the amenity of Northwood and was identified in Council’s 1987 heritage study as a significant tree to Northwood. A number of these palm trees line Northwood Road.

 

Removal of this tree would be contrary to the landscape aims of the DCP.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

The Arborist’s report states that:-

 

·    “A Canary Island Date Palm cannot be retained within the proposed building platform” ;

·    this tree  “…is about 12 meters in height and appears to be in Good health with Good structure”; and

·    This species is usually considered, by bushland officers, to be a weedy naturalising species as it is often spread by fauna into bushland.”

 

The proposed addition to the front northwest corner of the lower ground floor level guestroom, and the proposed squaring off of the porch (balcony) on the level above, would require this palm tree to be removed. Condition 12 requires this tree to be retained because it provides privacy to the occupants of 74A Northwood Road. This tree does not provide privacy to any other property.

 

Canary Island palm trees were included as landscape items of heritage significance under the previous LEP 1987, and a number were confirmed as being located along Northwood Road, although this particular tree was not listed in this way.

 

The site does not contain bushland, and is not within bushland areas covered by Council’s controls.

 

An extract of clause 1.5 of the DCP 2009 sets out the objectives and provisions for Landscaped Area which are: 

 

1.5   Landscaped Area

Objectives

The objectives for landscaped area are:

1    To provide privacy and amenity.

2    To retain and provide for significant vegetation, particularly large and medium sized trees and to provide continuous vegetation corridors.

3    To conserve significant natural features of the site.

4    To assist with on-site stormwater management.

Provisions

a)   A minimum of 35% of the site is to be landscaped area. A minimum width of 1m is required for inclusion as landscaped area.

b)   Proposals should seek to retain significant natural features on the site including mature trees, rocky outcrops and other major vegetation stands (including continuous vegetation corridors to the rear) by careful design of the dwelling and other structures.

c)   The landscaped area should be effectively distributed on the site to minimise the dominance of buildings, structures and paving when viewed from the street, public places and surrounding properties.

 

Although it is not the most significant tree on the site, its proposed removal would be contrary to the second objective and the second provision stated above. In addition this tree also provides privacy to part of the rear yard, and a main living room, of the two storey dwelling house of the property that adjoins the northwest side of the site at 74A Northwood Road.

 

As the tree is a major tree on the site, and offers privacy to an adjoining owner, one of the recommendations of this report is that this tree is retained by the retention of condition 12. In addition, conditions 70 – 74 inclusive that are associated with the retention of this palm tree, are also recommended to be retained.  

 

(ii) Brushbox

 

The (same) Arborist’s report states that the proposed lowering of the garage floor will compact the soil and affect its roots in contravention of conditions 57 and 63.

 

If this tree’s roots are damaged (by lowering the garage level) it could fall onto the dwelling house at 74A Northwood Road. Council should ensure its roots are protected to ensure its viability.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

Council’s Senior Tree Assessment Officer (STAO) has confirmed that the required excavation for the proposed lowering of the garage floor level would not have a significant impact on the roots of this tree and, further, does not require any change to existing conditions, or any additional condition, in relation to the proposed works.

 

The development consent has numerous conditions that seek to protect this, and other, trees on the site, particularly condition 7 as well as conditions 51, 53 - 65, 70 and 72. 

 

As the proposed changes to the garage should not threaten this tree all are recommended for approval.

 

(iii) East Side

 

It is proposed to move the footprint of the approved dwelling house 590mm to the east; this would impact the root zone of trees in this part of the site (condition 72), and it is likely that most of these trees would be removed. Council should engage an independent Arborist to assess the potential impact on these trees.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

The submitted plans show one tree retained along the east side boundary. This tree has been shown to be retained on the approved and the proposed plans, but not on the landscape plan that was later approved by Council in November 2008. Notwithstanding this inconsistency, Council’s STAO confirms that the minor amendments would not cause any additional influence on the existing trees on the site, and consequently, are recommended for approval. 

 


(iv) Hedge

 

An extensive hedge along the front of 12 Northwood Road has streetscape value and provides privacy; part of this hedge also borders the site. Concerned that it will be damaged during construction and ask that it be protected.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

As part of this hedge overhangs the public right of way that links Private Road and Northwood Road it would need to be pruned to allow access to the site.

 

5. Amenity

 

Proposal does not consider the amenity of neighbouring properties and has a significant impact on seven surrounding neighbours; this is exacerbated by a request to delete the following conditions:-

 

·    condition 6: as the height of the garage is proposed to be raised, this will have a visual impact on, and affect the views from, the dwelling house at 12 Private Road;

·    condition 7: the proposal ignores the restriction imposed on the garage floor level; as this is proposed to be lowered, it could affect a Brushbox tree;

·    condition 12: this condition is snubbed because the palm tree would be removed and replaced with a balcony; this would invade privacy and outdoor space; enlarging the footprint reduces privacy and increases overlooking and overshadowing, and windows could be changed under complying development;

·    condition 51: Council’s Tree Preservation Order (which would protect the palm tree);

·    condition 62: this allows some excavation to achieve a certain garage floor level;

·    condition 71: this  restricts excavation within 5m of the palm tree;

·    condition 73: requires the design to be modified so as to retain the palm tree, yet the proposal seeks to remove this tree and enlarge a balcony which will affect the privacy of the open space of 76 Northwood Road; and

·    condition 74: restricts the pruning allowed in relation to the palm tree.

 

Does not achieve a reasonable level of amenity because neighbouring sites would suffer adverse impacts which would be compounded by enlarging the footprint of the dwelling house.

 

Does not address the DCP’s building design objectives: overshadowing, loss of privacy, light spillage, loss of views and amenity are not minimised; extending the footprint exacerbates overshadowing, loss of privacy, views and amenity.

 

Does not address the DCP’s amenity objectives that require reasonable acoustic and visual privacy, and that seek to minimise overlooking. The proposal increases overlooking by extending the dwelling house footprint and decks, and removing the planter box to the south – eastern balcony.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

The proposal has considered the amenity of neighbouring properties in the following ways:-

 

·    by reinstating the planter box along the rear ground floor balcony adjoining the kitchen (being the only planter box included on the approved plans), potential overlooking of the adjoining dwelling house at 80A Northwood Road would be reduced;

·    deleting the glass bricks to the rear lower ground floor level main bedroom would remove the potential for light spillage to this same adjoining property;

·    deleting the kitchen windows on the west elevation would provide privacy to the adjoining two properties at 76 and 78 Northwood Road; and

·    reducing the size of the lower ground floor level bathroom and TV room windows on the west elevation would reduce light spillage to the adjoining property at 78 Northwood Road.

 

The proposed changes to the garage (condition 6) would have a marginal impact on the adjoining property at 12 Northwood Road because the relatively small increases that are proposed in its wall and parapet height would partly be offset by the proposed lowering of the approved garage level by 200mm. The visual impact of the garage would be reduced by an existing fence which includes lattice above, and natural screen plantings within this neighbouring site, that are both located along the common boundary with the subject site.

 

In relation to condition 7 Council’s Senior Tree Assessment Officer has confirmed that the required level of excavation would not have a significant impact on the root system of the Brushbox tree and therefore additional excavation can be tolerated under condition 62. A recommendation of this report requires condition 12, and therefore conditions 70 – 73 inclusive, to remain so as to retain the palm tree, with some pruning of its fronds permissible under condition 74.

 

Most of the proposed additions to the approved footprint of the dwelling house would not cause adverse impacts on neighbouring sites. However an additional condition 12a is recommended to be included so as to reduce the potential for three adjoining properties at 14 Private Road; 53 Cliff Road; and 80A Northwood Road, from being further overlooked by the wrap – around ground floor living room balcony.  In addition, condition 12b is recommended to reduce potential overlooking from the approved lower ground floor level TV room and its attached approved exterior stairs, and from both of the south facing windows of the relocated bedroom 2, into the north facing windows and/or courtyard, of 80A Northwood Road. 

 

Further, condition 12c is recommended prohibiting any addition at the rear of the approved lower ground floor level TV room, and the relocation of its attached exterior stairs, so as not to increase the visual impact of the approved dwelling house on the adjoining property at 80A Northwood Road. The overall change to the shadow cast by the proposal over the north facing habitable windows and skylights of the dwelling house at 80A Northwood Road would either be marginal or indistinguishable.

 

The proposed deletion and changes to windows on the rear/south and west side elevations would improve the amenity of adjoining properties by increasing privacy. The privacy of the adjoin dwelling house at 80A Northwood Road would be maintained by the reinstatement of the planter box to the kitchen balcony at the rear southwest corner of the ground floor level of the dwelling house.

 

The proposed changes would not affect existing views over and above those that would have been affected by the approved development. Indeed, the changes to the dwelling house roof may improve the overall outlook from the upper level windows of the two storey dwelling house located to the north of the site 12 Private Road. The applicant would be able to modify windows as complying development under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 if these complied with this Policy. However the Policy requires a privacy screen in a habitable room window (other than a bedroom) with a floor level more than 1m above existing ground level, and with a setback of less than 3m from a side or a rear boundary, and with a sill height of less than 1.5m.  Subject to the inclusion of conditions 12a, 12b and 12c, the proposal would result in a reasonable level of amenity for adjoining property owners.

 

6.  Privacy and Overlooking

 

Disagree with the applicant that the proposal maintains an acceptable level of privacy.

 

Ignores DCP objective because the development does not minimise overlooking between adjoining dwellings and their private open space.

 

The increase in the size of a rear corner window would increase overlooking of the outside living area and north facing windows of 80A Northwood Road.

 

The first floor level windows would look into the main bedroom windows of 12 Northwood Road.

 

Request that condition 66 (requiring screen planting along the west side boundary) remains so as to retain privacy.

 

Rear yard of 53 Cliff Road would be overlooked.  

 

Footprint is proposed to be increased, and the building, steps and TV room moved closer to 80A Northwood Road, and to the east side boundary. This would increase an already unacceptable degree of overlooking.

 

The plans suggest that the upper level balcony would be moved 1100mm and the lounge extended 790mm to the south; this is unacceptable as it will increase overlooking and exacerbate amenity problems of 80A Northwood Road; the close proximity of the balcony would allow occupants to look down into the skylights and north facing windows of this house..

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments.

 

The proposal includes the deletion of the kitchen windows on the west elevation, and reinstates the planter box for the kitchen balcony at the rear ground floor level that was included on the approved plans but deleted on the first s.96 application. The first of these two proposed changes would prevent, whilst the second would minimise, overlooking of the adjoining rear yards of 76 and 78 Northwood Road, and the dwelling house at 80A Northwood Road, respectively. As the proposed first floor (i.e. ground floor level) windows would be at a lower level than the first floor bedroom windows in the dwelling house at 12 Private Road, this adjoining dwelling house would not be overlooked. Indeed, the setback and levels of both approved floors would not cause an adverse impact on the privacy of any part of the two storey dwelling house at 12 Northwood Road.  

 

Condition 66, which requires screen planting along part of the site’s west side boundary, is recommended to be retained. In 2008 Council approved a landscape plan required by this condition. Part of the rear yard of 53 Cliff Road could be overlooked from the ground floor living room windows and adjoining balcony. In addition, this same balcony could overlook the outdoor covered courtyard located at the front/northeast corner of 80A Northwood Road. To reduce the potential for both of these outdoor areas to be overlooked, an additional condition 12a is recommended.Condition 12a is also recommended to reduce potential overlooking of the dining room window and adjoining covered terrace that are located on the rear/south elevation of 14 Private Road from the proposed windows and adjoining balcony on the north side of the ground floor level living room. However, this part of the condition is phrased to reflect that the owners’ of this property did not make a submission to the proposal.

 

Condition 12b is recommended so that the south facing windows of the approved TV room, and the approved attached exterior stairs, and both of the proposed south facing windows of bedroom 2, are all treated to reduce overlooking of 80A Northwood Road.  Subject to the inclusion of conditions 12a and 12b, the potential overlooking of adjoining property owners would be reduced to a reasonable level.

 

7. Size and Scale

 

The site is already overdeveloped.

 

The development is too large for the block and its design has not considered the amenity of neighbouring properties; it would have a significant impact on no less than 6 adjoining properties.

The proposed dwelling is excessive in bulk as most of its floor space is within an area of 300m2 (88.6% of the lower southern portion of the site).

 

The applicant’s Statement of Environmental Effects states that the proposed fsr would be 0.6:1 which exceeds the previous and current DCPs.

 

A small excavation would achieve a 3 storey house - as was the original intention in previously submitted drawings - and this was included in marketing pictures when the development was listed for sale.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments.

 

The applicant’s town planning consultant’s Statement merely indicates that the relevant development standard for the site is 0.6:1. This is, in fact, an incorrect statement. As detailed in the first numerical assessment table relating to the LEP 2009, the site has an unusual situation where it has two FSR standards: the standard that covers the access handle imposes an FSR of 0.6:1, but the rest of the site has a development standard of 0.5:1. The latter standard has been used for consistency in the FSR calculation in this report. FSR is not a DCP issue.

 

With an approved FSR of 0.44:1, and 36% landscaped area, the site is not overdeveloped. As the proposed changes would retain landscaped area and result in a relatively minor increase in floor space of 26m2, the proposed development would also be reasonable. Notwithstanding that the approved dwelling house has the potential for a third storey if additional excavation was proposed, this amendment is not proposed in this s.96 application and would need to be the subject of an application to Council.  

 

8. DCP: Non–Compliances

 

(i) Landscaped Area

 

May not achieve landscaped area requirement.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

The proposal would result in negligible reductions to the approved landscaped area and the proposal would still satisfy the DCP requirement.  

 

(ii) Rear Setback

 

Minimum rear setback ignored and yet the dwelling house affects 7 neighbouring properties in relation to overshadowing, privacy and overlooking; no further dwelling house extensions at the rear should be allowed.

 

The northern part of the site could accommodate a dwelling house that could resolve contentious issues of privacy, overlooking and solar access, and ensure compliance with the rear setback provision. By locating the pool on the flat area to the north of the site results in the dwelling house being located to the south; the dwelling house should be relocated to the north and the pool could be deleted.

 

A further proposed reduction of 800mm in the rear setback is not minor and would adversely impact the surrounding amenity.

 

The proposed rear setback of 2m is a gross non - compliance and will result in unreasonable overshadowing and cause overlooking

 

Applicants’ strategy is to maximise views to the south; hence the dwelling house is positioned on the level area at the rear of the site at the detriment of neighbouring properties; the dwelling house should be sited further north and away from 80A Northwood Road. Increasing the footprint appears only to benefit the applicant’s views at the expense of 80A Northwood Road being further overlooked.

 

Assessment Officer’s Comments

 

Generally there are relatively minor changes to the approved dwelling house footprint. At the time the development application was submitted and approved, Council’s previous Dwelling House Code did not specify a rear setback, and therefore a 1.5m setback was considered to be the minimum acceptable. The approved rear setback exceeded this figure. The proposed reduction in the approved rear setback of the dwelling house relates to the TV room and its exterior stairs, and bedroom 2 on the lower ground floor level. In particular, the proposed reduced setback of the latter room is relatively minor.

 

The proposed reduction to the approved rear setback could only affect the adjoining dwelling house to the south at 80A Northwood Road, and in relation to potential overlooking and increased overshadowing, the effects would be reasonable. A proposal to relocate the approved dwelling house to the northern part of the site would need to be the subject of an application to Council. Whilst this location should ensure compliance with the rear setback provision of the DCP 2009, it would be likely to result in adverse impacts in terms of potential loss of outlook and major trees, and overlooking of a number of adjoining properties.

 

It would be fair and reasonable to state that the maximum views that could be obtained from a two storey dwelling house would be one that is located on the highest part of the site. However, even where the proposed dwelling house is two storeys, the outlook from the upper/ground floor level would only be equivalent to the lower floor level of the dwelling house to the north east of the site at 14 Private Road. The relatively minor changes proposed to the footprint of the approved dwelling house would not result in any change to those views that could already be obtained.  The proposed reduction of 136mm in the rear setback of bedroom 2 is insignificant and is supported. However, due to the combined visual impact on the adjoining property at 80A Northwood Road, neither the rear addition to the TV room, or its relocated attached exterior stairs, are supported (condition 12c).

 

9. Access

 

Access to the site has not been considered.

 

Access for construction vehicles would be extremely difficult, if not impossible without damaging existing infrastructure and adjacent properties.

 

Access to the site is too restricted and difficult, and requires vehicles to be managed and traffic to be controlled.

 

Vehicular access to the site should be conditioned so that it is prohibited along the walkway between Private Road and Northwood Road.

 

Seek protection of garden features parallel to the access handle which could be damaged.

 

Concerned for our amenity when vehicles are parked in the driveway adjacent to our dining room and backdoor.

 

No provision for visitor parking.

 


Comment

 

Access to the site, and the management of construction vehicles, were assessed under the original development application and conditions 10, 82, 83, 87, 89, 91, 92, 96 and 97 imposed. In September 2008 Council approved a Construction Management Traffic Report submitted in relation to condition 10. At the time of the approval there was no car parking required for a dwelling house. The approved double garage satisfies the parking provision under the DCP. Visitor parking is not required for a dwelling house. Damage to neighbouring properties is a civil matter between the affected parties.

 

10. Views

 

A number of residences close to the site will lose all, or the majority, of their views. Views are not being shared.

 

Raising the garage roof would contravene condition 6 (which seeks to address views from 12 Private Road).

 

Both the city and water views to the east from 74A Northwood Road would be removed.

 

Comment

 

The potential impact on existing views formed part of the assessment of the original development application and was found to be reasonable. The proposed wall height of the garage (2.4m) is similar to the height of the lattice fixed to the top of the timber fence along that part of the common boundary between 12 Private Road and the subject site i.e. the fence that is directly in front of the ground floor dining room window of the former residence. The garage has been approved parallel to this boundary fence, and its approved location would not change under the s.96 application. Two changes are proposed that would affect the height of the approved garage:-

 

·    its approved floor level would be lowered by 200mm; and

·    the height of its parapet at the front and rear, and its exterior wall, would increase.

 

These proposed changes would have little, or no, impact on the available outlook from the adjoining two storey dwelling house to the north of the approved garage at 12 Private Road. In addition, the proposed changes to the dwelling house would have little, or no, impact on views from either of the adjoining two storey dwelling houses at 12 Private Road or 74A Northwood Road.

 

S.79C(1)(e) The public interest

 

This report has attempted to show that overall, the changes proposed to the approved dwelling house and garage would have a similar impact on adjoining neighbours compared to the approved design of these two structures. One of the concerns raised by some objectors has been overlooking. Some changes such as the deletion of windows at the rear and on one side would prevent overlooking of adjoining neighbours, whilst reductions to the size of some windows would reduce potential overlooking. It is recommended that two conditions (12a and 12b) are included in the development consent so as to reduce potential overlooking to three adjoining neighbours. Overall the concerns regarding overlooking can be addressed.

 

Condition 12c is recommended so as to address the visual impact of a proposed reduction in the setback of the dwelling house. Concerns in relation to shadow are not endorsed as the changes as a result of the proposal would be marginal or indistinguishable. By contrast, another concern raised by some objectors in relation to the proposed removal of a major tree on the site is endorsed.

Overall, as the proposal would generally be a reasonable development its approval would not be contrary to the public interest, whilst the retention of a major tree would be in the public interest as it not only provides privacy to a neighbour, but also offers amenity to other neighbours. 

  

Matters Arising

 

(i)    Condition 99

 

Condition 99 of the development consent required the building to be lowered by 500mm. At cl. 1.6 Building Design of the applicant’s Statement it states, in relation to Height, that the maximum height of the development has been reduced.

It is unclear if the height of the approved building was lowered prior to approval. Certainly there are instances where the height of the building has been reduced by exactly 150m compared to slightly earlier revisions to the approved plans (revision Z).

Irrespective of whether the building was lowered by the amount required by condition 99, the general overall height of the building under this s.96 application compared to the approved height has been reduced by an amount in excess of 150mm. It is therefore reasonable to delete condition 99.

 

(ii)    Inconsistencies

 

Some conditions should be modified due to inconsistencies. The conditions requiring modification and the reason are listed below:-

 

·    10: a Construction Management Traffic Report was submitted and endorsed by Council in September 2008. The last sentence of this condition requires this report to address the requirements for the relocation of the Canary Island Date Palm. As this tree is recommended to be retained under condition 12, these words need to be deleted. The condition otherwise should be retained in case a revised report is needed, particularly due to the time that has elapsed since the report was endorsed.

 

·    Condition 18 (17): this requires an Occupation Certificate for the building. However as it does not specify an Occupation Certificate for the garage and swimming pool, the condition should be amended to address all of the individual approved structures.

 

·    Condition 27 (52): under sub- clause b) an older Australian Standard is quoted. This sub – clause should be amended to address the current standard of 2007.

 

·    Sub – heading (i): this is located between conditions 53 and 54. It refers to conditions 55 – 64 that relate to the Brushbox tree required to be retained and protected at the south end of the access handle. As the relevant conditions are 54 – 65 the condition should be amended accordingly. 

 

(iii)       Deleted Conditions

 

In addition to condition 99, conditions 3, 4 and 98 can be deleted as they would no longer apply to the s.96 proposal because:-

 

·    the glass bricks in condition 3 have been replaced with brick;

·    the kitchen windows in condition 4 have been deleted; and

·    the roof terrace required to be deleted under condition 98 is not possible with the skillion roof.

 


CONCLUSION

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zone under the LEP 2009. The proposal also complies with the development standards for FSR and height, and does not raise any issues in relation to this environmental planning instrument, or any other.

 

The proposal complies with all of the numerical provisions of the DCP 2009 except wall height and rear setback. The first departure is numerically relatively minor and satisfies the relevant Building Design objectives of the DCP 2009 and the intent of the numerical provision itself. The second departure is based largely on the position of the approved dwelling house, and the location of its primary private open space on its north side and not at the rear. Although both non – compliances are supported, condition 12c is recommended so as to prevent further encroachment into the rear setback because of the proposed changes to an approved TV room, and its attached exterior stairs, in order to reduce the visual impact of both structures on an adjoining property.

 

Eight submissions have been received to the proposal, including six submissions from owners of properties that adjoin the subject site, the majority of whom raised concerns in relation to the original DA.  Of the numerous concerns raised one in relation to the retention of a Canary Island Date Palm, and another in relation to potential overlooking, are supported.

 

The proposed changes to the approved dwelling house can largely be accommodated if an appropriate level of residential amenity is maintained. An existing level of residential amenity can be maintained by additional conditions if these changes are approved, and the relevant objectives of the R2 zone under the LEP 2009 would also be satisfied.

 

It is considered that the proposal would result in relatively minor changes to an approved two storey dwelling house and a detached garage. Subject to the retention of the relevant existing conditions imposed to address potential overlooking, and/or that seek to retain the amenity of some adjoining owners, in conjunction with two additional conditions (12a and 12b) that seek to reduce potential overlooking of three adjoining properties, and an additional condition 12c that seeks to reduce the visual impact of changes proposed to part of the lower ground floor level, the proposal would otherwise have no adverse impacts on adjoining property owners or on Private Road. Matters in relation to both s.96 and s.79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, have been satisfied.

 

As the proposed changes are generally reasonable, the s.96 application is recommended for approval subject to the following:-

 

·    the amendment (and, where relevant, the proposed change shown in italics) of conditions 1 (the list of approved plans); 2 (a balcony privacy screen); 6 (garage height); 7 (the garage floor level); 10 (the traffic report); 18 (the Occupation Certificate); 27 ( swimming pool fence); sub - clause (i); and 62 (garage excavation);

·    the inclusion of additional conditions 12a and 12b to reduce potential overlooking of neighbours, and condition 12c so as to reduce the visual impact of some changes to the lower rear ground floor level;

·    the deletion of conditions 3 (master bedroom windows); 4 (side kitchen windows);  98 (the roof terrace); and 99 (the reduction in building height);

·    the retention of all other conditions of the development consent; and

·    the applicant being advised that the development consent dated 14 February 2008 will lapse unless works are substantially commenced prior to 14 February 2013.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the development consent granted on 14 February 2008 for the construction of a two storey dwelling house, a detached double garage and a swimming pool, on a vacant lot being  Lot 2 DP 1041458 and known as 16 Private Road, Northwood is amended in the following manner:-

 

A          By amending conditions 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 18, 27, 62 and sub – clause (i) to read:-

 

            1. (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with sheets 01; 02 and 03-12, Issue 14, dated 26.03.12, by Boka-Krslovic Homes Pty Ltd except as amended by the following conditions.

 

2.  In order to reduce overlooking into the adjoining rear yards of 76 and 78 Northwood Road, the applicant shall provide a privacy screen in toughened obscure glass and to a height of 1.7m above the finished floor level along the western side of the rear ground floor level balcony. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.  

 

            6. In order to reduce the visual impact and to improve views from 12 Private Road, the applicant shall limit the maximum height of the garage to RL 44.41.

 

            7. In order to ensure any potential adverse effect on the root system of the Brushbox tree required to be retained is kept to a minimum, any reduction of the garage floor level below RL 41.52 is to be subject to the agreement of Council’s Manager, Open Space.           

 

            10. A Construction Management Traffic Report (CMTR) must be submitted to the Manger, Traffic for the approval of the Open Space & Urban Services Division PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE. It must detail the traffic impact of the construction works on the local area and the means proposed to manage construction works to minimise such impacts. In particular, the Report must consider the impact on the on-street parking during construction, the movement of trucks to and from the site, the location of any site sheds and the use of any cranes and concrete pumps. The applicant is to note that the use of cranes and concrete pumps on the public reserve requires a ‘Permit to Stand Plant’ from Council. All materials and plant are to be stored on-site unless prior permission is received from Council to use the footpath.   The CMTR must also detail a proposed method for neighbour communication.

 

            18. (17) An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the dwelling house; swimming pool and garage.

 

            27. (52) The swimming pool being surrounded by a fence:-

            a) That forms a barrier between the swimming pool; and

            i)          any residential building or movable dwelling situated on the premises; and

            ii)         any place (whether public or private) adjacent to or adjoining the premises;             and

            b) That is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with the standards as             prescribed by the Regulations under the Swimming Pools Act, 1992, and the Australian             Standard 1926.1 – 2007 Swimming Pool Safety, Part 1: Safety barriers for swimming             pools.

            SUCH FENCE IS TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE FILLING OF THE             SWIMMING    POOL.

 

            62. There must be no soil excavation for the garage other than that required to achieve a floor level of RL 41.52.

 

(i) Tree protection for the Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) located within the proposed driveway (i.e. conditions 54 – 65 inclusive).

 

B          By inserting the following additional conditions 12a, 12b and 12c to read:-

 

            “12a.   In order to reduce the potential of the adjoining properties at 14 Private Road;                         53 Cliff Road; and/or 80A Northwood Road from being overlooked, the                                 following privacy measures are required:

 

·   unless the owners of 14 Private Road confirm in writing to the contrary to      the Principal Certifying Authority, a physical privacy screen with a height of at      least 1.7m above the FFL of the ground floor living room (i.e. a height of at      least RL 43) is to be constructed along the common boundary to 14 Private      Road independent of the dividing fence on the north side of the living room      balcony, prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate; and   

·   a privacy screen 1.7m in height above the FFL of this same room is to be                  attached to the east side of the adjoining balcony for a distance of 1.5m north             from its southeast corner and along its south side.

                 

                  PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A                     CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

   12b.  In order to reduce the potential of the adjoining property at 80A Northwood Road from being overlooked, the following privacy measures are required:

 

·   a privacy screen 1.7m above the FFL of the landing and each riser of the approved exterior stairs leading to the approved lower ground floor level TV room, is to be attached on its south side, and all three of its approved windows on the south side are to be finished in obscure glass, and fixed, up to this same height or, alternatively, the sill height of all three approved windows is to be raised to this same level; and

·   both windows of bedroom 2 on the south side of the lower ground floor level are to be finished in obscure glass, and fixed, up to a height of 1.7m above the FFL or, alternatively, the sill height of both windows is to be raised to this same level.

                 

                  PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A                     CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

     12c. In order to reduce the visual impact of the proposal from the adjoining    property at 80A Northwood Road, no approval is granted, or implied, for either the additions to the south side of the lower ground floor level TV room, or the relocation of the attached exterior stairs to this room, in other than the approved location. Only the additions on the west side of this room are permitted. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.” 

 

C         By deleting conditions 3, 4, 98 and 99 to read:-

 

            “3.   Deleted.

4.   Deleted.

             98.  Deleted.

             99.  Deleted”.

 

D         By retaining all of the other conditions of the original development consent i.e.                conditions 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13 – 17, 19 – 26, 28 – 61, and 63 – 97 inclusive. 

 

E       That the applicant to be advised that the development consent dated 14 February 2008 will             lapse on 14 February 2013 unless the approved works are substantially commenced.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Plans and Elevations

5 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Notification Plans

2 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Development consent dated 14 February 2008

17 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Site Plans and Elevations

 






ATTACHMENT 2

Notification Plans

 



ATTACHMENT 3

Development consent dated 14 February 2008

 

 

 

 

14th February 2008

Our Ref: AT:ms D357/05

 

 

Mr R Webber

61A Ronald Avenue

GREENWICH NSW 2065

 

 

 

Dear Sir,

 

Notice of Determination of Development Application issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Section 81(1)(a)

 

Development Application No.: D357/05

Address: 16 Private Road, Northwood

Proposed Development:  Construction of a two storey dwelling house, a detached double garage and a swimming pool, on a vacant lot.

 

You are advised that the abovementioned Development Application has been determined by Council at its meeting of 4th February, 2008 when it was resolved that Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application D357/05 for the erection of a two storey dwelling house, separate garage for the parking of two vehicles and the construction of a swimming pool at 16 Private Road Northwood, subject to the following conditions:-

 

Plans

 

1.         (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing numbers 0456/DA1, DA2 & DA3, Issue Z, dated 31.1.08, by Cant Dibden Pty Ltd Architects.

 

Specific

 

2.         In order to reduce overlooking into the adjoining rear yards of 76 and 78 Northwood Road, the applicant shall provide a privacy screen in toughened obscure glass and to a height of 1.7m above the finished floor level along the western side of the rear first floor balcony. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

3.         In order to improve the privacy of the occupants of 80A Northwood Road the applicant is to ensure that all 3 of the windows of the master bedroom on the southern elevation are constructed in glass bricks. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

4.         In order to reduce the overlooking potential of the adjoining rear yards of 76 and 78 Northwood Road, the applicant is to ensure that the kitchen windows on the western elevation are to be in obscure glass up to a height of 1.7m    above the finished floor level. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

5.         In order to reduce the overlooking potential of the western courtyard of 14 Private Road, the applicant is to construct a timber privacy screen 1.8m high above, and attached to, the concourse level of the swimming pool where the height of the existing boundary fence does not achieve this same height. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

6.         In order to reduce the visual impact and to improve views from 12 Private Road, the applicant shall limit the maximum height of the garage to RL 44.12.

 

7.         In order to ensure any potential adverse effect on the root system of the Brushbox tree required to be retained is kept to a minimum, any reduction of the garage floor level below RL 41.72 is to be subject to the agreement of Council’s Manager, Open Space.

 

8.         A revised BASIX Certificate is to be submitted PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE to address those changes made to the development since the original BASIX Certificate was issued. Plans submitted with the Construction Certificate must incorporate all of the revised BASIX commitments.

 

9.         The door to the ground floor w.c. adjacent to the front entry is to comply with clause 3.8.3.3 of the Building Code of Australia. PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

10.       A Construction Management Traffic Report (CMTR) must be submitted to the Manger, Traffic for the approval of the Open Space & Urban Services Division PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE. It must detail the traffic impact of the construction works on the local area and the means proposed to manage construction works to minimise such impacts. In particular, the Report must consider the impact on the on-street parking during construction, the movement of trucks to and from the site, the location of any site sheds and the use of any cranes and concrete pumps. The applicant is to note that the use of cranes and concrete pumps on the public reserve  requires a ‘Permit to Stand Plant’ from Council. All materials and plant are to be stored on-site unless prior permission is received from Council to use the footpath.   The CMTR must also detail a proposed method for neighbour communication and the requirements for the relocation of the Canary Island Date Palm.

 

11.       In order to prevent any new work encroaching on a neighbouring property, all new work is to be located wholly within the subject site. If any doubt is raised Council may request the submission of a survey report.

 

12.       In order to maintain privacy between the subject site and the occupants of 74A Northwood Road, the applicant shall ensure that the Canary Island Date Palm remains in its existing location.

 

General

 

13.       (1) The submission of a Construction Certificate and its issue by Council or Private Certifier PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION WORK commencing.

 

14.       (2) All building works are required to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

15.       (137)  Lane Cove Council charges a fee of $30 for the registration of any Part 4A Certificates (compliance, construction, occupation or subdivision certificates) issued by an accredited certifier under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

16.       (11) The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Check agent or Customer Centre to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met.  Plans will be appropriately stamped.  For Quick Check agent details please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au see Your Business then Building & Developing then Building & Renovating or telephone 13 20 92.

 

            The consent authority or a private accredited certifier must:-

 

         Ensure that a Quick Check agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before the issue of any Construction Certificate.

 

17.       (12) Approval is subject to the condition that the builder or person who does the residential building work complies with the applicable requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 whereby a person must not contract to do any residential building work unless a contract of insurance that complies with this Act is in force in relation to the proposed work.  It is the responsibility of the builder or person who is to do the work to satisfy Council or the PCA that they have complied with the applicable requirements of Part 6.  Council as the PCA will not release the Construction Certificate until evidence of Home Owners Warranty Insurance or an owner builder permit is submitted. THE ABOVE CONDITION DOES NOT APPLY TO COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION, OWNER BUILDER WORKS LESS THAN $5000 OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS LESS THAN $12000.

 

18.       (17)  An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the building.

 

19.       (35) All demolition, building construction work, including earthworks, deliveries of building materials to and from the site to be restricted to the following hours:-

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)                    7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                                   7.00am to 4.00pm

No work to be carried out on Sundays or any public holidays.

 

20.       (36) Stockpiles of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or other material capable of being moved by water to be stored clear of any drainage line, easement, natural watercourse, footpath, kerb or roadside.

 

21.       (37) The development shall be conducted in such a manner so as not to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood in respect of noise, vibration, smell, dust, waste water, waste products or otherwise.

 

22.       (46) Continuous balustrading is to be provided to all balconies, decks, terraces, landings and the like where more than 1 metre above the ground or floor surface beneath.  Such balustrading is to have a minimum height of 1 metre.  Openings in the balustrade must not allow a 125mm sphere to pass through and where the floor is more than 4 metres above the ground or floor surface below, any horizontal or near horizontal elements within the balustrade between 150mm and 760mm above the floor must not facilitate climbing.

 

23.       (47) Continuous balustrading is to be provided to all stairways and ramps where more than 1 metre or 5 risers above the ground or floor surface beneath.

 

The balustrade is to have a height of not less than 865mm above the nosings of the stair treads or the floor level of the ramp or landing and any opening does not permit a 125mm sphere to pass through it and for stairs, the sphere is tested above the nosings.

 

24.       (48) Depositing or storage of builder's materials on the footpath or roadways within the Municipality without first obtaining approval of Council is PROHIBITED.

 

Separate approval must be obtained from Council's Works and Urban Services Department PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT of any building waste container ("Skip") in a public place.

 

25.       (49) Under the Home Building Regulation 1997, a signboard must be erected on the site in a prominent position indicating in clear and legible characters the following information:-

   The name of the Licensee shown on the licence;

   The words "Licensed Contractor” or words to that effect;

   The number of the Licence held by the Licensee;

   Such signboard not to exceed 900 mm x 600 mm.

 

26.       (50) The cleaning out of ready-mix concrete trucks, wheelbarrows and the like into Council's gutter is PROHIBITED.

 

27.       (52) The swimming pool being surrounded by a fence:-

 

a) That forms a barrier between the swimming pool; and

 

i)   any residential building or movable dwelling situated on the premises; and

ii)   any place (whether public or private) adjacent to or adjoining the premises; and

 

b) That is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with the standards as prescribed by the Regulations under the Swimming Pool Act, 1992, and the Australian Standard 1926-1986.

 

SUCH FENCE IS TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE FILLING OF THE SWIMMING POOL.

 

28.       (53) The filter and pump being located in a position where it will create no noise nuisance at any time or, alternatively, being enclosed in an approved soundproof enclosure.  If noise generated as a result of the development results in an offensive noise Council, may prohibit the use of the unit, under the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

 

29.       (54) In accordance with the requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and Regulations thereunder a warning notice is to be displayed in a prominent position in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool at all times.

 

The notice must be in accordance with the standards of the Australian Resuscitation Council for instructional posters and resuscitation techniques and must contain a warning "YOUNG CHILDREN SHOULD BE SUPERVISED WHEN USING THIS POOL".

 

30.       (55) Fibrecrete Swimming Pool Shell being constructed in accordance with AS.2783-1985 "Concrete Swimming Pool Code, AS 3600-1988 - "Concrete Structure" and "AW1 Fibresteel Technical Manual, November 1981".

 

31.       Standard Condition (56) Where Lane Cove Council is appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority, it will be necessary to book an inspection for each of the following stages during the construction process.  Forty eight (48) hours notice must be given prior to the inspection being required:-

 

a)         The pier holes/pads before filling with concrete.

b)         All reinforcement prior to filling with concrete.

d)         Framework including roof and floor members when completed and prior to covering.

e)         Installation of steel beams and columns prior to covering

f)          Waterproofing of wet areas

g)         Pool reinforcement prior to placement of concrete.

h)         The swimming pool safety fence and the provision of the resuscitation poster prior to filling of the pool with water.

i)          Stormwater drainage lines prior to backfilling

k)         Completion.

 

32.       Standard Condition (57) Structural Engineer's details being submitted to Council and approved PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE for the following:-

 

b)         retaining walls;

c)         footings;

d)         reinforced concrete work;

e)         structural steelwork;

f)          upper level floor framing;

 

33.       (60) A temporary connection to be made to the sewers of Sydney Water (where available) with an approved toilet structure and toilet fixtures being provided on the site BEFORE WORK IS COMMENCED.  Where the Sydney Water sewer is not available a "Chemical Closet" type toilet shall be permitted.

 

34.       (61)  All timbers complying with Timber Framing Code AS 1684-79.

 

35.       (62) All glazing is to comply with the requirements of AS 1288.

 

36.       (63) All metal deck roofs being of a ribbed metal profile or colourbond corrugated galvanised or zincalume iron, in a mid to dark range colour and having an approved anti-glare finish.

 

37.       (65) Noise from domestic air conditioners is not to be audible in any adjoining dwelling between the hours of 10:00pm and 7:00am on weekdays or between the hours of 10:00pm and 8:00am on weekends and public holidays. 

 

If the noise emitted from the air conditioning unit results in offensive noise, Council may prohibit the use of the unit, under the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

 

 

38.       (67) 

(a)        The use of mechanical rock pick machines on building sites is prohibited due to the potential for damage to adjoining properties.

 

(b)        Notwithstanding the prohibition under condition (a), consideration will be given to the use of rock pick machines and may be approved by Council subject to:-

 

(1)        A Geotechnical Engineer's Report that indicates that the rock pick machine can be used without causing damage to the adjoining properties.

 

(2)        The report details the procedure to be followed in the use of the rock pick machine and all precautions to be taken to ensure damage does not occur to adjoining properties.

 

(3)        With the permission of the adjoining owners and occupiers comprehensive internal and external photographs are to be taken of the adjoining premises for evidence of any cracking and the general state of the premises PRIOR TO ANY WORK COMMENCING.  Where approval of the owners/occupiers is refused they be advised of their possible diminished ability to seek damages (if any) from the developers and where such permission is still refused Council may exercise its discretion to grant approval.

 

(4)        The Geotechnical Engineer supervises the work and the work has been carried out in terms of the procedure laid down.

 

            COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CONDITION       MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION           CERTIFICATE.

 

39.       (68) An automatic fire detection and alarm system, designed to ensure the occupants are given adequate warning so they can evacuate the building in an emergency, must be installed in the dwelling.

 

            This requirement is satisfied by:-

 

(a)        Smoke alarms installed in—

            (i)         Class 1a buildings in accordance with 3.7.2.3 of the Building Code of Australia; and

            (ii)        in Class 1b buildings in accordance with 3.7.2.4 and 3.7.2.5 of the Building Code of Australia

(b)        Smoke alarms complying with AS 3786.

(c)        Smoke alarms connected to the consumer mains power where consumer power is supplied to the building.

 

 

Location – Class 1a buildings (dwellings)

 

Smoke alarms must be installed in a Class 1a building on or near the ceiling in—

 

(a)        any storey containing bedrooms—

            (i)         between each part of the dwelling containing bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling; and

            (ii)        where bedrooms are served by a hallway, in that hallway; and

(b)        any other storey not containing bedrooms.

 

40.       (70) Protection of the dwelling against subterranean termites must be carried out in accordance with AS.3660.

 

41.       (73) The site being cleared of all debris and left in a clean and tidy condition at the completion of all works.

 

42.       (77) All spillage deposited on the footpaths or roadways to be removed at the completion of each days work.

 

43.       (78) The site being properly fenced to prevent access of unauthorised persons outside of working hours.

 

44.       (87) Pedestrians' portion of footpath to be kept clear and trafficable at all times.

 

45.       (103)  Floor wastes connected to an approved sanitary fitting are to be provided to all bathrooms, laundries and w.c's.

 

46.       (122) All rooms being provided with light and ventilation in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

47.       (130)  Compliance with the Waste Management Plan submitted under this application.

 

48.       (132)  It should be understood that this consent in no way relieves the owners or applicant from any obligation to obtain any other approval which may be required under any covenant affecting the land or otherwise nor relieve a person from the legal civil consequences of not complying with any such covenant.

 

49.       (138) All overflow water and drainage including backwash from filter washing from the swimming pool must be directed to the sewer in accordance with Sydney Water's requirements.

 

50.       (141) Long Service Levy  Compliance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; payment of the Long Service Levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or, where such a levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) – All building works in excess of $25,000 are subject to the payment of a Long Service Levy at the rate of 0.35%.

 

COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CONDITION MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

Landscape conditions

 

51.       (300)  A Tree Preservation Order applies in the Lane Cove local government area. The order prohibits the cutting, removal or damage of any tree except with the consent of Council, which must be strictly and fully complied with, and the penalty for contravention of this order is up to One million one hundred thousand ($1,100,000).  The co-operation of all residents is sought in the preservation of the bushland character of the Municipality.  All enquiries concerning the Tree Preservation Order must be made at the Council Chambers, Lane Cove.

 

52.       (301)  Prior to any works commencing on site a Tree Preservation Order Work Authority must be obtained to remove or prune those trees identified on the approved plans to be removed or pruned for construction.

 

53.       (302)  The protection on site, without damage, of all existing trees, excepting those shown in the approved plan to be removed or pruned.  Irrespective of this consent permission from Council must be obtained for the removal or pruning of any trees, including the cutting of any tree roots greater than 40 mm in diameter.

 

(i)         Tree protection for the Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) located within the proposed driveway (ie conditions 55-64 inclusive).

 

54.       An AQF Level 5 Arboriculturalist must be engaged by the builder to supervise and certify    all tree management on the site. The Supervising Arboriculturist must be on site and provide certification for their site attendance and supervision of the following works located within 8m of the Brush Box. In particular, the Arboriculturist must supervise the following works:

- Tree Protection including Trunk Battons and Root Protection   

   Padding

- Demolition

- Excavation for the pool

- Preparation for garage floor formwork

- Laying of garage floor

- Driveway Construction

 

55.       A report must be submitted by the Supervising Arboriculturalist within 7 days of inspection to Council’s Tree Preservation Officer, outlining the extent of the work and if there was any damage to the tree root system.

 

56.       The trunk of the Brush Box must be protected during the construction period by a trunk barrier.  The trunk barrier must be made of underfelt under a layer of hardwood battens (minimum size 50x50mm) spaced 50 mm apart joined together with galvanised strapping. The battens are to cover the trunk from ground level to 4m above ground level. The battons must NOT be fixed to the tree with nails or screws.

 

57.       Root protection padding is to be placed over all the ground area within 10m of the tree trunk. This padding shall comprise a layer of shadecloth, covered with 150mm layer of woodchip, and topped with a layer of 100mm x 100mm hardwood planks. All planks are to be bolted together with chain.

 

58.       The supervising Arboriculturalist must supervise any digging / excavation that is within 8m of the Brush Box. 

 

59.       Any services (sewer, water, gas, electricity) that are located within 8m of the Brush Box are to be located within 1m of the western boundary.

 

60.       (347) All tree protective measures (Trunk Protection and Root Protection Padding) must be in place PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE, to the satisfaction of Council’s Tree Preservation Officer and/or Landscape Architect, and must be maintained for the duration of works on the site. No further site works may take place until this certification has been obtained and a copy forwarded to the accredited certifier and Council.

 

61.       There must be no soil excavation for the driveway. The driveway must be laid directly onto the existing soil level.

 

62.       There must be no soil excavation for the garage other than that required to achieve a floor level of RL 41.72.

 

63.       The driveway must be constructed using Eco Pavers on a base of no fines road base as per specification in Ian English report titled Arboricultural Report – Development Assessment: Site: 16 Private Rd Northwood DA No357/05.

 

64.       Machinery on the site must be no greater than 8 tonne GVM.

 

65.       The Supervising Arboriculturalist must supervise any excavation within 3m of any tree on the site.

 

(ii)        Landscape Conditions to be satisfied prior to issue of Construction Certificate

 

66.       (381)  So as to reduce the visual impact of the development viewed from the adjoining sites to the west of the subject site, screen planting is required along the western boundary commencing at the southern boundary and to extend in a northerly direction for 18 linear metres.  These plants must be healthy, good quality nursery stock, grown to at least 25 L pot size, being free of girdling roots and other defects and to have a height of not less than 3m and will reach 6m tall at maturity .Plants must be spaced 1.5 m apart at planting.  Residents are strongly encouraged to use local native plant species in their gardens.  A species list of local native plants suitable for gardens is available from Council.

 

67.       (383)  The Applicant must ensure that all landscaping is completed to a professional standard, free of any hazards or unnecessary maintenance problems and that all plants are consistent with NATSPEC specifications.

 

68.       (393) Submission of  detailed landscape working drawings consistent with Councils Landscape Checklist, and complies in all respects with the conditions of the development consent are to be submitted for approval by Councils Landscape Architect  PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE. The plan shall include the screen planting featured on Dwg: 0456/DA1, Issue X,  dated 02.11.07 by Cant Dibden Pty Ltd Architects.

 

69.       (394b) All landscape works are to be inspected by Councils Landscape Architect upon practical completion in order to certify that all landscape works have been completed in accordance with the DA conditions and in conjunction with the approved landscape working drawing. The inspection is to be carried out PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE.

70.       There must be no change in soil level within 5m of any tree, outside of the building footprint.

71.       There must be no excavation within 5m of the Canary Island Date palm, except for building footings.

72.       There must be no excavation for any services within the Critical Root Zone (5x diameter of the trunk at chest height) of any tree.

73.       The design of the deck on the northern side of the kitchen must be changed to accommodate the palm (which is to remain in its current position). The deck must not be located closer than 500mm to the trunk of the Canary Island Date palm.

74.       Pruning of the Canary Island Date palm must be limited to removing only those fronds hanging below horizontal level, except where clearance for the roof is required.

 

 

General Engineering Conditions

 

75.       Design and Construction Standards.  All engineering plans and work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s standards and relevant Development Control Plans except as amended by other conditions.

 

76.       Control of Stormwater Runoff.  Stormwater runoff from all impervious areas shall be  collected and piped by gravity flow to the street gutter. The design and construction of the drainage system is to fully comply with, AS3500 and Council's DCP-Stormwater management. The design shall ensure that the development, either during construction or upon completion, does not impede or divert natural surface water so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties.

 

77.       Environmental Pollution Control Pit. A stormwater pit is to be installed on the new system, on the private property, just prior to the stormwater connecting to the receiving system. Environmental pollution Control Pit is to be designed to remove pollutants from the stormwater flow. The pit is to have a minimum dimension of 600 x 600 mm, a debris screen, sediment collection sump and must be designed to drain completely dry. The pit is to be maintained at all times.

 

78.       Rainwater Reuse Tanks

The applicant is to install a rainwater reuse system with a minimum effective capacity of 10000 Litres. Rainwater tanks are to be installed in accordance with Council’s rainwater tank policy and relevant Australian standards the plumbing requirements are as follows.

Note:

   Rainwater draining to the Reuse tank is to drain from the roof surfaces only. No “on - ground” surfaces are to drain to the reuse tank.  “On - ground” surfaces are to drain via a separate system.

   Mosquito protection & first flush device shall be fitted to the reuse tank.

   The overflow from the rainwater reuse tank is to drain by gravity to the street kerb and gutter.

   Rainwater tank is to be connected to all new toilets, one cold water washing machine tap and one outside tap within the development.

  

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior To Construction Certificate

 

79.       Drainage Plans. A drainage plan and supporting calculations are required. The plan must address or  include the following;

 

a.         An Environmental Pollution Control Pit is to be provided, just prior to system discharging to the receiving system.

b.         The minimum capacity of the piped drainage system shall be equivalent to the collected runoff from the 1 in 20 year average recurrence interval storm event.

c.         Runoff that enters the site from upstream properties must not be redirected in a manner, which adversely affects adjoining properties.

d.         The design shall ensure that the development, either during construction or upon completion, does not impede or divert natural surface water so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties.

e.         All work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s standards and specifications for stormwater drainage.

f.          A reuse tank with a minimum effective capacity of 10000L. An overflow from the reuse tank is to drain to the easement.

g.         The run-off from the “on ground” paved areas are NOT to be directed to the rainwater tank, but is to be directed to the pollution control pit before discharging to the easement.

h.         The reuse tank is to be “plumbed in” to all toilets in the development and one out door tap in proximity to the pool to allow for topping up. 

 

The design is to be certified by a Charted Practising Engineer. The certification is to note that the design fully complies with, AS3500 and Council's DCP Stormwater management. The design and certification shall be submitted to the satisfaction of Council or an Accredited Certifier prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.  

 

80.       Certification of easement.  The existing easement is to be certified that it is in good working order and meets the requirements set out in Council’s DCP Stormwater management. The certification is to be carried out by a fully licensed and insured plumber or a Charted Practising Engineer. Where an existing element does not comply with current standards the subject element is to be replaced. 

 

81.       Footpath Damage Bond. The applicant shall lodge with Council a $1000 cash bond or bank guarantee to cover damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

82.       Residential Crossing. The residential crossing shall be constructed to the specifications and levels issued by Council. An application shall be made to Council and relevant fees / bond, (being a $800 bond, plus inspection fee of $259 plus a design fee of $150, totalling $1209, - 2007/08) is to be paid to Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for the provision of street alignment levels and Council inspections.

 

83.       Boundary Levels. The levels of the street alignment shall be obtained from Council. These levels are to be incorporated into the design of the internal pavements, carparks, landscaping and stormwater drainage plans and shall be obtained prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

84.       Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan  (ESCP) shall be prepared by a suitably qualified consultant in accordance with the guidelines set out in the manual “Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction“ prepared by LANDCOM  ‘Fourth Edition 2004, Volume 1’.These devices shall be maintained during the construction works and replaced where considered necessary. The following details are to be included in drawings accompanying the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan:

 

   Location and design criteria of erosion and sediment control structures,

   Site access point/s and means of limiting material leaving the site

    Means of diversion of uncontaminated upper catchment around disturbed areas

   Procedures for maintenance of erosion and sediment controls

   Details and procedures for dust control.

 

85.       Existing Drainage Easement.   Documentation is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application demonstrating that the development site benefits from an appropriate downstream easement to drain water.

 

86.       Pool Construction

Overland Flow around pools:

The pool design shall ensure that either during construction or upon completion, surface water is not directed or diverted so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties.

 

To prevent overland flows from entering the pool the coping level must be a minimum of 150mm above the adjacent finished ground level. The entire outside perimeter of the pool surround must have overland flow escape routes which will protect the pool from flooding.

 

87.       Services Prior to any excavation works, the location and depth of all services must be ascertained. All costs associated with adjustment of the public utility will be borne by the applicant.

 

88.       Excavation greater than 1m

            Where there are structures on adjoining properties including all council infrastructures, located within five meters of the proposed excavation.

The applicant shall:-

(a)       seek independent advice from a Engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

(b)       detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining  during construction

(c)       provide Council with a certificate from the engineer on the necessity and adequacy of  support for the adjoining properties

(d)       provide a dilapidation report of the adjoining properties and Council infrastructure. The dilapidation survey must be conducted prior to any site work. The extent of the survey must cover the likely “zone of influence” that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. The dilapidation report must be prepared by a practicing engineer.

A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed prior to the commencement of works, must be carried out at the completion of the works.  

 

The above matters are to be completed and documentation submitted to Council PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

All recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineer are to be carried out during the course of excavation. The applicant must give at least seven (7) days notice to the owner and occupiers of the adjoining allotments before the excavation works commence.

 

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior to Commencement of Construction

 

89.       Restoration.  Public areas must be maintained in a safe condition at all times. Restoration of disturbed Council land is the responsibility of the applicant. All costs associated with restoration of public land will be borne by the applicant.

 

90.       Materials on Roads and Footpaths. Where the applicant requires            the use of council land for placement of building waste, skips or storage of materials an application for “Building waste containers or materials in a public place” is to be made. Council land is not to be occupied or used for storage until such application is approved. 

 

91.       Works on Council Property. Separate application shall be made to Council's Urban Services Division for approval to complete, to Council's standards and specifications, any associated works on Council property.  This shall include vehicular crossings, footpaths, drainage works, kerb and guttering, brick paving, restorations and any miscellaneous works. Applications shall be submitted prior to the start of any works on Council property.

 

92.       Public Utility Relocation. If any public services are to be adjusted, as a result of the development, the applicant is to arrange with the relevant public utility authority the alteration or removal of those affected services. Any such work being carried out at the applicant’s cost and prior to the commencement of works.

 

93.       Pedestrian Access Maintained. Pedestrian access, including disabled and pram access, is to be maintained throughout the course of the construction as per AS 1742.3, ’Part 3 - Traffic control devices for works on roads’.

 

94.       Sediment and Erosion Control. The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to any disturbance of the existing site. The devices are to be installed in accordance with an approved plan. These devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced where considered necessary. Suitable erosion control management procedures shall be practiced. This condition is imposed in order to protect downstream properties, Council's drainage system and natural watercourses from sediment build-up transferred by stormwater runoff from the site.

 

95.       Existing Drainage Systems.  Should the construction of the proposed development result in the disturbance of any existing on-site stormwater drainage systems, including pipelines, then these systems are to be relocated on-site in accordance with the requirements of Councils standards and specifications for stormwater drainage, at the applicant’s expense. This condition includes where the applicant causes disturbance to any existing public drainage system on private property.

 

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior to Occupation Certificate

 

96.       Construction of Residential Driveway Crossing. A full width residential duty vehicular crossing shall be provided opposite each vehicular entrance to the site, with a maximum width of 5.0 metres and a minimum width of 3.5 metres at the boundary line. These works shall be carried out prior to the issue of the occupation certificate by a licensed construction contractor at the applicant’s expense and shall be in accordance with Council’s issued drawings and level sheets.

 

97.       Certificate of Satisfactory Completion.  Certificates from a registered and licensed plumber, builder, or a suitably qualified engineer must be obtained for the following matters.  The plumber, builder is to provide a copy of their registration papers with the certificate. The relevant certificates are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

1)         Confirming that all vehicular footway and gutter (layback) crossings are constructed or reconstructed in accordance with Lane Cove Council’s ‘specification for construction of residential vehicular footpath crossings’. (When the works are satisfactory, the applicant must request the Council Crossing Inspector to provide written evidence of satisfactory completion of the works.

 

2)         Confirming that the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP Stormwater management. 

 

3)         All works have been completed in accordance with the issued Construction Certificate and conditions of this determination.

 

If Council is appointed the Principal Certifying Authority then the appropriate inspection fee is to be paid to Council with the subject documentation.

98.       The deletion of the roof terrace. Detailed plans being submitted with the Construction Certificate.

 

99.       The building being lowered a minimum of 150mm.  Details being submitted with the Construction Certificate Plan.

 

 

The reason for the Council’s consent being subject to the aforementioned conditions is to ensure that the proposal complies with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations thereunder and the Building Code of Australia and does not adversely effect the amenity of the area and/or the character of the neighbourhood.

 

This consent is to operate from 14th February, 2008.

 

This consent is to lapse on 14th February, 2013.

 

If you are dissatisfied with this determination you may:

 

(a)        apply to Council to review its decision under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.  Such application must be made within twelve (12) months after the date on which you received this notice.

(b)        appeal to the Land and Environment Court against the determination under Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, such appeal must be lodged within twelve (12) months after this notice.

 

Council recommends that you discuss these options with the relevant Council officer before acting.

 

Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not apply in the determination of a Development Application for State significance development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.

 

Should you require any further information or assistance please do not hesitate to contact Andrew Thomas by telephoning 9911 3649 Monday to Friday.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

EXECUTIVE MANAGER, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES