Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting

7 July 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 7 July 2020 commencing at 5:00pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Craig - GMYours faithfully

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting Procedures

 

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

The order of business is listed in the Agenda on the next page. That order will be followed unless the Panel resolves to modify the order at the meeting. This may occur for example where the members of the public in attendance are interested in specific items on the agenda.

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

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

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

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

The audio from these meetings is also recorded for the purposes of verifying the accuracy of the minutes and the recordings are not disclosed to any third party under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, except as allowed under section 18(1) or section 19(1) of the PPIP Act, or where Council is compelled to do so by court order, warrant or subpoena or by any other legislation.

 

 

 


Lane Cove Local Planning Panel 7 July 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.

 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Reports

 

1.       1-7 Merinda Street and 11-17 Willandra Street, Lane Cove North.... 4

 

2.       2 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards.................................................................... 20

 

3.       North Shore Rowing Club - Aquatic Park, Stuart Street, Longueville....................................................................................................................................... 197

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 7 July 2020

1-7 Merinda Street and 11-17 Willandra Street, Lane Cove North

 

 

Subject:          1-7 Merinda Street and 11-17 Willandra Street, Lane Cove North    

Record No:    DA18/162-01 - 34398/20

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Henry  Burnett 

 

 

 

Property:

1-7 Merinda Street and 11-17 Willandra Street, Lane Cove North

Application:

Section 4.55 Modification to DA162/2018 for a Residential Flat Building Development

Date Lodged:

15 April 2020

Cost of Work:

No change to cost of work ($29,501,518.00)

Owner:

Willandra Lane Cove Pty Ltd

Applicant:                        

Hyecorp Property Group Pty Ltd

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The Section 4.55 Modification is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as the development is the subject of 10 or more unique submissions by way of objection.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application seeks to amend an approved residential flat building development for 106 apartments, cafe and basement parking for 174 vehicles.

 

The subject Section 4.55 Modification Application as originally submitted sought to increase the building height as well as the floor area of the upper level. Council raised concerns with these components of the proposal and the application was amended by the applicant in response. 

Table 1 details the amendments proposed in the revised Section 4.55 Modification Application.

 

Table 1: Summary of Modifications

Proposed Modification

Description

Redistribution of Floor Levels

Redistribution of the finished floor levels to allow for the inclusion of sprinklers required under BCA 2019.

 

Redistribution of Gross Floor Area on Level 7

Redistribution of upper level (Level 7) GFA to provide for 3 x 3 bedroom units (originally 1 x 2 bed and 2 x 3 bed units).

 

Conversion of Service Area to Residential Facilities

 

Conversion of service area (non-GFA) on Level 1 to provide for residential facilities (GFA) including a theatre, exercise room, activity room and pram storage area with a total increase in GFA of 239m2.

 

New Service Areas to Basement 1 and 2

Enlargement of the Basement 1 and Basement 2 services, waste collection and parking areas adjacent to the driveway area.

 

Unit Layout Changes

 

Minor amendments to internal unit layout of south-eastern corner apartments at Level 1-3 (3 units) and balcony increases to Unit 611 and Upper Level Units.

 

Landscaping Amendments

Minor landscape amendments to factor in fire stair modifications and on-structure planting. Deep soil landscaping reduced by 64m2 from 26.53% (1265m2) to 25.19% (1201m2) but overall landscaped area (including on-structure planting) unchanged.

 

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and eleven (11) submissions were received. The concerns raised include building height, FSR and solar access. In amending the application (after notification) the applicant has reduced the building height in line with the original approval and no longer seeks to increase Gross Floor Area on the upper level. In making these amendments the applicant is considered to have addressed the submissions raised.

Given the applicant has moved to address a number of the objections by deletion and amendment the proposed final amendments have not been renotified as they would have a better planning outcome.

The proposal has been assessed against Section 4.55(1A) of the Act and is considered satisfactory. The proposal is of minor environmental impact and substantially the same with no increase in residential apartment GFA and only minor redistribution of building height to accommodate sprinklers required under Volume One of the National Construction Code 2019.

The proposal has been assessed against Section 4.55(3) of the Act. The final modification would result in a variation to the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) development standard contained within LCLEP 2009. An FSR of 1.846:1 is proposed where LCLEP 2009 permits a maximum FSR of 1.8:1. A variation of 2.55% or 221.6m2 is proposed. The additional Gross Floor Area which would not result in any additional bulk and scale (being contained in a basement section of Level 1), would provide significant amenity benefits to future occupants, and is considered supportable in this instance.

The proposed modifications are consistent with the original reasons for granting consent for the development including the provision of an L-shaped building which steps with the topography of the site to provide a better planning outcome for adjoining properties to the south of the site.

 

The Section 4.55 Modification is reported to the Local Planning Panel with a recommendation for approval subject to draft conditions.

 


 

SITE

 

The development site is 1-7 Merinda Street and 11-17 Willandra Street, Lane Cove North. The site has a total area of 4768m2. The site is an amalgamation of eight regular shaped allotments as shown in Figure 1 below.

 

Figure 1: Site Survey

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS

 

The Development Application, DA162/2018, subject to the Section 4.55 Modification was approved on 23 May 2019 as a deferred commencement consent by the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel for demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building development containing 106 apartments, cafe and basement parking for 174 vehicles.

 

In determining the application, the Local Planning Panel gave the following reasons for the deferred commencement determination:

 

·         The Panel agrees with the Officer’s assessment of the development application; and

 

·         A complete set of plans which detail the amendments proposed to the south elevation and consequential amendments has not been submitted by the applicant. The Panel therefore considered that deferred commencement consent is appropriate in these circumstances.

 

The deferred commencement condition was as follows:

 

PART A – DEFERRED COMMENCEMENT CONSENT:

 

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

 

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

 

                  i.        External sun shading is required on the northern face of the north western corner apartments between grid lines 01 and 02 as these are completely exposed to the Northern Sun. The living rooms on the western side either side of grid line C and the eastern side south of grid line G require external sun protection.

                 ii.        The provision of obscure glazing to 1.6m (or a high sill window) above the finished floor level for all south facing windows within 12.5 metres of the southern boundary.

                iii.        The provision of obscure glazing for all balcony balustrading;

                iv.        The deletion of part of the balcony and associated roof at the fifth storey to apartment 517 and 518 (Plan 7) to provide a minimum 12m building separation to the southern boundary (with associated amendments to openings);

                 v.        The deletion of part of the building to apartment 418 and 419 to provide for a 12m building separation to the southern boundary with associated internal reconfiguration (an uncovered balcony with planterbox for privacy can be located to the 9m building separation line; and

                vi.        The Gross Floor Area lost in Condition 1(v) can be relocated to the uppermost level (Plan 9) generally in accordance with the indicative Option 3 submitted to Council.

               vii.        Amended floor plans and elevations shall be provided which document the changes required within condition 1.

An operative consent was issued on 13 June 2019 after the applicant satisfied the above requirements.

 


 

PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS:

 

An extended summary of the proposed modifications is detailed in Table 2 below. Further, the proposed and approved plans are attached to the report as AT-1 (approved) and AT-2 (proposed plans).

 

Table 2: Extended Summary of Modifications

Proposed Modification

Description

Redistribution of Floor Levels

Redistribution of the finished floor levels to allow for the inclusion of sprinklers required under BCA 2019 in the following manner:

 

Level

Existing RL.

Revised Mod. RL.

Difference in RL.

B2

38.10

38.00

-0.1

B1

41.10

41.00

-0.1

L1

44.50

44.40

-0.1

L2

47.54

47.54

Nil

L3

50.58

50.58

Nil

L4

53.62

53.70

+0.08 (8cm)

L5

56.76

56.76

Nil

L6

59.90

59.91

+0.01 (1cm)

L7

63.04

63.04

Nil

ROOF

66.08

66.08

Nil

 

It is noted that the modification as originally submitted included the following amendments to floor levels:

 

Level

Existing RL.

Original Mod. RL.

Difference in RL.

B2

38.10

38.00

-0.1

B1

41.10

41.00

-0.1

L1

44.50

44.40

-0.1

L2

47.54

47.54

Nil

L3

50.58

50.68

+0.1

L4

53.62

53.82

+0.12

L5

56.76

56.96

+0.20

L6

59.90

60.10

+0.20

L7

63.04

63.24

+0.20

ROOF

66.08

66.38

+0.30

 

The applicant amended the modification to reduce the extent of the height changes. The minor increases (0.08m at Level 4 and 0.01m at Level 6) are considered satisfactory to allow for the provision of sprinklers which were not a requirement at the time of the original Development Application being introduced as part of BCA 2019.

 

Redistribution of Gross Floor Area on Level 7

Redistribution of upper level (Level 7) GFA to provide for 3 x 3 bedroom units (originally 1 x 2 bed and 2 x 3 bed units). The original deferred commencement condition Part A 1(v) and 1(vi) required the following:

 

 v.        The deletion of part of the building to apartment 418 and 419 to provide for a 12m building separation to the southern boundary with associated internal reconfiguration (an uncovered balcony with planterbox for privacy can be located to the 9m building separation line; and

vi.        The Gross Floor Area lost in Condition 1(v) can be relocated to the uppermost level (Plan 9) generally in accordance with the indicative Option 3 submitted to Council.

 

The transferred Gross Floor Area in the deferred commencement consent was 83m2 resulting in a total GFA for Level 7 of 338m2.

 

The modification as originally lodged sought to increase the GFA beyond the approved transfer amount with a total GFA to Level 7 of 388m2 being 50m2 beyond the approved transfer amount.

 

The applicant amended the proposed modification during the course of the assessment so that the approved GFA was not increased (at Level 7) by the subject proposal.

 

A comparison between the approved (operative consent) and revised proposed Level 7 plan is shown in Figure 2 and 3 below. In essence some floor area from the central apartment has been relocated to the western (left) apartment increasing the size of the western apartment from a 2 bedroom unit to a 3 bedroom unit.

 

Figure 2: Approved Level 7 Plan

 

Figure 3: Proposed Level 7 Plan

 

The approved and amended unit mix is outlined in the following table:

 

Unit Type

Approved

Proposed

Studio

3

3

1 Bedroom

44

44

2 Bedroom

38

37

3 Bedroom

21

22

Total

106

106

 

 

Conversion of Service Area to Residential Facilities

 

Conversion of service area (non-GFA) on Level 1 to provide for residential facilities (GFA) including a theatre, exercise room, activity room and pram storage area with a total increase in GFA of 239m2. A comparison between the approved and proposed area in Level is shown in Figure 4 and 5 below.

 

Figure 4: Approved Service and Storage Area

 

Figure 5: Proposed Residential Facilities

 

Extension of Basement 1 and 2 adjacent to Driveway Area

 

Enlargement of the Basement 1 and Basement 2 services, waste collection and parking areas adjacent to the driveway area as shown in Figure 6 and 7 below. The proposal is in the area of existing hardstand (either on the ground above or below) and does not meaningfully reduce landscaping opportunities.

 

Figure 6: Approved Basement 2 Plan

 

Figure 7: Proposed Basement 2 Plan

 

 

Figure 8: Approved Basement 1 Plan

 

Figure 9: Proposed Basement 1 Plan

 

The contrast appears significant particularly between Figure 8 and Figure 9. However, the actual loss of deep soil needs to be considered in context of what is occurring on Basement 2 and Level 1 (above and below Basement 1). Figure 10 shows the areas of deep soil lost by the proposal.

 

Figure 10: Actual Deep Soil Lost Through Proposed Modification

 

The areas lost for deep soil are retained as on-structure planting and in doing so the original intent of these areas is maintained. The suitability of the resulting deep soil area is addressed later in this report.

 

Minor Internal Layout Changes

 

Minor amendments to internal unit layout of south-eastern corner apartments at Level 1-3 (3 units) and balcony increases to Unit 611 and Upper Level Units.

 

Landscaping Amendments

Landscape amendments to factor in fire stair modifications and to accommodate on-structure planting requirements. Deep soil landscaping reduced by 64m2 from 26.53% (1265m2) to 25.19% (1201m2) but overall landscaped area (including on-structure planting) unchanged.

The proposal as originally lodged was not supported as it lacked suitable detail and removed significant planting from the northern boundary and Merinda and Willandra Street frontages. These elements were reinstated in the submission of amended plans and Council’s Landscape Section does not object to the modified elements of the revised landscape design. (See Attachment 2)

 

 

SECTION 4.55(1A) ASSESSMENT

 

1.         Compliance with Section 4.55(1A) of the EP&A Act, 1979

 

In accordance with Section 4.55(1A) Modifications involving minimal environmental impact, the consent authority may consider a modification of development consent provided:

 

(a)        the proposed modification is of minor environmental impact;

 

The proposed modification is of minor environmental impact as it maintains the overall landscaped intent. The new service area (adjacent to the driveway) is largely above or below existing hard stand and the landscape intent of that part of the site is retained despite numerical loss (64m2) of deep soil zones.

 

(b)       the proposal is substantially the same development;

 

The revised modification is substantially the same development. The GFA increase is the result of the conversion of an approved service area. There is no increase in residential apartment GFA and only minor redistribution of building height to accommodate sprinklers required under Volume One of the National Construction Code 2019 which was unforeseen at the assessment of the original application.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The eleven (11) submissions received relating to the modification concern building height, floor space ratio and solar access impacts. The issues are addressed in turn as follows:-

 

·          Building height – Council shared the concerns relating to any increase in the approved building height breach. The proposal was amended to remove the building height increase above the LCLEP 2009 height limit. Where there is a minor increase (Level 4 (8cm) and Level 6 (1cm)) the amount is negligible, reasonable and underneath the height limit in any event.

 

·          Floor space ratio – Council shares concerns relating to a floor space ratio increase where it would increase the bulk and scale of the development. In this regard, the applicant amended the modification to delete the proposed GFA increase on Level 7. The GFA increase to Level 1 is considered supportable for reasons outlined later in the report.

 

·          Solar access impacts – Given building height has been addressed, the solar access impacts would be all but the same. The leading edge of Level 6 as amended is only increasing by 0.01m (1cm) and the overshadowing would be all but the same.

 

2.         Compliance with Section 4.55(3) of the EP&A Act, 1979

 

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.

 

i.          Reasons Given for Granting of Original Consent

 

The proposal is in keeping with the original consent reasons chiefly that a suitable interface was provided to the southern adjoining properties.

ii.         Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

(a)        The provisions of

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument

 

 SEPP 65

 

            Compliance with SEPP 65 remains unchanged by the proposed modification. The   modifications have reviewed with respect to SEPP 65 as follows:

            - Level 1 Residential Amenities: The conversion of part of the storage area for residential amenities on Level 1 does not impact storage compliance with the ADG with the applicant            providing a storage volume table to confirm as such.

            ­- Level 7 GFA Redistribution: The Level 7 GFA redistribution complies with minimum        apartment sizes and layout provisions of the Apartment Design Guide.

            - Balcony Extensions: The balcony extensions to the three apartments on Level 7 and Unit            611 on Level 6 complies with building separation requirements and will not result in any additional overlooking.

            Accordingly, the proposed modification is considered satisfactory with respect to SEPP 65.

 

LCLEP 2009

 

The proposed modification has been assessed against the relevant provisions of LCLEP 2009.

 

Consideration

 

Control

Approved

Proposal

Compliance

Clause 4.3 – Building Height

 

17.5m

19.9m (lift overrun uppermost) + additional unit to Level 7

 

No change proposed

No change.

Clause 4.4 – Floor Space Ratio (max.)

1.8:1

1.79:1

1.846:1

 

No – 2.55% (221.6m2) variation.


A Clause 4.6 written request would be required under a Development Application to address a variation to a development standard. However, a Clause 4.6 written request is not required in this instance as the proposal satisfies substantially the same test and the application is made under Section 4.55 of the Act. Notwithstanding, the merits of the variation are addressed in this report as follows.

 

The proposal increases the Gross Floor Area by converting approved service area           previously excluded from GFA. The objective of the FSR development standard in Clause        4.4 of LCLEP 2009 is as follows:

                        to ensure that the bulk and scale of development is compatible with the character of                     the locality.


The conversion of service area to residential facilities would not result in any additional bulk and scale being in a subterranean part of Level 1.

The proposal provides for increased residential amenity with services not typically provided         to residential development in the Mowbray Precinct           including theatre, large gym and        change facilities, pram storage and activity rooms.

            Further, the relocated new service areas does not increase the bulk and scale of the        development when viewed from the public domain being retained behind the northern    driveway retaining wall and retaining the approved landscaped intent for this part of the site.

            A variation to the maximum permitted FSR is considered reasonable in this instance.

 (ii)        Any proposed instrument

 

N/A

 

(iii)       Any development control plan

 

-           Landscaping: The proposal reduces deep soil in the area around the new service area by 64m2. However, the total deep soil area remains greater than 25% in accordance with the DCP, and the proposal increases on-structure landscaping by 110m2.

 

-           Parking: The proposed alteration from a 2-bedroom to 3-bedroom technically requires a 0.5 parking space increase. Given the proposal has elsewhere rounded up the visitor parking by 0.5 the rounding down by 0.5 elsewhere is considered satisfactory particularly as there is no change in residential apartment total floor area proposed.

 

(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 impact of the development would remain unchanged.

 

(c)        The suitability of the site for the development

 

The proposed modification is considered minor and does not alter the suitably of the site for the development as previously assessed.

 

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

 

Eleven submissions were received as addressed previously in this report.

 

(e)        The public interest

 

The revised modification application raises no public interest issues and provides reasonable design refinement with no adverse impacts.

 

REFERRALS

 

Traffic and Transport

 

Traffic have reviewed the proposal and raise no objection with the amended basement layout noting the applicant’s engineers have been working closely with Council engineers in the design of the cul-de-sac head which is further detailed in the modification plans (but subject to separate approval under the existing conditions of consent).

 

Engineering

 

Engineering raise no objections to the amendments and are satisfied with the existing conditions.

 

Waste

 

Waste have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied the waste service requirements continue to be met and no amended or new conditions required.

 

Tree Preservation

 

Council’s Tree Preservation Officer reviewed the proposal and was not satisfied with the Construction Certificate arborist report and has requested the following additional conditions which the applicant has not objected to:

 

- All trees (ST1, ST2, ST3, ST4 and the additional tree) are to be provided tree protective fencing to isolate the nature strips. The trees are to be mulched with 75mm deep leaf mulch.

- Storm water installation is to be specified within the TPZ area of retained trees to be installed using manual excavations or sub surface boring.

- All works within the TPZ area are to be directly supervised by the project Arborist who is to provide written confirmation that conditions have been complied with.

- Council requires a site plan showing exactly where the TPZ fencing is to be installed around which trees and to encompass the nature strips.

 

The additional conditions are recommended to be imposed through draft conditions of consent.

 

Landscaping

 

The proposal as originally lodged was not supported as it lacked suitable detail and removed significant planting from the northern boundary and Merinda and WIllandra Street frontages. These elements were reinstated in the submission of amended plans and Council’s Landscape Section does not object to the modified elements of the revised landscape design.

 


 

SECTION 7.11 CONTRIBUTION

 

The total Section 7.11 contribution is not numerically changed by the subject proposal due to the $20,000 cap applying to 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom units. Notwithstanding, the condition is recommended to be replaced to reflect the revised unit mix. It is noted the Section 7.11 contribution has been paid.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 4.55(1A) and Section 4.55(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been considered.

 

The proposed modifications have been assessed against the relevant environmental planning instruments and development control plans and are considered satisfactory. The additional GFA will provide significant additional amenity to future occupants without creating additional bulk and scale.


Recent changes in BCA provisions resulted in the inclusion of water sprinklers for resident safety. This also provided the applicant the opportunity to fine tune the design and increase communal amenity for the residents. Council supports this approach, however, not at the expense of increasing the impact to the surrounding land uses or the Precinct generally.

Council considered the objections and provided the applicant the opportunity to address issues raised during the exhibition.

The applicant amended the application through the course of the assessment to remove additional GFA on the upper level and minimise changes to building height. The proposed amendments would result in a development that is consistent with the original reasons for approval of the development including considerations of the E4 zone interface.

 

The Section 4.55(1A) Modification Application is considered satisfactory and reported to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel with a recommendation for approval.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to section 4.55(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel at its meeting of 7 July 2020 exercising the functions of the Council as the consent authority grant consent to the Section 4.55 Modification Application to Development Application No. 162/2018  on land known as 1-7 Merinda Street and 11-17 Willandra Avenue, Lane Cove North, subject to the following:

 

i.          The replacement of condition 1 and 10 as follows:

 

1.       Approved Plans/Documents. Except where otherwise provided in this consent, the development is to be carried out strictly in accordance with the following plans (stamped approved by Council):

 

Plan No

Title

Author

Revision

Date

DA1.01

Project Summary

Hyecorp Design

E

24/06/2020

DA2.01

Plan 1

Hyecorp Design

D

05/06/2020

DA2.02

Plan 2

Hyecorp Design

D

05/06/2020

DA2.03

Plan 3

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA2.04

Plan 4

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA2.05

Plan 5

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA2.06

Plan 6

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA2.07

Plan 7

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA2.08

Plan 8

Hyecorp Design

F

05/06/2020

DA2.09

Plan 9

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA2.10

Plan 10

Hyecorp Design

D

05/06/2020

DA3.01

North and South Elevation

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA3.02

East and West Elevation

Hyecorp Design

E

05/06/2020

DA4.01

Section A & B

Hyecorp Design

F

05/06/2020

DA4.02

Section C

Hyecorp Design

F

05/06/2020

DA4.03

Driveway and Internal Ramp Section

Hyecorp Design

B

16/01/2019

DA-ST

Storage Design

Hyecorp Design

A

05/06/2020

3/8

Planter Plan

Iscape Landscape Architecture

A

11/06/2020

1/8

Landscape Plan

Iscape Landscape Architecture

B

11/06/2020

2/8

Irrigation Plan

Iscape Landscape Architecture

B

11/06/2020

4/8

Elevations 1

Iscape Landscape Architecture

A

05/02/2019

5/8

Elevations 2

Iscape Landscape Architecture

A

05/02/2019

6/8

Sections 1

Iscape Landscape Architecture

A

05/02/2019

7/8

Sections 2

Iscape Landscape Architecture

A

05/02/2019

 

            Note: The landscape elevations/sections are to be updated to be consistent with Drawing 1-            3/8 dated 11 June 2020 and including in the revised Construction Certificate detail as part of             meeting condition no. 3A of this consent.

 

 

10.       PAYMENT OF A CONTRIBUTION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL'S SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN. THE PAYMENT IS TO BE 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 payable is calculated in accordance with the Plan being the average number of persons per dwelling size as detailed in the following table:

 

No. bedrooms

Average occupancy

Amount of contribution per person

No. of Dwellings

Total

contribution

1 Bedroom  (inc. studio)

1.2 persons

$10,642.00 x 1.2 =

$12,770.40.00 per dwelling

47 x $12,770.40

$600,208.80

2 Bedrooms

1.9 persons

$10,642.00 x 1.9 =

$20,219.80 per dwelling

Capped Rate $20,000.00 per dwelling

37 x $20,000.00

$740,000.00


 

3 Bedrooms

2.4 persons

10,642.00 x 2.4 = $25,540.80

Capped Rate $20,000.00 per dwelling

22 x $20,000.00

$440,000.00

 

 

 

TOTAL

$1,780,208.80

 

The Section 7.11 contribution payable is reduced through any existing credit applied to the existing entitlements as detailed in the following table:

 

No. bedrooms

Average occupancy

Amount of contribution per person

No. of Dwellings

Total

contribution

2 + Bedrooms

N/A

Capped Rate $20,000.00 per dwelling

8 x $20,000.00

$160,000.00

 

 

 

TOTAL

$160,000.00

 

            The Section 7.11 contribution payable is $1,780,208.80 - $160,000.00 = $1,620,208.80 in             accordance with 2019/2020 fees and charges.

 

ii.          The addition of the following conditions:

 

3A.       An amended Construction Certificate is to be issued incorporating the Section 4.55             Modification approval (including architectural details and landscape design).

 

44A.     The following tree protection is to be complied with (in addition to the other conditioned             measures/requirements) and is to be certified by the project arborist as complied             with/completed/installed as part of the amended Construction Certificate:-

 

·         All trees (ST1, ST2, ST3, ST4 and the additional tree) are to be provided tree protective fencing to isolate the nature strips. The trees are to be mulched with 75mm deep leaf mulch;

·         Storm water installation is to be specified within the TPZ area of retained trees to be installed using manual excavations or sub surface boring;

·         All works within the TPZ area are to be directly supervised by the project Arborist who is to provide written confirmation that conditions have been complied with; and

·         Council requires a site plan showing exactly where the TPZ fencing is to be installed around which trees and to encompass the nature strips.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Approved Plans

15 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Proposed Plans

22 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Approved Plans

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Proposed Plans

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 7 July 2020

2 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards

 

 

Subject:          2 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards    

Record No:    DA17/141-01 - 23894/20

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Greg Samardzic 

 

 

 

Property:

2 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards

DA No:

DA17/141

Date Lodged:

12 March 2020

Cost of Work:

$9,589,963.00

Owner:

KLF North Shore P/L

Applicant:                        

KLF North Shore P/L

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Section 4.55(1A) modification to an approved residential flat building development to include increase the ground floor level height by a 100mm and to add a 1m high acoustic screen to A/C plant located on the roof level

Zone

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan (LCLEP 2009): R4 High Density Residential

Is the proposal permissible within the zone

Yes

Is the property a heritage item

No

Is the property within a conservation area

No

Is the property adjacent to bushland

No

BCA Classification

Class 2 and 7a

Stop the Clock used

No

Notification

Notified in accordance with Council’s policy 

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The subject Section 4.55(1A) Modification Application is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as the proposed development was subject to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (SEPP 65) – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development and originally considered by the Panel.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The subject Section 4.55(1A) Modification Application to an approved residential flat building development to increase the ground floor level height by 100mm and the addition of a 1m high acoustic screen to A/C plant units to be located on the roof level.

 

The above amendments have resulted in minor breaches to the LCLEP 2009 maximum 21m building height development standard with an amended maximum height of 21.82m, a 3.9% variation. The approved development included a maximum height of 21.26m, a variation of 1.2%. Whilst a formal application of Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to development standards is not required under a Section 4.55 Modification Application, the applicant has provided detailed amended Clause 4.6 written justification to provide evidence how the breaches achieve a better planning outcome and the proposed variation is reasonable in this instance.

The original height breach related to a lift overrun structure however the proposed breaches now include the lift overrun structure, an acoustic screen and the A/C plant. The further minor breach to height is reasonable in this instance as the A/C plant and associated screening on the roof top would provide benefits to the development and not cause any unreasonable impacts.

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application has been assessed in accordance with Sections of 4.55(1A) and 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is considered that the proposed modification as submitted involves a ‘minor environmental impact’ and is ‘substantially the same’ development. The proposed development as amended would improve the overall functionality of the development.

 

The subject application was notified in accordance with Council’s notification policy and no submission was received. The proposed development is recommended for approval subject to amending relevant original conditions to reflect the updated redesign of the development. 

 

SITE

 

Property

Lot 1 Sec 4 DP 7650 and Lot 2 Sec 4 DP 7650

 

Area

1,310m²

 

Site location

Eastern side of Canberra Avenue

 

Existing improvements

Under construction with basement/ground level formed

 

 

Shape and Dimensions

The site is triangular with a frontage of 48.265m, 12.475m & 24.47m, rear boundary adjoining the rail line of 75.39m and side boundary of 36.86m

 

Adjoining properties

The adjoining property on the southern boundary at No. 2 Duntroon Avenue is a residential flat building, the properties opposite the site along Canberra Avenue are low density residential dwelling and the rear eastern boundary adjoins the North Shore Railway Line.

 

The low-density residential dwellings along Canberra Avenue is within the St Leonards South Precinct which is currently undergoing a rezoning.

 

 

The notification plan and the site location plan are attached (AT-1 and AT-2).

 

THE SITE

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

On 7 August 2018, DA17/141 was approved by the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel for demolition and construction of a 7 storey residential flat building with two levels of basement car parking containing 34 apartments and 38 car parking spaces.

 

On 10 February 2020, a Section 4.55(1A) Modification Application to DA17/141 was approved under Council’s delegated authority to modify the approved basement levels and the configuration of the associated stairs for structural requirements. A new stair was to be added to the service room on the ground floor to achieve Building Code of Australia (BCA) compliance.

 

PROPOSAL

 

The subject Section 4.55(1A) Modification Application to an approved residential flat building development to include increase the ground floor level height by a 100mm to meet structural and minimum ceiling height requirements. The modification is to also include the addition of a 1m high acoustic screen to A/C plant located on the roof level. Each A/C plant would be 970mm(l) x 320mm(w) x 900mm(h) and the screen would be 11410mm(l) x 6615mm(w) x 1000mm(h). The units would be reinforced by a galvanized steel platform.

 

The acoustic screen was originally proposed to be constructed of galvanised steel and perforated metal to the internal facing elements. However, to improve the visual appearance of the screen it is proposed to be constructed out with a Lysaght longline profile in a powder coat finish in black to match the approved fence/window trim.

 

The justification of the amendment is to satisfy Condition No. 147 which reads as

 

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

 

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

 

Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.

 

The purpose of the modification is to in part to address the above condition and to locate the required A/C plant as it had not been considered under the original application.

 

SECTION 4.55 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 (the Act)

 

The proposal has been assessed in relation to the relevant matters under s.4.55(1A) of the Act as discussed below.

 

S.4.55 (1A)(a) It is satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental impact?

 

Yes, the proposal as amended would be of ‘minimal environmental impact’ where the proposed amendments would contain only minor and reasonable impact onto surrounding properties.

 

S.4.55 (1A)(b)  It is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all)?

 

Yes, it is considered that the proposed modification as submitted is ‘substantially the same development’ and would improve the overall functionality or structural integrity of the development while maintaining the objectives to complying amenity, privacy and overshadowing levels to surrounding developments. It is noted that the subject application has been notified and no submissions have been received.

 

S.4.55 (1A)(c)  It has notified the application in accordance with (i) the regulations, if the regulations so require, or (ii) a development control plan, if the consent authority is a Council that has made a development control plan that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent?

 

The subject Section 4.55 Modification Application was notified in accordance with Council’s policy.

 

S.4.55 (1A)(d)  It has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within any period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.

 

No submissions have been received as part of the subject Modification Application.

 

S.4.55 (3) Assessment of the proposed modification

 

Section 4.56(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.

 

SECTION 4.15 (1) OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 (the Act)

 

Section 4.15 (1)(a)(i)  The provisions of any environmental planning instrument

 

SEPP No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

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

 

SEPP No. 65 Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

This Policy aims to improve the design quality of residential flat building developments. The proposal as amended has been assessed against the following matters relevant to SEPP 65 for consideration:

 

·         The 9 SEPP 65 Design Quality Principles (AT-3); and

·         The NSW Apartment Design Guide (ADG) guidelines (AT-4).

 

The proposed development as amended is considered to adequately address the provisions of SEPP 65 and satisfy the requirements of the ADG. The proposed development as amended improves on the structural stability of the development and resolve the final location of the A/C plant units where it provide for improved functionality without impacting on surrounding developments.

 

LCLEP 2009

 

Development Standards

 

The proposal has been assessed against the applicable development standards within LCLEP 2009 as detailed in the following table of compliance:

 

Lane Cove LEP 2009

Proposal

Compliance

4.3 Height

21m

Maximum 21.82m (3.9% variation)

No, see discussion below

4.4 FSR

T1: 2.0:1 Site Area 1,310m²

FSR = 2,620m²

2.19:1or 2,875m² (9.7% variation)

No – unchanged with the subject application

 

Other Provisions

 

LEP

Proposed

5.6 Architectural Roof Features

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

 

5.10 Heritage Conservation

The application is not within a heritage conservation area or within the vicinity of a heritage item identified under Schedule 5 of LCLEP 2009.

 

 

Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings

 

Building height is defined in the LCLEP2009 as meaning the vertical distance between ground level (existing) at any point to the highest point of the building, including plant and lift overruns, but excluding communication devices, antennae, satellite dishes, masts, flagpoles, chimneys, flues and the like. Clause 4.3(2) of LCLEP 2009 states that the height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map. In this instance, the Height of Buildings Map identifies a maximum height of 21m for any building on the subject site.

 

The maximum height of the development as amended is 21.82m, a variation of 3.9% to the development standard which is attributed to the proposed acoustic screen, the A/C plant and the higher lift overrun resulting from the increased levels in height of the building.

 

Under the original application, the maximum height was 21.26m, a 1.2% variation to the lift overrun only (see diagrams below which indicates the proposed variations to the subject application and the original application in yellow). There are also new introduced breaches to height to the roof top terrace toilet structure and to one of the upper level apartments (see zoomed in diagrams further below in this report).

 

APPROVED VARIATION IN YELLOW

 

PROPOSED VARIATION IN YELLOW

 

Whilst a formal application of Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to development standards is not required under a Section 4.55 Modification Application, the applicant has provided an amended detailed Clause 4.6 written justification to provide evidence how the breach achieves a better planning outcome or how the proposed variation is reasonable in this instance. Refer to Attachment (AT5) to view the applicant’s written Clause 4.6 justification.

 

The proposal has been assessed with respect to Clause 4.6 as follows:-

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

(a) the consent authority is satisfied that:-

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

 

The applicant had provided the following justification/s:

 

This request seeks to modify the height exceedance to the maximum 21m Building Height development standard by a further 560mm to the original approved variation of 260mm to a maximum building height of 21.82m as compared to the approved maximum building height of 21.26m. The original application included a Clause 4.6 variation justification. The increase in building height is due to the provision of acoustic screening to the A/C plant on the roof and the increase in floor levels by 100mm.

 

260MM VARIATION APPROVED UNDER ORIGINAL APPLICATION

 

PROPOSED VARIATION UNDER SUBJECT APPLICATION

 

The proposal as amended is consistent with the objectives of the building height development where no significant additional visual, privacy or overshadowing impacts would occur onto surrounding developments. Majority of the exceedances are related to non-habitable structures and the development as amended still relates to the topography of the subject site. The proposed variation is mainly concentrated centrally within the roof form.

 

The proposal as amended is consistent with the zoning objectives where the development would continue to provide for appropriate housing at this location and continue to provide for positive amenity outcomes with respect to the landscape character and the streetscape.

 

The additional height does not contribute to any discernable or perceived bulk of the building where the screen and A/C units are located central to the roof level where it would not be discernible from any surrounding vantage points. The location of the screen/plant is situated at the most suitable location to satisfy noise attenuation requirements and would improve amenity for future occupants of the development.

 

The increase in levels would continue to provide for compliant ceiling levels between the ground and the first-floor level whilst providing for structural stability at the ground level.  

 

For reasons stated above approval of the development as amended would still be in the public interest. 

 

The maximum height breach relates now to more than a lift overrun structure however the further breaches to the other structures are reasonable in this instance to provide for a more functional development. The residential levels of the amended proposal are predominantly within the 21m height control and no further development yield has been proposed. The proposed development as amended would improve the amenity of the development without causing significant adverse off- site impacts such as minor additional overshadowing which is reasonable in this context and orientation of the subject site onto surrounding developments.

 

All surrounding developments would continue to receive adequate levels of solar access under the proposed development as amended. There are no additional privacy impacts arising from the amended proposal. The design approach adopted by the applicant and the justification/s provided are supported. The proposed variation is a technical non-compliance due to the existing topography of the land and the requirement to adjust to structural requirements. The proposed amendments provide would for a better planning outcome by providing for improved functionality without adversely affecting surrounding properties.

 

The proposal as amended would not be inconsistent with other residential flat building developments in the locality or in the Local Government Area (LGA).

 

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

 

The applicant relies in part upon improving the whole design of the approved development. The applicant also considers the topographical and orientational characteristics of the site and the development as amended. The proposal as amended would not be readily discernible in the context of existing developments within the locality or in the LGA. These references are of sound justification and would be a consistent or a reasonable approach undertaken in the assessment of other applications which beach the height standard. The further variation is supported in this instance for reasons already stated above.

 

Objectives of the particular standard

 

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

 

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

 

The proposal as amended would have only minor shadow impacts on surrounding residential dwellings and to the public areas where they would continue to receive satisfactory exposure to sunlight. The proposal as amended maximises solar access where the beach to the height control is located centrally to the building.

 

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

 

The proposal as amended would not contain additional privacy impacts onto the adjoining developments and the visual impact of the proposed development would be satisfactory.

 

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

 

The proposed design as amended is the best possible outcome achieved as the revised

design has improved the functionality of the whole development without compromising the

requirement to ensure the maximum amount of sunlight is provided to the public domain.

 

      (d)  to relate development to topography.

 

The proposed works address existing ground levels. The proposal as amended adequately relates to the existing topography of the site and meets the objective of the height standard.

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

 

The proposed variation is supported as the submitted Clause 4.6 written justification (whilst not technically required for a Section 4.55 Modification Application) provides evidence to demonstrate that there are only minor and reasonable impacts and that a better planning outcome would be achieved.

 

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

 

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of Clause 4.3 Height of buildings and the relevant zone objectives which are:-

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Is the exception well founded?

 

It is considered that the request for exception is well founded and is supported given that the development as amended would deliver a superior built form outcome in consideration of the site’s characteristics and its location amongst the surrounding buildings.

 

Section 4.15 (1)(a)(ii)  The provisions of any draft environmental planning instrument

 

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

 

While the Draft does consider introducing planning guidelines for the assessment/preparation of preliminary site investigations, the subject site has been used for residential purposes for a, number of years and would be adequate in this instance to address the requirements of the draft SEPP. The proposal is consistent with the Draft Remediation of Land SEPP.

 

Section 4.15 (1)(a)(iii)  The provisions of any development control plan

 

The Lane Cove Residential Development Control Plan (LCDCP) 2009

 

The proposed modification has been assessed against LCDCP as follows:

 


 

PART B – GENERAL

 

PART B – GENERAL

DCP Control

Proposed

Complies

B3 Site Amalgamation & Isolated site

3.1 General

a)  Development for the purpose of residential flat buildings and high density housing should not result in the isolation of sites such that they cannot be developed in compliance with the relevant planning controls, including Lane Cove LEP 2009 and this DCP.

 

The site is an isolated site due to surrounding development and the unusual nature of the street alignment and configuration. The site adjoins a residential flat building to its south and the North Shore railway line to its rear. The site is the last remaining allotment to be redeveloped and therefore does not result in any site isolation occurring.

Yes

B.6 Environmental Management

6.3 Energy and Water Efficiency for Buildings

a)  Incorporate passive solar design techniques to optimise heat storage within the building in winter and heat transfer in summer.

A BASIX certificate had been provided with the original application demonstrating water and energy efficiency.

Yes

B.7 Developments near Busy Roads and Rail Corridors

a) Acoustic assessments for noise sensitive developments as defined in clauses 87 and 102 of the Infrastructure SEPP may be required if located in the vicinity of a rail corridor or busy roads.

The proposal is located within a noise sensitive area, being close to the North Shore Railway line and a referral has been sent to Sydney Trains for concurrence and obtained. 

Yes

For residential and the residential part of any mixed use development, appropriate measures must be taken to ensure that the following LAeq levels are not exceeded:

I.   in any bedroom in the building: 35dB(A) at any time 10pm–7am

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

 

Appropriate acoustic reports has been lodged with appropriate recommendations for acoustic treatment for the development.

Yes

B.8 Safety and Security

a) Ensure that the building design allows for casual surveillance of access ways, entries and driveways.

Casual surveillance has been provided from the ground floor apartments. 

Yes

8.1 Activation

8.1.1 General

a) Development is to be well connected to the street and contribute to the accessibility of the public domain

Adequate street access has been provided.

Yes

All development is to face the street and/or public open spaces and provide uses at ground level that provide activity.

The development is orientated towards Canberra Avenue.

 

Yes

8.1.2 Residential development

a) All ground floor apartments, villas, townhouses and attached or detached dwellings that have a street frontage other than battle axe blocks are to have direct access or entries from the street and at least one habitable room with windows facing the street.

The development has direct access from the street to the lift lobby.

Yes

8.2 Passive Surveillance

a) All development at ground level is to offer passive surveillance for safety and security of residents and visitors.

The ground floor provides passive surveillance in the form of POS and balconies facing the street.

Yes

 

PART C – RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

 

PART C RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

DCP Control

Proposed

Complies

C.3 Residential Flat Buildings

3.2 Density

a)         The minimum site area for residential flat developments is 1,500m².

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Objectives:

1.         To achieve a reasonable level of amenity for the residential flat buildings, neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.

2.         To achieve sustainable development whilst providing a concentration of residents close to public transport and facilities.

3.         To create entrances which provide a desirable residential identity for the development, orient visitors and contribute positively to the streetscape and building facade design.

4.         To provide opportunities for lifestyle choice and dwelling mix.

The subject site is an isolated site with a total area of 1,310m². There is no amalgamation opportunity for this site due to the neighbouring development at No.  2 Duntroon Avenue having undergone redevelopment as a residential flat development.

 

Given the site is sterilised from amalgamation opportunities, a merit- based assessment has been given to the allotment size as to whether the site can accommodate a residential flat building generally within the parameters of Council’s development standards and DCP controls. 

 

The application has demonstrated that a residential flat building can occur on the site that meets the objectives of the DCP in terms of:

1.    the proposal achieves reasonable amenity for the building and neighbouring properties;

2.    the proposal provides a concentration of residents close to public transport and facilities;

3.    the building will contribute positively to the streetscape; and

4.    the development provides dwelling mix opportunities.

No – supported and unchanged under the subject application

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes – however a condition (Condition No. 31A) has been added requiring double glazing to ensure reasonable acoustic amenity from the railway

3.3 Building Depth

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

The proposal has a building depth of 18m with a slight encroachment at the ground floor which is minimal.

Yes – unchanged with subject application

b) This depth is exclusive of balconies

Depth is exclusive of balconies.

Yes

3.4 Building Width

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

Greater widths may be permissible if the proposed building articulation is satisfactory in the streetscape.

49.7m

 

Greater width has been considered due to the constraint shape of the site and the proposed articulation provided.

 

No – unchanged with subject application

 

 

3.5 Setbacks

3.5.1 Front/Street

a) The front setback of the building shall be consistent with the prevailing setback along the street (refer Diagram No.1).

7.5m setback:

4m from ground to Level 3

6.43m from Level 4 upwards

 

No – unchanged with subject application

b) The front setback area shall comprise terraces and gardens to the ground floor dwellings, deep soil zones, driveways and pathways.

Ground floor has provided a landscaped area which included deep soil areas with terraced POS to the ground floor apartments. 

Yes

3.5.2 Side and Rear

a) 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

1

2m for 9 storeys and above.

 

Side setback

Southern boundary:

6m

6m to 9m with encroachment of 2.4m from Apartment 502 bedroom

N/A

 

 

Rear Setback:

2m – 6m

 

 

 

Yes

No – unchanged with subject application

 

No – unchanged with subject application

b) To the boundary shared with R2 and R3 zones the minimum set back will be 9m if habitable rooms/balconies orient this side.

Not applicable.

N/A

3.5.3 General

a) In general, no part of a building or above ground structure may encroach into a setback zone. Exceptions are:

I. Encroachments into the setback zone of up to 2m may be permitted for underground parking structures no more than 1.2m above ground level (existing), where there is no unreasonable effect on the streetscape. Refer to Diagram 10.

II. Awnings, balconies, blade walls, bay windows and other articulation elements up to a maximum of 500mm.

 

 

III. Setback variation may be required or permitted on merit to preserve existing trees.

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apartment G02 encroachment from balcony and access stairs of approx. 1.2m for a width of 3m only. Whilst non-compliant it is considered acceptable as it is the only encroachment within the front setback and is minor in nature.

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No – unchanged with subject application

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

3.6 Building Separation (within developments)

a) Unless indicated elsewhere through block controls within the DCP, separation distances within a development are the same as provided under the ADG.

Refer to Part 3F of ADG Compliance table.

SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect

3.7 Fences

The provisions for fences in the Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies section shall apply.

1.4  Fences

1.4.1 Front Fences

 

 

Solid fences

a) permitted up to 900mm above ground level (existing) on the front boundary.

 

Metal palisade fencing to ground floor apartments proposed only.

 

 

Yes

1.4.2 Side and rear fences: Existing fencing to remain

3.8 Excavation

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

Major development - refer below.

 

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

Excavation for basement parking has been contained as practicably as possible given the site constraints.

Yes

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

Not applicable – proposal is not within Centres area.

N/A

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

Topography has been considered within the design.

Yes

e) The extent of excavation proposed for underground uses should not compromise the provision of deep soil areas or landscaped areas for residential flat buildings.

Adequate deep soil provisions under ADG have been provided.

Yes

3.9 Design of Roof Top Areas

a) Roof top areas including podium area are to be designed for use as recreation facilities where practicable and should be of high standard of finish and design. A detailed landscape design and plan of roof top design is to be submitted with the DA.

Ground floor and Level 6 roof top COS has been proposed with landscape, lift, pergola, BBQ and toilet details submitted with application.

Yes – condition imposed under original consent for roof top common space to have those details including power points, water/sink and lighting.

 

Additional roof top COS landscaping conditions to be imposed to ensure for improved amenity levels to require further landscaping details to be submitted and to ensure reticulated water is used and landscaping be finalised and maintained.

b) The design of exterior private open space such as roof top gardens is to address visual and acoustic privacy, safety, security, and wind effects.

Balconies have been designed to maximise visual and acoustic privacy.

Yes

3.10 Size and mix of dwellings

 

a) In residential flat buildings and the residential component of mixed use buildings, studio dwellings are to have a minimum size of 40m². This dwelling size is a net area and is to be exclusive of balconies, common corridors and lobbies, car spaces, storage areas outside the dwelling, private and communal open spaces and lift and other services shafts.

Refer to Part 4D of the ADG Compliance Table. Clause 6A of SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect

N/A

b) In residential flat buildings and the residential component of mixed use buildings, development should include a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units. At least 10% of each unit type should be provided.

·          4 x 1 bedroom (13.3%);

·          22 x 2 bedroom (73.4%)

·          4 x 3 bedroom (13.3%)

Apartment mix is acceptable.

Yes

3.11 Private Open Space (balconies and terraces)

Refer to Part 4E of the ADG Compliance Table.  Clause 6A of SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect

3.13 Storage

Refer to Part 4G of the ADG Compliance Table.  Clause 6A of SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect

3.15 Natural Ventilation

Refer to Part 4B of the ADG Compliance Table.  Clause 6A of SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect

3.16 Visual privacy

Refer to Part 3F of the ADG Compliance Table.  Clause 6A of SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect

3.17 Communal Open Space

a) A minimum of 25% of the site area is to be provided as communal open space.

330m² or 25% of the site area of 1,310m²

Yes

b) For mixed use sites, communal open space can be provided on podiums and roof terraces subject to achieving privacy for adjoining users.

Proposal is residential only.

N/A

3.18 Landscaped Area

a) A minimum of 40% of the site area is to be planted, comprising 25% landscaped area and a further minimum of 15% planting on structures or landscaped area.

27% deep soil area provided with 13.2% plantings on structure totaling 40.2%.

 

 

 

Yes – 526.62m² or 40.2% of the site area of 1,310m²

3.19 Planting on structures

Council’s Landscape Officer has raised no issues with the landscape plan subject to conditions of consent.

 


 

Part F - Access and Mobility

 

PART F - ACCESS AND MOBILITY

DCP Controls

Proposal

Complies

3.5 Adaptable and Visitable Housing (residential flats and dual occupancies)

Adaptable housing to be provided at the rate of 20% of all dwellings in a Class 2 development.

20% provided – 6 apartments to be adaptable.

Yes

Dwellings are to be visitable at the rate of 80% in developments requiring adaptable housing.

The development is capable of complying.

Yes

3.8 Access to, and within, buildings

1.         Access is to be provided in accordance with BCA Clause D3.1 and in accordance with Table 1:

-           Residential Flat Building 2;

-           Car park Class 7a

The development capable of complying with BCA Clause D3.1.

 

 

Yes

 

 

2.         Access is to comply with the relevant Provisions of the BCA, and associated referenced Australian Standards.

Access report prepared by a suitably qualified access consultant required as part of the DA documentation.

An accessibility report by was submitted with the original application. The report and its recommendations were included in the conditions of consent.

Yes

 

The application as amended is compliant with the parking requirements under Part F of LCDCP.

 

Part R – Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

Council’s car parking requirements are in modeled on the RMS Metropolitan Sub-Regional Centres with exception of 1-bedroom apartments being at a rate of 0.6 space per apartment as opposed to 0.5 spaces per apartment under Council’s DCP.

 

PART R TRAFFIC, TRANSPORT AND PARKING

Development Control

Proposed

Complies

2.2 Car Parking Rates

 

 

Residential Flat Building

 

 

Table 1 – Car parking rates

Dwelling mix:

4 x 1 bedroom

22 x 2 bedroom

4 x 3 bedroom

 

Residents:

0.6 spaces per 1-bed x 4: 2.4

0.9 space per 2 bed x 22: 19.8

1.4 spaces per 3 bed x 4: 4.2

Total: 26.4 = 27

 

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

 

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

 

Required:

4 x 1 bedroom = 2 spaces

22 x 2 bedroom = 19.8 spaces

4 x 3 bedroom = 4.2 spaces

Total residential = 26

 

Provided:

28 residential spaces including 6 disabled spaces

 

 

Loading bay provided

 

 

 

1 car wash bay provided

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

1 disabled space for each adaptable housing unit: 6 adaptable units are proposed within the building.

6 adaptable spaces provided in the basement - 1 adaptable residential space per apartment.

Yes

Visitor Parking:

1 space per 5 units

1 disabled space per 10 visitor spaces (minimum 1 disabled space)

Required:

30 units/5 = 6 spaces

 

Provided:

6 visitor spaces

 

 

 

 

Yes

Total Parking spaces:

34

Yes

2.7 – Motorcycle parking

1 motorcycle space per 15 car spaces

Motorcycle parking spaces are to have an area of 1.2m x 3m

3 motorcycle space provided in basement.

Dimensions 2.5m x 1.2m

Yes

 

 

The application as amended is fully compliant with the parking requirements under Part R of LCDCP.

 

Section 94 - Development Contributions Plan

 

The proposed development as amended would not amend the number of units or the mix of units approved under the original application, the original imposed contributions condition remains unchanged.

 

(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.

 

All relevant issues regarding built impacts of the development are discussed elsewhere in this report and it is considered that the proposal as amended would provide greater amenity for future residents. The amenity and privacy of surrounding developments would not be compromised. The development as amended would be satisfactory in terms of environmental, built, social and economic impacts.

 

(c)        The suitability of the site for the development

 

The site would be suitable for the proposed amended development.

 

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

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and no submissions were received.

 

(e)        The public interest

 

Having regard to the assessment and recommendations contained in this report, it is considered that approval of the development amended would be in the public interest. The proposal as amended would contribute to improved housing choice in a high-density locality of Lane Cove North.

 

Section 4.55(3) Consideration of any Reasons given by the Consent Authority for the Granting of the Original Consent.

 

The second part of Section 4.55(3) requires Council to consider any reasons given by the consent authority for the granting of the original consent.

 

The reasons provided within the conclusion of the original Lane Cove Planning Panel report were as follows:-

 

“Statement of reasons for approval

 

The application is supported for the following reasons:-

 

·         The proposed development meets the objectives of the zone;

·         The proposed development is consistent with the existing and emerging character of the locality;

·         The proposed development generally meets the requirements under the Apartment Design Guide;

·         The proposed development generally meets the objectives of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010;

·         The Clause 4.6 variations to LCLEP Building Height and Floor Space Ratio standards are considered well founded and acceptable; and

·         The proposed development would provide a high level of amenity to the future residents.”

 

The Lane Cove Planning Panel provided the following panel reasons within the minutes issued:

 

Panel Reasons

 

The Panel supports the findings contained in the Assessment Report and endorses the reasons for the approval contained in that Report, in particular:-

 

1)    The Panel has considered this application on it’s individual merits rather than any potential developments which may or may not occur on the opposite side of Canberra Avenue;

 

2)    The Panel notes that this is an isolated site of an unusual shape which in turn constrains any potential development;

 

3)    The individual merits of the application satisfy the 4 metre setback in this instance, which will have a marginal effect on the streetscape. Moreover there is landscaping proposed within the individual court yards at the front of the building;

 

4)    The Panel notes that the roof top communal open space is provided with a wide landscaping strip to the southern edge with effective screening to the adjoining property to the south and this space is, in any event, set back from the storey’s below; and

 

5)    Overall the Panel is of the unanimous view that this building, having undergone various design changes, is a well designed building which responds appropriately to the site.

 

 The decision of the Panel was unanimous.

 

The proposed amendments have been assessed against the relevant matters Section 4.15 of the Act and have been satisfied. The application as amended continues to meet the objectives of the zone and LCDCP, be consistent with the existing/future character of the locality and continues to meet the ADG. The amended Clause 4.6 is well founded or acceptable and the proposal as amended would continue to provide a high level of amenity to future residents.

 

The building setbacks, landscaping and roof top communal open space have remained unchanged. The proposed screening to the A/C units continue to maintain effective screening of the development to surrounding developments due to its location, height and setback on the roof level. The individual merits of the proposal as amended have remained unchanged and continues to be a well-designed building which responds to unique nature of the subject site.

 

REFERRALS

 

Principal Building Surveyor

 

Council’s Principal Building Surveyor has assessed the proposal as amended and raised no objections.

 

Environmental Health Officer

 

Council’s Environmental Health Officer has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

The proposal as amended has been reviewed and there are no objections to the changes requested provided compliance with Condition No. 147 is achieved.

 

It is recommended that Condition No. 147 be retained to ensure the relevant acoustic requirements are to be met when the development is operational.

 

Sydney Trains

 

The subject application was referred to Sydney Trains in accordance with SEPP (Infrastructure).  Concurrence was again granted on 4 May 2020 with conditions provided and included in the amended draft condition of consent.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Sections 4.15 and 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied. The further minor breach to height is reasonable as the proposed A/C plant and associated screening on the rooftop would provide benefits to the development and not cause any unreasonable impacts. The proposed further contravention of the Building Height development standard has been satisfactorily addressed with demonstration that the proposed amendments would improve the overall functionality of the development. The proposal as amended generally continues to meet with SEPP 65, the ADG and LCDCP.

 

On balance the proposed development as amended would be reasonable and recommended for approval subject to amending relevant conditions of consent to reflect the updated development.

 

 

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 7 July 2020 exercising the functions of the Council as the consent authority grant consent to the Section 4.55 Modification Application to Development Application No. 141/2017 on land known as 2 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards subject to the following:

 

The replacement of Condition No. 1 and as follows:

 

1.       Approved Plans/Documents. Except where otherwise provided in this consent, the development is to be carried out strictly in accordance with the following plans (stamped approved by Council) and support documents:

 

 

Plan No/Reference

Author

Date

Architectural Plans: A003/2, A004/2, A101/2 to A110/2, A201/2, A202/2, A203/2, A301/2, A302/2 & A303/2

Brewster Murray

March 18 Issue 2

A601/2 Exterior Finishes

Brewster Murray

March 18 Issue 2

A703/2 Adaptable Units

Brewster Murray

March 18 Issue 2


 

Landscape Plans: L-01 to L-09

Site Design + Studios

14/3/18 Rev J

Stormwater Plans:

C001 to C003 & C006

C004 & C005

Adams

 

12/03/18 Issue B

12/03/18 Issue C

Ground Movement and Vibration Monitoring Plan

Asset Geotechnical Engineering Pty Ltd

22 February 2018 Ref4708-R2-Rev R1

 

S1.00, S1.01, S1.02, S1.03, S1.09, S1.10, S1.11, S1.12, S1.13

lnstructure Consulting Engineers

Revision A

 

Documents

Date

Basix Certificate No. 860499M_02

12 March 2018

Aboricultural Impact Appraisal and Method Statement by Naturally Trees

22 November 2017

Acoustic Assessment for Development Application by Renzo Tonin

25 January 2018 Doc Ref: TH585-01F02

Statement of Compliance Access for People with a Disability by Accessible Building Solutions

Revision A 05/03/2018 Job No. 217175

Geotechnical Investigation Report Ref: 4708-1-R1 prepared by Asset Geotechnical Engineering Pty Ltd

20 December 2017

Report on numerical modelling Ref: 4708-R1 prepared by Asset Geotechnical Engineering Pty Ltd

19 December 2017

'Basement Excavation adjacent to Sydney Rail Corridor Statement' by lnstructure Consulting Engineers

23 February 2018

Letter to Sydney Trains prepared by lnstructure Consulting Engineers regarding reinforcing an existing retaining wall.

1 June 2018

 

          As amended by the following drawing numbers prepared by Brewster Murray:

 

A004/3, A101-A103/3, A201-203/3 and A301-303/3 Issue 3 dated Jan. 19.

 

And as further amended by the following drawing numbers prepared by Brewster Murray:

 

A104-110/6, A203/6 & A301-303/6 Issue 6 dated FEB 20 and A201-202/7 Issue 7 dated MAY 20.

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the following amendments to the above approved plans shall be made:-

 

(a)  The area directly above the OSD tank shall be a raised planter with a soil depth of at least 1.3 metres and supplied with an approved planter box mix capable of supporting trees which are to be installed at a 200 litre pot size with a minimum height of 2.7 metres at the time of planting;

(b)  Four (4) replacement canopy trees are to be provided on the Landscape plan in accordance with Appendix 1 – Plant List of Part J – Landscaping of LCDCP 2010 and endorsed by Council’s Landscape Officer; and

(c)   A controlled access by way of security gate or similar is to be provided to the pedestrian entry point located adjacent to the southern side boundary to provide resident access only to the site.

 

The Development must be carried out in accordance with the amended plans approved under this condition. Where any inconsistencies occur between the conditions of this consent and the drawings/documents referred to above, the conditions of this consent prevail.

 

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

 

The addition of the following conditions as follows:

 

1A.      The approved screening structure to the roof top A/C units are to be constructed of Lysaght

            longline profile in a powder coat finish in black.

 

            Reason: To improve the visual appearance of the development.

 

31A.     Double glazing to be provided to all windows and door cavities fronting the rail line.

 

             Reason: To ensure future occupants of the development are protected from railway noise.

 

31B.     The rooftop amenity is to be protected from railway façade noise by an Australian Standard

             Acoustic barrier to the satisfaction of the Certifier.

 

             Reason: To ensure future occupants are protected from the railway.

 

77A.   On Structure Landscaping: The Applicant must ensure that ‘On’ structure landscaping             has adequate soil depth, volume and suitable profile to support the number of trees and             shrubs indicated on the approved DA plan. On-structure landscape details to be submitted             for Council’s approval PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

89A.     Prior to the issuing of the final Construction Certificate, the following rail specific items             are to be submitted to Sydney Trains for review and endorsement:

 

   § Final Structural Design Drawings in accordance with the approved basement             level depths and ceiling heights.

 

            The Principal Certifying Authority is not to issue the Construction Certificate until it has             received written confirmation from Sydney Trains that this condition has been complied             with.

 

150.     Reticulated Water Supply

            Reticulated water supply is to be provided to all landscaping on the ground level and on the             rooftop terrace level and to be endorsed by Council’s Landscape Officer prior to the issue of

            the Occupation Certificate.

 

151.     Maintenance of Landscaping

            All approved landscaping on the ground level and on the rooftop terrace level is to be             maintained for the life of the development and failure to do so would be a breach of             consent.

 

152.    Practical Completion Report: A landscape practical completion report must be prepared             by the consultant landscape architect and submitted to Council’s Manager Open Space             directly by email within five (5) working days of the date of issue.  This report must certify             that all landscape works have been completed in accordance with the landscape working             drawings. A copy of the report must be submitted to Council PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF             THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑3View

SEPP 65 Design Quality Principles

4 Pages

 

AT‑4View

ADG Compliance Table

33 Pages

 

AT‑5View

Cl. 4.6 Submission

13 Pages

 

AT‑6View

Original Report

60 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 3

SEPP 65 Design Quality Principles

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 4

ADG Compliance Table

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 5

Cl. 4.6 Submission

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 6

Original Report

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 7 July 2020

North Shore Rowing Club - Aquatic Park, Stuart Street, Longueville

 

 

Subject:          North Shore Rowing Club - Aquatic Park, Stuart Street, Longueville    

Record No:    DA17/153-01 - 23891/20

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Greg Samardzic 

 

 

 

Property:

North Shore Rowing Club – Aquatic Park, Stuart Street, Longueville

DA No:

DA17/153

Date Lodged:

25 February 2020

Cost of Work:

Original cost of works under original Development Application: $751,513.00 Cost of works under Section 4.55 Modification Application: $150,000.00

Owner:

Crown Lands, Aquatic Park Reserve Trust managed by Lane Cove Council and Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) (below the Mean High-Water Mark (MHWM)

Applicant:                        

Dr Richard Sheldrake

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Section 4.55 Modification Application to an approved alteration and additions to the rowing club boatshed and reconstruction of the decking, ramp and launching pontoon to include a first-floor addition to the North Rowing Club shed

Zone

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan (LCLEP) 2009 – RE1 Public Recreation

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (SREP) Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005 – W8 Scenic Waters Passive Use

Is the proposal permissible within the zone

Yes – Recreation Facilities

Is the property a heritage item

Yes – A part of I261 – Aquatic Park Boat Shed and Yacht Bay and in proximity to I225 – Sandstone steps within Aquatic Park – satisfactory impacts

Is the property within a conservation area

No

Is the property adjacent to bushland

Yes – satisfactory impacts

BCA Classification

Class 9b – Assembly Building, Class 7B – Storage and Class 10B - Pontoon

Stop the Clock used

Yes

Notification

Notified in accordance with Council’s policy 

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The subject Section 4.55 Modification Application is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as the proposed development as amended is located on land (Aquatic Park) which is managed by Lane Cove Council.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The subject Section 4.55 Modification Application includes design amendments as follows:-

 

·    Removal of the existing gabled projecting to the bay at the north western corner of the building including the flat roofed infilled (the former caretaker’s quarters and existing amenities); and

·    Construction of a new one and two storey addition with boat store, stair, accessible W/C and shower on the ground floor and exercise room on the first floor.

 

The Section 4.55 Modification Application has been assessed in accordance with Sections of 4.55(2) and 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is considered that the proposed modification as submitted is ‘substantially the same development’ and would improve the overall functionality and internal amenity of the development while not causing any significant adverse impacts onto surrounding developments.

 

The subject application was notified in accordance with Council’s notification policy and three submissions have been received. The concerns relate to potential off-site impacts onto surrounding developments or the immediate locality such as traffic and noise however it is considered that the proposed works would not cause any unreasonable impacts.

 

The proposed development is recommended for approval subject to amending relevant original conditions to reflect the updated redesign of the structure. 

 

SITE

 

Property

Lot 2 DP 907301

Area

17,179sqm

Site location

The rowing club is located within Aquatic Park, Longueville and is on the foreshore of the Lane Cove River

Existing improvements

Boatshed including storage, changing rooms, club room, decking, ramp and launching pontoon

 

SITE DESCRIPTION

 

The boatshed is located within Aquatic Park, Longueville and is on the foreshore of the Lane Cove River. The boatshed site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation and borders the area of the reserve zoned E2 Environmental Conservation.

 

ZONING MAP

 

The reserve is not identified as State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 19 Bushland. The existing boat shed is among other developments within the park including the 12ft Sailing Club (see diagram below). The skiff club is accessed down a bush track behind the rowing club and the rowing club is accessed down a pedestrian pathway from the car park located within the reserve. The notification plan and neighbour notification plan is attached (AT1 and AT2). Aquatic Park is adjoined by mainly detached residential dwellings.

 

SITE LOCATION

 

THE SITE

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

DA2012/53

Alterations and additions to the existing rowing club to increase storage and provide new changing facilities (see diagram below)

DA2017/153

On 6 March 2018, the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel approved the alteration and additions to rowing club boat shed and reconstruction of decking, ramp and launching pontoon (see diagram below)

The approved works have included the completion of the deck, ramp and pontoon. The approved north wing extension had not commenced and is subject to works under the subject Section 4.55 Modification Application.

 

The approved development was classed as ‘Integrated Development’ under Section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 however the Department of Primary Industries, Industry and Investment (Fisheries) raised no objections and imposed no conditions.

 

There were two solar panels erected onto the roof of the front verandah around 2014 (see photomontage on page 6 of this report) where Council records indicate that no consent had been obtained. To adequately address this issue from a visual viewpoint, it is recommended that a condition be recommended that these solar panels be relocated elsewhere on the building to the satisfaction of Council prior to the issue of the occupation certificate.

 

PROPOSAL

 

The subject Section 4.55 Modification Application to an approved alteration and additions to the rowing club boatshed and reconstruction of the decking, ramp and launching pontoon is to include a first-floor addition to the North Rowing Club shed. The proposed amended works specifically include:-

 

·    Removal of the existing gabled projecting bay at the north western corner of the building including the flat roofed infilled (the former caretaker’s quarters and existing amenities); and

·    Construction of a new space and two storey addition with boat store, stair, accessible W/C and shower on the ground floor and exercise room on the first floor.

 

 

 

The proposed materials and colours would match those on the existing building.

 

Three trees are proposed to be removed to accommodate the proposed works however one of these trees (Tree No. 4) has already been removed for safety reasons.

 

Relevant owners consent from Crown Lands, the RMS and Lane Cove Council to lodge the subject application have been submitted as a portion of the proposed works are to occur below the MHWM. 

 

The proposed justification of the works is to improve amenity levels for current users with improved storage and training facilities.

 

PROPOSED PHOTOMONTAGE

 

SECTION 4.55 ASSESSMENT

 

1.         Compliance with Section 4.55(2) of the EP&A Act, 1979

 

Under the provisions of Section 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Council may, in response to an application, modify a consent granted if the development, as modified, is ‘substantially the same development’ as originally approved. It is considered that the proposed modification as submitted is ‘substantially the same development’ and would improve the overall functionality or internal amenity of the development while maintaining amenity and privacy levels to surrounding developments.

 

2.         Compliance with Section 4.55(3) of the EP&A Act, 1979

 

Section 4.56(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.

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

(a)        The provisions of

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument

 

SREP Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005

 

Zone

 

The waterway is zoned W8 Scenic Waters: Passive Use and the development is an existing use within the zone. Recreational and Club Facilities are a permissible use with consent and the construction of a first-floor addition is considered consistent with the objectives of the zone.

The relevant objectives are as follows:

 

(d)  to allow water-dependent development only where it can be demonstrated that it meets a demonstrated demand and harmonises with the planned character of the locality,

(e)  to ensure that the scale and size of development are appropriate to the locality and protect and improve the natural assets and natural and cultural scenic quality of the surrounding area, particularly when viewed from waters in this zone or areas of public access.

 

The proposed development as amended would satisfy the existing demand on the club’s facilities and is consistent with other rowing club facilities within the passive use zoning. The size of the addition is considered appropriate within the bay with consideration to the cumulative effects of surrounding development.

 

However, there were two solar panels erected onto the roof of the front verandah around 2014 where Council records indicate that no consent had been obtained. To adequately address this issue from a visual viewpoint, it is recommended that a condition be recommended that these solar panels be relocated elsewhere on the building to the satisfaction of Council prior to the issue of the occupation certificate.

 

Matters for Consideration

 

In accordance with Clause 21 (Biodiversity, ecology and environment protection) the proposed development as amended is considered to have minimal impact on the biodiversity and ecology of the foreshore area. Council Staff, the Department of Industry (Fisheries), the Department of Natural Resources Access Regulator and the RMS have raised no objections with respect to the disturbance of the adjoining bushland or waterfront area. 

 

In accordance with Clause 25 (Foreshore and waterways scenic quality) the proposed development as amended is a design and form that is suitable given its prominent foreshore context. The additions when viewed from the waterway are compatible with the existing boatshed and responds to the bushland setting of the foreshore with minimal increase in footprint and appropriate finishes.

 

In accordance with Clause 27 (Boat Storage Facilities) the proposed development as amended is considered to increase the availability of public boat storage for the use of the public rowing club.

 

Note. The subject application was referred to the Foreshores and Waterways Planning and Advisory Committee in accordance with Clause 29.

 

SEPP 55 Remediation of Land

 

The subject site is a part of a bushland reserve area which has not previously been developed and is therefore unlikely to be contaminated.

 

LCLEP 2009

 

Zoning: RE1 Public Recreation

 

The subject site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation under the LEP and ‘Recreational Facilities’ is a permissible use under the zone. The proposed works as amended would not be inconsistent with the intent or nature of the original consent and with the relevant zoning objectives.

 

Clause 4.3 Height - No Development Standard for the site.

 

The first-floor addition is reasonable in the context of the existing boatshed and the foreshore site.

 

Clause 4.4 FSR - No Development Standard for the site.

 

The addition results in a compatible extension of the boatshed on the northern western side of the existing building and is considered reasonable in the context of the existing boatshed and the foreshore site.

 

(i)         Any proposed instrument (Draft SEPP, LEP, Planning Proposal)

 

Draft SEPP Remediation of Land

 

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

 

While the Draft does consider introducing planning guidelines for the assessment/preparation of preliminary site investigations, the subject site has been used for recreational purposes for a, number of years and would be adequate in this instance to address the requirements of the draft SEPP. The proposal is consistent with the Draft Remediation of Land SEPP.

 

(ii)        Any development control plan

 

Foreshores and Waterways Development Control Plan 2005

 

The proposed development as amended is not considered to adversely impact the landscape character of the foreshore area. Whilst it is noted that three trees are to be removed the vegetated cover of the slope would not be discernibly affected as viewed from the waterway. Council’s Tree Assessment Officer has recommended that replacement trees are to be planted in conjunction with the construction. The scale of the development as amended is considered reasonable within its context as a foreshore development. The proposed addition is consistent with the use of the facility for public recreation and are not considered to detract from the natural foreshore area given the minimal increase in the buildings scale and visual prominence.

 

To assist, it is recommended that the existing unauthorised solar panels be relocated away from the foreshore.

 

The proposed works continue to provide approved floor levels to address the relevant flooding requirements of the DCP.

 

Lane Cove Development Control Plan

 

Part B.5 - Development in Foreshore Areas

 

The objectives of development within foreshore areas are as follows:

 

a) Maintain or enhance existing residential amenity and visual character of foreshore residential development by:-

 

i. Minimising the impact and prominence of foreshore development when viewed from the Lane Cove and Parramatta Rivers.

ii. Ensuring that the architecture of development that is highly visible from the rivers is not visually prominent, in character with the locality and minimises its bulk and scale.

 

The proposed development as amended is considered to meet these objectives as the addition is minimal and is in proportion to the existing design or scale of the boatshed. The boatshed is consistent with the character of the foreshore area particularly the other boatsheds along the foreshore of Aquatic Park. To assist, it is recommended that the existing unauthorised solar panels be relocated away from the foreshore. The proposed design and finishes would blend with its bushland setting. The proposed works continue to provide approved floor levels to address the relevant flooding requirements of the DCP.

 

Clause

Proposed

Control

Complies

5.1.1 Building Design and Style

The finishes proposed are to be consistent with the existing boatshed.

Finished to be consistent with the natural foreshore.

 

Yes, already conditioned under the original consent to ensure compliance.

The addition is minor in scale and blends into the existing boatshed ensuring its prominence is limited.

Structures proposed are not to be unreasonably prominent.

Yes

The addition is appropriately articulated. The proposed additional bulk and scale is consistent with the rest of the boatshed.

Development visible within foreshore areas is to be highly articulated and vary the alignment of visible facade and roof line to minimise bulk and scale.

Yes

5.1.2 Building Height

2 storeys

Maximum 2 storeys plus basement.

Yes

5.1.3 Foreshore Setback Line

N/A

The foreshore setback line is established by neighbouring dwellings.

N/A

 

Part F - Access

 

The club has in place an existing operational management plan to provide accessible access to the Club given the difficult access through the bush paths and stairs. The operational management strategy includes the collection of people with disabilities from the nearby public walkway and boat ramp adjacent to the Lane Cove 12ft Sailing Skiff Club and transportation via boat across the water to the North Shore Rowing Club boatshed (an approximate distance of 200m). The strategy is considered reasonable for the ongoing use of the club given the difficulty in providing direct accessible access from the car park to the club and the constraint of the location considering topography and the bushland setting.

 

Council’s Community Development Officer, ageing and disability has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comment:

 

The accessibility report for the Aquatic Park Rowing Shed has been reviewed. There doesn’t appear to be any access to the 1st floor Rowing training facilities except be a set of stairs.

 

Whilst people with disability or limited mobility would not have access to the first-floor area due to provision of a stair case, the club can make for alternative training or meeting arrangements to be made within the building to ensure people with a disability are not ultimately discriminated against as it would be cost-prohibitive to provide the necessary access due to the club being a non-profit organisation. To ensure that all members of the club are aware of the operation management strategy a condition was imposed under the original consent to require the operational management strategy to be signposted within the club’s foyer and published on the club’s website. 

 

Part R - Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

The proposed development as amended is unlikely to generate additional traffic as the increase in boat storage is minimal and there is no increase in the number of patrons. The existing parking demand is easily satisfied. The site is in proximity to a low-density residential area with ample street parking. Aquatic Park has a car park for approximately 25 vehicles. The rowing club is also not in proximity to other traffic generating developments operating at similar times.

 

The club has approximately 240 members of which 40 are a school group who are bused to the site. Due to the favorable water conditions majority of rowing activity takes place between 5:00-8:00am before work which mean that members arrive when traffic is minimal and are easily able to park. The member’s attendance is spread throughout the week with some rowers participating most days and other only once or twice a week. Additional sessions/attendance occurs throughout the week at other times although comprises of small groups or individuals.

 

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

 

All relevant issues regarding built impacts of the development are discussed elsewhere in this report and it is considered that the proposal as amended would provide greater internal amenity for patrons. The amenity and privacy of surrounding developments would not be compromised. The development as amended would be satisfactory in terms of environmental, built, social and economic impacts.

 

      (c)  The suitability of the site for the development

 

The site would be suitable for the proposed amended development.

 

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

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council policy and three submissions were received. The matters raised in the submissions are summarised and addressed in the following table:

 

Concern

Comment

The first-floor addition would drastically change the use of the facility which would adversely affect the locality. The use of first floor as an exercise room would alter the character of the building or intensify the current usage on the subject site causing additional traffic, noise and lighting impacts.

The first-floor addition would not change the use of the rowing club where an exercise room would be a suitable ancillary room. Any increase to overall patron numbers on the subject site and approval of the addition would not cause any unreasonable off-site impacts.

The proposed works would contain environmental impacts onto the adjacent bushland and waterway.

The proposed works would contain minimal environmental impacts and any trees to be removed are to be appropriately replaced.

The building must retain roofing of a tiled nature in keeping with the current structure.

Council’s Heritage Consultant has recommended that any existing tiles to be replaced are to be terra cotta tile however it is considered appropriate that the skillion roof be metal in a recessive colour. The applicant has agreed to a condition being imposed in any consent to ensure that this occurs.

The new application adds considerable bulk and is an inappropriate structure at this location which is out of character within the locality constituting as an overdevelopment.

The additional bulk created is minimal and the first-floor addition has been sensitively designed to the current design of the boatshed.

 

     (e)   The public interest

 

Having regard to the assessment and recommendations contained in this report, it is considered that approval of the amended development would be in the public interest. The proposal as amended would contribute to improved amenity levels for users of the North Shore Rowing Club while minimising impacts onto surrounding developments.

 

Section 4.55(3) Consideration of any Reasons given by the Consent Authority for the Granting of the Original Consent.

 

The second part of Section 4.55(3) requires Council to consider any reasons given by the consent authority for the granting of the original consent.

 

The reasons provided within the conclusion of the original Lane Cove Planning Panel report were as follows:

 

“The matters in relation to section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied. The application meets the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 and Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.

 

The proposed additions are minimal in scale within the context of the existing boatshed and foreshore site. The increased storage areas, decking and launching pontoon would allow for the ongoing and improved operation of the rowing club. The improved launching facilities would allow for all users to launch their vessels safely and efficiently especially during the congested peak hours as multiple crews enter and exit the water.

 

The slight encroachment into the bushland area would result in approximately 10m2 of excavation up to a depth of 1m, loss of two trees and understorey vegetation although is considered reasonable as the development is within the public interest and the footprint of the development has been minimised in response to the topography and location of significant trees in close proximity to the development. 

 

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

 

The first-floor addition has been assessed against the relevant matters Section 4.15 of the Act and have been satisfied. The application as amended continues to meet LCLEP 2009 and SREP Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005. The proposal as amended remains to be minimal in scale in its context and would further improved operations of the club. The proposed works as amended would continue to minimise its impact on the adjoining bushland and would not be contrary to the public interest.

 

REFERRALS

 

Principal Building Surveyor

 

Council’s Principal Building Surveyor has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

There are no building related objections with respect to compliance with the National Construction Code (BCA) 2019.

 

Development Engineer

 

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

All new impervious areas have been conditioned to drain into the existing stormwater system.

 

No objections subject to recommended draft conditions.

 

Manager Environmental Health

 

Council’s Manager Environmental Health has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

There are no objections to proposed modifications to the rowing club subject to compliance with the various reports (waste management etc.) and documentation that have been submitted, subject to draft conditions.

 

Manager Open Space

 

Council’s Manager Open Space has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

There are no concerns with the proposed first floor addition if the original comments and conditions from the initial assessment in 2018 outlined below are enforced.

 

Traffic Engineer

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

There are no concerns with the proposal as overall patron numbers have not increased.

 

Tree Assessment Officer

 

Council’s Tree Assessment Officer has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

It is acknowledged that the retention tree number 4 is at this stage unknown until roots are located through manual excavation. If the project Arborist deems the tree unretainable during construction this is not considered a breach on the provision justification from the Arborist is submitted to council in writing for public record.

This statement makes provision for the removal of tree number 4 in the event it is structurally compromised through the excavations. The Arborist has identified that there would be additional encroachment into the TPZ area but at this stage the destabilisation of the tree has not been confirmed. In the event the Project Arborist deems the tree to be at risk of destabilisation through the proposed excavations there are no objection to the tree’s removal.

All existing conditions pertaining to the retention and management of trees on site apart from tree number 4 are to be maintained for the duration of the development.

There are no objections to the additional upper floor addition or the required excavation. Additional conditions to be included.

It is noted that Tree 4 has recently been removed (with approval from Council’s Open Space Section) due to safety reasons for being in proximity to the excavated area. However, in October 2019 Council declared a climate emergency and call for a greater cause and consideration by staff. The North District Plan also calls for the tree canopy of all Council’s to be increased while actively seeking to replace the trees removed.

Bearing this in mind, it is recommended that the relevant trees condition be amended to reflect the current situation to include Angophora costastas in 45L pots at a ratio of 2:1 as close as possible to the location of the removed trees and as endorsed by Council’s Landscaped Officer to ensure planting procedures are followed and for healthy growth (see Condition No. 32).

Council’s Heritage Consultant

 

Council’s Heritage Consultant has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

The proposal is for a modification to the existing consent for alterations and redevelopment of the existing timber framed sheds and club house comprising the North Shore Rowing Club. The modification affects the configuration of first floor extension partially within the roof space over the former caretaker's residence and boat store.

 

Heritage Items

The Rowing Club buildings are listed as a group heritage item of local significance, together with private boatsheds and a Sea Scout shed (now demolished).

 

Potential Heritage Impact

The proposed alterations would have no impact on neighbouring boatsheds but modifications to the first-floor skylight would have marginal additional impact on the existing structures used by the Rowing Club. The impact arises from the visual relationship of the skylight and its prominence in the roof area. It is considered that the extent of impact is acceptable and the alterations would enhance the amenity and potential use of the rowing club facilities. The Statement of Heritage Impact by Perumal Murphy states that.... The proposed modifications to the approved additions are intended to improve the use and amenity of the building into the long term and are considered acceptable as the primary form, low scale and recognisable character and details of the Boatshed will be retained and the building will continue to be a visible feature of the Bay.

 

Assessment

It is satisfied that the proposed materials, colours and finishes are recessive and the work would have an acceptable impact on the existing Rowing Club buildings, the Yacht Bay waterfront setting and the bushland park behind the site. Lightweight materials are proposed for the first-floor additions which effectively reduce the bulk and scale of the development and potential impacts are mitigated by its location behind the existing ridge line. The proposed additions would complement the existing form and style of the original 1933 building.  

 

Conclusion

There are no objections to the proposed modifications nor any requirements for amendments apart from the earlier recommendation to replace the roof tiles with replacement terra cotta tile of variegated colour, similar to the existing roof.

RMS

 

The RMS has assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

It is advised that maritime planning has reviewed the application and have no comments.

 

Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries)

 

The Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries) have assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

This modification does not constitute any dredge and reclamation works.

 

Please note the original IDA advice provided in October 2017.

 

Department of Natural Resources Access

 

Department of Natural Resources Access have assessed the proposal as amended and made the following comments:

 

The Natural Resources Access Regulator (NRAR) has reviewed documents for the above development application and considers that, for the purposes of the Water Management Act 2000 (WM Act), General Terms of Approval and/or a Controlled Activity Approval is not required, and no further assessment by this agency is necessary.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Sections 4.15 and 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied. The proposed development as amended provides for better amenity levels for club patrons while maintaining amenity to surrounding developments. The proposal generally meets with SREP Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005, LCLEP 2009, Lane Cove DCP and the Foreshores and Waterways Development Control Plan 2005.

 

The proposal works as amended would still be minimal in scale within the context of the existing boatshed building and the subject foreshore site. The works would contain minimal bushland, waterway and off-site impacts subject to conditions such as ensuring that any tiles removed be replaced with terra cotta tiles, that the metal roofing on the first-floor skillion structure be recessive and that the unauthorised solar panels located on top of the verandah structure be appropriately relocated elsewhere. In accordance with Council’s emergency resolution, it is recommended that every tree removed as part of this development Angophora costastas trees be replanted in 45L pots at a ratio of 2:1 as close as possible to the location of the removed trees.

 

On balance the proposed development would be reasonable and is recommended for approval subject to amending and adding relevant conditions of consent to reflect the updated plans and the development as amended.

 

 

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 7 July 2020 exercising the functions of the Council as the consent authority grant consent to the Section 4.55(2) Modification Application to Development Application No. 153/2017 on land known as the North Shore Rowing Club – Aquatic Park, Stuart Street, Longueville on Lot 2 DP 907301 subject to the following conditions:

 

The replacement of Condition Nos 1, 10, 20, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36 and 41 as follows:

 

1.         Approved Plans: Except where otherwise provided in this consent, the development is to be carried out strictly in accordance with the following plans (stamped approved by Council) and support documents:

 

Drawing

Prepared by

DWG/Plan No.

Rev

Dated

Site and Ground Floor Plan

OPRA Architects

B79-DA 1

2

12.09.2017

Elevations and Sections

OPRA Architects

B79-DA 2

2

12.09.2017

 

            And as amended by Drawing Nos. 01_000, 01_011-12, 01_031, 01_101 and 01_201

            Revision A dated 24/01/20 prepared by Perumal Pedavoli Architects.

 

The Development must be carried out in accordance with the amended plans approved under this condition. Where any inconsistencies occur between the conditions of this consent and the drawings/documents referred to above, the conditions of this consent prevail.

 

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

 

10.       External Finishes: The exterior materials of the boatshed are to be painted in a colour to match the existing boat shed and in accordance with the details submitted with the application.

 

Reason: To ensure that the Boatshed is not visually prominent when viewed from the Waterway.

 

20.       Roof Material:  The replacement of existing roof tiles is to be with terracotta tiles of variegated colour and the new skillion roof is to be metal. All metal roofing is to be recessive. Skylights up to 1200mm long and 900mm wide are permitted and shall be limited to the eastern slope of the approved roof. 

           

            Reason: To ensure the development is visually unobstrucive from public places, to avoid glare and to protect the amenity of surrounding residents.

 

31.       Consent to remove Trees: This consent gives approval for the removal of Trees 5 and 6 upon issue of the Construction Certificate only.

           

            Reasons: To ensure trees are only removed in conjuction with the development that requires their removal.

 

32.       Replacement Planting: Trees removed as part of the Development Consent including for Trees 2, 3 and 4 which have already been removed must be replaced with Angophora costatas in 45L pots at a ratio of no less than 2:1 as close as possible to the location of the removed trees and endorsed by Council’s Landscape Officer. All plantings/landscaping must comply with Part J Landscaping of the Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2010 and be installed by a qualified horticulturalist; the trees are to be provided with support stakes, mulch and initial watering prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

            Reason: To retain the existing density of trees.       

 

33.       Trees to be Retained and Protected: All other trees on site are to be retained and             protected for the life of the development. All plans are to be updated prior to the issue of the             Construction Certificate to reflect the retention of neighbouring trees 8 and 9. A site specific             Tree Protection Plan produced by an AQF5 Consulting Arborist showing protective             measures for all trees within 5 metres of the development, including street trees and             neighbouring trees, is to be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the             Construction Certificate. All tree protective measures must be in place prior to any works             commencing on the site and must be maintained for the duration of works on the site. The             plan must include a work method statement specific to working within the tree protection             zones. The plan must meet Australian Standard AS4970-2009 Protection of Trees on             Development sites and AS4373-2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees. The above is required             prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

            Reason: To protect trees required to be retained.

34.       Footing, trench or excavation that is within the TPZ of any retained trees must be carried             out under the guidance of an AQF Level 5 Arborist and using non-destructive techniques.             No tree roots greater than 40mm diameter to be severed or damaged unless approved by             an AQF Level 5 Arborist. All roots are to be pruned and documented by an AQF Level 5             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. No excavations are to be carried out within 2.1 metres of neighbouring             trees 8 and 9. The Project Arborist is to oversee all works within 3.6 metres of these trees.

36.       Tree Protection (Trunk Guards): The trunk of Tree 1 must be protected during the construction period by a trunk guard.  The trunk guard must be made of underfelt under a layer of timber battens spaced 50 mm apart and up to 2 m from the ground.  All trunk guards must be installed PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

           

            Reason: To protect trees required to be retained.

 

41.       Lighting:  All lighting must be unobtrusive to minimise light pollution into the bushland area and neighbouring properties.

 

            Reason: To protect the amenity of the surrounding area.

 

The addition of the following conditions as follows:

 

28A.   The two existing solar panels erected on top of the existing verandah structure are to be             relocated elsewhere on the Rowing Club building to the satisfaction of Council and prior to             the issue of the occupation certificate.

 

            Reason: To improve the visual appearance of the Rowing Club when view from public             spaces.

 

36A.     The Project Arborist is to attend site monthly to monitor and record compliance to all tree             related development conditions including certification of any replacement planting has been             carried out upon completion of the landscaping phase. The Arborist is to attend, at a             minimum, at the following intervals:-

 

a.   Pre-demolition of any structures to record the condition of retained trees prior to works carried out;

b.   Pre-demolition to certify tree protection has been installed in compliance with development conditions and the tree protection plan;

c.   Post demolition to certify trees have not been damaged during the phase;

d.   During any excavation within the TPZ areas of retained trees;

e.   Certify storm water has been installed outside of the TPZ area of any retained trees;

f.    All root pruning is to be carried out and recorded by the project Arborist, no roots greater than 40mm in diameter are to be pruned unless approved in writing by the project Arborist;

g.   Monthly inspections during construction; and

h.   Final inspection to include a report on the longevity of retained trees has not been diminished because of the development.

 

All project Arborist attendance is to be followed by a certificate or statement of attendance to be submitted to the Principal Certifier within five days of attendance.

 

36B.     Pursuant to Section 80A(6)(a) and (7) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act             1979, the applicant must, prior to the issue of the construction certificate, provide security in             the amount of $6,000 (by way of cash deposit with the Council, or a guarantee satisfactory             to the Council) for the payment of the cost of making good any damage caused, as a             consequence of the doing of anything to which this development consent relates, to all trees             that are standing in the public reserve immediately adjoining the land subject of this             development consent. This bond may be forfeited in the event of damages to any of these             trees as a result of the development works as determined by Council’s Tree Management             Officer, at a minimum the cost of replacing the tree including labour will be deducted from             the bond. The applicant shall contact Council to have the street tree inspected following             issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

Health and Environment

 

58.     Operation of Plant or Equipment

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

 

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

 

59.     Noise Control – Offensive Noise

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

 

60.     Noise Level Restrictions – Demolition Works

Noise from demolition works must comply with the following criteria:

 

a)   For demolition periods of 4 weeks or less the noise level from demolition work must not exceed the background noise level by more than 20dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity

b)   For demolition periods greater than 4 weeks the noise level from demolition work must not exceed the background noise level by more than 10dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity

 

61.    Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition, excavation and remediation process being removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover NSW and the Environment Protection Authority, and with the provisions of:-

·        New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 2000;

·        The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001;

·        The Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 2001;

·        Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW); and

·        Environment Protection Authority's Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non Liquid Wastes (1999).

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Notification Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑2View

Neighbour Notification Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑3View

Original Report

28 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 3

Original Report

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator