m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting

7 April 2015, 5:00pm

 


 

Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Panel Members,

 

Notice is given of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting, to be held in the Council Chambers, 48 Longueville Road Lane Cove on Tuesday 7 April 2015 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 on 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 the 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 on 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 the 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 7 April 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING - 3 MARCH 2015

 

 

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Reports

 

2.       18A Bellevue Avenue, Greenwich..................................................................... 5

 

3.       Sec 96 Application 63 Northwood Road..................................................... 29

 

4.       Proposed dwelling and secondary dwelling at 26A Henley Street Lane Cove.............................................................................................................................. 40

 

Orders Of The Day  

 

 

 

 

 


Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting 7 April 2015

18A Bellevue Avenue, Greenwich

 

 

Subject:          18A Bellevue Avenue, Greenwich    

Record No:    DA14/193-01 - 15490/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Andrew Thomas 

 

 

Property:                                 18A Bellevue Avenue, Greenwich

 

DA No:                                    193/14

 

Date Lodged:                          21.11.14 (Revised plans received February and additional plans received March 2015)

 

Cost of Work:                          $570,723

 

Owner:                                    S. and T. Pannila

 

Applicant:                                Fowler Homes Pty Ltd

                                                                                                                      

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Demolition of a garage and retaining walls, and the construction of a part one and part two storey dwelling house with basement garage below and fences.

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 and 10b

STOP THE CLOCK USED

Yes: 30.1.15 – 13.3.15 (additional information and clarification of numerical matters)

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                             16, 16A, 16B, 18, 20 and 22 Bellevue Avenue and 1 and 3 Wisdom Road

Ward Councillors                   East

Progress Association             Greenwich Community Association Inc

Other Interest Groups            N/a

 

Reason for Referral

 

The application is referred to the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for determination given the competing impacts of compliance and view sharing.

 

Executive Summary

 

·     The subject site has an area of 550m2 which is the minimum lot size for a dwelling house under the Lane Cove LEP 2009;

·     The site has a fall of about 6.4m from its rear to its front boundary;

·     The proposed dwelling house complies with the height and floor space ratio standards of the Lane Cove LEP 2009;

·     The proposed dwelling house does not comply with all of the numerical requirements for dwelling houses under Council’s Development Control Plan 2009;

·     There is a two storey dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue on the northwest side of the site that has city views across the subject site. The owners of this adjoining property have expressed concern with regard to impact on their views;

·     It is considered that the adjoining neighbour’s views could be retained if the following amendments are made to the design of the proposed dwelling house:-

-      The relocation, or deletion, of a front bedroom;

-      The deletion of the roof over a front balcony; and

-      The change from a hipped to a flat roof.

·     These design changes are proposed having regard to the Land and Environment Court’s (NSW) planning principle which indicates that a more skilful design could reduce the impact on a neighbour’s views; and

·     The development application is recommended for approval subject to a deferred commencement requiring design changes.

 

Site

 

The subject site has a curved frontage of 17.24m to Bellevue Avenue, side boundaries of almost 33.0m along the northwest and 30.5m along the southeast, and an area of 550m2. The site is located on the high north side of this street and close to this street’s intersection with Sarner Road to the south.  

 

The subject site, and the adjoining property at 18 Bellevue Avenue, have reciprocal rights of a carriageway over a driveway that is parallel to the site’s southeast boundary. Along the northwest side of the driveway the site is retained by a wall with a variable height close to ground level at the rear and up to about 2.1m towards the front. The subject site is also burdened by a rectangular right of carriageway 2m wide and about 5m long towards the northeast corner of its rear yard.

 

The site is vacant with a garage close to the front boundary and sections of old and new retaining walls along the front boundary that vary in height between about 1.1m and 2.1m. The site has no significant trees.

 

The locality is predominantly residential. Facing the southeast side of the site is a part 2 and part 3 storey residential flat building, and adjoining its northwest side, at 16A Bellevue Avenue, is a two storey dwelling house. To the rear of the site, and on the opposite side of Bellevue Avenue, are either single or two storey dwelling houses.    Site Location Plan and Neighbour Notification Plan attached (AT-1 and AT-2).

 

Previous Approvals/History

 

Subdivision

 

The subject site was created by the subdivision of the original site known as 18 Bellevue Avenue by its current owners. The original site had a frontage to that street and a dwelling house located about 35m from its front boundary. 18 Bellevue Avenue is a battle - axe lot that is accessed by a driveway parallel to its southeast side boundary. The original driveway along the opposite side boundary has been filled in.

 

The development consent for the subdivision was D199/12 and was issued in February 2013.

 

Proposal

 

Pre - development application (DA) meeting

 

A Pre - DA meeting was held in November 2014.

 

Issues discussed included the potential impact on views from the adjoining dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue. A flat roof was suggested as a way to reduce this impact, and that this issue discussed with the owners of this adjoining property. However this suggestion was not taken up and a few weeks after this meeting the current development application was lodged for assessment.

 

Development application

 

(i)   Background 

 

In January 2014 further information and clarification was requested to assist with the determination of FSR, front setback non-compliances, side setbacks, fencing and shadow plans.

 

Revised plans have altered two first floor side windows and included a side boundary fence. Although these changes did not require the application to be re-notified, they have been shown and explained to the owners’ of the adjoining property at 16A Bellevue Avenue who have raised concerns.

 

Additional information has also been submitted to assist in the assessment of the application.

 

(ii)  The proposed development

 

The application seeks Council’s consent for:-

·     The demolition of a garage and an older front retaining wall; and

·     Construction of a part one and a part two storey dwelling house with a basement garage, and fences. The development would present as a three storey elevation to Bellevue Street.

 

Details of the proposed construction works follows.

 

Dwelling house

 

(i)   Garage level

 

Located towards the site’s northwest side boundary it would be mostly below existing ground level and would comprise an attached double garage with a panel lift door, and internal stairs that would provide access to the ground floor level above.

 

It would be accessed by a proposed driveway 5.5m wide and 6.5m deep from a proposed vehicular crossing off Bellevue Avenue. Across the driveway would be a metal gate that would match a proposed front fence.

 

(ii)   Ground floor level

 

This level would comprise an open plan family/meals room and kitchen at the rear with an adjoining covered alfresco area facing the rear yard. Below this with a step down of 1.2m would be a study, a powder room and a laundry. An elevated separate home cinema with an adjoining front balcony, and a main bedroom with an ensuite and walk in robe room, are proposed at the front . This level would be accessed by an elevated front patio.

(iii)   First floor level

 

This level would comprise two bedrooms at the rear, a bathroom, a gallery area, a front bedroom and an open plan sitting area with an adjoining front balcony.

 

Fences and retaining walls

 

A landscape plan submitted with the application proposes the following:-

·     A 1.2m high palisade metal fence above the existing and proposed retaining wall along the site’s front boundary, with returns along most of both sides of the front yard;

·     A 1.8m high timber paling fence above the retaining wall along the northwest side of the driveway; and

·     Either masonry, or timber, retaining walls (if required) in the following locations:-

-      On either side of the driveway between 260mm and 2.66m high, and about 6.5m long;

-      Along part of the front boundary between 660mm  and 1.7m high;

-      Along the northwest side boundary facing the proposed dwelling house about 100mm high;

-      On the northwest side of the alfresco area about 1.3m high; and

-      In the rear yard up to 600mm high.

 

The plans propose a 1.8m high timber fence along the site’s northwest side boundary that would replace a hedge of similar height. 

 

Construction and materials 

 

The proposed dwelling house would be of rendered brick veneer construction, with a hipped colorbond roof that would have a main pitch of 180 and a pitch of 250 for the roof over the ground floor level along the northwest side.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/COMPLIANCE: the Lane Cove LEP 2009 and Council’s DCP 2009

 

Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

Zoning: R2 Low Density Residential

Site area: 550m2

 

Proposed

Standard

Complies

Floor Space Ratio

0.49:1

0.5:1

Yes

Height of buildings

7.35m

9.5m

Yes

 

Part C.1 of Council’s DCP 2009

 

Dwelling houses 

 

Proposed

Provision

Complies

Front setback (min)

Garage level: 5.746m

 

 

 

 

Ground floor  balcony: 5.746m, and patio: 6.179m

 

First floor balcony : 6.179m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consistent with area, or 7.5m.

Irregular sites may be considered on their merits.

In certain circumstances a garage may be permitted, and balconies up to a maximum of 500mm, forward of the building line

No, however the garage is below the existing ground level and would not impact upon the views.

 

 

 

No, Points 3 and 5  under Part A* recommends that the depth of both balconies is reduced to ensure compliance.   

Side setback (min)

NW: 1.5m -  2.7m

 

SE: 3.31m (to boundary along SE side of driveway), and about 1.7m (from driveway retaining wall along its NW side)

 

 

1.2m : single storey

1.5m: 2 storeys

 

 

Yes

Rear setback (min): as average side boundary is about 31.7m, 25% would be 7.9m

Dwelling house: about 8m – about 14m

 

 

Alfresco area: 5m

<1000m˛: 8m or 25%, whichever is the greater:  8m is the greater.

Yes

 

 

 

 

May be allowed: as it would have no discernible adverse impact,  it is supported.

Wall height (max)

6.6m

7m

Yes

Subfloor height (max)

Garage: almost totally below ground

1m

Yes

No. of storeys (max)

Part single and part 2 storeys with basement garage below

2

Yes

Landscaped area (min)

37%

35%

Yes

 

Cut and fill (max)

Cut: about 1.5m – 3.7m (for the garage), but the rest of dwelling house : <1m

 

Fill: about 1.4m (front southeast corner of main bedroom)

 

 

 

 

1m

 

 

 

No, however the fill is within the building footprint and would not adversely impact upon views from the adjoining property.

Solar access (min)

 Exceeds 3 hours, and reasonable sunlight to recreational areas.

3 hrs to north - facing (habitable) windows, and reasonable sunlight to recreational areas of adjoining premises between 9am and 3pm on June 21

 

 

Yes

Deck/balcony depth (max)

First floor: 4.5m

3m

No, but Point 3 under Part A* recommends its depth be reduced to 3m to comply.

Private open space (min)

Both exceeded

24m˛

4m depth

Yes

BASIX Certificate

Supplied

Required

Yes

 

*Part  A refers to that part of the Recommendation to this report for a deferred commencement consent.

 

Fences

 

 

Proposed

Provision

Complies

Front and side return fence (solid and open design) height (max)

Lightweight: 1.2m (metal palisade above retaining walls)

Solid: 900mm

Lightweight: 1.2m

Palisade height complies.

Whilst overall height would be exceeded -because this fence would be above existing and proposed front boundary retaining walls of between 660mm and about 2.1m in height - the safety it would provide to residents is the reason it should be supported.

Side and rear fences

1.8m( both sides)

1.8m

Yes

Splays

Not proposed

May be required e.g. where a fence is over 900mm in height

Point 6 under Part A* requires a 1m x 1m splay on either side of the driveway entrance.

 

*Part A refers to that part of the Recommendation to this report for a deferred commencement consent.

 

Car parking and garages facing the street

 

 

Proposed

Provision

Complies

Off - street spaces (min)

2

2

Yes

Driveway width

4.5m

3m at the kerb, plus 500mm cutaways on both sides

No, but reasonable as a wider crossing would improve access into and off the site given the  curve in the street.

% of allotment width (17.24m)

6.23m

50% of lot width or 6m, whichever is the lesser  -  6m is the lesser

No, but reasonable as it is less than 50% of the lot width and the proposed building. 

 


Referrals

 

Development Engineer

 

Recommends draft conditions 41 - 58 under Part  B of the Recommendation to this report that would address stormwater, excavation, the proposed vehicular crossing and others of a more general nature.

 

Senior Tree Assessment Officer

 

Does not object to the removal of a medium - sized Cypress tree, and has recommended draft conditions 39 and 40 under Part B of the Recommendation to this report.

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 (The LEP)

 

The proposed dwelling house is permissible in the R2 zone and complies with the development standards for both FSR and height under the LEP.

 

The proposed dwelling house would satisfy two of the relevant objectives for this zone because it would provide:-

·     An additional dwelling house; and

·     Better landscaping on the site.       

 

However because of its current design the proposal would adversely impact upon the views from the adjoining dwelling house (16A Bellevue Avenue) and would not retain the existing residential amenity in the area.

 

SEPP 55: Remediation of Land

 

The subject site and adjoining sites are zoned residential. Given the type of use permissible within residential zones, it is unlikely that the subject site would be contaminated.

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (the EP&A Regulation)

 

The proposal includes the demolition of a garage and retaining walls close to the site’s front boundary.

 

The EP&A Regulation prescribes safety standards for demolition and compliance with AS 2601 -2001. Draft condition 31 (79) under Part B of the Recommendation to this report is included to address this requirement. 

 

Council’s DCP 2009

 

Part C.1 Objectives for dwelling houses

 

The proposal would satisfy two of the objectives for dwelling houses because it would provide:-

·           A dwelling house in a landscaped lot; and

·           A dwelling house designed to be compatible with the surrounding residences that would enhance the streetscape.

 

However, whilst the proposed dwelling house would partly satisfy another objective - that it would achieve a reasonable level of amenity for the owners of the subject site - it would not satisfy the  objective 1.7 Building Design because its design would have an adverse impact on views from an adjoining dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue.

 

Variations

 

The preceding policy assessment tables identify those controls that the proposal does not comply with. In relation to:-

·     The front first floor balcony: Point 3 under Part A of the Recommendation to this report requires both non-compliances i.e. its depth, and as a consequence its front setback, to comply;

·     Splays: Point 6 under Part A requires a splay to be provided on either side of the driveway to improve sight lines for motorists exiting the site; and

·     The driveway width is reasonable for the reason stated in the table.

 

The other three non - compliances are discussed below.

 

1.   Setbacks: front/building line 

 

Clause 1.3 of the DCP provides Objectives and Provisions for Setbacks

 

Objectives

 

The proposal satisfies the two relevant objectives because:-

·           It would maintain the predominant street character of elevated two storey dwelling houses; and,

·           It would enhance landscaping on the site, including within its front garden.

 

Provisions

 

The Provisions for front setbacks have been provided in the compliance table. The following parts of the proposed dwelling house would be forward of the standard building line of 7.5m:-

·     The garage  - by between 1.3m and 1.8m

·     At the ground floor level : the front balcony off the home cinema - by between 1.3m and 1.8m, and the patio next to the entrance  - by between 700mm and 1.4m 

·     The first floor balcony - by between 700mm and 1.4m.

 

Whilst the front patio is reasonable, Points 3 and 5 under Part A of the Recommendation to this report require the depth of both balconies to be reduced:-

·     The ground floor balcony is to be no closer than 7m from the front boundary (Point 5); and,

·     By reducing the depth of the first floor balcony to 3m would also ensure that it would be setback behind the building line of 7.5m (Point 3). 

 

Garage setback

 

The location of the proposed garage, a maximum of 1.8m forward of the building line, is supported because the garage is predominantly below the existing ground level, would have minimal impact on the streetscape and would not adversely impact upon the views from the adjoining property.  

2.   Car parking: garage width

 

Although the width of the attached double garage would exceed the maximum width allowed for the site, the non - compliance is considered reasonable given that it is less than 50% of the lot width and the proposed building.

 

3.   Cut and Fill

 

The slope of the land falls towards the street. The proposed garage has been excavated so as to take advantage of access to the site from street level to create a basement garage located below the ground floor of the dwelling house. Given the above the extent of the excavation is considered reasonable. 

 

Impacts

 

Built

 

The proposal has been amended to address potential overlooking of the adjoining dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue by the treatment of two windows and a 1.8m high fence along the site’s northwest side boundary.

 

The general impact of the proposed dwelling house on the streetscape and adjoining neighbours is considered to allow for greater amenity to be provided towards the rear.

 

However the impact on existing views from the adjoining dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue would be significant. To retain these views Part A of the Recommendation to this report recommends that:-

·     A front bedroom be either relocated, or deleted;

·     A front balcony be reduced in depth to 3m and its roof deleted; and

·     The pitched roof of the proposed dwelling house be changed to a flat roof.

 

Subject to the design changes recommended under Part A of the Recommendation to this report, the impact of the proposal on the built environment can be reduced to a reasonable level.

 

Natural

 

The few trees in the site’s rear yard would be removed. None are significant, and Council’s Senior Tree Assessment Officer does not object to their removal.

 

A landscape plan has been submitted that confirms that 37% of the site would consist of landscaped area. This plan proposes the planting of three trees between 6m and 9m high at maturity, the shorter of which is shown in the front yard. Although a landscape plan is not required for the proposed dwelling house it includes details of proposed fencing and retaining walls.

 

Whilst Point 1 under Part A of the Recommendation to this report includes this landscape plan for  approval, draft condition 2 under Part B of the same Recommendation ensures that no trees are planted in the front yard with a height exceeding 5m so as to preserve the views from the front of the adjoining dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue.   

 

The impact of the proposal on the existing natural environment would not be significant, and the landscaping proposed on the submitted landscape plan would enhance the current low level of landscaping on the site.

 

 

Response to Notification

 

One submission was received in response to the notification of the development application. The concerns in the objection submitted by the owners of the adjoining property at 16A Bellevue Avenue are summarised and discussed below.

 

1. View loss/front setback

 

With a setback of 6.13m the proposed front first floor balcony would encroach the front setback of 7.5m by 870mm. This non-compliance, especially the roof over the balcony, would affect our city views.

Understand that views are to share. Request the front setback complies and the roof over the first floor balcony is removed.

 

Comment

 

A portion of each of the three levels of the proposed dwelling house would encroach into the building line/front setback.  The non-compliance of between 700mm and 1.4m for both residential levels is recommended to be addressed under Part A of the Recommendation to this report.

 

By contrast, the departure of between 1.3m and 1.8m for the garage is reasonable given the front setback of the proximity of the neighbour’s attached garage and the curve in Bellevue Avenue in front of, and close to, the subject site.

 

Although overall compliance with the front setback would have a marginal impact on the overall city views enjoyed from the neighbour’s dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue, the main reason for the proposal’s adverse impact on views is its front first floor bedroom, and the roof over both this room and the front first floor level balcony.

 

A Judgment of the Land and Environment Court in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council (2004) NSW LEC 140 is the basis for the Planning Principle to assess view sharing. In this the then Senior Commissioner framed four questions to assess the impact on views and a discussion on this follows.

 

(i) Affected views     

An assessment of the affected views. Some views (eg. water views, views of iconic buildings) are valued more highly than others.

 

Comment

The proposal would affect city views from the first floor level on the southeast side of the dwelling house. Only the views of the city from the opposite end of the front first floor level balcony would be unaffected.

In addition the proposal would delete the current small view of the Harbour Bridge when standing in the kitchen. 

 

(ii)  Location of views   

From what part of the property are views obtained?  Assess views sitting and standing. The protection of sitting views across side boundaries are more difficult than from front and rear boundaries. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.

 

Comment

This neighbour’s dwelling house has city views from the side windows of a living room, a kitchen and adjoining family area, and both a rear and a front balcony on its first floor level. These views extend from the AMP building at Circular Quay through to Anzac Bridge and beyond to the west. All of these views are obtained across the site, with the extent of the view increasing towards the front of the first floor level. These city views are illuminated at night and the significance of these views is evident in the floor to ceiling window at the front corner of the living room.

In addition, the front first floor level living room and its adjoining balcony have views to the south and southwest including some water views. However whilst not affected by the proposal, these views are impaired by large trees across the road.

Even though the height of the proposed dwelling house is below the standard of 9.5m under the LEP, and its wall height at the front southwest corner is only about 5.4m, these views would be affected in either a standing or a sitting position from these rooms. View loss would be exacerbated by the proposed pitched roof. The wall height alone at this front corner would prevent city views from a sitting position in the front living room.

 

(iii)    Extent of views

 

Assess the extent of the impact for the whole of the property, not just the affected view.  Views from living areas (including kitchen areas) are more significant than from bedrooms. While the impact could be assessed quantitatively, it is more useful to look at the issue in a qualitative sense and ask whether the view loss is negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.

 

Comment

 

The overall view loss would be significant. In particular the view loss from the front living area and from the side of its adjoining balcony would be severe.

The view from the kitchen window includes an iconic view of the Harbour Bridge. The view from this window and the adjoining family area include city views. The view loss from both of these windows would be moderate because it would be reduced by the pitched roof over the two storey section of the proposed dwelling house.

 

(iv)    Reasonableness of the proposal

 

Assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact.  Factors include whether the proposal complies with development standards and whether view loss could be ameliorated by better design. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.

 

Comment

 

As the proposal complies with the height and FSR standards under the LEP, and the wall height and side setback provisions under the DCP, the cause of the main view loss from the front living room and its adjoining balcony is the first floor level front bedroom and its roof, and the roof over the front first floor level balcony of the proposed dwelling house.

 

Point 2 under Part A of the Recommendation to this report requires this bedroom to be relocated, or deleted, and Point 3 requires the front balcony depth to be reduced to 3m and its roof deleted. To help retain city views from the two side windows and rear balcony, Point 4 under requires the main roof over the two storey section of the dwelling house to be changed to a flat roof.

 


2. Overlooking

 

Will be overlooked by two proposed windows, perhaps a bathroom and a bedroom.

 

Request obscure glazing for the bathroom window, and a high level window for the bedroom

 

Comment

 

Revised plans submitted in February have addressed both requests.

 

3. Garage roof

 

Has a trafficable roof contrary to the DCP.

 

Comment

 

Point 5 under Part A of the Recommendation to this report requires the front ground floor balcony adjoining the home cinema to be reduced to address the front setback provisions of the DCP. Although this balcony is partly above the garage, the garage itself is generally located below ground level and it does not have a trafficable roof.

 

4. Detail

 

Site plan lacks detail of neighbour’s houses, particularly windows and floor plans lack room names.

 

Comment

 

As the concern appeared to have been based on a review of the neighbor notification plans, the authors were advised to review the plans made available for the public and this occurred.

 

Whilst the survey submitted with the proposal lacked certain details of adjoining properties, the survey with a development application for changes to the adjoining dwelling house at 18 Bellevue Avenue includes some missing details.

 

The footprint of the four corners and rear wall of the first floor level of the proposed dwelling house has been confirmed on-site to assist with the assessment of the impact on views and overlooking from side windows on neighbouring properties.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed dwelling house complies with the development standards for both height and FSR under the Lane Cove LEP 2009, but does not comply with some numerical provisions of the Council’s DCP 2009. Generally the proposal is a reasonable development. However it has attracted  one submission from the adjoining neighbour at 16 A Bellevue Avenue, which includes a a significant concern about view loss.

 

Whilst the views from this adjoining neighbour’s dwelling house are across the site, these include extensive views of the city that can be enjoyed during the day and at night. These views can be retained with changes to the design of part of the front first floor level.

 

Part A of the Recommendation to this report recommends that the application be subject to a deferred commencement consent that requires changes to the front first floor level of the proposed dwelling house, and other changes to address some non - compliances with the DCP. Subject to these design changes being made the development application is recommended for approval subject to draft conditions included under Part B of the same Recommendation.    

 

Matters in relation to s. 79C considerations of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, have been satisfied.

 

It is therefore recommended that development consent be deferred pending the submission to Council of confirmation that the requirements indicated in Part A of the Recommendation have been satisfied.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Part  A

 

That pursuant to Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the Council grants a deferred commencement consent to Development Application D193/14 for the demolition of a garage and retaining walls, and the construction of a part one and part two storey dwelling house with basement garage below and fences on Lot 2 DP1188107 and known as 18A Bellevue Avenue, Greenwich subject to the following:

 

1.                The development in the following drawing numbers:-

 

·     01, 02, 04 - 11, Issue B -2, dated 23.9.14 and as amended up to 12.3.15,

       by Marretta Design; and

 

·     L - 01, revision E, dated 3.11.14, by EcoDesign,

 

            be amended as per the following requirements:

 

2.                The relocation, or deletion, of the first floor level front bedroom/bedroom 2.

 

3.                The reduction in the depth of the front first floor level balcony off the sitting room to 3m and      deletion of its roof.

 

4.      The main roof over the two storey section of the dwelling house to be changed from a hipped roof to a flat roof.

 

5.     The reduction in the depth of the front ground floor level balcony adjoining the home cinema so that no portion would be closer than 7m from the front boundary. 

 

6    Confirmation that there would be no structure, or landscaping, exceeding 900mm in height within a 1m x 1m splay on either side of the driveway entrance to the site.

 

 Plans that address points 1 - 6 inclusive under Part A above are to be submitted to Council within 12 months of the granting of this deferred commencement consent. Commencement of the approval cannot commence until Council has confirmed in writing that the matters required under points 1 - 6 above have been provided and are satisfactory.

 

Part  B

 

Subject to Part A above being satisfied, a development consent and plans be issued, subject to the following conditions:

 

Plans

 

1.    (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with revised drawings (numbers to be inserted at a later date) that address all of the requirements under Part A above except as amended by the following conditions.

 

Specific

 

2.    In order to retain existing city views from the adjoining dwelling house at 16A Bellevue Avenue, no tree is to be planted in the front yard with a height at maturity that would exceed 5m.

 

General                         

 

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

 

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

 

5.    (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.

 

6.    (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 $5,000 OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS LESS THAN $20,000.

 

7.    (17)  An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the dwelling house.

 

8.    (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.

 

A Notice/Sign showing permitted working hours and types of work permitted during those hours, including the applicant’s phone number,  project manager or site foreman, shall be displayed at the front of the site.

           

 

9.    (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.

 

10.  (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.

 

 

11.  (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.

 

12.     (49) Prior to the commencement of any construction work associated with the development, the Applicant shall erect a sign(s) at the construction site and in a prominent position at the site boundary where the sign can be viewed from the nearest public place.  The sign(s) shall indicate:-

 

a)    The name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority;

b)    The name of the person in charge of the construction site and telephone number at which that person may be contacted outside working hours; and

c)    A statement that unauthorised entry to the construction site is prohibited.

 

The signs shall be maintained for the duration of construction works.

 

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

 

14.     (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; and

k)    Completion.

 

15.  (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; and

f)     Upper level floor framing.

 

16.  (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.

 

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

 

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

 

19.    (63) All metal deck roofs being of a ribbed metal profile or colorbond corrugated galvanised               or zincalume iron, in a mid to dark colour range.

 

20.  (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.

 

21.  (66) The removal, handling and disposal of asbestos from building sites being carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Regulations.  Details of the method of removal to be submitted PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY DEMOLITION WORKS.

 

22.  (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; and

 

(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.

 

23.  (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:-

(b)     

(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; and

(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.

 

(b)   Any other storey not containing bedrooms.

 

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

 

25.  (72) The demolition works being confined within the boundaries of the site.

 

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

 

27.  (74) All demolition works being completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of commencement.

 

28.  (76) All machinery used on the site during demolition shall have a noise emission no greater than 75dB(A) when measured at a radius of 7m from the specified item.

 

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

 

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

 

31.  (79) Compliance with Australian Standard 2601 - The Demolition of Structures.

 

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

 

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

 

34.              (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.

 

35.  (137)  Lane Cove Council charges a fee 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.

 

36.  (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.

 

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

 

38.  (143) Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant must make written application to Council for the provision of domestic waste services.

 

Trees    

 

39.  (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. 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.

 

40.  (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.

 

Engineering             

 

41.  (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.

 

42.  (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.

 

43.  (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 hoarding applications, 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.

 

44.  (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.

 

45.  (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.

 

46.  (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.

 

47.  (A7) Pedestrian Access Maintained: Pedestrian access, including disabled and pram access, is to be maintained throughout the course of the construction as per AS1742.3, ’Part 3 - Traffic control devices for works on roads’.

 

48.  (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.

 

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

 

50.  (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 are 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; and

·     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

 

51.              (D3) Drainage Construction: The stormwater drainage, and sediment and erosion control,            on the site are to be constructed generally in accordance with drawing numbers C00.01,       C01.01, C01.02, C02.01, C02.02 and C02.03, Revision B, dated 29.10.14, by    Engineering Studio.

 

Certification by a suitably qualified engineer of the above plans is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority stating that the design fully complies with AS 3500 and Part O of Council's DCP - Stormwater Management. The plans and certification shall be submitted prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority is to satisfy themselves of the adequacy of the certified plans for the purposes of construction. They are to determine what details, if any, are to be added to the Construction Certificate plans, in order for the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

52.  (V1) Proposed Vehicular Crossing: The proposed 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.

 

53.  (A10) 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, car parking, landscaping and stormwater drainage plans and shall be obtained prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. Note: The finished floor level of the proposed garage shall be determined by Council.

 

54.  (D1) Excavation Greater Than 1m: Where there are structures on adjoining properties including all Council infrastructures, located within 5m 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; and

(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; and

 

(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.

55.  (B1) Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $3,000 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

 

56(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 shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced when necessary.

 

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to Occupation Certificate

 

57.  (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.

 

58.  (V3) Redundant Gutter Crossing:  All redundant gutter and footpath crossings shall be removed and the kerb, gutter and footpath reinstated to the satisfaction of Council’s Urban Services Division. These works shall be carried out prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Location Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑2 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Site Location Plan

 


ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 



Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting 7 April 2015

Sec 96 Application 63 Northwood Road

 

 

Subject:          Sec 96 Application 63 Northwood Road    

Record No:    DA10/225-01 - 10295/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Norm Fletcher 

 

 

Property:                                 63 Northwood Road North Wood

 

DA No:                                    DA 225/10-01

 

Date Lodged:                          5/2/2015

 

Cost of Work:                          Nil

 

Owner:                                    Mary and Thomas Bradbury

 

Applicant:                                Mary and Thomas Bradbury

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Modification to rear balcony balustrades from timber to powder coated metal and vertical infill for safety

ZONE

R2 Low Density

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

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                             74, 65, 61, 76, 78, 72A, 69, 66, 71, 68, 67, 59, 72, 70B Northwood Road – 1 James Street

 

Ward Councillors                   East Ward

Progress Association             Nil

Other Interest Groups            Nil

 

Reason for Referral

 

The application seeks to modify the rear balcony balustrades that were approved with an original DA 225/10 dated 11th January 2011.

 

The original approval was for alterations to a dwelling that included a first floor addition with an attached car port and new front fence.

 

The works have been completed however the Principal Certifying Authority issued a notice of intention on the 16th December 2014 advising that the rear first floor balustrade has not been constructed in accordance with the Development Consent approved design.

 

Council issued an Order under Section 121B of the Act on the 6th January 2015 that required the Rear Balcony balustrade (west elevation) to be constructed in accordance with Development Consent DA 225/2010 and the Building Code of Australia Volume 2 Clause 3.9.2.3.

 

Executive Summary

 

The application was notified as per Council Policy and the adjoining owner at 63 Northwood Road has raised concerns about the unauthorized works and non compliant balustrade.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

Site

 

The subject site is an irregular shaped lot with a frontage of almost 24m to Northwood Road and an area of 663m2. The site has a shorter rear boundary of almost 13m and an angled boundary along its south side, and a maximum fall of 2.3m from its front to its rear boundary.

 

The site is located on the west side of the street close to a bend to the north that intersects with James Street.

 

Existing development on the site consists of a dwelling house that has recently under gone renovations that include a first floor addition that was approved by DA 225/10 dated 11th January 2011.

 

The locality is residential and includes a mix of both single and 2 storey dwelling houses of varying sizes and styles.  Site Location Plan and Neighbour Notification Plan attached (AT-1 and AT-2).

 

Proposal

 

The proposal seeks to modify the consent DA225/10 with changes to the rear balcony balustrade including the lower portion from timber to aluminum vertical construction to comply with the BCA and ensure it is more child safety friendly.

 

The amended architectural plans indicate that the rear balustrade would have a full height of 1.2 m above the adjoining finished floor level and to be vertical construction panels.

 

The original proposal that was approved with DA 225/10 indicated a solid infill area to a height of approximately 500 mm.

 

Previous Approvals/History

 

The original development consent was issued on the 11th January 2011 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling that included a first floor addition, attached car port and front fence.

 

The Construction Certificate for the works was issued on the 16th July 2013 CC 43/13 by Principal Certifying Authority Darren Ball BPB0019.

 

The application was subsequently modified on the 20th February 2014 and the modifications related to changes in window size on the side of the new works first floor.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority (Darren Ball) issued a notice of intention to give an order on the 16th December 2014 that indicated the rear first floor balcony balustrade has not been constructed in accordance with the development consent approved design.

 

The Lane Cove Council issued an order under section 121b of the EP & A Act 1979 that required the rear balcony balustrades (west elevation) in accordance with development Consent DA 225/2010 and the Building Code of Australia Volume Two Clause 3.9.2.3

 

The application has subsequently been modified that seeks consent to the design changes to the balustrade that has been constructed.

 

Proposal Data/Policy Compliance

 

As the approved exterior first floor level building envelope would remain unchanged and unaffected by the section 96 modification proposal, the changes to the balustrade design does not raise any issues in relation to either the Lane Cove LEP 2009 or the Lane Cove Development Control Plan.

 

Referrals

 

Referral of the proposal to other sections of Council, or external authorities was not considered to be necessary.

 

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 Sec 96(2) and (3) of the Act as discussed below.

 

Section 96 (2) (a) Is the modified development substantially the same

 

The application proposes a relatively minor, or otherwise incidental, change to the approved alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house on the site.

 

The modification relates to the balcony balustrade design at the rear on the first floor level.

 

It does not change the overall design or external configuration of the original approval and it is considered that modification as proposed will ensure that the development is substantially the same.

 

Section 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 other approval body as a result of the proposed modification.

 

Section 96 (2) (c) Notification of application to modify consent

 

The modification application was notified to adjoining and adjacent properties in accordance with Councils notification policy.

 

The application was notified on the 10th February 2015.

 

Council did receive submissions from the owners of number 65 Northwood Road prior to the notification occurring.

 

The submissions raised concern that the changes to the balustrade contributed to noise being emitted from the site apparently due to the vibration of the metal materials incorporated with the balustrade change, when the wind blows across the site.

 

The submission also raised concerns that the actual balustrade that had been erected did not comply the approved Development Application plans in regard to design and materials.

 

Following notification of the application Council received a further submission from the owners of 65 Northwood Road.

 

The issue raised was privacy being compromised to 65 Northwood Road as there are now unimpeded views into the family room and pool from the modified balcony.

 

It is requested that Council declines the application and require the solid section of the balustrade to be provided as per the original approval.

 

Comment

 

Councils Environmental Officer inspected the site and discussed the issue relating to noise with the owner of 63 Northwood Road who apparently did agree to co operated and address the noise concerns with minor works to the balustrade area.

 

The change as indicated in the modified plans to the lower section of the balustrade to the first floor area is considered to be a minor alteration. It is considered that the modification should not give rise to any increased privacy concerns when compared to the original approval.

 

The adjoining rooms to the first floor balcony are identified on the original approval as being a new bed room (1) and retreat and such uses are not normally high intensity use areas.

 

Furthermore the approved plans do indicate that it is proposed to provide retractable screens above the balustrade and with the vertical stiles in the area below the balustrade it would assist in ensuring a reasonable level of privacy can be afforded to the adjoining properties.

 

Section 96 (2) (d) Consideration of submissions

 

The submissions in response to Council’s notification are discussed under the following sub heading Section 79 C (1) (d).

 

Section 96 (3) Assessment of the proposed modification

 

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

 

Section 79c (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (The Act)

 

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

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

The proposal does not raise any issues in relation to the LEP 2009.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 remediation of land

 

This policy was addressed in the assessment of the original development application and no further review is considered necessary.

 

Deemed State Environmental Planning Policy: Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 (the SREP)

 

The site is identified as being within the harbor catchment by the SREP.  The proposal is not visible from the Harbour (Woodford Bay) and does not raise any issues in relation to this policy’s requirements concerning those matters for consideration.

 

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

 

Not applicable

 

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

 

1.   Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area  Development Control Plan 2005 (the DCP 2005)

 

The site is located within the foreshore area identified on the Foreshores and Waterways area Map of the SREP and as such is subject to the DCP 2005 that it complements.

 

The proposal does not raise any issues in relation to the two relevant clauses of the DCP 2005 ie Clause 5.3 Siting of Buildings and Structures, and Clause 5.4 Built Form

 

2.   Councils Development Control Plan 2009 (the DCP)

 

The modified proposal does not alter the original assessment completed by Council as there is no change in the building envelope or numerical provisions with the Section 96 modification.

 

Section 79 C (1) (b) The Likely Impacts of the Development

 

The changes to the approved external materials to the balcony balustrade from timber to metal would not create any greater impact on the adjoining and adjacent properties.

 

There should be no increase in privacy concerns and the design changes will ensure compliance with the BCA 2014 Volume 2 for Class 1a buildings for the balcony balustrade.

 

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

 

The original consent that allowed alterations and additions to a dwelling house has ensured the continued use for a residential purpose.

 

The changes to the balustrade design do not alter the original approval in regard to bulk, scale and impact on the locality and therefore it is considered that the modification is suitable for the site.

 

Section 79 C (1) (d) Any submissions made

 

A submission was received from the owners of the adjoining property on the south side of the site being 65 Northwood Road.

 

The submission raises concerns about privacy as the modifications will allow for an unimpeded view into the entire living area and family area of 65 Northwood Road that includes the backyard, pool and rear deck.

 

The submission states that Council did consider that privacy was a legitimate concern when the initial plans were submitted where further privacy screening was required.

The owners of 65 Northwood Road also indicate that they have spent considerable time since May working with the Certifier to have the non compliant matter addresses and over this period they have been unable to enjoy, entertain nor feel well have any privacy in their rear area.

 

The submission request Council declines the approval of the proposal.

 

The owners also invite Council to view the impact re the loss of privacy to their property with the modifications as proposed.

 

Comment

 

The change as indicated in the modified plans to the lower section of the balustrade to the first floor area is considered to be a minor alteration. It is considered that the modification should not give rise to any increased privacy concerns when compared to the original approval.

 

The adjoining rooms to the first floor balcony are identified on the original approval as being a new bed room (1) and retreat and such uses are not normally high intensity use areas.

 

Furthermore the approved plans do indicate that it is proposed to provide retractable screens above the balustrade and with the vertical stiles in the area below the balustrade it will assist in ensuring a reasonable level of privacy can be afforded to the adjoining properties.

 

Section 79 C (1) (e) The public Interest

 

It is considered that the variation to the balustrade design and construction would be in the public interest particularly as it would ensure the works meet with the minimum safety requirements of the BCA 2014 Volume Two for a Class 1a Building.

 

Approval of the proposal would not be contrary to the public interest.

 

Conclusion

 

The Section 96 modification application is for a change in the rear balcony balustrade design from timber to metal profile. The design change does not alter the original approval in regard to bulk, scale and compliance with the relevant planning controls.

 

The proposal does raise any issues in relation to the LEP 2009, the Deemed SEPP (the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) or its DCP 2005.

 

A submission was received to the proposal from the owners of the adjoining property on the south side of the site.

 

The issues related to loss of privacy with the change as proposed however it is considered that the change to the lower section of the balustrade would not substantially increase any privacy loss to the adjoining property.

 

The matters in relation to both section 79 C and section 96 considerations as identified in the of the Act have been satisfied and therefore the application is recommended for approval.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That: pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the development consent D225/10 granted on the 11th January 2011 and subsequently modified on the 20th February 2014 for alterations and additions, including a first floor level, an attached carport and front fence on Lot 71 DP 58263 and known as 63 Northwood Road, Northwood, is amended in the following manner.

 

A.   Condition 1 is amended to read:-

 

1.   (20) That the development be strictly, in accordance with drawing numbers DA01, 03, 05, 06, and 08, dated August 2010 and drawing numbers DA02, 04, 07 and 09 dated August 2010 and as amended by Council on 10.1.11, and as further amended by the same plans DA03 and DA04 and CC06A Amend A dated 20-8-2014 stamped Amended dated 2 Feb 2015 Lane Cove Council, by Strachan Architects

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Site Location Plans

2 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Neighbour Notification Plan

 



ATTACHMENT 2

Site Location Plans

 



Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting 7 April 2015

Proposed dwelling and secondary dwelling at 26A Henley Street Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          Proposed dwelling and secondary dwelling at 26A Henley Street Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA15/7-01 - 11441/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Norm Fletcher 

 

 

Property:                                 26A Henley Street Lane Cove West

 

DA No:                                    DA 7/15

 

Date Lodged:                          23/1/15

 

Cost of Work:                          $670,000

 

Owner:                                    Rajiv Khanna and Roopali Khanna

 

Applicant:                                Rajiv Khanna and Roopali Khanna

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Proposal is to construct a new two storey dwelling and a detached single storey secondary dwelling

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

 

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours  28, 26, 24 Henley Street –

28, 30, 26, 24, 22 Moore Street

39, 37, 35, Cullen Street

47 Barwon Street

 

Ward Councillors                  

West Ward

Progress Association

Lane Cove West Residents Association INC

                                              

 

 

 

Reason for Referral

 

The application following the notification procedure received eight (8) Submissions raising concerns about the development and the impact on the locality and adjoining residential properties.

 

The principal concerns are loss of privacy, bulk of the proposal, removal of trees, drainage, access and turning circle to the garage, replacement fencing and non compliance with planning controls.

 

The development application for the subdivision that created the subject site was by an applicant who at the time the application was determined was an elected representative of Lane Cove Council.

 

Therefore to ensure that the final determination of the application including the assessment process is open and transparent the application is referred to the Lane Cove Council Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for its consideration and final determination.

 

Executive Summary

 

The application proposes a two storey principal dwelling with a detached single storey secondary dwelling on the subject property that is a battle axe allotment.

 

The buildings are to be masonry external walls including rendered brickwork and stone facing with sheet metal roofing materials and a powder coated aluminum windows.

 

The principal dwelling would provide a double garage that obtains access directly from the driveway at the end of the battle axe section that leads to Henley Street frontage.

 

The application has been assessed against the provisions of the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 as there is no provision for secondary dwellings in the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009.

 

The application is recommended for refusal due to the impact on the locality particularly loss of privacy to adjoining properties, bulk and scale of the proposal, inadequate information provided to assess flooding, non compliance with the landscape controls and removal of protected trees.

 

Site

 

The site is legally described as Lot 2 DP 118537 Number 26A Henley Street Lane Cove West.

 

The site is a battle axe allotment that has boundaries with eight (8) adjoining residential properties with a total site area of 665.3 square metres including an access handle of 27.255 metres in length from the street frontage with a width of 3.5 metres.

 

The battle axe handle is identified as being subject to a right of carriage way and also affected by a covenant that relates to the drainage easement.

 

The battle axe section of the site is irregular in shape with boundary measurements as follows:

North - 22.825 m

North East - 18.48 m

East - 16.28 m

West - 16.755 m

South including access handle width - dimension 27.06 m

 

The site is burdened by storm water drainage easements that run through the driveway access handle and the mid section of the site from Henley Street to the rear, adjoining the north eastern boundary and interconnects to a Council storm water system.

 

The site is presently vacant and has a fall from the southern boundary to the northern boundary of approximately 3 metres.

The site is located within a Bush Fire Vegetation Buffer Zone.  Site Plan and Neighbour Notification Plans attached (AT-1 and AT-2).

 

Proposal

 

The proposal is to construct a new two storey masonry dwelling with a sheet metal roof on the western portion of the site and single storey masonry secondary dwelling on the eastern portion.

 

The access to the site is via the constructed driveway and the right of carriage way area that interconnects to the Street between numbers 26 and 28 Henley Street.

The secondary dwelling is a building that is separated via the driveway that provides access to the double garage in the main dwelling.

 

The new dwelling would include the following floor layout:-

 

Ground floor

Double garage

Entry foyer

Lounge room

Family room

Kitchen dining room

Walk in pantry

Bed room

Laundry

Toilet room

Internal stairway centrally located to the first floor area

Alfresco outdoor area

 

First floor

Bedrooms three (3)

Master bed room with ensuite

Bathroom

Balconies off master bed room and bedroom on the eastern elevation

Internal stairway to the lower ground floor

 

The secondary dwelling would include the following floor plan layout:

Bed room 1

Bedroom 2

Kitchen lounge

Combined bath room laundry

 

Previous Approvals/History

 

Subdivision

 

The allotment was created by the subdivision of two existing allotments that had a frontage to Henley Street. The subdivision resulted in the battle axe allotment (the subject site) with the drive way between 26 and 28 Henley Street.

 

The development consent for the subdivision was DA 07/143-01 and was issued on the 24th August 2007.

 

There was a condition applied to the consent requiring retention of trees on the site being number 10 that is as follows:

Condition 10

 

Trees numbered T8, T9, T10, T14, and T15 indicated on the plans submitted with the Development Application are to be retained, tagged and protected when configuring any future proposed dwelling house building footprint and associated engineering works.

 

The Linen Plan of subdivision was released by Council on the 15th March 2013.

 

Pre Development application meeting

 

A pre development application meeting was held at Council on the 18th December 2013.

 

There were a number of issues discussed including, setbacks, building height, landscape area requirements, storm water drainage, cut and fill, tree preservation particularly the retention of a turpentine tree that is to be provided with a tree protection zone of 6 m and car parking requirements.

 

Proposal Data/Policy Compliance

 

Site Area 665.30 m2, including access handle

Site Area 578.5 m˛, excluding access handle

 

Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

Zoning:           R2 Low Density Residential

 

The proposed new dwelling is permissible in the zone as indicated in the LEP 2009.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

The proposed secondary dwelling is not identified as being a permissible use in the land use table in the LEP 2009, however, under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 secondary dwellings are permissible in the R2 Zone.

Clause 8 of the SEPP indicates that:

If there is an inconsistency between this Policy and any other environmental planning instrument whether made before or after the commencement of this Policy, this Policy prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.

 

Therefore the following compliance table has been prepared to indicate how the proposal meets both the requirements of the Lane Cove LEP 2009, Lane Cove DCP and the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

Lane Cove LEP 2009 - Dwelling

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Floor Space Ratio

0.5

0.5

Yes

Height of Buildings

9.3 m

9.5m

Yes

 

 


Comprehensive DCP

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Front setback (min)

NA battle axe

Consistent with area or 7.5m

NA

Secondary street setback (corner lots)

NA

2m

NA

Side setback (min)

1.5 m and 1.2 m

1200mm/1500mm

Yes

Rear setback (min)

NA

<1000m˛: 8m or 25%

>1000m˛: 10m or 35%

NA

Wall Height (max) (maximum parapet of 600mm)

7.0 m

7.0m

Yes

Maximum Ridge height

9.3 m

9.5m

Yes

Subfloor height (max)

NA

1.5m

NA

Number of Storeys (max)

2

2

Yes

Landscaped area (min)(Minimum width of 1m required to be included in area)

34% Statement of effects

 

32.4 % Council manual calculation

 

 

35%

 

 

No

Foreshore Building Line            (min)

NA

 

NA

Cut and Fill      (max)

1 m

1m

Yes

Solar Access

Shadow diagrams indicate compliance

3 hrs to north-facing windows

Yes

Provide for view sharing

Two storey dwelling would partially restrict the views across the site from properties adjoining the southern boundary

 

Reasonable provision of view corridors across the site.

Heritage Conservation

NA

 

NA

Deck/Balcony depth (max)

1.2 m and 2.4 m

3m

Yes

Private open space

Provided as per control

24 m˛ (min)

4m minimum depth

Yes

Basix

Basix cert provided

 

Yes

 


Fences

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Front and side return fence (solid and open design) height (max)

NA

Solid:   900mm

Lightweight:     1.2m

NA

Piers width (max)

NA

350mm

NA

Setback from front boundary if fence is from 1.2m to 1.8m.

NA

Entire fence- 1.0m setback from front boundary

NA

Side and rear fences

Up to 3.2 m above new retaining wall

1.8m

No

 

 

 

 

Car Parking

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Off-street spaces (min)

2

2

Yes

Driveway width

3.5 m

3m at the lot boundary

Yes

Driveway width (battle-axe lots) (min)

3.5 m

3m

Yes

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 – Secondary Dwelling

 

Site requirements

Proposed

Control

Complies

 

Lot requirements

 

Site area 665.30 m2

 

Excluding drive way site area 578.5 m2

 

 

Battle axe Lot has an access way 3 ms in width and measuring 12ms x 12ms excluding access lane way

 

Yes

 Maximum site coverage

49.9 % (of the site including the dwelling and secondary dwelling

50% of the lot if the area is between 450 m2 and 900 m2

Yes

Maximum floor area for principal and secondary dwelling

Secondary dwelling

50 m2

 

Total GFA including the main dwelling and secondary dwelling is 322.35 m2

Max floor area of secondary dwelling not to exceed 60 m2 and the floor area of the principal dwelling and the secondary dwelling shall not exceed 380  m2

Yes

Setbacks and max floor area for balconies, decks patios terraces and verandahs

 

Nil proposed to secondary dwelling

 

NA

 

NA

Building height

Secondary dwelling 5.2 m

Control 8.5 m

Yes

Set backs from classified roads

 Greater than 28 m

Control 9 m

Yes

 

 

Set back from side boundaries

 

 

1.2 m

 

 

0.9 m if the lot has an area between 450 m2

to 900 m2

 

 

Yes

 

Set Backs rear boundary

No rear boundary

(see Schedule 1

 

NA

Landscaping

 

34% SEE

 

32.4% Council calculation

25% if the lot has an area between 600 m2

and 900 m2

Yes

Principal private open space

Area provided  31 m2

Required 24 m2

 

Yes

 

Privacy

Window locations and heights meet with the control and screens are not required

Screens required as per Clause 15 of Schedule 1

Yes

Drainage

Storm water to be piped to an easement that is connected to a public drainage system

 

Storm water to be collected to public drainage system, inter allotment drainage system or on site disposal

Yes

 

Referrals

 

Development Engineer

 

The application was reviewed by Council’s Development Engineer who indicates that the site is identified as a flood controlled Lot with Councils affectation maps.

 

The applicant is required to prepare a flood study in accordance with Part O in Council’s Development Control Plan Storm water Management. The applicant was requested to provide the study and at the time the report was prepared the study had not been submitted.

 

The flood study is required to establish the free overland flow path and finished floor levels of the dwellings after which conditions of consent can be provided.

 

Tree Assessment Officer

 

The application was reviewed by Council’s Tree Assessment officer indicates that he has reviewed the DA documents/Plans and visited the site. The proposed development consists of construction of a residential dwelling house including a secondary dwelling house. The Plans show four (4) trees designated for removal. However, the approved subdivision DA contains conditions of consent protect four (4) of these trees numbered T8 (Fiddlewood), T9 (Turpentine), Tree 10 (Paperbark), Tree 14 (Camphor laurel illegally removed in 2012) and tree 15. Tree 15 is standing in the neighbouring property.      

 

This development application cannot be supported from a landscape perspective given the tree retention conditions of consent in the approved subdivision DA. (refer to Condition 10 of DA07/143 below). 

“10.  Trees numbered T8, T9, T10, T14 and T15 indicated on the plan submitted with this Development Application are to be retained, tagged and protected when configuring any future proposed dwelling house building footprint and associated engineering works for the proposed rear lot.”

Trees numbered 8 and 9 are the two trees that would require retention on this allotment. The Paperbark (T10) and the Macadamia nut tree (not numbered) are standing in untenable locations for retention if the house footprint were to be centrally located on the block.

 

Bush Fire

 

Report prepared by Bushfire Management Consultants dated12th January has reviewed the proposal in regard to its location being within a Bush Fire Zone.

 

The report in the Executive Summary indicates that the construction recommended for both the dwelling and secondary dwelling should be BAL-19 for all elevations, including the roof in accordance with AS 3959-2009 Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas.

 

Condition is recommended to be applied to any consent that includes the construction as required being in accordance with AS 3959-2009 Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas.

 

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

 

The proposal is for a dwelling and a secondary dwelling. The dwelling is permissible in the R2 Zone with the consent of Council. The proposal does not raise any issues in relation to the Local Environmental Plan and complies with the development standards for Floor Space Ratio and Height.

 

Other Planning Instruments

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

Part 1 of the SEPP particularly Clause 8 indicates that:

 

If there is an inconsistency between this Policy and any other environmental planning instrument, whether made before or after the commencement of this Policy, this Policy prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.”

 

Part 2 and Division 2 of the SEPP refers to secondary dwellings and Clause 20 indicates that they are permitted in the R2 Low Density Zone.

 

Therefore the secondary dwelling is permitted with the consent of Council and the relevant development standards are outlined in Schedule 1 of the Policy.

 

The compliance table that is incorporated in this report indicates that the secondary dwelling meets with development standards as outlined in Schedule 1.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 Remediation of Land

 

The subject site and the adjoining properties are zoned for residential purposes and given the historical and current land use activities it is unlikely that the site would be contaminated.

 

Applicable Regulations

 

None relevant

 

 

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.

 

Landscape area

 

The landscape area proposed with the application is 34% of the site as indicated in the statement of environmental effects however calculations completed by Council manually indicates that the landscape area is 215.8 square metres i.e. 32.4 %

 

The Lane Cove Development Control Plan Part C indicates that the minimum are required is 35% of the site is to be landscaped area and the minimum width of 1m is required for inclusion as landscaped area.

 

The site application was not accompanied by a detailed landscape plan.

 

Officers Comment

 

It is considered that minimum of 35% should be provided and this could be achieved by a reduction in the building footprint of either the principal or the secondary dwelling.

 

Boundary Fences

 

The proposal includes a retaining wall along the northern boundary that would be provided with a fence above.

 

The height of the wall varies from 1.1m to 1.4 m above the existing adjoining ground level. 

 

The statement of environmental effects indicates that fences would be a maximum of 1.8 m high.

 

If a fence is located above the retaining wall as proposed the overall height from the ground level of the adjoining properties could be up to 3.2 m high and such is considered to be excessive.

 

Officers Comment

 

It is considered that the retaining wall, adjoining the northern boundary to properties 28, 26 and 24 Moore Street would create an un acceptable impact on the properties to the north as the maximum height of any dividing fence be limited to 1.8 m above the pre development existing ground levels and with the retaining wall and new fence the overall height of the fence would excessive.

 

Privacy

 

The first floor windows to the northern elevation of the two storey dwelling would provide a direct viewing opportunity into the residential properties to the north.

 

The windows are to a family rumpus room (full length ) 2.4 (h) x 3.51 (w),  bed room west side 1.93 (h) x 1.5 (w) (sill height approx 1.4 m above floor level) bed room east side 2 long windows 2.1 (h) x 610 mm (w).

 

There is also a balcony centrally located on the northern elevation and accessed from the passage way between the bed room and family rumpus room.

 


Officers Comment

 

The proposed windows to the family Rumpus Room, the bed rooms on the north and the balcony would provide direct viewing opportunity to the rear yard areas to the properties to the north.

 

 It is considered that the impact and substantial future loss of privacy to those properties would be compromised and is unacceptable.

 

The separation between all the common boundaries with both the dwelling and secondary dwelling is compliant but the open space between the buildings and boundaries being minimal with no structured landscaping.  There is no opportunity to lessen the privacy impact.

 

Part C of the Land Cove Development Control Plan in Clause 1.8 - Amenity indicates the following 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; and

3.       Minimise over looking between adjoining dwellings and their private open spaces

 

It is considered that the proposal does not meet with item 3 as indicated in the above objective that refers to minimizing overlooking of adjoining dwellings and their private open spaces.

 

Tree Removal

 

The application proposes the removal of a number of trees that have been indicated by Councils Tree Protection Officer that should be retained.

 

The retention of the nominated trees was indicated on the original subdivision consent and also out lined in the pre DA minutes as the need to be retained.

 

The main tree of significant concern is the Turpentine that is indicated to be removed as it is located within the building foot print for the principal dwelling.

 

Officers Comment

 

The removal of the Turpentine Tree is not supported by Councils Tree Protection Officer and as the applicant was previously advised that it should be retained at the pre DA meeting it is considered that the main dwelling should have been designed to ensure the retention of the Turpentine Tree.

 

Response to Notification (Section 79C(1)(d))

 

 Eight (8) submissions were received in response to the notification of the development application. 

 

The issues raised in the submission can be summarised as follows.

 

24 Moore Street Lane Cove

 

There is a lot of building space on a small battle axe allotment which doesn’t fit with the rest of the houses in area. The smaller building has windows that directly look into the back yard of 24 Moore Street. The smaller building would be raised adjoining the common boundary and need retaining wall

The buildings seem very close to the back fence adjoining our property.

Comment

 

The proposed development meets the FSR, Height and set back controls of the Lane Cove LEP, DCP and the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 except for the landscape provision.

 

The proposal includes new retaining wall adjoining the common boundary with 24 and 26 Moore Street.

 

The principal dwelling has windows on the north elevation to rooms that face the common boundary between 24 and 26 Moore Street being two bed rooms and family rumpus room on the first floor level, the family room on the ground floor.

 

The secondary dwelling being single storey has windows to the kitchen and bedroom 2 at the north east elevation.

 

The principal dwelling setback varies between 1.5 m and 2.939 m at both the ground and first floor level to the common boundary with the properties to the north being 28, 26 and 24 Moore Street.

 

The set back to the common boundary between the properties at 24 and 26 Moore Street with the secondary dwelling varies between 1.2 m and 2.8 m.

 

The windows of the principal dwelling on the northern elevation first floor level particularly to the family rumpus room area look directly towards the properties to the north.

 

There is also a first floor balcony on the north elevation of the principal dwelling that would allow for an opportunity to directly over look the properties to the north.

 

It is considered that there would be an unacceptable impact on the privacy to the adjoining properties to the north.

 

CKDS Architecture on behalf of 24 Moore Street

 

Floor space ratio: The calculations from the scaled plan indicate that potential gross floor area could be up to 389 sq m.

 

The information in the Statement of Environmental Effects indicates that the primary dwelling has an area of 282.33 sqm and the Secondary dwelling has 50 sqm thus having a non compliant 50.7% FSR.

 

The setbacks have been scaled at 1.4 m at the nearest point to the common boundary and given the boundary is shared it would not be unreasonable for the development to be considered as requiring a 3 m set back at least to any window.

 

The landscape has been calculated as being 31% which is less than the required 35%.

 

The wall height it exceeds the 7.0 m control with the parapet being 7.55 m and thus the bulk and scale is considered excessive.

 

There are serious privacy implications for the adjoining properties being 24, 26 and 28 Moore Street.

 

Comment

 

The FSR calculations have been reviewed and it is considered that the proposal meets with the control.

 

The landscape area as indicated in the DA does not meet the 35% requirement.

 

The height of the building in regard to wall height complies as a parapet can be 600 mm above the 7.0 m wall height control.

 

The concerns regarding privacy to the properties to the north is considered justified particularly from the first floor windows to the North.

 

 

28 Moore Street Lane Cove

 

The architectural plans indicate removal of four (4) trees within the building footprints.  Due to the utilization of the entire property there is no facility to replace those lost trees.

 

Privacy concerns as the first floor rumpus room windows regarding the property at 30 Moore Street.

 

Also the small balcony above the entry door vestibule and this provides a viewing platform but with limited purpose.

 

The building size and being constructed close to the boundary lines would be visible from Henley Street dominate the skyline behind number 28 Moore Street.

 

Storm water over flows should be controlled and directed to the easement.

 

The architects have crammed as much as they can into a confined space and the problem is that the second floor fascia may turn into a giant mirror or viewing platform.

 

The plan provides for a double garage along the driveway and no provision for turning by which to enter.

 

Comment

 

Privacy is identified as being a matter of concern to all properties on the northern side of the proposal.

 

The bulk and scale of the development would impact on the adjoining properties however it does comply with the planning controls in regard to set backs and heights.

 

The storm water and drainage is proposed to be connected to the easement and ultimately discharge into Councils drainage system in Moore Street.

 

The application does indicate removal of trees that have been identified by Council’s Tree protection Officer to be retained and the removal is not supported.

 

28 Moore Street

 

Concern about the loss of privacy particularly as the upstairs section of the house, does not appear to have privacy screens or frosted glass, to the windows that over look 28 Moore Street.

 

Concern has been raised about the new dwellings being constructed within 1 m of the dividing fence between properties.

 

The removal of the 15m Turpentine Tree is not supported and it should be retained.

 

 

 

Comment

 

Privacy concerns are justified as there would be direct view line from the first floor into number 28 Moore Street rear yard area.

 

The Turpentine Tree is identified as being removed due to its location in regard to the new buildings however Councils Tree Protection Officer does not support the removal and it should be retained as previously required with the subdivision consent and the pre DA meeting notes.

 

39 Cullen Street

 

It was noted that in the pre development application meeting notes that the Turpentine Tree be retained with a 6 m protection zone unless an Arborists report is submitted to Council.

 

Consideration should be given to greater setbacks with respect to the need to adequately protect the privacy of neighbouring dwellings with the aim of minimizing overlooking.

 

The proposal indicates that the existing fence is to be dismantled and new retaining wall provided.

 

Whose cost would the installation of a new fence be incurred where the destruction of the existing fence is a result of the development.

 

The size and scale of the proposed development is in compatible with the surrounding locality and would unreasonably reduce the amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring properties.

 

The SEE and the DA form differ in regard to the GFA in that the DA form indicates that it is 332.33 sq m and the SEE indicates 322.35 sq m.

 

Comment

 

The Arboriculture Impact Assessment prepared by Growing My Way (Kyle Hill) and submitted with the development application indicates all existing trees are to be removed from the site excluding a Macadamia tree which is proposed to be retained.

 

Councils Tree Protection Officer has indicated the removal of the Turpentine Tree is not acceptable and the trees that were identified in Condition 10 of the original subdivision consent should be retained.

 

The issue of privacy and over looking is a significant issue and the building should be redesigned to address the privacy concerns.

 

The cost of dividing fences is a matter between adjoining owners it is not an issue that Council can adjudicate on as it is covered by the Dividing Fences Act 1991.

 

The GFA of 332.33 sq m has been adopted by Council in the assessment of the application.

 

28 Henley Street

 

The proposal would over look number 28 Henley Street and all the private space would be overshadowed.

 

The proposal would completely destroy existing amenity and the entire northern aspect when viewed from 28 Henley Street would be blocked by an 8 m high building.

 

There has been no consultation and no information provided regarding screening provisions, frosting of windows and/or landscape screening provisions.

 

Side setbacks need to be addressed in a different fashion to a conventional dwelling as the proposal does not relate to the adjacent buildings in a typical side by side manner.

 

The subdivision of this nature should require conditions be placed to avoid the total loss of privacy an amenity to existing neighbouring parties from future use of the subdivided site.

 

Removal of the significant tree, full of local wildlife and has very historical and retention value.

 

Comment

 

The windows that are located on the southern elevation (Principal Dwelling) at the first floor level are to a master bed room, single bed room, bath room and ensuite.

 

The bed room windows are high light style with the sill height approximately 1.7 above the adjoining internal floor level.

 

The other windows are to the bath room, wc room and ensuite and it is considered that the glazing should be obscure as what is normally provided to such rooms.

 

The proposal does create an additional shadow effect at the winter solstice to the property at 28 Henley Street particularly between 9.00 am and 12.00 noon.

 

However the shadow impact is reduced after 12.00 noon and the solar provisions would comply with the Development Control Plan i.e.: 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.

 

26 Moore Street

 

The construction of a double storey building alone would be sufficient development on the site.

 

The extra height would make the buildings over look 26 Moore Street and a concern is raised to the removal of trees which have been a wonderful retreat of birds for many years.

 

Privacy is a matter of concern and the whole development is not desirable to the amenities of this area.

 

Comment

 

The issue of privacy has been commented previously in this report and it is considered that the windows size and intended use as family/rumps room would create privacy concerns.

 

The statement of environmental effects indicates that the development has been designed to meet with the numerical controls however the landscape area requires adjustment to comply with the minimum of 35%.

 

The two storey dwelling due to the location on the site with the proposed boundary setbacks would create a situation where it would be highly visible from all adjoining properties and would have a bulky presentation to all adjoining properties.

 

The trees that are nominated to be removed are generally within each building foot print and such cannot be retained unless complete redesign of the proposal.

 

26 Henley Street

 

Tree retention – The application shows the removal of trees that were designated for retention during the subdivision of the land.

 

Floor space ratio – The proposal appears to have larger FSR than designated in the LEP 2009.

 

Right of way – no recognition of the right of way and its inclusion in the lot calculations and no turning circle has been provided to meet with Councils requirements for vehicles to enter and leave the property.

 

Landscape area is considered to be non compliant.  Privacy to neighbours is a matter of concern particularly to properties at 28 Henley Street and 28 Moore Street.

 

The open space has been completely overlooked by the proposed new dwelling.

 

Two dwellings on the site is not believed to be possible in a 550 square metre site whilst comply with the FSR, setback from trees that are required to be maintained, storm water retention and vehicle access.

 

It is considered to be an over development of the area.

 

There appears to be major overshadowing to the main living areas of 26 and 28 Henley Street.

 

Comment

 

The Arboriculture Impact Assessment prepared by Growing My Way (Kyle Hill) and submitted with the development application indicates all existing trees are to be removed from the site excluding a Macadamia tree which is proposed to be retained.

 

Councils Tree Protection Officer has raise objection to the removal of the trees as proposed and considers that the requirements as indicated in Condition 10 of the original subdivision consent DA 143/07 should still apply.

 

Privacy to the adjoining properties from the first floor section of the principal dwelling as indicated is a concern and does not meet with the Lane Cove Development Control Plan objective as indicated in Part C Clause 1.8 Amenity.

 

The landscape as proposed does not meet with the minimum requirement being 35%.

 

The shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate compliance with the solar provisions in the Lane Cove Council development Control Plan.

 

The site area is 665.3 square metres that includes the access handle and the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 does not exclude the access handle from the site calculations in regard to Floor Space Ratio and Landscape provision.

 


Impacts

 

The development as proposed would create a visual impact on the neighbours and immediate locality as the site is presently vacant.

 

The impact is generally related to bulk of the proposal, location of the two dwellings on the site in regard to adjoining boundaries, non conforming landscape provision, removal of significant trees that should be retained, the built form and loss of privacy particularly to the properties adjoining the north side of the site.

 

The proposal in its present form and design cannot be supported and it is considered that a redesign is required to ensure compliance with the numerical controls and also addresses the privacy issues as well as the retention of trees that have been identified on the original development consent for the subdivision that created the site.

 

Section 79 C Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

Evaluation

 

The application has been assessed under the EP&A A 1979 and the relevant matters of consideration are as follows;

 

Section 79 (C) 1

 

(1)        Matters for consideration—general

In determining a development application, a consent authority is to take into consideration such of the following matters as are of relevance to the development the subject of the development application:-

(a)   The provisions of:-

(i)    Any environmental planning instrument;

(ii)   Any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject of public consultation under this Act and that has been notified to the consent authority (unless the Secretary has notified the consent authority that the making of the proposed instrument has been deferred indefinitely or has not been approved); and

(iii)  Any development control plan.

(b)   The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality;

(c)   The suitability of the site for the development;

(d)   Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations; and

(e)   The public interest.

 

The above matters have been considered in the assessment of the proposal and it is considered that the non compliance with the planning controls, the unacceptable impacts of the development on the adjoining properties particularly privacy concerns, negative environmental impact with the removal of the trees as indicated particularly the Turpentine Tree, the suitability of the site for the development as proposed the approval as submitted would not be in the public interest.

 


Conclusion

 

The proposal is to construct a new two storey dwelling and a detached single storey secondary dwelling on an existing vacant battle axe allotment.

 

The eight (8) submissions made to Council in response to the notification of the application raised concerns regarding, Floor Space Ratio being non compliant, Landscape provision being inadequate, Privacy to adjoining properties, Solar access being reduced, removal of a Turpentine Tree and the development with just a two storey dwelling would more acceptable.

 

The application has been assessed against the relevant planning controls and it is considered that the proposal cannot be supported with the design as submitted with the development application.

 

The proposal would create a development that is considered to be out of character to the existing surrounding residential development and the immediate impact on the adjoining properties is unacceptable due to the bulk and scale.

 

The existing openness of the site would be removed with the proposal, as the subdivision was created by the amalgamation of part of the adjoining properties and even though it would be a natural expectation that a future development would occur on the site that it should be with care and sensitivity to its context and designed to meet with the planning controls and the original subdivision consent conditions

 

Therefore the application is recommended for refusal as being inconsistent with the Objectives of the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and Lane Cove Development Control Plan in that non the compliance with landscape provisions, bulk and scale of the development, loss of privacy to adjoining properties, removal of significant trees and the impact on the locality in regard to visual amenity an approval cannot be supported.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to Section 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the Councils refuses development consent to Development Application 7/15 for a new two storey dwelling with a detached single storey secondary dwelling on Lot 2 DP 1185373 No 26A Henley Street Lane Cove, for the following reasons:-

 

Aims of the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

1.    The development application should be refused as the proposed development does not accord with clause 1.2 (2)(b),(c) and (f) of the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 (“Lane Cove LEP 2009”) in respect of the aims of the Lane Cove LEP 2009.

 

Particulars

 

a.    Clause 1.2 (2) (b) (c) and (f) of the Lane Cove LEP 2009 provides as follows:

 

1.2(2) The particular aims of this Plan are as follows:

 

(b) to preserve and , where appropriate, improve the existing character, amenity and environmental quality of the land to which this Plan applies in accordance with the indicated expectations of the community,

 

(c) in relation to residential development, to provide a housing mix and density

that:

 

(i)Accords with urban consolidation principles, and

(ii) Is compatible with the existing environmental character of the locality, and

(iii)Has a sympathetic and harmonious relationship with adjoining development

 

(f)In relation to conservation

 

(i)    To protect, maintain and effectively manage public and privately-owned water

courses and areas of riparian land, foreshores and bush land and, where possible, restore them to as close a state to natural as possible, and

(ii)   To ensure that development does not adversely affect the water quality or ecological

                  systems of riparian land or other areas of natural environment, and

(iii)  To control all new buildings to ensure their compatibility with surrounding existing

built form and natural environmental character and

(iv)To conserve heritage items

 

b.    The proposal has a bulk and scale that does not accord with the aims of the Lane Cove LEP 2009 in that the proposal detracts from the character particularly inadequate landscape provision, removal of a significant tree being a Turpentine (Syncarpia glomulifera), separation from adjoining boundaries, amenity being the impact on the privacy of adjoining residential development and environmental quality of the land to which the Plan applies (Clause 1.2(2)(b)); is contrary to the existing environmental character of the locality (Clause 1.2(2)(c)(ii) and is not compatible with the surrounding existing built form and natural environmental character (Clause 1.2(2)(f)(iii)).

 

Objectives of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan

 

2.    The development application should be refused because the proposed development does not accord with the objectives of Part C1 Residential Development Lane Cove Development Control Plan.

 

             Particulars

            

(a)   Clause 1.1 The objectives for dwelling houses and dual occupancies are to:-

 

1.    Provide dwellings in landscape lots;

2.    Ensure new dwellings and alterations and additions to existing dwellings are well designed and compatible with the surrounding context and enhance the streetscape within the area; and

3.    Achieve a reasonable level of amenity for both development and neighbouring dwellings.

 

       The proposal is not considered to be compatible with the surrounding context within the area and the proposal does not allow for a reasonable level of amenity to the adjoining residential dwellings due to the bulk and scale of the development together with the opportunity for overlooking and privacy impact to neignbouring residential premises.

 

       The proposal does not meet with the Objectives of the Clause.

 

(b)   Clause 1.4.2 Side and rear fences

 

Side fences behind the building line are to be a maximum of 1.8 m above ground level

 

           

            The fence adjoining the northern boundary is proposed to be located above a new retaining wall (varying in height between 1.1 and 1.4 m) and be provided with a 1.8 m timber fence above the retaining walls. The maximum height of the proposed dividing fence on the north side of the common boundary would be up to 3.2 m in height and exceed the control standard of 1.8 m.

 

(c)   Clause 1.5 Landscape area

                  

                   The objectives for landscape area are:-

 

1.    To provide privacy and amenity;

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

3.    To conserve significant natural features of the site; and

4.    To assist with on-site storm water management.

 

       The application has not been supported with a landscape plan and the available area is less than the 35% control requirement and the proposal requires the removal of a Turpentine Tree that Council considers should be retained as being significant.

 

       The proposal does not meet with the Objectives in 1 and 3 of the Clause.

 

(d)   Clause 1.7 Building Design

 

                   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 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; and

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

 

       The design of the principal dwelling has windows and a balcony on the first floor north elevation that provide direct viewing opportunities to the adjoining residential properties and thus impact on the privacy to the existing open space. The set back between the adjoining common property boundaries is minimal and this contributes to the privacy impact being unacceptable.

 

       The proposal does not meet with the Objectives in 1 and 4 of the Clause.

 

(e)   Clause 1.8 Amenity

             

       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; and

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

 

       The design of the principal dwelling has windows and a balcony on the first floor north elevation that provide direct viewing opportunities to the adjoining residential properties and thus impact on the privacy to the existing open space. The set back between the adjoining common property boundaries is minimal and this contributes to the privacy impact being unacceptable.

 

       The proposal does not meet with the Objectives in 2 and 3 of the Clause.

 

Section 79 C Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

Public Interest

 

3.    The development application should be refused because it does not meet with the Aims of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2009 for a Residential Development and its approval would not be in the Public Interest.

 

       The development application should be refused because it does not meet with the Lane Cove Development Control Plan Objectives in Part C Residential Development and its approval would not be in the Public Interest.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Neighbour Notification Plans

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Site Location Plans

5 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Neighbour Notification Plans

 



ATTACHMENT 2

Site Location Plans