Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Meeting

6 February 2018, 5:00pm

 

LC_WebBanner

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 6 February 2018 commencing at 5:00pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Craig - GMYours 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 6 February 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

public forum

 

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

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING - 5 DECEMBER 2017

 

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Reports

 

2.       320-322 Pacific Highway, Lane Cove

 

3.       66 Arabella Steet, Longueville  

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel   6 February 2018

320-322 Pacific Highway, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          320-322 Pacific Highway, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA17/78-01 - 48272/17

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Diep Hang 

 

 

 

Property:

320-322 Pacific Highway, Lane Cove

Lots 74 & 75 in DP11416

DA No:

DA 78/2017

Date Lodged:

16 June 2017

Cost of Work:

$2,738,828 (CIV as per QS Report)

Owner:

AJR (NSW) Pty Ltd

Applicant:        

Gelder Architect Group

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Demolition of existing structures, construction of a residential flat building containing 10 residential apartments with basement car parking pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

Zone

R4 High Density Residential

Is the proposal permissible within the zone

Yes

Is the property a heritage item

No - The subject site is not a listed heritage item or located within the vicinity of a listed heritage item.

Is the property within a conservation area

No - The subject site is not located within a heritage conservation area.

Is the property adjacent to bushland

No

BCA Classification

Class 2, 7a and 10b

Stop the Clock used

Yes

Notification

Neighbours, Ward Councillors, Willoughby Council, Osborne Park Residents Association

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

Development Application DA78/2017 is referred to Lane Cove Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) for consideration and determination given the proposed development seeks departures to street setbacks, deep soil areas, and minor breach of the maximum building height development standard.

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The proposal involves the demolition of existing structures, and the construction of a residential flat building containing 10 residential apartments with basement car parking pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

A total of five (5) of the ten (10) dwellings (Units 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9) are to be allocated for affordable rental housing for a 10 year period after completion. The affordable units would be managed by a registered community housing provider.

 

The proposed residential flat building is permissible within the R4 High Density Residential zone pursuant to Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan (LCLEP) 2009.

The proposal exceeds the maximum building height development standard of the LCLEP 2009. A written request for the exception has been lodged with Council for consideration in accordance with Clause 4.6(3) of the LEP.

 

Four (4) submissions have been received with respect to the proposed development. Matters raised in submissions relate to bulk and scale of the proposal, privacy and amenity impacts, traffic, parking and construction impacts, inadequate provision of landscaping, and non-compliance with setbacks, deep soil areas and the variation sought to the maximum building height permitted.

 

The proposal generally meets the development standards contained in SEPP (ARH) 2009, and built form controls and objectives of design provisions as required in the LCLEP 2009 and LCDCP 2010. The proposed development has been designed to minimise impacts on adjoining properties and responds to the topographic constraints of the site, and as such is considered to be compatible with the changing character of built form within the immediate area.

 

The development application is recommended for approval subject to amending conditions that provide additional communal open space and amenity for future residents.

 

SITE

Property

Lots 74 & 75 in DP11416

Area

456m²

Site location

The subject site is located on the western side of Pacific Highway. The property is bound by Cobden Avenue to the south and Haldane Lane to the east.

Existing improvements

The property is currently occupied by existing commercial premises with at grade parking to the rear from Haldane Lane.

Shape

Corner allotment with rear lane access

Dimensions

North: 34.785m

West: 11.365m (Haldane Lane)

East: 12.425m (Pacific Highway)

South: 31.545m (Cobden Avenue)

Adjoining properties

The site adjoins residential units directly to the north, which were previously commercial premises. To the south and west of the site are low density residential properties. The immediate area is currently undergoing change and is characterised by a mix of low to medium density scale housing to the western side of Pacific Highway.

 

Neighbour Notification Plan and Site Location Plans attached (AT1 and AT2).

Figure 1 – Aerial image of subject site highlighted in red (Extracted from NearMap 11 December 2017)

 

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

On 30 March 2017, a pre-DA meeting was held for the demolition of all existing structures, and construction of an in-fill affordable housing residential flat building comprising 11 dwellings, at 320-322 Pacific Highway, Lane Cove.

 

Previous Building Application (BA) approvals have been issued for both properties relating to the use of the individual premises. Council records do not indicate any recent Development Applications for either sites of relevance to the current proposal.

 

PROPOSAL

 

Consent is sought for the following:-

·    Consolidation of Lots 74 & 75 in DP11416;

·    Demolition of the existing commercial premises, including the awning and associated structures;

·    Construction of a four (4) storey residential flat building containing ten (10) residential apartments with the following dwelling mix:

1 x 1-bedroom unit;

8 x 2-bedroom units; and

1 x 3-bedroom unit.

·    Two (2) levels of car parking accommodating thirteen (13) car parking spaces, service bay/removalist space, storage, and garbage storage holding rooms.

·    Car parking is provided within the basement levels as follows:

11 resident car parking spaces;

2 visitor parking spaces (one standard visitor space, one accessible visitor space);

4 bicycles and 1 motorcycle space.

The application is made pursuant to SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. A total of five (5) of the ten (10) dwellings (Units 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9) are to be allocated for affordable rental housing for a 10 year period after completion.

 

Strata-subdivision is not sought as part of this application.

 

PERMISSIBILITY

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

The proposal is located in an accessible area given it is located on Pacific Highway. Major bus routes are accessed from both the eastern and western side of Pacific Highway – Refer to Figure 2 below.

 

Figure 2 – Map showing location of bus stops on Pacific Highway within vicinity of the subject site (Extracted from Google Maps)

 

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. The proposed works are for the construction of a residential flat building.

 

The definition of a ‘residential flat building’ is as follows:

 

Residential flat building means a building containing 3 or more dwellings but does not include an attached dwelling or multi dwelling housing.

 

The proposal is permissible under SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, and satisfies the locational requirements for such development under that SEPP. The development also meets the definition of residential flat building, and is permissible with consent in the R4 zone under LCLEP 2009.

 


 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY (AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING) 2009

 

The development application has been made under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, which applies to all land in the Lane Cove LGA and aims to facilitate the provision of affordable housing within New South Wales and particularly within the Sydney region.

 

The following provisions of the SEPP are relevant to this proposal:

 

*Note: Affordable Rental Housing is shortened to ARH in the below table.

 

Requirement

Proposed

Compliance

Clause 10 – Land to which Division applies

 

Proposed building ‘type’ must be permissible in the zone.

 

 

 

 

The proposed Residential Flat Building is permissible in the R4 zone applying to the site.

 

 

 

 

Complies

Land must be within an accessible area

(ie. within 400m walking distance of a regularly serviced bus stop or within 800m of a ferry wharf or train station).

The proposal is located in an accessible area given it is within approximately 200m walking distance to major bus routes accessed from both the eastern and western side of Pacific Highway.

Complies

Clause 13 – Floor Space Ratio

 

(1)   This clause provides an FSR bonus for ARH developments that provide more than 20% GFA as affordable rental housing

 

(2)   Max. FSR for development to which this clause applies is the existing max. FSR (1.2:1) for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land, plus:

 

(a)   If the existing max. FSR is 2.5:1 or less:

(i)    0.5:1 – if % of affordable GFA is 50% of higher;

(ii)   Y:1 – if % of affordable GFA is less than 50% where:

 

AH = % of affordable GFA

Y (bonus) = AH ÷ 100

 

 

 

Total GFA calculated as 760.95m² (1.67:1)

(Excludes stairs, void, lift).

 

Ground Floor: 206.25m²

First Floor: 230.4m²

Second Floor: 230.4m²

Third Floor: 93.9m²

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAX. FSR PERMITTED AS PER CLAUSE 13  OF SEPP

 

LEP Max. FSR permitted = ‘P’ (1.2:1) = Max. 547.2m²

 

Affordable GFA provided:

Unit 3 = 75m²

Unit 4 = 75m²

Unit 6 = 75m²

Unit 7 = 75m²

Unit 9 = 75m²

Total = 375m²

 

% of affordable = 375m²/775.2m² (48.4%)

 

As per Clause 13(2)(a)(ii), the bonus = 48.4%

 

Max. FSR permitted including bonus FSR =

1.2 (LEP) + 0.484 (% AH) = 1.684:1

= 1.684 x 456m² = 767.9m²

 

 

 

Clause 14 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent.

 

 

 

 

 

1.Site and solar access requirements

 

(b) Site Area:

Min 450m2

 

 

 

 

456m²

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

(c) Landscaped area:
min 30% (136.8m²) landscaped.

 

 

Basement 2 level/COS adjacent Haldane Lane = 46.26m²

Ground level planting = 44.61m²

Third Floor planting = 46.27m²

Total = 137.14m² (30%)

 

 

Complies

 

(d) Deep soil zones:
min 15% site area (68.4m²), 3m min dimension and two-thirds of the deep soil (45.6m²) located at rear of site if practicable.

 

 

 

 

 

Total: 46.26m² (10.14%) deep soil - COS on basement 2 level). This area is located to the rear of the site. Deficient by 22.14m².

 

Discrepancies between calculations are due to the exclusion of the planter box areas on ground floor and third floor. These planter boxes are not considered to be deep soil as nominated on plans. However, the planter boxes have a minimum soil depth of 1m which is considered adequate for the proposed plant schedule.

 

No – the deficiency in deep soil area of 22.14m² is considered acceptable as the roof top COS provides quality services and facilities (toilet/change facilities/wet bar and outdoor furniture) and landscaping to enable quality COS – Refer to Third Floor Plan and Condition 4.

 

(e) Solar Access:
70% of dwellings receive min 3 hours direct sunlight in mid-winter.

 

70% of dwellings = 7 units

 

Living areas and private open space of each dwelling receive solar access as follows:

Unit No.

Solar Access

1

No

2

12-3pm

3

12-3pm

4

9am-12pm

5

12-3pm

6

12-3pm

7

9am-12pm

8

12-3pm

9

12-3pm

10

12-3pm

 

9 out of 10 units receive adequate sunlight.

 

 

Complies

 

Conditions requiring sun protection measures/hoods to the eastern elevation windows of the proposal is recommended, to provide sufficient sunlight and shading to east facing rooms.

2. General

 

(a) Car Parking:

0.5 space for 1 bedroom

1 space for 2-bedroom 

1.5 spaces for 3-bedroom

 

The proposal contains

1 x 1-bedroom (1 space)

8 x 2 bedroom units (8)

1 x 3 bedroom units (1.5)

 

10.5 spaces required

*The required car parking rate is calculated to the proposed development in its entirety.

 

 

 

 

11 residential spaces provided

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

(b) Dwelling Size:

35m² for bedsitter or studio

50m² for 1 bedroom

70m2 for 2 bedroom

95m² for 3 bedroom

All units comply with the requirement.

Complies

Clause 16 – States that SEPP 65 applies to affordable housing RFB’s.

 

Satisfactory –

See SEPP 65 assessment.

Clause 16A – Character of Local Area.

 

 

This clause requires Council to take into consideration whether the design of the development is compatible with the character of the local area.

Satisfactory – An assessment of the compatibility of the proposal with the locality is located at the end of this table.

Clause 17 – Must be used for affordable housing for 10 years

 

Consent cannot be granted unless conditions are imposed that will require the development to be used for 10 years from issue of Occupation Certificate.

A condition will be imposed on any consent issued requiring that the development be held as affordable rental housing for a period of 10 years from the issue date of the Occupation Certificate.

Yes - Condition to be imposed on title of affordable units to comply with Clause 17.

 

The proposal therefore satisfies the standards contained in SEPP (ARH) 2009. The assessment of the proposal against the character of the local area as required by Clause 16A is contained below:

 

Clause 16A - Character of local area:

 

The below is a consideration of character within the terms defined in the Land and Environment Court planning principle established in consideration in the matter Project Venture Developments Pty. Ltd. v Pittwater Council [2005] NSW LEC 191.

 

As defined in the planning principle, merit assessment of character of the local area should consider the following 3 steps:

 

·    Step 1 – Identify the local area.

·    Step 2 – Determine the character (present and future) of the local area.

·    Step 3 – Determine if the development is compatible with the character of the local area.

An assessment against each step is provided below:

Step 1 - Identify the local area

 

Figure 3 identifies the local area as primarily the visual catchment of the site (as viewed from within the site and directly adjacent to the site on the street):

 

Figure 3 – Local Area being the approximate visual catchment from the site (the lots located on the western side of Pacific Highway highlighted in red).

NB: Red Border denotes area. Blue border denotes subject site. Yellow border denotes existing residential units.

 

Step 2 – Determine the character (present and future) of the local area.

 

Figure 4 provides an overview of the existing and proposed land use character of the block/local area (as identified in red in Figure 3). The subject site and adjoining land uses that form the ‘local area’, being the properties bound by Pacific Highway, Cobden Avenue, Haldane Lane and Allison Avenue were rezoned from 2(a1) pursuant to Lane Cove LEP 1987 (repealed) which permitted dwellings used in conjunction with shops; to R4 High Density Residential in accordance with comprehensive Lane Cove LEP 2009. The rezoning recognised the changing circumstance and function of not only the commercial properties facing Pacific Highway, but also the restrictive access and parking provisions of the major arterial road (Dedicated Road by the RTA).

 

Figure 4 – LCLEP 2009 Zoning map extract of the site and surrounds.

 

The existing premises are characterised as failing or empty commercial buildings that struggle to attract customers given the parking and access restrictions and poor on-site parking opportunities. Having regard to the limited economic utility provided by a zone which permits shops, the entire block was zoned to R4 High Density Residential to provide an economic alternative that replaced the existing commercial land use with an urban residential opportunity that transitions to the adjoining low density residential housing found west of Haldane Lane.

 

Step 3 - Determine if the development is compatible with the character of the local area.

 

In accordance with the Land and Environment Court’s ‘Planning Principle’ and recent case law compatibility is best defined as ‘capable of existing together in harmony’. In order to test compatibility two questions are to be considered. These questions, as well as a response to each, are provided below:

 

·    Are the proposal’s physical impacts on surrounding development acceptable? The physical impacts include constraints on the development potential of surrounding sites.

 

The above question is relatively objective. Physical impacts generally include privacy, overshadowing, visual bulk and compatibility in the streetscape.

 

As advised in this assessment report, the proposal, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, would not have undue impacts – that is – beyond the level anticipated by LCDCP 2010 - on the privacy or solar access achieved for surrounding residential allotments. The principal objectives of the ADG and LCDCP – Residential chapter are achieved. Notwithstanding the SEPP (ARH) 2009 bonus, the proposal is consistent in height and street presence to development that would be expected under that control.

 

As discussed in the LCLEP 2011 section of this report, the development would not unduly constrain development on the adjoining site, and the proposal is considered appropriate.

 

·    Is the proposal’s appearance in harmony with the buildings around it and the character of the street?

 

The subject site is in transition from a commercial land use to a high density residential land use. The existing built form is commercial, characterised by nil setbacks for frontage and side boundaries. The urban building footprint continued with the limited site area (456m²) presents limited and restrictive opportunities to maximize communal open space and boundary setbacks considered essential on larger sites with a residential land use. Notwithstanding these constraints, a high quality and well serviced roof top terrace may compensate for the apparent lack of deep soil and minimal boundary setbacks.

 

In conclusion, the proposal manages to keep in harmony with the emerging and anticipated streetscape, and is suitable in character with the locality.

 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY 65 – DESIGN QUALITY OF RESIDENTIAL FLAT DEVELOPMENT

 

SEPP 65 applies to the development as the building is 3 storeys. A design statement addressing the quality principles prescribed by SEPP 65 was prepared by the project architect and submitted with the application. The statement addresses each of the 10 principles and an assessment of this is made below. Council’s assessing officer’s comments in relation to the submission is outlined below.

 


 

DESIGN QUALITY PRINCIPLES

SEPP 65 sets 9 design quality principles. The development has adequately addressed the 9 design quality principle in the following way:

 

ADG design quality principle

Response

Context

The design of the proposed building is considered to respond and contribute to its context, especially having regard to the desired future qualities of the area. The scale of building and type of use are compatible with the proposed redevelopment of the area and recognizes an area in transition with limited area, and generally complies with the requirements of Lane Cove LEP 2009 and DCP 2010.

Built form

The design achieves an appropriate built form for the site and the building’s purpose, in terms of building alignments, proportions, type and the manipulation of building elements.

Density

The proposal would result in a density appropriate for the site and its context, in terms of floor space yield, number of units and potential number of new residents. The proposed density of the development is regarded as sustainable. The proposed density is considered to respond to the availability of infrastructure, public transport and community facilities while maintaining environmental quality.

Sustainability, resource, energy & water efficiency

A BASIX Certificate has been submitted and the building meets the required energy and water efficiency targets

Landscape

The landscaping solutions depicted in the architectural plans are considered to be of satisfactory quality.

Amenity

The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this regard, optimising internal amenity through appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, outlook, efficient layouts and service areas. The proposal provides for an acceptable unit mix for housing choice and provides access and facilities for people with disabilities.

Safety & security

The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in terms of future residential occupants overlooking public and communal spaces while maintaining internal privacy.

Social dimensions/housing affordability

The unit mix of the proposal provides acceptable housing choice within the area.

Aesthetics

The development provides an appropriate choice of colours and materials that will complement the locality.

 

Integral to SEPP 65 is the Apartment Design Guide (ADG), which sets benchmarks for the appearance, acceptable impacts and residential amenity of the development. The development’s compliance with the ADG is assessed below.

 

Apartment Design Code

Subject

Control

Proposal

Compliance

Communal Open Space (COS)

25% (114m²) of site

 

Developments achieve a min. of 50% direct sunlight to the principal useable part of the COS for a min. 2 hours between 9am and 3pm, mid-winter

117.18m² (25.7%)

 

Ground Floor (rear) – 46.26m²

Roof top terrace – 70.92m²

 

The ground floor COS area is located to the west of the site, and roof top terrace COS area receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight throughout the day, mid-winter.

 

Complies –

In order to improve the amenity for residents using the roof top terrace, conditions have been imposed for the inclusion of a toilet facility, sink and power outlets to the roof top COS area.

Deep Soil Zones

7% (31.92m²) of site

Min. dimensions of 3m

Deep soil zone is provided within the rear setback – 46.26m² (10.1%)

 

Complies

Visual Privacy/

Building Separation

Minimum distances to side and rear boundaries and between buildings on the same site:

 

Up to 12m (4 storeys)

Habitable rooms & balconies – 6m

Habitable & non-habitable rooms – 4.5m

Non-habitable rooms – 3m

 

East (Pacific Highway)

The development provides a nil setback to Pacific HWY. Balconies and living areas provide passive surveillance to Pacific HWY.

 

South (Cobden Avenue)

The development provides a nil setback to Cobden Ave. Living areas provide passive surveillance to Cobden Ave.

 

North

Nil setback provided as per existing residential unit block adjacent.

 

West (Haldane Lane)

Measured to external wall

Ground, First & Second Floor - Min. 10.466m

Third Floor – Min. 22m

 

Complies

Parking

For development in the following locations:

-  Within 800m of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or

-  On land zoned, and within 400m of land zoned B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre.

The minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant Council, whichever is less; is to be applied.

The subject site is not located in the nominated areas as it is not located within 800m of a railway station or light rail stop.

The subject site is approximately:

- 2.4km from Chatswood Station;

- 2.1km from St Leonards Station; and

- 3.0km from Wollstonecraft Station.

 

The subject site is also not located within the vicinity of land zoned B3 or B4.

 

Parking has been provided as per SEPP (ARH) 2009

 

11 residential parking spaces are provided on-site.

Refer to SEPP (ARH) Compliance table.

Solar Access

Living rooms and private open space of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a min. 2 hours of direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 21 June

*Note: the property is located within the Sydney Metropolitan Area or Newcastle and Wollongong LGA

 

A max. of 15% of apartments in the building receive no sunlight between 9am and 3pm at mid-winter

Apartments are required to receive a min. 2 hours of direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm, mid-winter.

 

9 out of 10 (90%) apartments receive a min. 2 hours of direct sunlight

 

 

No south facing single aspect apartments are proposed

Complies

 

Conditions requiring sun protection measures/hoods to the eastern elevation windows of the proposal is recommended, to provide sufficient sunlight and shading to east facing rooms.

Natural Ventilation

At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building

6 out of 10 (60%) apartments are naturally cross ventilated

Complies

Ceiling Heights

Ground floor retail 3.3m café/restaurant 4m

Habitable rooms 2.7m

Non-habitable 2.4m

N/A – all residential

All levels provide a ceiling height of 2.9m

Complies

Apartment Size & Layout

Studio 35m²

1 bedroom 50m²

2 bedroom 70m² 

3 bedroom 90m²

Studio N/A

1 bedroom 50m² (min.)

2 bedroom 75m² (min.)

3 bedroom 96.7m² (min.)

Complies

 

Master bedrooms have a min. size of 10m² & other bedrooms 9m² (excluding wardrobe space)

All bedrooms generally comply.

Complies

 

Bedrooms have a min. dimension of 3m

All min. dimensions of 3m generally provided

Complies

 

Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of:
- 3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom apartments.
- 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments.

All min. dimensions generally provided

Complies

Private open space and balconies

All apartments are to have primary balconies as follows:

Studio: 4m², N/A min. depth

1 bedroom: 8m², min. 2m depth

2 bedroom: 10m², min. 2m depth

3 bedroom: 12m², min. 2.4m depth

Balconies and courtyards provided are satisfactory

Complies

Common Circulation

Max. number of apartments off a circulation core on a single level is 8

A maximum of 3 apartments are accessed from the common lift core.

Complies

Storage

In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms, the following storage is required:

Studio: 4m³

1 bedroom: 6m³

2 bedroom: 8m³

3 bedroom: 10m³

Additional storage for each unit is provided in the basement. Internal storage is also accommodated internally within units by linen cupboards and wardrobes.

Complies

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

Zoning:           R4 High Density Residential                       Site Area:       456m²

 

Clause

Proposed

Control

Complies

Zoning

R4 High Density Residential

Residential flat buildings are permitted with development consent

Yes

4.3 Height of Buildings

12.439m to 12.887m

12m

No – Clause 4.6 request submitted

4.4 Floor Space Ratio

760.95m² (1.67:1)

1.2:1

No – Refer to SEPP ARH assessment which includes bonus FSR

4.6 Exceptions to development standards

Written request to be submitted to vary any development standards

Clause 4.6 written request submitted to vary building height development standard

Refer to Clause 4.6 discussion below.

 

EXCEPTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN LANE COVE LEP 2009

 

Objectives of Clause 4.6 of LCLEP 2009

 

(1)  The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a)  to provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development,

(b)  to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances.

 

A written request under the provisions of Clause 4.6 of LCLEP 2009 was lodged as the proposed development seeks a variation to the following development standard:

 

·    Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings

 

The proposal is non-compliant with Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings that stipulates that the height of a building is not to exceed the maximum height shown on the land on the Height of Buildings Map. The maximum building height permitted on the subject site is 12m.

 

The lift overrun, pergola and planter box structure exceeds the maximum building height permitted by a minimum of 0.439m and maximum 0.887m. This departure represents a variation of 3.66% to 7.39% the development standard.

 

The Applicant’s Clause 4.6 Variation Request to the Maximum Building Height is attached to this report (AT3).

 

Figure 1 – Extract of Section A-A Plan (Drawing No. DA05, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects, dated 27/10/2017)

 

 

 

Assessment of the exception under Clause 4.6:

 

In assessing an exception to vary a development standard, the following needs to be considered:

 

1.   Is the planning control a development standard?

 

Yes, Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings is a development standard.

 

2.   What is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

 

The purpose of Clause 4.3 is to ensure that transition in built form and land use intensity of the development is suitable with regard to the area of the site and the type of development proposed.

 

3.   Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

Preston CJ, in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827, stated that “the rationale is that development standards are not ends in themselves but means of achieving ends. The ends are environmental or planning objectives. Compliance with a development standard is fixed as the usual means by which the relevant environmental or planning objective is able to be achieved. However, if the proposed development proffers an alternative means of achieving the objective, strict compliance with the standard would be unnecessary (it is achieved anyway) and unreasonable (no purpose would be served).”

 

Compliance with the development standard is considered to be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the subject proposal. The lift overrun, pergola and planter box structure are the only components of the proposal which exceeds the maximum building height permitted.

 

In addition, Preston CJ, in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827, established a number of ways of determining whether compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. The most common approach is to establish that compliance with the objectives of the control is achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the particular standard.

 

In accordance with Clause 4.6(4)(a)(ii) of LCLEP 2009, the consent authority must be satisfied that “the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out”.

 

Objectives of the particular standard

 

The objectives of Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings are as follows:

 

4.3   Height of buildings

(1)  The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a)  to minimise any overshadowing, loss of privacy and visual impacts of development on neighbouring properties, particularly where zones meet, and

(b)  to maximise sunlight for the public domain, and

(c)  to relate development to topography.

 

Comment:

 

The proposed variation to the development standard is necessary for the structure containing the lift core and shade structure and facilities within the roof top terrace, and is consistent with the scale of the development envisaged within the R4 High Density Residential zone located in the immediate vicinity of the site. The departure sought is considered to be modest and does not unreasonably impact on adjoining properties with respect to overshadowing and visual impacts. The additional height does not result in the appearance of bulk when viewed from the existing streetscape as it is located within the centre of the building, and would not impinge on the changing streetscape that is anticipated for the immediate area. It is considered, therefore, that the strict compliance with the Development Standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Objectives for development within the zone

The subject site is zoned R4 High Density Residential Zone pursuant to LCLEP 2009.

 

The objectives of the R4 zone are as follows:

 

 Zone R4   High Density Residential

 

1   Objectives of zone

•  To provide for the housing needs of the community within a high density residential environment.

•  To provide a variety of housing types within a high density residential environment.

•  To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

•  To provide for a high concentration of housing with good access to transport, services and facilities.

•  To ensure that the existing amenity of residences in the neighbourhood is respected.

•  To avoid the isolation of sites resulting from site amalgamation.

•  To ensure that landscaping is maintained and enhanced as a major element in the residential environment.

 

Comment:

The proposal would provide for the housing needs of the community within an urban high density residential context. Due to the orientation of the site, the development does not unreasonably impact on the solar access of adjoining properties or disrupt existing view corridors. The building provides an appropriately scaled development that compliments adjoining developments, consistent with the built form envisioned for the immediate area. In addition, the proposed development is not considered to result in the isolation of land as the subject site is unable to amalgamate with the adjoining sites to the north, which have been recently improved and redeveloped to residential units.

 

The non-compliance sought to the maximum building height permitted only relates to the lift overrun, shade structures and facilities within the roof top terrace, and as such it is considered that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in these circumstances. The departure sought is considered to be modest and the portion of the building exceeding the maximum building height alone would not result in the appearance of bulk when viewed from the existing streetscape.

 

4.   Are there sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard?

 

The decision in Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 90, indicates that merely showing that the development standards achieves the objectives of the development standard is insufficient to justify that a development is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case for the purposes of an objection under Clause 4.6. The case also demonstrates that the requirement in Clause 4.6(3)(b) of the LEP to justify there are sufficient environmental planning grounds for the variation, requires identification of grounds particular to the circumstances of the proposed development, and not simply grounds that apply to any similar development on the site or in the vicinity.

 

Despite the non-compliance with the maximum height for the site, the proposal remains consistent with the objectives of the zone and has demonstrated the following:

 

·   The variation to the development standard for a portion of the building being the lift core, shade structure has resulted from the topography of the land.

·   Due to the orientation of the site, the development does not unreasonably impact on the solar access of adjoining properties despite the variation to the proposal.

·   The proposal does not result in a disruption of existing view corridors.

 

5.   Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the objectives of the development standard and the relevant objectives of the land zone?

 

Given that the variation of the lift overrun and structures located on the roof top terrace has resulted from the topography of the land and does not compromise relationships with adjoining properties having regard to privacy and overshadowing, the non-compliance sought is considered to be consistent with the objectives of both the building height standard and R4 High Density Residential zone.

 

6.   Will strict compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?        

 

Strict compliance with the development standard would hinder attainment of the objectives specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act as it would retain the social and economic welfare of the community, particularly that of neighbouring development within the subject site.

 

7.   Is the exception well founded?

 

The proposal with respect to the variation of the lift overrun and structures located within the roof terrace is considered to be consistent with the development standard and with the objectives of the zone. As such, the exception to the building height development standard is considered to be well founded and supported.

 

Lane Cove Development Control Plan (DCP)

 

Part B – General Controls

 

Clause

DCP

Proposed

Complies/ Comment

B3 – Site Amalgamation & Isolated site

To encourage site consolidation of allotments for development in order to promote the desired urban design outcomes and the efficient use of land and to avoid the creation of isolated sites.

Consolidation of 2 allotments for a residential flat building development.

 

The sites directly to the north has been recently converted from commercial premises for the purposes of a residential flat building:

DA161/2011 (324 Pacific HWY)

DA197/2014 (326-328 Pacific HWY)

Yes - The proposed development will not result in the isolation of any properties.

B7: Development near busy roads (and rail corridors)

LAeq levels:

(i) In any bed -room 35dB(A) 10.00pm to 7.00am.

(ii) anywhere else 40dB(A).

As vehicle traffic flow for Pacific Highway is greater than 20,000 vehicles per day, an acoustic report is required.

 

Acoustic Assessment, prepared by Acoustic Dynamics, dated 5 June 2017

Council’s Environmental Health officer has reviewed the Acoustic Report and imposed conditions for the recommendations of the report to be implemented.

B8: Safety & security

 

Required

The design provides a reasonable level of safety and security, and passive surveillance to the street and common areas.

Satisfactory

 

Part C.3 – Residential Flat Buildings

 

Clause

DCP

Proposed

Complies/Comment

3.2 Density (min)

Site area: 1,500m2

Site area: 456m2

No – meets min. 450m² site requirements of SEPP(ARH)

3.3 Building depth (max)

18m (exclusive of balconies)

13m (excludes balconies)

Yes

3.4 Building width (max)

40m fronting the street, or greater if articulation is satisfactory.

Pacific Highway = 12.4m

Cobden Avenue = 24.9m

Haldane Lane = 13.1m

Yes

3.5 Setbacks (min)

(i) Front

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(ii) Side

 

·     North

 

 

 

 

 

(iii) Rear

 

·     West

 

7.5m (if no predominant setback within the street)

 

For corner allotments, the secondary setback requirement is the same as the side setback requirement (6m for up to 4 storeys, 9m for 5-8 storeys)

 

 

6m for up to 4 storeys

 

 

 

 

 

 

6m for up to 4 storeys

 

To the boundary shared with R2 and R3 zones, the min. setback will be 9m if habitable rooms/balconies orient this side

 

 

Pacific Highway

Nil setback provided consistent with residential units directly to the north of the site.

 

Nil setback provided to Cobden Avenue – this is consistent with the nil setback provided to the side boundaries as per the residential units to the north.

 

 

 

 

Nil setback provided

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Land to the west is zoned R2 – min. 9m rear setback required.

 

Measured to external wall

Ground, First & Second Floor - Min. 10.466m

Third Floor – Min. 22m

 

Yes – Nil setback to Pacific Highway, Cobden Avenue and the northern boundary is consistent with the residential units directly adjoining the subject site to the north (No.324 Pacific Highway, and No. 326-328 Pacific Highway).

 

 

 

 

 

No – Acceptable as the adjoining residential units sharing a boundary with the subject site also provide a nil side setback.

 

Yes

3.5.3 General

encroachment into any setback zone (max)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Articulation elements (max)

 

 

1.2m above ground, and up to 2m within the setback zone, for underground parking structures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Up to 500mm of allowable encroachments

Nil setbacks provided for car parking.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Pacific Highway and Cobden Avenue corner has been articulated to clearly identify the entry. A mix of materials and finishes are proposed to add interest to the street facades.

Acceptable, as the site is in transition and having regard to the existing setbacks provided by development adjoining the site directly to the north and design response relating to the topography of the land to accommodate for adequate on-site parking.

 

Satisfactory

3.7   Fences

 

(i)    Front (height max)

 

 

 

(ii)        Side and rear (height max)

 

 

Up to 2m high of solid construction

 

 

 

1.8m behind the building line

 

 

 

Fencing is not proposed.

 

 

 

 

Fencing around the communal open space located on the corner of Cobden Avenue and Haldane Lane, and Basement Level 2 entry shall be amended to be a maximum height of 1.2m measured from the finished ground level to achieve satisfactory sight lines for vehicles and pedestrians.

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

A condition shall be imposed to ensure that fencing around the communal open space located on the corner of Cobden Avenue and Haldane Lane, and Basement Level 2 entry shall be a maximum height of 1.2m measured from the finished ground level.

3.8    Excavation

To be contained as close as practicable to the development’s footprint

Max. excavation of approximately 7m to accommodate the basement car parking levels.

The design responses to the steep topography of the land and provides 2 levels of basement with separate entrances from Cobden Avenue and Haldane Lane to accommodate for on-site parking for the proposal. Each basement level entry corresponds with the slope of the respective street in order to achieve safe vehicular access to and from the site.

3.9  Roof top areas

Use as recreation facility where practicable.

Roof terrace proposed including BBQ and seating (covered) with landscaped seating area.

Yes – however it is recommended that the area be of high amenity and service to compensate for the limited site area.

3.10 Size and mix of dwellings (min)

40m2 (studio) ,

 

10% of each unit type to be provided

No studios proposed.

1 x 1-bedroom (10%)

8 x 2-bedrooms (80%)

1 x 3-bedroom (10%)

Yes

3.11 Private open space (i.e. balconies and terraces) (min)

Ground floor dwellings:

Require a primary terrace of 16m2 with a depth of 4m, and direct access either to a terrace or a front garden.

 

Above ground dwellings:

Require a primary balcony of 10m2 with a depth of 2m

Unit 1 & 3 = 15m²

Unit 2 = 20m²

 

All other units provide balconies min. 10m².

Acceptable minor non-compliance of 1m² for ground floor Units 1 and 3. This is considered acceptable as the courtyard spaces provided are a sufficient size and shape to facilitate outdoor furniture for residents.

 

Also see 3.9 Roof top areas above.

3.12 Ceiling heights

Minimum 2.7m

2.9m

Yes

3.13  Storage

 

1 bedroom dwellings: 6m3

 

2 bedroom dwellings: 8m3

 

3 bedroom dwellings: 10m3

Adequate storage provided within units and in basement levels

Yes

3.14 Solar Access

Living rooms and private open spaces of 70% of the units (7 units) to receive 3 hours of direct sunlight between 9am – 3pm on 21 June

 

Maximum 10% dwellings (1 units) with a southerly aspect

 

9 out of 10 units (90%) receive a min. 3 hours sunlight, mid-winter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No single south facing units proposed.

Yes

3.15 Natural ventilation

 

Minimum 60% of the dwellings (6 units) should have cross ventilation.

 

Minimum 25% (2.5 units rounded up to 3 units) of kitchens have access to natural ventilation

6 out of 10 units are naturally cross ventilated.

 

 

 

4 out of 10 units’ kitchens have access to natural ventilation

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

3.16 Visual privacy

 

Provide visual privacy between the adjoining properties

North

 

Ground Floor:

A solid wall to the length of the adjoining units at No. 324 Pacific Highway balconies, and planter boxes are provided along the northern boundary of Unit 2’s balcony to mitigate overlooking to the adjoining units at No. 324 Pacific Highway.

 

First & Second Floor:

A solid wall to the length of the adjoining units at No. 324 Pacific Highway balconies are provided to Units 5 & 8. The balconies of Units 5 & 8 are also setback 1.3m from the northern boundary to assist with overlooking impacts.

 

Third Floor:

Planter boxes are provided along the northern boundary of the roof top communal open space area. The roof top terrace is also a level higher than the residential building at No. 324 Pacific Highway and is not considered to pose adverse visual privacy concerns to residents to the north as it would be adjacent to the roof of the building.

 

West

 

Adequate building separation and setbacks are provided to Haldane Lane. In addition, planting is provided adjacent to west facing units on the ground floor (Units 2 & 3) and the roof top terrace, to ensure privacy is maintained between properties.

 

East & South

 

Units facing Pacific Highway and Cobden Avenue provide passive surveillance to the street and are not considered to pose adverse overlooking and privacy concerns to neighbouring properties.

 

Satisfactory – The proposal has been designed and provides adequate privacy measures to mitigate overlooking and visual privacy impacts to neighbouring properties.

3.17 Communal open space

Minimum 25% (114m²)

Basement Level 2 = 34.4m²

Roof terrace = 117m²

Yes – conditions are imposed for additional amenities to be incorporated for the roof top terrace COS area.

3.18 Landscaped Area

25% provided at ground level (114m²) and up to15% (17.1m²) provided on structures (40% required)

Total landscaped area = 137.4m² (30%)

 

Basement 2 level/COS adjacent Haldane Lane = 46.26m² (10.1%)

 

Planting on structures =

Ground level = 44.61m²

Third Floor = 46.27m²

Total = 90.88m² (19.9%)

 

Acceptable – As the total landscaped area provided is greater than 25%.

 

High quality landscaping (self-watering and/or maintained by professional maintenance service) is recommended.

 

Part F - Access and Mobility

 

Clause

DCP

Proposed

Complies/ Comment

3.3 Public spaces and link to private properties

Development on public and private properties must provide and maintain accessible links and path of travel between BCA

Class 2 to Class 10 buildings and to adjacent public spaces or pedestrian networks.

The proposal has been accompanied by an Access Report and BCA Report.

Should development consent be granted, a condition would be imposed requiring access to be confirmed by a qualified Access consultant to ensure compliance.

3.5 Parking

1 accessible parking space for each adaptable dwelling =  car spaces

Units 6 & 9 are nominated as adaptable units. Accessible parking spaces are provided to these units.

Yes

3.6 Adaptable and visitable housing

1 adaptable dwelling per 5 dwellings (i.e. 2 dwellings), and evenly distributed

throughout all types and sizes of dwellings.

 

80% of the dwellings to be visitable (8 units)

Units 6 & 9 are nominated as adaptable units. Both units are 2 bedroom units with the same layout. Adaptable units are to be mixed throughout the building.

 

 

Acceptable, having regard to the constraints of the site and compliant provision of adaptable units. Unit 6 is located on the 1st floor and Unit 9 is located on the 2nd floor.

 

Should development consent be granted, a condition would be imposed requiring visitable units be confirmed by a qualified Access consultant to ensure compliance.

3.7 Access to, and within, buildings

Access is required to all dwellings, and all common areas.

 

Basement 2 level COS is not accessible.

The primary rooftop COS is accessible for residents and visitors.

 

Part R – Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

Clause

DCP

Proposed

Complies/ Comment

Table 1 – Car parking rates

 

Residential Flat Buildings

Residential Component:

0.5 spaces per studio (1 space)

1 space per 1-bedroom unit

1.5 spaces per 2-bedroom unit (12 spaces)

2 spaces per 3+ bedroom unit (2 spaces)

 

Dwelling mix:

2 x studio units

8 x 2-bedroom units

1 x 3-bedroom units

11 residential spaces

No – meets parking requirements of SEPP(ARH)

 

1 disabled space for each adaptable housing unit

 

2 adaptable units are proposed within the building

An accessible parking space is provided for each adaptable unit.

Yes

 

1 onsite removalist truck space per 100 residential units (as per relevant Australian Standards)

 

Service bay space provided on Basement Level 1 can be utilised as a removalist space

Yes

 

1 car wash bay per 50 units for developments over 20 units

 

N/A

 

Visitor Parking:

1 space per 4 units

1 disabled space per 50 visitor spaces (min. 1 disabled space)

Visitors required = 11units/4 = 2.75 units

 

3 visitor spaces provided as follows:

1 accessible space

1 dual car wash bay space

1 standard visitor space

Yes

 

REFERRALS

 

Development Engineer

 

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the proposed development and raised no objections subject to the imposition of draft conditions. The stormwater concept plan submitted has been conditioned to meet the requirements of Part O of Council’s DCP for stormwater management. The upgrade of Council’s infrastructure adjacent to the site, the new driveways and bulk earthworks have been conditioned accordingly.

 

Building Surveyor

 

Council’s Building Surveyor has reviewed the proposal against the BCA and relevant Australian Standards and raised no building related objection with respect to the development, as the proposed residential flat building is capable of achieving compliance with the Performance Requirements of the NCC 2015. BCA technical non-compliance matters will be addressed via a Fire Engineered Alternative Solution at the construction certificate stage of the project. As such, recommended conditions have been imposed as part of the development consent.

 

It is reiterated that no external cladding is permitted for the proposed development. This has also been further imposed as a recommended draft condition of consent.

 

Community Development, Ageing and Disability Officer

 

Council’s Community Development, Ageing and Disability officer has reviewed the proposal and it was advised that the submitted Disability Access Report (Ref No. J000146, prepared Access, dated 10 November 2016) highlighted a number of issues that can be addressed.

 

To ensure that the proposed adaptable dwellings are appropriately designed, a condition shall be imposed requiring plans submitted with the construction certificate to state that the required adaptable dwelling has been designed in accordance with the requirements of AS 4299-1995 for a class C Adaptable House.

 


 

Waste Contract Co-ordinator

 

Council’s Waste Contract Co-ordinator has reviewed the waste management plan and raises no objections subject to the imposition of conditions.

 

Environmental Health

 

Council’s Environmental Health officer has reviewed the proposed development and accompanying reports and raises no objections to the proposal subject to the imposition of draft conditions.

 

Traffic Engineer

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal and raises no objections to the development with respect to traffic and parking arrangements, subject to the imposition of recommended draft conditions.

 

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

 

The proposal is permissible, complies with the development standards for Floor Space Ratio and height and does not raise any issues in regard to the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009.

 

Other Planning Instruments

 

SEPP 55 Remediation of Land

 

The provisions of SEPP 55 have been considered in the assessment of the development application.  The site is not identified in Council’s records as being contaminated. A Site inspection reveals the site does not have an obvious history of a previous land use that may have caused contamination and there is no specific evidence that indicates the site is contaminated. Accordingly, the development application is satisfactory having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under SEPP 55 as it is considered that the site can be made suitable for the proposed residential purposes.

 

SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

The requirements outlined in the BASIX certificate have been satisfied in the design of the proposal. Conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure such commitments will be fulfilled during the construction of the development.

 

SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007

 

The site has frontage to a classified road to its northern boundary, being Pacific Highway.

 

The proposal did not require referral to the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) for concurrence, in accordance with Clause 101 of SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007, as the development does not propose vehicular access from Pacific Highway.

In accordance with Clause 102 of SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007, an acoustic report is required to be submitted to ensure that the following LAeq levels are not exceeded:

(a) in any bedroom in the building — 35 dB(A) at any time between 10 pm and 7 am,

(b) anywhere else in the building (other than a garage, kitchen, bathroom or hallway) — 40 dB(A) at any time.

 

Council’s Environmental Health officer has reviewed the submitted Acoustic Report and deemed the proposal satisfactory subject to the imposition of conditions.

 

SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS

 

The proposal comprises of the following dwelling mix:

·     1 x 1-bedroom unit;

·     8 x 2-bedroom units; and

·     1 x 3-bedroom unit.

 

No credits are given to the existing commercial premises. The below table reflects the dwelling mix and number of persons, with respect to the Section 94 contributions required (2017/2018 Fee Schedule).

 

No. of bedrooms

S.94’s per dwelling

Required Contribution

1 x 1-bedroom

1 x ($10,100/person x 1.2 person/dwelling = $12,120.00)

$12,120.00

8 x 2-bedroom

8 x ($10,100/person x 1.9 person/dwelling = $19,190.00)

$153,520.00

1 x 3-bedroom

1 x [($10,100/person x 2.4 person/dwelling = $24,240.00 reduced to $20,000.00 (cap)]

$20,000.00

Total

 

$185,640.00

 

Section 94 Contributions payable = $185,640.00.00

 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS

 

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 indicates that the standards for demolition and removal of materials should meet with AS 2601-2001 and therefore any consent will require the application of a relevant condition seeking compliance with the Standard.

 

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

 

The preceding policy assessment tables identify those controls that the proposal does not comply with.

 

The minor departures to the DCP provisions in relation to street setbacks, structures within the maximum permitted building height, and deep soil areas have been discussed in the compliance table. The proposed development meets the objectives of the provisions and is not considered to result in adverse impacts to adjoining properties as a result. As such, the variations sought to the DCP provisions are considered reasonable and supported.

 

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

 

In accordance with Council’s notification procedures contained in Lane Cove DCP 2009, the proposal was notified from 15 December 2016 to 11 January 2017.

 

Amended plans modifying the design and reducing the proposal by one unit was submitted and re-notified for 14 days from 31 October 2017 to 14 November 2017.

 

During the notification periods, a total of four (4) submissions were received. The issues raised within those submissions are addressed below.

 

·    Disruption of noise, pollution, property vibration, traffic congestion, blocked access to property and quality of life during demolition of construction phase.

Comment:

 

Lane Cove Council has a policy which specifies hours of building works for major residential development in the Lane Cove LGA as follows:

 

IF A MAJOR RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING

 

All demolition, building construction work, including earthworks, deliveries of building materials to and from the site to be restricted as follows:-

 

        Monday to Friday                     7am to 5.30pm 

        (inclusive)                                 High noise generating activities, including rock breaking and saw cutting be restricted between 8am to 5.00pm with a respite period between 12.00 noon to 1.30pm Monday to Friday.

 

        Saturday                                  8am to 12 noon

                                                         with NO high noise generating activities, including excavation, haulage truck movement, rock picking, sawing, jack hammering or pile driving to be undertaken.  Failure to fully comply will result in the issue of a breach of consent P.I.N. 

 

Sunday                                    No work Sunday or any Public Holiday.

 

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.

 

A condition requiring the Applicant to comply with Council’s policy will be included in the conditions of consent. Any breach of the above hours of construction reported to the Council will be the subject of investigation and action.

 

With respect to noise, dirt and dust during the construction phase, extensive environmental health conditions requiring the implementation of numerous mitigation measures have been imposed to reduce adverse impacts on neighbouring properties.

 

A Construction Traffic Management Plan is also required to be submitted to Council for further approval before construction is permitted to commence so as to minimise impacts of construction activities on neighbours, residents and users of the public footpath and roads.

 

·    The proposed setback is not aligned to the neighbouring properties and character of the area.

·    Adverse visual bulk and streetscape impacts.

 

Comment:

 

The proposed development provides a consistent front setback with prevailing residential units at 324-328 Pacific Highway. The proposal has articulated the Cobden Avenue and Pacific Highway corner of the building seeks to identify the entrance and utilises a mix of materials and finishes to the external façade to break up the building mass and appearance of bulk when viewed from the street. The balconies and screen planting proposed along the edges of the development further visually softens the building to provide a built form compatible with the changing character of built form within the immediate area. The overall design of the building is considered to be sympathetic to recent and adjoining housing, having regards to the topographic site constraints of the property and inability to redevelop with properties adjoining the subject site directly to the north.

 

·    Windows and balconies on the northern boundary will pose overlooking and visual privacy impacts.

·    Adverse amenity impacts on 324-326 Pacific Highway.

 

Comment:

 

The proposal provides a considered design approach which incorporates adequate visual privacy measures to mitigate overlooking and visual privacy impacts to neighbouring properties. Plant screening, and adequate separation has been provided between habitable rooms and private/communal open spaces of the proposal to neighbouring properties to ensure visual privacy and amenity is maintained between properties. Windows have also been oriented to minimise direct overlooking into adjoining sites.

 

·    Impacts of traffic coming to and from this development, and parking problems resulting from the proposal.

 

Comment:

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal and raised no objections subject to the imposition of conditions. A Construction Traffic Management Plan is required to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate to ensure that construction activities would not adversely impact neighbouring properties and the surrounding road network. The proposal provides and complies with the required on-site parking provisions outlined in SEPP (ARH) 2009.

 

·    Non-compliance with the building height standard under Clause 4.3 of LCLEP 2009. The Clause 4.6 submission is not well founded.

 

Comment:

 

Given that the variation of the lift overrun and structures located on the roof top terrace has resulted from the topography of the land and does not compromise relationships with adjoining properties having regard to privacy and overshadowing, the non-compliance sought is considered to be consistent with the objectives of both the building height standard and R4 High Density Residential zone.

 

The departure sought is considered to be modest and the portion of the building exceeding the maximum building height alone would not result in the appearance of bulk when viewed from the existing streetscape. As such, the exception to the building height development standard is considered to be well founded and supported in this instance.

 

·    Non-compliance with standards and controls in Clause 14(1) and (2) of SEPP (ARH) 2009.

·    Non-compliance with SEPP65 and the ADG.

 

Comment:

 

The proposed development has been amended to provide adequate landscaped areas with a minor non-compliance sought to the provision of deep soil. The departure sought is considered to be minor and acceptable in this instance as the proposal achieves the objectives of the landscaping and deep soil provisions with respect to maintaining privacy and amenity for residents and neighbouring properties, and designing an appropriately scaled built form in a landscaped setting, provided the landscaping is of high quality and maintained.

The proposal achieves adequate solar access to units and is not considered to adversely overshadow habitable rooms and private open space areas of neighbouring properties during mid-winter.

 

Appropriate privacy measures are incorporated in the design of the building to ensure visual privacy is maintained between properties.

 

On the balance, the overall proposal generally complies with the provisions and objections of design requirements stipulated by SEPP (ARH) 2009, SEPP65 and the ADG.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied.

 

The application generally meets with the development standards contained in SEPP (ARH) 2009, and built form controls and objectives of design provisions as required in the LCLEP 2009 and LCDCP 2010. The proposed development has been designed to minimise impacts on adjoining properties and responds to the topographic constraints of the site, and is considered to be compatible with the intended character of built form within the immediate area.

 

On balance, the proposed development would be reasonable and therefore is recommended for approval, provided draft conditions requiring high amenity and service provision is provided to the communal roof top terrace, and the common open space area.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

General Conditions

 

That pursuant to section 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Council grants development consent to:

·    Development Application DA78/2017

·    For Demolition of existing structures, construction of a residential flat building containing 10 residential apartments and basement car parking pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

·    On 320-322 Pacific Highway, Lane Cove

 

subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with:

 

Drawing No.

Date

Site Plan & Analysis, Drawing No. DA01, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

27/10/2017

Basement 1 & 2, Drawing No. DA02, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

11/12/2017

Ground Floor Plan, Drawing No. DA03, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

27/10/2017

First & Second Floor Plan, Drawing No. DA04, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

27/10/2017

Third Floor Plan & Sections, Drawing No. DA05, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

27/10/2017

East & South Elevations, Drawing No. DA06, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

27/10/2017

North & West Elevations, Drawing No. DA07, Amendment H, prepared by Gelder Architects

27/10/2017

Landscape Plan, Drawing Nos. LP01, LP02 & LP03, Issue A, prepared by Matthew Higginson Landscape Architecture Pty Ltd

1/06/2017

Schedule of Finishes, Ref No. 1762-E08-02, Rev 2, prepared by Gelder Architects

Undated

 

Documents

Date

Acoustic Assessment & Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan, prepared by Acoustic Dynamics

5/06/2017

Access Compliance Report, Project Ref 17092, prepared by Vista Access Architects Pty Ltd

24/05/2017

 

except as amended by the following conditions.

 

2.       Fencing around the communal open space area located on Basement Level 2 shall be a maximum height of 1.2m measured from the finished ground level to ensure adequate sight lines are achieved for vehicles entering and existing the basement and pedestrians utilising Haldane Lane.

 

3.       Amended plans shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application to provide a window for bedroom 1 of Unit 1.

 

4.       To provide reasonable livability for residents and visitors, it is recommended that the following amenities be added to the roof top terrace:

-           An accessible unisex toilet facility be provided on the roof top terrace;

-           Sink and water supply;  and

-           Two (2) power point outlets.

 

            Detailed plans incorporating the above additions to the roof top terrace shall be submitted to             Council satisfaction and approval. In the event that the toilet facility exceeds the maximum             12m building height permitted, the amended roof top terrace plans shall be accompanied by             a written request prepared in accordance with Clause 4.6 of LCLEP for Council             consideration.

 

5.       Sun protection measures/hoods shall be incorporated to the eastern elevation windows of the proposal to provide sufficient sunlight and shading to east facing rooms.

 

6.       No external cladding is permitted.

 

7.       All landscaping is to be of a high (advanced quality) and be maintained with a self watering system or maintenance agreement.

 

8.       (145) Addressing of developments

 

            The addressing of the development, including sub-addressing, must comply with all rules and regulations of the Geographical Names Board, including the NSW Addressing Users Manual, as approved by Council.

 

9.         (146) Adaptable Housing

 

            All adaptable dwellings shall be prominently marked and highlighted on the plans, a list of             adaptable units prepared and provided to Council prior to the issue of Construction             Certificate. The Section149 planning certificate and any promotional material shall mention             whether the unit is adaptable.  

 

10.       Plans submitted with the Construction Certificate must illustrate that the required adaptable    units have been designed in accordance with the requirements of AS4299-1995 for a Class    C Adaptable House.

 

11.     For a period of 10 years from the date of issue of the occupation certificate:

a)    Units 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 on the drawings hereby approved shall be used for the purposes of affordable housing as defined by the Affordable Rental Housing SEPP 2009;

b)    All accommodation that is used for affordable housing shall be managed by a registered community housing provider.

Council shall be notified of the issue of the occupancy certificate on the date of issue.

Reason:            To provide new affordable rental housing associated with the uptake on the site of a floor space ratio bonus.

 

12.     A copy of the signed contract between the developer and the Community Housing Provider who will manage the nominated affordable housing units shall be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a construction certificate for the development.

            Reason: To ensure that a minimum of 50% of the gross floor area of the development will             be used for affordable housing in accordance with the provisions of the Affordable Rental             Housing SEPP 2009.

 

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

 

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

 

15.       (11)  The approved plans must be submitted to Sydney Water online approval portal “Sydney Water Tap In”, please refer to web site www.sydneywater.com.au. This is 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. An approval receipt with conditions shall be issued by Sydney Water (if determined to be satisfactory) and is to be submitted to the accredited certifier prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

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

 

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

 

18.       (24) A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.

 

            Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator.  Please refer to the “Your Business” section of the web site www.sydneywater.com.au then follow the “e-Developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

            Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will advise of water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid.  Please make early contact with the Co-ordinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

            The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development/release of the plan of subdivision.

 

19.       (14) THE PAYMENT OF A CONTRIBUTION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL'S SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN. THIS PAYMENT BEING MADE PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE AND IS TO BE AT THE CURRENT RATE AT TIME OF PAYMENT.  THE AMOUNT IS $185,640.00 AT THE CURRENT RATE OF $10,100.00 PER PERSON (2017-2018).   NOTE:  PAYMENT MUST BE IN BANK CHEQUE.  PERSONAL CHEQUES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

 

THIS CONTRIBUTION IS FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES, OPEN SPACE/ RECREATION AND ROAD UNDER THE LANE COVE SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN WHICH IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE CUSTOMER SERVICE COUNTER, LANE COVE COUNCIL, 48 LONGUEVILLE ROAD, LANE COVE.

 

            Note:

 

            The Section 94 Contribution is calculated in the following manner:

 

No. of bedrooms

S.94’s per dwelling

Required Contribution

1 x 1-bedroom

1 x ($10,100/person x 1.2 person/dwelling = $12,120.00)

$12,120.00

8 x 2-bedroom

8 x ($10,100/person x 1.9 person/dwelling = $19,190.00)

$153,520.00

1 x 3-bedroom

1 x [($10,100/person x 2.4 person/dwelling = $24,240.00 reduced to $20,000.00 (cap)]

$20,000.00

Total

 

$185,640.00

 

            Total Section 94 Contribution payable:           $185,640.00

 

20.       All demolition, building construction work, including earthworks, deliveries of building             materials to and from the site to be restricted as follows:-

 

Monday to Friday                          7am to 5.30pm 

        (inclusive)                                 High noise generating activities, including rock breaking and saw cutting be restricted between 8am to 5.00pm with a respite period between 12.00 noon to 1.30pm Monday to Friday.

 

        Saturday                                  8am to 12 noon

                                                         with NO high noise generating activities, including excavation, haulage truck movement, rock picking, sawing, jack hammering or pile driving to be undertaken.  Failure to fully comply will result in the issue of a breach of consent P.I.N. 

 

Sunday                                    No work Sunday or any Public Holiday.

 

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.

 

21.       (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.

 

22.       (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.

 

23.       (45) A “Fire Safety Schedule” specifying the fire safety measures that are currently implemented in the building premises and the fire safety measures proposed or required to be implemented in the building premises as required by Clause 168 – Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 are to be submitted and approved PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

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

 

25.       (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.

 

26.       (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.

 

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

 

28.       (51) 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.

 

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

a) All reinforcement prior to filling with concrete.

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

c) Installation of steel beams and columns prior to covering.

d) Waterproofing of wet areas.

e) Stormwater drainage lines prior to backfilling.

f)  Completion.

 

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

a)    underpinning;

b)    retaining walls;

c)    footings;

d)    reinforced concrete work;

e)    structural steelwork;

f)     upper level floor framing;

 

31.       (63) All metal deck roofs being of a ribbed metal profile, in a mid to dark colour range with an anti glare finish. The intent of the condition is to reduce sun reflection and glare to protect the amenity of the surrounding resident.

 

32.       Standard Condition (64) A check survey certificate is to be submitted at the completion of:-

a.                The completion of works.

 

Note:   All levels are to relate to the reduced levels as noted on the approved architectural plans and should be cross-referenced to Australian Height Datum.

 

33.       (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.

 

34.       (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 or the Principal Certifying Authority may exercise its discretion to grant approval.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

39.       (86) An approved type of hoarding being erected along the street frontages.

 

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

 

41.       (130)  Compliance with the Waste Management Plan submitted along with the application.

 

42.       (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.

 

43.       (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.

 

44.       (139) A copy of Sydney Water’s Notice of Requirements must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE BEING ISSUED.

 

45.       (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.

 

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

 

General Engineering Conditions

 

47.     (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.

 

48.     (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. 

 

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

 

50.     (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.

 

51.     (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.

 

52.     (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.

 

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

 

54.     (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.

 

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

 

56.     (B1) Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $20,000 cash bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage or outstanding works 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 commencement of any demolition works.

 

57.     (H4) Truck Shaker:  A truck shaker ramp must be provided at the construction exit point. Fences are to be erected to ensure vehicles cannot bypass the truck shaker. Sediment tracked onto the public roadway by vehicles leaving the subject site is to be swept up immediately.

 

58.     (H5) Covering Heavy Vehicle Loads: All vehicles transporting soil material to or from the subject site shall ensure that the entire load is covered by means of a tarpaulin or similar material. The vehicle driver shall be responsible for ensuring that dust or dirt particles are not deposited onto the roadway during transit. It is a requirement under the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation, 1996 to ensure that all loads are adequately covered, and this shall be strictly enforced by Council’s ordinance inspectors. Any breach of this legislation is subject to a “Penalty Infringement Notice” being issued to the drivers of those vehicles not in compliance with the regulations.

 

59.     (O3) On-Site Stormwater Detention System - Marker Plate:  The on-site detention system shall be indicated on the site by fixing a marker plate. This plate is to be of minimum size: 100mm x 75mm and is to be made from non-corrosive metal or 4mm thick laminated plastic. It is to be fixed in a prominent position to the nearest concrete or permanent surface or access grate. The wording on the marker plate is described in part O Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management. An approved plate may be purchased from Council's customer service desk.

 

60.     (K2) Cast in Situ Drainage Pits: Any drainage pit within a road reserve, a Council easement, or that may be placed under Council’s control in the future, shall be constructed of cast in situ concrete and in accordance with Part O Council’s DCP- Stormwater Management.

 

61.     (O4) On-Site Stormwater Detention Tank: All access grates to the on site stormwater detention tank are to be hinged and fitted with a locking bolt. Any tank greater than 1.2 m in depth must be fitted with step irons.

 

62.     (X1) 88B Instrument: An instrument under 88B of the conveyancing Act 1919 plus two copies is to be submitted to Council prior to the release of subdivision certificate. The 88B instrument shall properly reflect the requirements of the conditions of the development consent, plans forming part of the consent and Council’s policies.

           

            Where Council, inter-allotment drainage lines or services are located within the development, drainage easements and easements for services shall be created in accordance with Council’s minimum widths as set out in Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

            Part 2 of the 88B instrument shall contain a provision that any easements, rights of way, covenants shall not be extinguished or altered without the written consent of Council.

 

63.     (X2) Linen Plan of Subdivision: A Linen Plan of Subdivision plus 5 copies are to be submitted to Council prior to the release of subdivision certificate.

 

            The linen plan of subdivision shall be suitable for endorsement by the general manager pursuant to Section 327 of the local government act and shall properly reflect the requirements of the conditions of the development consent, plans forming part of the consent and Council’s policies

 

64.     (S1) Stormwater Requirement: The following details need to be added to the amended stormwater design plans:

§ The above ground storage facility (on site detention) needs to be increased by 20%

§ A pool type fence enclosing the on-site detention area will be required where the depth of the basin will exceed 300mm

§ Discharge directly to the kerb and gutter is prohibited. The discharge of stormwater needs to be connected directly into the nearest Council stormwater pipeline system.

 

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

 

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to Construction Certificate

 

65.     (D2) Drainage Plans Amendments: The stormwater drainage plan numbered GO170296 issue B prepared by ACOR Consultants (CC) Pty Ltd dated June 2017 is to be amended to reflect the above condition titled ‘Stormwater requirement’. The amened design is to be certified that it fully complies with, AS-3500 and part O Council's DCP-Stormwater Management; certification is to be by a suitably qualified engineer. The amended plan and certification shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that the amendments have been made in accordance with the conditional requirements and the amended plans are adequate 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.

 

66.     (O1) Positive Covenant Bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $2000.00 cash bond to cover the registration of the required positive covenants. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

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

 

68.     (D2) Geotechnical Report: A geotechnical report is to be completed for the excavation and ground water impacts associated with this development. The Geotechnical Report and supporting information are to be prepared by a suitably qualified geotechnical engineer and be submitted to Principle Certifying Authority prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

69.     (D3) Geotechnical Monitoring Program: Excavation works associated with the proposed development must be overseen and monitored by a suitably qualified engineer. A Geotechnical Monitoring Program shall be submitted to the principle certifying authority prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. The Geotechnical Monitoring Program must be produced by suitably qualified engineer ensuring that all geotechnical matters are regularly assessed during construction. The Geotechnical Monitoring Program for the construction works must be in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and is to include

·    Recommended hold points to allow for inspection by a suitably qualified  engineer during the following construction procedures;

§ Excavation of the site (face of excavation, base, etc)

§ Installation and construction of temporary and permanent shoring/ retaining walls.

§ Foundation bearing conditions and footing construction.

§ Installation of sub-soil drainage.

·    Location, type and regularity of further geotechnical investigations and testing.

Excavation and construction works must be undertaken in accordance with the Geotechnical and Monitoring Program.

 

70.     (D4) Construction Methodology Report: There are structures on neighbouring properties that are deemed to be in the zone of influence of the proposed excavations. A suitably qualified engineer must prepare a Construction Methodology report demonstrating that the proposed excavation will have no adverse impact on any surrounding property and infrastructure. The report must be submitted to Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. The details must include a geotechnical report to determine the design parameters appropriate to the specific development and site.

 

     The Report must include recommendations on appropriate construction techniques to ameliorate any potential adverse impacts.

The development works are to be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the Construction Methodology report.

 

71.     D5) Dilapidation Report The applicant is to provide a dilapidation report of all adjoining properties and any of Councils infrastructure located within the zone of influence of the proposed excavation.

 

  Dilapidation report must be conducted by a suitably qualified engineer prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or construction works. The extent of the survey must cover the zone of influence that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. The Initial dilapidation report must be submitted to Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

  A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed prior to the commencement of works, must be carried out at the completion of the works and be submitted to Principle Certifying Authority prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

72.     (H1)  Road Dilapidation Survey: The applicant shall prepare a dilapidation survey and a dilapidation report detailing the existing state of repair / condition of the road surfaces along Pacific Hwy, Cobden Avenue and Haldane Lane adjacent the site. The survey and report need to be submitted to the Council prior to the issue of the first Construction Certificate.  Following completion of construction of the development and prior to the issue of the first Occupation Certificate, the applicant is to prepare a second dilapidation survey and a dilapidation report that includes details of all changes and damage caused to the surface of the said public roads as a consequence truck movements associated with the construction of the development. The Council may apply funds realised from the security referred to in applicable condition to meet the cost of making good any damage caused to the surface of the said public road as a consequence truck movements associated with the construction of the development to which the consent relates. The dilapidation surveys and reports must be prepared by an engineer registered with the Institute of Engineers.

 

73.     (V4) Car Parking Certification: The plans and supporting calculations of the internal driveway, turning areas, ramps, garage opening widths, parking space dimensions and any associated vehicular manoeuvring facilities shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority. 

 

The plans shall be prepared and certified by a suitably qualified engineer. The design is to be certified that it fully complies with AS 2890 Series and Council's standards and specifications. The design and certification shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.  

 

74.     (V1) Proposed Vehicular Crossings: The proposed vehicular crossings shall be constructed to the specifications and levels issued by Council. A ‘Construction of a Multi Unit 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

 

75.     (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 basement shall be determined by Council if required.

 

76.     (A11) Work Zone: A Traffic Construction Management Plan and an application for a Work Zone adjacent the development shall be submitted to Lane Cove Council for determination, prior to the commencement of the demolition and prior to any works that require construction vehicle and machinery  movements to and from the site. If the development has access to a State Road, the Construction Management Plan and Work Zone need to be referred to RMS for approval. The approval of the Traffic Construction Management Plan and application for a Work Zone by Council’s Traffic Section must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.  

 

77.     (K1) Council Construction Requirements: The applicant shall construct / reconstruct the following:

1.   New 1.5m wide concrete footpath adjacent the entire frontage of the site to Council’s satisfaction

2.   Reinstate all adjustments to the road surfaces to Council’s satisfaction.

3.   Reinstate all existing nature-strips with turf and soil to Council’s satisfaction.

A $5,000 cash bond or bank guarantee shall be lodged with Council to cover the satisfactory construction of the above requirements. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The Bond will be held for a period of six months after satisfactory completion of the works. All works shall be carried out prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. All costs associated with the construction of the above works are to be borne by the applicant.

 

78.     (K4) Council Inspection Requirements: The following items shall require Council inspections.

·    All new footpaths on Council Property

·    New kerb and gutter on Council Property

·    All asphalt adjustments to the roadway

·    All the approved stormwater drainage works on Council property

Each item is to be inspected prior to the pouring of any concrete (formwork) and on completion of the construction. An initial site meeting is to be conducted with Council and the contractor prior to the commencement of any of the above works to allow for discussion of Council construction / setout requirements.

An Inspection fee of $580.00 is to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.   

 

79.       (C1) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan:  An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) shall be prepared by a suitably qualified consultant in accordance with the guidelines set out in the manual “Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction Fourth Edition 2004 Volume 1’’ prepared by LANDCOM. The plan is to be submitted to the principal certifying authority to prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate 

 

Engineering condition to be complied with prior to commencement of construction

 

80.       (C2) Erosion and Sediment Control: The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to the start of any works on the site. The devices are to be installed in accordance with the approved plan satisfying condition ‘(C1) Erosion and sediment control ‘.The devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced when necessary.

 

Engineering Condition to be complied with prior to Occupation      Certificate

 

81.       (M1) Stormwater System Engineering Certification: On completion of the drainage system a suitably qualified engineer shall certify that the drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans, part O Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management and AS-3500.The certification is to include a work as executed plan. The work as executed plan shall:

(a)  be signed by a registered surveyor, &

(b)  clearly show the surveyor’s name and the date of signature.

All documentation is to be submitted to the Principle Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

82.       (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.

 

83.       (D6) Certification of Retaining Structures and Excavations: A suitably qualified engineer shall provide certification to the principal certifying authority that all retaining structures and excavations have been carried out in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Codes of Practise.

The certification and a complete record of inspections, testing and monitoring (with certifications) must be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

84.       (O2) Positive Covenants OSD and Pump Out System:  Documents giving effect to the creation of a positive covenants over the on-site detention system and over the basement pump out system shall be registered on the title of the property prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. The wordings of the terms of the positive covenants shall be in accordance with part O Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

Traffic conditions

 

            Parking and servicing

 

85.     The proposed car park design shall comply with AS 2890.1-2004. This includes all parking spaces, ramps, aisles, disabled parking and loading areas. All other aspects of the Car Parking areas are required to comply with AS 2890.2-2002 for Loading Facilities and Services Vehicles.

 

86.     The access to the car park shall comply with Australian Standards. AS 2890.1-2004.

 

87.     All accessible car spaces in the car park are to be adequately signposted and linemarked, and provided in accordance with AS2890.6: 2009 including the adjacent shared space and the height clearance.

 

88.     All parking spaces and aisle widths must be able to accommodate B99 vehicles at all locations in accordance to AS 2890.1-2004 (Appendix A –A4).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Pedestrians / Cycling

 

89.     All cycling racks and secure bike parking provided on-site must meet the minimum standards as outlined in Section 4.3 in Part R of the DCP and designed in accordance with AS 2890.3:2015.

 

            Waste Servicing

 

90.     On site garbage collection must be provided for with sufficient headroom in accordance with AS2890.2: 2002 and to allow the vehicle to enter and exit in a forward direction. The waste collection and holding area is to be clearly signposted and linemarked.

 

            Construction Traffic Management Plan

 

91.     The Construction Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to Lane Cove Council for further approval before issuing the construction certificate.

 

Works Zones

 

92.     Due to requirements for safe traffic and pedestrian movement, loading or unloading of any vehicle or trailer carrying material associated with the development must not take place on the public road unless within a works zone. The works zone application is to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the earlier of the following two situations occurring; either (a) issue of any Construction Certificate or (b) any work commencing, in the case where work is to occur on a Public Road during demolition.

 

The developer must give the Council written notice of at least 14 days prior to the date upon which use of the work zone will commence and the duration of the works zone approval shall be taken to commence from that date. All vehicle unloading/loading activities on a public roadway/footway are to be undertaken within an approved work zone.

 

Environmental Health conditions

 

93.     Any soils proposed to be removed from the site should be classified in accordance with the “Waste Classifying Guidelines, Part 1: Classifying Waste” NSW DECC 2014.

            A Hazardous Building Materials Assessment and an Asbestos Management Plan prepared             by a suitably qualified person as recommended in the preliminary site investigation             prepared by Benviron Group (Ref: E1286 May 2017) is required to be submitted prior to             demolition being carried out.

 

            An Asbestos Clearance Report must be provided to council following the removal of all             asbestos containing material from the site and prior to the commencement of bulk             excavation.

 

94.       (401) Demolition Works and Asbestos Removal/Disposal

The demolition of any existing structure is to be carried out in accordance with Australian Standards AS 2601-2001: The Demolition of Structures.  All vehicles leaving the site carrying demolition materials are to have the loads covered and are not to track any soil or waste materials into the road.  Pursuant to Section 27A of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1983 “notification to Commence Demolition Work” form is to be submitted to Workcover at least seven days prior to work commencing.  All asbestos, hazardous and/or intractable wastes are to be disposed of in accordance with the Workcover Authority and EPA guidelines and requirements.  The asbestos must be removed by a bonded asbestos licensed operator.  Dockets/receipts verifying recycling/disposal must be kept and presented to Council when required.

 

95.       (402) Dust Control

The following measures must be taken to control the emission of dust:

a)      Dust screens must be erected around the perimeter of the site and be kept in good repair for the duration of the work

b)     Any existing accumulations of dust (e.g. in ceiling voids and wall cavities) must be removed using an industrial vacuum cleaner fitted with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter

c)     All dusty surfaces must be wet down and any dust created must be suppressed by means of a fine water spray.  Water used for dust suppression must not be allowed to enter the street or stormwater system

d)     All stockpiles of materials that are likely to generate dust must be kept damp or covered

e)     Demolition work must not be carried out during high winds, which may cause dust to spread beyond the boundaries of the site.

 

96.       (403) Dust During Construction

Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during works to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding residences

 

97.       (404) Erosion and Sedimentation Controls – Major Works

Erosion and sediment control devices are to be provided.  All devices are to be established prior to the commencement of engineering works and maintained for a minimum period of six months after the completion of all works.  Periodic maintenance of the erosion and sedimentation control devices is to be undertaken to ensure their effectiveness.

 

98.       (406) Stabilised Access Point

A stabilised all weather access point is to be provided prior to commencement of site works, and maintained throughout construction activities until the site is stabilised.  These requirements shall be in accordance with Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction produced by the NSW Department of Housing (blue Book)

 

99.       (407) Site Water Management Plan

 A site water management plan is to be submitted to Council for approval.  The plan is required to be site specific and be in accordance with “Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction” (the blue book) produced by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

100.     (408) Stockpiles

 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.

 

101.     (491) Clean water only to stormwater system

Only clean unpolluted water is permitted to enter Council’s stormwater drainage system.

 

102.     (442) Noise Control – Offensive Noise

 To minimise the noise impact on the surrounding environment, the use of the premises, building services, equipment, machinery and ancillary fittings shall not give rise to an offensive noise as defined under the provisions of the Protection of the Environmental Operations Act 1997.

 

103.     (447) Noise Monitoring

 Noise monitoring must be carried out by a qualified acoustical consultant if complaints are received, or if directed by Council, and any control measures recommended by the acoustical consultant must be implemented during the demolition work

 

104.     (468) Offsite Disposal of Contaminated Soil

All contaminated soil removed from the sire must be disposed at a waste facility that can lawfully receive that waste.

 

Copies of all test results and disposal dockets must be retained for at least 3 years and be made available to authorised Council officers on request.

 

105.     The recommendations in Section 6 of the Report titled Construction Noise and Vibration Recommendations prepared by Acoustic Dynamics (Ref: 4083R002.MV.170521) are to be implemented.

 

106.     The recommendations set out in section 4, section 6 and section 7 of the Report titled Acoustic Assessment (Ref: 4083.R001.MV.170521) are to be implemented.

 

Waste Management conditions

 

107.   Waste and Recycling Storage Room

·    The waste and recycling storage room must be provided and be of sufficient size to accommodate a total of 4 x 240L general waste bins, 1 x 240L container recycling bins, 1 x 240L paper recycling bins, and 1 x 240L garden waste bins; with adequate space for manoeuvring garbage and recycling bins.

Minimum clearance between bins of 300mm

Minimum door openings of 1700mm

Minimum distance of 1700mm between rows of bins (where bins are located on either side of the room)

·    The floor of waste and recycling storage rooms (including bulky waste storage room) must be constructed of either:

Concrete which is at least 75mm thick; or

Other equivalent material; and

Graded and drained to a floor waste which is connected to the sewer

·    All floors must be finished to a smooth even surface, coved at the intersections of walls and floor.

·    The walls of waste and recycling storage rooms, bulky waste storage rooms, and waste service compartments must be constructed of solid impervious material and must be cement rendered internally to a smooth even surface coved at all intersections.

·    All waste and recycling storage rooms and bulky waste storage rooms must be provided with an adequate supply of hot and cold water mixed through a centralised mixing valve with hose cock.

·    A close-fitting and self-closing door that can be opened from within the room must be fitted to all waste and recycling and bulky waste storage rooms.

·    All waste and recycling and bulky waste storage rooms must be constructed to prevent the entry of vermin.

·    All waste and recycling and bulky waste storage rooms must be ventilated by either:

Mechanical ventilation systems exhausting at a rate of 5L.s per m@ of floor space area, with a minimum rate of 100L/s; or

Permanent, unobstructed natural ventilation openings direct to the external air.

·    All waste and recycling and bulky waste storage rooms must be provided with artificial light controlled by switches located both inside and outside the rooms.

·    Clearly printed “No Standing” signs must be affixed to the external face of each waste and recycling and bulky waste storage room.

 

108.   Bulky Waste storage Room

·    A readily accessible bulky waste storage room located near the garbage room must be provided for the use of all residents.

The bulky waste storage room must have a minimum floor area of 20m2 and be of sufficient size to practically accommodate a minimum of 10m3 of bulky waste at any given time. Doorways and travel paths must be a minimum width of 1700mm and of sufficient height and be free of obstructions to permit easy transport from individual units to the storage area, and from the storage area to the collection point.

 

109.   Access to Waste Collection Point

·    All waste must be collected on-site via on-site access by Council’s waste collection vehicles.

The location(s) of waste and recycling rooms and bulky waste storage areas must be conveniently accessible for both occupants and Council’s waste collection contractors.

The minimum finished ceiling height must be 2.6m along the path of travel from the street to the residential waste and recycling collection point and manoeuvring area. This clearance must be kept free of any overhead ducts, services and other obstructions.

The maximum grade of any access road leading to the waste and recycling point must not be more than 1:5 (20%). The running area at the base of any ramp must be sufficient for the manoeuvre of a 6.64m rigid vehicle to enter and exit the building in a forward direction.

Where security gates are installed, a remote control access device must be provided to Council to permit unimpeded access

 

110.   Indemnity

·    Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant must enter into a suitable Deed indemnifying Council and its contractors against claims for loss or damage to common property, liabilities, losses, damages, and any other demands arising from any on-site collection services.

 

111.   Composting and Worm Farming

·    The applicant must provide a container for communal composting/worm farming, the sitting of such must have regard to potential amenity impacts.

 

112.   Internal Waste Management

·    Internal waste and recycling cupboards with sufficient space for one day’s garbage and recycling generation must be provided to each dwelling.

 

113.   Provision of Waste Services

·    Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant must make written application to Council for the provision of domestic waste services and finalise the payment for the supply and delivery of all waste and recycling bins.

 

Landscape

 

114.   A revised set of landscape plans corresponding with the endorsed architectural plans, prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

 

115.   A landscape practical completion report must be prepared by the consultant landscape architect and submitted to Council or the accredited certifier within 7 working days of the date of practical completion of all landscape works. This report must certify that all landscape works have been completed in accordance with the approved stamped landscape plans. A copy of the report must be submitted to Council PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE.

 

Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of public record, a copy of the certification must be forwarded to Council within five (5) working days of the date of issue.

 

116.     A certificate must be submitted by a qualified hydraulic engineer, certifying that the proposed subsoil drainage and any associated waterproofing membrane have been installed in accordance with the details shown on the approved landscape working drawings and specification. Works must not progress until this condition has been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of public record, a copy of the certification must be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.

 

117.     Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must submit evidence of an agreement for the maintenance of all site landscaping by a qualified horticulturist, landscape contractor or landscape architect, for a period of 12 months from the date of issue of the Certificate of Occupation.

 

118.     At the completion of the landscape maintenance period, the consultant landscape architect/ designer must submit a final report to Council or the accredited certifier, certifying that all plant material has been successfully established, that all of the outstanding maintenance works or defects have been rectified prior to preparation of the report and that a copy of the 12 month landscape maintenance strategy has been provided to the Owner/ Occupier.  A copy of the report must be submitted to Council.

 

Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of public record, a copy of the certification must be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Site Location Plans

3 Pages

 

AT‑3View

Clause 4.6 Variation

16 Pages

 

 

 


 

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel   6 February 2018

66 Arabella Steet, Longueville

 

 

Subject:          66 Arabella Steet, Longueville     

Record No:    DA17/180-01 - 73841/17

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Michael Stephens 

 

 

 

Property:

66 Arabella Street, Longueville

DA No:

DA180/2017

Date Lodged:

23 November 2017

Cost of Work:

$1,022,175

Owner:

Lynette Jia Jun Li

Applicant:        

H3 Architects

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Alteration and additions to an existing dwelling house, construction of a new garage, driveway, fencing and associated landscaping.

Zone

R2 Low Density Residential

Is the proposal permissible within the zone

Yes

Is the property a heritage item

No

Is the property within a conservation area

No

Is the property adjacent to bushland

No

BCA Classification

Class 1a, 10a and 10b

Stop the Clock used

No

Notification

Neighbours                             41, 43, 45, 47, 49, 62-64, 66A, 68, 78A, 78B, 78C, 78D Arabella Street, Longueville.

Ward Councillors                  

Progress Association             Longueville Residents Association

 

Executive Summary

 

The Development Application seeks consent for alteration and additions to an existing dwelling house. The addition on the upper storey would result in a three storey building that would also breach the LEP Development Standard for Height.

 

The additions would result in an imposing bulk and massing to the northern adjoining property. The proposal also results in adverse overshadowing to the southern property and the loss of water views to an adjacent property located across the street. Furthermore, views to the Sydney Harbour Bridge from the public domain would be lost.

 

The proposed additions would breach the LEP height standard as well as the DCP provisions for maximum number of storeys and maximum external wall height. 

 

The applicant has submitted a written request to vary the development standard to a maximum height of 10.3m. The justification provided for the departure is not considered to be well founded. The request fails to demonstrate why the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the development. A better planning outcome for and from the development is also not evident.

 

The application also seeks consent to construct a two storey garage which would result in overshadowing to the adjoining property and impact the view corridor along the southwestern side of the property.

 

Submissions were received from four neighbours objecting to the loss of views, impact of the bulk and massing, overshadowing and overlooking.

 

Reason for Referral

 

The application is referred to Council’s Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for determination due the contentious nature of view loss and variation sought to the Development Standard for height pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the Lane Cove Local Environment Plan.

 

SITE

 

Property

Lot 301 DP829591

Area

629.6m2

Site location

Eastern (low) side of Arabella Street between Ann Street and Christina Street.

Existing improvements

Two storey dwelling house, carport, driveway and associated landscaping.

Shape

Rectangular

Dimensions

Width - 12.19m

Depth - 51.66m

Adjoining properties

North-east - Two Storey attached (side by side) dual occupancy with street level open carports and swimming pools within the rear setback.                                                      

South-east - Dwelling houses located at significantly lower RL.

South-west - Two Storey Dwelling House

North-west - Arabella Street then dwelling houses.

 

Site Description

 

The site is located on the low side of Arabella Street, Longueville and falls steeply from front to rear by approximately 11m. The site has a significant cross fall from southwest to northeast of approximately 5m. The site is generally long and narrow with a width of 12.19m and depth of 51.66m. The existing dwelling house is setback on the rear half of the site and is two storeys, stepped down across the site. There are balconies located at the rear of the dwelling on each level, with an additional balcony along the northeastern side of the dwelling on the second level.

 

A two vehicle carport is located in front of the dwelling on the southwestern side of the property accessed by a steep driveway. The north-eastern side of the property is landscaped, and contains a number of mature trees along the boundary, the most notable of which is an Angophora standing approximately 18m tall in the front setback.

 

Arabella Street enjoys significant views to the east of the Harbour, Sydney Harbour Bridge and the CBD Skyline. It is noted there are numerous vantage points along the street and from side streets that views are gained. There are numerous examples of open carports, flat roof dwellings and viewing corridors that preserve this view from the public domain. It has been a particular concern by previous Council’s that public domain views should be retained where possible.

Neighbour Notification Plan and Site Location Plan attached (AT1 and AT2)

 


 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

DA1992/120

Subdivision

DA1993/357

Construction of new dwelling house

 

PROPOSAL

 

The applicant seeks to undertake internal alterations, additions to include a stairwell and a lift, and to extend the existing upper storey (which is two storeys) over the existing two storey section of the house towards the northeastern side of the property that would create a three storey component. A curved roofline is proposed to blend the extension into the built form of the existing upper storey.

 

The dwelling would comprise:

 

Lower Ground Floor:

 

·         Existing Living Room;

·         Existing Bedroom 1 and 2;

·         Existing Bathroom;

·         Existing Subfloor Area;

·         Proposed foyer including a lift and stairs to the floors above;

·         Existing rear patio with stairs to the balcony above. The stairs are proposed to be enclosed with glazing.

 

Ground Floor

·         Removal of existing stairs;

·         Existing open plan kitchen, living and dining room;

·         Existing laundry;

·         Existing rear and side terraces;

·         Proposed entry foyer including a lift and stairs to the floors above and below.

 

First Floor

 

·         Existing Master bedroom with walk in robe and ensuite;

·         Proposed Bedroom 3;

·         Proposed Study;

·         Proposed Bathroom;

·         Proposed foyer and hallway including a lift and stairs to the floors below.

 

Other alterations and additions to the Site comprise:

 

·         Proposed outdoor patio located between the dwelling and the carport;

·         Conversion of the existing carport hardstand to a paved area as an extension of the outdoor patio area;

·         Proposed garage two storeys over the existing carport hardstand with parking for two vehicles located on the first floor. The driveway is to be regraded to reduce the steepness to access the garage. The garage includes stairs and a lift at its rear to the paved area below;

·         An entryway path and stairs are proposed along the northeastern side of the driveway and garage; 

·         Proposed 1.2m high front fence of a partially open design.

 


 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE

 

Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

Zoning:           R2 Low Density                                 Site Area: 629.6m²

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Floor Space Ratio

0.48:1

(GFA= 304.8m2)

0.5:1 (Max 314.8m2)

Yes

Height of Buildings

10.3m

9.5m

No, written request for clause 4.6 variation submitted.

 

FSR Calculation:

                Ground Floor = 85.8m2

            First Floor =109.5m2

            Second Floor =109.5

Garage (40m2 exempt from FSR) =36.7m2

FSR = (Total Floorspace 304.8m2 / Site area 629.6m2) :1

FSR= 0.484:1

 

Comprehensive DCP

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Front setback (min)

25m

Consistent with area or 7.5m

Yes

Side setback (min)

Garage

Southern = 1m

Northern = 5.2m

 

Dwelling

Southern - Existing

Northern - 2.1m

1200mm single storey

1500mm two storey

Yes

Yes

 

Unchanged

Yes

Rear setback (min)

Unchanged

<1000m²: 8m or 25%

>1000m²: 10m or 35%

Unchanged

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

Lift / Stair Shaft = 9.1m

7.0m

No

Maximum Ridge height

N/A

9.5m

N/A

Subfloor height (max)

Unchanged

1.0m

Unchanged

Number of Storeys (max)

3

2

No

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

34.1% - (215m2)

35%

No

Cut and Fill (max)

Nil

1m

Yes

Solar Access

Achieved to subject site and adjoining properties.

 

There would be additional overshadowing to the adjoining southern property throughout the day generally moving from the front to rear portion of the building caused by the stair/ lift addition and the two storey garage.

3 hrs to a portion of windows of habitable rooms and reasonable access to recreation areas between 9am and 3pm on 21st June for the subject site and neighbouring dwellings

Yes

Provide for view sharing

Refer to submission of 45 Arabella Street.

Public view of the Sydney Harbour Bridge also impacted.

 

No

 

No

 

Heritage Conservation

N/A

 

N/A

Deck/Balcony depth (max)

Unchanged

3m

Yes

Private open space

Unchanged

24 m² (min)

4m minimum depth

Yes

Basix

A285761_02

Required

Yes

 

Car Parking

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Off-street spaces (min)

2

2

Yes

Driveway width

3.2m

3m at the lot boundary

Acceptable

 

Carports within the Front Setback & Garages Facing the Street

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Setback of Carport Posts (min)

8.67m

1m from street boundary

Yes

% of Allotment Width (garages & carports)

6m

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

Yes

 

Fences

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Front fence height (max)

1.2m

Partially open design.

Solid:   900mm

Lightweight:     1.2m

Yes,

Side and rear fences

Unchanged

1.8m

Unchanged

 

Outbuildings

 

 

Proposed

Code

Complies

Overall Height (m) (max)

5.3m

3.6m

No

External wall height (max)

5.3m

2.4m

No

Maximum floor space

N/A partially open.

50 m²

N/A

No of Storeys

2

1

Yes

Setback

1m

900mm

Yes

 


 

REFERRALS

 

Development Engineer

The proposal was referred to Council’s Development Engineer who reported on 25 January 2018 that no objection is raised to the proposed development. No OSD is required as the increase in impervious surfaces is minimal. All new impervious surfaces have been conditioned to drain into the existing stormwater system.

As a result of their assessment 13 Draft Conditions have should development consent be granted. 

Tree Assessment Officer

The proposal was referred to Council’s Tree Assessment Officer who reported on 15 January 2018 that no objection is raised to the proposed development. The proposed changes to the driveway and access stairs are contained within the existing footprint of the driveway or may be cantilevered to not pose any additional impact on retained trees adjacent to the driveway.

As a result of this assessment, 8 Draft Conditions have been recommended should development consent be granted. 

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

 

The proposal is permissible within the R2 zone and complies with the development standard for Floor Space Ratio.

 

In accordance with Cl 4.3 the maximum building height permitted is 9.5m. The proposal provides a maximum building height of 10.3m, equating to a variation of 8.4% to the development standard.

 

A written request to vary the development standard has been made to Council pursuant to clause 4.6 of the Lane Cove LEP 2009 attached (AT3).

 

1.         Is the planning control a development standard?

 

Yes - Clause 4.3 of LCLEP 2009 - Height of Buildings is a development standard.

 

2.         What is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

 

Clause 4.3 of LCLEP 2009 

 

“(1)  The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a)  to ensure development allows for reasonable solar access to existing buildings and public areas,

(b)  to ensure that privacy and visual impacts of development on neighbouring properties, particularly where zones meet, are reasonable,

(c)  to seek alternative design solutions in order to maximise the potential sunlight for the public domain,

(d)  to relate development to topography.”

 

The relevant objectives of the clause are (b) and (d).

 

The proposed addition that would create a third storey would fail to ensure that privacy and visual impacts to the neighbouring properties are reasonable. The additional bulk and massing would have adverse visual impacts to the adjoining property at 64 Arabella Street and to the property located opposite at 45 Arabella Street.

 

The increase in the roof form to allow the third storey and the elongation of the building to include the stairwell and lift would result in significant bulk and massing when viewed from the rear terrace area of 64 Arabella Street. The stairwell’s floor to ceiling glazing at this third storey level would also compromise the privacy of this neighbour. 

 

The increased bulk and massing would also result in unreasonable impacts to the neighbouring property across the street at 45 Arabella Street. A view is currently gained over the existing roofline of the dwelling to the water of Woodford Bay. The enlargement of this roof area to create a third storey area and the inclusion of the lift shaft both result in the total loss of this view.

 

The proposed development fails to relate to the topography. The existing topography of the site falls to the rear and has a significant cross fall to the northern side. The current dwelling is two storeys at any one point although is collectively over three levels. The existing dwelling is stepped across the site in response to the sites cross fall. The proposed development seeks to create a third storey where the dwelling currently steps down in keeping with the topography.

 

Having regard to the above, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the objectives of the height standard.

 

3.         Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

No, in the circumstances of the site compliance with the development standard is necessary as it would serve a planning purpose in preventing material impacts to neighbours by limiting the perceived bulk and massing, and retaining water views. It is also not unreasonable that the development standard should be met as it would not prevent a two storey dwelling house being constructed on the site, nor does it restrict further additions within the available compliant building envelope to the west of the dwelling.  

 

4.         Are there sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard?

 

No, the variation would result in adverse material impacts to the amenity of the adjoining neighbour at 64 Arabella Street and the opposite neighbour at 45 Arabella Street.

 

The applicant has argued that the desired additional floor space the site is entitled to could not be constructed within a compliant building envelope by utilising the area to the west without resulting in a view impact to the northern neighbours (64 Arabella Street), the public domain and neighbours to the west.

 

Despite the applicant’s argument, a considered design utilising the western portion of the site would result in a compliant dwelling with reasonable impacts. Firstly, views from the northern neighbour at 64 Arabella Street would not be impacted. Secondly, water views from the public domain are gained over the existing roof line and could be retained despite an increased built form to the west of the dwelling. The views from 45 Arabella Street would also be retained in the same manner.

 

Considering the garage is proposed to be located to the west of the dwelling and is two storeys there would be potential to utilize the remaining area between the dwelling and this structure for additional floor space. Whilst this would result in additional overshadowing to the adjoining dwelling it would be considered more reasonable as it would be as a result of a compliant building envelope and sufficient solar access in accordance with the DCP would still be provided.

In the applicants proposal the exercising of proposed flexibility would not result in a better planning outcome than a compliant scheme in the circumstances of the case.

 

The applicant has secondly argued that the internal amenity is not compromised by the height non-compliance. This is a questionable argument as firstly, the proposed third storey element in parts does not meet the BCA ceiling height requirements. Secondly, additions in a compliant building form are more than likely to receive high levels of amenity due to the northern aspect of the site and easily achieve cross ventilation.

 

The planning grounds put forward to support the height variation are flawed and do not accurately consider that given the circumstances of the site they could be better achieved in a compliant building form.    

 

5.         Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in particular does compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

 

The objects of this Act are as follows:

(a)  to encourage:

(i)  the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(ii)  the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land,

 

Strict compliance with the development standard would be consistent with the objects of the Act. A compliant building form would allow for the proper residential development of cities for the purpose of promoting social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment. A compliant building form would be in the public interest and remain consistent with the expectations of this community. A compliant building form would also promote the orderly development of land that allows the applicant to develop their property although is restricted so as to achieve objectives relating to the amenity of the subject property and surrounding public and private domain. 

 

6.         Will strict compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

 

The objects of this Act are as follows:

(a)  to encourage:

(i)  the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(ii)  the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land,

 

No, strict compliance would not hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act.

 

7.         Is the exception well founded?

 

No, a degree of flexibility should not be afforded to the application as the written request does not provide a well founded justification within the specific context of the site or indicate how the development as proposed would result in a better planning outcome for and from the development.

 

There is potential to develop the property within a compliant building form. The proposed third storey fails to respond to the topography of the site and results in material impacts to the adjoining property due to its bulk and massing. The property opposite at 45 Arabella would be significantly impact due to its loss of view to the water and the public domain due to a loss of Iconic Harbour Bridge Views.

 

Other Planning Instruments

 

Deemed SEPP, Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment0 2005 and the Foreshores and Waterways Development Control Plan 2005

 

The proposed development is likely to be visible from the public domain of Woodford bay. The incremental additional bulk and massing created by the third storey would result in a built element blocking the view to a further portion of the ridgelines landscaping, being the angophora within the front setback that forms a backdrop to the development.

 

SEPP 55 Remediation of Land

 

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

 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS

 

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 indicates that the standards for demolition and removal of materials should meet with AS 2601-2001 and therefore any consent would require the application of a relevant condition seeking compliance with the Standard.

 

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.

 

Building Design - Number of Storeys and External Wall Height

 

The proposed additions to the upper storey would result in a third storey being created. The additional bulk and massing proposed by the additions would be imposing on the adjoining properties and visible from the public domain of Woodford Bay. Due to the fall of the land the bulk and massing would be most prevalent at the eastern corner of the dwelling where the existing house is located above a large subfloor area approximately a storey in height itself.

 

The addition at the front of the dwelling to construct stairs and a lift servicing each level would result in a new three storey portion of the dwelling with an external wall height of 9.1m to the northeastern elevation. This portion of the dwelling would result in excessive bulk and massing that is visually imposing on the adjoining property. There would also be privacy concerns created by the additional storey as this would overlook the first floor terrace area and master bedroom of 64 Arabella Street.

 

Public View Corridor

 

A significant view is gained over the existing dwelling towards the Sydney Harbour Bridge from the public domain of the footpath of Arabella Street. The proposed third storey addition would obliterate this view. Whilst the view is not gained along a side boundary corridor, the view is gained over the dwelling and would not be impacted by a development that complies with the LEP height standard. The clause 4.6 submission has not addressed the impact of the variation on the public view. Approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest. Arabella Street includes many opportunities for public views to the Harbour Bridge that should be retained in the interest of the community. 

 

Private Views

 

The likely loss of view has been assessed based on the Land and Environment Court’s Planning Principle. The four step test established in Tenacity vs Waringah [2004] has been applied as follows.

 

Step 1 - Assessment of views affected

 

The view affected is a small water view of Woodford Bay.

 

Step 2 - Where are the views obtained

 

The views are gained over the front boundary of 45 Arabella to the east and over the roof line of 66 Arabella Street.  The views can be gained from both a seated and standing position.

 

Step 3 - Extent of the Impact

 

The extent of the view lost for the whole property is quantifiably minor as views are gained over the subject site to the iconic Sydney Harbour Bridge and expansive water views are also gained from the first floor bedrooms. The views impacted are from living areas and therefore hold importance in the home.

 

Step 4 - Reasonableness of the proposal

 

The proposal that is causing the view loss is unreasonable given that the LEP development standard for height is breached by the portion of the development that results in the view loss.

 

The applicant’s clause 4.6 variation is not well founded and is not supported, partially due to the view loss raised by this submission.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development would not constitute view sharing but the removal of views and would have an unreasonable impact on the amenity of a neighbouring property.

 

Garage - Ancillary Development

 

The garage would have a maximum height of 5.3m towards its rear and a minimum of 4.3m at its front elevation. The garage is located on an elevated platform over the existing carports footprint. The garage is proposed to be raised in height as the existing driveway has a gradient is problematically steep. The proposed garage has a side setback of 1m from the southwestern boundary and a front setback of 8.67m from the front boundary.

 

The garage would create additional overshadowing to the southwestern property. Whilst the overall solar access provision is exceeded the overshadowing caused is unreasonable due to the excessive height of the garage and the reduced side setback. The garage is ancillary development, an objective of which is to enhance the amenity of the residents without compromising the amenity of the adjoining property. The lower level provides little amenity to the residents, whilst a more efficient gradient could be achieved for the garage without the need to raise the parking level by a whole storey.

 

The side setback of the garage of 1m is insufficient considering the increased height proposed. This reduced setback would have two impacts due to the increased bulk and massing along the boundary. There would be increased overshadowing to the adjoining properties windows and particularly north facing courtyard. The southwestern side boundary view corridor as enjoyed by Arabella Street would be obscured. Clause a) of Part B.4 provides that garages and outbuildings should not be located within view corridors.

 

Whilst the existing parking facilities are problematic to the residents, the proposed development is excessive in regards to the additional height proposed. The additional storey created below the parking level provides little amenity and results in an unreasonable built form for a garage that has material impacts to the amenity of adjoining properties.

 

Landscaped Area

 

The site would be slightly deficient of landscaped area by approximately 6m2. The overall landscaping of the site is generally unchanged except for a rearrangement of the driveway and access path. The majority of the significant vegetation is to be retained including significant trees. The variation is considered to be minor and is acceptable given the quality of landscaping that is to be retained.

 

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

 

45 Arabella Street, Longueville

 

·         The proposed non complying addition to the third storey would result in a loss of water views to and from the ground floor of 45 Arabella Street over the northern side of 66 Arabella Street. It is noted that the current view is somewhat obscured by the Council Street tree although when pruned provides a notable view of the water.

 

Comment: The view loss has been assessed above in accordance with the Land and Environment Court Planning Principle.  Despite the minor extent of view that is lost, the proportion of the proposed development that is causing the view loss is unreasonable given the LEP development standard for height is breached.

 

The applicant’s clause 4.6 variation is not well founded and is not supported, partially due to the view loss raised by this submission.

 

·         The view corridor along the southwestern side of the site would be reduced by the proposed development.

 

Comment: The additions to the dwelling would not impact this view as the additional bulk and massing is located centrally on the site and to the northern side. However, the height and reduced side setback of the garage is likely to impact the view corridor along the southwestern side of the subject site.

 

66A Arabella Street, Longueville

 

·         Master bedroom overlooks the ground floor terrace of 66A

 

Comment: The commenter has referenced the master bedroom windows which are existing although an assessment of the additional bedroom’s windows and balcony extension does not raise significant concern as to direct overlooking. The view to the commenter’s ground floor terrace or pool is only gained at an obtuse angle from the balcony. Considering the balcony is existing and proposed to be extended towards the north away from 66A Arabella Street there is minimal concern raised as to additional overlooking.

 

·         The garage roof may be used to mount solar panels and would be visually unattractive.

 

Comment: The current application does not pertain to the installation of solar panels although generally panels can be installed as exempt or complying development in accordance the SEPP Infrastructure 2007.

 

·         The proposed additions would result in overshadowing to the northern façade and courtyard of 66A Arabella Street. The setback of the garage is not sufficient to provide sunlight.

 

Comment: The property of 66A Arabella Street would receive natural light to a portion of windows for a minimum of 3hrs throughout the course of a mid-winter day. Although, there would be additional overshadowing to ground floor windows and the courtyard of 66A Arabella Street. The shadowing is as a result of the increased height of the garage which was previously a carport, and the three storey lift and stair area. Given that both elements of the proposal that are causing impact include respective height and setback non compliances their impact is considered to be unreasonable.    

 

·         The upper storey and its extension does not look attractive or complementary to its near neighbors. The visual impression is of immense size and a boxy disproportionate building.

 

Comment: Whilst the architectural character of the proposed development does not raise concern and makes an attempt to blend the proposed addition into the existing building, the overall bulk and massing created is out of scale with surrounding development and visually imposing to neighbouring properties.   

 

64 Arabella Street, Longueville

 

·         The current building exceeds the height limit and proposes further extension. The building is located further forward blocking views of the city, any further extension forward would compromise the view and privacy of number 64 Arabella Street.  

 

Comment: The proposed development seeks a variation to the LEP height development standard. The written request is not considered to be well founded. The non-compliance would result in additional bulk and massing that would be visually imposing on the adjoining property. Despite this the skylights as proposed would not result in overlooking to the adjoining property and the additions would not result in a loss of views to the city skyline if any from 64 Arabella Street.  

 

·         The proposed garage would eliminate the outlook from the kitchen of 64 Arabella Street and overshadow it. The subfloor area would be visually unattractive. Clarification is sought as to the use of the area under the garage.

 

Comment: The garage would not overshadow 64 Arabella Street as it is located to the south. There is sufficient building separation between the two properties so as not to be visually overbearing. The subfloor area is proposed to be screened whilst the lower storey area is a continuation of the outdoor patio and includes the stair and lift access to the garage above. 

 

·         The proposed lift and stair projects towards the swimming pool and entertaining decks of 64 Arabella Street and would result in a loss of visual and acoustic privacy.  

 

Comment: The proposed lift and stairs whilst sufficiently setback from the boundary is three storeys, breaches the LEP development standard for height and DCP provision for external wall height. The bulk and scale is visually imposing on the adjoining property and would result in direct overlooking from the upper storey to the swimming pool and private open space of 64 Arabella Street. 

 

60 Arabella Street, Longueville

 

·         Object to the disproportionate height, size and non-compliance of the building.

 

Comment: Agree that there are numerous non-compliances relating to the overall bulk and massing of the development that would be inconsistent with the character of the locality.  

 

·         Concern as to overlooking to main living area, bedroom and balcony are exacerbated by the larger building.

 

Planning Comment: The objector’s property is located to the northwest and would not be overlooked by the proposed development as there are no windows proposed along this elevation. Whilst there may be an opportunity from the small balcony, the angle required would not be conducive to overlooking of neighbouring properties.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 79 C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied.

 

The application meets with the Floor Space Ratio although not the height standard as required in the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. The applicant’s written request to vary the development standard is not well founded and not supported. 

 

The development also fails to meet a number of the Part C Residential Development Objectives in the Lane Cove Development Control Plan.

 

Submissions have been made by four neighbouring properties within the vicinity of the development who have raised valid concerns as to the impact the development would cause.

 

On balance the proposed development would not be reasonable as it would breach the development standard for height, and the provisions for number of storeys and external wall height, the impact of which is the loss of views to residents and from the public domain. The application is recommended for refusal.

 

 


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to section 80(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Council refuses development consent to Development Application DA17/180 for alteration and additions to an existing dwelling house, construction of a new garage, driveway, fencing and associated landscaping at 66 Arabella Street, Longueville for the following reasons.

 

Objectives of the Zone

1.    The proposed development should be refused as it does not meet the objectives of the zone.

 

Particulars

 

a)    Clause 2.3 of LCLEP 2009 provides the Land Use zones and their objectives.

b)    The subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential.

c)    The relevant objectives of the zone are as follows:

 

·         To retain, and where appropriate improve, the existing residential amenity of a detached single family dwelling area.

·         To encourage new dwelling houses or extensions of existing dwelling houses that are not highly visible when viewed from the Lane Cove River or Parramatta River.

 

d)    The proposed development would result in a detrimental impact to the existing residential amenity of what is a generally a detached single family dwelling area.

e)    The development is likely to be highly visible when viewed from the Lane Cove River due to the excessive height and number of storeys.

 

Development Standard - Height of Buildings

 

2.    The development should be refused as it does not comply with the LEP development standard or objectives for height of buildings.

 

Particulars

 

a)  Clause 4.3 of LCLEP 2009 provides as follows:

 

            “4.3   Height of buildings

(1)  The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a)  to minimise any overshadowing, loss of privacy and visual impacts of development on neighbouring properties, particularly where zones meet, and

(b)  to maximise sunlight for the public domain, and

(c)  to relate development to topography.

(2)  The height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map.

 

b)  Pursuant to the Height of Buildings map referred to in clause 4.3(2) of LCLEP 2009, the maximum permissible height for the subject site is 9.5m

c)  The proposed development provides a maximum height of 10.3m exceeding the 9.5m permitted.

d)  The applicant has submitted a written request to vary the development standard in accordance with clause 4.6 of LCLEP 2009 although is not considered to be well founded.

e)  The variation sought cannot be supported as the proposed development does not meet the objectives of the standard. The development does not have regard to the existing topography of the site and would result in an imposing bulk and massing, additional overshadowing and view loss for respective adjoining properties.

f)  Compliance with the development standard is not considered to be unreasonable of unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

g)  The proposed development would not be in the public interest because it is inconsistent with the objectives of the development standard.

Bulk and Massing

3.    The development should be refused as it would result in an unacceptable bulk and massing in the context of the locality.

 

Particulars

 

a)    Clause 1.7.1 a) and e) of LCDCP 2009 provides:

 

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

 

e) A maximum of 2 storeys plus basement is permissible at any point above ground level (existing).

 

b)    The upper storey addition and the lift / stairs would constitute three storeys.

c)    The stair and lift addition would have an external wall height of 9.1m.

d)    The bulk and massing of the development would be visually imposing on the adjoining neighbour at 64 Arabella Street, particularly when viewed from the first floor entertaining terrace.

e)    The bulk and massing would result in additional overshadowing to the adjoining property at 66A Arabella Street, Longueville.

f)     The bulk and massing would impact public and private views.

 

View Sharing - Private Views

 

4.    The development should be refused as it would result in the loss of water views from 45 Arabella Street, Longueville. 

 

Particulars

 

a)    A water view is gained over the northern portion of the exisisting dwelling to the water of Woodford Bay from 45 Arabella Street, Longueville located opposite the subject property.

b)    The extent of view lost is quantifiably minor although is the only view water view gained from the ground floor.

c)    Regarding the dwelling additions, the extent of the proposal that causes the view loss is unreasonable as it breaches the development standard for height, and the provisions for number of storeys and external wall height.

d)    A secondary view is gained along the southwestern side setback view corridor of the subject site to the water.

e)    The bulk and massing of the proposed garage due to it being two storeys and in conjunction with the 1m side setback is likely to result in a further loss of view to the water.

f)     The proposed development would not constitute view sharing.

 

View Sharing - Public Views

 

5.    The development should be refused as it would result in the loss of an iconic view from the public domain.

 

Particulars

 

a)    A view of the Sydney Harbour Bridge is gained over the top of the existing building from the footpath of Arabella Street.

b)    The view is considered to be iconic and is highly valued to the community.

c)    The extent of the proposal that causes the view loss is unreasonable as it breaches the development standard for height, and the provisions for number of storeys and external wall height.

d)    The loss of view would not be in the public interest.

 

Privacy

 

6.    The development should be refused as it would result in an undue loss of privacy to the adjoining property.

 

Particulars

 

a)    The floor to ceiling glazing on the northeastern side of the stair well would result in overlooking to the first floor deck and master bedroom of 64 Arabella Street, Longueville.

b)    The overlooking would occur primarily from the third storey.

 

 

Ancillary Development

 

7.    The proposed development should be refused as the garage would result in a loss of amenity to neighbouring properties.

 

Particulars

 

a)    Clause 1.10.3 b) and g) provides:

 

b) Outbuildings shall not exceed one storey up to a maximum of 3.6m in height. The maximum external wall height is 2.4m.

 

g) Outbuildings are not to be located in view corridors and are not to be used as a dwelling.

 

b)    The proposed garage is two storeys and has a maximum height of 5.3m with an external wall height to the southwestern side of 5.3m.

c)    The bulk and massing of the garage would impact the amenity of the adjoining property at 66A Arabella Street as additional overshadowing would fall across habitable windows and a north facing courtyard. 

d)    The bulk and massing of the garage would impact the view corridor along the southwestern side of the subject site.

 

Precedent

 

8.    The proposed development should be refused as approval would establish an undesirable precedent within the locality.

 

 

Particulars

 

a)    Given that the proposed development does not comply with and a number of numerical provisions including a principle development standard and their objectives, approval of the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent that implies that Council has abandoned these controls.

 

Public Interest

 

9.    The proposed development should be refused as approval would not be in the public interest due to the amenity impacts evident to neighbour properties and the public domain.

 

Particulars

 

a)    The aforementioned reasons for refusal and their particulars are evidence that the proposed development is not within the public interest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Site Location Plans

2 Pages

 

AT‑3View

Clause 4.6 Variation

12 Pages