Lane Cove Local Planning Panel 2 February 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting

2 February 2021,  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 2 February 2021 commencing at 5pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Craig - GMYours faithfully

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting Procedures

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

2.       Unit 15/228-230 Longueville Road, Lane Cove................................................ 4

 

 

 

 

 


 

Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 2 February 2021

Unit 15/228-230 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          Unit 15/228-230 Longueville Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA20/180-01 - 1179/21

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Greg Samardzic 

 

 

 

Property:

Lot 15 SP 6027, Unit 15/228-230 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

DA No:

DA 180/2020

Date Lodged:

22 December 2020

Cost of Work:

$90,000.00

Owners:

S J Pfeiffer and M J Pfeiffer

Acumen Strata

Applicant:                        

Lisa Strudwick

 

Description of the proposal to appear on determination

Alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building development to include a new bedroom/ensuite and enclosed alfresco extension to apartment unit 15 over the roof level

Zone

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

Yes

Notification

Notified in accordance with Council’s policy

 

No submissions have been received

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The subject Development Application is referred to the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel as a 17.4% breach to the Building Height and a 29% breach to the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) development standards under Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan (LCLEP) 2009 are proposed.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The subject Development Application is for alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building development to include a new bedroom/ensuite and enclosed alfresco extension to apartment unit 15 over the roof level.

 

The above works have resulted in a breach to the LCLEP 2009 maximum 12m Building Height development standard by a maximum of 2.089m (17.4%) with a maximum building height of 14.089m. The proposal has also resulted in a breach to the LEP maximum 0.8:1 FSR development standard by 0.2327:1 (29%) with a proposed maximum FSR of 1.0327:1 which is an increase over the existing FSR of 0.9945:1 by providing 51.1m² of additional gross floor area.

 

The applicant has submitted a Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to development standards written justification stating that the proposed variations are reasonable due to the proposed increase to the bulk or scale of the existing development would be marginal when compared to the existing development and would not involve significant impacts onto surrounding developments whilst providing for improved amenity levels for the current residents of the subject apartment unit.

 

The height breach is due to the design of the proposed extension over the topography of land which falls to the rear of the subject and the further FSR breach results in an additional bedroom and an enclosed alfresco area being created for the subject unit over the existing roof/balcony space. The proposed breaches are reasonable in this instance as the new works are well set back from behind the edge of the roof line and are in line with existing side building setbacks of the unit. The view to the rear towards the existing detached dwellings to the rear are heavily treed so the proposed works would not be visible.

 

The proposed development has DCP non-compliances with building setback and separation however it has adequate setbacks which would provide for reasonable privacy or amenity outcomes. The proposal would not be in contrast with the appearance of surrounding residential flat buildings. The proposal is considered compatible with the character of the immediate locality.

 

The subject Development Application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is considered that the proposal as submitted involves for a reasonable built outcome which is consistent with the existing built form in the locality. The proposed development would satisfy the needs of the residents of the current unit and would continue to maintain relevant amenity objectives to surrounding developments.

 

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 conditions. 

 

SITE

 

Property

Lot 15 SP 6027, Unit 15/228-230 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

 

Area

1,359.65m2

 

Site location

North-eastern side of Longueville Road

 

Existing improvements

Existing part 3 and 4 storey residential flat building development containing 15 units and a basement car park

 

Existing unit 15 is located on the upper level to the rear of the subject site adjacent to a large roof area

 

Adjoining properties

Adjoining residential flat buildings to the north-east and to the south-east zoned R4 High Density Residential approximately a maximum of 4 storeys in height

 

Predominantly detached dwellings located across Longueville Road and to the rear of the subject site zoned R2 Low Density Residential

 

 

Subject Site

Existing Residential Flat Building Development

 

 

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

The existing residential flat building development was constructed in the 1970’s.

 

Unit 15 has an existing floor area of 94.42m2 and is currently a two-bedroom unit.

 

Unit 15 contains a sunroom structure (13.07m2) and balcony area with balustrading over the existing roof area where the proposed works are to be located. To accommodate these works, an approved window to the lobby area had been removed and replaced with a door to enable access to the sunroom and balcony area. The lobby now forms part unit 15.

 

Council’s records indicate that there are no formal approvals in place however the structure and the use of the balcony area has been associated with the use of unit 15 for years now without complaints. Any approval of the subject Development Application would result in the formalisation of this area to form part of Unit 15. A

 

The strata managing agent has provided their relevant owners consent with the subject Development Application and a condition is recommended that all works are to comply with the Building Code of Australia (BCA) in any consent to be granted.

 

Existing Sunroom Structure

Existing Balcony Area

PROPOSAL

 

The subject Development Application is for alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building development to include a new bedroom/ensuite (25.76m²) and enclosed alfresco (25.34m²) extension to apartment unit 15 over the roof level.

 

View of the Proposed Development

The proposed bedroom/ensuite addition would replace the existing 13.07m² sunroom structure. To accommodate the above, it is proposed to remove the existing door leading out onto the balcony area and to increase its opening size with replacement of the existing internal stairs within the original lobby area out to the balcony. It is proposed to replace the existing tiles thought the existing balcony area. A new gate 1200mm high is proposed to prevent access to service zone of the roof area is to be installed.

 

SECTION 4.15 ASSESSMENT

 

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

 

Section 4.15 Matters for Consideration

 

(a)        The provisions of:-

 

 

(i)         Any environmental planning instrument:

 

 

SEPP 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 Apartment Development

 

N/A – the SEPP does not apply as it involves minor alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building development constructed in the 1970s. It is noted that the proposed 121.15m² 3-bedroom unit layout compliance with the minimum 90m² apartment unit layout requirement under the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) and continues to contain a substantial private open space area above the minimum 12m² requirement. Further, the proposed ceiling complies with the minimum 2.7m ceiling height ADG requirement to obtain increased levels of solar access and cross ventilation.

 

SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

A relevant BASIX certificate has been submitted as part of the subject Development Application which confirms that the proposal would meet the NSW Government’s requirements for sustainability.

 

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

12m

Maximum 14.089m (17.4% variation)

No, see discussion below

4.4 FSR

0.8:1

Site Area 1,359.65m²

FSR = 1,087.72m²

1.0327:1or 1,404.05m² (29% variation)

No, see discussion below

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.

 

A.        Clause 4.6 Written Request – Building Height

 

A maximum building height of 12m applies to the site under LCLEP 2009. The proposed building has a maximum building height of 14.089m (a variation of 2.089m or 17.4%). Relevant elevational diagrams of the proposal are provided below.  

 

 

 

 

Elevations Indicating Proposed Building Height Breach

 

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

 

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

 

Written request provided by the applicant

 

The applicant has provided a written request seeking a variation to the development standard with the lodged application. A copy of the request provided to the Panel (AT3). Under Clause 4.6(3) the applicant is required to demonstrate:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

This proposal achieves the objectives of the Building Height standard by:

 

·              Minimising overshadowing and loss of privacy to nearby properties.

·              Improving the privacy and visual impacts of the development on neighbouring properties by enclosing part of the outdoor area.

·              Achieving a perceived bulk and scale that is in character with existing development in the locality as there is no perceived increase in the number of stories.

·              Maximising sunlight for the public domain along the pedestrian/cycleway along the frontage of the site as the proposal sits to the rear having the development relate to the topography.

  

Comment:

 

The existing rear section of the apartment already exceeds the height limit by 45mm as the land drops away to the rear so anything beyond this point is going to be higher. The new floor level has been determined by the level of the existing rear steps. The roof pitches (5 degrees) to the rear and makes a change to the existing roof line to create more amenity internally. If the existing ceiling line was to be continued the room height would only be 2.1m as the existing apartment has a 2.4m ceiling height and Council’s DCP calls for 2.7m heights. There is a need to raise the floor level to the rear extension above the deck to create an independent slab to ensure the structural integrity of the extension. A higher roof is also required for waterproofing purposes.

 

The proposed variation has little effect to the scale of the existing building as it only infills part of an existing terrace area and strict compliance is unreasonable due to the slope of the land. The residential flat building development substantially still presents as a maximum 4 storey building due to the proposal being setback from the rear and sides of the roof edge building and has very little impact on the overall scale of the building.

 

The variation is consistent with the objectives of the development standard for the following reasons:

 

·              The proposed variation makes very little visible increase to the bulk and scale of the development and allows for reasonable solar access to existing buildings and public areas to be maintained.

·              The proposal improves the privacy and visual impacts of the development on neighbouring properties.

 

Given the slope of the land and minimal impacts on neighbouring properties and the public domain, strict compliance with the Height of Buildings development standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary in this instance. 

 

Compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstance of the subject proposal. The written request demonstrates that the breach to height would not result in the departure from the building height objectives in relation to privacy/visual physical impacts and to ensure that the development relates to the topography of the subject site. The proposed development appropriately identifies the existing character of the locality by providing for satisfactory building setbacks whilst providing for improved amenity levels of the current residents of the subject apartment unit.

 

The proposal would not have adverse privacy impacts with any adjoining site which is aided by an already established treed environment of the immediate locality. 

 

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

 

The requirement in Clause 4.6(3)(b) of the LEP is to justify there are sufficient environmental planning grounds for the variation, requires identification of grounds particular to the circumstances of the proposed development, and not simply grounds that apply to any similar development on the site or in the vicinity.

 

The applicant has stated that there are sufficient planning grounds to contrive the Building Height development standard as:

 

·              The proposal achieves a high level of amenity for current and future occupants.

·              There will be no detrimental impacts on both the natural and built environments.

·              There will be no detrimental social or economic impacts.

·              Site is suitable for the proposed development.

·              It is in the public interest.

 

The applicant stated that approval of the proposed development will not impact on the proposal’s ability to:

 

·              Achieve an appropriate balance between the development and management of the environment that will be ecologically sustainable, socially equitable and economically viable.

·              Minimise adverse impacts of the development.

·              Protect and enhance the amenity of the residents.

·              Protect and enhance the natural and built environment.

·              Meet the future housing needs of the population of the LGA.

 

Comment:

 

The environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard are considered relevant. The applicant has sought to provide for a design which would provide benefits to the existing residents whilst minimising any significant impacts externally. The additional height created above the 12m building height standard is due to the slope of the land and to address the different levels between the existing apartment and the external roof area. Reasonable attempts have been made to appropriately design the development to provide for a better planning outcome.

 

A clear or detailed analysis has been made in the submitted Clause 4.6 written justification. The overall impact on the locality has been minimised where the proposal would not adversely impact on the adjoining and surrounding premises. The environmental planning grounds provided are considered satisfactory and are supported. Clause 4.6(3)(b) is considered to be satisfied.

 

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

 

Development consent cannot be granted to vary a development standard unless a consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development would be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

 

The applicant has stated that the proposal achieves the relevant objectives of the Building Height standard ensuring that the bulk and scale of the development is compatible with the existing character of the high-density locality.

 

An assessment against the objectives of building height and the R4 High Density Residential zone contained within LCLEP 2009 are provided as follows:

 

Height of Building Objectives

 

Clause 4.3 (1) provides the following objectives:-

 

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

 

Comment: The development would allow for reasonable solar access to existing buildings and public areas.

 

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

 

Comment: There would not be adverse privacy and visual impacts onto the adjoining properties.

 

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

 

Comment:  The development would allow for reasonable sunlight for the public domain.

 

(d)  to relate development to topography

 

Comment:  The site has a considerable slope falling to the rear of the site and the proposal has been appropriately designed which appropriately considers the topography whilst providing for a high amenity development.

 

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

 

The applicant has stated that the proposed development is consistent with the R4 zone objectives as the proposed development:

 

·              Will provide for the housing needs of the community with a desired high-density residential environment.

·              Will provide for a variety of housing types in the form of an apartment with a master bedroom and ensuite together with an alfresco area.

·              Is well located to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

·              Is appropriately designed to maximise amenity impacts.

·              Is compatible with the existing character of the area and the desired high-density future character of the area as proposed by Council.

 

R4 High Density Residential Zone Objectives

 

The R4 High Density Residential Zone objectives are as follows:

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal provides an addition bedroom and enclosed alfresco area to meet the housing needs of the current residents. The proposal now provides for a 3-bedroom unit with a large private open space area to allow for reasonable amenity for the occupants with a well-sized room and an alfresco area to ensure for improved recreational activities.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal provides for this outcome in an older established high-density residential environment.

 

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

 

Comment: Not applicable.

 

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

 

Comment: The location is acceptable and has good access to Longueville Road public transportation services (buses only).

 

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

Comment: The proposed building design has regard to the existing amenity of residences in the neighbourhood. The height variation itself would not cause significant adverse impacts on the existing amenity of the neighbourhood. It is considered that the development would provide for a better planning outcome in this instance as it would maintain current amenity levels on the immediate locality whilst improving the internal living requirements of the current residents.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal would not result in the isolation of the adjoining site.

 

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

 

Comment: The proposal does not impact on existing landscaped areas.

 

In accordance with the above, the development does comply with the LCLEP 2009 objectives for the R4 High Density Residential zone.

 

4.         Concurrence of the Director General.

 

The Local Planning Panel can assume concurrence for exceptions to development standards where the variation to the development standard is greater than 10%. The building height variation is more than 10% (17.4%). As the proposal is referred to the Local Planning Panel for determination; concurrence is taken to be assumed should the Panel be satisfied that notwithstanding the above impacts and non-compliances the proposal is acceptable.

 

5.         Conclusion

 

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

 

B.        Clause 4.6 Written Request – FSR

 

A maximum FSR of 0.8:1 applies to the site under LCLEP 2009. The proposal has a maximum FSR of 1.0327:1 (29% variation), an increase over the existing FSR of 0.9945:1 by providing 51.1m² of additional gross floor area equating to 0.2327:1.  

 

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Written request provided by the applicant

 

The applicant has provided a written request seeking a variation to the development standard with the lodged application. A copy of the request is provided to the Panel (AT3). Under Clause 4.6(3) the applicant is required to demonstrate:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The Clause 4.6 variation has argued that it is unreasonable or unnecessary for the same reasons provided under the building height development standard to require strict compliance with the development standard however provided the additional following reasons:

 

The existing character of the locality, particularly in relation to bulk and scale is reflected in the higher density developments to neighbouring properties along Longueville Road which extend from Alpha Road and Zeta Road and further beyond these intersections. The existing block of development from Alpha Road to Zeta Road is characterized by buildings that range from 3 storeys fronting Longueville Road to 5 storeys to the rear (including one basement storey).

 

The proposed development perceptually does not add any additional storeys, Furthermore, the proposed extension to that apartment is to the rear of the building and setback from the terrace edges such that it has a very minimal impact from the street front.

 

In accordance with the primary objective of the FSR standard, the proposed development has a bulk and scale that is compatible with the existing character of the high-density locality.

 

Comment:

 

Compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstance of the subject proposal. The written request demonstrates that the breach to FSR is consistent with the LEP FSR objective to ensure that the bulk and scale of development is compatible with the character of the locality. Clause 4.6(3)(a) is satisfied in this instance.

 

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

 

The applicant has provided the same environmental planning grounds justification provided under the Building Height standard variation.

 

The increase in floor area is located over the existing building footprint and does not produce any additional stormwater. The extension on the roof level is only by a width of 5.510m when viewed on the northern side. The area of the terrace is expansive and would be better utilised and offer better amenity to the occupants with a good-sized master bedroom and undercover entertainment area. The covered area would be more private for the occupants and neighbours alike. Sound transmission and overlooking would be reduced by having a covered outdoor area to the rear.

 

Given the existing footprint of the building and to the extent of the extension together with the minimal impacts on neighbours and improved privacy, strict compliance with the FSR development standard would seem unreasonable in this instance. 

 

The requirement in Clause 4.6(3)(b) of the LEP to justify that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds for the variation, requires identification of grounds particular to the circumstances of the proposed development, and not simply grounds that apply to any similar development on the site or in the vicinity.

 

Comment:

 

The environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard are considered relevant and justify the case. A clear or detailed analysis has been made in the submitted Clause 4.6 written justification. The environmental planning grounds provided are satisfactory. Clause 4.6(3)(b) is satisfied.

 

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

 

Development consent cannot be granted to vary a development standard unless a consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development would be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

 

The applicant has stated that the proposal achieves the relevant objectives of the Building Height standard ensuring that the bulk and scale of the development is compatible with the existing character of the high-density locality.

 

An assessment against the objectives of FSR and the R4 High Density Residential zone contained within LCLEP 2009 are provided as follows:

 

FSR Objective

 

Clause 4.4(1) provides the following objective:-

 

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

 

Comment: The additional 51.1m² floor space created would not contribute to unnecessary bulk and scale to the overall residential flat building and in turn would not adversely affect the character of the locality whilst providing a good planning outcome.

 

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

 

The applicant has provided the same justification as to why the proposed development is consistent with the R4 zone objectives under the the Building Height standard variation.

 

R4 High Density Residential Zone Objectives

 

See the R4 zone objectives discussion above under the Building Height Clause 4.6 written request section of this report.

                                              

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

 

 

 

 

4.         Concurrence of the Director General.

 

The Local Planning Panel can assume concurrence for exceptions to development standards where the variation to the development standard is greater than 10%. In this instance the variation is more than 10% (29%). As the proposal is referred to the Local Planning Panel for determination; concurrence is taken to be assumed should the variation be supported by the Panel.

 

5.         Conclusion

 

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

 

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 proposal 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.

N/A – works on an existing residential flat building site

N/A

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 site is not located within a noise sensitive area

N/A

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.

N/A

N/A

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 maintained

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 maintained

Yes

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

N/A

 

N/A

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.

N/A

N/A

8.2 Passive Surveillance

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

N/A

N/A

 

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

Existing development site area has remained unchanged

N/A

3.3 Building Depth

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

The existing maximum building depth has remained unchanged

 

New works has a maximum depth of 9.1m

Yes

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.

Unchanged – works would not be visible from Longueville Road

 

Yes

 

 

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).

Unchanged

 

N/A

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

N/A 

N/A

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

12m for 9 storeys and above.

Side setback

 

Northeastern side boundary (Part 4 storeys and part 5 storeys):

 

Min. 5.29m for new works

 

 

Balcony/terrace setback: Min. 2.88m

 

 

Southeastern side boundary (Part 4 storeys and part 5 storeys):

 

Min. 9.65m for new works (5 storey component)

 

 

Balcony/terrace setback: Min. 7.95m (5 storey component)

 

Rear Setback:

 

Min. 9.15m for new works

 

Balcony/terrace setback: Min. 3.97m

 

 

 

 

 

No, see discussion below

 

No, see discussion below

 

 

 

 

No in part, see discussion below

 

 

No in part, see discussion below

 

 

 

See below

 

See below

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

Adjoining rear boundary is zoned R2

 

Min. rear setback is 9.154m for new works

 

Balcony/terrace setback: Min. 3.97m

 

 

Yes

 

 

No, see discussion below

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 - existing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Encroachments exceed 500mm

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No – see above under setbacks

 

 

N/A

3.6 Building Separation (within developments)

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

 

Up to four storeys (approx12m):

-    12m between habitable rooms/balconies

-    9m between habitable and non-habitable rooms

-    6m between non-habitable rooms

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Five to eight storeys (approx 25m):

-           18m between habitable rooms/balconies

-           12m between habitable and non-habitable rooms

-           9m between non-habitable rooms

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approx, a 12m building separation is maintained between the subject new works and the adjoining 4 storey residential flat building development to the northeast

 

Approx. a 10m separation is proposed between the balcony/terrace area and the adjoining development to the northeast

 

Approx. a 14m building separation is maintained between the new works and the adjoining 3 storey residential flat building development to the southeast

 

Approx. a 13m separation is proposed between the balcony/terrace area and the adjoining development to the southeast

 

A minor section of the new works approx. 2.75m in width and the associated terrace area are technically 5 storeys due to the height of this section of the existing basement directly below being 1m above natural ground level  

 

Approx, a 12m building separation is maintained between the subject new works and the adjoining 4 storey residential flat building development to the northeast

 

Approx. a 10m separation is proposed between the balcony/terrace area and the adjoining development to the northeast

 

Approx. a 14m building separation is maintained between the subject new works and the adjoining 3 storey residential flat building development to the southeast

 

Approx. a 13m separation is proposed between the balcony/terrace area and the adjoining development to the southeast

 

Note: a minimum 25m building separation is provided between the balcony terrace area to the adjoining detached dwellings to the rear of the subject site

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

No, see discussion below

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, see discussion below

 

 

 

 

No, see discussion below

 

 

 

 

No, see discussion below

 

 

 

 

No, see discussion below

 

 

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.

 

N/A – existing fencing to remain

 

 

N/A

1.4.2 Side and rear fences: Any 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.

No excavation is proposed

N/A

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

N/A

N/A

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.

N/A

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.

Existing

N/A

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.

Existing

N/A

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.

Current use and design of the roof level by unit 15 as private open space is appropriate and has been for years without incident

Yes

 

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.

The terrace area has been designed and has been used to maximise visual/acoustic privacy and safety/security

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.

The subject unit is not a studio

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.

The existing 2-bedroom unit is proposed to be a 3-bedroom unit resulting in an altered apartment mix of:

 

-           2 x 1-bedroom units

-           7 x 2-bedroom units

-           6 x 3-bedroom units

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 – The required minimum 16sqm with a minimum 4m depth achieved and in addition to the size of the original private open space area approved in the 1970’s

3.13 Storage

Refer to Part 4G of the ADG Compliance Table.  Clause 6A of SEPP 65 – DCP provisions are of no effect – Existing and suitably sized storage areas for all units are available in the basement car park and were approved under the original consent

3.15 Natural Ventilation

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

3.16 Visual privacy

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

3.17 Communal Open Space

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

Unchanged

N/A

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.

Unchanged

 

N/A

3.19 Planting on structures

N/A – unchanged

 

Side/Rear Setback and Building Separation Variations

 

The required setbacks and building separation with adjoining developments are not achieved due to:

 

Northeastern side boundary (4 storeys and part 5 storeys): A minimum 5.29m setback for the new works and a minimum 2.88m balcony/terrace setback are proposed where a minimum 6m and 9m side setbacks are required respectively. The 9m setback is required as there is a minor section of the new works approximately 2.75m in width and the associated terrace area are technically 5 storeys due to the height of this section of the existing basement directly below being 1m above natural ground level.

 

Approximately a 10m separation is proposed between the balcony/terrace area and the adjoining 4 storey residential flat building development to the northeast where a minimum 12m and 18m building separation are required respectively. Further, approximately a 12m building separation is maintained between the subject new works and the adjoining development to the northeast where a minimum 18m building separation is required.

 

Southeastern side boundary (Part 4 storeys and part 5 storeys): A minimum 9.65m for new works and a minimum 7.95m balcony/terrace setback are proposed along the 5th storey component by a maximum width of 2.7m of the existing building where a minimum 9m side setback is required.

 

Approximately a 14m building separation between the subject new works and approximately a 13m separation are proposed between the balcony/terrace area and the adjoining development to the southeast the adjoining 3 storey residential flat building development where a minimum 18m building separation is required.

 

Rear Setback: A minimum.3.97m balcony/terrace setback is proposed where a minimum 9m rear setback is required.

 

A minimum 25m building separation is provided between the balcony terrace area to the adjoining detached dwellings to the rear of the subject site

 

The relevant setback and building separation DCP objectives are:

 

Setbacks

1.         To establish the desired spatial proportions of the street and define the street edge and provide a transition between the public and private space.

2.         To assist in achieving visual privacy to dwellings from the street.

3.         To allow for street landscape character.

 

Building Separation

1.         To provide visual and acoustic privacy for existing and new residents.

2.         To allow for the provision of appropriately sized open space for recreational activities.

3.         To provide deep soil zones for stormwater management and tree planting, where contextual and site conditions allow.

 

The applicant has stated that all new building works are in line with existing side building setbacks and the existing balcony/terrace area has been used for years without any significant adverse privacy or amenity impacts.

 

Comment:

 

The justification/s provided by the applicant is agreed with as the new works along the side boundary matches the existing built setback and are set back well behind the edge of the roof edge line to reduce any adverse privacy impacts. The size of windows facing the northeastern boundary has been reduced when compared to the existing sunroom extension. The use of the roof area for private recreational uses is reasonable in this instance as the view to the rear towards the existing detached dwellings which are approximately 25m away to the rear are heavily treed so the proposed works would not be visible. There is also a large tree between the proposal and the adjoining development to northeast.

 

This terraced area has been used by the residents of unit 15 for many years now and without any real incident which would indicate that approval of the subject would maintain the current amenity levels enjoyed by adjoining residents. The proposed works and use of this roof space for private recreational activities would improve the living environment of the residents of the unit without unreasonably affecting privacy, trees, landscaping and stormwater management. There are other large terraced open spaces areas available to the adjoining residential flat building developments and the subject terraced area would not be inconsistent with existing developments in the immediate vicinity.

 

It is recommended that the proposed variations be supported.

 

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.

Existing residential flat building development constructed in the 1970’s which did not provide for any adaptable housing and only includes staircases for access

No, however it is unreasonable for the subject unit or the whole building to be upgraded to comply

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

See above

No – see above

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

Existing building with existing access

 

 

No, however it is unreasonable for the site and building to be upgraded to comply

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.

See above

No – see above

 

Part R – Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

PART R TRAFFIC, TRANSPORT AND PARKING

Development Control

Proposed

Complies

2.2 Car Parking Rates

 

 

Residential Flat Building

 

 

Table 1 – Car parking rates

 

Residents:

0.5 spaces per studio

1 space per 1-bedroom unit

1.5 spaces per 2-bedroom unit

2 spaces per 3+ bedroom unit

Dwelling mix:

2 x 1 bed = 2 x 1 = 2

7 x 2 bed = 7 x 1.5 = 10.5

6 x 3-bed = 6 x 2 = 12

Total required: 24.5(25)

 

 

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

 

 

Existing 2-bedroom unit 5 proposed to be a 3-bedroom unit which equates to a 0.5(1) car space increase required to be provided

 

Total: 16 existing residential spaces which is approx. 1 space per unit

 

 

 

 

 

No truck space currently provided

 

 

 

 

No car wash currently provided

 

 

No, however it is unreasonable for the subject site to be upgraded to comply

 

A 1 car space variation is minor and public transport is available on Longueville Road

 

 

No, however it is unreasonable to retrofit the current basement car park

 

No, see above

 

1 disabled space for each adaptable housing unit

 

 

No adaptable units are present within the building

 

No accessible spaces provided in the basement

No, see above

 

Visitor Parking:

1 space per 4 units

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

Four visitor spaces required

 

No existing visitor spaces available

No, see above

 

2.7 – Motorcycle parking

1 motorcycle space per 15 car spaces: 66/15 = 4.4(5)

Motorcycle parking spaces are to have an area of 1.2m x 2.5m

5 motorcycle space required

 

No spaces available

No, see above

 

 

Section 94 - Development Contributions Plan

 

The proposed development would not amend the number of units however the mix of units has altered with unit 15 going from a 2-bedroom unit to a 3-bedroom unit. The S7.11 plan has specified the average number of people per dwelling, based on the number of bedrooms where the average occupancy ratio for a 2-bedroom unit is 1.9 persons and 2.4 persons for a 3-bedroom unit. The S7.11 contribution for each person is calculated at the current rate of $10,942.00 per person (2020/2021) which requires a payable contributions amount of $5,471.00. A condition is recommended to reflect this amount. 

 

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

 

All relevant issues regarding built impacts of the development are discussed elsewhere in this report and it is considered that the proposal would not contain significant adverse internal or external amenity impacts. The privacy of surrounding developments would not be compromised by the approval of the subject application. The development 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 development.

 

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

 

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

 

(e)        The public interest

 

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

 

REFERRALS

 

Principal Building Surveyor

 

No objections subject to recommended draft conditions.

 

Development Engineer

 

No objections subject to recommended draft conditions.

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have been satisfied. The proposal is not compliant with the numerical Building Height and FSR development standards within LCLEP 2009. The submitted Clause 4.6 written request is considered satisfactory and well-founded as detailed in this report.

 

The proposed development has DCP non-compliances with building setback and separation however it has adequate setbacks which would provide for reasonable privacy or amenity outcomes. The proposal would not be in contrast with the appearance of surrounding residential flat buildings. The proposal is considered compatible with the character of the immediate locality.

 

The proposed development does meet the relevant objectives of LCLEP 2009 and LCDCP, is adequate on merit and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Lane Cove Planning Panel approve the proposed variations to the Building Height and FSR development standards in Clause 4.3(2) & 4.4(a) in Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 as the applicant’s written request does adequately address the matters required to be demonstrated. The proposed development would be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standards, the objectives for development in the zone and there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the variation.

           

The Lane Cove Local Planning Panel, in exercising its duties as the consent authority, pursuant to Section 4.16(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, approve the subject Development Application DA180/2020 for alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building development to include a new bedroom/ensuite and enclosed alfresco extension to apartment unit 15 over the roof level at Unit 15/228-230 Longueville Road, Lane Cove subject to the following conditions:

 

General Conditions

 

1.         That the development be strictly in accordance with:

            ·          Drawing number/s: DA08-09 & DA11-12 Issue F dated 24/11/2020 and DA10 Issue G dated 15/12/20 prepared by Zugai Strudwick Architects

 

            except as amended by the following conditions.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

 

4.         The approved plans must be submitted to Sydney Water online approval portal “Sydney Water Tap In”, please refer to web site www.sydneywater.com.au. This is to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met. An approval receipt with conditions shall be issued by Sydney Water (if determined to be satisfactory) and is to be submitted to the accredited certifier prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

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

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)               7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                              7.00am to 4.00pm

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

9.         The development shall be conducted in such a manner so as not to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood in respect of noise, vibration, smell, dust, waste water, waste products or otherwise.

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

 

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

 

            Separate approval must be obtained from Council's Works and Urban Services Department PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT of any building waste container ("Skip") in a public place.

 

            Reason: To protect the environment and public amenity.

 

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

a)      the name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifier;

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

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

 

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

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety and public information.

 

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

 

            Reason: To protect the environment.

 

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

 

a)      The pier holes/pads before filling with concrete.

b)      All reinforcement prior to filling with concrete.

c)      The dampcourse level, ant capping, anchorage and floor framing before the floor material is laid.

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

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

f)       Waterproofing of wet areas.

g)      Stormwater drainage lines prior to backfilling.

h)      Completion.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

14.       Structural Engineer's details being submitted PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE for the following:-

 

a)         underpinning;

b)         retaining walls;

c)         footings;

d)         reinforced concrete work;

e)         structural steelwork;

f)          upper level floor framing.

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

 

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

 

            Reason: To ensure structural adequacy.

 

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

 

            Reason: To protect residential amenity.

 

17.       A check survey certificate is to be submitted at the completion of:-

 

            a          The completion of works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

            Reason: To ensure public safety.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

            Reason: To ensure compliance with the Australian Standards.

 

23.       It should be understood that this consent in no way relieves the owners or applicant from any obligation to obtain any other approval which may be required under any covenant affecting the land or otherwise nor relieve a person from the legal civil consequences of not complying with any such covenant.

 

            Reason: To ensure all works are carried out lawfully.

 

24.       Long Service Levy  Compliance with Section 6.8 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; payment of the Long Service Levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or, where such a levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) – All building works in excess of $25,000 are subject to the payment of a Long Service Levy at the rate of 0.35%.

 

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

 

            Reason: To ensure the levy is paid.

 

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

 

            Reason: Statutory requirement.

 

26.  THE PAYMENT OF A CONTRIBUTION FOR AN ADDITIONAL 0.5 PERSON IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL'S SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN. THIS PAYMENT BEING MADE PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE AND IS TO BE AT THE CURRENT RATE AT TIME OF PAYMENT. THE AMOUNT IS $5,471.00 AT THE CURRENT RATE OF $10,942.00 PER PERSON. NOTE: PAYMENT MUST BE IN BANK CHEQUE.  PERSONAL CHEQUES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

 

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

 

            Reason: Council requirement to provide community services and infrastructure for additional resident.

 

General Engineering Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

            Reason:     To ensure public safety and amenity.

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

            Reason   To ensure public safety.

 

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

 

            Reason:   To maintain Council infrastructure.

 

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

 

            Reason:    To protect, maintain and provide utility services.

 

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

 

            Reason:   To ensure pedestrian access is maintained.

 

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to Construction Certificate

 

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

 

            Reason:   To protect and maintain public infrastructure.

 

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

 

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

 

            Where an existing element does not comply with current standards the subject element is to  be replaced. A drainage design is required detailing the proposed stormwater replacement  works. The stormwater drainage plan is to be prepared and certified by a suitably qualified  engineer and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the  Construction Certificate. The design is to be certified that it fully complies with, AS-3500 and  Part O, Council's DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

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

 

Engineering condition to be complied with prior to Occupation Certificate

 

36.       Certificate of Satisfactory Completion:  Certificates from a registered and licensed             Plumber or a suitably qualified Engineer must be obtained for the following matters. The             plumber is to provide a copy of their registration papers with the certificate. The relevant             Certificates are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of any             Occupation Certificate.

 

·           Confirming that the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management. 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Neighbour Notification Plan

4 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Notification Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑3View

Clause 4.6 Written Justification (Building Height & FSR)

12 Pages

 

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 1

Neighbour Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 2

Notification Plan

 

PDF Creator


ATTACHMENT 3

Clause 4.6 Written Justification (Building Height & FSR)

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator