AGENDA - LPP

Meeting:

Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP)

Date:

Thursday, 5 September 2019

Time:

4.00pm

Venue:

Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Hurstville

Panel Members:

Paul Vergotis (Chairperson)

Juliet Grant (Expert Panel Member)

John Brockhoff (Expert Panel Member)

Erin Sellers (Community Representative)

Council Staff:

Meryl Bishop (Director Environment and Planning

Ryan Cole (Manager Development and Building)

Nicole Askew (Coordinator Development Assessment)

Cathy McMahon (Manager Strategic Planning)

Cathy Mercer (PA to Manager Development and Building)

Sue Matthew (Team Leader DA Admin)

Monica Wernej (Admin Assistant)

 

  

1. On Site Inspections - 1.00pm – 3.30pm

a) 14-16 Victoria Street Kogarah

b) 13 Derby Street Kogarah

c) 5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay

d) 2-4 Vaughan Street Blakehurst

e) Taylors Reserve Lugarno

 

 

 

Break - 3.30pm

2. Public Meeting – Consideration of Items 4.00pm 6.00pm

Public Meeting Session Closed - 6.00pm

(Break – Light Supper served to Panel Members)


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 5 September  2019

Page 67

 

 

3. Reports and LPP Deliberations in Closed Session - 6.30pm

 

LPP030-19        2-4 Vaughan Street Blakehurst - DA2018/0517

(Report by Senior Development Assessment Planner)

LPP031-19        5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay - MOD2019/0022

(Report by Principal Planner (Appeals and Major Development))

LPP032-19        13 Derby Street Kogarah - DA2018/0198

(Report by Independent Assessment)

LPP033-19        Part Lot 1 and whole of Lot 2 DP1200078, Taylors Reserve Lugarno - PP2017/0003

(Report by Manager Strategic Planning)

LPP034-19        14-16 Victoria Street Kogarah - PP2019/0002

(Report by Strategic Planner)

 

 

4. Confirmation of Minutes

 


 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 05 September 2019

 

LPP Report No

LPP030-19

Development Application No

DA2018/0517

Site Address & Ward Locality

2-4 Vaughan Street Blakehurst

Blakehurst Ward

Proposed Development

Demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a five (5) storey residential flat building containing twenty three (23) units and basement car parking for thirty nine (39) vehicles with access off the rear laneway and associated site works

Owners

Nick Pyliotis and Tina Cassim

Applicant

Gianni Georges

Planner/Architect

Mersonn Pty Ltd

Date Of Lodgement

29/11/2018

Submissions

Two (2) submissions

Cost of Works

$7,133,399.00

Local Planning Panel Criteria

Construction of a Residential Flat Building where the provisions of SEPP 65 apply

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development, State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004,

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No.2 – Georges River Catchment, State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, Draft Evironment State Envronmental Planning Policy, Draft State Environmental Planning Policy – Remediation of Land,

Kogarah Local Enivornmental Plan 2012, Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

Statement of Environmental Effects, Architectural Plans,

Traffic and Parking Assessment,

Acoustic Report, BASIX Certificate,

Arborist Report

Report prepared by

Senior Development Assessment Planner

 

 

Recommendation

That the application be refused in accordance with the reasons stated in the report.

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Not Applicable

 

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

No as the application is being recommended for refusal

 

Site Plan

Development site outlined in yellow

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Proposal

1.    The development application (DA) seeks consent for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of five (5) storey residential flat building comprising of a total of twenty three (23) units (4 x 1 bedroom, 17 x 2 bedroom and 2 x 3 bedroom units), two (2) levels of basement car parking catering for a total of thirty nine (39) car parking spaces, tree retention and new landscaping and associated site works.

 

2.    The application has been amended on two occasions (2 May 2019 and 25 June 2019) in response to the concerns raised by the Design Review Panel (DRP) and Council Officers. The most recently amended plans were not re-referred to the DRP as the amendments were considered minor in nature and did not address their previous recommendations.

 

3.    The application was referred to the DRP on two occasions (the original plans and the first set of amendments received on 2 May 2019), on both occasions the Panel were not satisfied with the design resolution of the building. The most recent amended plans do not address the fundamental design and built form concerns raised by the Panel, and the design fails to satisfy the provisions of SEPP 65 and the design intent expressed by the design guidelines established in the Unit Design Guide (ADG). The development fails to comply with a number of ADG provisions including an inadequate amount of deep soil area, insufficient area and treatment of communal open space and non-compliant physical separation distances.

 

4.    The expression of the building, its mass, form and siting is considered to be out of character with the residential nature of the streetscape and immediate area. It is recognised that this precinct is in the process of transitioning from a low scale residential environment to a medium density residential landscape, however the monolithic, brutalist and modernist design as proposed is not in keeping with the nature of recently approved medium density style developments and the existing streetscape acknowledging the opposite side of Vaughan Street remains R2 low density.

 

5.    The design and siting of the building also creates adverse amenity impacts to immediately adjoining residential dwelling houses 4, 6 and 8 James Street given the extent of overshadowing generated by the development which is considered to result in an unreasonable impact on these properties, failing to satisfy the minimum requirements for solar access for neighbouring properties as referenced by the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 (KDCP).

 

6.    There remain some fundamental internal design, amenity and layout  issues which have not been appropriately resolved namely;

-      Poor location of the bin store at ground level at the rear and convoluted access to this space from Units 1 and 4 whereby you have to enter the public domain (street) and then re-enter the development to access the communal area of open space and bin store.

-      The location and access to the bin store removes the potential for landscaping at the rear of the building and it shares a wall with the courtyard wall of Unit 10.

-      The submerged nature and design of Units 1 and 4 results in high retaining walls to the rear private terrace areas between Unit 1 and 2 resulting in bulk and scale and amenity impacts.

-      The ground floor area of communal open space is located along the southern side of the building. The supporting services and amenities within this space are located adjoining the main lift core; the central open corridor space also adjoins the main entries to units, which is considered a poor design solution for a recreation area.

-      Part of the main pedestrian accessway cantilevers the basement driveway.

-      The kitchens of most ground floor units are orientated to the main circulation corridor resulting in poor amenity for the future occupants.

-      The ground floor units are two storey in form, the ground floor has not incorporated a WC on this level which is inconvenient as occupants and visitors need to access the WC on the first floor level.

-      The lift core location and the exposed and open style main corridor and accessway are visually dominating features. The accessway is exposed to the elements.

-      The development lacks the provision of adequate deep soil areas to enable for increased significant tree planting to occur on the southern and northern sides of the site.

-      Swept path diagrams have been requested to demonstrate compliance with the manoeuvrability in the basement, these have not been forthcoming, access to car parking space No.10 and car parking space No.13 is also awkward and is considered unusable.

-      The narrow 3.6m wide driveway access will create potential conflicts between vehicles entering the lower basement level and vehicles exiting the lower basement level and could result in queuing along the rear laneway.

-      The driveway width as amended is too narrow and does not satisfy the provisions of AS2890.1:2004.

-      There is no detailed updated Landscape Plan which shows how the changes (including the new rooftop terrace area) will impact on the original landscape design.

 

7.    The assessment of the application has been conducted having regard to the most recent plans issue No. C dated 25 June 2019.

 

Figure 1: 3D Montage of the proposed front elevation of the building as viewed from Vaughan Street (courtesy AGM Studio, 2018)

 

Site and Locality

8.    This application relates to land known as 2-4 Vaughan Street at Blakehurst. Number 2 Vaughan Street is legally described as Lot 22 DP15830 and includes a two (2) storey dwelling house, swimming pool at the rear and a mature and established Narrow Leaved Iron Bark (Eucalyptus crebra) located in the rear yard. The site has secondary access from the laneway at the rear known as Stuart Lane. Number 4 Vaughan Street is legally described as Lot 21 DP 15830 and includes a single storey dwelling house, a series of retaining walls at the rear and a garage that has access off the Stuart Lane.

 

9.    The development site has a frontage of 26.80m to Vaughan Street and a secondary frontage of 20.12m to Stuart Lane. The site is irregular in shape and the total site area is 1,327.6sqm.

 

10.  The site is located within close proximity to amenities such as Todd Park and a variety of commercial/retail uses located along the Princes Highway and King Georges Road. The immediate locality comprises of mixed uses to the east and a lower to medium scale residential environment to the north, west and south.

 

Zoning and Permissibility

11.  The subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential under the provisions of the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP2012). The proposed Residential Flat Building is permissible with consent.

 

Submissions

12.  The DA was notified to neighbours in accordance with the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 (KDCP2013) for a statutory notification period of fourteen (14) days. Two (2) submissions were received. The issues raised include concerns regarding additional noise, an increase in parking and traffic congestion, privacy and overlooking issues. These issues are discussed in greater detail later in this report.

 

Reason for Referral to the Local Planning Panel

13.  This application is referred to the Georges River Local Planning Panel for consideration and determination, as the proposal relates to a Residential Flat Building and the provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

Planning and Design Issues

14.  The original proposal exceeded the 15m height control permitted in the KLEP 2012. The design of the building was amended to remove Unit 24 on Level 4 which was located at the rear of the building. The removal of the unit is replaced with rooftop communal open space. The removal of Unit 24 results in a compliant building height. The lift overrun originally was located at RL25.6 and slightly exceeded the height control however the overrun has been reduced in height to RL25.250; the lift overrun now does not exceed the height control.

 

15.  The application fails to satisfy a number of Unit Design Guide (ADG) provisions, namely, the provision of landscaped area, deep soil area, internal layout and design concerns for units, accessibility and functionality of spaces and the design and siting of ancillary structures (ie lift core and bin storage area).

 

16.  The issues raised by the DRP on both occasions have not been resolved by the latest set of amended plans which are the subject of this assessment, as the Panel was of the opinion the site planning, built form and overall massing of the building is inappropriate and creates an overbearing and visually dominating building. The building in response should take up a different form and potentially be ‘broken up’ to create two buildings which would improve the relationship of the development to adjoining lower scale residential properties, reducing the visual impacts of the development as well as breaking up the bulk, scale and overall mass of the building.

 

17.  The amended design proposes to retain the large, mature and attractive Iron Bark Tree located to the northern side of the site; however the tree has a significant canopy spread which will be adversely affected by the siting of the building. The canopy spread of Lemon Scented Gum will also be adversely affected.

                                                                                                                                     

18.  Council’s Landscape Officer is concerned about the amount of canopy that will be cut back and the effect of this on the overall visual appearance, contribution and amenity of the trees on the streetscape and immediate locality. Currently they are visually important elements in the landscape and substantially add to the environmental qualities of the streetscape.

 

Conclusion

19.  The application has been assessed having regard to the Matters for Consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the provisions of the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies, Local Environmental Plans and Development Control Plans. The proposed siting, design scale, form and bulk of the building is considered to be an unsuitable planning and urban design response for the site.

 

Report in Full

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL

20.  The original development proposed the demolition of existing structures and the provision of a four storey residential flat building (RFB) containing twenty four (24) units over one (1) level of basement car parking. Several iterations and amendments of the original plans have occurred over time.

 

21.  The most recent set of amended plans included a series of design changes which in summary include the following (but are not limited to just these);

·   Inclusion of an additional lower basement car parking level to achieve the minimum numerical car parking requirement in accordance with the provisions of the Kogarah Development Control Plan.

·   Removal of Unit 24 on Level 4 which has been replaced with a rooftop area of communal open space.

·   Relocation of the ground floor bin storage area to the rear at grade level.

·   Retention of the Iron Bark Tree located on site and the reconfiguration of the basement car parking level to accommodate the necessary TPZ for the tree. This involves moving the driveway from the northern to the southern side of the site.

·   Increase the height of the floor level for the living and dining areas and front courtyards to Units 1 and 4 so that they are not as submerged as originally proposed.

 

22.  The most recent amendments to the application seek consent for the demolition of the two (2) dwelling houses on the sites and all ancillary structures and construction of a five (5) storey RFB containing twenty three (23) units and one and a half levels of basement car parking accommodating thirty nine (39) vehicles.

 

23.  The proposal has been amended to retain and protect the existing Narrow Leaved Iron Bark tree (eucalyptus crebra) located along the northern boundary of the site and the Lemon Scented Gum (Corymbia citriodora) located with the rear yard of a southern neighbour.

 

24.  Further details of the proposal are as follows:

 

Lower Basement Plan

-    Seventeen (17) car parking spaces including a nominated waiting bay and a signal system for vehicle movement given the access between the two (2) basement levels is only one (1) lane wide

-    Fire access stairs

-    Lift and stair lobby

 

Basement Plan

-    Twenty two (22) car spaces including two (2) accessible spaces

-    Lift and stair lobby

-    Twenty three (23) independent storage spaces

-    A designated bike parking area for eleven (11) bikes.

-    Two (2) waiting bays

-    1.52m wide existing stormwater easement along the southern boundary of 4 Vaughan Street

 

Ground Floor Plan

-    Driveway access along the southern side of the development site from Stuart Lane

-    Bin store located in the rear north eastern corner of the site extending to the boundary of the site and Stuart Lane

-    Ten (10) two storey units with kitchen, living/dining spaces on the ground floor

-    Lift lobby

-    Designated area of communal open space

-    Egress stairs from the basement.

-    Landscaping

 

Level 1

-    Upper level of the ground floor units referenced as Units 1-10, comprising two (2) bedrooms and a bathroom, some contain ensuites and study nooks.

 

Level 2 - 3

-    1 x 1 bedroom unit

-    3 x 2 bedroom units

-    1 x 3 bedroom unit

-    Access corridor and lift/stair lobby

 

Level 3

-    1 x 1 bedroom unit

-    3 x 2 bedroom units

-    1 x 3 bedroom unit

-    Access corridor and lift/stair lobby

 

Level 4

-    2 x 1 bedroom units

-    1 x 1 bedroom unit

-    Lobby with lift and stair access

-    Roof top area of communal open space being 150sqm in area located along the north eastern side of the building.

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND LOCALITY

25.  The subject site comprises of two (2) allotments with the following legal descriptions;

 

·   Lot 22 DP 15830 (2 Vaughan Street)

·   Lot 21 DP 15830 (4 Vaughan Street)

 

26.  The subject site is located on the eastern side of Vaughan Street and comprises of two (2) irregular shaped allotments.  2 Vaughan Street has a frontage of 13.46m to the street with a secondary frontage width of 10.06m to Stuart Lane at the rear. The southern boundary with 4 Vaughan Street is regular and has a length of 57.91m, the northern boundary is irregular in its shape having a length of some 58.32m with a total site area of 663.8sqm.

 

Photo 1: Existing front view of 2 and 4 Vaughan Street (courtesy site inspection conducted 14 February 2019)

 

Photo 2: Properties on the western side of Vaughan Street (opposite side of the road) (courtesy site inspection conducted 14 February 2019)

 

Photo 3: View of the exising sites and trees to be retained from Stuart Lane (courtesy site inspection conducted 14 February 2019)

 

Photo 4: Adjoining land uses located along Stuart Lane at the rear (courtesy site inspection conducted 14 February 2019)

 

Photo 5: Adjoining land uses located along Stuart Lane at the rear (courtesy site inspection conducted 14 February 2019)

 

27.  Number 2 Vaughan Street has a frontage of 13.4m with a secondary frontage to Stuart Lane of 10.06m. The site contains a two (2) storey brick and tile detached dwelling house with a swimming pool at the rear. Along the northern boundary is an attractive, mature Iron bark tree which is in good health and reaches a height of some 15m. The allotment has an area of 663.8sqm.

 

28.  Number 4 Vaughan Street has a frontage of 13.4m with a secondary frontage to Stuart Lane of 10.06m. The northern boundary with 2 Vaughan Street is regular and has a length of 57.91m; the southern boundary is irregular in its shape having a length of some 58.32m with a total site area of 663.8sqm. Existing onsite is a single storey brick dwelling house including retaining walls at the rear and a detached garage structure facing the rear laneway (Stuart Lane).

 

29.  Combined the sites have a frontage of 26.86m and total site area of approximately 1,328.4sqm.

 

30.  The site falls from the front (west) to the rear (east) of some 1.5m and there is a gradual cross fall of some 200mm from the north to south. 

 

31.  The site is located within a residential area with low density residential properties immediately adjoining the site. Immediately to the north are the rear yards of a series of detached dwelling houses known collectively as 2-8 Stuart Street. To the south are the rear yards of dwellings collectively known as 2-8 James Street which consists of a series of detached dwelling houses.

 

32.  To provide some further context Council has amended its planning controls to provide a height and floor space uplift to allotments in this immediate locality to permit a higher density of development. Recent Development Applications for mixed use developments and  RFB’s that have been determined within the immediate vicinity of the site including the  following properties 621-635 Princes Highway (DA2016/0157), (refer to Figure 2), 1-5 James Street (DA2018/0217), (refer to Figure 3) and 6-8 Vaughan Street (DA2018/0237), (refer to Figure 4).

 

Figure 2: Front elevation of the approved  mixed use development at 621-635 Princes Highway (DA2016/0157) (courtesy Council file)

 

Figure 3: Front elevation (3D montage) of the approved development at 1- 5 James Street (DA2018/0217) (courtesy Council file)

 

Figure 4: Front elevation of the proposed development at 6-8 Vaughan Street (DA2018/0237) (courtesy Council file)

 

33.  Otherwise the site is conveniently located within close proximity to Todd Park, commercial and retail properties along Princes Highway and other local services and amenities.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

34.  Compliance with the relevant state environmental planning policies is summarised in table 1, and discussed in more detail below.

 

Table 1: Compliance with State Planning Policies

State Environmental Planning Policy

Complies

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

Yes

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Unit Development

 

Non-compliance with a series of ADG provisions

 

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

35.  The main aims and objectives of this plan are (not limited to);

 

·      to maintain and improve the water quality and river flows of the Georges River and its tributaries and ensure that development is managed in a manner that is in keeping with the national, State, regional and local significance of the Catchment,

 

·      to protect and enhance the environmental quality of the Catchment for the benefit of all users through the management and use of the resources in the Catchment in an ecologically sustainable manner,

·      to ensure consistency with local environmental plans and also in the delivery of the principles of ecologically sustainable development in the assessment of development within the Catchment where there is potential to impact adversely on groundwater and on the water quality and river flows within the Georges River or its tributaries,

·      to establish a consistent and coordinated approach to environmental planning and assessment for land along the Georges River and its tributaries and to promote integrated catchment management policies and programs in the planning and management of the Catchment,

 

36.  The proposed system and method of stormwater disposal relies on a pump out system in the basement and includes an OSD basin located along the north-eastern part of the Site draining out to the rear lane (Stuart Lane). The proposed method of stormwater detention has been referred to Council’s Engineering Section. The following comments were made;

 

After an engineering review, the submitted drainage plans are found to be inadequate and there is insufficient information provided regarding Council’s drainage easement and the OSD system discharge from the site.  

 

The following engineering issues are to be addressed adequately by the applicant and resubmitted for assessment:  

 

1.0  OSD system and Proposed Discharge Pipe in Stuart Lane:

a)   The depth of the existing drainage pit in Stuart Lane is measured to be 0.5m over a distance of approximately 40m to the proposed location of the OSD tank. In order to show that the site stormwater system and the OSD tank can drain by gravity: the surface and invert levels of this existing pit in the Lane shall be provided by a registered surveyor and incorporated in the design.

b)   A longitudinal section of the pipe in the Lane shall be prepared and submitted to show the practicality of the proposed system.

c)   The drainage plan shall show a protection of the basement from inundation of stormwater from the lane way. 

 

2.0 Council’s stormwater pipe and associated drainage easement through the site (Asset and Infrastructure Section):

a)   Council records indicate there is a Council stormwater pipe and associated drainage easement through the site and the easement is not defined on the survey plan lodged. Council’s records indicate that the pipe is 375mm diameter however this would need to be confirmed. A peg-out survey of Council’s stormwater pipe to determine its location for its full extent within the property will need to be undertaken. This peg-out along with the drainage easement will need to be plotted onto the architectural and stormwater plans.

b)   It is to be noted that the location of the pipe may not be wholly within the drainage easement. No structures or footings are permitted to be built over Council’s pipe or easement. If this is the case it may impact on the allowable development area.

c)   The applicant is to have a suitably qualified drainage engineer carry out an analysis of the upstream catchment to determine the 1 in 20 year storm and 1 in 100 year storm design flows from the upstream catchment that are directed to Council’s pipe, through and adjacent to the south eastern side of the site for Council’s assessment review in order to avoid flooding the proposed development.  Sufficient details of software used, methodology and calculations will be required to be submitted to allow for assessment by Council.”

 

37.  The applicant amended the plans on 16 April 2019 to include the size and location of the drainage easement on the basement floor plan (Figure 5). The easement dissects the site along the southern side towards the front. The applicant did not conduct a peg-out survey of Council’s stormwater pipe and did not carry out an analysis of the upstream catchment to determine potential future flood impacts as requested by Council.

 

Figure 5 – Basement Plan showing the location of the easement burdening the site

 

38.  The amended plans have relocated the driveway from the northern to the southern side, to retain the Iron Bark Tree and relocated the bin store from the front to the rear of the site. The bin store is now located where the OSD tank was originally located. Amended stormwater plans have not been submitted to reflect the design changes and as such the original stormwater design is not consistent with the amended architectural plans.

 

39.  The lack of information fails to address Council’s Engineering concerns and no specific details of how the site is to be drained has been provided.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

40.  BASIX Certificate No.975398M dated 12 November 2018 has been issued for the proposed development and the development meets the provisions and minimum requirements of BASIX in terms of water, thermal comfort and Energy efficiency.

 

41.  The two sets of amended plans reduce the density of the development from 24 units to 23 units. The internal layout and configuration of the units has not been substantially altered and the original BASIX commitments will remain unchanged. If consent was to be considered, an updated BASIX would be required prior to determination.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

42.  SEPP 55 aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land in order to reduce the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment.

 

43.  Clause 7 requires contamination and remediation to be considered in determining a development application. The consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of development on land unless it has considered whether or not the land is contaminated. 

 

44.  A review of the site history indicates that the site has been used for residential purposes for extended periods of time. A Stage 1 Environmental Investigation was prepared by Dirt Doctors dated 27 November 2018 to accompany the application. The report is a Preliminary Site Investigation with no laboratory testing undertaken. The report concluded that “based on the finding of this investigation it is considered that the risk to human health and the environment associated with soil and groundwater contamination is low in relation to the proposed development for the subject site.”

 

45.  The report recommends that if the application is approved the following measures are to be conducted to ensure the site is suitable for the redevelopment;

 

·      Site investigation by DD post demolition, to identify and potential areas of contamination;

·      Preparation of a clearance certificate is asbestos is identified;

·      Contamination sampling to confirm the absence of contamination following demolition of structures and excavation of driveway areas;

·      Undertake council, work cover searches and address data gaps including council searches.

 

46.  The report and its recommendations can be conditioned if consent is granted. An unexpected finds condition can also be imposed which is a standard condition and cover any unforeseen incidents during the construction process.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

47.  The aim of the Policy is to facilitate the effective delivery of infrastructure across the State. The Policy also examines and ensures that the acoustic performance of buildings adjoining a rail corridor or busy arterial road is acceptable and internal amenity within units is reasonable given the impacts of adjoining infrastructure development.

 

48.  Clause 102 (Impact of road noise or vibration on non-road development) of the SEPP, is not relevant to this DA as the site is not considered to be immediately “adjacent” to the road corridor (Princes Highway/King Georges Road). This property is setback from these roadways by a series of properties that directly access them and is separated by Stuart Lane. The mixed use development that is currently under construction at No.621-635 Princes Highway will largely screen and assist in buffering noise.

 

Draft Remediation of Land SEPP

49.  The Department of Planning and Environment has announced a Draft Remediation of Land SEPP, which will repeal and replace the current State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land.

 

50.  The main changes proposed include the expansion of categories of remediation work which requires development consent, a greater involvement of principal certifying authorities particularly in relation to remediation works that can be carried out without development consent, more comprehensive guidelines for Councils and certifiers and the clarification of the contamination information to be included on Section 149 Planning Certificates.

 

51.  Whilst the proposed SEPP will retain the key operational framework of SEPP 55, it will adopt a more modern approach to the management of contaminated land. The Draft SEPP will not alter or affect the findings in respect to contamination at the Site as previously discussed.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

52.  The Vegetation SEPP regulates clearing of native vegetation on urban land and land zoned for environmental conservation/management that does not require development consent.

 

53.  The Vegetation SEPP applies to clearing of:

 

(a) Native vegetation above the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS) threshold where a proponent will require an approval from the Native Vegetation Panel established under the Local Land Services Amendment Act 2016; and 

(b) Vegetation below the BOS threshold where a proponent will require a permit from Council if that vegetation is identified in the council’s development control plan (DCP). 

 

54.  The Vegetation SEPP repeals clause 5.9 and 5.9AA of the Standard Instrument - Principal Local Environmental Plan with regulation of the clearing of vegetation (including native vegetation) below the BOS threshold through any applicable DCP.

 

55.  The originally proposed development sought to remove the mature Iron Bark Tree within the site due to the footprint of the driveway and basement location encroaching on the TPZ (refer to Figure 5). Concerns regarding the removal of this tree were expressed by Council’s Landscape Officer and the Design Review Panel given the trees maturity, good health and its visual contribution. The arborist report that was submitted with the application prepared by The Tree Guardian and dated 27 November 2018 acknowledged the good condition of the tree. The application has been amended to retain this tree and relocate the driveway to the southern side of the site, which resulted in the redesign of the basement in order to provide an acceptable TPZ. In general it is accepted that structures can impact on 10% of any designated TPZ while ensuring the ongoing health of the tree.

 

Figure 6: Aerial view of the two trees and their canopy spread that are being retained

 

Figure 7: The Lemon Scented Gum (Corymbia citriodora) (Tree 6) that is located within the rear yard of 4 James Street (courtesy Council’s Landscape Officer)

 

56.  The arborist report was not updated to reflect the retention of this tree and whether the designated TPZ around the tree as noted by the plans is acceptable and compliant. From general observation the canopy spread of both trees recommended to be retained being trees 1 and 6, is wide and covers a large radius of the site (refer to the aerial in Figure 6). The built form at the rear will encroach on these canopies resulting in a significant amount of the canopies to be cut back greater than the permitted 10%. This would likely undermine the integrity of both trees and the substantial impact would compromise their longevity. Council’s Landscape Officer has considered the amended application and is not satisfied that only 10% of the designated TPZ would be impacted by the building.

 

57.  The designated TPZ for the Lemon Scented Gum (Corymbia citriodora) is 9.6m from the centreline of the trunk. When looking at the basement plan, the stairs adjoining the lift encroach well into the zone with part of the driveway to the lower level basement also encroaching on the TPZ; however this encroachment by the basement is considered to be minor. When looking at the upper levels of the building, the staircase and the main accessway along the southern side encroach well into the TPZ exceeding the permitted 10%. A substantial amount of the canopy will be affected and requires cutting back.

 

Figure 8: The existing Iron Bark Tree (Tree 1) to be retained that is located within the site (courtesy Landscape Officer)

 

58.  In respect to the Iron Bark Tree, the situation is similar. Firstly the proposed TPZ is not clearly noted and scaled off the plans has a radius of approximately 7m. It is unclear how this TPZ has been established as the Arborist report originally acknowledged this tree as being removed and the report has not been updated to confirm the desired TPZ and whether the design is acceptable to enable its retention. Although the building above ground is setback 6m from the boundary it appears that a significant amount of the canopy will be affected well exceeding 10%.

 

59.  Whilst the design intends on retaining the trees it appears both trees will be adversely impacted and their attractiveness, visual significance and overall contribution to the streetscape will be severely impacted and undermined. There is no certainty provided that the features and structural integrity and visual importance of these trees will remain intact.

 

Draft Environment SEPP

60.  The Draft Environment SEPP was exhibited from 31 October 2017 to 31 January 2018. This consolidated SEPP proposes to simplify the planning rules for a number of water catchments, waterways, urban bushland, and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property.

 

61.  Changes proposed include consolidating the following seven existing SEPPs:

·   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas

·   State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Drinking Water Catchment) 2011

·   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 50 – Canal Estate Development

·   Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2 – Georges River Catchment

·   Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No.2-1997)

·   Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

·   Willandra Lakes Regional Environmental Plan No. 1 – World Heritage Property.

 

62.  Subject to the resolution of stormwater/drainage issues and the design, the proposal is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Draft Instrument.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 - Design Quality of Residential Unit Development

63.  State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings (SEPP 65) was gazetted on 26 July 2002 and applies to the assessment of DAs for residential flat developments of three or more storeys in height and containing at least four dwellings. Amendment 3 to SEPP 65 commenced on 17 July 2015 and implemented various changes including the introduction of the Unit Design Guide (ADG) to replace the Residential Flat Design Code. Given the nature of the development proposed, SEPP 65 applies.

 

64.  Clause 28(2) of SEPP65 requires that the consent authority take into consideration the following as part of the determination of DAs to which SEPP 65 applies:

a)      the advice (if any) obtained from the design review panel, and

b) the design quality of the development when evaluated in accordance with the design quality principles, and

c) the Unit Design Guide.  

 

65.  The proposal was referred to the Georges River Design Review Panel on two (2) occasions. The Panel considered the development on 14 February 2019 and 9 May 2019 and the Panel assessed the development against each of the nine (9) Design Quality Principles and also considered the provisions within the Unit Design Guide (ADG). The Panels comments are summarised and addressed in Table 3 below. The comments made at the February meeting included in bold and comments made at the May meeting are noted in italic. The recommendation of the Panel for both meetings was that the design cannot be supported in its present form.

 

Table 2: Application of SEPP 65

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

3 - Definitions

Complies with definition of “Residential Unit Development” (RAD)

Complies with definition

Yes

4 - Application of Policy

Development involves the erection of a new RFB, substantial redevelopment or refurbishment of a RFB or conversion of an existing building into a RFB. The definition of an RFB in the SEPP includes mixed use developments.

Erection of an RFB which satisfies the SEPP’s definition of this residential land use.

Yes

Design Verification

Design verification statement provided by qualified designer

Registered Architect Name and Registration No.

Design Verification Statement provided by Registered Architect:  Alan Mhanna (Registration No.7755)

Yes

 

Table 3: Part 2 Design Quality Principles under the SEPP

SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings 

DRP Comment

Planners comment

Context and Neighbouring 

Character 

Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context is the key natural and built features of an area, their relationship and the character they create when combined. It also includes social, economic, health and environmental conditions. 

 

Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of an area’s existing or future character. Well designed buildings respond to and enhance the qualities and identity of the area including the adjacent sites, streetscape and neighbourhood. 

 

Consideration of local context is important for all sites, including sites in established areas, those undergoing change or identified for change. 

The site is within an R3 zone and may be the earliest site to take up the zoning. It is important therefore that any development must set a good precedent. The design process has not been informed by a proper site and contextual analysis. The site is challenged by being in the centre of a block which narrows towards Stuart Lane to the east. To the north and south are single dwellings (four (4) each) backing onto the sides of the subject site.

 

Redevelopment of these areas is likely to happen soon. None of this appears to have been thought about in the design approach.

 

In the centre of the street block are three (3) very prominent trees. One (1) (Eucalyptus crebra) is just inside the north boundary of the subject site, the second (Ceorymbia citriodora) is just outside the southern boundary and the third is a Chinese elm on the adjacent property which has not been included in the arborist assessment or DA application. It has been assumed by the designer that Tree 1 can be removed despite the arborist report rating it as ‘high retention value’. The Panel considers this tree to be important and its retention to be a non-negotiable issue. The other two (2) trees are also of high retention value and require significant protection including adequate Tree Protection Zones and appropriate design measures to ensure their longevity and health. Consequently a fundamentally different approach to site planning is necessary. 

 

The proposal has been amended to accommodate the existing trees however the building layout remains essentially the same.

The development site is awkward in its configuration as it comprises of two irregular centrally located sites which are orientated east west as the adjoining properties to the north (along Stuart Street) and properties to the south (along James Street) are orientated north/ south which creates a total of eight (8) rear yards adjoining the subject site.

 

Contextually this block and the adjoining block of residential properties to the south have been uplifted to allow for higher medium density developments.

 

The configuration of the proposed building and its built form has been criticised by the Panel as there are no breaks in the building, its length and overall siting will adversely affect the amenity of adjoining residential properties.

 

The Panel expressed from the onset that the proposed built form is inappropriate for the site given the site conditions and the layout of adjoining allotments. This issue has not been addressed and the changes that have been made relate to slight variations to the internal layout and creation of an additional basement level to address the parking deficiency.

Built Form and Scale 

Good design achieves a scale, bulk and height appropriate to the existing or desired future character of the street and surrounding buildings.

 

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

 

Appropriate built form defines the public domain, contributes to the character of streetscapes and parks, including their views and vistas, and provides internal amenity and outlook. 

The application is for a five (5) storey building. The site configuration raises multiple built form and scale issues:

 

·    The fifth floor is subject to 9m separation distances from the boundaries which have not been met. Instead the design relies on the privacy provisions of the ADG which results in blank walls facing north and south, some splayed, to achieve windows facing east and west. This results in an ugly shed like structure that is at odds with the rest of the building. It may be possible to re-plan the units on the wider west side of the site to integrate them into the design, however the Units 23 and 24 in the narrow part of the site are very unsatisfactory and it would be of much greater benefit to the occupants and the development to have roof top communal open space in this location with shade, planting and a WC.

 

Due to ADG separation requirements, the constraints of the site width, shape and issues of bulk and scale, it is preferable to remove the top level of units entirely. The Panel does not believe that 15m height equates with five (5) levels, based on the recommendations of the ADG (3.1m floor to floor to achieve 2.7m high ceilings).

 

Privacy issues relating to the communal open terrace require further resolution.

 

·    A poorly configured building footprint which does not accommodate sufficient deep soil or provision for existing trees as noted above under ‘Context’.

 

The basement has been re-planned to provide adequate clearance for the site trees however there are questions regarding the breaches into the tree protection zone of the proposed lift core and stair.

 

·    Over reliance on privacy screens and high level windows

 

This remains an issue. The ADG does not allow the primary source of light for habitable rooms to be provided by high level windows. This issue relates to the narrowness of the site and the building form proposed.

 

·    Poor street frontages and inadequate fenestration

 

There is a poor interface to Vaughan Street due to the proposed single floor level through the entire building which creates a submerged units and highly complicated entry with ramps, stairs, etc. It would be better to rotate the units adjacent to the street and to provide direct street access. These units should be set at a level commensurate to the streetscape (approximately RL11.20)

 

·    Poorly designed basement car park with overprovision of car parking spaces (9 stacked) reduces deep soil zone and impinges on Tree Protection Zones of T2 and T3.

 

See note above.

 

·    Driveway access should be relocated to be clear of the existing trees on site and adjacent site. It was suggested that the driveway could be curved, or repositioned centrally, to respond to these site conditions.

 

See note above.

The proposal does not satisfy the separation distances that are nominated for the fifth floor of the building. The building is splayed and where parts of the building encroach upon the setbacks, they include privacy screening or blank walls which aim to reduce the potential for overlooking.

The fifth floor level is perceived as an “add on” structure and is not considered to be an integrated element.

Unit 24 has been removed and replaced with approximately 150sqm of communal open space. This only partly addresses the Panel’s concerns, they recommend that the units within the top floor be removed and replaced with open space.

There is minimal deep soil areas provided as the basement takes up the majority of the site and the drainage easement will adversely impact on the provision of landscaping along the southern side of the property. This built form arrangement severely limits the potential to plant substantial trees along the periphery of the site.

 

Many of the units and spaces rely on highlight windows and the provision of privacy screens.

 

The building has been amended however the ground floor known as Unit 4 facing Vaughan Street is submerged by between 400-500mm below the existing street level. Unit 1 is set below street level by 250mm.

 

The amended plans remove the stacked car parking arrangement by creating an additional half a level of basement parking.

 

The lower level basement parking level is generally compliant however the basement level remains awkward in its design with car parking spaces Nos 10, 11, 12 and 13 difficult to access and it seems that parking space No.13 would be nearly impossible to enter and exit due to the location of the driveway obstructing it.

The access and egress from the basement is concerning from a usage and functionality perspective given the narrow access from Stuart Lane, no waiting bay at this level is provided and the potential for queuing along the rear lane is considered an undesirable outcome.

Density 

Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each unit, resulting in a density appropriate to the site and its context. 

Appropriate densities are consistent with the area’s existing or projected population. Appropriate densities can be sustained by existing or proposed infrastructure, public transport, access to jobs, community facilities and the environment.

The application claims to have a compliant FSR of 1.49:1. The Panel is of the opinion the constraints of the site, configuration and essential retention of trees and the requirement for appropriate separation distances from future development adjacent makes the achievement of the FSR highly problematic.

 

As proposed this appears to be an overdevelopment of the site and liable to impact heavily on the physical and visual amenity of adjacent properties.

The density and floor space of the proposal has been reduced by the removal of Unit 24. The FSR is now compliant and below the 1.5:1 maximum permitted. A detailed discussion of the proposed (amended) design in respect to achieving the gross floor area is covered in more detail later in this report.

Sustainability 

Good design combines positive environmental, social and economic outcomes. 

 

Good sustainable design includes use of natural cross ventilation and sunlight for the amenity and liveability of residents and passive thermal design for ventilation, heating and cooling reducing reliance on technology and operation costs. Other elements include recycling and reuse of materials and waste, use of sustainable materials and deep soil zones for groundwater recharge and vegetation.

Subject to BASIX.

 

Retention of trees noted above is critical for sustainability as they provide shade, amenity and habitat for the surrounding neighbourhood.

 

See notes above under ‘Built Form’.

 

The unorthodox layouts of the units on Level 4 make effective cross ventilation doubtful.

 

The layout is essentially the same.

An amended BASIX has not been submitted with the application, if the proposal was to be supported a revised BASIX would need to be provided prior to determination. It would appear the modified design would be compliant as the main changes reflect improvements to the layout of some units, reduction in density and the creation of an additional basement car parking level.

Landscape 

Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, resulting in attractive developments with good amenity. A positive image and contextual fit of well designed developments is achieved by contributing to the landscape character of the streetscape and neighbourhood. 

 

Good landscape design enhances the development’s environmental performance by retaining positive natural features which contribute to the local context, co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy, habitat values and preserving green networks. 

 

Good landscape design optimises useability, privacy and opportunities for social interaction, equitable access, respect for neighbours’ amenity and provides for practical establishment and long term management. 

See notes above under ‘Context’ and ‘Built Form’ on the existing site trees.

Communal open space is extremely poor, located on the south side of the building and will not receive adequately direct sunlight at the winter solstice. It also compromises the privacy of the ground floor unit adjacent and is poorly configured as a corridor rather than a usable attractive space. It is recommended that an alternative location for communal open space be provided as noted above under ‘Built Form’.

A communal open space has now been provided on the roof top. However privacy issues and overlooking to adjacent properties have not been adequately addressed in the design. The proposed communal open space on ground level remains a concern in terms of solar access and utility and should be reconsidered.

 

The arborist report provided in this application nominates that new trees will be provided to replace the ten (10) trees that are to be removed for this development. Landscape documentation does not incorporate large trees and is predominately incorporating small tree species. This is an inappropriate design response to the loss of so many large trees.

 

As no landscape plan has been provided for this revised application. This remains an issue.

 

The entrance to the building is confusing with two (2) pathways from Vaughan Street. Equitable access should be provided to the main entrance of the building and the additional access should be removed.

 

The issues raised under ‘Built Form’ regarding the single internal ground level creates excessive ramping and stairs in landscape zones. This is problematic and should be revised as part of the architectural proposal.

 

The paved courtyards are awkwardly shaped and insufficient planting provided. There is no detail included for podium planters.

 

Refer note above regarding absence of revised landscape documentation.

 

Detailed sections showing site conditions and interface to adjacent properties should be included.

 

Refer note above regarding absence of revised landscape documentation.

The communal area of open space on the ground floor remains poorly configured and located on the southern side receiving poor solar access.

The new rooftop area is an improvement but as the Panel notes in their comments the issue of overlooking from this space have not be adequately addressed given the space should have a setback of 9m from the northern and southern sides.

The landscape response for this site is considered to be poor and inappropriate given there is limited deep soil areas and inadequate areas to plant larger trees that will provide additional screening. The retention of the Iron Bark Tree is encouraged and is noted as being in good condition.

 

There are more trees being removed from the site and their loss is not adequately compensated by the provision of new species to capture the loss.

 

The original Landscape Plan has not been amended to reflect the revised architectural plans. The original Landscape Plan prepared by Aspect shows mainly smaller shrubs and ground cover around the southern side of the site.

Amenity 

Good design positively influences internal and external amenity for residents and neighbours. Achieving good amenity contributes to positive living environments and resident well being. 

 

Good amenity combines appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, outlook, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts and service areas and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility. 

The Panel has identified multiple short comings in the amenity that would be provided by the proposal:

 

·   The entrance from Vaughan Street has stairs and a long 1m wide passageway before a dog leg to the lift. This is contrary to the ADG guidelines for internal circulation.

 

This remains an issue. Refer comments above under ‘Built Form’.

 

·   A second entrance from Vaughan Street via the communal open space has a disabled access lift which would need to be used by disabled and able bodied residents entering the site at this point. The entrance from Stuart Lane has stairs and is also not available for disabled residents.

 

Access and circulation should be reviewed to create clear sight lines, barrier free access and should match site levels at all street interfaces.

 

·   Bedroom 2 in Unit 3 has poor outlook facing south along a narrow recess.

 

This is unchanged

 

·   Bedrooms in east and west facing units have high sills and poor outlook

 

The ADG stipulates that habitable rooms cannot gain primary access to light and air from high windows.

 

·   Bedroom 1 in Units 12 and 17 rely on deeply recessed vertical slot windows and will provide a dungeon like environment

 

This remains an issue

 

·   The adaptable Units 11, 16 and 21 are all single bedroom units providing limited housing choice and very poor solar access at the winter solstice. They all rely on a single lift for access, provided the lift is operating

 

A single lift only is still provided

 

·   There is inadequate shade and shelter for floor to ceiling glazing to living areas on Level 4

 

See note regarding removal of Level 4 units

 

·   Internal circulation to units is poor with blank walls to ensure privacy of the kitchens that will be passed by

 

The issue remains

 

·   Several units have insufficient kitchen bench space

 

The issue remains

 

·   All units on Level 4 rely on narrow east or west facing windows and have poor amenity.

 

See note above regarding removing Level 4 units.

 

·   Poorly designed planters adjacent to Unit 11 and Unit 13 would be potentially very difficult to maintain and may pose safety issues

 

This issue remains

 

·   Tandem parking in the basement is unworkable. Nine (9) tandem parking sets would create severe congestion in the traffic isle should more than one (1) occupant need to use the rear vehicle. The nine (9) rear tandem spaces exceed the parking requirement and should be deleted. This would assist in increasing the deep soil zone.

 

This has been addressed

 

·   Unit 4 has no windows on its external wall at ground level

 

Noted

 

·   Bin storage located on Vaughan Street would be difficult to access for residents and presents a poor street frontage. This should be relocated into the basement.

 

Bin storage has been relocated to the lane

The provision of a single lift is considered satisfactory in this case as the development is only catering for 23 units with a maximum of five units being accessed off one lift core.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is no access report submitted with the application so it is unclear whether disabled access and ramping is satisfactory.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Solar access to Bedroom 2 of Unit 3 will be poor.

 

 

 

 

 

The issues regarding the internal amenity of the units remains largely unresolved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kitchen space allocated to Units 1, 11, 12, 14, 15 17, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 are considered to be small and insufficient in size.

 

 

 

 

Not amended or resolved

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As discussed above

 

 

Bedrooms on Level 4 still rely on smaller slot windows limiting solar access to these spaces e.g. bedroom 1 to Unit 23

 

 

 

No change

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tandem spaces have been removed and the car parking complies numerically however the design and layout of some spaces in the basement are poorly designed and access into and out of these will be awkward and restrictive e.g. 10, 11, 12 and 13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The bin store has been relocated to the north eastern side of the site. This improves the streetscape appearance and presentation to Vaughan Street. However to access the bin store Units 1 and 4 have to access the public domain (street) then re-enter the site and building, walk the length of the site to access both the area of communal open space and the bin store area. It is an inconvenient and poorly planned arrangement.

Ideally basement garbage/waste storage would be more appropriate as it would free up the space at the rear of the site for landscaping.

Safety 

Good design optimises safety and security within the development and the public domain. It provides for quality public and private spaces that are clearly defined and fit for the intended purpose.

 

Opportunities to maximise passive surveillance of public and communal areas promote safety.

 

A positive relationship between public and private spaces is achieved through clearly defined secure access points and well lit and visible areas that are easily maintained and appropriate to the location and purpose.

There appears to have been little, if any, thought given to safety and security around the site, in particular the deep and concealed main entrance and the open thoroughfare through the communal open space to the lift. No gate is shown in the entrance from Stuart Lane.

 

Sight lines are still problematic

 

The travel distances to the single fire stair in the basement appear to be excessive.

 

This requires confirmation

This issue is exacerbated by the fact the building is very long and if it was broken up into two built forms waste removal could be divided and in part taken out from Vaughan Street and part taken from Stuart Lane at the rear.

Housing Diversity and Social Interaction 

Good design achieves a mix of unit sizes, providing housing choice for different demographics, living needs and household budgets. 

 

Well designed unit developments respond to social context by providing housing and facilities to suit the existing and future social mix. 

 

Good design involves practical and flexible features, including different types of communal spaces for a broad range of people and providing opportunities for social interaction among residents. 

See above for limited accessible unit choice and poor communal open space.

 

Refer to comments above under ‘Built Form’

No accessibility report has been submitted so it is unclear whether the adaptable units comply.

Aesthetics 

Good design achieves a built form that has good proportions and a balanced composition of elements, reflecting the internal layout and structure. Good design uses a variety of materials, colours and textures. 

 

The visual appearance of a well designed unit development responds to the existing or future local context, particularly desirable elements and repetitions of the streetscape. 

The elevations have a hostile appearance. This applies most of all to the east and west elevations which have large areas of blank wall, horizontal and vertical slot windows. This design approach is totally unsatisfactory in establishing a character for the future development of the R3 zone. The top floor looks like a shed bearing no relationship to the design approach of the rest of the building. The landscape plan does not provide large enough canopy trees to soften the impact of built form.

 

While the elevations have been revised, they still are insensitive to context and potentially hostile. The lack of landscape treatments is of significant concern.

The built form is considered to be inappropriate for this site and the harsh and somewhat brutal design of the building is not consistent with the residential feel of the surrounding developments. Materials, colours and finishes are very modern and contemporary and do not reflect the simple proportions and finishes of the existing residential properties in the streetscape and immediate surrounds. The dwelling houses and recently approved medium density developments are simple in their design and form, integrating traditional finishes including brick with rendered elements.

 

66.  DRP in their first meeting recommended that the design cannot be supported and required a complete redesign. The Applicant did prepare changes but did not alter the design intent and built form outcome which was considered an unacceptable response for this site. The changes that have been made do not go far enough in addressing and satisfying the Panels concerns.

 

67.  Clause 28 of SEPP65 requires the consent authority to take into consideration the provisions of the ADG. The Table below assesses the proposal against these provisions.

 

Table 4: Part 3 and Part 4 – Compliance with the ADG

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

3D - Communal open space

 

 

1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site.

Minimum 332sqm

 

 

 

-Where it cannot be provided on ground level it should be provided on a podium or roof

 

-Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, such as on small lots, sites within business zones, or in a dense urban area, they should:

• provide communal spaces elsewhere such as a landscaped roof top terrace or a common room

• provide larger balconies or increased private open space for units

• demonstrate good proximity to public open space and facilities and/or provide contributions to public open space

 

2. Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid-winter)

Rooftop: 150sqm

Ground Floor: 127.4sqm

Total = 277.4sqm

21% of the site is designated as common open space.

 

 

No

 

This is short of the requirement. The ground floor area is poorly designed and configured.

 

Yes - the rooftop area of open space will achieve the solar access requirements of the ADG for the communal open space. The area on the roof top comprises more than 50% of communal area dedicated to this development.

Comment on communal area and its treatment

The communal area is divided into two (2) distinct spaces. On the ground floor the space adjoins the lift core and is immediately adjacent to the main entrances to Units 7 and 8 which is a poor design outcome. This space is not very private as it adjoins the main accessway through the building. This is also the only space where the site includes a deep soil zone and most of this area comprises of hard surfaces (as per floor plan below, Figure 9).

 

Figure 9: Roof plan which shows the location of the ground floor communal area

 

The area on the ground floor is poorly orientated (facing south) and it will not receive adequate solar access in order to fully enjoy this space as it will be substantially overshadowed by the building. The treatment of this ground floor space is considered to be poorly designed and will impact adversely on the long term functionality and useability of this area. The amount of communal landscaped area is also short of the numerical requirement required by the ADG.

3E – Deep Soil zones

 

 

1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum

requirements:

 

Min deep soil area of 7% (93sqm)

 

Minimum dimension of 3m

 

Applicants calculation = 221.5sqm (17%) The Applicants calculations seem to include areas which have a minimum dimension of less than 3m.

Council’s calculation = approximately 86sqm (6%) This only includes areas with a width of 3m which are not paved or containing hard surfaced areas.

The Applicant’s calculation area includes that part of the site which includes a drainage easement. It is unclear the depth of the easement, but irrespective, this would undermine the purpose of creating a deep soil zone. A deep soil zone needs to be clear of any obstructions to ensure it allows for ample tree planting and substantive vegetation.

 

Design guidance also suggests a larger deep soil zone of some 10% on sites with an area of between 650sqm-1500sqm.

No

 

 

Comment on deep soil areas

The functionality and use of the deep soil areas is poorly designed and short of the minimum requirement. The deep soil areas are a result of maintaining a TPZ around the existing mature trees on site and adjoining the site rather than creating meaningful deep soil zones to allow for substantial planting that will assist in screening the building and in creating attractive, green spaces around the perimeter of the building. The area along the southern side is dedicated as communal area and is hard paved and includes benches and seating inclusive of a BBQ area. This is a poor use of such a valuable area which could include substantive vegetation and planting to assist in softening the building and improving the presentation of the building and its spaces especially when looking at this area from the main accessway and adjoining residences.

 

The Applicant’s calculation relies on the area along the southern side of the building where the proposed drainage easement exists. It is unclear the depth of this easement and given its location unlikely that substantial tree planting can occur within this space which is the intention of providing deep soil areas. A 3m wide area is restrictive for growth given that a TPZ for an established 15m tall tree is in the order of 8-9m. The easement itself is a constraint and will not allow for the full potential of this space to be utilised.

Given the visual bulk, scale and dominance of the building, the requirement to provide generous landscaping and larger trees and plantings around the periphery of the site is critically important to screen the mass and form. There is limited and minimal consideration given for deep soil/buffer landscaping addressing the site edges. It does not provide a sympathetic response to the predominant (existing as well as evolving) footprint and scale of development or have regard to the desired landscape character of the surrounding locality.

3F- Visual Privacy

Separation between windows and balconies is provided to ensure visual privacy is achieved.

Minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows:

Up to 12m (4 storeys)

Habitable - 6m

Non-habitable – 3m

 

Up to 25m (5-8 storeys)

Habitable – 9m

Non-habitable – 4.5m

 

 

 

 

 

North western side

Ground floor and Level 1 = minimum of 6m

Level 2 and 3 = 5.8m to 6.079m

 

Level 4 = 6m to 9m

 

 

South eastern side

Ground floor, Level 1 and 2 = 2m to 6m

Level 3 = 2m to 7m

 

Level 4 = 2m to 7.3m

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

Partial non-compliance

 

Partial non-compliance

 

 

Partial non-compliance

 

 

No

Comment on Visual Privacy

Along the north western side the ground, first and second floor units comply with the minimum separation distance required of 6m. At Levels 2 and 3 there is a minor encroachment along the northern side with the living room and balcony of Unit 17 being non-compliant. This is considered a minor non-compliance and has been addressed by the provision of a highlight window to the living room and a solid northern wall along this side to the front balcony.

 

At the fourth floor level the majority of the building does not comply with the 9m setback requirement. There are small sections of the building that are setback 9m. The walls to Units 22 and 23 have been designed so there are no openings along this side removing the potential for overlooking, but this creates an adverse impact on the internal amenity of these spaces, as solar access is relying upon narrow slot windows to some rooms (i.e. Bedroom 1 to Units 22 and 23). The rooftop area of communal open space is setback 6m from the boundary as opposed to the 9m requirement. Given the siting of the elevated communal open space there will be potential for overlooking to the adjoining properties. It is accepted that the existing tree on site and the one on in the southern allotment will provide some screening, however it is questionable that these trees can be maintained given the building structure encroaches on the designated TPZ by over 10%. This issue is discussed in more detail above. Plantings and vegetation cannot be relied on solely as privacy mechanisms.

 

Along the south eastern side of the building, the units are setback between 2m to 6m. The greatest encroachment along this side is the lift core and staircase structure. This element is setback between 2-4m from the southern common boundary. Whilst there are no privacy impacts from this part of the structure, it will be a visually dominating element with a height of some 15m. This feature should be internalised. At Level 1 most of the building (apart from the lift core) satisfies the minimum separation distance. On Levels 2 and 3 the building wall is staggered and most of the building complies with the 6m setback apart from the main corridor which is setback 4.8m-5m from the boundary. Again the ADG permits certain encroachments and allows non-habitable rooms to be setback 3m (ground to Level 3 and permits a 4.5m side setback at Level 4) however the ADG states that “Gallery access circulation should be treated as habitable space when measuring privacy separation distances between neighbouring properties”. As such the corridors do not comply with the minimum provisions. This element is long and includes a frosted glass privacy screen (although plans seem to also reflect a solid rendered balustrade). On Level 4 no part of the building complies with the 9m setback. Where the building encroaches on the setbacks, habitable spaces have highlight windows and the corridor area and lift core are treated with varying privacy screens. The need to protect privacy and minimise any amenity impacts has been achieved through the implementation of architectural techniques (highlight windows, staggering walls, privacy screens, slot windows etc.) which compromises the integrity and amenity of habitable spaces and creates an adhoc built form.

 

The proposed built form solution for this site is considered to be unacceptable and necessitates the reliance on a series of privacy mechanisms to alleviate impacts which is considered to be a poor design solution. Many window openings rely on the lower levels of the windows to be constructed of obscure glazing which is a poor design and internal amenity outcome. The DRP maintained that the built form is inappropriate for this site given its awkward configuration and existing constraints. Two buildings with a central courtyard would be more appropriate and would reduce the overall mass, bulk and form and improve its relationship to adjoining residential properties.

3G – Pedestrian Access and entries

Building entries and pedestrian access connects to and

addresses the public domain

 

Multiple entries (including communal building entries

and individual ground floor entries) should be provided to activate the street edge

Separate front entries to the ground floor units off Vaughan Street are provided with a central entry door to the remainder of the units.

Entry to the ground floor units can also be obtained from the laneway however the main accessway adjoins the main driveway entry and the main entry to Unit 9 is poor as it abuts the driveway and there is no transition or landscape buffer provided.

 

Main access to the rear units is off a partially open corridor which is again not an ideal or suitable design solution.

Yes but poorly designed and configured at some levels.

Units 1 and 4 have no entry off the main corridor and rely on individual access from Vaughan street. There is no integration with the services (lift, stairs and corridor) from within the development. To remove waste from these units, the occupants will have to go out onto the street then come back into the main entry of the development. Unit 4 could have a gate from the rear yard through the communal area but this is not an ideal or functional arrangement.

3H-Vehicle Access

Vehicle access points are designed and located to achieve safety, minimise conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and create high quality streetscapes

The main driveway access point has been relocated from the northern side of the site to the southern side in order to retain the Iron Bark Tree.

The proposed driveway has a width of 3.6m which is less than that required however, the applicant relies on a traffic management system to avoid conflicts between cars entering and leaving the site. There is also no vegetation along the southern side of the driveway to soften the interface of the driveway and the adjoining property.

No

The car parking design and arrangement is cramped and convoluted which indicates that there is too many units proposed and the development is considered to be an overdevelopment of the site.

3J-Bicycle and car parking

For development in the following locations:

 

-     On sites that are within 800m of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or

 

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

The minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating

Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant council, whichever is less.

The subject site is not within an “accessible” location as defined under the ADG, as such compliance with parking provisions in the KDCP are the applicable assessment criterion in this case.

 N/A

4A- Solar and daylight access

Living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of units in a building receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm at mid-winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area

 

 

 

 

 

 

A maximum of 15% of units in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in midwinter

Solar access diagrams were submitted with the application breaking down the units and the amount of solar access they receive.

From the solar access assessment, all units apart from Units 4, 11, 16 and 21 will receive a minimum of 2 hours of solar access which amounts to 82% (19 units) of the development.

 

Four (4) units located on the southern side will receive no solar access at all (Units 4, 11, 16 and 21). This amounts to the 17%.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No - the built form and orientation of the building results in more than the minimum amount of units which will have no solar access.

4B- Natural Ventilation

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

Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through unit does not exceed 18m, measured glass  line to glass line

 

The building should include dual aspect units, cross through units and corner units and limit unit depths

The applicant has not confirmed the number of units that will be cross-ventilated.

An analysis of the plans indicates that over 60% of units have dual aspect and comply with the minimum cross ventilation requirements of the ADG.

Yes

4C-Ceiling Heights

Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are:

 

Habitable rooms  = 2.7m

Non-habitable rooms = 2.4m

The floor to floor heights at each level are 3.05m which are below the 3.1m as specified by the ADG provisions. Floor to floor heights of 2.7m can still be achieved with floor slabs of 350mm however the roof slab is only 200mm deep which is considered inappropriate as services and ducting is unlikely to be able to be catered for in this space.

Yes but roof slab is considered to be too thin and will not be able to cater for services and ducting in order to satisfy the 2.7m internal height.

4D- Unit size and layout

Units are required to have the following

minimum internal areas:

 

1 bedroom = 50sqm

2 bedroom = 70sqm

3 bedroom = 90sqm

 

The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5sqm each

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Every habitable room must have a window in an external wall with a total minimum glass area of not

less than 10% of the floor area of the room. Daylight and air may not be borrowed from other rooms

 

 

 

 

1 bedroom units have the following areas;

Unit 11 = 59sqm

Unit 16 = 59sqm

Unit 21 = 56sqm

Unit 23 = 53sqm

 

2 bedroom units have the following internal areas;

Unit 1 = 86sqm

Unit 2 = 88sqm

Unit 3 = 81sqm

Unit 4 = 110sqm

Unit 5 = 85sqm

Unit 6 = 78sqm

Unit 7 = 71sqm

Unit 8 = 71sqm

Unit 9 = 71sqm

Unit 10 = 70sqm

Unit 13 = 76sqm

Unit 14 = 70sqm

Unit 15 = 72sqm

Unit 18 = 76sqm

Unit 19 = 70sqm

Unit 20 = 72sqm

Unit 22 = 86sqm

 

3 bedroom units have the following internal areas;

Unit 12 = 105sqm

Unit 17 = 105sqm

 

It would appear from the plan that each habitable room satisfies this provision and most rooms have two windows.

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4D-2 Unit size and layout

Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5 x the ceiling height

 

In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window

Habitable room depths are to be a minimum of 7.6m.

 

Some kitchens are very tight and small with limited pantry space and bench space.

 

The internal amenity of the dual level units on the ground floor (Units 1-10) are compromised by the fact bathrooms are located on the upper level, with no access to a WC on the ground floor which is inconvenient and not functional.

 

The site planning and built form creates units which are split level and this reflects poorly on the internal amenity for these units but also impacts on the external visual appearance of the building as some levels are higher and others lower.

 

This split level arrangement also creates a rear courtyard to Unit 1 which is elevated some 700mm above the courtyards to Units 2, 3, 5, 6,7,8,9 and 10. This creates a poor relationship between units and external spaces.

Kitchen window of Unit 4 facing the communal open space and other kitchen windows facing the main accessway. This is a poor outlook and aspect with these windows having to be highlight and preferably fixed for safety, security and to improve internal amenity.

The internal stairs to Unit 4 extend out into the main entry/accessway which is a poor design solution.

Yes

 

Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10sqm and other bedrooms 9sqm (excluding wardrobe space)

 

Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m

(excluding wardrobe space)

 

3. Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of:

 

-3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom

- 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom units

 

The width of cross-over or cross-through units

are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow unit layouts

All master bedrooms have internal areas with a minimum of 10sqm.

 

 

 

 

Minimum dimension of 3m is achieved

 

 

 

 

Living spaces have a minimum width of 4m

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

4E- Private Open space and balconies

All units are required to have primary balconies as follows:

-1 bedroom = 8sqm/2m depth

-2 bedroom = 10sqm/2m depth

-3+ bedroom = 12sqm/2.4m

 

The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m

 

For units at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15sqm and a minimum depth of 3m

Ground floor units have private open space with the following areas;

Unit 1 = min 50sqm

Unit 2 = min 30sqm

Unit 3 = min 30sqm

Unit 4 = min 30sqm

Unit 5 = min 30sqm

Unit 6 = min 30sqm

Unit 7 = min 30sqm

Unit 8 = min 30sqm

Unit 9 = min 30sqm

Unit 10 = min 30sqm

All balconies satisfy the minimum widths of 2m and 2.4m for the 3 bedroom units.

The private open space area for Unit 10 is punctuated by the presence of the bin store which is unfortunate and again a poor planning and layout solution.

 

1 bedroom units have the following areas;

Unit 11 = 9.5sqm

Unit 16 = 9.5sqm

Unit 21 = 13.2sqm

Unit 23 = 8sqm

 

2 bedroom units have the following internal areas;

Unit 13 = 11.2sqm

Unit 14 = 11sqm

Unit 15 = 11sqm

Unit 18 = 11sqm

Unit 19 = 11sqm

Unit 20 = 11sqm

Unit 22 = 14sqm

 

3 bedroom units have the following internal areas;

Unit 12 = 12.5sqm

Unit 17 = 12.5sqm

Yes - Ground floor courtyards comply

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4F- Common circulation areas

The maximum number of units off a circulation core on a single level is eight

Maximum of 8 units have access to the lobby on the ground level.

 

Units 1 and 4 have direct access off Vaughan Street and there is no direct access from the unit to the main corridor which is a flaw in the design. This means that to access the areas of communal open space on the ground floor or access the waste bins then occupants of these units will need to go out onto the street and then come back through to the main lobby entry, this is a poor, convoluted arrangement.

The protrusion of the internal access stair of Unit 4 into the main lobby entry is a poor design outcome as it narrows this space and impacts the flow of the development.

Complies

4G- Storage

In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and

bedrooms, the following storage is provided:

 

1 bedroom = 6m³

2 bedroom – 8m³

3 bedroom – 10m³

 

 

 

 

At least 50% of storage is to be located within the unit.

The basement has been designed to provide for individual storage rooms for every unit with an internal area of 6cubic metres. This complies for the 1 bedroom units additional storage is provided within each unit, with the 3 bedroom units having large spaces within the unit catering for storage purposes which is considered to be compliant.

 

Most units have internal storage areas within the unit which are considered to satisfy the ADG provisions. The storage plan that is provided with the application indicates that 50% of storage provided within the unit is achieved.

Yes

4H- Acoustic Privacy

Adequate building separation is provided within the development and from neighbouring buildings/adjacent uses.

 

Window and door openings are generally orientated away from noise sources

 

Noisy areas within buildings including building entries and corridors should be located next to or above each other and quieter areas next to or above quieter areas

Storage, circulation areas and non-habitable rooms should be located to buffer noise from external sources

A detailed assessment in respect to the acoustic compliance of the scheme has been discussed in detail above.

The design of the development has some problems in relation to locating habitable areas adjoining potential noise sources. Kitchens of many units adjoin the main open style corridor which is considered a poor design solution and the kitchen window to Unit 4 abuts the communal open space facing the BBQ and the main accessway, which is considered a poor design option.

No

4J – Noise and Pollution

To minimise impacts the following design solutions may be used:

 • physical separation between buildings and the noise or pollution source

• residential uses are located perpendicular to the noise source and where possible buffered by other uses

• buildings should respond to both solar access and noise. Where solar access is away from the noise source, non habitable rooms can provide a buffer

• landscape design reduces the perception of noise and acts as a filter for air pollution generated by traffic and industry

The design solutions within the ADG seek to minimise noise and acoustic impacts has not  been employed through this design, it is believed that more substantive design changes are required to achieve improvement and compliance.

No

Comment on Noise/Acoustic impacts

An Acoustic report was submitted with the application prepared by Day Design and dated 26 November 2018. The acoustic assessment was based on the results from a series of six (6) loggers located at the site and immediately adjoining it (3 October until 11 October 2018). The following acoustic results were found:

 

Figure 10: Measured noise levels as presented in the Acoustic Report (courtesy Day Design, 2018)

 

The acoustic assessment compared the results from the loggers to the noise levels referenced and stipulated by the EPA’s NSW Noise Policy for Industry (2017) as provisions of the Infrastructure SEPP are not considered to be relevant given the location of the Site. In relation to the EPA provisions the Noise Policy for Industry (2017) sets assessment noise levels, consistent methods, and best practice measures to manage industrial noise, and is based on the latest scientific research regarding the effect of noise on health. The policy provides for more conservative standards, the development would technically comply as the acoustic consultant states in the report, namely;

 

Provided reasonable and feasible noise controls are implemented prior to the issue of a construction certificate, the level of noise emitted by the residential development at Blakehurst will be able to meet the acceptable noise level requirements of the NSW EPAs Noise Policy for Industry”.

 

The EPA notes that this Policy can be used by local Council’s for assistance with their planning and regulatory functions. However the policy relates primarily to industrial development.  Mechanical plant has also not been selected or identified on the plans in terms of its type, form and location. It is likely that mechanical plant servicing the development will consist of residential condenser units for the air conditioning system and ventilation fans for the basement car park and garbage exhaust. A series of noise control recommendations have been suggested in relation to the location, siting and type of car park ventilation fans, outdoor condensing units and the like within the acoustic report.

 

Based on the conclusions of the acoustic report the development is satisfactory.

4K – Unit Mix

A range of unit types and sizes is provided to cater for different household types now and into the future

 

The unit mix is distributed to suitable locations within the building

The development offers a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units in the following manner;

4 x 1 bedroom units = 17%

17 x 2 bedroom units = 75%

2 x 3 bedroom = 8%

Yes

4L – Ground Floor Units

Street frontage activity is maximised where ground floor units are located.

 

Design of ground floor units delivers amenity and safety for residents.

Although the amended design has raised the floor level of the ground floor units facing Vaughan Street they are still partially submerged below the existing ground floor at street level which is a poor design outcome.

 

The rear area off Stuart Lane is poorly designed as it is taken up by the bin store and associated access to this waste room. This space could have been well landscaped and could have activated the laneway and created a space that is utilised and more functional promoting natural surveillance and greater safety to this secondary accessway.

Generally complies

4M - Facades

Facades should be well resolved with an appropriate scale and proportion to the streetscape and human scale.

The style and design of the building and its associated facades to Vaughan Street and Stuart Lane are not considered to be sympathetic with the predominant built form and character of the existing residential dwelling houses within the context of the site. Most buildings are constructed of face brick work with simple proportions and openings, rendered elements. The proposed materials and form of the building is not in keeping with the design, type and form of existing development. New developments that have been approved in the immediate vicinity of the site are more residential in their character and design including more face brick work and simple proportions. The proposed building is modern, contemporary and will not fit comfortably within the streetscape. It lacks a residential feel to it.

Could comply with some improved treatment and softening the proposed colours.

Poor materiality in relation to the context of the site and the character of the adjoining residential properties.

4N – roof design

Roof treatments are integrated into the building design and positively respond to the street. Opportunities to use roof space for residential accommodation and open space are maximised. Incorporates sustainability features.

The roof design is a standard flat roof form. This element isn’t a strong architectural feature as the roof has a width of 200mm. It is not considered to be a strong, articulated feature of the development

The roof includes communal open space which complies with the intention of the ADG.

Design could be improved.

4O – Landscape Design

Landscape design is viable and sustainable, contributes to the streetscape and amenity

The proposed roof top landscape design aims to be consistent with the approved rooftop design although this application is not accompanied by a formal Landscape Plan. Therefore the roof top communal area of open space has not been designed or treated appropriately. This could be conditioned if approval is considered, but considering the application is recommended for refusal this is an issue that needs further detailed attention and is considered to be unacceptable.

No

4P- Planting on Structures

Planting on structures – appropriate soil profiles are provided, plant growth is optimised with appropriate selection and maintenance, contributes to the quality and amenity of communal and public open spaces

This issue could be conditioned if approval is recommended. Planter boxes have been integrated into the design on some levels but haven’t been included along the upper levels along the southern or northern elevation (apart from the upper level which has been recessed and can accommodate planters on slabs). Lower levels 1, 2 and 3 should include more planters or alternatively look at including green walls and other creative landscaping methods to reduce the bulk, scale, and mass of the building and soften the harsh and strong built form.

The design could be improved.

4Q – Universal Design

Universal design – design of units allow for flexible housing, adaptable designs, accommodate a range of lifestyle needs

Satisfactory

Yes

4R – Adaptive reuse

Adaptive reuse as unit of existing buildings- new additions are contemporary and complementary, provide residential amenity while not precluding future adaptive reuse.

N/A as the development is new

N/A

4U – Energy Efficiency.

Development incorporates passive environmental design, passive solar design to optimise heat storage in winter and reduce heat transfer in summer, natural ventilation minimises need for mechanical ventilation

A revised BASIX Certificate is required if the application was to be supported prior to determination.

No

4V – Water management and conservation

Water management and conservation – potable water use is minimised, stormwater is treated on site before being discharged, flood management systems are integrated into the site design

The amended plans are not supported by an updated stormwater drainage plan and the concerns of Council’s Drainage Engineers have not been addressed.

No

4W – Waste Management

Waste management – storage facilities are appropriately designed, domestic waste is minimised by convenient source separation and recycling

The waste management arrangement has changed slightly and has been relocated from the front of the development to the rear. The bin store is located at the ground level and ideally it should be sited below ground out of sight allowing for the ground floor spaces to be landscaped and appropriately treated.

 

If the bin store was relocated the rear area adjoining the laneway could be well landscaped and treated more sympathetically.

Yes – satisfies requirements but its layout and location could be improved.

4X – Building Maintenance

Building design provides protection form weathering

 

Enables ease of maintenance, material selection reduces ongoing maintenance cost

Contextually the proposed materials which rely on a large amount of rendered area is opposed to the brick veneer finishes exemplified in the street and immediate locality. The building is very solid and harsh; it will not sit comfortably within the context of the streetscape and immediate area. It lacks harmony with the simple and regular proportions of the existing dwelling houses and materiality of the properties is not reflected in the design (as shown in Figure 11 below).

Not consistent with the residential character and nature of immediately adjoining residential properties.

 

Figure 11: Rear elevation of the proposed development when viewed from Stuart Lane (courtesy AGM Studio, 2018)

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 

Zoning

68.  The subject site is zoned Zone R3 Medium Density Residential under the provisions of the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP2012). Refer to zoning map below. The proposed development is defined as a Residential Flat Building which is a permissible land use in the zone.

 

69.  The objectives of the zone are as follows:

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

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

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

 

70.  The proposal has been designed to satisfy the objectives of the zone.

 

71.  The extent to which the proposal complies with the relevant standards of Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP2012) is outlined in Table 5 below.

 

Figure 12: Zoning map extract from the KLEP2012 (Map Extract_007)

   

Table 5: KLEP2012 Compliance Table

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

2.2 Zone

R3 Medium Density Residential

The proposal is defined as a Residential Flat Building (RFB) which is a permissible use within the zone.

Yes

 2.3

Objectives

Objectives of the Zone

Consistent with zone objectives

Yes

4.1A Minimum lot sizes for Residential Flat Buildings

Clause 4.1A requires a minimum site area of 1,000sqm for the purpose of RFB’s in the R3 zone.

The total site area is 1,328sqm

Yes

4.3 – Height of Buildings

15m as identified on Height of Buildings Map

The building has been amended to comply with the 15m height limit. The lift overrun has been reduced and Unit No.24 has been deleted and replaced with an area of communal open space.

Yes

4.4 – Floor Space Ratio

1.5:1 as identified on Floor Space Ratio Map

The proposed FSR is 1.34:1 however the GFA calculations do not seem to be accurate see discussion below.

Yes

4.5 – Calculation of floor space ratio and site area

FSR and site area calculated in accordance with Cl.4.5

The GFA calculations provided by the Applicant have been considered and the applicant has excluded the main corridor at all levels. It is accepted that part of these spaces are exposed and partially open (breezeway) and parts of these spaces where generally enclosed should be included. The corridor does add bulk to the building. The fact that most of the accessway contains privacy screening along the southern side it will largely be enclosed and should be included in the calculations.

If these spaces were included they contribute to an additional 129sqm. This creates a maximum GFA of 1918.5sqm which amounts to an FSR of 1.44:1 which still satisfies the maximum FSR control.

Yes

4.6 –

Exceptions to Development Standards

The objectives of this clause are as follows:

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

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

The proposal originally marginally exceeded the height control pursuant to Clause 4.3 of the KLEP and therefore a Clause 4.6 Statement was submitted to justify the non-compliance with the control.

 

The applicant has amended the design to ensure that the building complies with the height control. This has been confirmed against the survey plan and seems to comply. No variation is sought.

Not required

5.10 – Heritage Conservation

The objectives of

this clause are;

(i) to conserve the environmental heritage of Kogarah,

(ii) to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views.

The site is not located within a Heritage Conservation Area nor is it a Heritage Item. There are no items or conservation areas within the vicinity of the site.

Yes

6.1 Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS)

The objective of this clause is to ensure that development does not disturb, expose or drain acid sulfate soils and cause environmental damage

The site is affected by Class 5 ASS. A Geotechnical Report was prepared by Dirt Doctors, dated 27 November 2018 which focused on an ASS assessment. The report was acceptable with not significant issues arising.

The objectives of the work are;

·    Summarise the relevant environmental characteristics of the site that may impact Actual Acid Sulfate Soils (AASS) and result in the release of acidity and the potential leaching and transport of contaminants.

·    Outline potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed works.

·    Summarise the presence or the absence AASS and Potential Acid Sulfate Soils (PASS).

In conducting the assessment a review of historical data occurred and soil sampling and testing. The soil samples that were examined and tested did not indicate the presence of any ASS and as such an ASS Management Plan is not required in this instance.

Yes

6.2 Earthworks

To ensure that earthworks do not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land

The proposed development includes excavation and associated earthworks to accommodate a full level of basement car parking and a half level of lower ground parking.

The basement car park essentially extends the full length and width of the site apart from being setback to accommodate the TPZ for both existing trees and to accommodate the drainage easement. Otherwise there is no setback from the boundaries which is unfortunate as this severely limits the ability to cater for deep soil zones along the periphery of the Site to encourage landscaping and also to setback excavation off the boundary.

Yes

6.5 Airspace Operations

The consent authority must not grant development consent to development that is a controlled activity within the meaning of Division 4 of Part 12 of the Airports Act 1996 of the Commonwealth unless the applicant has obtained approval for the controlled activity under regulations made for the purposes of that Division.

The height of the proposed development is below the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS).

N/A

 

Development Control Plans

Kogarah Development Control Plan No 2013 (KDCP)

72.  Apart from satisfying some of the provisions of the ADG and SEPP 65 the controls within the KDCP are applicable. Part B, General Controls, Part C2 Medium Density, controls in Appendix 4 relating to residential development in the R3 zone are required to be considered in the design of the proposal.

 

73.  Table 6 below summarises the compliance of the scheme in relation to these controls.

 

Table 6: KDCP2013 Compliance Table

KDCP 2013 Compliance Table

Required

Proposed

Complies

PART B – GENERAL CONTROLS

B2 Tree Management and Greenweb

Compliance with provisions of Clause 5.9 Preservation of Trees or Vegetation of KLEP 2012 must be achieved.

The design has been amended to retain the mature and attractive Iron Bark Tree that exists on site. As previously discussed, the siting and location of the building above the ground floor level is unlikely to be able to retain the overall integrity of the tree. The canopy spread of both trees is substantial and the building footprint will adversely affect the canopy spread. 

The tree located on the adjoining site (within the rear yard of 4 James Street) is a Lemon Scented Gum which is mature and stands approximately 15m high. This tree must be retained and the building includes a 9.6m TPZ. Again it is likely the building footprint will adversely affect the tree canopy by more than the 10% that is stipulated.

The arborists report has not been updated and also hasn’t assessed the significance or impact of the amended design nor has it clearly stated that the retention of both trees (1 and 6) can occur based on the design and proposed built form.

Council’s Landscape Officer also questions the validity of retaining both trees and the building will eat into the established canopy by more than 10% given the setbacks.

No

B3 – Development near busy roads and rail corridors

Acoustic assessment for noise sensitive development may be required if located in the vicinity of a rail corridor or busy roads

An acoustic report was prepared and is deemed satisfactory.

This has been discussed in greater detail above.

No

B4 Parking and Traffic

Residential parking:

4 x 1bedroom units @ 1 space per unit = 4 spaces required

 

17 x 2 bedroom units @ 1.5 spaces per unit = 25.5 spaces required.

 

2 x 3 bedroom units @ 2 spaces per unit = 4 spaces required

Total required resident parking

= 34 spaces

34 resident spaces are provided however it is questionable whether some spaces can actually work i.e. spaces No. 10, 11, 12 and 13.

No swept path diagrams have been provided and the original traffic and parking report has not been updated to take into consideration the design changes made.

Technically numerically compliant but operationally will not comply with AS2890.1 as access into some spaces (No.10, 11, 12 and 13) is difficult.

Visitor parking:

23 total units @ 1 space per 5 units = 5 spaces required

5 visitor spaces are provided however have not been clearly designed within the development.

Yes

 

Car wash bay:

1 bay, which can also function as a visitor space

No designated car wash bay has been provided but the DCP allows for a visitor space to cater as a car wash bay.

No – but could comply via a condition.

Bicycle Parking:

1 space per 3 dwellings

(8 spaces) + 1 space per 10 dwellings for visitors (2 spaces)

= 10 spaces total

11 bicycle parking spaces in the basement

Yes

Car park access and layout to comply with relevant Australian Standards

Council’s Traffic Engineer advises the proposal does not comply with relevant Australian Standard (AS2890.1). The design of the parking area has been assessed by Council’s Traffic Engineers as satisfactory with the exception of the driveway width and car parking spaces No.10, 11, 12 and 13 are difficult to access and manoeuvre into.

Partial non-compliance

B5 – Waste Management and Minimisation

Submit waste management plan

Provide a dedicated caged area within the bin room for the storage of discarded bulky items.

WMP was submitted but provided minimal information and just designated the bin storage area. Originally the bin store was proposed at the front of the site.

The amended design has relocated the bin store to the rear with access off the laneway. Although this is a better design outcome the bin store encroaches on the area of private open space and removes all of the ground floor area which could be dedicated to landscaping but is now an accessway through to the bin store. This is considered a poor planning outcome.

The bin store should only be located at the ground floor area if there is insufficient space within the basement. These structures should be easy to access and hidden from view.

There is no dedicated area adjoining the bin room or within the development that can be used for storing bulky goods.

There are a sufficient number of waste bins catered for but the location is inappropriate as it removes the potential for landscaping at the rear of the site.

 

No bulky storage area provided.

 

 

B6 – Water Management

All developments require consideration of Council’s Water Management Policy

The proposed method of stormwater management is not considered satisfactory. Updated stormwater drainage plans have not been submitted to address Council’s concerns and reflect the amended architectural design.

No

B7 – Environmental Management

Building to be designed to improve solar efficiency and are to use sustainable building materials and techniques

Design, materials, siting and orientation generally optimise solar efficiency, with high proportion of north-facing window openings. Glazing is minimised on the southern elevation and western elevations.

 

The development is BASIX-compliant.

 

Note: Although amended plans were submitted, a revised BASIX Certificate was not provided as the design changes did not trigger the requirement for a new certificate.

Yes

PART C2 – MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING

1. Site isolation and amalgamation for medium density development

Adjoining sites not to be left isolated.

Site amalgamation requirements apply for specific sites.

The proposal does not cause any site isolation.

The site is not subject to any amalgamation requirement.

Yes

 

N/A

2. Specific precinct controls – residential flat buildings

Specific precinct controls apply to various sites and locations

The site is not located in a specific precinct nominated in the DCP.

N/A

4. Medium site and density requirements

20m minimum frontage for residential flat building

26.80m to Vaughan Street.

20.12m to Stuart Lane.

Yes

1.1sqm of site area per square metre of dwelling

 

NOTE: The above DCP control is over-ridden by KLEP 2012 minimum lot size requirement which is 1000sqm.

Site Area = 1,328sqm which complies with the LEP requirement. Satisfactory.

Yes

5. Height and building envelope requirements

4-storey RFBs have a “H1” height control of 12m; and a “H2” height control of 14m.

(method for calculating these heights are discussed in detail in KDCP 2013)

Excluding the lift overrun, the proposal has a height of 15m. The Applicant has provided sections showing the proposed building envelope and there are parts of the building which encroach on the intended building envelope. The intention of the control is recess the upper level into the roof space and reduce its visibility.

No – see comment below

Comment on Building Height

There is incongruence between the KLEP 2012 and the KDCP 2013 building height limits, and the KLEP 2012 heights prevail. The proposal has been amended to comply with the maximum LEP height.

6. Building setbacks

Front setbacks:

Maximum 75% of width of building to be setback minimum 5m, remainder 25% being setback minimum 7m

Front setback to Vaughan Street ranges from 5m to 7m as follows:

 

Proportion of the building’s total width with a 5m setback:

·    Ground floor:

Unit 4 front setback 7m (33%)

Unit 1 front setback 5m (26%)

The living/dining area of Unit 1 encroaches on the front setback by 1m

·    Level 1:

Unit 4 setback 7m (33%)

Unit 1 setback 5m (60%)

·    Level 2 and 3:

Unit 11 setback 7m (33%)

Unit 12 setback 5m (33%)

The balcony of Unit 12 encroaches on the 5m setback by 1m

·    Level 4:

Balcony to Unit 22 setback 5m

Balcony to Unit 21 setback 7m

Partial non-compliance with some encroachments onto the prescribed minimum front setback.

Side/rear setbacks: 3m + one quarter of the amount that the wall height exceeds 3m.

 

[3m + (¼ x 12m)] = 6m required.

The development provides a minimum 6m setbacks from the northern side.

On the southern side the lift core and corridor encroach on the 6m setback with most of the remaining building wall setback 6m.

Yes the building is setback in accordance with the KDCP provisions on the northern side.

No – building elements encroach on the 6m side setback along the southern side. The ADG provisions prevail.

7. Site coverage

Maximum 45% (597sqm)

Applicants calculations: 39% (524.1sqm)

Council Officers calculations: 40% (527.8sqm)

Yes

8. Open space

Private open space (POS) – 35sqm with min. 3m dimension for ground level dwellings and 12sqm with min. 3m dimension for other dwellings

(This control superseded by ADG Requirements)

Unit 1 has a private area of open space of 78sqm and Unit 4 has an area of private open space of 100sqm.

All other units on the ground floor have terraces and courtyards of 30sqm.

Units on the upper levels have balconies with minimum sizes of 8sqm, 10sqm and 12sqm for the 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom units. The private open space per unit is compliant with the ADG provisions.

No (for some ground floor units) – but all units meet the ADG private open space requirements.

Common open space – 30sqm per dwelling with min. overall area of 75sqm and min. dimension of 5m.

i.e. 30sqm x 24 units = 720sqm

(This control is superseded by ADG Requirements)

Rooftop: 150sqm

Ground level: 127.4sqm

Total: 277.4sqm

 

No – also fails the minimum ADG COS requirements

Maximum 55% impervious area

Applicants calculations amount to 520sqm which amounts to 39%

Yes

9. Vehicular access, parking and circulation

Car parking to be provided in accordance with Part B4

Partial non-compliance with the parking provided as detailed under Part B4 above.

Partial non-compliance with accessibility into some spaces (see discussion above).

Garages to be accessed from rear lane where available

Access off the rear lane (Stuart Lane).

Yes

All residential flat buildings to provide car wash bay

No designated car wash bay.

No but could be conditioned to comply.

11. Solar access

Primary open space to achieve 4 hours of direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm at mid-winter

This DCP control is over-ridden by the ADG control.

The proposal complies with the solar access provisions of the ADG that relate to direct sunlight to the principal useable area of COS.

Yes – complies with the ADG requirement.

Where the neighbouring properties are affected by overshadowing, at least 50% of the neighbouring existing primary private open space or windows to main living areas must receive a minimum of 3 hours sunlight between 9am–3pm on the winter solstice (21 June)

Adjoining dwellings at 2-8 James Street will be impacted by the proposed development as these are located to the south and south east of the subject site.

The proposed building will affect the rear yards of these properties between 11am until 3pm in June with the worst affectation being after 1pm daily.

Shadows will only affect the living spaces of these properties in the afternoon from about 2pm onwards. The building will cast shadows across approximately 50% of the rear yard area of 6 and 8 James Street from 11am onwards. From the shadow diagrams submitted the rear yards and living spaces of the adjoining dwellings will receive a minimum of 3 hours of solar access.

Yes

12. Views and view sharing

Provide for reasonable sharing of views

The location does not have significant views. Development generally complies with height requirements and is reasonable in terms of view sharing.

Yes

13. Adaptable and accessible housing

3 adaptable units required for developments with 21 – 30 units

3 adaptable dwellings nominated – Units 11, 14, and 16

2 liveable units are also designated being Units 15 and 20.

Yes

 

Interim Policy – Georges River Development Control Plan 2020

74.  Council at its Environment and Planning Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2019 resolved to adopt the Georges River Interim Policy DCP.

 

75.  The Interim Policy is a public policy that is to be used as a guide to set a consistent approach for the assessment of residential development within the LGA. It is a supplementary document, meaning that current DCP controls will prevail if they are considered best practice. The Interim Policy has no statutory recognition in the assessment of DAs pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (EP&A Act).

 

76.  An assessment of the proposal has been carried out against the provisions of the Interim Policy as set out in the following table.

 

Table 7: Interim Policy – Georges River DCP 2020

Standard

Proposed

Complies

Site Frontage

20m

 

26.8m to Vaughan Street and 20.26m to Stuart Lane.

Yes

 

Building Height

The relevant LEP controls relating to building height will prevail over DCP controls that relate to height in storeys

The proposal is fully compliant with the KLEP 2012 height limit.

Yes

Private Open Space

The ADG requirements prevail over the DCP controls for private open space

The proposal is fully compliant with the ADG’s private open space requirements.

Refer to “4E – Private Open Space and Balconies” within the ADG Compliance Table above.

Yes

Communal Open Space

The ADG requirements prevail over the DCP controls for COS

 

The proposal is not considered to comply with the requirements of the ADG with respect to COS.

Refer to “3D – Communal Open Space” within the ADG Compliance Table above.

No

 

Parking

In accordance with 'A Plan for Growing Sydney' (Department of Planning and

Environment):

·    If located in a strategic centre (ie Kogarah CBD and Hurstville CBD) and within 800m of a Railway, the “Metropolitan Regional Centre (CBD)” rates apply.

·    If located within 800m of a railway and outside the strategic centres the “Metropolitan Subregional Centre” rates apply.

·    If located outside of 800m of a Railway, the relevant DCP applies.

The KDCP parking requirements need to be satisfied as the site is not located near a railway station or close to a commercial centre in accordance with the ADG provisions.

Some parts of the car parking layout is non-compliant.

Solar Access

The ADG requirements prevail over the DCP controls for solar access

 

The proposal is acceptable on merit with the ADG Solar Access requirements as detailed within the ADG Compliance Table above.

Refer to “4A – Solar and Daylight Access” within the ADG Compliance Table.

Yes

 

Developer Contributions

77.  The proposed development would require payment of developer contributions under Section 7.12 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is applicable. If the development consent is granted a condition outlining the required contributions will be imposed.

 

IMPACTS

Natural Environment

78.  The proposed development will adversely affect the natural environment as the proposal is inconsistent and incongruous with the residential character of development in the streetscape and immediate locality. In addition it is unclear whether the longevity, integrity and visual amenity of the existing mature trees (Iron Bark Tree and the Lemon Scented Gum tree) will be able to be retained as the building footprint substantially affects the TPZ of both these trees.

 

Built Environment

79.  The proposed development is considered to be excessive in terms of its built form, bulk and scale and is considered to be an overdevelopment of the site. The massing and form of the building will be visually dominating and will not have an appropriate or sympathetic relationship to the lower scaled residential properties to the south, north and west of the site.

 

Social Impact

80.  No adverse social impacts have been identified as part of the assessment. The proposed development, in principle, will cater for a cross-section of the community and could assist with providing for additional housing in the area.

 

Economic Impact

81.  The proposed development has no apparent adverse economic impact. There may be a small positive economic impact as a result of the construction of development.

 

Suitability of the site

82.  The site is zoned R3 – Medium Density Residential. The proposal is a permissible form of development in this zone. Although the site is suitable for this form of development the overall design and amenity of the development is not considered to be acceptable given the site considerations, context and nature of adjoining developments.

 

SUBMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST

83.  The application was neighbour notified in accordance with Kogarah DCP 2013 for a period of 14 days. Two (2) submissions were received from immediately adjoining property owners. The concerns raised are summarised below.

 

·      The height and bulk is out of scale with the existing streetscape

Comment: This issue has been discussed in greater detail throughout this report. The DRP raised serious concerns regarding the proposed built form and building footprint. The long length of the building creates a dominating and overly bulky form. There are no breaks to the building and its height, scale, materiality and visual appearance will create a visually dominating structure which is out of character with the nature of existing and recently approved developments.

 

·      Loss of privacy and overlooking to rear yards

Comment: This issue has been discussed in detail in the report especially as the separation distances along parts of the building fail to comply with the minimum ADG requirements. This has been addressed by windows being designed to be either highlight or including a lower portion of the window as obscure glazing (a poor internal amenity outcome for the units to achieve compliance). This will reduce the potential for overlooking but the roof top area of open space could still overlook the rear yards of properties to the north and south.

 

·      Overshadowing to properties along James Street

Comment: This has been addressed in detail and the shadowing impacts generated by the building comply with the KDCP provisions and properties to the south will receive a minimum of 3 hours of solar access during midwinter to their living spaces and to 50% of their private open space.

 

·      Traffic issues, increase congestion and conflicts generated along Stuart Lane

Comment: Access off Stuart Lane, the secondary roadway is preferred. As discussed the 3.6m width of the driveway is considered to be too narrow and this could create conflicts entering and leaving the site. A traffic management system as proposed will assist in reducing conflicts to a small degree however a wider driveway or at least provision of a wait bay would be a more desirable solution.

 

·      Bin store is too close to the neighbouring properties.

Comment: The location of the Bin store is on the northern boundary with no setback to 2 Stuart Street however will abut an existing garage structure so it will be obscured by this existing structure to a large degree. The bin store and access to this area will remove the potential to create an attractive rear landscaped area and would be more ideally located in the basement.

 

·      Only one set of fire stairs provided

Comment: The development will need to satisfy the provisions of the BCA in relation to fire safety

 

·      Lift core and staircase too close to neighbours dwellings and will exacerbate noise impacts

Comment: The location of the lift core, staircase structure and communal accessway at all levels is considered to be poorly designed. The structures are visually dominating and too close to the boundary. The accessway is designed as an open form however the balustrade is increased in height and solid to reduce the potential for overlooking to the south which increases the solidity and dominance of this structure. The lift core and corridor ideally should be internalised. There would be some additional noise generated but this is considered to be acceptable given that the corridor only accesses a small amount of units and will not be intensively utilised.

 

REFERRALS

Council Referrals

 Development Engineer

84.  The application was referred to Council’s Engineers for comments. Council’s Engineer required a series of additional information in respect to the OSD design and operation, location and functioning of the drainage easement across the site, flooding impacts etc. The applicant was provided in writing that this information was required. In response the basement plan was amended to show the location of the easement and that no proposed structures are affecting this element. Updated stormwater drainage plans have not been submitted and additional information is required in order to satisfy Council’s Engineers. At the point of preparing this report the proposed stormwater/drainage design was non-compliant and insufficient information has been provided to satisfy Council’s concerns.

 

Traffic Engineer

85.  The application was referred to Council’s Traffic Engineer for comment. A series of issues were raised by the Traffic Engineer as discussed in the car parking and traffic section of the report above. Initially the number of car parking spaces failed to comply with Council’s requirements. The proposed basement car parking design was amended and a second level of basement car parking provided. The amended scheme now satisfies the required number of spaces in accordance with the KDCP however there are outstanding issues with the layout, manoeuvrability of the basement level and design of some spaces. Council’s traffic section raised a  number of concerns with the amended scheme including;

 

·    The driveway width of 3.6m is too narrow and does not satisfy the AS2890.1:2004, 3.2.2. This requires the driveway be a minimum of 5.5m so that a B85 and B99 are able to pass each other.

·    The manoeuvrability within the basement seems tight and constrained.  Swept path diagrams have not been submitted to demonstrate how each vehicle will be able to manoeuvre in and out of the waiting bay.  Especially space 10, 11, 12 and 13.

 

86.  The Traffic Section cannot support the application in its current form until these issues are resolved.

 

Environmental Health Officer

87.  Council’s Environmental Health Officer has raised no objection subject to conditions of consent being attached if approval is granted.

 

External Referrals

Ausgrid

88.  The application was referred to Ausgrid for comment on 4 December 2018 in accordance with Clause 45 of the Infrastructure SEPP. To date no response has been provided and given the timeframe concurrence can be assumed. 

 

CONCLUSION

89.  The proposal has been assessed using the matters for consideration listed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The proposal is considered to be an unreasonable intensification of site and the proposed additional scale, bulk and height relating to the boundaries is considered to be an unacceptable planning and design outcome for this site and will adversely affect the character of development in the street and immediate locality.

 

90.  The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the KLEP 2012 and KDCP 2013 and the proposal satisfies the key planning controls in this environmental planning instrument relating to height and floor space.

 

DETERMINATION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS

Statement of Reasons

91.  The reasons for this recommendation are:

·    This part of Blakehurst is undergoing transition to medium density residential flat buildings with new controls allowing for a greater density and scale. However, the proposal fails to respond to both the existing context of the streetscape and the desired future character for development which has been established by the recent approvals of residential flat buildings within this precinct.

·    The proposed development presents an excessive bulk and scale with limited consideration for deep soil/buffer landscaping addressing the site edges. It does not provide a sympathetic response to the predominant (existing as well as evolving) footprint scale or the desired landscape character of the surrounding context.

·    The lack of deep soil landscaping and the reduced side setbacks as well as other amenity, layout and design concerns indicates that the proposal is an overdevelopment of the site.

·    The proposal with reduced setbacks and encroachment into the upper level setback zones and location of the lift core presents an overbearing mass when viewed from the neighbouring properties located immediately to the south and north. The bulk and scale of the building will also be highly visible and dominating when viewed from James Street and Stuart Street.

·    The proposed built form and the treatment of the front and rear façade and reliance on a high level of solidity and long, narrow windows creates an institutional character to Vaughan Street and the design shows little regard to the existing lower scale residential context and associated materiality.

·    The proposal provides a visually dominant interface between the residential dwellings to the north and south of the site and those along Vaughan Street.

·    The proposed design even in its amended form has not adequately addressed the issues raised by the Design Review Panel.

·    The proposed basement car park and other site constraints such as the drainage easement severely limit the opportunity for a large consolidated deep soil area on site and limits the ability to achieve an appropriate landscape buffer to adjacent residential buildings and the public domain.

·    The deep soil area provides little utility as the area along the southern side is treated with seating and hard paving to create a communal area of open space.

·    The proposed stormwater and drainage plan and arrangement has not been updated to reflect the amended plans and fails to address Council’s Engineering concerns.

·    The layout of the basement car park and associated car parking spaces are convoluted and car spaces No.10, 11, 12 and 13 are difficult to access and unlikely they satisfy the provisions of AS2890.1.

·    The proposed building design and siting, in particular the location of the lift core and associated stairs at all levels, corridor, the basement carpark and the associated hard paved communal areas at ground floor level will adversely affect the TPZ and canopy spread of the Lemon Scented Gum Tree and its longevity, hydrology and integrity will be severely impacted. More than 10% of encroachment on the TPZ is anticipated which is considered to be unacceptable. The canopy spread of both trees (Ironbark and Lemon Scented Gum) will be substantially cut back to accommodate the new building and the visual appearance and contribution of these trees will be adversely affected.

·    The amended proposal has been designed to retain the existing Ironbark Tree on site however given the location and built form the canopy spread and visual amenity of this tree will be adversely affected. 

·    In consideration of the aforementioned reasons, the proposed development is recommended for refusal.

 

Determination

92.  THAT pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) the Council refuse development consent to Development Application DA2018/0517  for demolition of the existing structures on site and construction of a five (5) storey residential flat building containing twenty three (23) units and two (2) levels of basement car parking for thirty nine (39) vehicles and associated site works at Lot 21 and 22 DP15830 and known as 2-4 Vaughan Street, Blakehurst, for the following reasons:

 

1.   The proposed development fails to meet Design Quality Principle No.5 (Landscape) and Design Criteria 3D-1(1) of the Unit Design Guide in respect to the amount of communal open space to be provided and the quality of this space. The actual principle useable area of open space fails to satisfy the minimum 25% requirement and the ground floor south facing communal area is poorly designed and its functionality and useability is compromised given its orientation and lack of soft landscaped area.

 

2.   The proposed development fails to meet Design Quality Principle No.5 (Landscape) and Design Criteria 3E-1(1) of the Unit Design Guide in respect to the amount of deep soil area to be provided. The development fails to achieve a minimum area of 7% with a minimum dimension of 3m. The proposed basement car park and other site constraints such as the drainage easement severely limit the opportunity for a large consolidated deep soil area on site and limits the ability to achieve an appropriate landscape buffer to adjacent residential buildings and the public domain. The Landscape Plan has not been amended to address the modified design and associated landscaping treatment which is considered to be an unacceptable response to this site given the building’s proposed form, mass and siting.

 

3.   The proposed development fails to meet Design Quality Principle No.6 (Amenity) and Design Criteria 4A-1 of the Unit Design Guide in respect to the solar access that is afforded to the units within the development. Over 15% of the development has units that will receive no solar access during midwinter due to their orientation and design. This amount fails to satisfy Design Criteria 4A-1(3) of the Unit Design Guide and the resultant impact is considered to adversely affect the internal amenity of the development and is an unacceptable planning and design outcome.

 

4.   The proposed development fails to meet Design Quality Principle No.6 (Amenity) and Design Criteria 4D  of the Unit Design Guide in respect to the layout, siting and planning of the development in that ground floor cross over units do not include a bathroom on the ground floor, the proposed open style corridor area is a poor design option and there are a number of poor design outcomes namely;

o Split level arrangement which still creates the two ground floor units off Vaughan Street located below ground level.

o The bin store at the rear on the ground floor level has a poor relationship with the rear yard area of Unit 10 and access to the bin store removes the potential for more substantial landscaping at the rear.

o The design of Unit 4 is unsatisfactory with the internal stairs encroaching into the main corridor/entryway and the kitchen window overlooks the communal BBQ area.

o The location of kitchen windows facing the main entryway are not considered to be a suitable outcome and will create a poor outlook from these key internal spaces.

o The cantilevered accessway over the driveway at the rear is unsuitable and the design is devoid of presentation and landscaping to enhance this space.

 

5.   The proposed development fails to meet Design Quality Principle No.9 (Aesthetics) of SEPP 65 in respect to the proposed built form, siting and design of the building. The building length and its absence of any breaks in the mass and form creates a visually dominating built form with a poor interface between the residential dwellings to the north and south of the site. Features such as the lift core, stair and corridor structure so close to the southern boundary and their treatment will be a highly dominating element. These should be centralised and internalised within the building. The bulk, scale and proposed mass of the building is inconsistent with recently approved developments and will create a poor planning and urban design response for this site.

 

6.   The proposed development fails to meet Design Quality Principle No.9 (Aesthetics) and Design Criteria 3C and 4M of the Unit Design Guide in respect to the design and treatment proposed for the building in particular the front and rear building facades to Vaughan Street and Stuart Lane are considered to be inappropriate in respect to the character of existing residential development and their materiality. The very solid, institutional and modernist design is an unsympathetic design response in respect to the predominant (existing as well as evolving) footprint scale or the desired landscape character of the surrounding context.

 

7.   The bulk and scale of the proposal is out of character with adjoining developments and will be inconsistent with the objectives of the height control as reflected in Section 5.2, Part C2 of the Kogarah DCP 2013.

 

8.   The proposed stormwater and drainage arrangement does not satisfy the provisions of Part B6 (Water Management) of the Kogarah Development Control Plan and Council’s Water Management Policy. The original stormwater and drainage plan has not been updated to reflect the design changes and additional information to satisfy Council’s Engineering concerns in respect to the proposed OSD system and proposed discharge pipe in Stuart Lane and the location, capacity and operation of Council’s stormwater pipe and associated drainage easement that crosses the site have not been provided. Without this information the proposed stormwater arrangement is considered to be unsatisfactory.

 

9.   The proposed basement car parking arrangement and design fails to satisfy the provisions of Part B4 (Parking and Traffic) of the Kogarah Development Control Plan in that manoeuvrability and access to car parking spaces No’s 10, 11, 12 and 13 is difficult and fails to comply with AS2890.1. No swept path diagrams have been provided to ensure access to these spaces can be achieved.

 

10. The driveway width fails to satisfy the provisions of AS2890 as it is too narrow. The design also fails to provide any landscaping along the southern boundary of the driveway to soften its visual appearance.

 

11. The proposal does not satisfy the provisions of Part B2 of the Kogarah Development Control Plan as the proposed building design and siting, in particular the location of the lift core and associated stairs at all levels, corridor, the basement car park and the associated hard paved communal areas at ground floor level will adversely affect the TPZ and canopy spread of the Lemon Scented Gum Tree and its longevity, hydrology and integrity will be severely impacted. The canopy spread of both trees (Ironbark and Lemon Scented Gum) will be substantially cut back to accommodate the new building and the visual appearance and contribution of these trees will be significantly impacted.

 

12. The proposed development in its current form will establish and undesirable precedent for development in the area is considered an overdevelopment of the site and will not be in the public interest.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Site plan - 2-4 Vaughan St Blakehurst

Attachment 2

Front Elevation - 2-4 Vaughan St Blakehurst

Attachment 3

Side Elevation - 2-4 Vaughan St Blakehurst

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 5 September 2019

LPP030-19              2-4 Vaughan Street Blakehurst

[Appendix 1]          Site plan - 2-4 Vaughan St Blakehurst

 

 

Page 68

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 5 September 2019

LPP030-19              2-4 Vaughan Street Blakehurst

[Appendix 2]          Front Elevation - 2-4 Vaughan St Blakehurst

 

 

Page 69

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 5 September 2019

LPP030-19              2-4 Vaughan Street Blakehurst

[Appendix 3]          Side Elevation - 2-4 Vaughan St Blakehurst

 

 

Page 70

 


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 5 September  2019

Page 115

 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 05 September 2019

 

LPP Report No

LPP031-19

Development Application No

MOD2019/0022

Site Address & Ward Locality

5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay

Kogarah Bay Ward

Proposed Development

Modification of DA2017/0663 - Convert the communal area on the south western side of an approved residential flat building to part communal and part private open space and a minor change to the rear of Unit 601 to add a window to the kitchen, change a window to bedroom 3 to a door in the western elevation, and resize the window of bedroom 2

Owners

Touma Kogarah Bay Pty Ltd c/- Urbanlink Pty Ltd

Applicant

Touma Property Development Pty Ltd

Planner/Architect

Urban Link Pty Ltd

Date Of Lodgement

14/02/2019

Submissions

Nil

Cost of Works

No change to the cost of works

Local Planning Panel Criteria

Section 4.56 modification to an application that is a Residential Flat Building where the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy 65 apply.

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX, Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment,

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007, Draft Environment State Environmental Planning Policy, Draft Remediation State Environmental Planning Policy,

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012, Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

Statement of Environmental Effects

Architectural Plans

BASIX Certificate

Landscape Plan

Report prepared by

Principal Planner (Appeals and Major Development)

 

 

Recommendation

That the application be approved in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Not Applicable

 

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

No, standard conditions have been attached with no design changes which can be reviewed when the report is published

 

Site Plan

Figure 1 - Subject site outlined in red

 

Executive Summary

 

Proposal

1.    The Section 4.56 modification application seeks consent for amendments to a Land and Environment Court approval (case number 2018/00038420, orders made on 14 November 2018) for demolition of existing dwelling and structures and construction of a seven (7) storey residential flat building containing forty three (43) units over two (2) levels of basement car parking.

 

2.    The modifications sought include:

 

·      The conversion of 78sqm of communal open space to private open space at the ground level;

·      Alterations to windows and doors of the living room of unit 601; and

·      Provision of a new landscape plan to reflect the landscaping amendments.

 

Figure 2: Communal open space on the ground level as approved

 

Figure 3 - Communal open space on the ground floor as proposed

 

Figure 4 - As approved Unit 601 fenestration

 

Figure 5 - As proposed Unit 601 fenestration

 

 Site and Locality

3.    The site is known as 5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay and is legally described as Lot CP in SP65142, Lot18 in DP1963 and Lot CP in SP68349 respectively. The allotments contain two (2) attached dual occupancies and a two (2) storey dwelling house and associated structures.

 

4.    The site is located on the northern side of John Street, and is one (1) block to the south of the Princes Highway. 

 

5.    The northern side of John Street was up-zoned from R2 Low Density Residential to R3 Medium Density Residential in May 2017 as part of Kogarah LEP 2012 (KLEP) Amendment No. 2 with a 21m height limit and maximum FSR of 2:1. The southern side of John Street remained R2 Low Density Residential.

 

6.    The site comprises three (3) lots having a combined area 1839.4sqm.  The approved development has not yet commenced on the site.

 

7.    The surrounding area is characterized by low density residential development in John Street, and a number of RFBs have been approved adjoining the site, but have not yet commenced.

 

Zoning and Permissibility

8.    The subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential under the provisions of Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP 2012). The proposal involves amendments to an approved residential flat building which is a permissible use in the zone.

 

Submissions

9.    The application was notified between 28 February and 14 March 2019 in accordance with the Kogarah Development Control Plan. In response no submissions were received.

 

Reason for Referral to the Local Planning Panel

10.  The proposal is referred to the Local Planning Panel for determination as the development is subject to SEPP 65 and the Georges River Local Planning Panel is the consent authority via the Ministerial Direction of 23 February 2018.

 

Conclusion

11.  The application has been assessed having regard to the s4.56 and the Matters for Consideration under Section 4.15(1) of the EP&A Act 1979.  Following the assessment of the proposal, it is considered that Modification No. MOD2018/0022 is worthy of support and is recommended for approval. 

 

Report in Full

Proposal

12.  The applicant seeks to modify Development Consent No DA2017/0663 in the following manner:

·      Conversion of part of the approved communal open space (COS) along the south western setback to part communal and part private open space (POS) for Units G01 and G08. This will result in the COS and POS each being 3m wide. The POS will be within fenced courtyards.

·      Conversion of the north eastern facing bedroom 3 window to a sliding door and install a kitchen window to the uppermost unit referenced as unit 601. The window to Bedroom 2 is also altered in elevation to provide a lower sill height.

·      Updating the landscape plan to incorporate the amendments required by approved condition 26 of the consent together with the inclusion of the proposed modifications, which states:

 

The submitted Landscape Plan shall be amended as follows:

 

a)    The communal open space/deep soil area on the southwestern side of the site shall be planted with canopy trees centred in the space (and not planted only along the boundary), and the lawn deleted and replaced with shrub and ground cover planting suited to the aspect.  A pathway of gravel or crushed sandstone or similar material through the space may be provided.  The areas shall be shown as common property on any future plan of strata subdivision.

 

b)    The front setback area shall be planted with trees and mass planted with shrubs and ground cover and all lawn deleted.  No seating is to be provided in the front setback area, this area is to be screen planting.

 

c)    The separate pathways to the ground floor units G06 and G07 shall be consolidated into one pathway central pathway (to be located where the Cordyline planting bed is shown), with a side gate to courtyard of each unit.  This will allow for the two pathway areas (to approx. 1 metre beyond the top of the two steps) to be added to the mass planted landscaped area in the front setback.

 

d)    The provision of two additional street trees, Callistemon viminalis, 45 litre pot size, to be staked, watered, mulched and protected.

 

Site and Locality

13.  The site is known as 5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay, and is located on the northern side of John Street, which is one block to the south of the Princes Highway. The subject side of John Street was up-zoned to R3 Medium Density Residential in May 2017 as part of Kogarah LEP 2012 (KLEP) Amendment No. 2 and has a 21m height limit and maximum FSR of 2:1. The southern side of John Street is zoned R2 Low Density Residential.

 

Figure 6 - Zoning Map showing the development site zoned R3 and the opposite site of John Street being zoned R2 – Low Density Residential

 

14.  The site comprises three (3) lots having a combined area of 1839.4sqm.  The approved development has not yet commenced.

 

15.  The surrounding area is characterized by low density residential development in John Street, and a number of RFBs have been approved adjoining the site, but have not yet commenced.

 

Background

16.  This is a modification application lodged pursuant to Section 4.56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and proposes modifications to Development Consent DA2017/663, which was approved by the Land and Environment Court via a Section 34 Agreement on 14 November 2018 (Case number 2018/00038420).

 

17.  The proposal is referred to the Local Planning Panel for determination as the application is a modification to a residential flat building under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy 65, whereby the Georges River Local Planning Panel is the determining authority via the Ministerial Direction of 23 February 2018.

 

18.  The approved development is for the demolition of two (2) dual occupancies, a dwelling house and structures and construction of a seven (7) storey residential flat building containing 43 units (12 x one bedroom, 23 x two bedroom and 8 x three bedroom) and two (2) levels of basement parking with 63 residential spaces (including spaces for five (5) adaptable units), and nine (9) visitor spaces.

 

19.  The modification application seeks to amend the proposal to convert part of the communal open space on the southern-western boundary (the 6m side building setback area) partially into 3m wide private courtyards for units G01 and G08, and partially 3m wide communal open space.  A minor amendment to window/door openings of Unit 601 is also proposed (added as part of the application on 31 July 2019), and a revised landscape plan which includes requirements of the consent and also amendments to reflect the modifications sought.

 

ASSESSMENT

Section 4.56 of the EP&A Act 1979

20.  In consideration of the proposed changes sought under the subject application, the following assessment is provided including with reference to Section 4.56 of the EP&A Act:

 

Assessment Question:

Assessment

Is the subject Modification Application associated with an Operative (i.e. not lapsed or surrendered) Development Consent?

Yes

 

Is Council the relevant Consent Authority to determine the subject application?

Yes – via the Georges River Local Planning Panel.

Is 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)? (cl4.56(1(a))

Yes - there is no change proposed to the overall density, scale, building envelope or footprint.

Pursuant to Council’s Notification & Advertising provision of the Regulation and the Development Control Plan, has the subject application required to been notified or advertised (cl4.56 (b) (ii))

Yes – from 28 February to 14 March 2019.  No submissions were received. The amendment made to the fenestration added in July is considered not reo result in an additional environmental impact, therefore no re-notification was required.

Pursuant to s4.56(c) of the EPA Act 1979, have the previous objectors been notified?

Yes

Pursuant to s4.56(1A) have the reasons given for the grant of consent been taken into consideration?

As noted in the s34 Agreement, in Point 1:

The parties have reached agreement, due to the Applicant proposing to rely on further amended plans (attached at Annexure B hereto) which relevantly provide for:

a. compliance with the height development standard in clause 4.3 of the LEP;

b. compliance with the floor space ratio development standard in clause 4.4 of the

LEP;

c. the provision of appropriate setbacks for the fifth (5th) storey and above to

provide an appropriate transition between the R2 and the R3 zone;

d. the provision of good quality communal open space including on the seventh (7th) storey.

 

The proposal remains consistent with the reasons for approval identified above, with communal open space areas, particularly the roof top, remaining of high quality.

 

Section 4.15 Evaluation

21.  In determining a section 4.56 modifications the provisions of Section 4.15 of the EP&A Act 1979 (where relevant) need to be considered as part of the assessment.  The following considers the proposal in respect to these requirements.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

22.  Compliance with the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) are discussed in the table below.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy

Complies

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

Yes – no change

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land

Yes  - no change 

State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure

Yes  - no change 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

An amended BASIX certificate was provided with the application, received 31 July 2019

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

Yes - see discussion below

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

23.  The proposed modification does not affect the overall design quality of the development which was also taken into consideration under Clause 29 of the SEPP in the assessment of the original DA with regards to the cl 29(b) the design quality principles, and cl 29(c) the Apartment Design Guide (ADG).

 

24.  An assessment of the application against the relevant Design Principles of SEPP 65 and the Objectives in the ADG is provided below.  Compliance with Principles 2 - Built form and scale, 3 - Density, 8 - Housing diversity and social interaction, and 9 – Aesthetics will not be affected by the modifications proposed.

 

Part 4 Application of Design Principles under the SEPP

Principle 1: Context and neighbourhood character

25.  The overall design of the building is generally unchanged and its relationship to its context is maintained as approved.

 

Principle 4: Sustainability

26.  An updated BASIX certificate in relation to the change to the windows and open space has been issued and indicates compliance with the BASIX SEPP.

 

Principle 5: Landscape

27.  The landscape principles for the proposal as amended will be met, and are demonstrated on the amended landscape plan (see further discussion under ADG assessment, below).

 

Principle 6: Amenity

28.  The development provides good amenity for residents, neighbours and visitors to the site which is consistent with Principle 6. The change proposed to provide increased POS to two units will increase the amenity of these dwellings.

 

Principle 7: Safety

29.  The amended design does not affect the safety and security of the development.

 

30.  In summary, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the principles of the ADG and SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development.

 

Clause 28 – Consideration of Apartment Design Guide

31.  The following table is an assessment against the Objectives of the ADG relevant to the modification application.

 

ADG Objective

Design Criteria

Complies

Part 3D

Objective 3D-1

Adequate area of communal open space is provided to enhance residential amenity and to provide opportunities for landscaping

1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site (see figure 3D.3).

As approved, development provides 484sqm (26.3%).

The proposal will provide 405.66sqm (22%) 

No

Planner Comment: The proposal as modified, with areas designated communal open space on the ground floor in the approved plans being reallocated as private open space in the proposal, does not provide the minimum communal open space standard contained in the Apartment Design Guide.

 

Notwithstanding, the proposed variation is considered acceptable as the development continues to provide adequate areas of communal open space – with the passive landscape space on the ground floor being well-designed with the active space on the roof top.

 

The roof top communal open space includes a barbeque area, outdoor seating, and weather protection. The ground floor space maintains its green corridor character notwithstanding the proposed change, with the private open space areas as proposed now serving to assist in the activation and on-going maintenance of this space, which largely consists of lawn and landscaping, along with an improved privacy outcome for ground floor units.

 

The by way of the access arrangements to the space, the key beneficiaries of the approved ground floor communal open space will be for the ground floor units.  Following the modification, the ground floor units will all benefit from generous private open space areas in excess of the minimum requirement, which include a mix of hardstand and lawn/landscaped areas.

 

Above the ground floor, the larger apartments (ie all except one bedroom apartments) benefit from generous areas of private open space beyond the minimum requirement, with at least 14 of the units above the ground floor having a minimum of 25sqm of private open space.

 

In the context of the passive nature of the usability of the communal open space on the ground floor, the generous provision of private open space throughout the development, and the provision of a high quality rooftop communal area, it is considered that the variation proposed is justified. The development is considered to have adequate communal open space for its needs given the amount of private open space provided throughout the development, and the proposed arrangement represents a better design outcome overall for the proposed development.

Part 3 Deep soil zones

Objective 3E-1

Deep soil zones provide areas on the site that allow for and support health plant and tree growth.  They improve residential amenity and promote management of water and air quality

1.Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum

Site area - greater than 1500sqm with significant existing tree cover = 6m minimum dimension; 7% of site area

No change proposed.

Part 3F Visual privacy

Objective 3F-1

Adequate building separation distances are shared equitably between neighbouring sites , to achieve reasonable levels of external and internal visual privacy

1. Separation between windows and balconies is provided to ensure visual privacy is achieved.

Minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows:

-Up to 12m (4 storeys)

Habitable rooms and balconies = 6m

Non-habitable rooms = 3m

-Up to 25m (5-8 storeys)

Habitable rooms and balconies = 9m

Non-habitable rooms = 4.5m     

Yes

 

The additional window and sliding door to the rooftop Unit 601 (from the bedroom/kitchen to the unit’s terrace) maintains the required separation distances.  A change is also shown to enlarge the window to Bedroom 2, but this needs to remain a highlight, as it adjoins the communal open space. A condition is included in the recommendation in this regard.

 

Other Matters

32.  Condition 26 required amendments to the landscape plan, prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, as follows:

 

Amendments to Landscape Plan - The submitted Landscape Plan shall be amended as follows:

 

a)    The communal open space/deep soil area on the south-western side of the site shall be planted with canopy trees centred in the space (and not planted only along the boundary), and the lawn deleted and replaced with shrub and ground cover planting suited to the aspect.  A pathway of gravel or crushed sandstone or similar material through the space may be provided.  The areas shall be shown as common property on any future plan of strata subdivision.

 

b)    The front setback area shall be planted with trees and mass planted with shrubs and ground cover and all lawn deleted.  No seating is to be provided in the front setback area, this area is to be screen planting.

 

c)    The separate pathways to the ground floor units G06 and G07 shall be consolidated into one pathway central pathway (to be located where the Cordyline planting bed is shown), with a side gate to courtyard of each unit.  This will allow for the two pathway areas (to approx. 1 metre beyond the top of the two steps) to be added to the mass planted landscaped area in the front setback.

 

d)    The provision of two additional street trees, Callistemon viminalis, 45 litre pot size, to be staked, watered, mulched and protected.

 

33.  The amended landscape plan (Drawing no. L01 Rev C dated 5/07/19) now lodged with the modification application (as amended in July 2019) shows that these amendments have been included, so this condition is now able to be deleted with the updated landscape plan include in the plans condition.

 

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012

34.  The modification does not affect the compliance of the development with the provisions of KLEP 2012. The building height and FSR are not changed by the modification.

 

Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

35.  A Draft Environmental SEPP was exhibited from 31 October 2017 to 31 January 2018.  The consolidated SEPP proposes to simplify the planning rules for a number of SEPPs.  The proposal is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Draft Instrument.

 

36.  A Draft State Environmental Planning Policy – Remediation of Land exists, this amendment does not undermine the requirements of this instrument.

 

Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013

37.  The proposed development does not affect the relevant provisions of KDCP 2013 with regards to Residential Flat Buildings.  The controls in the KDCP relating to open space are superseded by the provisions of the ADG.

 

Georges River Development Control Plan 2020 (Interim Policy)

38.  The Interim Policy is a supplementary document, meaning that current DCP controls continue to apply if a particular control is not specified in the Interim Policy, or if it is still considered best practice. All operative DCPs still legally apply. Whilst the Interim Policy has no statutory recognition in the assessment of a Development Applications pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the policy will be used as a guide as it is an endorsed position of the Council.

 

39.  In relation to the proposal, the Interim Policy states with respect to communal open space in residential flat development that the Apartment Design Guide provisions apply. The proposal has been assessed in this regard earlier in this report. The design is considered to be acceptable and worthy of support.

 

Developer Contributions

40.  The proposed development is subject to developer contributions which were levied at the time of the development determination and are not required to be amended by this proposal.

 

Planning Agreements

41.  There is no planning agreement applicable to the development.

 

EP&A Regulation 2000

42.  No matters within the Regulation are affected by the modification.  An updated BASIX certificate has been lodged. The BASIX certificate reference in the conditions of consent is required to be updated.

 

IMPACTS

Likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality

43.  The proposed changes are minor and result in minimal environmental impacts, as discussed above.

 

Suitability of the site for the development

44.  The site is zoned R3 – Medium Density Residential. The proposal is a permissible form of development in this zone. The proposed changes do not affect the suitability of the site for the development.

 

SUBMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST

45.  The application was notified in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.56 (b)(i) of the EP&A Act 1979 with reference to KDCP 2013 and Section 4.56 (1)(c) of the EP&A Act 1979.  No submissions were received.

 

The public interest

46.  The proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

 

REFERRALS

Council Referrals

Landscaping

47.  The application was referred to Council’s Arborist who advised the proposal was acceptable as amended.

 

CONCLUSION

48.  The application has been assessed having regard to the Section 4.56 and the Matters for Consideration under Section 4.15(1) of the EP&A Act 1979.  Following assessment, it is considered that Modification No. MOD2018/0022 is considered worthy of support. 

 

49.  The modification to the approved drawings converts part of the communal open space on the south western boundary to part communal and part private courtyards for the Ground Floor Units G01 and G08; and the addition of a window and sliding door to the northern elevation of Unit 601.

 

50.  A change shown on the amended west elevation (Drawing DA3002 Rev I dated 30/7/19) is not supported, as it shows that the highlight window to Bedroom 2 of Unit 601 is changed to full length. This window needs to stay as highlight only, as it adjoins the communal rooftop open space. The other change to add a window and sliding door is satisfactory as these rooms open onto the unit’s private courtyard.

 

51.  The proposal is otherwise satisfactory and approval of the modification is recommended.

 

52.  In detail, the changes required to the existing notice of determination area as follows:

 

1.  Insert reference to new drawings, in Condition 1.

 

2.  Delete Condition 26 which references modifications now included in the revised landscape plan.

 

3.  Add a new Condition 27A to read as follows:

 

Amendment to window shown on western elevation:

 

The full height window to bedroom 2 of unit 601 shown on Drawing no DA3002 Rev I dated 20/7/19 shall be amended to be a highlight window as originally approved, as this room adjoins the communal rooftop open space, hence privacy needs to be maintained.

 

4.  Amend Condition 48 to refer to the updated BASIX Certificate dated 31 July 2019.

 

5.  Amend Condition 62 to refer to the amended landscape plan.

 

 

DETERMINATION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS

Statement of Reasons

53.  The reasons for this recommendation are:

·   The proposal remains consistent with the original reasons for approval; and

·   The proposal provides sufficient recreation space throughout the building in communal and private spaces with generous private open space provision above the minimum requirement for the majority of units, and well-appointed communal areas provided.

 

Determination

54.  THAT pursuant to Section 4.56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 that the Georges River Local Planning Panel grant consent to Modification Application MOD2019/0022 for modifications to DA2017/0663 to convert the communal area on the south western side of an approved residential flat building to part communal and part private open space and a minor change to the rear of Unit 601 to add a window to the kitchen, change a window to bedroom 3 to a door in the western elevation, and resize the window of bedroom 2 in accordance with the conditions of consent originally imposed at Lot CP SP 65142, Lot CP SP 68349, and Lot 18 Section 17 DP 1963 known as 5-9 John Street, Kogarah Bay, subject to the amendments in bold in the below conditions of consent:

 

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF CONSENT

 

1.      Approved Plans

 

a)      The development must be implemented in accordance with the approved plans and supporting documentation listed below which have been endorsed by Council’s approved stamp, except where marked up on the plans and/or amended by conditions of this consent:

 

Description

Reference No.

Date

Revision

Cover page, perspective

DA001

05/09/18

30/07/19

H  J

Site Plan

DA1002

05/09/18

30/07/19

H  J

Greater Site Analysis

DA5001

05/09/18

H

Basement 02 Floor Plan

DA2001

05/09/18

C

Basement 01 Floor Plan

DA2002

05/09/18

C

Ground Floor Plan

DA2003

05/09/18

30/07/19

H  J

Level 01 Floor Plan

DA2004

05/09/18

H

Level 02 Floor Plan

DA2005

05/09/18

H

Level 03 Floor Plan

DA2006

05/09/18

H

Level 04 Floor Plan

DA2007

05/09/18

H

Level 05 Floor Plan

DA2008

05/09/18

H

Elevations North and East

DA3001

05/09/18

H

Elevations South and West

DA3002

05/09/18

30/07/19

H  I

Sections AA and CC

DA4001

05/09/18

H

Sections BB and detail floor to ceiling heights

DA4002

05/09/18

H

Sections DD & E-E; 3D Height plane

DA4003

05/09/18

H

GFA Calculations

DA2901

05/09/18

H

Adaptable/Liveable Units

DA2910

25/9/18

B

Site Coverage

DA5002

27/07/18

A

Communal Open Space Calculations

DA5003

03/09/18

30/07/19

H  J

Solar Access Winter Solstice

(9 am -12 noon)

DA2903

 

H

Solar Access Winter Solstice

(1pm – 3pm)

DA2903.1

05/09/18

H

Solar Access 3D Sun Path (Existing)

DA2905

05/09/18

H

Solar Access 3D Sun Path (Future) (1pm and Elevational)

DA2905.1

05/09/18

H

Solar Access 3D Sun Path (Existing) (2pm – 3pm and Table)

DA2905.2

05/09/18

H

Solar Access 3D Sun Path (Future) (9 am – 12 noon)

DA2906.1

05/09/18

H

Solar Access 3D Sun Path (Future) (1 pm & 2 pm)

DA2906.2

05/09/18

H

Solar Access 3D Sun Path (Future) (3pm & Table)

DA2906.3

05/09/18

H

Stormwater concept plan prepared by

Cover Sheet

DA100

 

 

 

30/08/18

B

Basement 2 Plan

DA201

B

Ground Floor Plan

DA202

B

Roof Plan

DA203

B

Details Plan

DA301

B

Details Sheet – External Stormwater

DA3021

A

Erosion and Sediment Control Plan & Details

DA401

B

Landscape Plans

Prepared by Zenith Landscape Designs P/L

Sheets 1 – 3: L01, L02, L03

18-3746

04/09/18

05/07/19

B  C

Survey Prepared by W Buxton Pty Ltd

204900

29/08/17

 

Access Report

Prepared by Vista Access Architects Pty Ltd

17246

 

B

Waste Management Plan

Prepared by Urban Link Pty Ltd

 

Undated

 

Geotechnical Investigation Report

STS Geoenvironmental Pty Ltd

 

19/12/17

 

Materials and Finishes Schedule prepared by Urbanlink

 

26/09/18

A

Roof Plan, prepared by Urbanlink

DA2009

07/11/18

30/07/19

I  J

 

(This condition is amended as part of MOD2019/0022 (DA2017/0663))

 

FEES AND CONTRIBUTIONS

 

2.      Fees and contributions to be paid

 

a)      Fees referred to in this consent must be paid in accordance with the conditions of this consent and Council’s adopted Fees and Charges applicable at the time of payment (available at www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au).

 

b)      Payments must be made prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate or prior to the commencement of work (if there is no associated Construction Certificate).

 

c)      Please contact Council prior to the payment of Section 7.11 Contributions to determine whether the amounts have been indexed from that indicated below in this consent and the form of payment that will be accepted by Council.

 

d)      Council will only accept Bank Cheque or Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) for transaction values of $500,000 or over.  Council must be contacted prior to payment to determine correct total amount to be paid and bank account details (if applicable).

                            

e)      The fees and charges above are subject to change and are as set out in the version of Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges or as required by other Government Authorities, applicable at the time of payment.

 

3.      Damage Deposit - Major Works

 

a)      In order to insure against damage to Council property the following is required:

 

(i)      Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a damage deposit for the cost of making good any damage caused to any Council property as a result of the development: $56,510.00.

 

(ii)     Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a non-refundable inspection fee (for two inspections) to enable assessment of any damage and repairs where required: $371.00.

 

4.      Long Service Levy

 

a)      The Long Service Corporation administers a scheme which provides a portable long service benefit for eligible workers in the building and construction industry in NSW. All benefits and requirements are determined by the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986. More information about the scheme and the levy amount you are required to pay to satisfy a condition of your consent can be found at http://www.longservice.nsw.gov.au.

 

b)      The required Long Service Levy payment can be direct to the Long Service Corporation via their web site https://online.longservice.nsw.gov.au/bci/levy.  Payments can only be processed on-line for the full levy owing and where the value of work is between $25,000 and $6,000,000. Payments will be accepted for amounts up to $21,000, using either MasterCard or Visa.

 

5.      Development Contributions

 

a)      The Section 7.11 contribution is imposed to ensure that the development makes adequate provision for the demand it generates for public amenities and public services within the area.

 

b)      The Section 7.11 contribution has been levied on the subject development pursuant to the Kogarah Section 94 Contributions Plans as follows (based on 43 units with credit for five existing dwellings):

 

 

Contribution Plan

Description

Section 94 contributions assessed ($)

No. of existing lots (credit) ($)

Section 94 contributions payable ($)

Plan No. 1

Road and traffic management - residential

               9,101.85 

              (1,614.84)

               7,487.00 

Plan No. 5

Open Space - 2006

            460,830.54 

            (76,178.17)

            384,652.37 

Plan No. 9

Kogarah libraries - buildings component

             10,347.36 

              (1,769.30)

               8,578.06 

Plan No. 9

Kogarah libraries - books component

               6,403.20 

              (1,261.50)

               5,141.70 

Total Section 94 Contributions Currently Payable

 

 

            $405,859.13 

 

c)    Indexation

          The above contributions will be adjusted at the time of payment to reflect changes in the cost of delivering public amenities and public services, in accordance with the indices provided by the relevant Section 94 Development Contributions Plan.  The above rates only are current to 7 November 2018.

 

d)    Timing of Payment

          The contribution must be paid and receipted by Council prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.

 

e)    Further Information

          A copy of the all current Development Contributions Plans may be inspected or a copy purchased at Council’s offices (Georges River Civic Centre, MacMahon Street, Hurstville and Kogarah Library and Service Centre, Kogarah Town Square, Belgrave Street, Kogarah) or viewed on Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au.

 

Separate Approvals Required Under Other Legislation

 

6.      Section 138 Roads Act 1993 and Section 68 Local Government Act 1993

 

a)      Unless otherwise specified by a condition of this consent, this Development Consent does not give any approval to undertake works on public infrastructure.

 

b)      Separate approval is required under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and/or Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for any of the following activities carried out in, on or over a public road (including the footpath) listed below.  An application is required to be lodged and approved prior to the commencement of any of the following works or activities:

 

(i)      Placing or storing materials or equipment;

(ii)     Placing or storing waste containers or skip bins;

(iii)    Erecting a structure or carrying out work;

(iv)    Swinging or hoisting goods over any part of a public road by means of a lift, crane or the like;

(v)     Pumping concrete from a public road;

(vi)    Pumping water from the site into the public road;

(vii)   Constructing a vehicular crossing or footpath;

(viii)  Establishing a “works zone”;

(ix)    Digging up or disturbing the surface of a public road (eg Opening the road for the purpose of connections to utility providers);

(x)     Stormwater and ancillary works in the road reserve;

(xi)    Stormwater and ancillary to public infrastructure on private land.

 

c)      If any excavation is to be supported by the use of below ground (cable) anchors that are constructed under Council’s roadways/footways.

 

d)      These separate activity approvals must be obtained and evidence of the approval provided to the Certifier prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

e)      The relevant Application Forms for these activities can be downloaded from Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au. For further information, please contact Council’s Customer Service Centre on (02) 9330 6400.

 

7.      Below ground anchors - Information to be submitted with S68 Application under LGA 1993 and S138 Application under Roads Act 1993

 

a)      In the event that the excavation associated with the basement carpark is to be supported by the use of below ground (cable) anchors that are constructed under Council’s roadways/footways, an application must be lodged with Council under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Roads Act 1993 for approval, prior to commencement of those works.

 

b)      The following details must be submitted:

 

(i)      That cable anchors will be stressed released when the building extends above ground level to the satisfaction of Council;

(ii)     The applicant has indemnified council from all public liability claims arising from the proposed works, and provide adequate insurance cover to the satisfaction of Council.

 

(iii)    Documentary evidence of such insurance cover to the value of $20 million;

 

(iv)    The applicant must register a non-terminating bank guarantee in favour of Council for the amount of $45,720.00.

 

(v)     The guarantee will be released when the cables are stress released. In this regard it will be necessary for a certificate to be submitted to Council from a structural engineer at that time verifying that the cables have been stress released.

 

(vi)    In the event of any works taking place on Council’s roadways/footways adjoining the property while the anchors are still stressed, all costs associated with overcoming the difficulties caused by the presence of the ‘live’ anchors will be borne by the applicant.

 

8.      Road Opening Permit

 

A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from Council for every opening of a public road reserve to access services including sewer, stormwater drains, water mains, gas mains, and telecommunications before the commencement of work in the road.

 

Requirements of Other Government Authorities

 

9.      Sydney Water – Tap in TM

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Tap inTM to determine whether the development application will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met.  The approved plans will be appropriately endorsed.  For details please refer to ‘Plumbing, building and developing’ section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then see ‘Building’, or telephone 13000 TAP IN (1300 082 746).  The Certifying Authority must ensure that a Tap inTM agent has appropriately stamped the plans prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

10.    Notice of Requirements for a Section 73 Certificate

 

a)      A Notice of Requirements of what will eventually be required when issuing a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.  Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator.  Please refer to the ‘Plumbing, building and developing’ section of the web site www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to ‘Providers’ under ‘Developing’ or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

b)      Following application, a ‘Notice of Requirements’ will advise of water and sewer infrastructure to be built and charges to be paid.  Please make early contact with the Co-ordinator, as it can take some time to build water/sewer pipes and this may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

c)      The Notice of requirements must be submitted prior to the commencement of work. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate will be required at the completion of development in accordance with further conditions.

 

11.    Section 73 Compliance Certificate

 

A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

12.    Electricity Supply

 

An application is required to be made to Ausgrid for a network connection. This may require the network to be extended or its capacity augmented. Evidence of this application being lodged with Ausgrid is required to be provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. For further details, you are advised to contact Ausgrid on 13 13 65 or www.ausgrid.com.au (Business and Commercial Services).

 

Prior to Demolition AND PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK ON SITE INCLUDING EXCAVATION

 

13.    Tree Removal & Replacement

 

a)      Permission is granted for the removal of the following trees:

 

Tree species

Number of trees

Location

Schinus Spp

1

Back north west corner of 9a Johns St

Cupressus Spp

3

Front south east corner of 5/5a Johns St

 

b)      All tree removal shall be carried out by a certified Tree Surgeon/Arborist to ensure that removal is undertaken in a safe manner and complies with the AS 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees and Tree Works Industry Code of Practice (Work Cover NSW 1.8.98).

 

c)      No trees are to be removed on the site or neighbouring properties without the prior written approval of Council.

 

d)      Council shall be appointed to remove all tree/s on public land. All costs associated with the removal of the tree/s and the planting of replacement trees shall be met by the applicant. Fees and charges outlined in the table below are subject to change and are set out in the current version of Council's ‘Schedule of Fees and Charges’, applicable at the time of payment.

 

e)      This consent does not approve the removal or pruning (branches or roots) of any trees on Council’s public footway, public reserves or on neighbouring properties.

 

14.    Tree Protection Measures

 

a)      The Callistemon viminalis street tree is to be retained shall be protected and during demolition, excavation and construction of the site.

 

b)      The tree protection measures must be in undertaken in accordance AS4970 -2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

 

c)      Unless otherwise specified in AS 4970-2009, a protective fence consisting of 1.8 metres high, fully supported chainmesh fence shall be erected around the base of the tree.  The distance of the fence from the base of each tree is to be in accordance with the TPZ listed in the table above.  A layer of organic mulch 100 millimetres thick shall be placed over the protected area and no soil or fill should be placed within the protection area.

 

d)      This fence shall be kept in place during demolition, construction and also have a sign displaying ‘Tree Protection Zone’ attached to the fence and must also include the name and contact details of the Project Arborist.

 

e)      The Tree Protection zone of each tree to be protected shall be watered thoroughly, regularly to minimise the effects of construction works.

 

f)       No services shall be installed within the TPZ of the tree unless approved by Council.

 

15.    Dilapidation Report on Public Land

 

a)      Prior to the commencement of works (including demolition and excavation), a dilapidation report must be prepared for the Council infrastructure adjoining the development site.  The report must include the following:

 

(i)      Photographs showing the existing condition of the road pavement fronting the site

(ii)     Photographs showing the existing condition of the kerb and gutter fronting the site

(iii)    Photographs showing the existing condition of the footpath pavement fronting the site

(iv)    Photographs showing the existing condition of any retaining walls within the footway or road,

(v)     Closed circuit television/video inspection (in DVD format) of public stormwater drainage systems fronting, adjoining or within the site, and

(vi)    The full name and signature of the structural engineer.

 

b)      The Dilapidation Report must be prepared by a qualified structural engineer.  The report must be provided to the Certifier and a copy provided to the Council.

 

c)      The report is to be supplied in electronic format in Word or PDF.  Photographs are to be in colour, digital and date stamped.

 

d)      Note: Council will use this report to determine whether to refund the damage deposit after the completion of works.

 

16.    Pre-Construction Dilapidation Report – Private Land

 

a)      A professional engineer specialising in structural or geotechnical engineering shall prepare a Pre-Construction Dilapidation Report detailing the current structural condition of adjoining the five (5) adjoining properties.

 

b)      The report shall be prepared prior at the expense of the applicant and prior to the commencement of nay work on the site and is to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Certifier prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

c)      A copy of the pre-construction dilapidation report is to be provided to the adjoining properties (subject of the dilapidation report), a minimum of 5 working days prior to the commencement of work.  Evidence confirming that a copy of the pre-construction dilapidation report was delivered to the adjoining properties must be provided to the Certifier.

 

d)      Should the owners of properties (or their agents) refuse access to carry out inspections, after being given reasonable written notice, this shall be reported to Council to obtain Council’s agreement to complete the report without access. Reasonable notice is a request for access in no sooner than 14 days between 8.00am-6.00pm.

 

17.    Demolition & Asbestos

 

a)      The demolition work shall comply with the provisions of Australian Standard AS2601:2001 - Demolition of Structures, NSW Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and the NSW Work Health & Safety Regulation 2011.  The work plans required by AS2601:2001 shall be accompanied by a written statement by a suitably qualified person that the proposals contained in the work plan comply with the safety requirements of the Standard.  The work plans and the safety statement shall be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the commencement of works.

 

b)      For demolition work which involves the removal of asbestos, the asbestos removal work must be carried out by a licensed asbestos removalist who is licensed to carry out the work in accordance with the NSW Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and the NSW Work Health & Safety Regulation 2011 unless specified in the Act and/or Regulation that a license is not required.

 

c)      All demolition work including the removal of asbestos, shall be undertaken in accordance with the Demolition Code of Practice (NSW Work Cover July 2015).

 

d)      Note: Copies of the Act, Regulation and Code of Practice can be downloaded free of charge from the SafeWork NSW website: www.SafeWork.nsw.gov.au.

 

18.     Demolition Notification Requirements

 

The following notification requirements apply to this consent:

 

a)      The developer /builder must notify adjoining residents five (5) working days prior to demolition.  Such notification is to be a clearly written note giving the date demolition will commence, contact details of the developer/builder, licensed asbestos demolisher and the appropriate regulatory authority. Notification is to be placed in the letterbox of every premises (including every residential flat or unit, if any) either side and immediately at the rear of the demolition site.

 

b)      Five (5) working days prior to demolition, the developer/builder is to provide written notification to Council advising of the demolition date, details of the SafeWork licensed asbestos demolisher and the list of residents advised of the demolition.

 

c)      On demolition sites where buildings to be demolished contain asbestos, a standard commercially manufactured sign containing the words “DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” measuring not less than 400mm x 300mm is to be erected in a prominent visible position (from street frontage) on the site. The sign is to be erected prior to demolition work commencing and is to remain in place until such time as all asbestos material has been removed from the site to an approved waste facility.

 

19.    Demolition work involving asbestos removal

 

Work involving bonded asbestos removal work (of an area of more than 10 square metres) or friable asbestos removal work must be undertaken by a person who carries on a business of such removal work in accordance with a licence under clause 458 of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011.

 

20.    Utility Arrangements

 

Arrangements are to be made with utility authorities in respect to the services supplied by those authorities to the development. The cost associated with the provision or adjustment of services within the road and footway areas is to be at the applicant’s expense.

 

21.    Erosion & Sedimentation Control

 

a)      Erosion and sediment controls must be provided to in accordance with the approved Site Management Plan.

 

b)      Removal or disturbance of vegetation and top soil is confined to within 3 m of the approved building area (no trees to be removed without approval).  All disturbed areas are rendered erosion-resistant by turfing, mulching, paving or similar.

 

c)      All clean water run-off is diverted around cleared or exposed areas.

 

d)      Silt fences, stabilised entry/exit points or other devices are installed to prevent sediment from entering drainage systems or waterways.

 

e)      Controls are put into place to prevent tracking of sediment by vehicles onto adjoining roadway.

 

f)       Compliance with Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction (Blue Book) produced by Landcom 2004 is to be met.

 

g)      These measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of work (including demolition and excavation) and must remain until works are completed and all exposed surfaces are landscaped/sealed.

 

22.    Site sign - Soil & Erosion Control Measures

 

Prior to the commencement of works (including demolition and excavation), a durable site sign, issued by Council in conjunction with this consent, must be erected in a prominent location on site.  The site sign warns of the penalties which apply to pollution, storing materials on road or footpath and breaches of the conditions relating to erosion and sediment controls.  The sign must remain in a prominent location on site up until the completion of all site and building works.

 

23.    Dial before your dig

 

The applicant shall contact “Dial Before You Dig on 1100” to obtain a Service Diagram prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.  The sequence number obtained from “Dial Before You Dig” shall be forwarded to Council’s Engineers for their records.

 

Prior to the Issue of a Construction Certificate

 

24.    Design amendments

 

Conditions 25–28 require amendments and information that shall be submitted to Council’s Manager Development and Building for approval, prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

25.    Provision of a Car Wash Bay

 

a)      A visitor space must be designated as a car wash bay.

 

b)      The car wash bay must:

 

(i)      have clearly visible signs which indicate that no degreasing or mechanical work is to be undertaken in the bay;

(ii)     have a fixed basket trap for floor waste; and

 

(iii)    includes a 1000 litre general purpose pit.

 

c)      Details of the disposal of trade waste water are to be indicated on the Construction Certificate drawings.  Three options exist for the disposal of trade wastewater from residential car wash bays.  They are:

 

(i)      removal off-site by an authorised liquid waste disposal contractor;

 

(ii)     reuse of treated wastewater for car washing or irrigation on landscaped areas.  An appropriate method should be used to treat grease, oil and silt before reuse or irrigation; or

 

(iii)    discharge to the sewer via appropriate pre-treatment.  If the car wash bay discharges into the sewer, a Permission to Discharge Trade Wastewater issued by Sydney Water must be obtained prior to approval of the development.

 

(iv)    If the carwash bay is not discharged into the sewer, applicants must provide Council with details and evidence of how wastewater will be removed (eg removal by an authorised liquid waste disposal contractor).

 

26.    This condition is deleted as part of MOD2019/0022 (DA2017/0668).

 

27.    Provision of privacy screens

 

To improve the privacy to adjoining properties and those across John Street, and useability of the space:

 

a)       The balconies of all units on the first four levels (Ground to Level 3) shall be provided with moveable screens and to screen overlooking to the adjoining properties.

 

b)       The sides of all balconies that face the side property boundaries shall have fixed louvre type privacy screens.

 

27A. Amendment to window shown on western elevation

 

The full height window to bedroom 2 of unit 601 shown on Drawing no DA3002 Rev I dated 20/7/19 shall be amended to be a highlight window as originally approved, as this room adjoins the communal rooftop open space, hence privacy needs to be maintained.

 

(This condition is added as part of MOD2019/0022 (DA2017/0663))

 

28.    Use of rooftop open space

 

a)       A Plan of Management (POM) for use of rooftop open space must be submitted for approval of Council.

 

b)       The POM must outline the:

 

(i)   hours of use of the rooftop deck;

 

(ii)  maximum number of users at any one time;

 

(iii) provisions for no amplified music to be played;

 

(iv) and identify other measures to ensure that the amenity of persons within the development and in nearby existing and future development is maintained.

 

c)      The approved POM shall be incorporated into the Owners Corporation by-laws in any future Strata subdivision.

 

29.    Road Noise attenuation

 

The site is affected by noise from the Princes Highway.  The construction certificate plans shall show that the development has been designed in accordance with the measures of acoustic attenuation to meet the internal noise levels specified in Clause 102 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, as recommended in the Acoustic Report – Traffic Noise and Environmental for proposed development at 5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay prepared by Acoustic, Vibration & Noise P/L, dated 26 April 2018.

 

30.    Site Management Plan Major Development

 

a)     A Site Management Plan must be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate, and include the following:

i)       location of protective site fencing;

ii)      location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

iii)     location of building materials for construction, e.g. stockpiles;

iv)     provisions for public safety;

v)      dust control measures;

vi)     method used to provide site access location and materials used;

vii)    details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

viii)   method used to provide protective measures for tree preservation;

ix)     provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

x)      location and size of waste containers/skip bins;

xi)     details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

xii)    method used to provide construction noise and vibration   management;

xiii)   construction and demolition traffic management details.

 

b)      The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any works including demolition and excavation.  The site management measures are to be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity.

 

c)      A copy of the Site Management Plan must be kept on site and is to be made available upon request.

 

31.    Vehicular Crossing – Major Development

 

a)      The following vehicular crossing and road frontage works will be required to facilitate access to and from the proposed development site:

 

(i)      Construct a 1.2 metre wide footpath for the full length of the frontage of the site in John Street in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought;

 

(ii)     The thickness and design of the driveway shall be in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought.

 

b)      Any existing vehicular crossing and/or laybacks which are redundant must be removed.  The kerb and gutter, any other footpath and turf areas shall be restored at the expense of the applicant.  The work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s specification, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

 

c)      Constructing a vehicular crossing and/or footpath requires separate approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993, prior to the commencement of those works.

 

32.    Driveway Construction Plan Details

 

a)      Detailed engineering plans for the driveway shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application that shows:

 

(i)      Longitudinal and cross sections, gradients, access onto the proposed lots, type of construction materials designed in accordance with Council's Subdivision standards and AS/NZS2890.1-2004;

 

(ii)     Suitable underground provision for the supply of all relevant services to the proposed lots (proposed position of pipes and conduits); and

 

(iii)    The full length of the driveway designed with a minimum 150mm thick reinforced concrete and minimum of 2.7m wide pavement/kerb face to kerb face width, and a non-slip surface.

 

33.    General Tree Protection Measures

 

a)      All trees to be retained shall be protected (see Condition 13) shall be marked on the construction Certificate Plans shall be maintained during excavation and construction of the site.

 

b)      The tree protection measures must be in undertaken in accordance AS4970 -2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

c)      Details of the tree protection measures to be implemented must be provided with the application for a Construction Certificate by a suitably qualified Arborist (AQF Level 5 or above in Arboriculture).

 

d)      The Arborist must be present on-site during the stages of construction when works are being undertaken that could impact on the tree canopy or root zone within the tree protection zone to implement the tree protection measures as required.

 

e)      Unless otherwise specified in AS 4970-2009, a protective fence consisting of 1.8 metres high, fully supported chainmesh fence shall be erected around the base of the tree.  The distance of the fence from the base of each tree is to be in accordance with the TPZ listed in the table above.  A layer of organic mulch 100 millimetres thick shall be placed over the protected area and no soil or fill should be placed within the protection area.

 

f)       The Tree Protection Zone of each tree, to be protected, shall be watered thoroughly, regularly to minimise the effects of construction works.

 

g)      No services shall be installed within the TPZ of the tree unless approved by Council. This fence shall be kept in place during demolition, construction and also have a sign displaying ‘Tree Protection Zone – DO NOT ENTER’ attached to the fence and must also include the name and contact details of the Project Arborist.

 

34.    Excavation works near tree to be retained

 

a)      Excavations around the trees to be retained on site or the adjoining properties shall be supervised by the Project Arborist to ensure that the root system will not adversely be affected.

 

b)      Where the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of trees on site or adjoining sites become compromised by any excavation works, the Project arborist shall be consulted to establish the position of any major roots and determine the necessary measures to protect these roots. The recommendations of the Arborist shall be submitted to Council prior to any further demolition or construction works taking place.

 

c)      Tree Protection Zone around the trees to be retained are not to have soil level changes or services installed in this area. Any structures proposed to be built in this area of the trees are to utilise pier and beam or cantilevered slab construction.

 

d)      Details satisfying this condition shall be shown on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

35.    Pier and Beams

 

a)      To preserve the Callistemon viminalis street tree, the footings of the proposed front boundary fence shall be isolated pier and beam construction within a four (4) metre radius of the trunk.  The piers shall be hand dug and located such that no roots of a diameter greater than 50mm are severed or injured in the process of any site works during the construction period. The beam shall be located on or above the existing soil levels.

 

b)      Details of this construction method shall be shown on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

36.    Stormwater System

 

(a)        Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, a longitudinal section of the new Ø375mm RCP pipe in the road showing surface levels, invert levels and public utility services shall be submitted to Council’s Asset and Infrastructure  Engineer for his approval in writing and to his satisfaction ad specifications.

(b)        The full extent of the new kerb inlet pit on John Street is to be relocated to be a minimum clear distance of 8.2 metres to the north east of the north eastern boundary of the site. The cost shall be borne by the developer or shared, as privately negotiated, with any other developer seeking connection to that pit.

(c)        All stormwater shall drain by gravity to Council’s existing drainage pit located in John Street using a Ø375mm RCP pipe in accordance with the Australian Standard AS3500.3: 2015 to Council’s satisfaction.

(d)        The PCA shall ensure that the approved drainage design levels are surveyed during construction by a registered surveyor.

(e)        The PCA shall ensure that a drainage engineer shall supervise the construction of the OSD stormwater system on site and certify his supervision in writing and state his satisfaction of the constructed site stormwater system is built as intended in this consent.

(f)         Stormwater drainage plans including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, dimensions and types of drainage pits prepared by a professional engineer who specialises in Hydraulic Engineering in accordance with the Australian Institute of Engineers Australian Rainfall and Runoff (1987) and Council's Stormwater Drainage Guidelines, shall accompany the application for the Construction Certificate.

(g)        Design details and certifications shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate application.

 

Advisory note: There is an adjacent development proposal at 1–3 John Street that also requires the extension of the Council drainage system along John Street. If both developments are to proceed the applicant bears responsibility for undertaking any necessary negotiations with the developer for this proposal with regards to lodgement of the required Stormwater Drainage Application(s), the detailed design(s) and the construction works. Council will not become involved in any negotiations with regards to responsibilities and costs associated with these works. Note that the extension to the drainage system will become Council’s assets upon completion and that Council may approve the connection of other properties and developments stormwater discharge to the system.

 

37.    Stormwater Systems with Basement

 

a)      The underground basement car park must pump to and all other stormwater must drain by gravity to the drainage system within the site via a silt trap pit.

 

b)      The design of the proposed drainage system must be prepared by a professional engineer who specialises in hydraulic engineering and be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate application.

 

c)      The underground basement shall be protected from possible inundation by surface waters from the street.

 

d)      Evidence from a professional engineer who specialises in hydraulic engineering that this design requirement has been adhered to shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

 

38.    On Site Detention

 

a)      An on-site detention (OSD) facility designed by a professional engineer who specialises in Hydraulic Engineering must be designed, approved and installed.  The design must include the computations of the inlet and outlet hydrographs and stage/storage relationships of the proposed OSD using the following design parameters:

 

(i)      peak flow rates from the site are to be restricted to a permissible site discharge (PSD) equivalent to the discharge when assuming the site contained a single dwelling, garage, lawn and garden;

(ii)     at Annual Recurrence Intervals of 2 years and 100 years;

 

(iii)    discharge by gravity to the street stormwater system; and

 

(iv)    ensure the provision of an overland flow bypassing the orifice plate to the street.

 

b)      The design and structural adequacy of the OSD tank system shall be certified by a practicing drainage engineer to the satisfaction of the certifier.

 

39.    Pump-Out System Design for Stormwater Disposal

 

a)      The design of the pump-out system for storm water disposal will be permitted for drainage of basement areas only, and must be designed in accordance with the following criteria:

 

(i)      The pump system shall consist of two pumps, connected in parallel, with each pump being capable of emptying the holding tank at the rate equal to the rate of inflow for the one-hour duration storm. The holding tank shall be capable of holding one hour’s runoff from a one-hour duration storm of the 1 in 20 year storm;

 

(ii)     The pump system shall be regularly maintained and serviced, every six (6) months; and

 

(iii)    Any drainage disposal to the street gutter from a pump system must have a stilling sump provided at the property line, connected to the street gutter by a suitable gravity line.

 

b)      Details and certification of compliance from a professional engineer specialising in civil engineering shall be provided for approval with the Construction Certificate application.

 

40.    Driveway Construction Plan Details

 

Detailed engineering plans for the driveway shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application for approval that show:

 

a)      Longitudinal and cross sections, gradients, access onto the proposed lots, type of construction materials designed in accordance with Council's Subdivision standards and AS/NZS2890.1-2004.

 

b)      Suitable underground provision for the supply of all relevant services to the proposed lots (proposed position of pipes and conduits).

c)      A longitudinal driveway sections are to be prepared by a qualified civil/traffic engineer and be submitted for to and approved by the Certifying Authority. These profiles are to be at 1:100 scale along both edges of the proposed driveway, starting from the centreline of the frontage street carriageway to the proposed basement floor level.

 

d)      The civil/traffic engineer shall provide specific written certification on the plans that:

 

(i)      Vehicular access can be obtained using grades of 25% (1 in 4) maximum; and

 

(ii)     All changes in grade (transitions) comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 (2004) – “Off-street car parking” to prevent the scraping of the underside of the vehicles.

 

41.    Council Property Shoring

 

a)      Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, plans and specifications prepared by a professional engineer specialising in practising structural engineering must detail how Council’s property shall be supported at all times.

 

b)      Where any shoring is to be supporting, or located on Council’s property, certified structural engineering drawings detailing; the extent of the encroachment, the type of shoring and the method of removal, shall be included on the plans.  Where the shoring cannot be removed, the plans must detail that the shoring will be cut to 150mm below footpath level and the gap between the shoring and any building shall be filled with a 5MPa lean concrete mix.

 

42.    Geotechnical requirements during construction

 

a)      The recommendations of the Geotechnical Report Geotechnical Investigation for Leonard Street Pty Limited dated December 2017 prepared by STS GeoEnvironmental shall be complied with during construction, including:

 

(i)   to ensure that buildings or other developments on adjacent properties are not damaged when excavating rock, limiting vibration to 10mm/sec, with vibration monitoring; or using the excavation methods shown in Table 5.1 on page 5;

 

(ii)  adopting the other recommendations in each paragraph on pages 5, 6 and 7 in Section 5.2;

 

(iii) adopting recommendations for foundation design in Section 5.3.

 

b)   Construction methods must ensure that nuisance from vibration does not occur, which as noted in page 5 of the Geotechnical Report may occur at levels below the threshold for building damage.  Vibration monitoring in this regard may be required and on-site guidance by a vibration specialist during the early part of excavation.

 

c)   As the submitted Geotechnical Report is based on the findings of three boreholes only (due to limited site access) and data has been extrapolated across the site, should actual site conditions differ from those inferred, an updated Geotechnical Report, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in geotechnical engineering who holds the relevant Certificate of accreditation as required under the Building Professionals Act 2005 in relation to dilapidation reports, all site works and construction is to be submitted before the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

43.    Traffic Management - Compliance with AS2890

 

All driveways, access ramps, vehicular crossings and car parking spaces shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current version of Australian Standards, AS 2890.1 (for car parking facilities) and AS 2890.2 (for commercial vehicle facilities).

 

44.    Construction Traffic Management Plan

 

a)      A Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing:

 

(i)      construction vehicle routes;

(ii)     anticipated number of trucks per day;

(iii)    hours of construction;

(iv)    access arrangements

(v)     proposed traffic measures to minimise impacts of construction vehicles must be submitted for the approval of Council’s Engineers.

 

b)      Council’s Engineers must specify in writing that they are satisfied with the Traffic Management Plan prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

45.    Fire Safety Measures

 

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate a list of the essential fire safety measures that are to be provided in relation to the land and any building on the land as a consequence of the building work must accompany an application for a construction certificate, which is required to be submitted to either the Council or a private Certifier.  Such list must also specify the minimum standard of performance for each essential fire safety measure included in the list.  The Certifier will then issue a Fire Safety Schedule for the building.

 

46.    Access for Persons with a Disability and Adaptable Housing

 

Access for persons with disabilities and adaptable housing must be provided to the premises/building in accordance with the requirements of AS4299-1995, the Building Code of Australia, and AS 1428.1 where relevant.  The requirements and amendments indicated in Access Report prepared by Vista Access Architects Revision B are to be complied with and are to be shown on the construction certificate drawings.

 

47.    SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement

 

A design verification statement, prepared by the qualified designer, shall be submitted to the Certifier verifying that the plans and specifications achieve or improve the design quality of the development for which development consent was granted, having regard to the design quality principles set out under Schedule 1 of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 -Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

48.    BASIX Commitments

 

All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the BASIX Certificate No. 889064M_2 dated 13 September 2018 889064M_3 dated 31 July 2019 must be implemented on the plans lodged with the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

(This condition is amended as part of MOD2019/0022 (DA2017/0663))

 

49.    Design Quality Excellence

 

In order to ensure the design quality excellence of the development is retained:

 

a)      The design architect is to have direct involvement in the design documentation, contract documentation and construct stages of the project.

b)      The design architect is to have full access to the site and is to be authorised by the applicant to respond directly to the consent authority where information or clarification is required in the resolution of the design issues throughout the life of the project.

 

c)      Evidence of the design architect’s commission is to be provided to the Council prior to release of the Construction Certificate.

 

d)      The design architect of the project is not to be changed without prior notice and approval of the Council.

 

50.    Waste Storage

 

a)      The construction certificate drawings shall include details of the waste storage area as follows:  22 x 240 l garbage bins and 12 x 240 l recycling bins.  As noted in the Waste Management Plan, the bins will be collected on site by a private contractor. Bins will not be allowed to stand on or be collected from the street at any time.

 

b)      The waste room is to contain the following to minimise odours, deter vermin, protect surrounding areas, and make it a user-friendly and safe area:

 

i)       floor to be sealed;

ii)      walls and floor surface is flat and even;

iii)     all walls painted with light colour and washable paint;

iv)     equipment electric outlets to be installed 1700mm above floor levels;

v)      is mechanically exhausted as required by AS 1668.2;

vi)     must be well lit (sensor lighting recommended); a light switch is installed at height of 1.6m;

vii)    an optional automatic odour and pest control system may be installed to eliminate all pest types and assist with odour reduction;

viii)   all personnel doors are hinged and self-closing; and

ix)     conform to the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standards and local laws; and childproofing and public/operator safety shall be assessed and ensure that the bin movements should be with ease of access.

 

51.    Low reflectivity roof

 

Roofing materials must be low glare and reflectivity. Details of finished external materials including colours and texture must be provided to the Certifier.

 

52.    Structural details

 

Engineer's details prepared by a practising Structural Engineer being used to construct all reinforced concrete work, structural beams, columns and other structural members.  The details are to be submitted to the Certifier for approval prior to construction of the specified works.  A copy shall be forwarded to Council where Council is not the Certifier.

 

During Construction

 

53.    Physical connection of stormwater to site

 

No work is permitted to proceed above the ground floor slab level of the building until there is physical connection of the approved stormwater drainage system from the land the subject of this consent to John Street.

 

54.    Cost of work to be borne by the applicant

 

The applicant shall bear the cost of all works associated with the construction of the development that occurs on Council property.  Care must be taken to protect Council's roads, including the made footway, kerbs, etc., and, where plant and vehicles enter the site, the footway shall be protected against damage by deep-sectioned timber members laid crosswise, held together by hoop iron straps and chamfered at their ends.  This construction shall be maintained in a state of good repair and condition throughout the course of construction.

 

55.    No Obstruction of Road or Footpath

 

The use of the road or footpath for the storage of any building materials, waste materials, temporary toilets, waste or skip bins, or any other matter is not permitted unless separately approved by Council under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and/or under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.  Penalty infringement Notices may be issued for any offences and severe penalties apply.

 

56.    Hours of construction for demolition and building work

 

a)    Any work activity or activity associated with the development consent that requires the use of any tools (including hand tools) or any power operated plant and machinery that creates noise on or adjacent to the site shall not be performed, or permitted to be performed, except between the hours of 7.00 am to 5.00 pm, Monday to Saturday inclusive.  No work or ancillary activity is permitted on Sundays, or Public Holidays.

 

Note: A penalty infringement notice may be issued for any offence.

 

57.    Waste Management Facility

 

All materials removed from the site as a result of demolition, site clearing, site preparation and, or excavation shall be disposed of at a suitable Waste Management Facility.  No vegetation, article, building material, waste or the like shall be ignited or burnt.  Copies of all receipts for the disposal, or processing of all such materials shall be submitted to the Principal Certifier, and Council, where Council is not the Principal Certifier.

 

58.    Ground levels and retaining walls

 

The ground levels of the site shall not be excavated, raised or filled, or retaining walls constructed on the allotment boundary, except where indicated on approved plans or approved by Council.

 

59.    Registered Surveyors Report - During Development Work

 

a)      A report must be submitted to the Principal Certifier at each of the following applicable stages of construction:

 

(i)      Set out before commencing excavation;

 

(ii)     Floor slabs or foundation wall, before formwork or commencing brickwork;

 

(iii)    Completion of Foundation Walls - Before any construction of flooring, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans;

 

(iv)    Completion of Floor Slab Formwork - Before pouring of concrete/walls construction, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  In multi-storey buildings a further survey must be provided at each subsequent storey;

 

(v)     Completion of any Roof Framing - Before roof covered detailing eaves/gutter setback from boundaries;

 

(vi)    Completion of all Work - Detailing the location of the structure (including eaves/gutters) relative to adjacent boundaries and its height relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  A final Check Survey must indicate the reduced level of the main ridge.

 

b)      Work must not proceed beyond each stage until the Principal Certifier is satisfied that the height and location of the building is proceeding in accordance with the approved plans.

 

Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

 

60.    Acoustic Certification

 

Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, a report prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant must be submitted to the Principal Certifier certifying that the construction has incorporated the recommendations in the DA Acoustic Report titled Traffic Noise and Environmental for proposed development at 5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay prepared by Acoustic, Vibration & Noise P/L, dated 26 April 2018 has been complied with and meets the required specifications and criteria.

 

61.    Acoustic Compliance – General Operation of Premises

 

a)      The proposed use of the premises and the operation of all plant and equipment shall not give rise to an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (as amended) and Regulations.

 

b)      A suitably qualified person shall certify that the operation of the plant equipment shall not give rise to sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background LA90, 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise sources under consideration by more than 5dB.  The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq, 15 min in accordance with the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s “NSW industrial Noise Policy.

 

c)      Certification must be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

62.    Completion of Landscape Works

 

All landscape works must be completed before the issue of the Final Occupation Certificate in accordance with landscape plans, drawn by Zenith Landscape Design L01- L03 dated 4/9/2018  05/07/2019 Issue C (as amended by Condition 26) in its entirety.

 

(This condition is amended as part of MOD2019/0022 (DA2017/0663))

 

63.    Post Construction Dilapidation report – Private Land

 

a)      At the completion of the construction works, a suitably qualified person is to be engaged to prepare a post-construction dilapidation report.  This report is to ascertain whether the construction works associated with the subject development created any structural damage to the five adjoining premises.

 

b)      The report is to be prepared at the expense of the applicant and submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.  In ascertaining whether adverse structural damaged has occurred to the adjoining premises, the Principal Certifier, must compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report required by conditions in this consent.

 

c)      Evidence confirming that a copy of the post-construction dilapidation report was delivered to the adjoining properties subject of the dilapidation report must be provided to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

64.    Traffic Control Devices

 

a)      The internal road network, pedestrian facilities and parking facilities (including visitor parking and employee parking) shall be designated and line marked in accordance with Australian Standard - AS1742, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

 

b)      If an exit from car park utilises a pedestrian footpath, then a warning system such as flashing light and/or ‘alarm sound’ must be installed on the subject property to alert pedestrians of vehicles exiting the car park.  The Alarm System must be designed and installed in accordance with AS2890.1 -2004.

 

65.    SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement

 

The Principal Certifier must not issue an Occupation Certificate to authorise a person to commence occupation of the residential flat development unless design verification from a qualified designer, being a statement in which the qualified designer verifies that the residential flat development achieves the design quality of the development as shown in the plans and specifications in respect of which the construction certificate was issued, having regard to the design quality principles set out in Part 2 (Schedule 1) of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development.

 

66.    Major Development car parking areas

 

Internal driveways and parking spaces are to be adequately paved with concrete or bitumen, or interlocking pavers to provide a dust-free surface.  All car parking spaces are to be line marked in accordance with AS1742, ‘Australian Standard Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices’ and the relevant guidelines published by the RMS.

 

67.    Consolidation of Site

 

The site shall be consolidated into one allotment and by a Plan of Consolidation being prepared by a Registered Surveyor.  This Plan shall be registered at the NSW Land and Property Information prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

68.    Restriction to User and Positive Covenant for On-Site Detention Facility

 

A Restriction on Use of the Land and Positive Covenant shall be created and registered on the title of the property, which places the responsibility for the maintenance of the on-site stormwater management system on the owners of the land.  The terms of the instrument are to be in accordance with Council’s standard terms and restrictions which are as follows:

 

a)      Restrictions on Use of Land

The registered proprietor shall not make or permit or suffer the making of any alterations to any on-site stormwater management system which is, or shall be, constructed on the lot(s) burdened without the prior consent in writing of Georges River Council. The expression “on-site stormwater management system” shall include all ancillary gutters, pipes, drains, walls, kerbs, pits, grates, tanks, chambers, basins and surfaces designed to manage stormwater quantity or quality including the temporary detention or permanent retention of stormwater storages. Any on-site stormwater management system constructed on the lot(s) burdened is hereafter referred to as “the system.

 

Name of Authority having the power to release, vary or modify the Restriction referred to is Georges River Council.

 

b)      Positive Covenants

The registered proprietor of the lot(s) hereby burdened will in respect of the system:

 

i)          keep the system clean and free from silt, rubbish and debris

ii)         maintain and repair at the sole expense of the registered proprietors the whole of the system so that if functions in a safe and efficient manner

iii)        permit the Council or its authorised agents from time to time and upon giving reasonable notice (but at any time and without notice in the case of an emergency) to enter and inspect the land for the compliance with the requirements of this covenant

iv)        comply with the terms of any written notice issued by the Council in respect of the requirements of this covenant within the time stated in the notice.

 

c)      Pursuant to Section 88F(3) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 the Council shall have the following additional powers:

 

In the event that the registered proprietor fails to comply with the terms of any written notice issued by the Council as set out above the Council or its authorised agents may enter the land with all necessary materials and equipment and carry out any work which the Council in its discretion considers reasonable to comply with the said notice referred to in part b) (iii) above.

 

The Council may recover from the registered proprietor in a Court of competent jurisdiction:

 

i)          any expense reasonably incurred by it in exercising its powers under subparagraph (c) hereof. Such expense shall include reasonable wages for the Council’s employees engaged in effecting the work referred to in (c) above, supervising and administering the said work together with costs, reasonably estimated by the Council, for the use of materials, machinery, tools and equipment in conjunction with the said work.

 

ii)         Legal costs on an indemnity basis for issue of the said notices and recovery of the said costs and expenses together with the costs and expenses of registration of a covenant charge pursuant to section 88F of the Act or providing any certificate required pursuant to section 88G of the Act or obtaining any injunction pursuant to section 88H of the Act.

 

Name of Authority having the power to release vary or modify the Positive Covenant referred to is Georges River Council.

 

69.    Maintenance Schedule for On-site Stormwater Management

 

A Maintenance Schedule for the proposed on-site stormwater management measures is to be prepared and submitted to Council. The Maintenance Schedule shall outline the required maintenance works, how and when these will be done and who will be carrying out these maintenance works.

 

70.    Works as Executed and certification of stormwater works

 

a)      Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifier must ensure that the stormwater drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the approved design and relevant Australian Standards.  A works-as-executed drainage plan and certification must be forwarded to the Principal Certifier and Council, from a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering.

 

b)      This Plan and Certification shall confirm that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system satisfies the conditions of development consent and the Construction Certificate stormwater design details approved by the Principal Certifier.

 

c)      The works-as-executed drainage plan must be prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering in conjunction with a Registered Surveyor and must include the following details (as applicable):

 

(i)      The location of any detention basin/s with finished surface levels;

(ii)     Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals (if applicable);

(iii)    Volume of storage available in any detention areas;

(iv)    The location, diameter, gradient and material (i.e. PVC, RC etc.) of all stormwater pipes;

(v)     The orifice size/s (if applicable);

(vi)    Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and (if applicable);

(v)     Details of any pumping systems installed (including wet well volumes) (if applicable).

 

71.    Requirements prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

 

The following shall be completed and or submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate:

 

a)      All the stormwater/drainage works shall be completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate plans prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

b)      The internal driveway construction works, together with the provision for all services (conduits and pipes laid) shall be completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate plans prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

c)      Construct any new vehicle crossings required.

 

d)      Replace all redundant vehicle crossing laybacks with kerb and guttering, and replace redundant concrete with turf.

 

e)      Work as Executed Plans prepared by a Chartered Professional Engineer or a Registered Surveyor when all the site engineering works are complete shall be submitted to the Principal certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

f)       The construction of the new footpath shall be completed in accordance with the conditions and specifications of the Section 68 Activity Approval

 

g)      Planting of the two new street trees.

 

72.    Completion of major road related works

 

a)      Council’s Engineering Services Section must advise in writing that the works have been completed to their satisfaction prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

b)      The damage deposit paid to Council will not be released until the works have been completed to Council’s satisfaction.

 

73.    Dilapidation Report on Public Land

 

a)      Upon completion of works, a follow up dilapidation report must be prepared or the items of Council infrastructure adjoining the development site.  The dilapidation report must be prepared by a professional engineer specialising in structural engineering, and include:

 

(i)      Photographs showing the condition of the road pavement fronting the site;

(ii)     Photographs showing the condition of the kerb and gutter fronting the site;

(iii)    Photographs showing the condition of the footway including footpath pavement fronting the site;

(iv)    Photographs showing the condition of retaining walls within the         footway or road;

(v)     Closed circuit television/video inspection (in DVD format) of public stormwater drainage systems fronting, adjoining or within the site, and

(vi)    The full name and signature of the professional engineer.

 

b)      The report must be provided to the Principal Certifier and a copy provided to the Council.  The reports are to be supplied in electronic format in Word or PDF. Photographs are to be in colour, digital and date stamped.

 

Note: Council will use this report to determine whether or not to refund the damage deposit.

 

74.    Stormwater drainage works – Works As Executed

 

Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, storm water drainage works are to be certified by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, with Works-As-Executed drawings supplied to Council detailing:

 

a)      Compliance with conditions of development consent relating to stormwater;

b)      The structural adequacy of the On-Site Detention system (OSD);

c)      That the works have been constructed in accordance with the approved design and will provide the detention storage volume and attenuation in accordance with the submitted calculations;

d)      Pipe invert levels and surface levels to Australian Height Datum;

e)      Contours indicating the direction in which water will flow over land should the capacity of the pit be exceeded in a storm event exceeding design limits.

 

Council’s Engineering Services section must advise in writing that they are satisfied with the Works-As-Executed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

75.    Fire Safety Certificate before Occupation or Use

 

a)     In accordance with Clause 153 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, on completion of building works and prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the owner must cause the issue of a Final Fire Safety Certificate in accordance with Clause 170 of the aforesaid Regulation.  The Fire Safety Certificate must be in the form or to the effect of Clause 174 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000. In addition, in relation to each essential fire or other safety measure implemented in the building or on the land on which the building is situated, such a Certificate is to state that:

 

(i)      the measure has been assessed by a person (chosen by the owner of the building) who is properly qualified to do so; and

 

(ii)     as at the date of the assessment the measure was found to be capable of functioning at a standard not less than that required by the Schedule.

 

b)      A copy of the certificate is to be given by the applicant to the Commissioner of Fire & Rescue NSW and a further copy is to be displayed in a frame and fixed to a wall inside the building's main entrance.

 

76.    Allocation of car parking spaces

 

Car parking associated with the development is to be allocated as follows and shall be reflected on the strata plan:

 

a)     Residential dwellings: at least one car space per unit, total 63 spaces including five spaces for persons with a disability allocated to the adaptable units.

b)     Residential visitors: nine spaces.

c)     One car wash bay.

 

77.    BASIX Certificate

 

All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the approved BASIX Certificate in the plans approved with the Development Consent, must be implemented before issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

Operational Conditions (Ongoing)

 

78.    Noise Control

 

The use of the premises must not give rise to the transmission of offensive noise to any place of different occupancy. Offensive noise is defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (as amended).  This includes the use of the rooftop open space.

 

79.    Compliance with POM for use of rooftop open space

 

The approved POM for use of the rooftop open space shall be enforced by the Owners Corporation.

 

80.    Outdoor Lighting

 

To avoid annoyance to the occupants of adjoining premises or glare to motorist on nearby roads, outdoor lighting must comply with AS 4282-1997: Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

 

81.    Entering & Exiting of vehicles

 

All vehicles shall enter and exit the premises in a forward direction.

 

82.    Annual Fire Safety Statement

 

The owner of the building premises must ensure the Council is given an annual fire safety statement in relation to each essential fire safety measure implemented in the building.  The annual fire safety statement must be given:

 

a)      Within 12 months after the date on which the fire safety certificate was received.

 

b)      Subsequent annual fire safety statements are to be given within 12 months after the last such statement was given.

 

c)      An annual fire safety statement is to be given in or to the effect of Clause 181 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

d)      A copy of the statement is to be given to the Commissioner of Fire & Rescue NSW, and a further copy is to be prominently displayed in the building.

 

83.    Responsibility of Owners Corporation

 

The Owners Corporation shall be responsible for presenting all approved waste and recycling receptacles for collection, and returning all receptacles to the Main Waste Collection Room, as soon as practicable after they have been serviced.

         

The Owners Corporation shall also be responsible for maintaining all equipment, systems, facilities and storage areas used in conjunction with the provision of waste management services in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, relevant health and environmental standards, and to the satisfaction of Council.

 

84.    Maintenance of Landscaping

 

All trees and plants forming part of the approved landscaping in must be maintained in perpetuity.  Maintenance includes watering, weeding, removal of rubbish from tree bases, fertilizing, pest and disease control, replacement of dead or dying plants and any other operations required to maintain healthy trees, plants and turfed areas.

 

85.    Amenity of the neighbourhood

 

The implementation of this development shall not adversely affect the amenity of the neighbourhood or interfere unreasonably with the comfort or repose of a person who is outside the premises by reason of the emission or discharge of noise, fumes, vapour, odour, steam, soot, dust, waste water, waste products, grit, oil or other harmful products.

 

86.    Waste facilities

 

Occupational Health and Safety issues such as slippery floors in waste rooms and the weight of the waste and recycling receptacles will need to be monitored.  Cleaners must monitor the bin storage area and all spills need to be attended to immediately by cleaners. 

 

Operational Requirements Under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

 

87.    Requirement for a Construction Certificate

The erection of a building must not commence until a Construction Certificate has been issued.

 

88.    Appointment of a Principal Certifier

 

a)      The erection of a building must not commence until the applicant has:

 

i)       appointed a Principal Certifier for the building work; and

 

ii)      if relevant, advised the Principal Certifier that the work will be undertaken as an Owner -Builder.

 

b)      If the work is not going to be undertaken by an Owner - Builder, the applicant must:

 

i)       appoint a Principal Contractor to undertake the building work. If residential building work (within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989) is to be undertaken, the Principal Contractor must be a holder of a contractor licence; and

 

ii)      notify the Principal Certifier of the details of any such appointment; and

 

iii)     notify the Principal Contractor of any critical stage inspections or other inspections that are required to be carried out in respect of the building work.

 

89.    Notification Requirements of Principal Certifier

 

No later than two days before the building work commences, the Principal Certifier must notify:

 

a)      the consent authority and the Council (if not the consent authority) of his or her appointment; and

 

b)      the applicant of the critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out with respect to the building work.

 

90.    Notice of Commencement

 

The applicant must give at least two days notice to the Council and the Principal Certifier of their intention to commence the erection of a building.

 

91.    Critical Stage Inspections

 

The last critical stage inspection must be undertaken by the Principal Certifier.  The critical stage inspections required to be carried out vary according to Building Class under the Building Code of Australia and are listed in Clause 162A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

92.    Notice to be given prior to critical stage inspections

 

The principal contractor for a building site, or the owner-builder, must notify the Principal Certifier at least 48 hours before each required inspection needs to be carried out. Where Georges River Council has been appointed as the Principal Certifier, 48 hours notice in writing, or alternatively 24 hours notice by facsimile or telephone, must be given when specified work requiring inspection has been completed.

 

93.    Occupation Certificate

 

A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building unless an Occupation Certificate has been issued in relation to the building or part.  Only the Principal Certifier appointed for the building work can issue the Occupation Certificate.

 

Prescribed Conditions

 

94.    Clause 97A - BASIX Commitments

 

This Clause requires the fulfilment of all BASIX Commitments as detailed in the BASIX Certificate to which the development relates.

 

95.    Clause 98 – Building Code of Australia & Home Building Act 1989

 

Requires all building work to be carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia.  In the case of residential building work to which the Home Building Act 1989 relates, there is a requirement for a contract of insurance to be in force before any work commences.

 

96.    Clause 98A – Erection of Signs

 

Requires the erection of signs on site and outlines the details which are to be included on the sign.  The sign must be displayed in a prominent position on site and include the name and contact details of the Principal Certifier and the Principal Contractor.

 

97.    Clause 98B – Home Building Act 1989

 

If the development involves residential building work under the Home Building Act 1989, no work is permitted to commence unless certain details are provided in writing to Council.  The name and licence/permit number of the Principal Contractor or Owner Builder and the name of the Insurer by which work is insured under Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

98.    Clause 98E - Protection & support of adjoining premises

 

If the development involves excavation that extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, this prescribed condition requires the person who benefits from the development consent to protect and support the adjoining premises and where necessary underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any damage.

 

99.    Clause 98E - Site Excavation

 

Excavation of the site is to extend only to that area required for building works depicted upon the approved plans.  All excess excavated material shall be removed from the site.

All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely and in accordance with appropriate professional standards.

 

All excavations associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.

 

If the soil conditions require it, retaining walls associated with the erection or demolition of a building or other approved methods of preventing movement of the soil shall be provided and adequate provision shall be made for drainage.

 

END CONDITIONS

 

NOTES/ADVICES

 

1.      Lapsing of Consent - This consent will lapse unless the development is physically commenced within 5 years from the Date of Operation of this consent, in accordance with Section 4.53 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

 

2.      Disability Discrimination Act - This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.  No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The applicant is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation.  The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which refers to AS1428.1-Design for Access and Mobility. 

 

3.      Security deposit administration & compliance fee - Under Section 97 (5) of the Local Government Act 1993, a security deposit (or part) if repaid to the person who provided it is to be repaid with any interest accrued on the deposit (or part) as a consequence of its investment.

 

a)      Council must cover administration and other costs incurred in the investment of these monies. The current charge is $50.00 plus 2% of the bond amount per annum.

b)      The interest rate applied to bonds is set at Council's business banking facility rate as at 1 July each year.  Council will accept a bank guarantee in lieu of a deposit.

c)      All interest earned on security deposits will be used to offset the Security Deposit Administration and Compliance fee. Where interest earned on a deposit is not sufficient to meet the fee, it will be accepted in full satisfaction of the fee.

 

4.      Stormwater & Ancillary Works - Applications under Section 138 Roads Act and/or Section 68 Local Government Act 1993

 

a)      To apply for approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993:

 

(i)      Complete the Driveway Crossing on Council Road Reserve Application Form which can be downloaded from Georges River Council’s Website at www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au

(ii)     In the Application Form, quote the Development Consent No. (eg. 2017/DA/****)

(iii)    Lodge the application form, together with the associated fees at Council’s Customer Service Centre, during business hours.  Refer to Council’s adopted Fees and Charges for the administrative and inspection charges associated with Vehicular Crossing applications.

 

b)      An approval for a new vehicular crossing will contain the approved access and/or alignment levels which will be required to construct the crossing and/or footpath. Once approved, all work shall be carried out by a private contractor in accordance with Council’s specifications prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

c)      The developer must meet all costs of the extension, relocation or reconstruction of any part of Council’s drainage system (including design drawings and easements) required to carry out the approved development.

 

d)      The preparation of all engineering drawings (site layout plans, cross sections, longitudinal sections, elevation views together with a hydraulic grade analysis) and specifications for the new storm water drainage system to be arranged by the applicant.  The design plans must be lodged and approved by Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

e)      Note: A minimum of four weeks should be allowed for assessment.

 

5.      Site Safety Fencing

 

Site fencing must be erected in accordance with SafeWork Guidelines, to exclude public access to the site throughout the demolition and/or construction work, except in the case of alterations to an occupied dwelling. The fencing must be erected before the commencement of any work and maintained throughout any demolition and construction work.  A demolition licence and/or a high risk work license may be required from SafeWork NSW (see www.SafeWork.nsw.gov.au).

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Site Plan - 5-9 John St Kogarah Bay

Attachment 2

Amended Elevation - 5-9 John St Kogarah Bay

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 5 September 2019

LPP031-19              5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay

[Appendix 1]          Site Plan - 5-9 John St Kogarah Bay

 

 

Page 116

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 5 September 2019

LPP031-19              5-9 John Street Kogarah Bay

[Appendix 2]          Amended Elevation - 5-9 John St Kogarah Bay

 

 

Page 117

 


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 5 September  2019

Page 177

 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 05 September 2019

 

LPP Report No

LPP032-19

Development Application No

DA2018/0198

Site Address & Ward Locality

13 Derby Street Kogarah

Kogarah Bay Ward

Proposed Development

Alterations and additions to an existing shop top housing development consisting of amendments to the approved level 4 of the development and the inclusion of two additional storeys being five (5) additional units and communal open space - the development is currently under construction.

Owners

Croycon Investments Pty Ltd

Applicant

Joseph Kizana

Planner/Architect

Planner - Boston Blyth Fleming, Architect - Kizana Design Group

Date Of Lodgement

21/05/2018

Submissions

No submissions received

Cost of Works

$1,650,000.00

Local Planning Panel Criteria

Development to which State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development applies

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Residential Apartment Development, State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 – Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017,

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index:BASIX) 2004, Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment, Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment),

Draft Remediation State Environmental Planning Policy, Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012, Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

Architectural Plans

 

 

 

Report prepared by

Independent Assessment

-                      

 

Recommendation

THAT the application be approved in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Not Applicable

 

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

No – however the conditions will be available to the applicant at the time this report is published.

 

Site Plan

Subject Site – 13 Derby Street, Kogarah outlined in red

 

Executive Summary

 

Proposal

1.    The development application (“DA”) proposes alterations and additions to an approved shop top housing development, DA131/2014, which is currently under construction. The amendments proposed seek alterations to level four (4) including an additional unit, the addition of four (4) units over two (2) additional floors fronting Derby Street, and the additional communal open space/rooftop balcony areas adjacent to Derby Street and Kensington Lane.

 

Site and Locality

2.    The subject site is legally identified as Lot 201 DP1093335, and has a street address of 13 Derby Street Kogarah.

 

3.    The site is located off the south western side of Derby Street between Kensington Street and Post Office Lane and has a secondary (rear) frontage to Kensington Lane. An approved mixed use development comprising of ground floor commercial/retail space and four (4) levels of shop top housing was approved via DA131/2014, the development is currently under construction.

 

4.    The wider locality features a diverse mix of land uses including primarily medical related uses, commercial/retail activities, shop top housing and the St George Hospital campus, further to the south.

 

Zoning and Permissibility

5.    The site is zoned ‘B4 Mixed Use’ under the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP). The development is defined as shop top housing under KLEP which is permissible with consent in this zone.

 

Submissions

6.    The development application was publicly exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013. A submission in support of the proposal was received as a result. No submissions objecting to the proposal were received.

 

7.    Subsequent amendments to the application received during the course of its assessment were not required to be publicly notified in accordance with the development control plan, as they did not result in significant additional environmental impacts.

 

Level of Determination

8.    This development application is referred to the Local Planning Panel for consideration and determination as it comprises development to which State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development applies as required by the Ministerial Direction of 23 February 2018.

 

Conclusion

9.    The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the matters for consideration under Section 4.15(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The proposal is acceptable subject to minor design changes and it Is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

Report in Full

Description of Proposal

10.  This application proposes alterations and additions to an approved shop top housing development, DA131/2014, which is currently under construction. The amendments proposed seek alterations to level four (4) including an additional unit, the addition of four (4) units over two (2) additional floors fronting Derby Street, and the additional communal open space/rooftop balcony areas adjacent to Derby Street and Kensington Lane.

 

11.  Specifically, the proposal includes the following:

 

·   Reconfiguration of the approved fourth floor level to accommodate 3 x 2 bedroom units and a 1 bedroom unit with a study;

·   The addition of a new fifth floor level to accommodate a 2 bedroom unit and a 1 bedroom unit with a study each having a balcony facing Derby Street and a communal rooftop open space area that extends to the Kensington Lane alignment;

·   The addition of a new sixth floor level to accommodate 2 x 1 bedroom units each having a balcony fronting Derby Street; and

·   The roof area and structures over the communal opens space over the fifth floor.

 

12.  As a result of the proposed alterations and additions, the building will comprise of 20 units, resulting in five (5) additional units as a result of the reconfiguration of level 4 and the incorporation of level 5 and 6.

 

13.  No other changes are proposed to the approved development with the exception of the provision of four (4) additional car spaces within the basement parking levels, to address the increase in density of this proposal.

 

14.  Elevation drawings of the proposed development as viewed from Derby Street and Kensington Lane are illustrated as follows:

 

Figure 2: Front and rear elevations of proposed development

 

Description of the Site and Locality

15.  The site is located on the south western side of Derby Street between Kensington Street and Post Office Lane and has a secondary (rear) frontage to Kensington Lane. It comprises of a singular stratum allotment, legally described as Lot 201 DP 1108943 and commonly known as 13 Derby Street, Kogarah. It is rectangular in shape, having street frontages of 12.195m to Derby Street and Kensington Lane, a depth of 44.15m and an overall area of 538.4sqm.

 

16.  An approved shop top housing development comprising of ground floor commercial/retail space and four (4) levels of residential approved via DA131/2014 is currently under construction. The basement car park over which the approved shop top housing development is being constructed is not part of this allotment as it is separately titled. The basement car park extends underneath the commercial building on the adjoining property adjoining and its car spaces are shared between the respective sites. A parking assessment was undertaken by Terraffic Pty Ltd which outlined that this development required an additional 3 car parking spaces (12 approved via DA131/2014 for residential and 15 required given the increase in density of the additional 5 units). The applicant has provided Council with 2 contracts of sale date 2 July 2018 for the purchase of 2 additional car parking spaces, one being a tandem, being 3 spaces in total from SP86897 being Lots 18 and 22. As a result of this purchase, the car parking is compliant for this development and there remains excess car parking associated with the development located at 19 Kensington Street Kogarah being SP86897.

 

17.  Immediately to the south of the site is a four (4) storey commercial building occupied by a medical centre. Immediately to the north is a two (2) storey residential flat building. Across the road to the north east is a seven (7) storey mixed use building including church uses and a heritage listed church building occupied by medical practices. Across the rear lane to the south west is child care centre.

 

18.  The wider locality features a diverse mix of land uses including primarily medical related uses, commercial/retail activities, shop top housing and most prominently the St. George Hospital campus. Kogarah railway station and the adjoining retail complex known as Kogarah Town Centre are approximately 350m walking distance from the site.

 

19.  The current nature of the site and its surrounds is illustrated in figures 3 - 8 as follows:

 

20190809_100751

Figure 3: Westerly view of subject site (at centre of image) from Kensington Street

 

20190809_101231

Figure 4: Southerly view of subject site from opposite side of Derby Street

 

20190809_102311

Figure 5: South easterly view of Derby Street from Post Office Lane

 

20190809_101740

Figure 6: Easterly view of subject site (in background of image) from Kensington Lane

 

20190809_101627

Figure 7: North westerly view of Kensington Lane from Kensington Street

 

20190809_101923

Figure 8: View of entrance to basement car park from Kensington Lane

 

History

Current Development Application – DA2018/0198

20.  The development application was lodged on 21 May 2018. It was referred to a number of officers within and external to Council, and also neighbour notified and advertised. One submission in support was received. Further details on these processes are discussed later in this report.

 

21.  The DA was referred to the Design Review Panel on 3 October 2018, where a number of design modifications were requested to address specific issues of concern – in particular regarding natural light (through the internal light court/light well), as well as poor solar access to the units below as a result of the new units on the upper levels.

 

22.  The applicant was provided with a copy of the DRP Minutes, and in response provided amended plans for further consideration. These were referred back to the Design Review Panel on 6 December 2018.

 

23.  The DRP remained concerned regarding the amenity and solar access issues of the proposal, in particular the Panel was concerned that these would be exacerbated by the proposal (on the adjoining site at 7-11 Derby Street). In particular, one option that the Panel suggested the applicant explore would be to locate the additional floors only on the Derby Street (north eastern) part of the site, removing the proposed two (2) additional floors on the Kensington Lane (south eastern) part of the site. This would significantly enhance the overall amenity of the additional units, which would not be overshadowed by development on the adjoining site. All additional units would have good solar access and cross ventilation, and the quality and amenity of the central courtyard would remain acceptable.  Although this option would limit the additional yield to four (4) units and two (2) ‘townhouses’, this may be considered commercially worth pursuing.

 

24.  The Panel advised that the proposal could not be supported in this form. The minutes of the DRP meeting of 6 December 2018 were provided to the applicant.

 

25.  The applicant submitted further amended plans. These were referred to the DRP on 11 April 2019. The Panel remained un-supportive of the proposal, and in particular it was commented that “The applicant has not adopted the previous advice of the Panel that additional floors could potentially only be supported if they were located on the north side of the building. This advice has not been heeded. The DA for the adjoining site at 7-11 Derby Street which is currently under consideration by council was taken into consideration in reaching this position, and its form strongly reinforces the above advice”.

 

26.  The applicant was provided with a copy of the DRP minutes, and was requested to withdraw the current DA, and re-submit a new DA which addressed in full the concerns of the DRP.

 

27.  In response, the applicant submitted further amended plans. These were re-referred to the DRP for consideration on 11 July 2019. The Panel advised they support the proposal in terms of the latest amended plans, however they remained concerned about solar amenity. This is discussed in more detail in the body of the report.

 

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

28.  The subject site has been inspected and the development has been assessed under the relevant Section 4.15, Matters for Consideration of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

29.  Compliance with relevant State Environmental Planning Policies is summarised in the table as follows and discussed in more detail thereafter.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy

Complies

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

N/A

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy – Infrastructure

Yes

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

30.  The State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land in order to reduce the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment.

 

31.  Clause 7 of the SEPP requires contamination and remediation to be considered in determining a DA. The consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of development on land unless it has considered whether or not the land is contaminated.

 

32.  Prior to the construction of the basement car park several, the site had a long history of residential use. Since then, no ‘potentially contaminating activities’ have taken place on the site. Up until the commencement of this development, the roof slab of the basement car park had not been used for any particular purpose, apart from it being a temporary construction site. Construction of the approved shop top housing development has since commenced and is well advanced. On this basis, no further assessment is warranted with regard to site contamination and the proposed development and associated land use is considered suitable for the site.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

33.  The State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 aims to ensure consistency in the implementation of a scheme to encourage sustainable residential development throughout New South Wales (also referred to as the ‘BASIX scheme’).

 

34.  An updated BASIX certificate accompanies the DA (as amended) verifying that the relevant water, energy and thermal comfort targets have been met by the proposal. Conditions of consent have been included in the recommendation to ensure the commitments required under the BASIX certificate will be satisfied by the proposed development.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

35.  The State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 (‘Vegetation SEPP’) regulates clearing of native vegetation on urban land and land zoned for environmental conservation/management that does not require development consent. 

 

36.  The Vegetation SEPP applies to clearing of: 

 

1.    Native vegetation above the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS) threshold where a proponent will require an approval from the Native Vegetation Panel established under the Local Land Services Amendment Act 2016; and

2.    Vegetation below the BOS threshold where a proponent will require a permit from Council if that vegetation is identified in the council’s development control plan (DCP). 

 

37.  The Vegetation SEPP repeals clauses 5.9 and 5.9AA of the Standard Instrument - Principal Local Environmental Plan, with the regulation of the clearing of vegetation (including native vegetation) below the BOS threshold being through any applicable DCP.

 

38.  No issues arise in terms of the provisions of the Vegetation SEPP, as there is no vegetation on the site or within the footpath area of Derby Street immediately fronting the site. Further, there is no significant vegetation on immediately adjoining properties in close proximity to the site.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

39.  The State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (‘SEPP 65’) aims to improve the design quality of residential apartment development in New South Wales.

 

40.  The proposed development meets the pre-requisites for the application of the SEPP 65 in that it constitutes development for the purpose of ‘shop top housing’ in a proposed building of more than three (3) storeys and having more than four (4) dwellings. Therefore, it must be assessed against the provisions of SEPP 65 and the Apartment Design Guide (ADG).

 

41.  A design verification statement dated 1 August 2019 has been provided by Ziad Boumelhem Registered Architect (Registration No. 8008) in accordance with Clause 50 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

42.  The DA and various alterations of the proposal have been reviewed by the Design Review Panel (DRP) on four (4) separate occasions. This is further detailed in the DRP discussions carried out below.

 

Design Review Panel

43.  The initial plans that accompanied the application were referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) on 4 October 2018. These plans proposed an additional two (2) storeys including a rooftop terrace adjacent to Derby Street and an additional four (4) storeys adjacent to Kensington Lane and yielded an additional 11 dwellings. The DRP raised several design quality issues and concluded that the design could not be supported. A section drawing of the initial proposal is illustrated as follows.

 

Figure 10: Longitudinal section of initial proposal

 

44.  Revised plans were subsequently submitted and reviewed by the DRP on 6 December 2018. These plans proposed the same scale of development as the initial plans, albeit including relatively minor design changes. The DRP again raised several design quality issues and concluded that the design could not be supported. A section drawing of the first revised proposal is illustrated as follows.

 

Figure 11: Longitudinal section of first revised proposal

 

45.  Further revised plans were subsequently submitted and reviewed by the DRP on 11 April 2019. These plans proposed an additional two (2) storeys and rooftop terraces adjacent to both street frontages and yielded an additional 9 dwellings. The DRP again raised several design quality issues and concluded that the design could not be supported. A section drawing of the second revised proposal is illustrated as follows.

 

Figure 12: Longitudinal section of second revised proposal

 

46.  Final revised plans were subsequently submitted and reviewed by the DRP on 11 July 2019. These plans proposed an additional two (2) storeys adjacent to Derby Street and rooftop terraces adjacent to both street frontages and yielding an additional 5 dwellings. The DRP concluded that the application satisfies the design quality principles of SEPP 65 and in general supports the application subject. A section drawing of the latest revised proposal is illustrated as follows.

 

Figure 13: Longitudinal section of latest revised proposal

 

47.  The proposal during its assessment has evolved by way of a substantial reduction in density, bulk and scale such that most of the design issues raised from the outset have been largely resolved.

 

48.  The design quality principles of SEPP 65 are addressed as follows, in the context of the DRP comments. Commentary in response has been provided by the Assessment Officer where necessary.

 

Context and Neighbourhood Character

49.  The Panel raised concerns over the lack of contextual information accompanying the application, with specific attention being given to the proposal’s impact on Kensington Lane. The Panel also doubted the quantum of development sought would be achievable having regard to the small size and dimensional limitations of the site and the effects of adjacent development conforming to the current planning controls.

 

50.  With regard to the latest revised architectural plans, the Panel’s advice remains unchanged generally. However, the Panel acknowledges that achievement of floor space ratio potential is challenging on a single site and therefore does not press its previous doubts as outlined above.

 

51.  Assessment Officer’s Comment: The proposal is adequate in terms of addressing the relevant design quality principle. The proposed additions have been substantially reduced such that the proposal is now well within the maximum floor space ratio and building height limits that apply to the site and surrounding properties. The resultant ‘stepped’ built form of the proposal better relates to the scale of Kensington Lane. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable in this regard.

 

Built Form and Scale

52.  The Panel has raised no issues in terms of the latest revised plans, noting that the proposal has been amended as previously recommended. The panel also advises that the deletion of the additional floors at the rear eliminates its concern about overshadowing and that the amended landscape plans submitted are acceptable.

 

Density

53.  The Panel previously raised concerns over the density of the proposal in view of amenity issues raised at the same time. However, the panel has raised no issues in terms of the latest revised plans.

 

54.  Assessment Officer’s comment: The floor space ratio and dwelling yield of the overall development has been substantially reduced since those previous concerns were raised. As a result, the amenity of the podium level courtyard and units on the lower floor levels of the building is improved.

 

Sustainability

55.  The Panel raised concerns over the environmental sustainability of the proposal. These concerns remain and are reiterated as follows:

 

56.  If the development were to include some measures relating to environmental sustainability, such as greening of rooftops, rainwater recycling, solar panels etc, this would improve the overall quality of the development, and strengthen the case for support of a revised proposal.

 

57.  Assessment Officer’s comment: The proposal is adequate in terms of addressing the relevant design quality principle. The updated BASIX certificate accompanying the application verifies that the relevant thermal comfort and water/energy use reduction targets have been met by the proposal. It is also noted that the rooftops and podium courtyard incorporate ‘greenery’ in the form of deep soil planter boxes with a range of plant species.

 

Landscape

58.  The Panel raised concerns over the landscape quality and amenity of the roof garden and podium level courtyard as detailed in the landscape concept plan submitted at that time. With regard to the landscape plan accompanying the latest revised architectural plans, minor issues have been raised by the DRP and these are reiterated as follows:

 

●     The roof terraces are large paved zones with limited spatial variation. The design requires more refinement to create a range of zones for use by multiple groups. A greater variety of seating should be provided including tables, benches and BBQ facilities. Consideration should be given to how residents with children could use the roof terraces.

●     The level 1 planter should be fully planted.

●     A 400 litre street tree should be provided.

●     Irrigation design should be included and annotated with DA drawings.

 

59.  Assessment Officer’s comment: The above design change recommendations are not unreasonable and have been included in the recommended conditions of consent at the end of this report.

 

Amenity

60.  The Panel previously raised concerns over the proposal’s non-compliance with the ADG building separation and solar access requirements. With the deletion of the additional floor levels fronting Kensington Lane, the Panel notes that the building separation requirements are now satisfied. However, the panel also notes that the additional units will not receive ADG compliant solar access.

 

61.  Assessment Officer’s comment: The proposed additional units, being elevated well above the street on the fourth, fifth and sixth floor levels and having a north easterly aspect, will benefit from high quality access to sunlight. Whilst it is acknowledged that the ADG solar access requirements may not be satisfied when taking into account both the existing and proposed units, the practicality and reasonableness of compliance in this instance has to be questioned, particularly given the town centre context and density and scale of development permitted on the site and surrounding properties. On this basis, the proposal is adequate in terms of addressing the relevant design quality principle.

 

Safety

62.  The Panel concluded that the proposal was satisfactory and this position remains unchanged.

 

Housing Diversity and Social Interaction

63.  The Panel raised concerns over the design of the communal rooftop open space, particularly with respect to solar access and proposed planting. These concerns remain and are reiterated as follows:

 

64.  Communal rooftop open space needs to be designed to respond to solar access in regard to configuration, seating layout and plant species. Revised landscape plans and sections must be provided to demonstrate that rooftop gardens are fit for purpose, are fully irrigated and have adequate soil depth to accommodate plant growth. Solar access plans need to be provided demonstrating minimum solar access to communal rooftop space is achieved.

 

65.  Assessment Officer’s comment: The above recommendations regarding the landscape treatment of the communal rooftop open spaces are not unreasonable and have been included as a recommended condition of consent at the end of this report. The rooftop communal open space adjacent to Kensington Lane, on top of the fourth floor level will have limited access to sunlight, noting that the proposed additional units and adjacent lift/stairwell structure, together with likely future built form on the adjoining properties to the north west will cast shadows over this space. However, the rooftop open space adjacent to Derby Street, being elevated well above the street on top of the sixth floor level and having a north easterly aspect, will benefit from high quality access to sunlight. On this basis, the proposal is adequate in terms of addressing the relevant design quality principle.

 

Aesthetics

66.  The Panel has raised no issues in terms of the latest revised plans, noting that the proposal has been amended as previously recommended.

 

Apartment Design Guide

67.  An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant design criteria of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) is detailed in the compliance table as follows.

 

Note: where relevant, the figures/percentages in the ADG compliance table have been rounded up/down to the nearest whole number.

 

Section

Design Criteria

Proposed

Comply

3D - Communal and public open space

Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site (Site area = 538.4sqm – communal open space required = 134.6sqm)

Communal open space has been provided at the fifth floor level and topmost roof level of the building. A total area of 199.9sqm across these levels equating to 37.1% of the site area.

Yes

Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid-winter)

2 hours of sunlight is achieved to at least 50% of the rooftop communal open space area orientated towards Derby Street.

 

Yes

3E – Deep soil zones

Deep soil zones are required at a sliding scale in this clause. For a site area of 538.4m2, the deep soil zone requirement is a deep soil zone of 7% with no minimum dimensions.

 

The existing development as approved provides no deep soil zones at ground level. This situation remains unchanged. The ADG acknowledges sites located within a centre that are of a constrained nature may not achieve the required deep soil area across the site. This appears to be governing the shortfall in the circumstance of this case.

Regardless, the podium level courtyard located through the middle of the building includes a large planter 700mm high enabling the planting of shrubs and small trees.

Furthermore, in line with the DRP recommendations, a consent condition is proposed to the effect that the podium level planter include more extensive planting by way of shrubs and small trees in place of areas of mulch, mosaic tiling and gravel.

No – Acceptable on merits and subject to a condition of consent.

3F – Visual privacy

Minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows:

·    For building height up to 12m / 4 storeys – Habitable rooms and balconies 6m; and non-habitable rooms 3m.

 

·    For building height up to 25m / 5-8 storeys – Habitable rooms 9m; and non-habitable rooms 4.5m.

 

·    For building height over 25m / 9+ storeys – Habitable rooms 12m; and non-habitable rooms 6m

 

Within the site, the proposed additional floor levels comply with this criterion given that a minimum 12m building separation is provided.

 

With respect to the future relationship between the proposed units and that of existing and proposed development on neighbouring sites, a blank wall is provided along the extent of the southern elevation to the neighbouring medical centre located at 19 Kensington Street.

 

Along the north elevation where the development will adjoin a proposed shop top housing development at 7-11 Derby Street, a blank wall has been provided both to the dwellings and their associated areas of private open space.

 

Furthermore, in order to prevent the ability for any future overlooking from the proposed fifth and sixth floors level circulation areas into the neighbouring future building at 7-11 Derby Street, a consent condition has been imposed requiring the provision of a 1.8m high privacy screen along the outer perimeters of these spaces.

 

In terms of any potential impact to the childcare centre located across form the site along Kensington Lane, the proposed fifth floor level in this location constitutes an open recreation area with open pergola over. In order to mitigate any potential overlooking from this space into the childcare centre’s outdoor play area, a consent condition will be imposed requiring the provision of a 2m wide planter inclusive of hedge planting along the extent of the Kensington Lane frontage.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3J – Bicycle and car parking

For development in the following locations:

·    on sites that are within 800m of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or

·    on land zoned, and sites within 400 metres of land zoned, B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre

the minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant council, whichever is less

The car parking needs for a development must be provided off street

Based on the RMS Guidelines, the proposed development requires the provision of three (3) additional parking spaces.

 

The development satisfies the RMS requirements with the provision of an additional three (3) parking spaces, with one (1) being a tandem space.

 

These spaces have been purchased from SP86897 being Lots 18 and 22 which is known as 19 Kensington Street Kogarah. The parking required for the commercial building on this site remains compliant with the KDCP.

Yes

4A – Solar and daylight access

Living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm at mid-winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area and in the Newcastle and Wollongong local government areas

The living rooms of the 6 units (single 3 bedroom unit on level 4 converted to 2 by 1 bedroom units plus the additional 2 units on level 5 and 6)  has their balconies and accessed from living spaces facing Derby Street which has a north easterly aspect. The required solar access is achieved.

Yes

A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm at mid-winter

The 6 units proposed as part of this application receive solar access.

Yes

4B – Natural ventilation

At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building. Apartments at ten storeys or greater are deemed to be cross ventilated only if any enclosure of the balconies at these levels allows adequate natural ventilation and cannot be fully enclosed.

All proposed units are naturally cross ventilated.

Yes

Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18m, measured glass line to glass line.

All of the proposed units are less than 18m in depth.

Yes

4C – Ceiling heights

Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are:

·    Habitable rooms 2.7m

·    Non-habitable rooms 2.4m

·    For 2 storey apartments: 2.7m for main living area floor

2.4m for second floor, where its area does not exceed 50% of the apartment area

·    Attic spaces: 1.8m at edge of room with a 30 degree minimum ceiling slope

·    If located in mixed use areas - 3.3m for ground and first floor to promote future flexibility of use

 

These minimums do not preclude higher ceilings if desired.

All of the proposed units have ceiling heights of 2.8m.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4D – Apartment size and layout

Apartments are required to have the following minimum internal areas:

Studio – 35sqm

1 bedroom – 50sqm

2 bedroom – 70sqm

3 bedroom – 90sqm

 

The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5sqm each

 

A fourth bedroom and further additional bedrooms increase the minimum internal area by 12sqm each.

Unit type proposed as part of this application:

 

1 bedroom 51sqm min

2 bedroom 72sqm  min

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

Every habitable room must have a window in an external wall with a total minimum glass area of not less than 10% of the floor area of the room. Daylight and air may not be borrowed from other rooms.

Within prescribed range

Yes

Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5m x the ceiling height.

Within prescribed range

Yes

In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window

Within prescribed range

Yes

Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10sqm and other bedrooms 9sqm (excluding wardrobe space)

All bedrooms comply

Yes

Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobe space)

All bedrooms comply

Yes

Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of:

·    3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom apartments

·    4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments

All living rooms comply

Yes

The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts.

All of the proposed units are in excess of 4m width internally.

Yes

4E – Private open space and balconies

All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows:

·    Studio apartments require 4sqm with no min depth

·    1 bedroom apartments require 8sqm with min depth 2m

·    2 bedroom apartments require 10sqm with min depth 2m

·    3+ bedroom apartments require 12sqm with minimum 2.4m depth

 

The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m.

 

 

 

 

 

All balconies have 15sqm area with minimum depths  of 2.4m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

For apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15sqm and a minimum depth of 3m.

None of the proposed units are at ground level or on a podium or similar structure.

N/A

 

4F – Common circulation and spaces

The maximum number of apartments off a circulation core on a single level is eight.

 

Four (4) units are proposed on the fourth floor level and two (2) units are proposed on the fifth and sixth floor levels respectively.

Yes

For buildings of 10 storeys and over, the maximum number of apartments sharing a single lift is 40.

The building is less than 10 storeys.

N/A

4G - Storage

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

·    Studio apartments require 4m3

·    1 bedroom apartments require 6m3

·    2 bedroom apartments require 8m3

·    3+ bedroom apartments require 10m3

 

At least 50% of the required storage is to be located within the apartment.

The additional units do not provide storage size volumes compliant with the design criteria detailed within the ADG. In this regard, a consent condition has been imposed requiring that all proposed units are provided with the minimum storage size volume capacities as detailed.

No – condition imposed

 

Proposed Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Environment SEPP

68.  The Environment SEPP was exhibited from 31 October 2017 to 31 January 2018. This consolidated SEPP proposes to simplify the planning rules for a number of water catchments and waterways, urban bushland and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property.

 

69.  Changes proposed include consolidating the following SEPPs:

·        State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas

·        State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Drinking Water Catchment) 2011

·        State Environmental Planning Policy No. 50 – Canal Estate Development

·        Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2 – Georges River Catchment

·        Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No.2-1997)

·        Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

·        Willandra Lakes Regional Environmental Plan No. 1 – World Heritage Property.

 

70.  The proposal is not inconsistent with the provisions of this proposed instrument.

 

Remediation of Land SEPP

71.  The Department of Planning and Environment has prepared a Remediation of Land SEPP which is intended to repeal and replace the State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land.

 

72.  The main changes proposed include the expansion of categories of remediation work which requires development consent, a greater involvement of principal certifying authorities particularly in relation to remediation works that can be carried out without development consent, more comprehensive guidelines for Councils and certifiers and the clarification of the contamination information to be included on Section 149 planning certificates.

 

73.  Whilst the proposed SEPP will retain the key operational framework of SEPP 55, it will adopt a more modern approach to the management of contaminated land.

 

74.  The proposal is not inconsistent with the provisions of this proposed instrument.

 

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012

 

Zoning and Permissibility

75.  The proposal may be characterised as development for the purposes of ‘shop top housing’ meaning ‘one or more dwellings located above ground floor retail premises or business premises’.

 

76.  The site is located within the ‘B4 Mixed Use’ zone under the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012. ‘Shop top housing’ is permissible with consent in this mixed use zone.

 

Figure 14: Extract from the NSW legislation website including the subject site outlined in red

 

77.  The objectives for development in the B4 Mixed Use zone are as follows:

 

·      To provide a mixture of compatible land uses.

·      To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

·      To encourage development that contributes to economic growth and employment opportunities.

·      To encourage development that contributes to an active, vibrant and sustainable town centre.

·      To provide opportunities for residential development, where appropriate.

 

78.  The proposed development is consistent with the above objectives in that it provides for additional residential accommodation in the form of ‘shop top housing’ located above compatible land uses at ground floor level and within close proximity to a range of services and facilities including public transport options. The additional residential accommodation will also contribute to the economic viability and social vibrancy of the Kogarah Town Centre.

 

Compliance Table – Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 Development Controls

79.  An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant provisions of Kogarah LEP 2012 is detailed in the compliance table below:

 

Clause

Objectives/Provisions

Comment

Complies

4.3 - Height of buildings

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 case, the relevant map limits the height of buildings on the subject site to 39m.

The proposal has a building height of up to 27m.

Yes

4.4 - Floor space ratio

The maximum floor space ratio for a building on any land is not to exceed the floor space ratio shown for the land on the Floor Space Ratio Map. In this case, the relevant map limits the floor space ratio for buildings on the subject site to 4.5:1.

The proposal has a floor space ratio of 3.4:1.

Yes

5.10 - Heritage conservation

The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

(a) to conserve the environmental heritage of Kogarah,

(b) to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views,

(c)  to conserve archaeological sites,

(d) to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance.

 

The subject site is not identified as a heritage item or located within a heritage conservation area, nor is it immediately adjoining a heritage item or heritage conservation area. It also contains no recognised archaeological sites or aboriginal objects.

The site is across the road from the ‘Former Kogarah Presbyterian Church and hall’ which are identified collectively as a heritage item of local significance. Given the ample separation provided by Derby Street, the proposal is not likely to result in any adverse effects upon the heritage significance of church and hall opposite and associated public views of these buildings.

Yes

6.1 - Acid sulfate soils

 

 

The objective of this clause is to ensure that development does not disturb, expose or drain acid sulfate soils and cause environmental damage.

The subject site is not identified on the Acid Sulfate Soils Map as being affected by any particular class of acid sulfate soils.

N/A

6.2 - Earthworks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The objective of this clause is to ensure that earthworks for which development consent is required will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land.

The proposal does not involve any excavation or filling as the basement carpark exists and the development approved via DA131/2014 is well under construction.

N/A

6.3 - Flood planning

 

The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

(a) to minimise the flood risk to life and property associated with the use of land,

(b) to allow development on land that is compatible with the land’s flood hazard, taking into account projected changes as a result of climate change,

(c)  to avoid significant adverse impacts on flood behaviour and the environment.

The subject site is not identified on the Flood Planning Map as being within a Flood Planning Area. Further, Council’s records do not indicate the site is at or below the ‘flood planning level’.

N/A

6.5 - Airspace operations

The objective of this clause is to protect airspace around airports

 

The proposed development will penetrate prescribed airspace for Sydney Airport requiring a ‘controlled activity’ within the meaning of Division 4 of Part 12 of the Airports Act 1996. The applicant has obtained the necessary approval for the controlled activity (refer to further commentary in the referrals section of this report).

Yes

 

Development Control Plans

 

Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013

80.  The provisions of Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 (KDCP 2013) are relevant to the proposed development. Several controls within the KDCP 2013 are significantly conflict with the scale of development now permitted under the KLEP 2012 (as amended on 26 May 2017). As a consequence, the proposed development will contravene a number of the controls including significant variations to the height and floor space ratio controls.

 

81.  The significant variations to KDCP 2013 have resulted from the subsequent amendments to KLEP 2012 which allows a higher density/scale of development. The approach to support the development with significant variations to KDCP 2013 (but compliant with LEP 2012) is consistent with recent judgements in the NSW Land and Environment Court. In particular, in Michael Murr v Georges River Council [2017] NSWLEC1369.

 

82.  It is also noted that in the hierarchy of planning controls, Development Control Plans cannot prescribe more onerous corresponding controls than those in a Local Environmental Plan.

 

83.  An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant controls in the KDCP 2013 is detailed in the compliance table below.

 

Part B General Controls

Part

Objectives/Controls

Comments

Complies

B1 - Heritage Items and Heritage Conservation Areas

The objectives of this part are to:

·      Ensure development protects and enhances the environmental and cultural heritage of Kogarah;

·      Ensure proposed development is sympathetic to heritage items and Heritage Conservation Areas;

·      Provide guidance on appropriate design, siting, bulk, materials, landscaping and streetscape character.

The site is across the road from the ‘Former Kogarah Presbyterian Church and hall’ which are identified collectively as a heritage item of local significance. Given the ample separation provided by Derby Street, the proposal is not likely to result in any adverse effects upon the heritage significance of church and hall opposite.

 

Yes

B2 - Tree Management and Green Web

The objectives of this part include the following:

·    Ensure the protection of existing trees which contribute to the visual amenity and environment of the City of Kogarah;

·    Protect trees within and adjacent to development sites;

·    Maximise healthy tree canopy coverage across the City of Kogarah.

Refer to earlier comments regarding the provisions of the Vegetation SEPP.

The site is not within a ‘habitat corridor’ or ‘habitat reinforcement corridor’ under council’s green web strategy.

N/A

B3 - Developments near Busy Roads and Rail Corridors

The objectives of this part are to:

·    Ensure an appropriate acoustic amenity can be achieved for development near transport corridors, particularly residential development and other noise sensitive land uses;

·    Provide additional acoustic design or mitigation measures that may be necessary;

·    Development fronting a busy road or a rail corridor should be designed and sited to minimise noise impacts.

Based on the location of the site and characteristics of the surrounding locality, the rail noise/vibration and road noise/vibration provisions in clauses 87 and 102 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 are not relevant to this p