Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting

1 October 2019, 5:00pm

 

LC_WebBanner


 

Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Panel Members,

 

Notice is given of the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting, to be held in the Council Chambers, 48 Longueville Rd, Lane Cove on Tuesday 1 October 2019 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

 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting Procedures

 

The Lane Cove Local Planning Panel (LCLPP) 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 Lane Cove Local Planning 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 LCLPP 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 LCLPP, 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.

 

 

 


Lane Cove Local Planning Panel 1 October 2019

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Reports

 

1.       44 Lower Serpentine Rd, Greenwich................................................................ 4

 

2.       98 Longueville Road, Lane Cove...................................................................... 82

 

3.       38-42 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove................................................................... 130

 

4.       2 - 20 Rosenthal Avenue Lane Cove............................................................... 242

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 1 October 2019

44 Lower Serpentine Rd, Greenwich

 

 

Subject:          44 Lower Serpentine Rd, Greenwich    

Record No:    DA19/57-01 - 52012/19

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Henry  Burnett 

 

 

 

Property:

44 Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich

DA No:

DA57/2019

Date Lodged:

24 May 2019

Cost of Work:

$2,480,500.00

Owner:

Zhanchun Song and Siu Po Yeung

Applicant:                        

Zhanchun Song

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Demolition of Existing Structures and Construction of a Dwelling House

Zone

R2 Low Density Residential

Is the property a heritage item

Yes – Item of local significance under Schedule 5 of LCLEP 2009 (Item No. I133)

Is the property within a conservation area

Yes – Greenwich Heritage Conservation Area

Notification

Notified in accordance with Council policy and 5 submissions received.                               

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The proposal is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as the proposed works include the demolition of a dwelling house on land that is listed as a heritage item under Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. While the dwelling proposed to be demolished is not a heritage item, the site is listed as having heritage significance and so the report is put to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel to ensure transparency in decision making.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Development Application is for the demolition of an existing dwelling house and construction of a three storey dwelling house with associated earthworks and landscaping.

 

The proposal has been assessed against Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and complies with the maximum building height and floor space ratio development standards. The site is listed as a heritage item under Schedule 5 of the LCLEP 2009. The site formed part of a boatyard established in early 1900’s. A heritage study of the site has identified Rockleigh house on 2 Richard Street, Greenwich, and 9 other items of archeological significance across 2 Richard Street and 44 Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich. The dwelling house proposed to be demolished is not a heritage item and the impacts on the heritage items within the Rockleigh heritage listing are considered satisfactory.

 

The proposal has been assessed against Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 and complies with the exception of wall height, excavation, the southern side setback, number of storeys and mechanical car stacker. The proposed dwelling is designed to fit within its context and would not appear as an overdevelopment of the site when viewed in context from Lower Serpentine Road, the foreshore and adjoining properties. The variations to LCDCP 2010 are considered satisfactory in this instance with the exception of the mechanical car stacker for reasons outlined in the report.

 

The proposal was notified to adjoining properties on two occasions. In response to the first notification of the proposal 4 submissions were received by way of objection. In response to the second notification of the proposal after additional information was submitted, 3 submissions were received (comprising 2 further submissions and 1 new submission). The submissions primarily relate to view sharing of 8-12 Mitchell Street and 2 Richard Street, the interrelationship of title restrictions between No.  2 Richard Street and the subject site, and construction impacts. The submissions are summarised in the report and are considered to be adequately addressed by the applicant through the amended scheme and the provision of additional information.

 

The Development Application is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel with a recommendation for approval subject to draft conditions.

 

SITE

 

The site is known as 44 Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich (Lot 2 in DP 1011512). The site is situated on Greenwich Point. The site is irregular in shape with a total site area of 1,032m2. The site is a foreshore property with a cross-fall of 12 metres from the Lower Serpentine Road boundary to the foreshore. The subject site contains an existing multi-level dwelling house, swimming pool and a rock/sandstone retaining wall of approximately 7 metres benching the site from the foreshore. The site is adjoined by single detached dwellings including Rockleigh which is listed as a heritage item of local significance under Schedule 5 of LCLEP 2009. The subject site is also listed as forming part of ‘Rockleigh’ as it contains a number of identified items of archeological significance however this does not include the existing dwelling house or swimming pool. The site is also within the visual catchment of Greenwich Baths and situated within the Greenwich Heritage Conservation Area.

 

Figure 1: Subject Site


PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

Date

Description

Circa. 1997

Development Application DA131/1997 approved for the Torrens title subdivision in to two allotments (registered in 2000) of the now No. 44 Lower Serpentine Road and 2 Richard Street, Greenwich.

 

 

PROPOSAL

 

The proposal is for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a three storey dwelling house containing 5 bedrooms and a double garage with car shaft providing storage for an additional two vehicles. The dwelling presents as single storey to Lower Serpentine Road and three storey to the foreshore commensurate with the existing dwelling house.

 

The proposal primarily utilises the existing excavated/benched ground level for the new dwelling. Additional excavation is limited to the north-eastern corner as shown on the submitted cut and fill floor plan to an area of approximately 20m2 for a depth of up to 2.28m.

 

The proposal seeks to remove one Kentia Palm located along the southern boundary.

 

SECTION 4.15 ASSESSMENT

 

The following assessment is provided against the relevant provisions of Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979:

 

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument:

 

 

SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land

 

The proposal is considered satisfactory with respect to SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land. Suitable contamination reporting was undertaken at the subdivision stage prior to registration in 2000. The subsequent use of the site for residential purposes for a single dwelling house is unlikely to result in any contamination. The site was inspected as part of the assessment and no likely sources of contamination or hazardous materials were observed.

 

SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

The proposal is considered satisfactory with respect to SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 and the associated Development Control Plan. No works are proposed beneath the existing sandstone/natural rock retaining wall of approximately 7 metres in height which separates the upper part of the site containing the existing and proposed development, from the lower part of the site which directly interfaces with the foreshore. Notwithstanding, an assessment against the provisions of the SREP are provided as follows:

 

Clause 21 - Biodiversity, ecology and environment protection

 

Comment: The proposal would have a neutral effect on the quality of water entering the waterways, would not result in impact to aquatic vegetation, would not alter foreshore vegetation, and would not alter the existing landscaped area or result in any significant tree removal other than one Kentia Palm.

 

Clause 22 – Public Access to, and use of, foreshore and waterways

 

Comment: The development would not impact existing access to the foreshore.

 

Clause 23 – Maintenance of a working harbour

           

Comment: The development continues the use of the site as a dwelling house and there is not an anticipated future demand that would require the use of the subject site for the purposes of a working harbour.

 

Clause 24 - Interrelationship of waterway and foreshore uses

 

Comment: The proposal maintains the existing interrelationship being wholly behind an existing retaining wall with no change to existing ground levels beneath the sandstone/natural rock retaining wall.

 

Clause 25 – Foreshore and waterways scenic quality

 

Comment: The scale, form, design and siting of the building is generally in keeping with the existing dwelling house.

 

Clause 26 – Maintenance, protection and enhancement of views

 

Comment: The proposal enhances views of the harbour by replacing a solid front fence with a palisade fence which would allow for views through to Greenwich Baths from Lower Serpentine Road.

 

Clause 27 – Boat storage facilities

 

            Comment: N/A

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

i.          Permissibility

 

A dwelling house is permissible with consent in the R2 Low Density Residential zone under LCLEP 2009.

 

ii.         Principal Development Standards

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Floor Space Ratio

0.47:1

0.5:1

Yes

Height of Buildings

9.5m

9.5m

Yes

 

iii.        Heritage Conservation

 

The proposal is considered satisfactory with respect to Clause 5.10 of LCLEP 2009. Clause 5.10(2) LCLEP 2009 prescribes consent being required for the demolition of a heritage item. The proposal was accompanied by a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by John Oultram Heritage and Design (AT1). Both Council’s Heritage Advisor and John Oultram raise no objection to the demolition of the dwelling which was constructed in the 1990's, being to the design of renowned architect Alexander Tzannes, as it has no heritage significance, and is not part of the reason why the site is listed as a heritage item. A copy of Council’s heritage advisors report is attached (AT2). The report outlines how design amendments have resulted in the proposal being satisfactory given the heritage context.

 

Prior to the subdivision of the site (formerly 2 Richard Street and 44 Lower Serpentine Road were a single allotment) a heritage study was prepared by Edward Higginbotham and Associates Pty Ltd, on behalf of the former owner of the site, and was accepted by Council staff at the time as being a satisfactory report as to the heritage significance of the site. The report identified Rockleigh House and nine other items of significance listed in Figure 2 and 3 below. The items are principally on the lower part of the site divided from the area of the proposed works by a retaining wall/natural rock shelf (item 7). The proposed dwelling house replaces an existing dwelling house and will not disturb the remaining heritage items on site (noting the two sheds items 4 and 5 have been demolished with consent previously).

 

Figure 2: Map from Higginbotham Heritage Study (Proposed Work Zone in Red).

Figure 3: List of Items of Historical Significance.

 

For completeness, the heritage inventory sheet accompanying the LCLEP 2009 listing is attached (AT3). The listing specifically nominates Rockleigh House as the heritage item of local significance.

 

 

(ii)        Any proposed instrument (Draft LEP, Planning Proposal)

 

 

Not applicable.

 

 

(iii)       Any development control plan

 

 

Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010

 

i.          Part B4 – View Sharing

 

The objectives of Part B4 – View Sharing are as follows:

 

a)  To ensure the public view corridors between buildings or along streets are retained and enhanced from streets or public spaces.

b)  To minimise the impact of new development on existing public and private views and vistas.

c)  To preserve or fairly share water views for foreshore residents. 

Public Views

 

The proposal improves existing views from the public domain (Lower Serpentine Road) by replacing an existing solid front fence with a portion of palisade fencing to open views to Greenwich Baths from Lower Serpentine Road meeting the objectives and relevant prescriptive provisions of Part B4.

 

Private Views

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and 4 submissions were received specifically raising concern with view sharing as a result of the proposed development from No. 8, 10 and 12 Mitchell Street and 2 Richard Street. The applicant in response to the submissions submitted the following:

 

·   Deletion of a pergola along the northern side boundary;

·   Lowering of the building height up to 360mm; and

·   Provision of further view analysis using photos obtained during site inspections of the adjoining properties (AT4).

The concluding assessment of the applicant’s town planner is generally agreed with:

 

The view impact photos demonstrate that there is no material impact on existing views from the nominated properties and the principles of view sharing are achieved. Encroachments into existing views are generally less than 1% to 2% of the total view and do not obstruct views to any landmark or iconic features and have minimal impact on water or land/water interface views.

 

Where the impact is greater other clearer views are obtainable from elsewhere within the property and dwelling. The proposed private view sharing has been assessed having regard to the objectives and prescriptive measures contained within Part B4 of LCDCP 2010 as well as the planning principles established in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council [2004] NSW LEC 140 and is considered satisfactory. The assessment against each objecting property is provided as follows:

 

8 Mitchell Street, Greenwich

The impact on the view from 8 Mitchell Street is negligible with the existing dwelling having a similar impact to the proposed as demonstrated in the applicants view analysis (red outline existing, blue outline proposed). On receipt of the further view analysis (including Figure 4 below) no further submission was received in relation to view sharing from 8 Mitchell Street.

 

Figure 4: View from First Floor of 8 Mitchell Street

 

10 Mitchell Street, Greenwich

10 Mitchell Street is a two storey dwelling and concern was originally raised that the applicant did not analyse view sharing from the ground floor of 10 Mitchell Street where the main living areas and a principal outdoor balcony area are located.

 

The applicant submitted further analysis of the ground floor view impact (including Figure 5 below). The analysis shows that a portion of the vegetation on the eastern side of Greenwich Baths will be obscured when viewed from the balcony to the living area, and a square of harbour will be obscured between 2 Richard Street and the proposed dwelling when viewed from principal outdoor balcony area located further north. 10 Mitchell Street retains the city skyline view, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the southern bridge approach and the majority of the harbour at the ground floor. The impact at the first floor is considered more severe as the depth of the proposed building is more visible (see Figure 6 below). However, at this location more expansive views are obtained and view sharing can be said to be achieved.

 

A further submission from 10 Mitchell Street was received in response to the submitted view analysis principally raising objections to views lost towards Greenwich Sailing Club. The view loss in proportion to the total view retained is minor and therefore further amendments to the plans are not considered warranted in this instance.

 

Figure 5: View from Ground Floor Balcony of 10 Mitchell Street

 

 

Figure 6: View from First Floor of 10 Mitchell Street

 

12 Mitchell Street, Greenwich

Concern is raised that the proposal will result in loss of views to Greenwich Baths as a result of the reduced northern boundary setback of 2.42 metres, structures within the 2.42 metre side setback, higher structures to Lower Serpentine Road and from landscaping. The applicant submitted view analysis as shown in Figure 7 and 8 below to outline the views impact to Greenwich Baths.

Figure 7: Existing View from First Floor of 12 Mitchell Street

 

Figure 8: Proposed View from First Floor of 12 Mitchell Street

 

The proposed dwelling results in some view loss of the water of Greenwich Baths as well as the eastern boat storage area. While the impact to this part of the view obtained from 12 Mitchell Street is moderate consideration has to be given to the total view obtainable from the first floor of 12 Mitchell Street. A site inspection revealed extensive views obtainable from the first floor of 12 Mitchell Street which will be largely unchanged, including significant iconic views, as a result of the proposed development (See Figure 9 below). In this way a moderate impact to one component of the view is considered satisfactory given the views obtainable from the same part of the property being the open plan living dining and kitchen area at this floor. While a further submission was received objecting on the same grounds, the applicant has made a reasonable effort to consider design methodology to improve that view corridor from the public domain, and has deleted a pergola structure to improve the view from 12 Mitchell Street compared to the originally submitted proposal. View sharing from 12 Mitchell Street is considered satisfactory in this instance.

 

Figure 9: Site Inspection Photo from First Floor of 12 Mitchell Street

 

2 Richard Street, Greenwich

The proposed dwelling is directly adjoining 2 Richard Street, Greenwich. The majority of the proposal is across the side boundary and as such is difficult to maintain views. 2 Richard Street retains all the views it currently enjoys directly east from the balcony areas at the ground and first floor. In fact, the proposal cuts back the lower 2 floors which will improve the view obtained from the ground level terrace and first floor balcony of 2 Richard Street (see Figure 10 below). The proposed view sharing is considered acceptable in this instance.

 

Figure 10: View from First Floor Balcony of 2 Richard Street (Red Existing, Blue Proposed)

 

 

ii.         Part B5 – Development in Foreshore Areas

 

The proposal increases the existing foreshore building setback and is generally in keeping with the architectural style of the existing dwelling house. Figure 11 and 12 below details the existing and originally proposed dwelling. The proposed dwelling design has been modified slightly during the assessment period however it is predominantly as shown in Figure 12. The proposal is considered satisfactory with respect to Part B5 of LCDCP 2010.

 

Figure 11: Foreshore View Existing

Figure 12: Foreshore View Proposed

 

iii.        Part B9 – Heritage

 

The heritage assessment undertaken by Council’s Heritage Advisor has considered the relevant provisions of Part B9 of LCDCP 2010 particularly the impact on Rockleigh at 2 Richard Street. The proposal is satisfactory (as amended) with respect to Part B9 of LCDCP 2010.


 

 

iv.        Part C1 – Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies

 

The following table provides a summary of compliance against the provisions of Part C1:

 

 

Control

Proposed

Complies

Front setback (min)

Consistent with area or 7.5m

Blade wall: 0m

Garage setback: 1.25m

Building line: 3m

 

Yes, consistent with the area.

Side setback (min)

1500mm

Northern: 1.5m-2.42m

Southern: Min. 860mm garage

 

Yes

No , however supported with a setback of 900mm (refer condition 1A) see discussion below.

 

Rear setback (min)

>1000m²: 10m or 35%

Foreshore line setback prevails.

Yes

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

 

7.0m

9.5m

No, 2.5m variation which is supported, see discussion below.

 

Number of Storeys (max)

2

3

No, 1 storey variation which is supported, see discussion below.

 

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

35%

35.3%

Yes

Foreshore Building Line (min)

2m from top of escarpment.

The retaining wall sets an ‘escarpment line’ and the proposal does not extend beyond existing dwelling.

 

Yes

Cut and Fill (max)

1m

2.28m

No, 1.28m variation which is supported, see discussion below.

 

Solar Access

3 hrs to a portion of north-facing windows and recreation area.

Satisfactory to the extent possible on north-south orientated block.

 

Yes

Deck/Balcony depth (max)

3m

3.1m

 

Yes, amended to comply (refer draft condition 1A).

 

Private open space

24 m² (min)

4m minimum depth

Provided

Yes

Basix

Required

Provided

Yes

 

Off-street spaces (min)

1

2 (total 4 with shaft)

Yes

% of Allotment Width (garages & carports)

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

5.68m

Yes

Front fence height (max)

Solid:              900mm

Lightweight:    1.2m

1.2M palisade fence setback adjacent to northern boundary.

Yes

 

The following table addresses each of the departures to Part C1:

 

Variation Proposed

Comment

Side Setback

The proposed southern side boundary setback is 860mm at the ground floor and to the roof structure where the DCP requires 1500mm. A minimum 900mm is considered necessary for the purposes of National Construction Code compliance, however otherwise a reduced setback at this location is considered satisfactory. The interface is to a garage on the adjoining property to the south, a blank wall is provided to the proposed dwelling on the subject site, resulting in no privacy impacts and the proposed first floor are behind the roof structure is stepped back 1.86m in compliance with the DCP. A draft condition is recommended to amend the plans to provide for a minimum 900mm garage and roof structure side setback along the southern side boundary (refer draft condition 1A). A variation is considered satisfactory in this instance due to no adverse amenity or unreasonable building constraints are imposed on the adjoining property.

 

Wall Height

A wall height of up to 9.5m is proposed where the DCP limits wall height to 7m plus 600mm parapet for a flat roof design. The following 2 diagrams outline the part of the dwelling above the 7m wall height when measured from the existing ground line (Figure 13) and the part of the proposed dwelling above the 7m wall height where in addition to the existing dwelling (Figure 14). While the proposal does appear to be significantly above the 7m wall height limit, this is primarily the result of historic excavation of the site. In addition, the proposed dwelling along results in a reasonable increase in wall height above the 7m threshold when compared with the existing dwelling. The dwelling can be said to step with the topography of the site and as per the existing dwelling retains a single storey presentation to Lower Serpentine Road and three storey in elevation presentation to the foreshore.

 

Figure 13: Proposed Dwelling above 7m Wall Height Shaded Yellow

 

Figure 14: Proposed Dwelling above 7m Wall Height in Addition to Existing Dwelling Shaded Red

 

The proposed wall height is considered suitably in context considering the transition provided between the adjoining dwellings as shown in Figure 15 below.

 

Figure 15: Proposed Dwelling in Context of Adjoining Dwellings (viewed from Foreshore)

 

While the prescriptive measure of a 7m height requirement the DCP objectives of ensuring new dwellings reinforce the typical bulk and scale, ensuring elevations to street and public domain and street are well proportioned and designed, and minimising amenity impacts to adjoining properties, have been met in the proposed design.

 

Number of Storeys

The proposal generally follows the sectional design of the existing dwelling which presently includes three storey sections. Notwithstanding, the presentation of the dwelling to both the street, foreshore and adjoining properties is considered satisfactory. The building would read as single storey from Lower Serpentine Road as the lower floor is below street level, and the upper floor is hidden behind the roof line. From the foreshore the dwelling house would read as three storeys in elevation which is anticipated under LCDCP 2010. From the adjoining properties the subject dwelling would read as stepping with the topography of the site and aligning with the stepping of the existing dwellings. Importantly, the proposed dwelling complies with the LCLEP 2009 building height limit measured from the excavated ground level (not the historic ground level) which minimises the visual impact of the dwelling even further. While the prescriptive measure of a maximum of two storeys is not met the DCP objectives of  ensuring new dwellings reinforce the typical bulk and scale, ensuring elevations to street and public domain and street are well proportioned and designed, and minimising amenity impacts to adjoining properties, have been met in the proposed design.

 

Cut and Fill

The proposal primarily utilises the existing excavated/benched ground level for the new dwelling. Additional excavation is limited to the north-eastern corner as shown on the submitted cut and fill floor plan to an area of approximately 20m2 for a depth of up to 2.28m being a variation of 1.28m from the maximum 1m of cut permitted under LCDCP 2010. Given the small area of the additional excavation, and suitable draft conditions being imposed for excavation greater than 1m (to protect adjoining structures) a variation is considered satisfactory in this instance, as such enables and facilitates a reduced bulk and scale from the street and aides view sharing.

 

 

v.         Part R – Traffic, Transport Parking

 

Clause 2.9 of Part R prohibits the use of mechanical stacked parking. The proposal seeks to provide for a total of four (4) car parking spaces utilising a vertical mechanical car stacker as indicatively shown in Figure 16 below.

 

 

Figure 16: Mechanical Car Stacker (Left) and Proposed Section (Right)

 

The proposed car stacker is not considered satisfactory in this instance for the following reasons:

 

·    The utilisation of mechanical stackers is prohibited by Part R of LCDCP 2010;

·    Should the mechanical stacker require repair it would result in up to 4 additional cars parking on the street;

·    There is inadequate queuing space on site for the manoeuvring of vehicles in and out of the garage without utilising the public road; and

·    Lower Serpentine Road is part of a bus route and any potential interruption to the operation of the public road through vehicle manoeuvring may adversely impact public transport services in this location.

Given the above, it is recommended that a draft condition be imposed prohibiting the provision of a car shaft with the applicant being able to seek an alternate use of the cavity space (given it is included within the GFA) through amended plans. A two vehicle garage is considered appropriate notwithstanding the dwelling proposes 5 bedrooms as this area is well served with public transport options and streets are narrowed and congested.

 

 

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

 

 

The impacts of the development have been considered and subject to the recommended draft conditions would not demonstrate adverse impact to the locality.

 

 

(c)  The suitability of the site for the development

 

 

The site suitability has been established as the site constraints have been addressed as outlined within this report.

 

 

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

 

 

The proposal was notified to adjoining properties on two occasions. In response to the first notification of the proposal 4 submissions were received by way of objection. In response to the second notification of the proposal after additional information was submitted, 3 submissions were received (comprising 2 further submissions and 1 new submission). The submissions are summarised and addressed within the following table:

 

Concern

Comment

Owners consent and consideration of easements etc. of No. 2 Richard Street.

 

The applicant has proposed a condition requiring that a Registered Surveyor confirm that the built form does not encroach upon existing easements or impede the use of the easements in favour of the neighbouring property. This is considered a reasonable approach (Refer draft condition 60). There are a number of easements around foreshore access and services and a review of the plan indicates compliance can be achieved.

 

Further a condition is imposed that development consent relates to works within the subject site only and that a Registered Surveyor is to certify all works are within the subject site prior to issue of a Construction Certificate (refer draft condition 61).

 

It is noted that the plans were amended after receipt of the further submission from No. 2 Richard Street to remove demolition works from the adjoining property and confirm no change was being made to the swimming pool fence. In this regard, draft condition 61 is considered to be able to be met with the amended scheme.

 

Building height non-compliance with LCLEP 2009.

 

The proposal has been amended to comply with the maximum building height limit within LCLEP 2009.

Non-compliances with LCDCP 2010.

 

The non-compliances with LCDCP 2010 in the amended scheme have been addressed in this report and subject to conditions or merit are considered satisfactory.

 

View sharing

 

The amended scheme and additional information provides further analysis and improves view sharing outcomes when compared with the originally submitted design. The amended view sharing has been addressed in detail in this report against NSW LEC Planning Principles and the LCDCP 2010 and is considered satisfactory.

 

Construction impacts on No. 2 Richard Street.

 

Suitable conditions are imposed to ensure construction impacts are appropriately managed including structural engineers guidance (refer to draft condition 55). The draft condition includes the requirement for a dilapidation report to be prepared of No. 2 Richard Street, Greenwich.

 

Construction impacts to No. 42 Lower Serpentine Road.

 

The submitted cut and fill plan indicates no additional excavation would occur adjacent to No. 42 Lower Serpentine Road. Draft condition 55 includes a requirement that a dilapidation report be prepared for No. 42 Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich.

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied.

 

The application meets with the Floor Space Ratio and Height controls as required in the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and meets with Lane Cove Development Control Plan Part C Residential Development whether by compliance with the prescriptive measure or on merit against the relevant objectives as outlined in the report. In particular, the proposed design facilities compliance with streetscape, view sharing and bulk and scale objectives.

 

The proposal seeks demolition of a dwelling house which has been considered against the relevant heritage provisions of LCLEP 2009 and LCDCP 2010. The dwelling house is not a heritage item and the impact on the adjoining heritage items is considered satisfactory with the amended design ameliorating impacts on the heritage dwelling house located on 2 Richard Street, Greenwich.

 

On balance the proposed development would be reasonable and therefore is recommended for approval.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 1 October 2019, exercising the functions of Council as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application DA57/2019 for Demolition of Existing Structures and Construction of a Dwelling House on 44 Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich (Lot 2 DP 1011512), subject to the following conditions:\

 

General Conditions

 

1.         That the development be strictly in accordance with:

·    Drawing number/s 0319/DA/01-09, 13, 15, 16 - Revision E, dated 12/08/2019, By StudioJLA (Note: 1, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 13 as per submitted to Council on 09/09/2019)

·    Landscape Concept Plan, Drawing No. 486.19.CP 1H, dated 09/09/2019, By Adam Robinson Design

 

except as amended by the following conditions.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is in accordance with the determination.

1A.       The following amendments are to be made to the plans prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager of Development Assessment (i.e. the PCA must be provided with confirmation in writing from Council’s Manager Development Assessment that the plan amendments have been made to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager Development Assessment prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate):

 

·    The ground floor balcony is to be amended to have a maximum depth of 3m;

·    A minimum 900mm southern side boundary setback is to be provided to the garage and associated roof structure; and

·    The mechanical car shaft is to be deleted and an alternative use as part of the dwelling house provided.

2.         The submission of a Construction Certificate and its issue by Council or Principal Certifier PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION WORK commencing.

 

            Reason:  Ensures the detailed construction plans and specifications comply with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and any relevant Australian Standard.

 

3.         All building works are required to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

4.         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.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

5.         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 Principal Certifier (PC) that they have complied with the applicable requirements of Part 6.  Council as the PC 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.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

6.         An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifier before the occupation of the building.

 

            Reason: To ensure all works have been completed in accordance with the development consent conditions, approved plans and the Building Code of Australia.

 

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

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)                    7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                                   7.00am to 4.00pm

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

 

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

 

Reason: To ensure reasonable amenity is maintained to the neighbouring properties.

 

8.         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.

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

9.         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.

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

10.       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.

 

Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

11.       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 Certifier;

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.

 

Reason: To ensure public safety and public information.

 

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

 

            Reason: To protect the environment.

 

13.       The swimming pool being surrounded by a fence:-

 

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

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

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

 

b) That is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with the standards as prescribed by the Regulations under the Swimming Pool Act, 1992, and the Australian Standard AS1926 – 2012, “Swimming Pool Safety”.

 

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

 

            ADVICE: In accordance with the Swimming Pools Amendment Act 2012, the swimming pool or spa is required to be registered on the NSW Government State wide Swimming Pool Register when completed.

            The register can be found at www.swimmingpoolregister.nsw.gov.au.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

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

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

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

 

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

 

Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

16.       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 residents.

 

            Reason: To protect residential amenity.

 

17.       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.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is in accordance with the determination.

 

18.       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.

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

19.       The demolition works being confined within the boundaries of the site.

 

            Reason: To ensure compliance with the determination and public safety.

 

20.       All spillage deposited on the footpaths or roadways to be removed at the completion of each day’s work.

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

21.       The site being properly fenced to prevent access of unauthorised persons outside of working hours.

 

            Reason: To comply with Work Health and Safety Regulations and ensure public safety.

 

22.       Compliance with Australian Standard 2601 - The Demolition of Structures.

 

            Reason: To ensure compliance with the Australian Standards.

 

23.       Compliance with the Waste Management Plan submitted along with the application.

 

            Reason: To protect the surrounding environment.

 

24.       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.

 

            Reason: To ensure all works are carried out lawfully.

 

25.       Long Service Levy  Compliance with Section 6.8 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.

 

Reason: To ensure the levy is paid.

 

26.       BASIX - Compliance with all the conditions of the BASIX Certificate lodged with Council as part of this application.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

Tree Preservation Conditions

 

27.       Lane Cove Council regulates the Preservation of Trees and Vegetation in the Lane Cove local government area in accordance with State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in non-rural areas) 2017. Part 2 Section 7(1) of the SEPP states “A person must not clear vegetation in any non-rural area of the State to which Part 3 applies without the authority conferred by a permit granted by the council under that Part.” Clearing of vegetation includes “a) cut down, fell, uproot, kill, poison, ringbark, burn or otherwise destroy the vegetation, or b) lop or otherwise remove a substantial part of the vegetation.” 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.

 

28.       This condition of consent gives approval for the removal of one Kentia Palm located on the rear terrace of the existing dwelling. Trees are to be removed upon issue of the Construction Certificate only.

 

29.       Trees removed as part of the DA process must be replaced at a ratio of no 1:1 and all plantings/landscaping must comply with part J Landscaping of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010. Trees are to be installed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. All other trees located on and adjoining the site are to be retained and protected for the life of the development.

 

30.       Retaining walls and the existing concrete stairs along the southern boundary are to be retained as per the Architectural and Landscape Plans provided to minimise disturbance to retained trees and provide protection from construction activities.

 

31.       The new dwelling is to utilise the terraced levels of the existing dwelling and no material excavation is to be carried out within the TPZ areas of trees 1 and 2 to minimise disturbance to retained trees and provide protection from construction activities.

 

32.       This condition of consent gives approval for the pruning of trees 1 and 2 as identified in the Arborist Report prepared by Naturally Trees dated 19th August 2019. Pruning is to be assessed and approved by the project Arborist as compliant with AS4373 Pruning of Amenity Trees (2007). All pruning is to be carried out by an Arborist with a minimum AQF Level 3 qualification and be overseen by the Project Arborist. Owners consent to prune trees is to be provided prior to works carried out.

 

33.       Trees identified as 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 as identified in the Arborist Report prepared by Naturally Trees dated 19th August 2019 will not require physical protection measures due to their location away from the proposed development. Any works carried out within 5 metres of retained trees are to be reviewed by the Project Arborist who is to recommend appropriate protective measures.

 

34.       The trunks and branches of trees 1 and 2 as identified in the Arborist Report prepared by Naturally Trees dated 19th August 2019 must be protected during the construction period by a trunk guard and branch guards.  Timber Planks (50mmx100mm or similar) shall be placed at 100mm intervals and must be fixed by wire ties or strapping. Hessian cloth is to be placed between the tree and the planks to minimise damage. The timber planks are not to be fixed directly to the tree in any way. Trunk and branch protection is to be installed PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

35.       All tree protective measures including sediment control must be in place prior to any works commencing on the site and must be maintained for the duration of works on the site. The Project Arborist is to provide written certification to approve tree protective measures are compliant prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

36.       A Project Arborist of minimal AQF Level 5 qualification is to be appointed prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate to oversee/monitor trees condition during construction and sign off on tree protection measures. Trees are to be monitored throughout construction and a certificate produced upon completion demonstrating the trees have been maintained in good condition. All certificates are to be submitted to the Principal Certifier within five days of site attendance and must be available to council immediately upon request; failure to produce the latest certificate will be considered a breach of conditions. Final certification is to be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of Occupation Certificate.

 

37.       The Project Arborist is to carry out inspections and certify compliance with the development phases identified in the identified in the Arborist Report prepared by Naturally Trees dated 19th August 2019.

 

38.       All excavations are to be carried out in consultation with the Project Arborist who is to oversee and sign off on any excavations within the Tree Protection Zones of retained trees. The certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifier and approved prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

39.       Footing, trench or excavation that is within the TPZ of any retained trees, particularly the installation of storm water pipes, must be carried out under the guidance of the Project Arborist and using non-destructive techniques. Techniques include Hydrovac, air Knife or manually excavating.

 

40.       The Project Arborist is to submit a statement upon completion of the development that all conditions related to working around trees have been complied with. The statement is also to recommend remedial advice for trees post construction to mitigate construction impacts long term. The statement is to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifier Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

General Engineering Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

45.       Restoration: Public areas must be maintained in a safe condition always. Restoration of disturbed Council land and assets is the responsibility of the applicant. All costs associated with restoration of public land will be borne by the applicant.

 

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

 

47.       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’.

 

48.       Council Drainage Infrastructure: The proposed construction shall not encroach onto any existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement unless approved by Council. 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. Developer must lodge Stormwater Inspection Application form to Council. All costs associated with the relocation of the stormwater line are to be borne by the applicant.

 

49.       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.

 

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

 

51.       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.

 

52.       Rainwater Reuse Tanks: The proposed rainwater tank is to be installed in accordance with Council’s rainwater tank policy and relevant Australian standards:

 

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

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

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

 

53.       Drainage Construction: The stormwater drainage on the site is to be constructed generally in accordance with plan numbered 190108 Rev 1 prepared by Instruct Engineers dated 13-3-19.

 

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

 

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

 

54.       Proposed Vehicular Crossing: The proposed vehicular crossing shall be constructed to the specifications and levels issued by Council. A ‘Construction of Residential Vehicular Footpath Crossing’ application shall be submitted to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. All works associated with the construction of the crossing shall be completed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

55.       Excavation Greater Than 1m: Where there are structures on adjoining properties including all Council infrastructures, located within 5 meters of the proposed excavation (including but not limited to No. 2 Richard Street, Greenwich (Lot 1 DP 1011512) and 42 Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich (Lot C DP 358245)):

The applicant shall:-

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

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

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

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

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

A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed shall be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer and submitted to the principle certifying authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

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

 

56.       Pool Construction: The pool design shall ensure that either during construction or upon completion, surface water is not be directed or diverted so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties. Council accepts no liability for any damage to the pool as a result of overland flows or high tide inundation. The property owner shall submit written acceptance of liability of any damages prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

57.       Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $3000 bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets as a result of the development. The bond will be released upon issuing of the Occupation Certificate. If Council determines that damage has occurred as a result of the development, the applicant will be required to repair the damage. Repairs are to be carried out within 14 days from the notice. All repairs are to be carried in accordance with Council’s requirements. The full bond will be retained if Council’s requirements are not satisfied. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

58.       Erosion and Sediment Control: The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to the start of any works on the site. The devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced when necessary.

 

59.       Certificate of Satisfactory Completion:  Certificates from a registered and licensed Plumber or a suitably qualified Engineer must be obtained for the following matters. The plumber is to provide a copy of their registration papers with the certificate. The relevant Certificates are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of any Occupation Certificate. Confirming that the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

OTHER CONDITIONS

 

60.       A Registered Surveyor is to confirm that the built form does not encroach upon existing easements or impede the use of the easements in favour of the neighbouring property prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

61.       This development consent relates to works within the subject site only (Lot 2 DP 1011512). A registered surveyor is to certify all works proposed to be undertaken, including landscaping and fencing works are within the subject site (or on the common boundary) prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Heritage Impact Statement

37 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Heritage Advisors Report

3 Pages

 

AT‑3View

Heritage Inventory Sheets

3 Pages

 

AT‑4View

View Sharing Analysis

7 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Heritage Impact Statement

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Heritage Advisors Report

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 3

Heritage Inventory Sheets

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 4

View Sharing Analysis

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 1 October 2019

98 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          98 Longueville Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA19/20-01 - 53280/19

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Greg Samardzic 

 

 

 

Property:

98 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

DA No:

DA 20/2019

Date Lodged:

13 February 2019

Cost of Work:

$1,000,000.00

Owner:

Delnavaz and Afaghi P/L

Applicant:                        

Turner Hughes Architects

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Alterations and additions to an existing commercial building

Zone

B2 Local Centre

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 5

Stop the Clock used

Yes

Notification

Notified in accordance with Council’s policy

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The subject Development Application is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as the proposed building height exceeds 10% of the applicable maximum 9.5m building height development standard of Lane Cove Local Environment Plan 2009.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is for alterations and additions to an existing commercial building, 3 storeys at Longueville Road and 5 storeys at Pottery Lane.

 

The proposed design has a maximum building height of 14.1m where the maximum building height for the site is 9.5m. A variation of 4.6m (48%) is proposed to the maximum building height. The applicant has sought to apply Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to development standards and has submitted a written request to vary the building height development standard. The proposal has been assessed with respect to Clause 4.6 and it is considered that the proposed variation is not supported as the Clause 4.6 written justification fails to provide any evidence how the breach achieves a better planning outcome.

 

The Development Application has been assessed in accordance with the considerations of Section 4.55 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is considered that the proposed development as submitted does not comply with the aims and objectives of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and the objectives and controls of the Lane Cove Commercial Development Control Plan as there are unreasonable variations proposed in relation to streetscape, building aesthetics or articulation and car parking impacts. 

 

There are further concerns with the design in relation to Council’s Commercial DCP including the existing/envisaged character statements for the Lane Cane Shopping Village locality. The design of the proposed development would not be compatible with the visual relationship with the traditional 2 storey shopfronts in the vicinity. Given that the subject site is currently 1 level along Longueville Road and would be 3 levels, approval of the proposed development as submitted would be difficult. It is recommended that a deferred commencement condition be imposed to remove the top level. To further assist, it is recommended that the deferred commencement condition to include the break-up of the large windows expanse at the first-floor level facing Longueville Road into smaller elements to improve consistency with the streetscape.

 

The development proposal was notified in accordance with Council’s notification policy and no submissions have been received. The proposed development is recommended for a deferred commencement approval subject to conditions including a relevant car parking contributions condition. 

 

SITE:

 

The subject site is located on the south eastern side of Longueville Road and is bounded by Pottery Lane. The site area is 224.5sqm and an existing part one and three storey commercial building is located on the site currently being used as shops and offices. The site has one on site car parking space. The site slopes from north west (Longueville Road) to south east (Pottery Lane) with Longueville Road frontage being 5.8m above Pottery Lane at the rear of the property. The street frontage is part of an existing grouping of attached buildings.

 

The subject site is also located within the Lane Cove Shopping Centre and surrounding developments comprise a mixture of commercial and mixed-use commercial/residential premises with similar narrow frontages (see Neighbour Notification Plan and Notification Plan attached (AT1 and AT2)). 

 

PROPOSAL

 

 

The application is for alterations and additions to an existing commercial building, 3 storeys (viewed as 2 storeys) from Longueville Road and 5 storeys from Pottery Lane. The application is for the new commercial office tenancies to be used as a radiology practice and the existing basement level would also be used by the practice. The proposed works include:

 

·    Adding 2 floors fronting Longueville Road.

·    Alterations to the building to provide accessibility from the street to the ground and new floors.

·    New stairs to the rear of the building to provide access to Pottery Lane.

·    New toilets including accessible toilets.

 

All proposed signage would be subject to a separate Development Application. No additional car parking spaces are proposed however 3 new bike racks are proposed.

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/ HISTORY

 

DA94/07

 

Council granted Development Consent (DA No. 94/07) for alterations and additions to existing commercial premises including a first-floor addition on 17 July 2007 on the subject site. The consent has lapsed.

 

DA20/19

 

On 23 April 2019, a letter was sent to the applicant requesting withdrawal of the subject Development Application due to the proposed variations to Council’s floor space ratio (FSR) and building height development standards of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. On 22 May 2019, a meeting was held to discuss the concerns with the proposal including concerns with the design of the roof profile and articulation of the façade. On 30 May 2019, amended plans were submitted to comply with FSR, further reduce the building height and improving the overall streetscape design of the proposal.

 

SECTION 4.15 ASSESSMENT

 

(a)  The provisions of

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument:

 

State and Sydney Regional Environmental Planning Policies

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land

 

The provisions of SEPP 55 require Council to consider the potential for a site to be contaminated. The subject site has a history of commercial use and as such, it is unlikely to contain any contamination and further investigation is not warranted in this case.

 

Lane Cove LEP 2009

 

The following is a summary of the clauses under LCLEP 2009 applicable to the development.

 

Zoning: B2 Local Centre       Site Area: 224.5m²

 

LEP

Proposed

Complies

4.3 Height of Buildings

J:  9.5m

14.1m max (variation of 48%)

No – see Clause 4.6 variation below

4.4 Floor Space Ratio (FSR)

T1: 2.0:1 (449m² FSR permitted)

 

 1.99:1 (448.9m² proposed)

Yes

 

Clause 2.2 - Zoning

 

Under Lane Cove LEP 2009, the property is zoned B2 Local Centre, and the proposed development as a ‘commercial premises’ would be permissible under the LEP.

 

 

 

Clause 2.3 – Zone Objectives

 

The consent authority must have regard to the objectives for development in a zone when determining a Development Application in respect of land within the zone. The objectives for the B2 Local Centre zone are as follows:-

 

·    To provide a range of retail, business, entertainment and community uses that serve the needs of people who live in, work in and visit the local area.

·    To encourage employment opportunities in accessible locations.

·    To maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

·    To ensure that this centre functions as a Town Centre in the hierarchy of Inner North Sub-region retailing.

·    To permit development for the purposes of offices, community and other facilities.

·    To encourage urban design maximising attractive public domain and adequate circulation space throughout the Lane Cove town centre for current and future users.

·    To ensure that landscaping is a significant element in public and private development viewed from the public domain.

 

The proposed development is inconsistent with the last two objectives and would be contrary to the following aims of the LEP:

 

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

 

‘in relation to economic activities, to provide a hierarchy of retail, commercial and industrial activities that enables the employment capacity targets of the Metropolitan Strategy to be met, provides employment diversity and is compatible with local amenity, including the protection of the existing village atmosphere of the Lane Cove Town Centre.’

 

There are concerns with the proposed design in relation to the existing and envisaged character of the Lane Cove Shopping Village (which will be discussed in more detail later in this report). The design of the proposal would be incompatible with the visual relationship with the traditional 2 storey shopfronts in the vicinity. Given that the subject site is currently 1 level along Longueville Road and would be 3 levels, approval of the proposed development as submitted would be difficult. It is recommended that a deferred commencement condition be imposed to remove the top level.

 

To further assist, it is recommended that the deferred commencement condition to include the break-up of the large windows expanse at the first-floor level into smaller elements to improve consistency in relation to the Longueville Road streetscape.

 

Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings

 

Building height is defined in the LCLEP2009 as meaning the vertical distance between ground level (existing) at any point to the highest point of the building, including plant and lift overruns, but excluding communication devices, antennae, satellite dishes, masts, flagpoles, chimneys, flues and the like. Clause 4.3(2) of LCLEP 2009 states that 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. In this instance, the Height of Buildings Map identifies a maximum height of 9.5m for any building on the subject site. The maximum height of the development is 14.1m (variation of 48%). Refer to attachment (AT3) to view the applicant’s written Clause 4.6 justification. The proposal has been assessed with respect to Clause 4.6 as follows:

 

Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to Development Standards

 

(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.

 

(1)  Development consent may, subject to this clause, be granted for development even though the development would contravene a development standard imposed by this or any other environmental planning instrument. However, this clause does not apply to a development standard that is expressly excluded from the operation of this clause.

 

(2)  Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

 

(a)          that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and

(b)          that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

(3)  Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:

 

(a)  the consent authority is satisfied that:

(i)         the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and

 

The Applicant has provided the following justification for the variation to height: 

 

The variation to height is caused by the steep change in levels across the site. The proposed development seeks to increase one and a half additional floors to the existing commercial premises. The proposed works seek to assist in providing additional commercial floor space to a growing area and within a highly accessible location. As shown by the shadow diagrams, the proposal has no impact on the residential apartments that face Pottery Lane. The setback to the rear exceeds the minimum requirements and the proposal relates to the slope of the land. The proposal represents a better outcome than a strictly complying envelope and has no significant adverse impacts due to additional setbacks provided for from Pottery Lane.

 

Together with the diversity of commercial spaces, cafes and residential accommodation, which are already established, the proposal would positively contribute to the desired mixed-use character and serve the needs of the local and wider community. The additional floor space would encourage employment opportunities within the surrounding Lane Cove commercial area. The site is serviced by a good network of public transport and pedestrian infrastructure thereby encouraging the use of active modes of transport to access the site. The proposal is utilising underdeveloped and potential commercial floor space.

The proposal integrates within the surrounding context and amenity of the adjoining/surrounding sites whilst accommodating additional capacity which is permissible on the subject site. The proposed building height departure would have no undue impact on the streetscape or surrounding properties and is consistent with the desired character of the locality. The proposal is compatible with surrounding developments in terms of visual appearance, scale and design. The proposed development complies with the current FSR development standard of the LEP. The proposal would support the productive economic use of the subject site.

 

The development would be in the public interest as the proposed development outweigh the public disadvantages of the development by driving increased commercial interest and creating employment. The proposed non-compliance would not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning.

 

Comment: The design approach adopted by the applicant and the justification/s provided are not supported. The Clause 4.6 request fails to address any relevant issue and fails to provide any evidence how the breach is a better planning outcome. It does not address existing ground level (a reliance on assumed historical ground levels) and relevant building aesthetics or articulation matters. 

 

Clause 4.6(3)(a) Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

The applicant relies in part upon building heights approved on adjoining and surrounding properties along Pottery Lane. The applicant also relies on the topographical characteristics of the site and that the proposal would not be readily discernible in the context of existing developments in the village or its desired future character. These references are not of sound justifications to not to fully comply with the development standard and the variation is not supported in this instance.

 

Objectives of the particular standard

 

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

 

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

 

The proposal has no impact on the residential apartments that face Pottery Lane and no impact to the public areas of the residential building as they are covered by a large awning. The existing impact to this area is limited to the late afternoon and generated mostly by existing buildings built to the rear boundary.

 

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

 

The proposed upper level roof terrace would contain privacy impacts onto the adjoining residential flat building development and the visual impact of the proposed development would have negative streetscape outcomes for the immediate locality.

 

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

 

The proposal does not appear to be the best possible outcome achieved.

      (d)  to relate development to topography.

 

The site has a considerable slope toward Pottery Lane. The proposed building does not address existing natural ground levels and instead only attempts to follow the assumed historical slope of the site prior to its excavation to accommodate a basement. The proposed variation would be approximately 8.5% and if should the historical natural ground levels be followed however the proposal does not adequately relate to the existing topography of the site and does meet this objective of the height standard.  

 

Clause 4.6(3)(b) Are there sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard?

 

The proposed development could be redesigned to achieve better or full compliance with the building height standard. It is advised that part of the justification provided within the Clause 4.6 request that a fully compliant development would adversely impact on the operational requirements of the radiology practice should not be the determining outcome for this proposal and there are no valid environmental planning grounds to breach the height standard by such a large amount in this instance. 

 

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

 

The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 4.3 Height of Building and the relevant zone objectives. 

 

Is the exception well founded?

 

The proposed development would not meet the zone objectives. It is not considered that a better planning outcome has been achieved where the proposed variation to height seeks to fully maximise the full development potential of the proposal. The proposed development is unsatisfactory and the request for variation is not considered to be well founded and not supported. The proposal as submitted contains adverse impacts on streetscape, building presentation and inadequate car parking provided. It is recommended that a deferred commencement condition be imposed to remove the top level of the proposed development which reduce the maximum height of the development to 11.3m (a variation of 19%). The site footprint is narrow and is problematic when seeking to accommodate the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles.

 

Clause 4.4 (2) – Floor space ratio

 

This clause prescribes a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 2:1. The subject site has a site area of 224.5m² allowing for a total floor area of 449m². The proposed FSR would be 1.99:1 where a total floor area of 448.9m² is proposed. The proposed development complies with the LEP FSR standard.

 

Other Provisions

 

LEP

Proposed

5.6 Architectural Roof Features

The application does not include any roof features that exceed the maximum building height.

5.10 Heritage Conservation

The application is not within a heritage conservation area or within the vicinity of a heritage item identified under Schedule 5 of LCLEP2009.

 

(ii)        Any proposed instrument (Draft LEP, Planning Proposal)

 

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Remediation of Land)

 

The Draft Remediation of Land SEPP was subject to public exhibition between 31 January and 13 April 2018. The Draft SEPP maintains the overarching objectives being to promote the remediation of land to reduce the risk of potential harm to human health or the environment. The new draft measures primarily relate to scenarios where more complex remediation/ongoing management is required, and the certification of remediation works undertaken as development not requiring consent.

 

While the Draft does consider introducing planning guidelines for the assessment/preparation of preliminary site investigations, no further considerations are imposed if the subject Development Application were to be approved and are adequate for its purpose. The proposal is consistent with the Draft Remediation of Land SEPP.

 

(iii)       Any development control plan

 

Lane Cove DCP 2010;

 

A full assessment of the proposal under DCP 2010 is illustrated in the following compliance table. The non-compliances identified in the table are assessed below.

 

Part D – Commercial Development and Mixed Use

 

DCP Control

Proposed

Complies

D.1 General Provisions

1.1 Building Form

1.1.1 Building to Street Frontages

a)     For developments within zones B1, B2 and B4 (and see Section 1.1.6 below)-

I.      New buildings are to have street frontages built predominantly to the street alignment

II.     Street setback of maximum 2.0m is permitted for suitable use such as outdoor seating for a cafe.

 

 

 

Built to street

 

 

Additional setback not proposed

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

NA

1.1.2 Street Frontage Heights

Refer to controls for specific zones and localities:

 

 

B2: No Specific Controls under DCP

Max. Building Height under LEP:9.5m

Number of storeys not specified in the DCP.

 

Number of storeys not specified in the DCP.

 

 

There are no specific controls for the site in the locality controls. The DCP does not specify number of storeys.

 

The Longueville Road frontage is 3 storeys where adjoining properties are 2 storeys

 

 

The development from the rear would present as a 5 storeys even though the upper levels have been set back where adjoining properties presents as 3 and 4 storeys.

NA

 

 

 

No

 

 

 

 

No

1.1.3    Street Frontage Activities

a) Street and lane frontage uses should incorporate one, or a combination of, the following at street level:

I.     Entrances to residential and commercial occupying less than 50% of the street frontage

II.    Retail shop front, cafés or restaurants, if accompanied by an entry from the street

III.   Active office uses, such as reception, if visible from the street

IV.  Civic or community building if accompanied by an entry.

V.    Allow for visual interest on the external face of fire escapes, service doors and equipment hatches.

 

 

 

 

Provided

 

 

 

Existing.

 

 

Existing/provided to rear lane.

 

 

No civic or community building are proposed

Not achieved

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

NA

 

 

Yes

 

 

N/A

 

No

 

 

 

b)  Limit opaque or blank walls for ground floor uses to 20% of the street frontage.

No blank or opaque walls proposed along Longueville Road frontage.

Yes

c)  Minimise the extent and visual impact of vehicle entrances and other entries not associated with active uses or building entries.

Existing vehicle driveway located in Pottery Lane which has a new protruding pedestrian accessway which does not provide for improved visual interest.

No

d)  Provide enclosure on corner sites to define the corner.

Not applicable.

N/A

e)  All street frontage windows at ground floor level are to have clear glazing.

Existing.

Yes

f)  Security grilles are to be fitted only within the shop itself. Such grilles are to be transparent.

No grilles proposed on plans.

N/A

g)  Provide multiple entrances for large developments including an entrance on each street

Not considered a large development.

N/A

1.1.4  Build Depth & Bulk

a)  For Commercial Developments in all the business zones:

 

I.          The maximum floor plate area of any commercial building is to be 2,000m² subject to other requirements in this DCP.

II.         Buildings with large floor plates must be expressed as separate building elements of not more than 1,000 m².

III.        The horizontal dimensions of any single building facade must not exceed 50 metres.

IV.        All points on an office floor should be no more than 10m from a source of daylight (eg. window, atria, or light wells). The depth for office floors with openings on one side should be a maximum of 10m. The depth for office floors with openings on two opposite sides should be a maximum of 20m.

V.         Use atria, light wells and courtyards to improve internal building amenity and achieve cross ventilation and/or stack effect ventilation.

 

 

 

Maximum floor plate of approximately 448.9m²

 

 

 

Not applicable.

 

 

 

 

The proposed development has a 5.37m frontage and a 32.71m horizontal dimension

 

Satisfactory

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Satisfactory

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

The lot is too narrow for 5 levels

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

b) For Mixed Use Developments:

I. The maximum horizontal dimension of the residential component parallel to the street frontage is to be 40m.

 

N/A

 

N/A

1.1.5  Building separation

The separation distance between buildings on the same site is not to be less than the setback to buildings in adjoining sites in the same business zonings. Refer to ‘Setbacks’ for different business zonings.

Development contains one building only.

N/A

1.1.6 Setbacks

Front/Street Setbacks are to comply with the following Table:

Zone B2

1-2 storey - nil or 3m maximum on ground floor for suitable use such as outdoor cafe seating.

3 storey – Nil

Existing nil setback provided to Longueville Road frontage.

No outdoor café seating proposed.

Yes

Side setbacks in all Business Zones except special areas are to comply with the following Table:

1 storey: nil

2 storey: nil for commercial use

& 3m for residential use & shop top housing

3+ storey: 6m

Nil setback however 6m setback not achieved above 2 storeys as the subject site is too narrow to achieve such a setback

 

No

Rear setback – refer to Lane Way Setbacks.

Lane way setbacks are to comply with the following Table:

1 storey: 3m (to allow colonnades & landscaping)

 

2 storey: Nil (commercial use) &

3m (residential use/shop top housing)

 

3+ storey: 6m

Ground floor: 4m however no landscaping is proposed

 

Level 1: 4m

Level 2: 4m

Level 3: 4m

Level 4: 14.6m

A nil setback for commercial is permitted

Yes

No

No

Yes

1.1.7 Building Design & Exteriors

a)  Floor to Ceiling height – See Diagrams 4 and 5 and for mixed use development see Part C 3.12 Ceiling Heights:

Min. 3.3m required

 

Min. 2.7m provided

No

Part C 3.12 Ceiling Heights

a) In residential flat buildings, including residential apartments in mixed use buildings, the floor to ceiling height shall be:

I. for non-habitable rooms, a preferred minimum of 2.4m, however a minimum of 2.25m will be permitted;

II. for the upper level of a 2 storey apartment, a minimum of 2.4m provided at least 50% of the apartment has a minimum of 2.7m height; and

III. for all single level apartments, a minimum of 2.7m.

N/A

N/A

b)  Materials, colours, finishes, proportion and scale of new development should add interest to façades and the streetscape.

Proposed building height and presentation/articulation not supported.

 

Satisfactory subject to removal of top level and large windows along Longueville Road being broken down into smaller segments.

No

c)  Avoid large unbroken expanses of blank wall on any facade adjacent to the public domain.

Avoided except for side walls

No

d)  Provide flexible building layouts and floor to ceiling heights which allow variable tenancies or uses on the first floor of a building above the ground floor.

Flexible floor layouts to commercial floors provided for radiology practice however minimal ceiling heights are proposed.

 

Proposed second and first floors are to be used by the radiology practice including the existing basement level.

No

e)  The design of roof plant rooms and lift overruns is to be integrated into the overall architecture of the building.

None proposed

N/A

f)  Balconies and terraces should be provided, particularly where buildings overlook public open spaces. They should be avoided where they overlook the private open spaces and severely impact the privacy of the adjoining residential properties.

Balconies have been placed at the front and rear of the development with no overlooking to other private open space from Longueville Road.

 

However the rear terrace would contain privacy impacts onto the adjoining residential flat building units facing Pottery Lane.

No

g)  Gardens on the top of setback areas of buildings are encouraged.

Rooftop terrace not provided.

N/A

1.2 Excavation

a)   All development is to relate to the existing topography of the land at the time of the adoption of this DCP.

Excavation is minimal.

Yes

b)   Excavation for major development is to be contained within the footprint of the development.

See above

Yes

c)   For development within Centres, Council may consider full site coverage for underground excavation and podium footprints where it is demonstrated that mature landscaping, landscaped area and rainwater retention is able to be provided as roof terraces on podium structures.

See above

Yes

d)  Uses at ground level are to respond to the slope of the street by stepping frontages and entries to follow the slope.

Ground level uses are existing/proposed

Yes

1.3  Design and Location of On-Site Parking

a) Parking of vehicles is prohibited in setback areas

Existing car parking spaces provided to the rear.

N/A

b) All developments must incorporate the required car parking on-site.

Insufficient car parking by 7 spaces has been provided and is discussed further under Part R –Traffic, Transport and Parking.

No – refer Part R below

c) All on-site parking, loading facilities and vehicle access points must be:

I. accessed from a rear lane wherever available

II. fully concealed from view from any public street or arcade

 

 

III. accessible from only one opening in the rear lane facade for both on-site parking and loading. Access openings are to be fitted with a garage door or roller shutter.

 

 

Existing vehicular access via Pottery Lane.

No basement parking and existing at grade parking containing 1 space arrangement is proposed to be maintained.

An existing driveway entry to an on-grade parking space provided.

 

 

Yes

 

No

 

 

 

No

d) For developments with a rear lane façade width less than 12.0m this opening must not be wider than 3.0m

No opening provided for

No

e) For developments with a rear lane façade width equal to or greater than 12.0m this opening must not be wider than 6.0m.

N/A

N/A

f) Vehicle entry should be:

I. easily accessible and recognisable to motorists

II. located to minimise traffic hazards and queuing of vehicles on public roads

III. located to minimise the loss of on street car parking, and to minimise the number of access points.

IV. Located away from main pedestrian entries and on secondary frontages.

V. Located having regard to any approved cycling routes.

 

Existing vehicular access provided on Pottery Lane.

No adverse traffic impacts.

 

 

No loss of existing spaces and only one access point provided.

 

Adjacent to pedestrian entry and on Pottery Lane which is a secondary frontage.

No adverse impacts on cycling routes.

 

Yes

g) Avoid black holes in the facade for major development by providing security doors to car park entries

N/A

N/A

h) Return the facade material into the car park entry recess up to the extent visible from the street.

N/A

N/A

i) Parking and service/delivery areas are to be located underground within building footprint or screened from adjacent residential uses or the public domain by sleeving with active uses.

Existing parking and loading area

N/A

j) Parking and service/delivery areas are to be located to minimise conflict between pedestrians/cyclists and vehicles and to minimise impact on residential amenity.

See above

N/A

k) Extensive areas of blank walls are to be avoided

Avoided.

Yes

l) Vehicular access is not permitted along the boundary adjacent to residential zone unless there is no other practical solution.

Existing

N/A

m) Residential and non-residential car parking spaces are to be physically separated.

N/A

N/A

n) For residential flat buildings, generally limit the width of driveways to a maximum of 6.0m.

N/A

N/A

o) Integrate ventilation grills or screening devices of carpark openings into the facade design and landscape design.

N/A

N/A

p) Provide safe and secure access for building users, including direct access to residential apartments, where possible.

N/A

N/A

q) Basement car parking is to be:

I. adequately ventilated

II. predominantly located within the building footprint

III. located fully below natural ground level. Where slope conditions mean that this is unachievable, the maximum basement projection above natural ground level is to be 1.2m but not to the street front.

N/A  

N/A

1.4.1 Commercial in all areas other than St. Leonards Centre

a) Except in the case of Shop Top Housing car parking, a cash contribution may be made to Council in lieu of required parking not provided on-site. The car parking contribution rate is listed in the Section 94 Contributions Plan (1999).

Contributions are applicable.

Yes – subject to a condition

b) For Lane Cove Village Centre see Section D3 – 3.8

Refer to report below.

Yes

1.5 Awnings

a)  Continuous street frontage awnings are to be provided for all new developments on main streets or major retail streets in centres except where colonnades are required.

No change to existing arrangement

N/A

b)  Awning design must be coordinated with building facades and be complementary in alignment and depth to the adjoining buildings and its awnings.

N/A

N/A

c)  Where a building is sited on a street corner, wrap awnings are to be provided around corners for a minimum 6.0 metres unless there is continuity in active uses and in such case they should be continued.

Not applicable.

N/A

d) Awnings should generally be:

I. Minimum soffit height of 3.3 metres.

II. Low profile, with slim vertical facia or eaves (generally not to exceed 300 mm height)

III. Setback a minimum of 60nilm from the kerb.

IV. Located and designed to ensure no conflict with street trees

 

N/A

 

N/A

e)  Awnings are to allow for street trees or poles via innovative solutions, which may include cut outs.

Not applicable.

N/A

f)   To control sun access/protection, canvas blinds along the street edge may be permitted, subject to design merit and assessment.

Not proposed.

N/A

g)  Under awning recessed lighting is to be provided to facilitate night use and public safety.

No change

N/A

1.6 Reflectivity

a) Visible light reflectivity from building materials used on the facades of new buildings should not exceed 20%.

Lower light reflectivity external finish colours are submitted with the Development Application.

Yes

b) Subject to the extent and nature of glazing and reflective materials used, a Reflectivity Report that analyses potential solar glare from the proposed development on pedestrians, cyclists or motorists may be required.

Not required.

N/A

1.7 External lighting of buildings

a)   Any external lighting of buildings is to be considered with regard to:

I. the integration of external light fixtures with the architecture of the building (for example, highlighting external features of the building)

II. the contribution of the visual effects of external lighting to the character of the building, surrounds and skyline

III. the energy efficiency of the external lighting system

IV. the amenity of residents in the locality.

Satisfactory

Yes

b) Floodlights for buildings are prohibited.

Not proposed.

Yes

1.8 Landscaping

a) Locate basement car parking predominately under the building footprint to maximize opportunities for landscaped area.

No basement car park proposed and existing on-grade parking provided.

No – however landscaped area to be conditioned within rear building area.

b) Deep soil zones in atria, courtyards and boundary setbacks are encouraged.

No change to existing building footprint and built site coverage on site

No - however landscaped area to be conditioned within rear building area by 1.5m x 2.7m (4.05sqm).

1.9 Planting on Structures

a) Areas with planting on structures should be irrigated with recycled water and appropriate drainage provided.

N/A

N/A

b) Provide sufficient soil depth and area to allow for plant establishment and growth. The recommendations are:

I. Large trees (canopy diameter of up to 16m at maturity)

i. minimum soil volume 150m3

ii. minimum soil depth 1.3m

iii. minimum soil area 10m x 10m area or equivalent

II. Medium trees (8m canopy diameter at maturity)

i. minimum soil volume 35 m3

ii. minimum soil depth 1m

iii. approximate soil area 6m x 6m or equivalent

III. Small trees (4m canopy diameter at maturity)

i. minimum soil volume 9m3

ii. minimum soil depth 800mm

iii. approximate soil area 3.5m x 3.5m or equivalent

IV. Shrubs

i. minimum soil depths 500-600mm

V. Ground cover

i. minimum soil depths 300-450mm

VI. Turf

i.          minimum soil depths 100-300mm.

 

N/A

N/A

1.10 Solar Access

These provisions apply to proposed developments and any residential development beyond the site.

a) Commercial and mixed use developments are not to reduce sunlight to dwellings in the adjacent or same zone below a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight on a portion of the windows of the habitable rooms between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

Solar access to adjacent dwellings at the adjoining residential flat building development receives minimum 3 hours of sunlight.

Yes

b) Where adjacent dwellings and their open space already receive less than the standard hours of sun, new development should seek to maintain this solar access where practicable.

Not applicable.

N/A

e) Council may accept a reduction in solar access for the subject site and adjacent development if the topography and lot orientation (as distinct from a preferred design) are such that the standard is considered unreasonable.

Not applicable.

N/A

1.11  Access and Mobility

a) Any new development must comply with Australian Standards AS 1428 Design for Access and Mobility, AS 4299 Adaptable Housing, AS 2890 Parking Facilities and AS 1735 Lifts, Escalators and Moving Walks and with the Part F of this DCP – Access and Mobility.

Proposal is for alterations and additions however a lift has been provided.

 

Yes

1.12 Toilet Facilities

a) Accessible and well sign-posted toilet facilities complying with AS 1428 shall be provided in all developments containing 10 or more shops or more than 500m² of retail floor space. These facilities shall have the same minimum opening and closing hours specified for arcades.

Accessible toilet facilities have been proposed.

Yes

1.13 Signage

a) All signage shall comply with the Part N of this DCP – Signage and Advertising.

No signage has been proposed for the development.

N/A

Part D.3 Development within Lane cove Village Centre – (B2) Local Centre and Surrounds

3.2 Lanes: Active frontages encouraged

 

Activation not achieved under the proposal

 

3.3 Arcades, Thru Links/Midblock connections encouraged

 

Existing connections maintained however is not direct, narrow and concealed

3.4 Principal Retail Street

a)   The only permissible uses facing a principal retail street at street level shall be:

I.      shopfront retailing of goods and services;

II.     arcades and

III.    entrances to uses located elsewhere in the building and fire exits. The aggregate width of such entrances and exits shall not exceed 1m for lots with a principal retail street frontage of 1nil or less; or 2m for lots with a principal retail street frontage greater than 10m (see BCA for further details).

The uses facing Longueville Road are commercial and has an existing pedestrian entrance.

Yes

b) Longueville Road and Lane Cove Plaza:

I.   A new building façade to a principal retail street in the vicinity of heritage shopfronts should be broken up by vertical elements into units of 4m to 6m width, reflecting the Centre’s traditional small shop street frontages and providing interest to the streetscape at pedestrian level.

II.  A minimum of 80 percent of that portion of the principal retail street facade of a new development up to a height of 2.7m which is allocated to retail use shall be transparent.

 

 

There are no heritage items in the vicinity of the proposed development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Uses are transparent as per the requirement of the DCP

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

c)  Ground floor shop fronts may incorporate security grills provided these ensure light falls onto the footpath and that the interior of the shop is visible. Blank roller-shutter doors are not permitted.

Existing shop fronts to be maintained

N/A

d)  Vehicle access points will only be permitted on retail streets where there are no alternatives for access.

Rear vehicular access provided via Pottery Lane.

Yes

3.5 Facades

a)   Facades are to be articulated at the ground floor and above.

Articulated and to be further assisted by conditioning that the large windows fronting Longueville Road to be broken up into smaller segments.

Yes

e)   Facades where all solid elements are coplanar are not permitted. For the facade of a development facing Longueville Road:

I.   The average setback for facade articulation is to be a maximum of 0.5m either side of the front boundary alignment.

II.   Elements forward of the street alignment are to be restricted to balconies.

III. Where the façade abuts an existing building on an adjoining site, it must be coplanar with the existing façade, unless the existing façade is set back more than 300mm from the street boundary.

Coplanar solid elements not proposed.

N/A

3.6 Heritage: Not applicable

3.8 Car Parking for Lane Cove Village Centre

a)  Except in the case of Shop Top Housing car parking, a cash contribution may be made to Council in lieu of required parking not provided on-site. The car parking contribution rate is listed in the Section 94 Contributions Plan (1999).

S7.11 contributions condition imposed.

Yes

b)  Most land within Lane Cove Village Centre is subject to a special parking levy in addition to the normal rates charged by Council. The additional moneys generated in this manner are used to offset the costs of providing and maintaining Council car parks in the Centre area. Therefore, the provision of on-site parking or a contribution for car parking not provided on-site within the area subject to the special parking levy is only required for floor area in excess of that equivalent to a floor space ratio of 1:1.

See above

Yes

 

 

Street Frontage Heights and Setbacks

 

D.3 Development within Lane Cove Village Centre – (B2) Local Centre and Surrounds states that the village is defined by retail development of two storeys and that it should be maintained.

 

The relevant objective is:

 

1.   Maintain the typical two storey built form with a vertical emphasis to facades and parapet to the principal retail streets.

 

The proposed development is 3 storeys in principal to Longueville Road and 5 storeys to Pottery Lane.

 

Clause 1.1.2 - Street Frontage Heights states that controls to specific zones and localities are to be referred to. Clause 1.1.6 – Setbacks requires a minimum 6m rear setback above 2 storeys and 6m side setback above 3 storey.

 

There are encroachments into the rear 6m setback area with the provision of the new stair case and nil side setbacks are proposed due to the narrow width of the lot. The subject site is too narrow for compliance with the required development controls to be effective. The lot is too narrow for a 3 storey building to Longueville Road and a 5 storey building to Pottery Lane. To better achieve compliance the relevant DCP controls, appropriate site amalgamation should have been sought after by the applicant.

 

The relevant DCP objectives are as follows:

 

1.1.2 Street Frontage Heights

1.         To achieve comfortable street environments for pedestrians in terms of daylight, scale, sense of enclosure and wind mitigation as well as a healthy environment for street trees.

2.         To strengthen the urban form through consistent street wall heights.

 

1.1.6 Setbacks

1.         To reduce the impact of scale as well as assist with cross-ventilation, solar access, privacy, views sharing and to reduce adverse wind effects.

 

The applicant’s justification to street presentation and setbacks are that the DCP allows for a nil setback for buildings up to 3 storeys and to require deletion of the third level or that it has a greater setback is very confusing. The applicant stated that the proposal as currently designed is the best solution available.

 

Comment: There are concerns with the design in relation to the proposed variations to building height and to Council’s Commercial DCP including the existing/envisaged statements under the Lane Cove Shopping Village locality section under the DCP. The applicant had submitted amended plans with improved minor articulation however there remain concerns with the proposal. Included are general observations in how the proposal could be generally interpreted against those locality existing/envisaged statements in the DCP as follows:

 

·    Guiding principles for the future urban design of Pottery Lane includes increasing the quality of the urban form, improving the comfort and safety of pedestrians and improving the activation and vibrancy of Pottery Lane (one example of this occurring is at 102-104 Longueville Road).

·    The elevation of the proposal to Longueville Road appears as three levels where a two storey façade to the street would be more in keeping with the desired urban form of Longueville Road (this statement is agreed with given the building to the north).

·    The overall urban form to the laneway (including the subject site) is not acceptable as it comprises an at-grade parking space and a protruding stairwell. There is an opportunity to encourage developments which adds to the quality and activation of the laneway streetscape and not to degrade it. A more ideal setback for the building would be more consistent with 102-104 Longueville Road.

·    There exists a mixed response with the Pottery Lane development which calls for a more considered approach that provides a markedly improvement to the quality of Pottery Lane. Every opportunity should be taken to further improve the quality of the streetscape.

·    The proposed height could be viewed as excessive (this statement is agreed with).

·    It is considered that, if the DA is approved, the adjoining property would be isolated and dwarfed by the surrounding properties forming an inconsistent built form across the lane. A better result would be to amalgamate the sites to allow the building to better address the street and consider rear access via stairs and or lift combined with an active frontage (this statement is agreed with as there are concerns with the Longueville streetscape where the proposed development would present as 3 levels to that road).

·    Buildings have been approved in the past which include undesirable characteristics, such as, tall narrow unsympathetic buildings clearly exceeding the height limit, with excessively large blank wall to side boundaries. In addition to this, some facades to Longueville Road are clearly over two storeys, and even more damaging to the streetscape are those buildings which include three levels which include façade treatments to appear as two levels (unsuccessfully). It should not be intended to replicate these examples of poor urban development.

 

There are already controls available in the Commercial DCP that encourages some of the general observations. The DCP states that shop fronts are typically 2 storeys within the precinct. Whilst there may be no controls in place to require amalgamation of sites, the nature of the development would isolate the adjoining site and as it is 3 levels, it is difficult in this instance to recommend approval. It would be more practical to apply the above amalgamation statement where the applicant may seek amalgamation to better achieve their development potential as the lot is too narrow for 5 levels to be provided along Pottery Lane.

 

As discussed earlier, the proposed development does not relate to the topography of the subject site and the applicant’s Clause 4.6 written justification to the building height development standard is not supported. The design of the proposal as submitted would not be compatible with the visual relationship with the traditional shopfronts in the vicinity and has a negative impact on the streetscape. If the panel were of the mind to agree with the above statements, a recommendation to delete the top level as a deferred commencement approval should be adopted or at least consider a further increase to the third storey setback to Longueville Road to be adopted however the applicant is of the opinion, that a fair balance has been adopted under the subject proposal.

 

It is also recommended that a deferred commencement condition be imposed to break up the large windows expanse at the first-floor level into smaller elements to improve consistency in relation to the Longueville Road streetscape and that there is provision of landscaping within the rear building setback to Pottery Lane. The proposed development as amended would improve the Longueville Road street presentation and would not be inconsistent with adjoining/surrounding developments.

 

 

 

 

Street Frontage Activities

 

Clause 1.1.3(a)(v) requires that works are to allow for visual interest on the external face of fire escapes, service doors and equipment hatches.

 

Clause 1.1.3(c) requires that works are to minimise the extent and visual impact of vehicle entrances and other entries not associated with active uses or building entries.

 

Part D.3 3.2(a) Development within Lane Cove Village Centre encourages active frontages and high pedestrian amenity along lanes.

 

Part 3.3(a)(i)(ii) requires direct without concealment pedestrian connections and have a minimum width of 4m.

 

A new narrow enclosed staircase to the rear of the building to provide pedestrian access to Little Lane is proposed however it does not provide much visual interest or amenity.

 

The relevant objective is:

 

1.   To provide active frontages and pedestrian-orientated activities that add life, particularly at ground level in the retail streets and major pedestrian streets.

 

The applicant has claimed compliance however it is considered that an enclosed protruding staircase does little to provide for activation and visual interest. It is recommended that the deferred commencement condition includes as part of the redesign a landscape strip (1.5m x 2.7m: 4.05sqm) to be provided along the rear boundary line and the staircase to reduce its adverse visual impact.

 

Building Design and Exteriors

 

Clause 1.1.7(a) of the DCP requires a minimum 3.3m height to commercial floor levels and a minimum ceiling height of 2.7m is proposed.

 

Clause 1.1.7(b) requires that materials, colours, finishes, proportion and scale of new development should add interest to façades and the streetscape.

 

Clause 1.1.7(c) seeks to avoid large unbroken expanses of blank wall on any facade adjacent to the public domain.

 

Clause 1.1.7(d) seeks to provide flexible building layouts and floor to ceiling heights which allow variable tenancies or uses on the first floor of a building above the ground floor.

 

Clause 1.1.7(a) requires that balconies and terraces should be avoided where they overlook the private open spaces and severely impact the privacy of the adjoining residential properties.

 

Blank walls are avoided except for part of the exposed side walls. Flexible floor layouts to commercial floors provided for radiology practice however minimal ceiling heights are proposed. The proposed second and first floors are to be used by the radiology practice including the existing basement level. Balconies have been placed at the front and rear of the development with no overlooking to other private open space from Longueville Road. However, the rear terrace would contain adverse privacy impacts onto the adjoining residential flat building units facing Pottery Lane.

 

The objectives for building design and exteriors are to achieve:

 

1.   Attractive, cohesive and high quality streetscapes.

2.   An appropriate grain and articulation to the building massing and facades.

 

The applicant has again claimed compliance however the proposed variation to ceiling heights is not supported. It is recommended that a minimum 3.3m ceiling height be provided to substantially improve internal amenity levels for future users. The proposed building height and presentation/articulation not supported. The proposed other variations would be adequately addressed subject to removal of top level and the proposed large windows along Longueville Road being broken down into smaller segments.

 

Design and Location of On-Site Parking

 

Clause 1.3(c)(ii) & (iii) requires fully concealed from view from any public street or arcade and accessible from only one opening in the rear lane facade for both on-site parking and loading. Access openings are to be fitted with a garage door or roller shutter.

 

Clause 1.3(d) requires developments with a rear lane façade width less than 12m this opening must not be wider than 3m.

 

No basement parking and existing at grade parking containing 1 space arrangement is proposed to be maintained. An existing driveway entry to the on-grade parking space is maintained. Also, no such required access opening has been provided for.

 

The relevant DCP objectives are:

 

1.   Minimise the impact of vehicle access points and driveway crossovers on streetscape amenity, pedestrian & cyclist safety and the quality of the public domain by:

a)   Designing vehicle access to required safety and traffic management standards,

b)   Integrating vehicle access with site planning, streetscape requirements, traffic patterns, cycle routes and

c)   Minimising potential conflict with pedestrians & cyclists.

2.   Minimise the size and quantity of vehicle and service crossings to retain streetscape continuity and reinforce a high quality public domain.

 

The applicant stated that there are no variations to the above controls as the proposed car parking design is relying on an existing arrangement however the recommended landscaping strip within the rear building setback area would assist in reducing the visual impacts of the development when viewed from Pottery Lane. 

 

Landscaping

 

Clauses 1.8(a) & (b) requires the location of the basement car parking to be predominately under the building footprint to maximize opportunities for landscaped area and deep soil zones in atria, courtyards and boundary setbacks are to be encouraged.

 

No basement car park is proposed and the existing on-grade parking for 1 space is provided for. No change to existing building footprint and built site coverage on site is proposed to allow for landscaping.

 

The relevant objectives are:

 

1.   Assist with on-site stormwater and groundwater management.

2.   Improve the amenity of developments through the retention and/or planting of large and medium sized.

The proposed stormwater plan is satisfactory however again to assist, the recommended landscaping at the rear would soften the appearance of the building to Pottery Lane.

 

Part R – Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

Table 1 specifies that office premises or business premises are to have one space for 60m2 of gross floor area and 1 disabled space per 10 car parking spaces provided for. A total floor area of 448.9m2 which technically requires a total of 8 car parking spaces. There is 1 car parking space provided for at present and no amendments are proposed to the current provision of parking on site. The applicant has not adequately addressed the shortfall in car parking however had indicated that a contributions amount would need to be imposed to address such a shortfall in car parking. It is recommended that appropriate contributions be levied for. As the top floor is also recommended to be removed, this would assist in reducing the shortfall in car parking by 1 space.

 

Section 7.11 - Development Contributions Plan

 

The proposed development is subject to S7.11 contributions in accordance with Council’s S94 Contributions Plan as no car parking spaces are provided on site due to the increase in floor area and the current rate is $25,400.00 per car space for any additional commercial floor space provided above the FSR ratio of 1:1. Based on this, this would represent a parking shortfall of four car parking spaces resulting in a total contributions of $101,600.00. Further, there is a contributions rate of $134.00 per m2 of retail/commercial development and as additional 206sqm of floor space is provided for, an additional contribution of $27,604.00 is required. A total contribution of $129,204.00 is payable and a relevant condition has been recommended.

 

As the top floor is also recommended to be removed, this would reduce the total contributions payable to $94,812.60

 

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

 

All relevant issues regarding built impacts of the development are discussed elsewhere in this report and it is considered that the proposal would contain significant adverse visual or streetscape impacts onto the Lane Cove Village precinct. The proposed development would be in excess, of the maximum permissible height control and the excessive height would dominate surrounding developments. It is recommended that the top level to be deleted and the upper level windows be made smaller. The parking provided for insufficient in relation to Council’s car parking DCP however it would be difficult to provide any further on site. The parking matter can be dealt with the imposition of a contributions amount to address the car parking shortfall.

 

The privacy of surrounding developments would not be compromised subject to deletion of the upper level rear terrace. The development subject to these amendments would be satisfactory in terms of environmental, built, social and economic impacts.

 

 

 

 

 

(c)  The suitability of the site for the development

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development where issues relating to height, street presentation, setbacks and parking have not been dealt with by the applicant. A more considered proposal as recommended in this report would better deliver relevant the LEP and DCP objectives.

 

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

 

No submissions have been received as part of this Development Application.

 

(e)  The public interest

 

Having regard to the assessment and recommendations contained in this report, it is considered that approval of the development as a deferred commencement consent to require for an appropriate redesign to the development would be in the public interest. The proposal would contribute to additional office space generating employment opportunities and providing for a radiology service to residents of Lane Cove.

 

REFERRALS

 

Building Coordinator

 

No objections subject to recommended draft conditions.

 

Development Engineer

 

No objections subject to recommended draft conditions.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied. The proposed contravention of the building height development standard was accompanied by a written request which did not satisfy the matters under Clause 4.6 of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. The breach to height is not satisfactory and would adversely impact on adjoining/surrounding properties and on the existing streetscape. The application meets with the Floor Space Ratio controls as required in the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and generally meets with the Part D Commercial and Mixed-Use Development objectives in the Lane Cove Development Control Plan.

 

On balance the proposed development would be reasonable and recommended for approval subject to a draft deferred commencement condition to include that the top level to be deleted and the upper level windows be made smaller to reduce the overall height and to improve the visual presentation of the development to Longueville Road/Pottery Lane.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 1 October 2019, exercising the functions of the Council as Consent Authority pursuant to Clause 4.16 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 approve a variation to the height prescribed by Clause 4.3 of the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. Whilst that the applicant’s request has not adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by Clause 4.6 of that Plan, the proposed development subject to deletion of the top floor as a deferred commencement consent would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the objectives of that particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone.

 

That pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 1 October 2019, exercising the functions of Council as the consent authority, grant a deferred commencement consent to Development Application DA20/2019 for alterations and additions to an existing commercial building on 98 Longueville Road, Lane Cove, subject to the following:

 

This consent shall not operate until the applicant satisfies the consent authority by producing satisfactory evidence relating to the matters set out in Part A within one year of the issue of this consent.

 

Upon the consent authority being satisfied as to compliance with the matters set out in Part A the consent shall become operative and take effect from the date of notification under Clause 95(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations subject to the conditions set out in Part B.

 

PART A – DEFERRED COMMENCEMENT CONSENT:

 

The consent will not operate and it may not be acted upon until the Council or its delegate is satisfied as to the following matters:

 

1.         The following amendments are to be made to the development application plans to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager Development Assessment::

 

                        i.          to delete the top level of the development including the upper level terraces                                     (Plan 374 DA06).

ii.          to break up the large windows expanse at the upper floor level into smaller             elements to improve consistency in relation to the Longueville Road             streetscape.

iii.         the provision of a landscaped strip (1.5m x 2.7: 4.05sqm) between the bike             racks and the rear boundary line to Pottery Lane.

iv.        a minimum 3.3m floor to ceiling heights to be achieved for any new floor             level.

 

Amended floor plans and elevations are to be submitted to Council which document the changes within Condition 1.

 

Reason: To ensure that the height of the development is reduced, that the Longueville Road/Pottery Lane streetscape is protected and internal amenity is to be provided for future users.

 

PART B – CONDITIONS OF CONSENT:

Note: This part of the consent will not become operable until Council advises that the matters contained in Part A are satisfied.

 

1.         That the development be strictly in accordance with:

·    Drawing number/s: DA01 Revision E dated 7/2/19 and DA02 – 11 Revision F dated 30/5/19

·    By Turner Hughes Architects

 

except as amended by the following conditions and amended plans to satisfy Condition 1 under Part A of this consent.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is in accordance with the determination.

 

2.         Separate Development Application/s: Separate Development Application/s is to be             submitted for the use/operation including any signage of the two approved commercial             levels.

 

Reason: To ensure the first-time usage of the levels are appropriately regulated.

 

3.         A Traffic Management Plan: A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) is to be submitted. The             TMP is required to address the impact of traffic/parking from the demolition and the             construction    phase of the project. The plan is to be submitted in accordance with             Council’s commitment to reducing traffic/parking impacts on the surrounding residential and             commercial area. This is to be submitted prior to construction being carried out.

 

Reason: To ensure reasonable amenity is maintained to the neighbouring properties and to the current workers on the subject site.

 

4.         The submission of a Construction Certificate and its issue by Council or Principal Certifier             PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION WORK commencing.

 

            Reason:  To ensure the detailed construction plans and specifications comply with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and any relevant Australian Standard.

 

5.         All building works are required to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the             Building Code of Australia. A Completion Certificate is to be issued by either the Principal             Certifier or accredited Fire Safety Engineer, confirming that all identified Performance Solutions             have been completed/implemented for the building prior to the issue of a Final Occupation             Certificate. 

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

6.         THE PAYMENT OF A SECTION 7.11 CONTRIBUTION OF $94,812.60 TOWARDS             TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS, OPEN SPACE AND             RECREATION FACILITIES, DRAINAGE AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES. THE             CONTRIBUTION TO BE MADE PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE             AND TO BE AT THE CURRENT RATE AT TIME OF PAYMENT.  NOTE:  PAYMENT             MUST BE IN BANK CHEQUE.  PERSONAL CHEQUES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

 

THE CONTRIBUTION IS PARTLY BASED ON NO ON-SITE CAR PARKING BEING PROPOSED WHERE A TOTAL OF 4 CAR PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL FLOOR SPACE PROVIDED ABOVE THE FSR RATIO OF 1:1 AND THE CURRENT RATE (2018-19) OF $25,400.00 PER PARKING SPACE WITHIN THE LANE COVE CENTRE

 

THE CONTRIBUTION IS PARTLY BASED ON 138.0SQM AND THE CURRENT RATE (2018-19) OF $134.00 PER SQM OF ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL FLOOR SPACE.

 

THIS CONTRIBUTION IS UNDER LANE COVE COUNCIL SECTION 94 (now 7.11) CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN WHICH IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE CUSTOMER SERVICE COUNTER, LANE COVE COUNCIL, 48 LONGUEVILLE ROAD, LANE COVE.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

7.         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.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

8.         An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifier before the occupation of the building.

 

            Reason: To ensure all works have been completed in accordance with the development consent conditions, approved plans and the Building Code of Australia.

 

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

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)                    7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                                   7.00am to 4.00pm

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

 

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

 

Reason: To ensure reasonable amenity is maintained to the neighbouring properties.

 

10.       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.

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

11.       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.

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

12.       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.

 

Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

13.       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 Certifier;

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.

 

Reason: To ensure public safety and public information.

 

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

 

            Reason: To protect the environment.

 

15.       Where Lane Cove Council is appointed as the Principal Certifier, 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.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

16.       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.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

17.       Structural Engineer's Certificate being submitted certifying that existing building is capable of carrying the additional loads.  Such Certificate being submitted PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

            Reason: To ensure structural adequacy.

 

18.       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 residents.

 

            Reason: To protect residential amenity.

 

19.       A check survey certificate is to be submitted at:-

 

a) Dampcourse Level

b) 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.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is in accordance with the determination.

 

20.       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.

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

21.       The demolition works being confined within the boundaries of the site.

 

            Reason: To ensure compliance with the determination and public safety.

 

22.       All spillage deposited on the footpaths or roadways to be removed at the completion of each days work.

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

23.       The site being properly fenced to prevent access of unauthorised persons outside of working hours.

 

            Reason: To comply with Work Health and Safety Regulations and ensure public safety.

 

24.       Compliance with Australian Standard 2601 - The Demolition of Structures.

 

            Reason: To ensure compliance with the Australian Standards.

 

25.       Compliance with the Waste Management Plan submitted along with the application.

 

            Reason: To protect the surrounding environment.

 

26.       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.

 

            Reason: To ensure all works are carried out lawfully.

 

27.       Long Service Levy  Compliance with Section 6.8 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.

 

Reason: To ensure the levy is paid.

 

Building Conditions

 

28.       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.

 

29.       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.

 

30.       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.

 

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

 

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

 

32.       An approved type of hoarding being erected along the street frontage.

 

33.       Pedestrians' portion of footpath to be kept clear and trafficable at all times.

 

General Engineering Conditions

 

34.       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.

 

   Reason: To ensure all works are in accordance with Council’s requirements.

 

35.       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.

 

   Reason: To ensure public safety and amenity.

 

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

 

   Reason: To ensure public works are carried out in accordance with Council’s requirements.

 

37.       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.

 

   Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

38.       Restoration: Public areas must be maintained in a safe condition always. Restoration of             disturbed Council land and assets is the responsibility of the applicant. All costs associated             with restoration of public land will be borne by the applicant.

 

   Reason: To maintain Council infrastructure.

 

39.       Public Utility Relocation: If any public services are to be adjusted, because 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.

 

   Reason: To protect, maintain and provide utility services.

 

40.       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’.

 

   Reason: To ensure pedestrian access is maintained.

 

41.       Council Drainage Infrastructure: The proposed construction shall not encroach onto any             existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement unless approved by Council. 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. Developer must lodge Stormwater Inspection Application form to Council. All             costs associated with the relocation of the stormwater line are to be borne by the applicant

 

   Reason:  To protect public infrastructure.

 

42.       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.

 

   Reason: To protect and maintain infrastructure assets.

 

Health Conditions

 

43.     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.

 

44.     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.

 

45.     Dust During Construction

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

 

46.     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.

 

47.     Clean Water Only to Stormwater System

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

 

48.     Operation of Plant or Equipment

To minimise the impact of noise from the development, all sound producing plant, equipment, machinery, mechanical ventilation systems and or refrigeration systems, shall be designed and or located so that the noise emitted does not exceed 5db(A) above the ambient background level when measured from the boundary of any affected premises between the hours of 8am to 10pm.  Between the hours of 10pm and 8am, noise shall not exceed the ambient background level when measured at the boundary of an affected premises.

 

All sound producing equipment shall comply with the Protection of the Environmental Operations Act 1997.

 

49.     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.

 

50.      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

 

51.     Ventilation

To ensure that adequate provision is made for ventilation of the premises, mechanical and/or natural ventilation systems shall be designed, constructed and installed in accordance with the provision of:

 

a)           The Building Code of Australia

b)           AS 1668 Part 1 and 2 – 1991

c)           Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

 

A certificate shall be submitted from a practicing mechanical engineer certifying that the design and operation of the mechanical ventilation system meets the requirements of AS 1668 Parts 1 and 2.

 

52.       Water Cooling System

            Regulated Systems

            All air handling and water systems regulated under the Public Health Act 2010 must be             installed, operated and maintained in accordance with the requirements of Public Health             Regulation 2012. The system is to be registered with Council together with payment of the             approved fee, prior to occupancy of the building.

 

53.       Access for Maintenance Purposes

Safe easy access must be provided for the inspection and maintenance of all plant, equipment and components covered by Australian Standard AS3666.2:2002 Air handling and water systems of buildings – Microbial control – Operation and maintenance.

54.       Registration of Water Cooling and Warm Water Systems

All water cooling and warm water systems regulated under the Public Health Act 1991 must be registered with Council’s Environmental Services Unit within one month of installation.

 

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to Construction Certificate

 

55.       Council Infrastructure Damage Bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $3000             cash bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage to Council's roads,             footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets because of the development. The bond             will be released upon issuing of the Occupation Certificate. If Council determines that             damage has occurred because of the development, the applicant will be required to repair             the damage. Repairs are to be carried out within 14 days from the notice. All repairs are to             be carried in accordance with Council’s requirements. The full bond will be retained if             Council’s requirements are not satisfied. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the             issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

  Reason:   To protect and maintain public infrastructure.

 

56.       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.

           

  Reason:  To protect neighbouring properties.

 

57.       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.

 

   Reason: To provide a record of public and private infrastructure.

 

58.       Stormwater Requirement: The stormwater runoff from the new and altered impervious areas             within the development shall be connected to the existing drainage system in accordance with             the requirements of Lane Cove Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

   The existing stormwater system is to be certified that it is in good working order and meets    the requirements set out in Part O, Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management. The    certification is to be carried out by a fully licensed and insured plumber or a suitably    qualified engineer prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

   Where an existing element does not comply with current standards the subject element is to    be replaced.

 

   Where the existing system does not comply with Part O, Councils DCP-Stormwater    Management a drainage design is required. The stormwater drainage plan is to be prepared    and certified by a suitably qualified engineer and submitted to the Principal Certifying    Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The design is to be certified that it    fully complies with, AS-3500 and Part O, Council's DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

  Reason:  To ensure existing and proposed stormwater system comply with Council’s requirements.

 

Engineering condition to be complied with prior to commencement of construction

 

59.       Erosion and Sediment Control: The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control             devices prior to the start of any works on the site. The devices shall be maintained during             the construction period and replaced when necessary.

 

  Reason:  To ensure worksite pollutions are controlled accordingly to protect the environment.

 

60.       Safety fence along the boundary of the property: Before commencement of any works,             barrier or temporary fencing is to be provided along the full frontages of the property. This             fence is for the safety of pedestrians on the public footpath.

 

   Reason: To ensure safety of road and footpath users.

 

Engineering condition to be complied with prior to Occupation Certificate

 

61.       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.

 

  Reason:  To ensure stormwater infrastructure has been installed in accordance with Australian Standards and Council’s requirements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Neighbour Notification Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑2View

Notification Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑3View

Cl. 4.6 Request

10 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 3

Cl. 4.6 Request

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 1 October 2019

38-42 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          38-42 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA18/14-01 - 56537/19

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Greg Samardzic 

 

 

 

Property:

38-42 Burns Bay Road Lane Cove

DA No:

DA14/2018

Date Lodged:

19 July 2019            

Cost of Work:

$7,042,418.00

Owner:

Vatera Pty Ltd

Applicant:                        

MHN Design Union

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Section 8.2 review for demolition of existing commercial buildings, construction of a mixed-use building being shop top housing and basement car parking.

Zone

B2 Local Centre

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 2, 5, 6 and 7a

Stop the Clock used

No

Notification

Notified in accordance with Council’s policy 

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The Section 8.2 Review Application is again referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as it was originally referred to on 3 September 2018 however it was not determined as two of the sitting Panel members were part of the determination of the original Development Application by the Panel on 20 February 2019. The minutes from the Panel meeting on 3 September was as follows:

 

The Panel was unable to consider this application under Section 2.1 Reviews of the Local Planning Panels Direction Operational Procedures, as the determination of a review application from a Panel decisions shall be determined by different members of the Panel to those who made the original determination, and two members of the Panel were involved in the original determination. Accordingly as a quorum for this item of business was not present the matter was deferred.   

 

The review was referred to the Panel on 3 September 2009 as the original refusal notice was issued to the applicant on 4 March 2019 and the subject review application was lodged on 19 July 2019. The 6-month period to determine a Section 8.2 Review is to be counted from the date of the issued refusal (i.e. 4 March 2019) to facilitate a Land & Environment Court appeal to be lodged. However, on 30 July 2019 a Class 1 appeal against the above refusal of the original application was lodged with the Court and was lodged within 6 months of the issued refusal notice. It is likely that the appeal would not be disposed of until 2020.

Legal advice from the applicant has been received which states based on the relevant facts, the Review Application can be determined by operation of Section 8.3(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 which reads as:

 

8.3   Application for and conduct of review

(1)  An applicant for development consent may request a consent authority to review a     determination or decision made by the consent authority. The consent authority is to review the determination or decision if duly requested to do so under this Division.

(2)  A determination or decision cannot be reviewed under this Division:

(a)  after the period within which any appeal may be made to the Court has expired if no appeal was made, or

(b)  after the Court has disposed of an appeal against the determination or decision.

 

The Review Application is referred back to the panel as the original application was determined by the Panel and there is nothing preventing or restricting the panel from the determining the Review Application.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel, in exercising its duties as the consent authority, pursuant to Section 4.16(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, consider the above and review, consider and determine the development as amended under the subject Section 8.2 Review Application to DA14/2018 for demolition and constructing of shop top housing on land at 38-42 Burns Bay Road Lane Cove.

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Previous Report to Lane Cove Local Planning Panel - Part 1

48 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Previous Report to Lane Cove Local Planning Panel - Part 2

62 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Previous Report to Lane Cove Local Planning Panel - Part 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Previous Report to Lane Cove Local Planning Panel - Part 2

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 1 October 2019

2 - 20 Rosenthal Avenue Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          2 - 20 Rosenthal Avenue Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA19/98-01 - 53549/19

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Christopher Shortt 

 

 

 

Property:

2 – 20 Rosenthal Avenue

DA No:

DA2019/98

Date Lodged:

8 August 2019

Cost of Work:

$85,000

Owner:

Lane Cove Council

Applicant:                        

Urbis Pty Ltd

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Installation of external and internal signage for the retail centre known as ‘The Canopy’.

Zone

B4 Mixed Use

Is the proposal permissible within the zone

Yes

Is the property a heritage item

No – but located adjacent to a local heritage item St Andrew’s Anglican Church Hall.

Is the property within a conservation area

No

Is the property adjacent to bushland

No

Stop the Clock used

No

Notification

Neighbours                             1, 15 Finlayson, 71, 73, 79-83, 85, 87, 89, 91-93, 95, 97, 99, 101, 103, 105-109, 111, 113, 115 Longueville Road, 2 – 18 Rosenthal Avenue, 2, 5, 9, 18, 22 Birdwood Avenue,                                                                         

 

Progress Association             N/A

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The Development Application is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as the development is on Council land.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Development Application is for the installation of external and internal retail signage for ‘The Canopy’ mixed use development which is currently under construction.  The Development Application proposes building name signage for ‘The Canopy’ and business name signage for Coles/Liquorland and ALDI supermarkets, which are the largest retail tenancies on the site. Other signage proposed includes directional/ way-finding signage for the basement carpark, lifts and loading dock. A total of 32 signs are proposed in the Development Application.

 

The Development Application has been assessed against State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 64, Council’s Local Environmental Plan and Council’s Development Control Plan and is compliant.

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and one (1) submission was received. The submission raised the following concerns:

 

·          Size of signage in context to the development;

·          Illumination of signs; and

·          Integration of signs with stonework and vegetation on the corner of Rosenthal Lane and Rosenthal Avenue.

 

In response to the submission the following recommendations were made:

 

·          A draft condition has been recommended in the development consent requiring the luminance level to comply with clause 3.9 of the DCP to preserve residential amenity; and

 

·          A draft condition has been recommended requiring the illumination to be turned off outside of Coles and ALDI business trading hours.

 

The Development Application is recommended for approval subject to draft conditions.

 

SITE

 

The site is located at 2 – 20 Rosenthal Avenue has an area of approximately 7031sqm. The site is bound by Birdwood Avenue to the north, Birdwood Lane to the west, Rosenthal Lane to the south, and Rosenthal Avenue to the east. The site is currently under construction for the redevelopment of Rosenthal Car Park. The redevelopment would accommodate a 6 level mixed use building.

 

The site is located within the Lane Cove Town Centre. Surrounding development to the north and north west are residential flat buildings up to 7 storeys in height fronting Birdwood Avenue. To the south is the Lane Cove Village and retail centre. To the east across Birdwood Lane are various retail and commercial developments, primarily fronting Longueville Road. To the west is St Andrews Anglican Church and residential flat buildings.  Site Location Plan and Neighbour Notification Plan attached (AT1 and AT2).

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

DA198/2015    Stage 1 Concept for staged redevelopment of Rosenthal Car Park, Rosenthal Avenue, Lane Cove and to include 500 car spaces, retail and public open space approved by Sydney East JRPP (now Sydney North Planning Panel – “SNPP”) on 28 April 2016.

 

DA198/2015    Section 4.55(2) Modification to the Concept DA to change the envelope of the basement and park levels, reconfiguration of retail and basement levels, changes to pedestrian access through the park and a minor increase to maximum GFA, and the amount of car parking spaces to be provided, approved by Sydney North Planning Panel on 16 November 2017.

 

DA 46/2017     Redevelopment of Rosenthal Car Park involving construction of a six (6) storey mixed use building comprising basement car park, two (2) supermarkets, retail tenancies and public open space approved by Sydney North Planning Panel on 16 November 2017. 

 

DA 46/2017     Section 4.55(1) Modification to the Main Works DA to include a condition specifying approved hours of operation for level 1 retail tenancies approved under Delegated Authority on 7 May 2018.

 

DA 46/2017     Section 4.55(1A) Modification to the Main Works DA to include additional excavation to allow for structural support and stormwater disposal approved under Delegated Authority on 16 May 2018.

 

DA 47/2017     Early works program consisting of demolition of all existing structures, removal of all trees, site preparation including excavation and construction of retaining walls was approved by Council’s IHAP on 6 June 2017.

 

DA47/2017      Modification of Early Works DA to vary working hours specified in condition 9 of the consent approved under Delegated Authority on 21 November 2017.

 

DA184/2018    Construction of park level retail tenancies for the Rosenthal Project and use as a restaurant or café approved by the Lane Cove Planning Panel on 19 March 2018.

 

This application granted approval for the following signs:

·          One (1) wall mounted sign (illuminated) fronting Birdwood Lane.

·          Seventeen (17) above awning wall signs (illuminated) above the retail tenancies - including 4 signs fronting Birdwood Lane and 2 signs fronting Rosenthal Lane, 1 sign fronting Rosenthal Avenue and the remaining 10 signs on internal elevations away from the street. 

·          Nine (9) top hamper signs (illuminated) but only 1 fronting Birdwood lane and the remaining 8 signs on internal elevations away from the street. 

 

PROPOSAL

 

The application proposes the installation of signage at the new retail centre known as ‘The Canopy’. The application seeks approval for the installation of a total of 32 signs. All signs are proposed to be internally illuminated. Signage includes:

 

·          Three (3) freestanding directional signs (SIG-301 in the proposed plans) for the retail centre and business identification. Located at the entrance of the retail zone and within the carpark area to the east of the site;

 

·          Four (4) ‘The Canopy’ identification façade signs (SIG-401, SIG-402, SIG-403, SIG-404) of various sizes on the Rosenthal Lane, eastern retail building along Rosenthal Avenue, and Birdwood Avenue façade;

 

·          Fourteen (14) business identification façade signs of various sizes for Coles (SIG-601, SIG-602, SIG-603) ALDI (SIG-201, SIG-202, SIG-203) and Liquorland (SIG-701, SIG-702). The signs front the Rosenthal Lane, Rosenthal Avenue and Birdwood Avenue facades, a number of smaller business identification signs are proposed adjacent to the lift entrance;

 

·          Six (6) directional wall signs (SIG-501, SIG-502, SIG-506, SIG-507) for carpark way finding on the building façade near the entrance to the basement carpark off Rosenthal Avenue, and facades of retail buildings onto Rosenthal Lane and Birdwood Avenue;

 

·          Two (1) wayfinding sign (SIG-101) for the loading dock on the building façade along Rosenthal Avenue;

 

·          Two (2) projecting wall signs (SIG-503) for the loading dock and car park on the Rosenthal Avenue façade;

 

·          One (1) welcome sign (SIG-801) with speed limit indication located within the basement carpark near the entrance; and

 

·          One (1) façade sign (SIG-802) for business identification located inside the basement carpark next to vehicle access ramp.

 

The signs are proposed to be located in three main areas:

 

·          West elevation: Basement carpark entry/exit fronting Rosenthal Lane;

 

·          South and west elevation: The retail building located in the south-west corner of the Rosenthal Avenue and Rosenthal Lane; and

 

·          North elevation: The building providing lift and stair access between the basement carpark and the park level above fronting Birdwood Avenue.

 

There are also a number of directional signs proposed outside the main signage clusters on all 4 frontages.

 

Figure 1: Subject site (shaded red)

Figure 2: Site signage plan (Coles & ALDI signage in red)

 

       Figure 3: Basement carpark entry Rosenthal Avenue.                Figure 4: Retail building Rosenthal Avenue.

 

Figure 5: Loading dock Rosenthal Avenue.               Figure 6: Retail building Rosenthal Lane.

  

   Figure 7: Customer lift/escalator entrance Birdwood Lane.    Figure 8: Retail building Birdwood Avenue.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE

 

Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

Zoning:           R2 Low Density                                 Site Area:                               7031m²

 

 

Proposed

Control

Complies

Floor Space Ratio

No change

0.5:1

Yes

Height of Buildings

No change

9.5m

Yes

 

REFERRALS

 

No referrals were required in this instance.

 

ASSEESSMENT – ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979

 

Section 79c(1)(a)(i) Any environmental planning instrument

 

1. Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 (the LEP)

 

Signage is permissible in Zone B4 Mixed Use under the LEP with the consent of Council. Signage includes a sign or advertisement, as well as the structure used to display signage.

 

Although the objectives of the B4 zone do not address signage, the proposal does not raise any issues under the LEP.

 

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

 

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

 

Heritage. The site is located adjacent to a local heritage item known as St Andrew’s Anglican Church Hall. The item is located south west of the site on the opposite side of Rosenthal Avenue. The signs proposed on the Rosenthal Avenue frontage would be sympathetically integrated with the built design and would not detract from the heritage significance of St Andrew’s Anglican Church Hall.

2. SEPP 64 - Advertising and Signage 

 

SEPP 64 applies to the assessment of signage. The relevant clauses of this Policy, including Schedule 1, are discussed below.

 

Part 1 Preliminary

 

Clause 3 Aims and objectives

 

In summary, the relevant aims of this Policy that are set out under sub - clause (1)(a) are:

 

·          to ensure that signage:

-           is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, and

-           provides effective communication in suitable locations, and

-           is of a high-quality design and finish, and

·          to regulate signage.

 

Comment: The proposed number and location of building, business, and wayfinding signage complies with the aims and objectives. The signs are of high quality and are integrated with the architectural features of the building. The signs inform the general public of the primary tenants within the retail development. All signs are sympathetic and contribute to the visual character of the Lane Cove Village Town Centre.

 

Clause 4 Definitions   

 

The application proposes:

 

1.         Building identification sign (‘The Canopy’)

 

Under the standard instrument a building identification sign is defined as:

 

·          building identification sign means a sign that identifies or names a building and that may include the name of a building, the street name and number of a building, and a logo or other symbol but does not include general advertising of products, goods or services.

 

2.         Business identification sign (Coles/Liquorland and ALDI) identifies the two main tenants within the development.

 

Under the standard instrument a business identification sign is defined as:

 

·          business identification sign means a sign:

(a)  that indicates:

(i)  the name of the person or business, and

(ii)  the nature of the business carried on by the person at the premises or place at which the sign is displayed, and

(b)  that may include the address of the premises or place and a logo or other symbol that identifies the business,

but that does not contain any advertising relating to a person who does not carry on business at the premises or place.

 

The proposed signs are permissible in the zone under either of these two definitions.

 

Other signs proposed are traffic directional /speed limit and loading dock signage located in at the vehicle entrance, and within the basement carpark. The SEPP is silent on these types of signs. Therefore, the directional / wayfinding / speed limit signs will not be assessed under the SEPP 64 provisions.

 

Part 2 Signage generally

 

Clause 8 Granting of consent to signage

 

Under cl. 8 Council, as the consent authority, must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the Council is satisfied that the proposed signage:

 

·          is consistent with the objectives of the Policy as set out in cl. 3(1)(a), and

·          satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1 of the DCP.

 

Comments on both matters follow.

 

(i) Clause 3(1)(a)

 

Comment: The proposed signage generally satisfies the relevant Aims and objectives under cl. 3(1)(a) of this Policy because it would:

 

·          be compatible with the area, and

·          provide effective communication, and

·          be of a high-quality design and finish, and

·          subject to draft condition 2, that would control the level of illumination of each sign, and draft condition 3, that would prohibit the illumination of any sign during the night, ensure that all three signs would not have an unreasonable adverse impact on the locality in general, or residents in particular.   

 

(ii) Schedule 1 Assessment criteria

 

Comment: The proposed signage complies with all relevant assessment criteria in schedule 1. Each of the 8 points under Schedule 1 is discussed below.

 

Point 1: Character of the area: would be compatible with the existing mixed commercial, retail and surrounding residential character of this area; in addition, it would be consistent with the commercial function of the Lane Cove Village Town Centre;

 

Point 2: Special areas: as the site is not located in a Special area (heritage, environmentally sensitive etc) this aspect is not relevant;

 

Point 3: Views and vistas: would be within the existing building envelope and below the height of its parapet roof and therefore it would not adversely impact views, the skyline, or other advertisers. The freestanding directional signs are 2m in height and unlikely to obscure any significant views.

 

Point 4: Streetscape, setting or landscape: is appropriate for the mixed uses within the area and the streetscape; the signs are necessary to provide an identity to the building and the main retailers. The signage would contribute to the visual interest and be below the height of the building’s parapet roof, and given the length of each frontage the number of signs on the building’s four facades would not cause visual clutter or dominate the streetscape; 

 

Point 5: Site and building: would be compatible with the scale and proportion of the buildings; indeed, each sign is relatively low-key compared to the scale of the building; 

 

Point 6: Logos: would include appropriate logos that would be internally illuminated as an integral part of the proposed signage, and the proposed colours and finishes would be sympathetic to the architectural elements of the building.

 

Point 7: Illumination: although all signs are proposed to be internally illuminated, would, subject to conditions 2 and 3, be required to comply with the illumination controls of the DCP and prohibit their illumination during the night, respectively, so as not to adversely affect other local uses, particularly residents within the area’s surrounding residential flat buildings; and,

 

Point 8: Safety: would not reduce safety along Rosenthal Lane, Rosenthal Avenue, Birdwood Avenue or Birdwood Lane, or reduce the safety of pedestrians, cyclists or children.

 

Part 3 Advertisements

 

Division 1 General

 

This Division addresses signs that are relevant to the Policy, and those that are exempt, or prohibited. 

 

1. Clause 9 Advertisements to which this part applies

 

The Policy states that Part 3 does not apply to:

 

·          business and building identification signs

·          signage on vehicles

·          signage that is exempt development under an environmental planning instrument.

 

As the proposed signage is generally business- or building- related Part 3 of this Policy does not apply.

 

Part 4 Miscellaneous

 

As there are no matters under Part 4 of the Policy relevant to this application this Part does not apply.

 

Other Planning Instruments

 

SEPP 55 Remediation of Land

 

The site has been previously subject of detailed site investigations relating to the early works/main works DAs which concluded the site could be made suitable for the proposed land uses. No further assessment is required.

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) Any development control plan

 

The Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2009 (the DCP) - Part N Signage and Advertising

 

The assessment of the proposed signage under Part N of this DCP follows.

 

 

Aims and objectives

 

(i) Aims

 

In summary the provisions of the DCP seek to ensure the character of buildings and streetscapes are consistent with Council’s desired future outcomes, whilst its purpose is to encourage well designed and located signs which contribute positively to the diversity and viability of businesses in Lane Cove.

 

The proposed signage satisfies these aims because:

 

·          the design and size of the signs and advertising would respect and enhance the character of the Lane Village Town Centre;

·          the signage appropriately informs users of the business type and location and therefore promotes the Centre;

·          the level of signage in context to the site would be acceptable. It would be appropriately located and not result in visual clutter or adverse amenity impacts.

 

2.13 Location and Design of Signage and Advertising

 

The design and location of all proposed signage and advertising is to consider certain matters. The proposed signage would satisfy all matters because:

 

·          The accumulated length surrounding all four street frontages is approximately 372m. This is significantly larger than almost any other comparable retail centre development within the Local Government Area. Therefore assessment on merit is recommended in context to the unique characteristics of the site. 

 

o    The Rosenthal Avenue frontage is approximately 154m in length. It proposes signs in two main areas which are located approximately 36m distance apart. These two areas are the basement carpark entry and the entry to the retail building at the southern end of the Rosenthal Avenue frontage. The Rosenthal Avenue frontage is proposed to have 1 loading dock sign and 2 way-finding parking signs.

§   Basement Carpark (external) proposes 2 Coles and 2 ALDI signs, 1 The Canopy sign, and 1 wayfinding at the entry to the basement carpark,

§   Basement carpark (internal) proposes 2 basement car park directional signs which are internally located, however would be visible at the entry point to basement carpark from Rosenthal Avenue.

§   Retail building proposes 1 The Canopy sign, 1 Coles and 1 ALDI sign on the façade of the retail building

§   Loading Dock. A loading dock sign is located approximately 25m north on the Basement carpark entry, and 2 parking wayfinding signs on the leading towards the basement entry.

o    The Birdwood Lane frontage is approximately 130m in length.

§   Entry to carpark– proposes 1 Coles and 1 ALDI signs directly adjacent to the escalator stairs to the carpark. 

§   2 freestanding directional signs (combined Coles/ALDI/Liquorland) which are 2m in height which are located approximately 20m distance either side from the retail entry zone.

o    The Rosenthal Lane frontage is approximately 44m in length.

§   Signs for the Retail building at west end proposes 1 The Canopy, 1 Coles and 1 ALDI sign on the retail building at entry

o    The Birdwood Avenue frontage is approximately 44m in length.

§   Lift entry – proposes 1 The Canopy, 1 Coles, 1 Liquorland, 1 ALDI and parking signs adjacent to the lift entry.

 

·          Although the proposed number of signs on the Rosenthal Avenue frontage exceeds the permitted number of retail signs per frontage, the proposed number of signs are minor in comparison to full extent of the street elevations and would not result in visual clutter;

·          The signs are integrated and sympathetic to the architectural style of the buildings on site. The signage utilises high quality finishing materials which would not detract from the architectural features of the buildings;

·          The previous approval (DA18/184) included approval for 4 retail awning signs on the Birdwood Lane elevation for each of the retail (café/restaurant) tenancy and 1 awning sign on the Rosenthal Avenue frontage. The proposed building name, business name, and directional signs in the subject Development Application are a significant distance away from these retail tenancy signs. The accumulative impacts of the total number of signs would not result in visual clutter;

·          The size of the signs is considered appropriate based on the significant length and size of the street elevations. The largest proposed signs are ‘The Canopy’ signs (approx.9.9sqm).  The Coles signs (approx. 3.65sqm) and ALDI signs (approx. 1.72sqm)

·          The proposed signs would not impact on view lines to existing approved signage;

·          They would be independent of any other sign because they would not be supported by, hung from or placed on, existing signage;

·          They would be in English;

·          The signs would include company logos that address the subject building’s main tenants (Coles/Liquorland and ALDI); and

·          The signage would be appropriate in relation to the desired future character of the Lane Cove Village Town Centre (see below section Character statements).

 

2.2 Character Statements

 

The proposed signage is consistent with the objectives of the character statement:

 

·          the signs and advertising would be integrated with the building design and are of an appropriate size and number in context to the site as a whole;

·          the signage appropriately informs users of the new retail centre business. The directional and wayfinding signs encourage trade and economic viability to the area and promotes the new retail precinct.

 

2.4 Prohibited Signage

 

The Development Application does not propose any prohibited signage as defined in the DCP.

 

N.3 General Signage Controls.

 

Control

Proposal

Compliance

Below Awning Signage – Flush Wall Signage

 

Where a tenancy has a minimum of two frontages first part, flush wall signs are permitted at a rate of one per frontage, where the flush wall sign is not located on the primary frontage.

The site is 7031sqm and has 4 street frontages. There are also multiple buildings on each elevation. Multiple signs are proposed on each elevation.

 

The Rosenthal Avenue has 3 Coles and 3 ALDI signs 

No in part

 

Refer to variations section.

 

 

 

A flush wall sign is to be a maximum of 5% of the tenancy on which it is located on. Flush wall signs are to be located a minimum of 1m from ground level.

The wall signs consist of less than 5% of the street frontage elevation area on which they are located. All wall signs are greater than 1m from ground level.

Yes

Pylon, plinth and Pole Signage

 

Pylon, plinth and pole signage is to be in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and must be structurally sound.

 

Pylon signage is generally not appropriate in the Lane Cove Village Town Centre. An arcade which is setback from the street may be permitted to have a tenancy direction pylon sign within the arcade.

 

Maximum size of tenancy direction signage is 2m height x 0.8m width x 0.1m depth.

There are 3 proposed freestanding directional (Pylon) signs.

 

The signs are proposed to be 2m in height x 0.8m in width.

 

2 signs are proposed (1 either side) of the retail entry escalators on the Birdwood Lane frontage.  1 sign is proposed within the carpark set back from the street frontage.

 

 

Yes

 

The proposed pylon signs are setback from Birdwood Lane and provide tenancy directional signage to the major retail tenancies within the site. Although not related to an arcade the signs relate to stairs and escalators (transitionary spaces) leading to retail tenancies.

 

This proposed pylon signage is similar to the multiple approved pylon signs on Longueville Road which is also within the Lane Cove Village Town Centre.

 

The proposed pylon signs comply with the relevant objectives of the DCP

 

·          which ensure tenancies setback from the street (Coles/Liquorland and ALDI) can sufficiently identify the location of their business.

·          The signs also reasonably reflect the size of the building which they relate to.

·          The pylon signs are of high quality and will not obstruct pedestrian access on the footpath of Birdwood Lane.

Illuminated signage

 

To enhance the village centre character of the lane Cove Centre and safety of users, below awning signage is permitted to be illuminated without restriction of hours of operation. In certain areas, a time limit to 11pm (only for above awning) may be enforced by Council where amenity of residents is affected.

 

Where the amenity of existing residential properties may be affected by light spillage, illuminated signage is not appropriate.

All signs are proposed to be internally illuminated

Yes

(Subject to conditions)

 

The proposed illumination is considered acceptable and complies with the objectives:

 

The illuminated signage maintains the village character of the Lane Cove, preserves the residential amenity of the residential use in proximity to the site, and may assist in providing passive surveillance to discourage anti-social behavior and provides public safety.

To ensure that potential light spillage would not impact on the surrounding residential uses north and west of the site the following draft conditions are recommended:

 

1.         Draft condition (2) has been recommended in the development consent requiring the luminance level to comply with clause 3.9 of the DCP to preserve residential amenity.

 

2.         Draft condition (3) has been recommended requiring the illumination to be turned off outside of Coles and ALDI business trading hours. The signs would be required to be switched off between 10.00pm and 6.00am daily.

 

 

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 table identifies those controls that the proposal does not comply with:

 

Clause 3.3 Below Awning Signage - Flush Wall Signage.

 

The controls limit the amount of below awning signs (including flush wall signs) for each tenancy at a rate of 1 per frontage, where the flush wall sign is not located on the primary frontage.  The application proposes 3 Coles signs and 3 ALDI signs on the Rosenthal Avenue frontage. The proposal is considered acceptable in this instance based on the following:

 

·          The Rosenthal Avenue frontage is 154m in length. This is significantly longer than almost any other comparable retail development within the Local Government Area. Therefore, an assessment on merit is appropriate in context to the unique characteristics of the site.  The number of signs is reasonable in comparison to full extent of the street elevations;

·          3 business signs are appropriate on a single frontage due to the large frontage length. Additional signage is acceptable to help inform and direct the public toward the main retail tenancies;

·          The proposed signs comply with the objectives for below awning signage. The level of signage engages the public without overwhelming users. The proposed signs do not result in visual clutter; and

·          On the Rosenthal Avenue the proposed tenancy signs either side of the basement carpark entry would provide clear visibility to the entry in an appropriate and logical manner. The other tenancy signage relates to the entry of the retail building located approximately 36m from the basement carpark entry.

 

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

 

As a result of the notification period, one (1) submission was received. The submission was on behalf of RASAD (Residents and Shopkeepers for Appropriate Development). A summary of the concerns raised are listed below:

 

1.         Concerns that signs are large and would be inappropriate in scale once the buildings are erected.

 

Response: Each street frontage surrounding the site covers a significant distance. The accumulated length surrounding all four street frontages is approximately 372m. This is significantly longer than almost any other comparable retail development within the Local Government Area. The size and content of the signs are reasonable in comparison to full extent of the street elevations and would not result in visual clutter. The size of signs is appropriate and complies with the objectives of SEPP 64 and the Lane Cove DCP 2010.

 

2.         Concerns about the proposed illumination of signs around the central core. The submission request that the signs above the lifts on the façade of the building near Birdwood Lane and facing the escalators not be permitted to be illuminated.

 

Response: To ensure that potential light spillage would not impact on the surrounding residential uses north and west of the site the following draft conditions are recommended:

 

·          The signs would be required to not exceed the required luminance level to comply with clause 3.9 of the DCP to preserve residential amenity. Refer to Condition (2)

 

·          The illumination of all signs to be turned off at close of business hours for Coles and ALDI and resume at opening hours. This would result in lights being switched off between 10.00pm and 6.00am.  This would ensure illumination does not adversely impact during the hours when neighboring residents traditionally are sleeping. Refer to Condition (3).

 

3.         Concerns on how the proposed signs on the corner of Rosenthal Lane and Rosenthal Avenue will be integrated with the stonework of the façade and the proposed landscaped vegetation. on these elevations.

 

Response: The signs on this elevation are bespoked in quality and sympathetic design. The signage is incorporated into the façade and would not detract from the stonework elements fronting Rosenthal Avenue.  Landscaping on this elevation would not be adversely affected by the signage.  Landscaping would be maintained on an ongoing basis to ensure such does not obscure the signs.

 

CONCLUSION

 

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

 

The proposal complies with the relevant provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 64 Signage and Advertising.

 

The application meets the zoning objectives of the Mixed-Use zone, does not alter the Floor Space Ratio and Height controls as required in the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009. The application generally meets with the requirements of Part N - Signage and Advertising of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan.  The non-compliance with Part N relates to an exceedance with the number of business name signs on the Rosenthal Avenue elevation. However, the non-compliance is supported in this instance as 3 business signs are appropriate on a single frontage due to the long frontage length. Additional signage is acceptable to inform and direct the public towards the main retail tenancies. The signs are well designed and do not detract from the façade. 

 

The proposed number and location of building, business, and wayfinding signage complies with the aims and objectives of the signage and advertising DCP. The proposed signs are of high quality and integrated with architectural features of the building. The signs inform the general public of the primary tenants within the retail development. All signs are sympathetic and contribute to the visual character of the new retail precinct called ‘The Canopy’. On balance the proposed development would be reasonable and therefore is recommended for approval.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 1 October 2019, exercising the functions of Council as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application DA19/98 for signage at 2 – 20 Rosenthal Avenue subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         That the development be strictly in accordance with the following stamped plans,

 

Drawing Number:

Prepared by:

Dated:

AR-CD6071 – Rev 7

Coles & ALDI signage plan

Level B0 – Dock Signage

Level B0- Carpark Entry Signage

Section – welcome sign

Section – center signage

scott carver

28/06/19

AR-CD6072 – Rev 7  Coles & ALDI Signage Elevations

scott carver

28/06/19

AR-CD6073 – Rev 6   Coles & ALDI Signage Schedule

scott carver

28/06/19

 

Specific                              

 

2.                     In order to ensure compliance so as preserve existing and future residential amenity,         the signage is not to exceed the maximum daytime luminance level for Zone 3 within Table 1: Luminance rules under cl. 3.9 of Part N – Signage and Advertising of the             Lane Cove DCP 2009 (the DCP 2009) and further, no illuminated sign is to flash and             any night-time luminance of signage must not exceed one-quarter of the prescribed             value.

 

3.                     In order to preserve existing and future residential amenity, and to ensure             compliance with cl. 3.9.1e of the DCP 2009, no sign is to be illuminated between the             hours of 10pm and 6am on any day.

 

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

 

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

 

6.         (17) A Certificate of Completion being obtained from the Principal Certifier before the completion of the installation of all signs.

 

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

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)              7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                                         7.00am to 4.00pm

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

 

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

 

8.                     (57) Structural Engineer's details being submitted PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A             CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE for how the signage would be attached to the building.

 

9.         (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.

 

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

 

11.       (B1) Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $12,000 bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets as a result of the development. The bond will be released upon issuing of the Occupation Certificate. If Council determines that damage has occurred as a result of the development, the applicant will be required to repair the damage. Repairs are to be carried out within 14 days from the notice. All repairs are to be carried in accordance with Council’s requirements. The full bond will be retained if Council’s requirements are not satisfied. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Site Location Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Site Location Plan

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator