Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting

4 February 2020  

 

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 on Tuesday 4 February 2020 commencing at 5pm. 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 4 February 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

public forum

 

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

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      LANE COVE LOCAL PLANNING PANEL MEETING - 3 DECEMBER 2019

 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Reports

 

2.       72 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

 

3.       47 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 4 February 2020

72 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          72 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove     

Record No:    DA15/136-01 - 76252/19

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Henry  Burnett 

 

 

 

Property:

72 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

DA No:

Section 4.55(2) Modification to a Child Care Centre - DA136/2015

Proposal:

Increasing the maximum capacity from 105 to 120 children

Date Lodged:

5 November 2019

Cost of Work:

Nil

Owner:

Formative Group Pty Ltd

Applicant:                        

P Pisani

Submissions:

Three (3) submissions received by way of objection.

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The proposed modification is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel under the discretion of Council staff as the original application was determined by an Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel and the modification is considered a Section 4.55(2) Modification under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Section 4.55 Modification seeks to increase the maximum capacity of an approved and operational child care centre from 105 children to 120 children.

 

The proposal would meet with the requirements of SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017, Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010, with the exception of the parking rate. LCDCP 2010 requires the provision of 34 spaces where 29 parking spaces are proposed, being a shortfall of 5 spaces.

 

The applicant has submitted a Plan of Management as recommended by a previous Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel determination, outlining a process to provide for a lower car dependency. Further, the applicant has also allowed for the centre to run for a period of two (2) years, in accordance with a subsequent Council determination, to better ascertain the traffic and acoustic impacts of 105 children and whether 120 children could be accommodated on site.

 

The proposal, while meeting the above terms of the previous determinations, received a number of submissions (3) during the public notification of the application. The concerns raised during the notification of the proposal primarily relate to traffic safety and acoustic impacts. The concerns raised do not directly relate to any concerns regarding the availability of on-site parking.

 

Given the submissions received, and the parking shortfall remaining untested, a 12-month trial period for 120 children is considered appropriate in this instance. Nearing the end of the 12-month period the applicant can apply, with detailed acoustic and traffic and parking assessment, for 120 children to be ratified as an ongoing condition, or if no application is made the number of children would revert back to 105 children. The applicant raises no objection to this proposed condition or further reporting.

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application is recommended for approval subject to draft amended conditions of consent.

BACKGROUND

 

The site is known as No. 72 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove and contains a heritage building known as Mandalay which is presently being used as a child care centre with a maximum capacity of 105 children.

 

The original Development Application for the child care centre (DA136/2015) was approved by the Lane Cove Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel at its meeting of 2 February 2016. The applicant sought consent for 120 children. The Panel found the child care centre suitable for 120 children with the exception of car parking. Accordingly, the number of children was limited to 105 based on parking provision (29 cars). An advisory note was placed on the consent as follows:

 

If the applicant were to prepare a Plan of Management giving preference to parents of children who either walk or get public transport to the subject property, then consideration will be given to increasing the number of children by an additional 15.

 

A subsequent Section 4.55 Modification was lodged in October 2016 seeking approval for minor internal alterations, an increase in parking from 29 to 31 spaces and an increase in children numbers from 105 to 120. The application was made prior to the construction of and operation of the child care centre. A comment was made in the Council report as follows:

 

It would be most appropriate for Council to consider the increase in children numbers once the centre has been operational for a period of time to demonstrate that the acoustic, traffic and parking concerns are able to be managed within an acceptable level and the operation of the child care centre would not cause unacceptable impacts to the amenity of local residents.

 

The Section 4.55 Modification application was approved under Delegated Authority on 6 April 2017 ultimately approving the internal alterations only and resulting in the total parking numbers (29 spaces) and maximum capacity (105 children) remaining unchanged.

 

A further Section 4.55 Modification Application was approved under Delegated Authority on 8 June 2017 for minor modifications to the materiality of approved alterations and additions, the height of the acoustic fence and retaining wall extent.

 

The child care centre was constructed and commenced operations in January 2018.

 

Figure 1: Existing Child Care Centre

 

PROPOSED MODIFICATION

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application seeks approval to increase the maximum number of children from 105 to 120. The applicant has lodged the application with reference to the ‘criteria’ established under previous applications to assess the increase in the maximum number of children as follows:-

 

·    The child care centre has been operational for two years;

·    A survey has been undertaken on the transport modal share of current enrollments; and

·    A Plan of Management has been prepared giving preference to enrollments utilising walking/public transport as their mode of transport (AT-1).

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application relates to an increase in the maximum number of children only and does not include any alteration or addition to building works approved under the previous applications.

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application seeks to delete and replace condition no. 2 of the existing consent. Condition no. 2 as approved states:-

 

2.         The maximum number of children in the proposed child care centre must not exceed 105 at any time.

 

SECTION 4.55 ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the proposal against the relevant provisions of Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is provided as follows:

 

1.         Compliance with Section 4.55(2)

 

In accordance with Section 4.55(2) Other Modifications the consent authority may modify a consent if –

 

(a)        the proposal is substantially the same development;

 

The proposal is substantially the same development as it would result in no changes to the built form of the development and relates to an increase in children numbers only. The child care centre has been built with capacity for 120 children (in relation to internal area and external play area) and has received NSW Department of Education approval for 120 children. The original Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel foreshadowed the grounds of a modification application to increase the maximum children numbers in determining the original application. The proposal is being limited currently to 105 children by way of condition 2 of the consent as it relates to parking. Accordingly

 

(b)       concurrence authorities are consulted;

 

Not Applicable - there are no concurrence authorities.

 

(c)        has been notified in accordance with the regulations and a development control plan;

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council’s notification policy.

 

(d)       Council has considered any submissions regarding the proposed modification.

 

Three (3) submissions have been received by way of objection which are summarised and addressed below in the report section ‘Submissions’.

 

2.         Compliance with Section 4.55(3)

 

Section 4.55(3) requires Council to consider relevant matters referred to in Section 4.15(1) and any reasons given by the consent authority for the granting of the original consent.

 

A.        Consideration of Section 4.15(1) Matters

 

(a)        The provisions of

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument

 

SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017

 

SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 commenced 1 September 2017 subsequent to the child care centre being approved by the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel. Accordingly, while the child care centre was constructed to meet the design requirements of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 for 120 children (with the exception of parking), the applicant was requested to confirm the compliance of the centre against the subsequently gazetted SEPP. In particular, an assessment of the unencumbered indoor and outdoor area as any non-compliance would require concurrence of the Department of Education. The applicant submitted a plan indicating SEPP-compliant indoor and outdoor area for 120 children (AT2).

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

The proposal remains permissible in the R2 Low Density Residential zone and does not alter the building height (10.9m for existing heritage item, 8.9m for additions) as previously assessed. In relation to floor space ratio the previous assessment report included Lot Y DP 379033 (known as 1A Tambourine Bay Road) in the site area which now has an operative development consent for a dwelling house on the site. Accordingly, for clarity, the floor space ratio is calculated to just include the site area relating to Lot B DP 379033 (1,992m2). LCLEP 2009 permits an FSR of 0.5:1. The total gross floor area approved (and remaining unchanged in the proposed modification) is 978.6m2 being an FSR of 0.491:1 complying with the provisions of LCLEP 2009. 

 

(ii)        Any proposed instrument

 

N/A

 

(iii)       Any development control plan

 

The SEPP overrides Council’s Development Control Plan 2010 with the exception of height, rear and side setbacks and parking rates. The proposal does not alter the approved building height or side/rear setbacks. However, an assessment against the parking rates contained within Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 is required. An assessment is provided below in the report section ‘Traffic and Parking Assessment’.

 

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

 

The likely impacts of the development in relation to the built and natural environment remains unchanged as the physical form or landscaping would not be altered by the modification. The increase in child numbers would provide a beneficial economic impact by providing additional places at a child care centre that provides for a high-quality environment for the care of children (and currently has a waiting list for enrollment). The likely amenity impacts in relation to acoustics and parking have been considered in detail in this report and are considered reasonable with a twelve (12) month trial period to determine whether or not the higher number of children would adversely impact the locality.

 

(c)        The suitability of the site for the development

 

The suitability of the site for the development remains unchanged. The site provides a large area for a well-proportioned development that balances heritage curtilage, landscaped setting, built form and separation from adjoining residential properties. The acoustic and traffic concerns raised by adjoining properties are addressed in the report section ‘Submissions’.

 

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

 

Three (3) submissions have been received by way of objection which are summarised and addressed below in the report section ‘Submissions’.

 

(e)        The public interest

 

The development as constructed is of a high quality and the utilisation of the full design capacity (for 120 children) is considered in the public interest subject to suitable management and mitigation of amenity impacts to adjoining properties which are addressed in detail in this report and are the basis for a 12 month trial period.

 

B.        Consideration of the Reasons for the Original Consent

 

No specific reasons were given by the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for the granting of consent on 2 February 2016, noting that the requirement for reasons for the determination was not in place in 2016. Notwithstanding there was extended discussion during the Panel meeting as to the appropriate number of children. The Council report recommended a maximum of 80 based on parking provision. The applicant was requesting 120 children. The Panel ultimately determined 105 children was reasonable and included the following advisory note on the consent to the applicant in relation to the circumstances under which 120 children would be considered:

 

If the applicant were to prepare a Plan of Management giving preference to parents of children who either walk or get public transport to the subject property, then consideration will be given to increasing the number of children by an additional 15.

 

Parking therefore was a principal consideration of the Panel. Parking is considered in detail below satisfying Clause 4.55(3) of the Act in relation to considering the reasons for the original consent.

 

TRAFFIC AND PARKING ASSESSMENT

 

A.        Parking Controls

 

The development is subject to the provisions of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 Part R – Traffic, Transport and Parking which outlines the parking requirements for child care centres in Table 1. An assessment of the approved and proposed children numbers against the requirements of Table 1 is provided as follows:

 

 

 

Provision

Required Original DA

 

Provided Original DA

Complies

Required

Proposed S4.55

Provided

Proposed S4.55

Complies

Staff Parking

1 space per 2 employees

 

18 staff – 9 spaces

10 spaces

Yes (+1 space)

20 staff – 10 spaces

10 spaces

Yes

Short Term Parking

1 space per 5 children

 

105 children – 21 spaces

19 spaces

No (-2 spaces)

120 children – 24 spaces

19 spaces

No (-5 spaces)

Access. Parking

1 per 20 parking spaces

 

2 spaces

2 spaces (inclusive)

Yes

1 per 20 parking spaces

2 spaces

Yes

Total

 

30

29

No (-1 space)

34

29

No (-5 spaces)

 

 

The original application approved an overall 1 space shortfall to the parking requirements of Table 1 and the proposed modification application would result in a 5 space shortfall to the short term parking requirement under Table 1. Consideration to be given to whether the proposal meets the objectives of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 despite non-compliance with the prescriptive measure.

 

B.        Parking Objectives

 

The objectives of Part R of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 are as follows:

 

·    Ensure that reasonable parking needs are met.

·    Ensure that developments do not impose excessive demand for on-street parking on surrounding streets.

·    Ensure that car parking spaces are convenient and accessible so that they are utilised for their intended purpose.

·    Provide a lower level of car parking in areas with good access to public transport and services.

 

C.        Parking Justification (Applicant)

 

The applicant has submitted the following justification for the variation to the DCP as contained within the Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by MB Town Planning:

 

·    The IHAP were willing to consider the proposition of there being 120 children, generating the demand for 34 car parking spaces subject to there being a plan of management that gives enrollment preference to children being able to walk or use public transport;

 

·    The DCP includes specific allowances within Part R to consider a reduced parking rate within Clause R.2.12 Child Care Centres:

 

(b) Council may consider a reduction in parking requirements where a study justifies the assumptions that staff and users of the centre will use public transport, or live or work within walking distance, or due to other considerations on an individual site’s merits. Particular consideration will be given to centres with a high number of 0-2 year old spaces.

(d) Consideration may be given to reducing on-site parking requirements, in terms of drop off/ pick up component, where convenient and safe on-street parking is available (i.e. indented parking bays) in streets which experience low traffic volumes subject to not adversely affecting the safety and amenity of the adjacent area or causing traffic problems.

 

·    Of the above specific controls, one is applicable in the circumstance of the present case:

 

The submitted Plan of Management by Stanec dated 24 September 2019 include an analysis of the current travel mode split demonstrating 24 percent of parents walk to and from the child care centre to drop off and pick up their children, 7 percent use buses or cycling, and 68 percent travel by car.

 

The Plan of Management sets out a strategy for new enrolments with questions that new applicants would be asked. Responses would be used to prioritise applicants that would be likely to use modes other than private car. The plan of management also specifies a green travel plan once the child care centre is at maximum capacity.

 

The Plan of Management satisfies the intention of the IHAP determination by giving preference to parents of children who either walk or get public transport to the subject property. On that basis, the proposed increase in numbers to 120 is consistent with the intent of the IHAP determination and should be approved.

 

·    The DCP also includes general allowances within Part R to consider a reduced parking rate within Clause R.2.2 Car Parking Rates:

 

There are realistic transport alternatives to the private car in the locality.

The applicant can demonstrate a low demand for parking e.g. car ownership survey data in the vicinity or relevant examples of similar developments where reduced parking rates have been successfully implemented.

In locations where there is no risk of overspill parking from the development impacting on local streets.

There are exceptional site constraints which limit available on-site parking and appropriate mitigation measures and/or financial contributions are suggested in lieu.

There is an overriding community benefit arising from the development.

 

·    Of the above general controls, three are applicable in the circumstances of the present case:

 

Firstly, there are realistic alternatives to the private car in the locality because the site is within walking distance of a large number of apartments and is across the road from Lane Cove shops. Furthermore, there are frequently operating buses directly in front of the site.

 

Secondly, there are exceptional site constraints for the site, which accommodates a heritage listed building that could not be demolished to accommodate a full basement car park.

 

Thirdly, there is a community benefit including the provision of child care places in a central position within Lane Cove with a large number of 0-2 yrs and 2-3 yrs accommodated.

 

D.        Review of Submitted Justification (Council Staff)

 

Council’s Traffic and Transport Coordinator has reviewed the Plan of Management. The Plan of Management gives priority to those within walking distance and the main travel mode would be walking. This provision satisfies the submission requirements of the original IHAP determination. A draft condition of consent is recommended requiring compliance with the Plan of Management (refer draft condition 104A). 

 

Further, there are unique and site-specific reasons why a five (5) space parking shortfall is justified in this instance including the following reasons:

 

·    The site includes a heritage item and as such the site area available for parking is limited by the heritage item and the need to provide suitable curtilage;

·    The car parking provided is functional being designed in accordance with current Australian Standards including a double width driveway to Burns Bay Road allowing simultaneous forward entry/exit of vehicles in to the site; and

·    Observationally the car park has been operating well with adequate spare capacity being maintained for the drop off and pick up of children in peak periods with no recorded complaints received by Council in relation to car parking overflowing on to the street

 

Notwithstanding the above, the suitability of additional child numbers has not been adequately tested, and as such, a 12-month trial period is recommended. The trial period would enable appropriate parking and acoustic assessments to be completed, as well as giving a period in which the adjoining properties and general locality can experience, and make comment to Council, on the impact of the increase in child numbers, if any. The applicant does not object to a trial period being put in place. The trial period is specified in draft condition 2.

 

A variation to parking for a trial period is considered satisfactory in this instance and the variation to Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 is recommended to be supported.

 

SUBMISSIONS

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and three (3) submissions by way of objection were received which are summarised and addressed as follows:

 

Concern

Comment

Traffic and Parking

Concern is raised in relation to the right hand manoeuvre into Burns Bay Road from vehicles exiting the child care centre, the speed at which these occur to take advantage of small breaks in traffic, and the associated impact on the safety of vehicles attempting to exit a residential property on the other side of Burns Bay Road (69 Burns Bay Road). Either a ‘no right turn’ sign should be in place or a median strip (as part of the traffic signalisation works) to prevent the manoeuvre.

 

The concern was referred to Council’s Traffic and Transport Section for consideration. In regards to the right turn restriction from the site, Council shall be installing traffic signals at the Burns Bay Road/Tambourine Bay Road/Coxs Lane intersection. As part of this intersection upgrade, Sutherland Street at Coxs Lane would be permanently closed to through traffic. As such, restricting the right turn would significantly hinder access out of the development as vehicles would not be able to utilise the option of turning right into Graham Street, Sutherland Street and Coxs Lane to access Burns Bay Road. Notwithstanding, the impact of the increase in child numbers on this manoeuvre can be considered further at the end of the trial period.

 

Acoustic Impacts

Concern is raised that the modification would exacerbate noise impacts which are currently unacceptable for an adjoining property (No. 3 Burns Bay Road) including the following:

 

-     Generally unacceptable noise levels from early in the morning until 6:00pm;

-     Babies allowed to cry for long periods without assistance from carers;

-     Use of an external loudspeaker to talk to children/play music;

-     Play areas are already crowded based on extent of noise;

-     There appears to be little control of children based on the noise generated.

 

Given the above, an extension should not be granted as it would exacerbate an already substantial noise issue.

 

Further noise concerns were raised anonymously, and they requested hours of operation be adhered to and that staff consider minimising noise along the western boundary and how unscreened balconies are used (i.e. not for the purposes of comforting crying children).

 

The original application was accompanied by an acoustic report prepared by Renzo Tonin and Associates dated 4 September 2015. The report included recommendations in relation to mitigation (acoustic fencing) which the applicant has complied with.

 

It is noted that the recommendation of this report includes a 12-month trial period. Given a number of concerns regarding acoustics have been raised it is considered that a further detailed acoustic assessment based on operational noise levels (rather than predicted noise levels used in the original acoustic report) would be required as part of any request to formalise an application for 120 children.

 

Notwithstanding, a draft condition is recommended to be added under this modification regarding external amplified noise sources. The original acoustic report did not assess the impact of external amplified noise sources. As such, the appropriateness of amplified noise sources has not been established. Further, no specific condition was placed on the consent regarding no external loudspeaker or amplified music. This is a common condition that should be applied in this instance and is a draft recommended additional condition of consent (refer draft condition 73A).

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 4.55(2) and Section 4.55(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been considered.

 

The opportunity to increase the maximum capacity from 105 to 120 children is considered reasonable in the circumstances of this case, subject to confirmation of external impacts, including the existing car park being functional, the child care centre operating with minimal complaints for two years, and the Plan of Management satisfying the previous Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel determination.

 

However, given the submissions received relating to acoustic impacts, and the extent of parking non-compliance proposed, it is considered that a 12-month trial period should be put in place. Subsequent reporting and analysis must then be undertaken by the applicant at the completion of the 12-month trial period as to acoustics and traffic impacts on the locality and considered as part of a Section 4.55 Modification Application prior to any formal endorsement.

 

The Section 4.55(2) Modification Application is therefore considered satisfactory subject to a recommended 12-month trial period to increase the capacity to a maximum of 120 children.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to section 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 4 February 2020 exercising the functions of the Council as the consent authority grant consent to the Section 4.55 Modification Application to Development Application No. 136/2015 on land known as 72 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove, subject to the following:

 

A.         The replacement of condition 2 with the following:

 

2.         The maximum number of children on-site any one time is regulated as follows:

 

(a)  The number of children on-site at any one time is not to exceed 105.

(b)  Notwithstanding (a) above, the number of children on-site at any one time is not to , exceed 120, for a trial period of 12 months, expiring 4 February 2021.

 

B.         The addition of the following conditions:

 

73A.     Amplified Noise Sources. When amplified music devices,  public address systems or             audible intercoms are used, they are only to be operated within the child care centre             building (s) with windows and doors closed. Sound from these devices is not to exceed             5dBA above background noise when measured at the property boundary.

 

104A.   Plan of Management. Compliance with the Plan of Management prepared by Stantec             dated 24 September 2019 including implementation of the ‘Strategy for New Enrollment’             and the ‘Green Travel Plan’.

 


 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Plan of Management

11 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Unencumbered Area Plans

9 Pages

 

 

 


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel   4 February 2020

47 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North

 

 

Subject:          47 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North    

Record No:    DA19/105-01 - 73821/19

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Henry  Burnett 

 

 

Property:

47 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North

DA No:

DA105/2019

Date Lodged:

16 August 2019

Cost of Work:

$4,180,000.00

Owner:

Staldone Rosedale Pty Ltd

Applicant:                        

Staldone Rosedale Pty Ltd

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Demolition of existing improvements and construction of a boarding house with 26 boarding rooms, managers dwelling and associated landscaping and car parking.

 

Zone

R4 High Density Residential

Permissibility

Yes - pursuant to SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

Heritage item or conservation area

No

Adjacent to bushland

No

Stop the Clock used

No

Notification

Twelve (12) submissions received by way of objection.       

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The proposal is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as 10 or more submissions have been received by way of objection.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The proposal is for the demolition of existing improvements and construction of a six storey boarding house with 26 boarding rooms, managers dwelling and associated landscaping and a single level of basement car parking for thirteen (13) vehicles.

 

The proposed boarding house is currently subject to a Class 1 Appeal to the NSW Land and Environment Court against the deemed refusal of the application. A Section 34 conference is scheduled for 27 May 2020.

 

The proposed boarding house is compliant with the numerical standards within SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 with the exception of building height. The variation relates to the lift overrun only, is minor (500mm or 2.85%) and the submitted Clause 4.6 written request is considered satisfactory and well-founded as detailed in this report.

 

The proposed boarding house is considered compatible with the character of the local area provisions contained in Clause 30A of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 including a merit assessment against the relevant provisions of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 and consideration of the NSW Land and Environment Court Planning Principle relating to character.

 

The proposal would not isolate No. 49 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North. In any event the applicant has submitted a record of offers to the affected property which are reasonable and no submission was received in response to the notification of Development Application No. 105/2019 or 106/2019 from No. 49 Mindarie Street. Further discussion of isolation is provided in the report.

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and twelve (12) submissions were received. The submissions relate to bulk and scale, visual appearance, social impacts, traffic and parking, and amenity concerns.

 

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

 

SITE

 

The subject site and adjoining land-uses are described in the following table and Figure 1:

 

Property

Lot 55 DP 35865

Area

557.4m2

Site location

Mowbray Road Precinct – Lane Cove North

Existing improvements

Dwelling House, 13 trees (none of high significance)

Shape

Rectangular

Dimensions

Width: 15.24m; Depth: 36.575m

Topography

Falls 1m to Mindarie Street from Rear Boundary at 2.7%

Adjoining properties

North and West: Single Dwelling Houses

East: Residential Flat Building

South: Mindarie Street

 

Figure 1: Subject Site

 

PROPOSAL

The proposal is for the demolition of existing improvements and construction of a six storey boarding house with 26 boarding rooms, managers dwelling and associated landscaping and a single level of basement car parking for thirteen (13) vehicles. Each boarding room is proposed as a double lodger room with kitchen facilities, shower/toilet room, lounge area and a double bed. 

 

The following amendments were made to the application throughout the course of the assessment of the application:-

 

·         Excavation reduced through rationalising two (2) basement levels into one (1) basement level;

·         Further articulation provided to the front elevation through reducing extent of blank wall;

·         Passing bay and commercial garbage bay provided to the front setback; and

·         Side access path set in from the side boundary within the front setback to allow for additional tree planting.

 

 

Figure 2: Original (Left) and Amended (Right) Mindarie Street Perspective

 

The proposal includes the construction of a front fence for the purposes of providing additional soil depth to the front setback area for landscaping. The wall has a maximum height of 900mm.

 

The proposal seeks to remove 10 trees. Council’s Tree Preservation Officer has indicated there are no trees of high value on the subject site. Three (3) site trees within the front setback area and one (1) street tree are proposed to be planted.

 

Vehicle access to the basement is proposed via a single lane driveway with a passing bay within the front setback to allow for the waiting of vehicle while the driveway is occupied for exiting. The passing bay will double as the loading bay for the garbage collection vehicle.

 

Waste management is proposed to be commercial collection. A suitably sized garbage storage area is provided within the building at the ground floor level, and the applicant amended the proposal to provide for a garbage truck standing area within the front setback area.

 

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:

 

Section 4.15 Matters for Consideration

 

(a)  The provisions of:-

 

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument:

 

 

SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The assessment against the SEPP is outlined in the following table:

 

Part 2 – New Affordable Rental Housing

Division 3 – Boarding Houses

Clause

Control

Proposal

Complies

26 – Land to which this Division applies

Any of the following land use zones:

 

(a)  (a) Zone R1 General Residential,

(b)  (b) Zone R2 Low Density Residential,

(c)  (c) Zone R3 Medium Density Residential,

(d)  (d) Zone R4 High Density Residential,

(e)  (e) Zone B1 Neighbourhood Centre,

(f)  (f) Zone B2 Local Centre,

(g) (g) Zone B4 Mixed Use.

 

The subject site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under LCLEP 2009 and therefore the Division applies to the subject site.

Yes

27 – Development to which Division applies

(1) For the purposes of a boarding house

 

The proposal is for the purposes of a boarding house.

 

Yes

(2) Despite (1) clauses 29, 30 and 30A do not apply to land within Zone R2 Low Density Residential in the Sydney region unless the land is within an accessible area.

 

Not required to be accessible as the zoning of the site is R4 High Density Residential. Notwithstanding, the site is within walking distance to bus services on Epping Road and Mowbray Road.

Yes

28 – Development may be carried out with consent

Development to which this Division applies may only be carried out with consent

The Development Application is for the purposes of seeking consent for a boarding house.

Yes

29 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent

if the density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio are not more than:

 

1(a) the existing maximum floor space ratio for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land; or

 

1(b) – N/A

 

1(c) – if the development is on land within a zone in which residential flat buildings are permitted and the land does not contain a heritage item that is identified in an environmental planning instrument or an interim heritage order or on a State Heritage Register – the existing floor space ratio for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land plus:

 

(i) 0.5:1 if the existing maximum FSR is 2.5:1 or less;

(ii) 20% of the existing maximum FSR, if the existing FSR is greater than 2.5:1

 

Clause 29(1)(c) applies (See below).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The maximum FSR permitted under LCLEP 2009 is 1.8:1.

 

Residential flat buildings are permitted in the zone therefore clause 29(1)(c) of the SEPP allows for a bonus FSR of 0.5:1 in addition to the maximum permitted under LCLEP 2009.

 

The maximum permitted FSR therefore is 2.3:1.

 

The proposed FSR is 1.98:1.

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

2(a) If the building height of all proposed buildings is not more than the maximum building height permitted under another environmental planning instrument.

 

The site has a maximum permitted building height of 17.5 metres under LCLEP 2009.

 

The proposed maximum building height is 18 metres to the top of the lift overrun being a variation of 500mm or  2.85%

 

No, see Clause 4.6 request below.

2(b) if the landscape treatment of the front setback area is compatible with the streetscape in which the building is located.

 

The landscape treatment of the front setback is compatible with the streetscape in which the building is located. It provides for two (2) trees of medium size (melaleuca linariifolia), one (1) tree in deep soil of a larger size (tristaniopsis laurina) and one (1) street tree of the same species. This planting is supplemented by shrub and groundcover planting. The provision of a passing bay has reduced the front setback landscaped area however a balance between traffic safety and a compatible landscaping outcome is considered to have been achieved.

 

Yes

2(c) where the development provides for one or more communal living rooms, if at least one of those rooms receives a minimum 3 hours direct sunlight between 9:00am and 3:00pm in mid-winter.

 

3 hours would be available to the western window of the top level communal living room between 12pm and 3pm mid-winder (noting the rear of the site is slightly west of directly north orientation which would allow for direct solar access at noon).

Yes

2(d) if at least the following private open space areas are provided (other than the front setback area):

 

i. one area of at least 20 square metres with a minimum dimension of 3 metres is provided for the use of the lodgers;

 

 

ii. if accommodation is provided on site for a boarding house manager, one area of at least 8 square metres with a minimum dimension of 2.5 metres is provided adjacent to that accommodation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

i. One area at the upper level of the boarding house with an area of 20 square metres is provided for use of the lodgers. The space is directly connected to the communal living area.

 

 

ii. Provided within the rear setback area with a total area of 27m2.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

2(e)

 

(i) – N/A

 

(ii) – N/A

 

(iia) – In the case of development not carried out by or on behalf of a social housing provided – at least 0.5 parking spaces are to be provided for each boarding room.

 

(iii) – in the case of any development – not more than 1 parking space is provided for each person employed in connection with the development and who is resident on site.

 

 

 

(i) N/A

 

(ii) N/A

 

(iia) The proposal provides for a total of thirteen (13) car parking spaces which equates to 0.5 parking spaces for each boarding room in compliance with the SEPP.

 

 

 

(iii) No parking space provided for on-site manager, however it is considered that the control is a maximum, not a prescribed minimum, and therefore compliance is achieved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

2(f) if each boarding room has a gross floor area (excluding any area used for the purposes of private kitchen or bathroom facilities) of at least:

 

(i) 12 square metres in the case of a boarding room intended to be used by a single lodger, or

 

(ii) 16 square metres in any other case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(i) No single lodger rooms.

 

 

 

 

(ii) All rooms meet minimum 16 square metres excluding private kitchen and bathroom facilities). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

Yes

3 – A boarding house may have private kitchen or bathroom facilities in each boarding room but is not required to have those facilities in any boarding room.

 

Each boarding room has private kitchenette and bathroom facilities.

Yes

4 -  A consent authority may consent to development to which this Division applies whether or not the development complies with the standards set out in subclause (1) or (2).

 

The proposal complies with the provisions of subclause (1) and (2) as detailed above with the exception of building height which is addressed in the Clause 4.6 requested below.

Noted

30 – Standards for Boarding Houses

(1) A consent authority must not consent to development to which this Division applies unless it is satisfied of each of the following:

 

(a)  if a boarding house has 5 or more boarding rooms, at least one communal living room will be provided,

 

(b)  no boarding room will have a gross floor area (excluding any area used for the purposes of private kitchen or bathroom facilities) of more than 25 square metres,

 

(c)  no boarding room will be occupied by more than 2 adult lodgers,

 

(d) adequate bathroom and kitchen facilities will be available within the boarding house for the use of each lodger,

 

(e)  if the boarding house has capacity to accommodate 20 or more lodgers, a boarding room or on site dwelling will be provided for a boarding house manager,

 

(f) (Repealed)

 

(g)  if the boarding house is on land zoned primarily for commercial purposes, no part of the ground floor of the boarding house that fronts a street will be used for residential purposes unless another environmental planning instrument permits such a use,

 

(h)  at least one parking space will be provided for a bicycle, and one will be provided for a motorcycle, for every 5 boarding rooms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a) One communal living room provided (25 square metres)

 

 

 

(b) Maximum 25 square metre room size (ranging between 23 and 25 square metres).

 

 

 

 

 

(c) Appropriate condition can be imposed (refer draft condition 4).

 

 

(d) Provided to individual rooms.

 

 

 

 

 

(e) The proposal accommodates a maximum of 52 lodgers and therefore a boarding house manager is required and proposed.

 

 

 

(f) N/A

 

(g) The land is primarily zoned for residential purposes and accordingly the requirements of subclause (g) do not apply.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(h) Provided (6 motorcycle and 6 bicycle). Additional bicycle racks provided at ground level adjacent to entrance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

30AA – Boarding houses in R2 Low Density Residential zone.

A consent authority must not grant development consent to a boarding house on land within Zone R2 Low Density Residential or within a land use zone that is equivalent to that zone unless it is satisfied that the boarding house has no more than 12 boarding rooms.

N/A – The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential.

N/A

 

Clause 30A – Character of local area

A consent authority must not consent to development to which this Division applies unless it has taken into consideration whether the design of the development is compatible with the character of the local area.

 

See assessment below. Requested amendments have addressed streetscape issues satisfactorily.

Yes

Part 4 – Miscellaneous

 

Clause 52 – No subdivision of boarding houses

A consent authority must not grant consent to the strata subdivision or community title subdivision of a boarding house.

 

No strata subdivision or community title subdivision of the boarding house is permitted (Refer draft condition 5).

Yes

 

A.        Clause 4.6 Written Request – Building Height

 

A maximum building height of 17.5m applies to the site under LCLEP 2009. The proposed building has a maximum building height of 18.0m (a variation of 0.5m or 2.85%) to the lift overrun. A sectional diagram of the proposed building is provided in Figure 3 below.  

 

Figure 3: Section Showing Proposed Building Height Breach (Shaded Red)

 

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

Clause 4.6 of LCLEP 2009 allows exceptions to development standards.  Consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered and agrees with the written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard. This written request must demonstrate compliance with the relevant provisions of Clause 4.6 of LCLEP 2009.  These matters are discussed below:

 

Written request provided by the applicant

 

The applicant provided a written request seeking a variation to the development standard with the lodged application.  A copy is provided to the Panel (AT1). Under Clause 4.6(3) the applicant is required to demonstrate:

 

(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.

 

1.         Whether compliance with the development standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

The Clause 4.6 variation has argued that it is unreasonable or unnecessary to require strict compliance with the development standard for the following reasons:-

 

·         The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding the non-compliance with the numerical standard (First Method established in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSW LEC 287);

 

·         The accompanying shadow diagrams demonstrate that at least 3 hours of solar access will be maintained to the north facing living and rear private open space of the adjoining dwelling to the east (No. 49 Mindarie Street) between 12 noon and 3pm on 21st June with at least 2 hours of solar access (ADG) maintained to the western apartments within the western adjoining residential flat building (No. 41-45 Mindarie Street) between 11am and 1pm on 21st June. The building height breach elements will not result in unreasonable shadowing impacts on the public domain. The proposal is consistent with this objective;

 

·         The building height breaching elements do not result in any adverse visual or aural privacy impacts noting that all habitable floor space sits comfortably below the height standard. The proposal is consistent with this objective;

 

·         The building height breach elements will not result in unreasonable shadowing impacts on the public domain. The proposal is consistent with this objective; and

 

·         The development relates sensitively to site topography with excavation limited to that necessary to accommodate the basement parking and service areas. The proposal is consistent with this objective.

 

Comment:

 

Compliance with the development standard is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstance of the subject proposal. The written request clearly demonstrates that the breaches to height do not result in a departure from the building height objectives. The eye of the sun diagrams shows the breaching elements (lift over run and plant screening) contribute to only marginal additional overshadowing at 9:00am and nil additional overshadowing at 12:00pm and 3:00pm mid-winter as shown in Figure 4 below.

 

Figure 4: Eye of the Sun Diagrams

 

 

The additional overshadowing from the breaching elements is considered negligible. Clause 4.6(3)(a) is considered to be satisfied.

 

2.         Environmental planning grounds to justifying contravening the development standard.

 

The decision in Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 90 demonstrates that the requirement in Clause 4.6(3)(b) of the LEP to justify there are sufficient environmental planning grounds for the variation, requires identification of grounds particular to the circumstances of the proposed development, and not simply grounds that apply to any similar development on the site or in the vicinity.

 

The applicant has argued that:

 

·          This form of housing is under supplied in the Lane Cove LGA and is encouraged by SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

·          SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 provides a 0.5:1 FSR bonus to encourage boarding house development. The proposal only utilises 0.18:1 of that bonus while maintaining the building under the height limit, with the exception of the lift over run.

·          The non-compliance can generally be attributed to the topography of the site and the necessary lift overrun projection.

·          The building is of acceptable design and represents the orderly and economic use and development of the land consistent with objectives 1.3(c) and (g) of the Act.

 

Comment:

 

The environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard are considered relevant. In particular, the SEPP allows for an FSR bonus, that is not necessarily anticipated by the building height control within LCLEP 2009. The applicant has sought to provide lesser side and rear building setbacks in order to achieve only a part of the additional FSR available. By placing the additional massing horizontally rather than vertically (with the exception of the lift overrun), the overall impact on the locality is minimised particularly in relation to overshadowing as shown in Figure 4. The environmental planning grounds provided are considered satisfactory and supported. Clause 4.6(3)(b) is considered to be satisfied.

 

3.         Consistent with the zone objectives and objectives of the development standard.

 

Development consent cannot be granted to vary a development standard unless a consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development would be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out. An assessment against the objectives of building height and the R4 High Density Residential zone contained within LCLEP 2009 are provided as follows:

 

Height of Building Objectives

 

Clause 4.3 (1) provides the following objectives:-

 

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

 

Comment: The development allows for reasonable solar access to existing buildings and public areas. In relation to the area of non-compliance, it provides only marginal additional overshadowing in the morning period mid-winter (as shown on the 9:00am shadow diagrams) however is otherwise overshadowing the proposed boarding house only, falling across the roof which sits within the 17.5m height limit.

 

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

 

Comment: The variation to the lift overrun do not result in any privacy and visual impacts to surrounding developments.

 

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

 

Comment:  The proposed development provides solar access to the public domain in accordance with the 17.5m height limit prescribed under LCLEP 2009.

 

(d)  to relate development to topography

 

Comment:  The site has a slight slope falling to Mindarie Street. The southern leading edge of the building is within the height limit and in this way considers topography by pulling back the upper storey roof form to respond to the falling topography.

 

In accordance with the above, the development complies with the LCLEP 2009 objectives for the height control and is supported.

 

R4 High Density Residential Zone Objectives

 

The R4 High Density Residential Zone objectives are as follows:

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal provides 26 boarding rooms to the community in a high-density building form. The proposed boarding house, as limited and allowed for by SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 would provide reasonable amenity for future occupants with well-sized rooms for a boarding house development.

 

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

 

Comment: A boarding house is an alternate housing type allowed for by SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 in the high density residential environment.

 

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

 

Comment: Not applicable.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal has good access to Epping Road and Mowbray Road public transportation services (buses only). Notwithstanding, SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 has no access requirements for sites zoned R4 High Density Residential.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposed building design has regard to the existing amenity of residences in the neighbourhood. The height variation itself would cause negligible impact on existing amenity as previously detailed. Particular attention has been required to the front façade and privacy impacts to adjoining residential flat building.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal would not result in the isolation of any site as detailed later in this report noting however that the development type would likely be limited to a boarding house development.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal provides for landscaped areas in accordance with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 which limits the scope of assessing landscaping to the front setback area only. The front setback area provides for compatible landscaping with the surrounding residential environment.           

 

In accordance with the above, the development complies with the LEP 2009 objectives for the R4 High Density Residential zone.

 

4.         Concurrence of the Director General.

 

The Local Planning Panel can assume concurrence for exceptions to development standards where the variation to the development standard is greater than 10%. In this instance the variation is less than 10% (2.85%) however the application is referred to the Panel on other grounds (12 submissions by way of objection). As the proposal is referred to the Local Planning Panel for determination; concurrence is taken to be assumed.

 

5.         Conclusion

 

The objectives of Clause 4.6 are to provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards and to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances. The variations to the height standard of LCLEP 2009 are considered justified and supported in the circumstances of this case.  The development would satisfy the objectives of the control despite the non-compliance with the height control. The development satisfies the objectives and the criteria outlined in clause 4.6. As such, the variation is considered well founded, results in a better planning outcome and is in the public interest.

 

B.        Character of Local Area

 

Clause 30A of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 requires the consent authority to consider whether the design of the development is compatible with the character of the local area. The NSW Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle on compatibility in Project Venture Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 181. The judgement specifies the most apposite meaning of compatibility in an urban design context is capable of existing together in harmony. It then goes on to stipulate that compatibility is thus different from sameness. The principle establishes two tests as to whether the proposal is compatible within its context which are addressed as follows:

 

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

 

The proposal’s physical impacts on surrounding development have been assessed as being adequate. A merit assessment has been undertaken against the part of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 applying to residential flat buildings. The amenity afforded by the design to adjoining residents including in relation to privacy and solar impacts is considered reasonable. An assessment of site isolation of No. 49 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North, is provided in this report proceeding the DCP merit assessment (See ‘C – Site Isolation’ below).

 

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

 

The proposal’s appearance has been considered in relation to buildings around it and the character of the street. The proposed building height is not out of character with the area and would be satisfactory as detailed in the preceding Clause 4.6 justification. An assessment has been undertaken against LCLEP 2009 and LCDCP 2010 which establishes key building envelope controls for residential development on R4 High Density Residential zoned land. The proposal meets with the objectives of the DCP notwithstanding non-compliance with a number of the prescriptive requirements. Where objectives are not met, the SEPP excludes these matters as considerations (e.g. landscaped side and rear setbacks) and takes precedent over the local controls.

 

In summary the proposal is considered to meet both the physical impact and harmony test contained within Project Venture Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 181. A summary of the merit assessment against the principal building envelope/design provisions of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 Part C Residential, Part C3 – Residential Flat Buildings, has been undertaken as detailed in the following table of compliance:

 

PART C RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

DCP Control

Proposed

Complies

C.3 Residential Flat Buildings

3.3 Building Depth

3.3 Building Depth

The maximum residential flat building depth is to be 18 m.

The depth can be measured either from side/side or front/rear. In this case the width of the building is 9.24m

 

Yes

3.4 Building Width

The maximum overall width of the building fronting the street shall be 40m.

The maximum proposed width is 9.24m.

 

Yes

 

3.5 Setbacks

3.5.1 Front/Street

The front setback of the building shall be consistent with the prevailing setback along the street (refer Diagram No.1) or where there is no prevailing setback, 7.5m.

 

7.5m provided to Mindarie Street

 

Yes

 

3.5.2 Side and Rear

To the boundary within the R4 zone, the minimum side and rear setback shall be:

 

6m up to 4 storeys

9m for 5-8 storeys

 

The proposal includes a 3m side and rear storey setback for all 6 storeys of the proposed boarding house. The departure is considered satisfactory as the proposal maintains compliance with the relevant objectives of the DCP despite the non-compliance as follows:

 

- Landscape Character: An objective of the control is to establish a landscaped character for the area including to side and rear setback areas. However, the SEPP specifically states for boarding houses the only consideration for landscaped area is the front setback area. Accordingly, compliance with this objective is exempt. It is noted the front setback complies and the proposed landscaping of this area would be compatible with the character of the area in compliance with the SEPP.

 

- Spatial Proportions of the Street: In relation to the objective relating to establishing spatial proportions of the street the proposal would remain compatible, noting this is not meaning the same as, in that the proposed building width (9.24m being less than the allowable 40m) would result in the appearance of a tall but slender building which would not be overbearing on the street. It is noted the floor to ceiling heights of the boarding house are 2.4m not 2.7m as would be required for a residential flat building. Accordingly, while the development presents a 5 storey podium to Mowbray Road it would have a lesser height/scale as a 5 storey podium under the ADG.

 

- Visual Privacy: There are no objectives relating to visual privacy. Notwithstanding, the proposal has provided highlight windows to side boundaries, and an additional privacy screen to side boundary facing measures are proposed including the utilisation of obscure glazed balustrades, privacy screens and planter boxes. In addition, the ADG allows for 3m building separation (whilst differing from a setback) to non-habitable rooms. Subject to the provision of the privacy measures this can be said to be adequately addressed (refer to draft condition 6).

 

No, however satisfactory on merit or exempt under SEPP.

 

 

Exempt under SEPP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acceptable

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adequate

 

 

 

 

3.7 - Fences

Maximum 900mm solid fence.

 

Maximum 900mm.

Yes

3.8 Excavation

Excavation for major development is to be contained as close as practicable to the footprint of the development.

 

Excavation for basement parking has been extended to the boundaries to reduce the levels of basement to a single level. In any event, the basement level is not considered to contribute to the SEPP ‘character test’ as it is not visible from the street.

 

Acceptable

 

PART C – RESIDENTIAL LOCALITIES 

 

PART C RESIDENTIAL LOCALITIES

DCP Control

Proposed

Complies

Locality 6

A 17.5m height limit is to correspond with a maximum height of 5 storeys. 

The difference between floor to floor heights between a residential flat building and boarding house and the equivalent height are as follows:

 

 

Overall Height

Storeys

ADG

(3.1m floor/floor)

Boarding House

(2.75m floor/floor)

4

12.40m

11.00m

5

15.50m

13.75m

6

18.60m

16.50m

 

Based on the above, a six storey RFB is not capable of six (6) storeys however is capable for a boarding house. The difference in overall height between a 5 storey RFB and 6 storey boarding house is 1m which is negligible considering compatibility under the SEPP does not necessary mean the same.

 

No, however adequate on merit.

 

Any 5th storey is to have a maximum of 50% floor area of the storey below, and be set back 3m from that lower storey’s building façade line.

 

The 5th storey part is not set back an additional 3m. However as above, under the ADG four storeys would be equivalent to 12.4m where a boarding house can be 13.75m for five storeys. The difference of 1.35m is negligible and it would not appear out of character with the locality.

 

The upper storey is not 50% of the floor below however it is set back an additional 4.5m from the front boundary and 3m from the rear boundary which reduces its perceived footprint adequately.

 

No, however adequate on merit

 

Development proposals are to be in character with the palette of materials, finishes and design elements that are in harmony with the natural landscape and complementary with the bushland setting of the precinct. In addition, roof form articulation is encouraged.

 

The proposed material palette is considered in keeping with the natural setting and the roof form is suitably articulated through the stepping-in of the uppermost storey.

Yes

 

C.        Site Isolation

 

An assessment has to be made as to whether the subject proposal, lodged concurrently with a separate boarding house proposal at No. 51 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North, would isolate No. 49 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North. No. 49 Mindarie Street consists of a single detached dwelling house on approximately 562 square metres of land. A diagram showing No. 49 Mindarie Street in the context of surrounding proposed development is shown in Figure 5 below.

 

Figure 5: No. 49 Mindarie Street and Surrounding Development

 

The proposal is situated just to the north of a residential flat building development which was subject to appeal to the NSW Land and Environment Court in Landmark Group Australia Pty Ltd v Lane Cove Council [2019] NSWLEC 1034.  One of the contentions related to the potential isolation of No. 28 and 34 Mindarie Street. The sites were not considered isolated in part because the minimum lot size control is contained within a Development Control Plan, only applies to residential flat building development, and there are other forms of residential accommodation permissible on the land (e.g. boarding house development) to which no minimum lot size applies. In the subject application No. 49 Mindarie Street would have similar characteristics to No. 28 and 34 Mindarie Street, and accordingly is not considered isolated by the criteria outlined in the above caselaw.

 

Notwithstanding, the proposal was notified to No. 49 Mindarie Street on two occasions and no submission was received objecting to the developments. The applicant submitted a record of correspondence with, and offers made to, No. 49 Mindarie Street. The offers are considered reasonable and were not accepted. Given this, it is considered the applicant has made reasonable attempts to purchase No. 49 Mindarie Street and met their obligations to pursue site amalgamation under Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010.

 

SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

 

A boarding house, even if in the form of a residential flat building (3 or more storeys), is specifically excluded from the application of SEPP 65 under Clause 4(4). In this instance the merit assessment against Council’s Development Control Plan is considered to provide suitable analysis of the building envelope and a merit assessment against SEPP 65 is not required. In relation to the amenity provisions of SEPP 65, the eye of the sun shadow diagrams indicate the majority of boarding rooms would receive reasonable solar access and natural ventilation. While the apartment size provisions do not apply, the rooms are generously sized for boarding house rooms (23-25 square metres) and would provide reasonable amenity to future occupants (See Clause 30A assessment for consideration of amenity impacts to adjoining properties).

 

SEPP 55 Remediation of Land

 

The provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) have been considered in the assessment of the development application. The development application is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under SEPP55 with contamination restricted to the dwelling given the age of the structure, and contamination is unlikely to be on surrounding land given the historical use of the site as a dwelling.  The proposal complies with the provisions of SEPP 55 Remediation of Land.

 

SEPP (BASIX) 2004

 

The proposal was accompanied by a BASIX Certificate in accordance with the requirements of SEPP (BASIX) 2004. The development application is considered satisfactory with respect to the SEPP subject to a draft condition of consent requiring the implementation of the Certificate requirements (refer draft condition 19). The proposal complies with the provisions of SEPP (BASIX) 2004.

 

 

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

 

 

Draft Remediation of Land SEPP

 

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 where the certification of remediation works is undertaken as development not requiring consent. While the Draft does consider introducing planning guidelines for the assessment/preparation of preliminary site investigations, such as the one lodged with the subject Development Application, the report has been reviewed in detail and is sufficient for its purpose. The proposal complies with the Draft Remediation of Land SEPP.

 

 

(iii)       Any development control plan

 

 

Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010

 

The proposal complies with the relevant provisions of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 as outlined in the following table of compliance:

 

Part C5 – Boarding Houses

Clause

Control

Proposal

Complies

5.2 – Social Impact

Social Impact Assessments must be provided for proposed boarding houses.

 

The proposal was accompanied by a Social Impact Assessment which demonstrates a reasonable level of substantive, objective evidence, for the establishment of a boarding house, with the social impact acceptable subject to appropriate management measures. A Plan of Management is recommended to be required as a condition of consent (Refer draft condition 3).

 

Yes

5.3 – Internal Amenity

The maximum kitchen area within a boarding house room is 2 square metres.

 

The maximum kitchen area does not exceed 2 square metres.

Yes

 

The following referrals were undertaken as part of the assessment of the Development Application of relevance to SEPP (Affordable Renal Housing) 2009 for the construction of a new building:

 

Referral

DCP

Comment

Waste Management

 

Part Q – Waste Management and Minimisation

Satisfactory - The applicant amended the plans to provide a garbage truck waiting bay for commercial collection of waste which was considered a satisfactory outcome for a constrained site. Draft conditions of consent are proposed (69 to 71).

 

Engineering

 

Part O – Stormwater Management

Satisfactory - The applicant would be required to extent the stormwater pipe system along Mindarie Street. No objection raised subject to draft conditions (20 to 54).

 

Tree Preservation

 

Part J – Landscaping

Satisfactory - The Arborists report accurately assess thirteen trees located on and adjoining the site that may be impacted by the proposed development. The subject trees are varying in value to the site, there are no trees on the site that are considered of high value. It is acknowledged that tree number 11 located on an adjoining site has been removed as part of a neighbouring development. The proposal would contribute a major encroachment into the TPZ and SRZ of tree 9, located on a neighbouring property. Given the height of the tree is approximately 5 metres, some disturbance into the fringe of the SRZ area is not considered to be significant on the provision it is managed appropriately. Draft conditions of consent are proposed (55 to 62).

 

Replacement planting includes large pot sized trees (200L) to Mindarie Street and 100L trees to side and rear boundaries. Trees removed are recommended to be replaced at a ratio of 1:1. The nominated species listed on the landscape plan are considered satisfactory. The resultant planting would enable the development to contribute to the creation of suitable canopy cover as the plants establish.

 

Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

Part R – Traffic, Transport and Parking

Satisfactory - No objection subject to draft conditions (63 to 68) addressing compliance with the Australian Standards, manoeuvring, safe ingress/egress and construction traffic management.

 

Environmental Health

 

N/A

Satisfactory - No objection subject to draft conditions (72 to 79).

 

 

 

(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 demonstrated to not adversely impact the locality. It is noted Council has declared a Climate Emergency in which tree canopy is sought to be protected to improve the resilience of communities in the face of increasing temperatures. The site has little established canopy with medium height trees existing. Ideally the proposal would provide for a high quality canopy across site. However, the SEPP limits landscaping considerations to the front setback area. Within the front setback area both the species selection and the initial planting size will provide for a more rapid reestablishment of the tree canopy. A total of five (5) trees ranging in mature height to 7m-8m with a minimum initial installation height of 4m are proposed. While the SEPP does limit planting considerations, the proposal provides adequate planting where required and will provide canopy protection to the public domain and front of the site.

 

 

(c)  The suitability of the site for the development

 

 

The site suitability is acceptable having particular regard to the accessibility and character compatibility provisions under SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

 

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

 

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and twelve (12) submissions were received. The submissions are summarised and addressed within the following table:

 

Concern

Comment

Affordable housing brings people in to the area that are not socially cohesive and would drive down the socioeconomic outcomes for the area. The location in proximity to Mowbray Public and Mindarie Park is not appropriate.

 

 

Affordable housing is permissible under SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and provides for housing choice. The proposal is not social housing and operates on the open rental market. The proposal is in the style of a new generation boarding house, providing larger boarding rooms with higher amenity levels than a traditional boarding house. A diversity of housing is encouraged under the SEPP and such is supported.

 

Traffic generation and insufficient parking.

 

The proposal provides parking in accordance with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and cannot be refused on these grounds.

 

The building is not aesthetically pleasing and looks more commercial in nature, stark and monolithic.

 

The proposed design was amended to provide for further articulation to the front façade. The proposal though architecturally unique by way of the site constraints would be compatible (not meaning the same as) with the future envisaged high-density character of the locality.

 

The overdevelopment of Lane Cove is impacting upon housing prices.

 

The Floor Space Ratio is 1.8:1 under LCLEP 2009. SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 allows for an additional 0.5:1 FSR on sites zoned R4 High Density Residential. Therefore a total FSR of 2.3:1 is allowable where 1.98:1 is proposed. Under Clause 29 of the SEPP a boarding house cannot be refused on the grounds of density or scale if the FSR is equal to, or less than, 2.3:1. 

 

The building height is excessive.

 

The building height variation is minor in nature and has been assessed to satisfy Clause 4.6 of LCLEP 2009.

 

The side and rear boundary setbacks are not sufficient being 3 metres instead of 6 metres, and the basement setbacks are not suitable.

 

The non-compliance with the prescriptive measures are noted however a 3 metre setback is considered suitable in this instance for reasons outlined within the report.

 

The communal living space is not suitably sized for the number of occupants.

 

The communal living room size is not specified by  SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 only that is required to have one. The communal living room is 25 square metres, is well connected to the communal open space and is in addition to private living rooms provided to each boarding room.

 

The Floor Space Ratio of 1.98:1 is out of keeping with the character of the area.

 

The Floor Space Ratio is 1.8:1 under LCLEP 2009. SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 allows for an additional 0.5:1 FSR on sites zoned R4 High Density Residential. Therefore a total FSR of 2.3:1 is allowable where 1.98:1 is proposed. Under Clause 29 of the SEPP a boarding house cannot be refused on the grounds of density or scale if the FSR is equal to, or less than, 2.3:1.

 

Privacy measures for neighbours are insufficient.

 

Additional privacy measures to balconies are proposed to ensure privacy in line with Apartment Design Guide (ADG) standards are provided for (refer to draft condition 6).

 

Not sufficient public transport (bus only), local shops and employment opportunities.

 

Service access is not a consideration for development within the R4 High Density Residential zone. Notwithstanding, bus services are available in walking distance on Mowbray Road and Epping Road.

 

The development is for the purpose of forcing the owners at No. 49 Mindarie Street to sell.

 

Site isolation is addressed in the report. No. 49 Mindarie Street is not isolated. However, development options for 49 Mindarie Street would be reduced.

 

Acoustic impacts for neighbours given proximity to side boundary.

 

The acoustic impacts from the proposal would not be unreasonable given the limited number of window and door openings, the limited balcony sizes and privacy screen measures.

 

Affordable rental housing should make up no more than 30% of all units within the building.

 

The proposal is for a boarding house in which rooms are not designated ‘affordable housing’ within the meaning of Clause 17 of the SEPP. A boarding house is made affordable primarily through the boarding rooms being smaller in area than an apartment. The mechanism for affordability is different than other forms of affordable rental housing under ‘Division 1 – In-fill Affordable Housing’ of the SEPP.

 

 

 

(e) Public Interest

 

 

The proposal is in the public interest as it provides for a permissible form of residential accommodation and is compliant with the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

SECTION 7.11 ASSESSMENT

 

The proposal is subject to the Lane Cove Council Section 94 Contributions Plan (now referred to as Section 7.11 in the Act). The Section 7.11 contribution for the proposed boarding house development is calculated in accordance with the Plan as follows:

 

Number of Rooms

Occupancy Rate

Per Room/Dwelling Rate

Contribution

26 lodger rooms

1 person per room

 

$10,642.00

$276,692.00

1 manager room

1.2 persons per dwelling

$12,770.40

$12,770.40

 

 

Total

$289,462.40

 

A credit is applied under the Plan for the existing dwelling house is $20,000 (capped).

 

The required amount to be paid is $269,462.40, being the contribution less the credit.

 

CONCLUSION

 

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

 

The proposed boarding house is compliant with the numerical standards within SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 with the exception of building height. The variation relates to the lift overrun only, is minor (500mm) and the submitted Clause 4.6 written request is considered satisfactory and well-founded as detailed in this report.

 

The proposed boarding house is considered compatible with the character of the local area provisions contained in Clause 30A of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 including a merit assessment against the relevant provisions of Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 and consideration of the NSW Land and Environment Court Planning Principle.

 

The proposal is not considered to isolate No. 49 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North. However, the development potential of No. 49 Mindarie Street would likely be reduced. In any event the applicant has submitted a record of offers to the affected property which are reasonable and no submission was received in response to the notification of Development Application No. 105/2019 or 106/2019 from No. 49 Mindarie Street.

 

On balance the proposed development would therefore meet the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, is adequate on merit and is recommended for approval.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 4 February 2020, 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, as it is satisfied that the applicant’s request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by Clause 4.6 of that Plan, and the proposed development would be in the public interest as it is 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 4 February 2020, exercising the functions of Council as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application DA105/19 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a boarding house on 47 Mindarie Street, Lane Cove North, subject to the following draft conditions:-

 

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

 

Drawing No.

Title

Author

Rev

Date

DA02

Basement

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA03

Ground Floor

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA04

Typical Floor Plans (L1, L2, L3, L4)

Wolski Coppin Architecture

-

02/12/2019

DA05

Level 5

Wolski Coppin Architecture

-

02/12/2019

DA06

Roof, Site and Height Variation Plan

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA07

Section AA

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA08

Section BB

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA09

Ramp Sections

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA10

South Elevation

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA11

North Elevation

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA12

East Elevation

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

DA13

West Elevation

Wolski Coppin Architecture

A

02/12/2019

1/5

Landscape Plan

iScape Landscape Architecture

B

02/12/2019

 

            except as amended by the following conditions.

 

 2.        Registration of Boarding House The boarding house is to be registered as a boarding house with the New South Wales Department of Fair Trading and present written proof to the Council and Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencement of the use.

 

3.         Plan of Management A Plan of Management is to be prepared incorporating the measures described in the submitted Social Impact Assessment and Acoustic Report to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager Development Assessment prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. A copy of the Plan of Management is to be made available to all boarding house occupants and be complied with at all times for the life of the development.

 

4.         Boarding Room Capacity Each boarding room is limited to a maximum of two adult lodgers at any one time.

 

5.         Subdivision The strata subdivision or community title subdivision of the development is not permitted and a restrictive covenant is to be placed on title to this effect prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

6.         Privacy Measures. Fixed and permanent privacy screens of a minimum height of 1.6m (maximum up to 1.8m) are to be provided to the side boundary facing edge of the balcony to Room 105 (L1, L2, L3, L4), the east facing edge of the balcony to room 502, the west facing edge of the balcony to Room 503, the west facing edge of the balcony to the communal living room and the east facing edge to the balcony of Room 501. The height is to be measured from the relevant balcony level. Privacy screens are to be aluminium louvred (fixed) screens. A planter box with a minimum width of 1m is to be provided along the northern edge of Room 503 and Room 502 to make the effective edge of the trafficable balcony set back 4 metres from the rear boundary. Obscure glazing is to be provided to all glass balustrades of Room 103 and Room 104 (L1, L2, L3, L4). The measures are to be shown on the Construction Certificate drawings prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate to the satisfaction of Council and the Principal Certifying Authority. The privacy measures are to be installed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate and are to be maintained for the life of the development.

 

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

 

8.         Compliance with the Building Code of Australia 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 Certifying Authority or a qualified accredited Fire Safety Engineer, confirming that all identified Performance Solutions have been completed for the building PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A FINAL OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE.

 

9.         Occupation Certificate An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the building.

 

10.       Sydney Water 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.

 

11.       THE PAYMENT OF A CONTRIBUTION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL'S SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN (NOW KNOWN AS SECTION 7.11 IN THE ACT).  THIS PAYMENT BEING MADE PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE AND IS TO BE AT THE CURRENT RATE AT TIME OF PAYMENT.  NOTE:  PAYMENT MUST BE IN BANK CHEQUE. PERSONAL CHEQUES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

 

The Section 7.11 Contribution for the boarding house development is calculated at the current rate of $10,642.00 per person (2019-2020) as follows:

           

Number of Rooms

Occupancy Rate

Per Room/Dwelling Rate

Contribution

26 lodger rooms

1 person per room

 

$10,642.00

$276,692.00

1 manager room

1.2 persons per dwelling

$12,770.40

$12,770.40

 

 

Total

$289,462.40

           

A credit is applied under the Plan for the existing dwelling house is $20,000 (capped).

 

The required amount to be paid is $269,462.40, being the contribution less the credit.

 

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

 

Reason:  To provide community services and infrastructure for additional residents

 

12.       Section 73 Certificate 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..

 

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

                 Monday to Friday                     7am to 5.30pm (inclusive)           

 

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

 

                 Saturday                                  8am to 12 noon   

 

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

 

                 Sunday                                     No work Sunday or any Public Holiday.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

15.       Fire Safety Schedule 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.

 

16.       Check Survey Certificate A check survey certificate is to be submitted to Council and the Certifier at the completion of:-

 

a        The establishment of each slab level; and

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.

 

17.       Waste Management Plan Compliance with the submitted Waste Management Plan.

 

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

 

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

 

19.       BASIX - Compliance with all the conditions of the BASIX Certificate lodged with Council as part of this application. Certification of Certificate measures being met/installed is to be provided by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

Engineering Conditions

 

20.       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.

 

21.       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

 

22.       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.

 

23.       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.

 

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

 

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

 

26.       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’.

 

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

 

28.       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.

 

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

 

30.       Rainwater Reuse Tanks: The applicant is to install a rainwater reuse system with a minimum capacity of 2,500 Litres. Rainwater tanks are to be installed in accordance with Council’s rainwater tank policy and relevant Australian standards. The plumbing requirements are as follows

           

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

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

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

·         Rainwater tank is to be connected to the nominated fixtures in the BASIX Certificate.

 

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

 

32.       Heavy Vehicle Duty Employee and Truck Cleanliness: The applicant   shall

 

·         Inform in writing all contractors of Council’s requirements relating to truck cleanliness leaving the site.

·         Keep a register of all contactors that have been notified, the register is to be signed by each contractor. The register must be available for access by Council officers at all times.

·         Place an employee within close proximity of the site exit during site operation hours to ensure that all outgoing heavy vehicles comply with Council’s requirements. This employee shall liaise with heavy vehicle drivers and provide regular written updates to drivers on the conditions of entry to the subject site.

 

            Those drivers who have been determined to continually not comply with Council’s requirements, either by the developer or authorised Council officers, shall not be permitted re-entry into the site for the duration of the project.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

36.       Council Infrastructure Damage Bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $7,200 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 start of any works on the site.

 

37.       Drainage Plans Amendments: The stormwater drainage plan No: CC180536 - C2 issue B prepared by Acor Consultants Pty Ltd dated on 24/06/19 is to be amended to reflect the following conditions. This plan should show full details of new pipe network includes following;

 

a)      A gross pollutant trap needs to be designed and added to the amended plans within the property boundary prior to the connection to the street system

b)      Access to the above ground on site detention system is to be restricted by enclosing the area with a swimming pool type fence with childproof, self closing gate for access

c)      Provide a minimum of 13.7m3 capacity of OSD as required

d)      Overflow from the OSD shall not re-enter the site via proposed driveway

e)      A Rain Water Reuse System to collect rain water from roof area needs to be designed and added to the amended plans as required by BASIX

f)       The proposed stormwater discharge to Kerb & Gutter is prohibited. The proposed stormwater discharge from the proposed development needs to drain directly into the nearest Council’s stormwater infrastructure via pits and pipes. All new pipes within Council’s land will require a minimum of 375mm diameter RCP. Pits or cleaning eyes shall be provided at bends, changes in grades and every 30m along the pipeline.

g)      All the proposed stormwater pipes shall have a minimum 1.0% grade

 

            The amended design is to be certified that it fully complies with, AS-3500 and Part O, Council's DCP-Stormwater management; certification is to be by a suitably qualified engineer. The amended plan and certification shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

            The Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that the amendments have been made in accordance with the conditional requirements and the amended plans are adequate for the purposes of construction. They are to determine what details, if any, are to be added to the construction certificate plans, in order for the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

38.       Drainage Construction: The stormwater drainage on the site is to be constructed generally in accordance with plan No: CC180536 - C1 to C7 issue B prepared by Acor Consultants Pty Ltd dated 24-06-19 with the amendment mentioned above in condition 37.

 

            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.

 

39.       Positive Covenant Bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $1000.00 cash bond to cover the registration of a Positive Covenant over the on site detention system. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

40.       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.

 

41.       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.

 

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

 

43.       Geotechnical Monitoring Program: Excavation works associated with the proposed development must be overseen and monitored by a suitably qualified engineer. A Geotechnical Monitoring Program shall be submitted to the principle certifying authority prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. The Geotechnical Monitoring Program must be produced by suitably qualified engineer ensuring that all geotechnical matters are regularly assessed during construction.

 

            The Geotechnical Monitoring Program for the construction works must be in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and is to include:-

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

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

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

o   Foundation bearing conditions and footing construction.

o   Installation of sub-soil drainage.

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

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

 

44.       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.

 

45.       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.  In the event that access for undertaking the dilapidation report is denied by the relevant property owner(s), the applicant must demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority that reasonable steps have been taken to obtain access and advise the affected property owner(s) of the reason for the survey. If these steps have failed, no such report is required. 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.

 

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

 

47.       Council Construction Requirements: The applicant shall construct / reconstruct the             following:

 

1.    Construct 1.5m width concrete footpath to match existing along the Mindarie Street frontage.

2.    New Kerb and Gutter to match existing along the Mindarie Street frontage of the site.

3.    Reinstate all adjustments to the road surface to Council’s satisfaction.

4.    Construction of a new stormwater line that drains directly into the nearest Council’s stormwater infrastructure.

 

            A $46,000.00 cash bond or bank guarantee shall be lodged with Council to cover the             satisfactory construction of the above requirements. Lodgement of this bond is required             prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The Bond will be held for a period of             six months after satisfactory completion of the works. All works shall be carried out prior to             the issue of the Occupation Certificate. All costs associated with the construction of the             above works are to be borne by the applicant.

 

48.       Council Inspection Requirements: The following items shall require Council inspections.

·      New footpath

·      New kerb and gutter

·      All asphalt adjustments to the roadway

·      All the approved stormwater drainage works on Council property

 

Each item is to be inspected prior to the pouring of any concrete (formwork) and on completion of the construction. An initial site meeting is to be conducted with Council and the contractor prior to the commencement of any of the above works to allow for discussion of Council construction / setout requirements. The Council’s applicable inspection fee is to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

49.       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.

 

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

 

51.       Certification of Retaining Structures and Excavations: A suitably qualified engineer shall provide certification to the principal certifying authority that all retaining structures and excavations have been carried out in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Codes of Practise. The certification and a complete record of inspections, testing and monitoring (with certifications) must be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

52.       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.

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

 

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

 

54.       Positive Covenant OSD:  Documents giving effect to the creation of a positive covenant over the on site detention system shall be registered on the title of the property prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. The wording of the terms of the positive covenant shall be in accordance with part O Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

Tree Management Conditions

 

55.       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.

 

56.       This condition of consent gives approval for the removal of trees identified in the Arborists Report prepared by Landscape Matrix dated May 2019 as 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,12 and 13. Trees are to be removed upon issue of the Construction Certificate only.

 

57.       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. In order to achieve 1:1 planting two additional trees from that on the landscape plan are to be provided including an additional street tree of the same species (forward of western side boundary in front of site) and additional site tree adjacent to the eastern side boundary (Blueberry Ash). Trees are to be installed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

58.       Replacement tree species are to be installed in accordance with the Landscape Plan prepared by iScape dated December 2019. The following species indicated on the plan are to be installed at a size index of 100 litres (except where amended by condition 81 of this consent); T. laurina, B. ericifolia, E. reticulatus and A. smithii. The number of each species is to remain consistent with the landscape plan provided.

 

59.       Footing, trench or excavation that is within the TPZ of any retained trees must be carried out under the guidance of the Project Arborist and using non-destructive techniques. No tree roots greater than 40mm diameter to be severed or damaged unless approved by the Project Arborist. All roots are to be pruned and documented by the Project Arborist then submitted with the final certificate of compliance upon completion of the project. Prior to the issue of Occupation Certificate. Once Complete and roots have been pruned clear of the area, civil machinery may resume excavation from outside of the tree protection zone.

 

60.       Excavation for the proposed basement line within the Tree Protection Zone for tree 9 is to be carried out prior to the commencement of any works on site. Soil is to be removed using non-destructive techniques such as a pneumatic spade or manual means. Roots are to be assessed, pruned and documented by the Project Arborist who is to hold an AQF Level 5 qualification in Arboriculture. The excavation is then to be back filled until required to be removed again for construction. The compliance document is to be submitted to Council for review by Councils Senior Tree Assessment Officer immediately after root pruning. This condition is to be met prior to the commencement of any works on site.

 

61.       Ground protection is to be installed within three (3) metres, where not conflicting with the proposed basement, radius of the trunk of tree number 9 as identified in the Arborists Report prepared by Landscape Matrix dated August 2019. Ground protection is to meet Australian Standard 4970 Protection of Trees on Development Sites (2009) and be approved in writing by the Project Arborist. Certificates of compliance to this condition are to be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

62.       All tree protection measures are to be clearly identified on the landscape plans provided prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

Traffic and Parking Conditions

 

63.       Parking. The proposal is to be provided with a total of 13 car parking spaces (inclusive of             one small space and one accessible space), 6 motorcycle spaces and 6 bicycle spaces.

 

64.       Wheel Stops Install wheel stops on all car parking spaces to prevent any collision with             structures or objects.

 

65.       Certification of Basement Car Park. A Traffic Report prepared by a suitably qualified traffic consultant demonstrating the safety and functionality of the basement car park, including details of the proposed signalised system should be provided to, and approved by Council’s Development Engineer-Traffic before issuing of Construction Certificate. A traffic engineering consultant is to certify the system is operational prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

66.       Line Marking and Sign Posting. The small car space, motorcycle spaces and waiting bays should be adequately linemarked and signposted.

 

67.       A Construction Traffic Management Plan must be submitted and approved by Lane Cove Council before issuing the Construction Certificate. Consultation with NSW Police, RMS and Transport for NSW / Sydney Buses will be required as part of preparation of the Construction Traffic Management Plan.

 

68.       Work Zones Due to requirements for safe traffic and pedestrian movement, loading or unloading of any vehicle or trailer carrying material associated with the development must not take place on the public road unless within an approved Works Zone.  If the Works Zone is required, the developer must give the Council written notice of at least six (6) weeks prior to the date upon which use of the Works Zone will commence and the duration of the Works Zone approval shall be taken to commence from that date. All vehicle unloading/loading activities on a public roadway/footway are to be undertaken within an approved Works Zone.

 

Waste Management Conditions

 

69.       Waste Storage for Boarding Rooms Each boarding room is to be provided with an indoor waste/recycling cupboard (or other appropriate storage space) for the interim storage of a minimum one day’s garbage and recycling generation.

 

70.       Waste Management. The development is to adhere to the waste management plan submitted with the initial development application. Waste and recyclables are to be transported to the Waste collection point identified in the submitted plans, to allow for collection without impeding on local traffic flow. The bins are to be returned to the waste store within 24 hours of collection.

 

71.       Commercial Servicing. The development is to be serviced by a commercial waste contractor. Evidence of a suitable contract arrangement is to be submitted to Council prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate. The servicing by a commercial waste contractor does not exempt the development from paying Council waste service levies.

 

Environmental Health Conditions

 

72.       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.

 

73.       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.

 

74.       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.

 

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

 

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

 

77.       Assessment of Potentially Contaminated Soils All stockpiles of potentially             contaminated soil must be assessed in accordance with relevant NSW Environment             Protection Authority guidelines, such as the publication titled Environmental Guidelines:             Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non – Liquid Wastes (EPA,             1999).

 

78.       Offsite Disposal of Contaminated Soil All contaminated soil removed from the sire must be disposed at a waste facility that can lawfully receive that waste. Copies of all test results and disposal dockets must be retained for at least 3 years and be made available to authorised Council officers on request.

 

79.       Storage of Potentially Contaminated Soils All stockpiles of potentially contaminated soil must be stored in an environmentally acceptable manner in a secure area on the site.

 

Landscape Conditions

 

80.       All landscaping works shall be in accordance with the stamped, approved plans. A Compliance Certificate from a registered, practicing landscape architect confirming the landscape has been installed in accordance with the plans shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority upon completion with a copy forwarded to Council within 5 business days.

 

81.       All trees along Mindarie Street (including the street tree(s) and the front setback zone) shall be of a 200L pot size and a minimum 4m height, at time of installation. The two (2) melaleuca hypericifolia within the front setback is to be planted within a minimum 1m soil depth, other tree plantings within the front setback/street are within deep soil zones.

 

82.       All trees are to be maintained in a healthy condition for the life of the development with replacement trees to be installed within 6 months of the trees demise.  This obligation shall become the responsibility of the building owner at the completion of the 12-month maintenance contract.

 

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

 

84.       All trees must conform to Australian Standard 2302:2018 Tree Stock for Landscape Use.  Trees are to be inspected by the project Landscape Architect upon delivery to site but prior to installation.  The project landscape architect shall provide written verification that each tree meets the standards for health, shape and vitality as outlined in the standard.

 

85.       A landscape practical completion report must be prepared by the consultant landscape architect and submitted to Council or the accredited certifier within 7 working days of the date of practical completion of all landscape works. This report must certify that all landscape works have been completed in accordance with the landscape working drawing. A copy of the report must be submitted to Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate. Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of public record, a copy of the certification must be forwarded to Council within five (5) working days of the date of issue.

 

86.       A certificate must be submitted by a qualified practising landscape architect, Landscape/environmental designer or horticulturist, certifying that the proposed subsoil drainage and any associated waterproofing membrane have been installed in accordance with the details shown on the approved landscape working drawings and specification. Works must not progress until Council or the accredited certifier has confirmed that this condition has been fully satisfied. Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of public record, a copy of the certification must be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.

 

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

 

88.       All landscaping areas shall have an automatic irrigation system on a timer that provides adequate water for the ongoing health and vitality of the plants.  The watering times and frequencies are to be adjusted seasonally to account for the different watering requirements for the temperatures and hours of sunlight for each season and maintained for the life of the development.  This obligation shall become the responsibility of the Strata Management outside the Council appointed maintenance period.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Clause 4.6 Written Request

6 Pages