AGENDA - LPP

Meeting:

Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP)

Date:

Thursday, 17 September 2020

Time:

4.00pm

Venue:

Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Hurstville

Panel Members:

Adam Seton (Chairperson)

Juliet Grant (Expert Panel Member)

Michael Leavey (Expert Pane Member)

Fiona Prodromou (Community Representative)

 

  

1. On Site Inspections - 1.00pm –  3.30pm

a)    799 Forest Road Peakhrust

b)    121 Mi Mi Street Oatley

c)    54 and 54A Noble Street Allawah

 

 

 

 

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, 17 September 2020

Page 2

 

 

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

 

LPP045-20        799 Forest Road Peakhurst – DA2019/0431

(Report by Senior Development Assessment Officer)

LPP046-20        54 and 54A Noble Street Allawah – DA2019/0314

(Report by Senior Development Assessment Planner)

LPP047-20        121 Mi Mi Street Oatley – DA2020/0172

(Report by Senior Development Assessment Planner)

LPP048-20        Public Exhibition of Draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020

(Report by Senior Strategic Planner)

 

 

 

 

4. Confirmation of Minutes

 


 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 17 September 2020

 

LPP Report No

LPP045-20

Development Application No

DA2019/0431

Site Address & Ward Locality

799 Forest Road Peakhurst

Peakhurst Ward

Proposed Development

Demolition of existing structures and construction of six multi-unit dwellings, associated vehicle accommodation, an in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and site works

Owners

Leila Mourad and Maurice Mourad

Applicant

Monument Design Partnership

Planner/Architect

Planner: Gat and Associates, Architect: Monument Design Partnership

Date Of Lodgement

20/09/2019

Submissions

Twenty five (25) submissions received

Cost of Works

$2,513,463

Local Planning Panel Criteria

More than ten (10) unique submissions received

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

Enviromental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building and Sustainability Index: 2004), State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2007, Greater Regional Environmental Metropolitan No 2 – Georges River Catchment, Draft Environment SEPP,

Draft Remediation SEPP, Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020,

Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012, Hurstville Development Control Plan No. 1, Georges River Council Interim Policy 2019

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

Architectural Plans

 

 

 

Report prepared by

Senior Development Assessment Officer

 

 

Recommendation

That the application be granted a deferred commencement consent 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, as the conditions can be viewed when the report is published.

 

Site Plan

Figure 1: Aerial extract of subject site (799 Forest, Road, Peakhurst) outlined in blue (Source: GRC Intramaps, 2020).

 

Executive Summary

Proposal

1.         The development application seeks development consent for the demolition of existing structures and construction of six (6) multi unit dwellings, associated vehicle accommodation, an in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and site works on land known as 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst.

 

2.         During the assessment process Council has accepted an amendment to the development application of which the original design comprised a one (1) x two (2) storey townhouse and five (5) x single storey villas. The amended proposal comprises of five (5) x two (2) storey townhouses and one (1) x single storey villa.

 

3.         The proposal seeks variations to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No. 1 relating to:

 

·     side setbacks;

·     window side setbacks,

·     driveway; and

·     solar access.

 

4.         The variations sought are considered to be acceptable in this instance and are supported on planning merit.

 

5.         The proposal complies with the key design aspects regarding; floor space, height of the buildings, onsite car parking, landscape, private open space, tree protection and engineering.

 

6.         An arborist report was provided in support of the proposal which seeks to protect four (4) trees on the subject site and three (3) trees on an adjoining southern property known as 53B Isaac Street, Peakhurst. Council’s Consulting Arborist has reviewed the proposal and supports the measure provide by the application to protect these trees which has been reinforced by conditions of consent.

 

7.         The proposal seeks to drain to the rear via an approved easement granted through 4 Dawn Street, Peakhurst. Approval for this easement was granted through development consent DA2017/0326. This consent is currently not operational however; it remains valid until 30 August 2022. The proposed stormwater disposal and impacts have been considered by Council’s development engineer and is supported subject deferred commencement conditions and conditions of consent. The conditioning for the upgrading of Council’s infrastructure within Dawn Street has also been conditioned.

 

8.         The proposal is supported by Council’s other specialist namely traffic, infrastructure and GIS subject to conditions of consent.

 

9.         The proposal was referred to Ausgrid and is supported subject to conditions of consent.

 

Site and Locality

10.      The site is legally described as Lot 2, DP 210901 and known as 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst. The site forms an irregular rectangular shaped allotment. Forest Road is classified as a local road. The site is dimensioned as follows; 18.235m along the western splayed boundary fronting Forest Road, Peakhurst, 31.67m along the southern side boundary, 15,24m along the western side boundary return, 52.33 along the southern side boundary, 30.47m along the eastern rear boundary, 73.94m along the northern side boundary with a total site area of 1,998sqm (DP). The site falls from front high (RL38.97) western frontage to the rear low (35.46) south east corner. The site is affected by overland flow.

 

11.      There are currently thirteen (13) trees on site, the largest and most prominent trees are located within the rear setback along the southern side boundary.

 

12.      A single storey masonry dwelling is located along the western front portion of the site. Ancillary structures are located within the rear setback. A concrete driveway provides vehicular access along the southern side boundary.

 

13.      A gully pit, a hydrant, an Ausgrid powerline and a Telstra pit are located within the road reserve.

 

14.      The immediate surrounding area comprises residential uses. 796-797 Forest Road, Peakhurst which adjoins the site to the north comprises of a single storey dwelling house.  801 Forest Road, Peakhurst comprises of a single storey dwelling house with a carport and a swimming pool within rear setback.

 

15.      53B Isaac Street, Peakhurst comprises of a single storey dwelling house. 51B Isaac Street, Peakhurst to the south, comprises a single storey dwelling which is accessed from a shared access handle off Isaac Street. 4 and 6 Dawn Street, Peakhurst to the east contains single storey dwellings. Council’s records indicate Dawn Street, Peakhurst located to the east is affected by flooding.

 

Zoning and Permissibility

16.      The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential pursuant to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (LEP). The proposal seeks consent for multi dwelling housing.

 

17.      As of 6 December 2019 multi dwelling housing is no longer a permissible use within the zone.

 

18.      Clause 1.8A of the LEP contains Savings Provisions relating to development applications  which were lodged but not yet determined at the time of adoption of amendments to the LEP applies to this development application.

 

19.      The application was lodged on 20 September 2019. At the time of lodgement, multi dwelling housing was a permissible use with development consent within the zone. The proposal is therefore permissible by operation of Clause 1.8A of Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012.

 

Submissions

20.      The proposal was notified and renotified following the receipt of the amended proposal in accordance with the provisions of Council’s notification policy. In total, twenty-five (25) submissions were received of which raised concerns relating to key concerns regarding; stormwater, trees, density, built form and traffic, overshading, privacy and amenity impacts generated by the proposed works. The concerns raised have been considered and are addressed in detail within the body of this report.

 

Conclusion

21.      That the development application be supported subject to a deferred commencement to lawfully obtain/register an easement through a downstream property.

 

Report in Full

 

Proposal

22.      Development Consent is sought for demolition of existing structures,  construction of six (6) multi-dwelling housing dwellings and associated vehicle accommodation an in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and site works on land known as 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst.

 

Figure 2: Extract of montage of proposal viewed from Forest Road, Peakhurst (western front elevation) (Source: Monument Design Partnership, 2020).

 

23.      A detailed description of the proposal is as follows:

 

24.      In detail, the particulars of the development application are described as follows;

 

·     Demolition of an existing dwelling and ancillary structures;

·     The protection of four (4) trees on the subject site and three (3) trees on an adjoining property known as 53B Isaac Street, Peakhurst.

 

25.      Dwelling 1: Two storey Townhouse (accessible dwelling)

·     Ground floor: front portico, double garage, bathroom, guest bedroom, living areas kitchen, rear alfresco, in-ground swimming pool and private open space to the rear;

·     First floor: First floor: three (3) bedrooms all with ensuites and front balcony which faces Forest Road.

 

26.      Dwelling 2: Two storey Townhouse (accessible dwelling)

·     Ground floor: portico, lounge, dining, kitchen, laundry, bathroom, two (2) accessible stacked car spaces and associated private open space;

·     First floor: four (4) bedrooms one (1) with ensuite, a bathrooms and front balcony (facing internally into site).

 

27.      Dwelling 3: Single storey Villa

·     Portico, three (3) bedrooms one (1) with ensuite, bathroom, laundry, lounge, dining, kitchen and double garage and associated private open space.

 

28.      Dwelling 4: Two storey Townhouse

·     Ground floor: portico, WC, lounge, dining, kitchen, laundry, two (2) stacked spaces;

·     First floor: three (3) bedrooms one (1) with ensuite, a bathroom and front balcony (facing internally into site).

 

29.      Dwelling 5: Two storey Townhouse

·     Ground floor: portico, WC, lounge, dining, kitchen, laundry, two (2) stacked spaces;

·     First floor: three (3) bedrooms one (1) with ensuite, a bathroom and front balcony (facing internally into site).

 

30.      Dwelling 6: Two storey Townhouse

·     Ground floor: portico, bedroom, bathroom, lounge, dining, kitchen, laundry, two (2) car garage and associated private open space;

·     First floor: three (3) bedrooms one (1) with ensuite, a bathroom.

 

31.      The proposal seeks associated works including front fencing, retaining walls, driveways, pathways, landscaping, engineering works and bin storage areas.

 

32.      For the purposes of assessment, a summary table of the proposal each dwelling has been provided below.

 

Table 1: Summary Table of proposed development

Dwelling

No. of storeys

No. of bedrooms

Car parking spaces

Private Open Space

No.1

2

4

2

97.6sqm (Note: this is the only area that complies with the definition).

No.2

2

3

2

60.3sqm

No.3

1

3

2

155.7sqm

No.4

2

3

2

60.2sqm

No.5

2

3

2

60.3sqm

No.6

2

4

2

154.5sqm

       

Figure 3: Extract of site plan (Source: Monument Design Partnership, 2020).

 

THE SITE AND LOCALITY

33.      The site is legally described as Lot 2, DP 210901 and is known as 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst. The site forms an irregular rectangular shaped allotment. Forest Road at this location is classified as a local road. The site is dimensioned as follows; 18.35m along the western splayed boundary fronting Forest Road, Peakhurst, 31.67m along the southern side boundary, 15,24m along the western side boundary return, 52.33 along the southern side boundary, 30.47m along the eastern rear boundary, 73.94m along the northern side boundary with a total site area of 2,001.3sqm (DP 1998sqm). The site falls from front high (RL38.97) western frontage to the rear low (35.46) south east corner. The site is not affected by overland flow.

 

34.      A single storey masonry dwelling is located to the western portion of the site. Ancillary structures are located within the rear setback. A concrete driveway provides vehicular access along the southern side boundary.

 

35.      A gully pit, a hydrant, an Ausgrid powerline and a Telstra pit are located within the road reserve.

 

36.      The immediate surrounding area comprises residential uses. 796-797 Forest Road, Peakhurst which adjoins the site to the north comprises of a single storey dwelling house. 801 Forest Road, Peakhurst comprises of a single storey dwelling house with a carport and a swimming pool within rear setback. 51B Issac Street, Peakhurst to the south, contains a single storey dwelling which is accessed from a shared access handle off Issac Street. 4 and 6 Dawn Street, Peakhurst adjoining the site to the east each contains a single dwelling.

 

Figure 4: Photograph of subject site (799 Forest Road, Peakhurst) (Source: GRC, 2020).

 

Figure 5: Photograph of rear of subject site (799 Forest Road, Peakhurst) (Source: GRC, 2020).

 

Figure 6: Photograph of adjoining northern property, 796-797 Forest Road, Peakhurst (Source: GRC, 2020).

 

37.      The immediate surrounding area is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012. Adjoining the site comprises of a mixture of dwelling houses, dual occupancies and multi dwelling housing of varying architectural styles and designs.

 

Figure 7: Extract of HLEP 2012 with subject site outlined in blue (799 Forest Road, Peakhurst) (Source: GRC Intramaps, 2020).

 

38.      The streetscape is undergoing transitional change from established dwellings to contemporary infill development. There are several trees within the adjoining residential properties.

 

Background

39.      Development consent (DA2015/0457) was granted for the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a six (6) dwelling multi housing development at 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst via Hearing process by the New South Wales Land and Environment Court on 16 February 2017. The consent was granted approval via deferred commencement for twelve (12) months to satisfy drainage and engineering requirements. The deferred commencement conditions were not satisfied within this timeframe. This consent lapsed on 16 February 2018.

 

40.      Development consent DA2017/0326 was granted for easement works connecting from  the subject site 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst through 4 Dawn Street, Peakhurst to the public drainage system. This consent is currently not operational however it remains valid until 30 August 2022.

 

41.      A development application DA2019/0431 (the current application) was lodged on 20 September 2019 for demolition of existing and construction of six (6) multi-unit dwellings associated vehicle accommodation, an in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and site works on land known as 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst.

 

42.      A meeting was held with the applicant on 8 November 2019 advising that the application in its lodged form was not supported, and the applicant was provided an opportunity to amend the plans to better address Council’s controls.

 

43.      Amended plans and documentation were received by Council and have been accepted under Clause 55(2) Amendment of Development Application under The Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000.

 

44.      The proposed use as multiple unit dwellings forms a permissible use on the site given that a savings provision applies to the development application under clause 1.8 of the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan. The proposal results in a reasonable built form which provides satisfactory levels of residential amenity. The proposal is considered to be responsive to the site, its immediate context and is not considered to result in any unreasonable material impacts. Given the above, the proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions of consent.

 

Compliance and Assessment

45.      The development has been assessed having regarding to Matters for Consideration under Section 4.15(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Section 4.15 Evaluation

46.      The following is an assessment of the application with regard to Section 4.15(1) Evaluation of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

(1)  Matters for consideration - general

In determining an application, a consent authority is to take into consideration such of the following matters as are of relevance to the development the subject of the development application:

 

The provision of:

(i)    Any environmental planning instrument,

 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

47.      Compliance with the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPP) is detailed below.

 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY NO 55 – REMEDIATION OF LAND

48.      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. 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.

 

49.      A review of the site history indicates that the site has been used for residential purposes for extended periods of time, and such uses and/or development are not typically associated with activities that would result in the contamination of the site. The proposed works do not include any change to the use of the land that would result in any concerns with respect to contamination. There is no indication of previous uses that would cause contamination. In this regard there is no indication that the land is contaminated.

 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY (BUILDING SUSTAINABILITY INDEX: BASIX) 2004

50.      The trigger for BASIX Certification is when the estimated cost of works for residential development (new dwelling(s)/alterations and additions) is equal to or above $50,000. The proposal results in a cost of works of $2,513,463. A BASIX Certification is also triggered when proposing a swimming pool with a volume of 40,000 litres. A BASIX Certificate referenced 1044722M_05 dated 9 April 2020 prepared by Greenworld Architectural Drafting has been submitted with the Development Application satisfying the minimum requirements of SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004. The DA requirements of the BASIX Certificate have been detailed on the plans. In this regard, the proposal has adequately satisfied the requirements of the SEPP.

 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY (VEGETATION IN NON-RURAL AREAS) 2017

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

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). 

 

52.      The objectives of the SEPP are to protect the biodiversity values of trees and other vegetation in non-rural areas and preserve the amenity of non-rural areas through the preservation of trees and other vegetation. This policy is applicable pursuant to Clause 5 (1) of the SEPP as the site is within both Georges River Council and the R2 Low Density Residential zone.

 

53.      Pursuant to Clause 8 (1) of the SEPP, clearing does not require authority under the policy as it is a type of clearing that is authorised under Section 60O of the Local Land Services Act 2013 (specifically, that associated with a development consent issued under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).

 

54.      An arborist report was provided in support of the proposal which seeks to protect four (4) trees on the subject site and three (3) trees on an adjoining property known as 53B Issac Street, Peakhurst.

 

55.      The proposal has been assessed and is supported by Council’s consulting arborist subject to conditions of consent which include suitable replacement landscaping to embellish the site.

 

GREATER METROPOLITAN REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN NO 2 — GEORGES RIVER CATCHMENT

56.      The main aims and objectives of this plan include but are not limited to the following:

 

·     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,

 

57.      The proposed stormwater drainage system which seeks to drain to the rear has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineer and is satisfactory subject to deferred commencement conditions to obtain an easement within a downstream property and extension of a stormwater pipe within Dawn Street, Peakhurst. 

 

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL SEPP

58.      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. 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.

 

59.      The proposal is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Draft Instrument.

 

DRAFT REMEDIATION OF LAND SEPP

60.      The Draft Remediation of Land SEPP was exhibited from 31 January 2018 to 13 April 2018. The proposed remediation of land SEPP will:

 

·     Provide a state-wide planning framework for the remediation of land;

·     Maintain the objectives and reinforce those aspects of the existing framework that have worked well;

·     Require planning authorities to consider the potential for land to be contaminated when determining development applications and rezoning land;

·     Clearly list the remediation works that require development consent;

·     Introduce certification and operational requirements for remediation works that can be undertaken without development consent.

 

61.      The proposal is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Draft Instrument.

 

HURSTVILLE LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2012

62.      The provisions of this Local Environmental Plan are relevant to the proposal. The extent to which the proposal complies with the relevant standards of Local Environmental Plan 2012 (LEP2012) is outlined in the table below.

 

Part 2 – Permitted or Prohibited Development

1.8A Savings Provisions for Development Applications

63.      Clause “1.8A Savings provisions relating to development applications” applies to the development application whereby the clause states that “If a development application has been made before the commencement of this Plan in relation to land to which this Plan applies and the application has not been finally determined before that commencement, the application must be determined as if this Plan had not commenced.”

 

64.      The development application was lodged on 20 September 2019 whereby multi dwelling housing were prohibited within the HLEP 2012 effective of 6 December 2019.

 

65.      As of 6 December 2019 multi dwelling housing is no longer a permissible use within the zone.

 

66.      Clause 1.8A of the LEP contains Savings Provisions relating to development applications  which were lodged but not yet determined at the time of adoption of amendments to the LEP applies to this development application.

 

67.      The application was lodged on 20 September 2019. At the time of lodgement, multi dwelling housing was a permissible use with development consent in the zone. The proposal is therefore permissible by operation of Clause 1.8A of Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012.

 

Clause 2.1 – Land Use Zones

68.      The subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential. The proposal seeks development consent for “multi dwelling housing” which is a permissible form of development with Council’s consent at the time of lodgement. The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone.

 

Table 2: Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

4.1A Multi Dwelling Housing

1000sqm (min)

1,998sqm (based on DP)

Yes

4.3 Height of Buildings

9m

7.8m (RL45.5)

Yes

4.4 Floor Space Ratio

Site area = 1,998sqm (based on DP)

0.6:1

1,198.8sqm (max)

 

0.516:1

1,031sqm

 

Yes

4.5 Calculation of floor space ratio and site area

To be calculated in accordance with clause

Floor space and site area calculated in accordance with this clause.

Yes

 

Part 6 – Additional Local Provisions

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

6.1 Acid Sulphate Soils

Acid sulphate soils objectives to be satisfied

Not affected, minimal cut and fill proposed to accommodate residential development

Yes

6.9 Essential Services

Essential utility services to be provided

Essential services provided to the site that can be extended to service the proposal.

Yes

 

Aims of Plan

69.      The particular aims of the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 in relation to Clause 1.2 (2) are as listed below:

(2)  The particular aims of this Plan are as follows—

(a)  to encourage and co-ordinate the orderly and economic use and development of land that is compatible with local amenity,

(b)  to provide a hierarchy of centres to cater for the retail, commercial, residential accommodation and service needs of the Hurstville community,

(c)  to provide a range of housing choice that—

(i)  accords with urban consolidation principles, and

(ii)  is compatible with the existing environmental character of the locality, and

(iii)  is sympathetic to adjoining development.

(d)  to conserve, protect and enhance the environmental heritage, cultural heritage and aesthetic character of Hurstville,

(e)  to maintain and enhance the existing amenity and quality of life of the Hurstville community,

(f)    to ensure development embraces the principles of quality urban design,

(g)  to ensure development is carried out in such a way as to promote the efficient and equitable provision of public services, infrastructure and community facilities,

(h)  to protect and enhance areas of remnant bushland, natural watercourses, wetlands and riparian habitats,

(i)    to retain, and where possible extend, public access to foreshore areas and link

existing open space areas for environmental benefit and public enjoyment,

(j)    to ensure development embraces the principles of ecologically sustainable development,

 

70.      The proposal satisfies the aims of the plan. The proposal forms a permissible use and complies with the development standards and zone objectives within the LEP.

 

DRAFT GEORGES RIVER LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2020

71.      Consideration is given to the provisions of Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 in the assessment this application.

 

72.      In this regard, the provisions have no determining weight as a result of proposed operation of Clause “1.8A Savings provisions relating to development applications” of the Draft Plan which provides “If a development application has been made before the commencement of this Plan in relation to land to which this Plan applies and the application has not been finally determined before that commencement, the application must be determined as if this plan had not commenced.”

 

73.      It is noted that multi dwelling housing is not a permissible use within the R2 Low Density Residential Zone under the Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS

Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1

74.      The provisions of this Development Control Plan are relevant to the proposal. An assessment of the proposal against the key controls is outlined as follows.

 

Section 3.1 Vehicular Access, Parking and Manoeuvring

75.      The proposal provides car parking in the form of a dwelling house configuration for dwelling 1 which comprises of a double garage and driveway directly from Forest Road through a proposed driveway crossing. Dwellings 2 - 6 comprise of double garages and central turning area which allows a car to exit in a forward direction via a central driveway. The proposal is accordance with the multi dwelling housing requirements with compliant access for 6 by three (3) and four (4) bedroom dwellings. Adequate car parking and manoeuvrability is provided to accommodate the proposal based on the density and number of bedrooms proposed subject to conditions of consent.

 

Section 3.3 Access and Mobility

76.      The proposal is considered to reasonably satisfy the considerations within this subsection with adaptable dwellings provided with suitable access and amenities. Two (2) accessible dwellings (Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2) are proposed which complies with Council’s requirements of providing One (1) accessible dwelling per five (5) dwellings. The finished floor levels and driveway gradient of dwelling 1 are to be amended to allow compliant gradient access to and from Forest Road.

 

Section 3.4 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

77.      The proposal seeks to provide suitable outlook to and from the development to Forest Road and from the common driveway to the dwellings within the site. This is achieved through appropriate window placement allowing sight lines to the central driveway which services dwellings 2-6. The proposal contains logical entrances for each dwelling which minimise concealment opportunities. In this regard, the proposal reasonably satisfies the considerations within this subsection.

 

Section 3.5 Landscaping

78.      The proposal provides landscaping areas within the front, centre and rear of the site with suitable dimensions which could reasonably accommodate trees, shrubs and lawns subject to the deletion of fencing and hard paved areas within the front setback. Council’s Consulting arborist supports the proposal subject to conditions of consent.  In this regard, the proposal reasonably satisfies the considerations within this subsection.

 

Section 3.6 Public Domain

79.      The proposal is conditioned to retain the street tree as recommended by Council’s Consulting Arborist as a result this retains the streetscape appearance and satisfying the criterion to ‘reinforce the street hierarchy’. In this regard, the proposal reasonably satisfies the considerations within this subsection.

 

Section 3.7 Stormwater

80.      The proposal seeks to drain to the rear which is supported by Council’s Development Engineer subject to conditions of consent regarding the creation of an easement and upgrading Council infrastructure.

 

81.      Section 4.2 Multi Dwelling Housing

 

Table 3: Hurstville Development Control Plan Section 4.2 Multi Dwelling Housing Compliance Table

Applicable DCP Controls

Standards

Proposal

Complies

PC2. Site frontage

 

 

PC3. Density

15m (min)

 

 

315sqm per dwelling

6 dwellings = 1,890sqm (minimum site area required)

Site area = 1,998sqm

18.235m along Forest Road, Peakhurst (as per survey)

 

Site area 1,998sqm.

6 dwellings = 333sqm per dwelling density.

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

PC4. Height front of site (R2):

 

Height:

 

 

Height rear of site (R2):

 

Height:

 

Floor to Ceiling

2 storey

 

 

9m

 

 

1 storey

 

6m

 

2.7m

Dwellings 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 = 2 storey.

 

Dwellings 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 = 7.8m (RL45.5)

 

Dwelling 3 = 1 storey

 

Dwelling 3 = 4.76m

(RL40.65)

 

Range: 2.7 to 3.5m

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

PC.5 Excavation

500mm maximum

Less than 500mm, ground floor slabs proposed to be located on or above natural ground level, some cut and fill required to support the proposed design.

Yes

PC6. Setbacks and building separation

 

DS6.1Side setbacks:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DS6.2 Front setback:

 

DS6.3 Garage front setback

 

 

 

 

DS.4Articulation elements

 

DS6.6 Min separation distance from windows and balconies on site.

 

D6.7 Rear setback:

 

 

 

3m (450mm eaves max encroachment)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.5m

 

 

5.5m (stacked car parking)

 

 

 

 

1m forward of building line at 25%

 

5m

 

 

 

 

 

6m (450mm eaves max encroachment)

 

 

 

 

Dwelling 1:

North: 1,237mm on ground floor and first floor.

 

Dwelling 2:

West: 4m – dwelling wall

 

South: 3.0m – dwelling wall

South: 909mm – garage.

 

Dwelling 3:

South: 3.909m – dwelling wall.

South: 909mm - garage

 

Dwelling 6:

North: 3,018mm - dwelling

North: 919mm - garage

 

Dwelling 1:4.5m minimum

 

Dwelling 1 fronting the street is not proposed in a stacked configuration, car parking is side by side.

 

All elements behind 4.5m.

 

More than 5m between the windows within the site.

 

 

 

Dwelling 6 - 6.494m

Dwelling 3: 3006mm from roofed rear alfresco is to be deleted as a condition of consent.

 

 

 

 

 

No (1)

 

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

No (1)

 

 

Yes

 

No (1)

 

 

 

Yes

No (1)

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

(1) Side setbacks

Council’s controls (PC6. Setbacks and Building Separation, DS6.1) prescribe a minimum ground floor side setback of 3m from side boundaries. The proposal seeks a variation to the above control whereby Dwelling 1 (two storey townhouse) which seeks a setback of 1,237mm (ground floor) and 1,237mm (first floor) from the northern side boundaries.

Figure 8: Site plan indicating location of variations proposed along the northern and southern side setbacks (Source: Monument Design Partnership, 2020).

 

The proposed side setback for Dwelling 1 adopts a setback and visual built form of that of a two (2) storey dwelling house and is not dissimilar to approved multi dwelling housing existing within the locality (to which the Hurstville DCP applies). There are no high habitable use room windows along these side setback encroachments and therefore, no unreasonable privacy impacts arise.

 

The proposal seeks a 909mm (ground floor) side setback for Dwelling 2 and Dwelling 3 (southern elevation) and 916mm setback for Dwelling 6 garage (northern elevation). This is to allow compliant internal vehicular circulation within the site to Forest Road, Peakhurst. The extent of the variations relate to single storey elements only which align with single storey dwelling house controls.

 

There are no windows along the reduced side setbacks for the garages. The extent of this variation is not readily perceivable from the public domain as this is obscured by the two (2) storey built forms of Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2 which form two (2) storey townhouses. The flat skillion roof design also reduces visual bulk and scale impacts to adjoining residential properties.

 

For the reasons above, the proposed variations to the side setbacks are considered to be acceptable.

PC7. Car parking:

DS7.1

 

3 bedroom +

 

 

 

DS7.2

 

 

DS7.3 Driveway width

 

 

 

2 car spaces

 

 

 

Car parking behind main building face

 

40% (site less than 20m) 7.29m

 

 

 

Dwellings 1 to 6: 2 car spaces provided for each dwelling within garages.

 

All car parking spaces behind building line.

 

Site width: 18.23m, Total driveway width = 4m + 6.6m (10.6m combined 58%

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

No  (2)

(2) Driveway width

Council’s controls (PC7 Car Parking, DS7.3 Driveway Width) prescribes a maximum driveway width of 40% for sites less than 20m. The site contains a frontage of 18.23m to Forest Road, Peakhurst whereby the application of these controls prescribes a maximum driveway width of 7.29m. The proposal seeks a variation to this control as two (2) driveways are proposed being 4m servicing Dwelling 1 and 6.6m serving dwellings 2 - 6. This equates to 10.6m in total driveway width equating to 58%.

The variation is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·    The driveway width for the southern driveway (to facilitate access for Dwellings 2-6) proposes a driveway width of 6.6m at the front of the property boundary which is provides a passing bay.

 

·    The proposed driveway width of 4m servicing Dwelling 1 is considered to be reasonable as the configuration, which presents to the street as a dwelling house, and functions generally independently to the other dwellings on site. It is noted that Council’s controls a residential driveway width of 4.5m maximum.

 

·    The proposed cumulative driveway width will not result in an unreasonable loss of on street car parking on Forest Road which forms a local road. It is noted that there is 6.26m spatial separation between the driveways of which would reasonably allow a car to be parked within the site frontage.

 

·    The proposed configuration is compatible the immediate surrounding area and is similar to that of approved multi dwelling housing within the locality which results in a reasonable planning outcome given the allotment shape.

 

·    The proposal incorporates landscaped area within the front setback which is considered to be well integrated with the driveway layout and configuration. Additional conditions of consent require the removal of planter boxes, stepping stones, bin storage behind the building line, deletion of the blade wall along the southern side elevation forward of the building line.

 

·    An additional design condition prior to issue of construction certificate is recommended to ensure that a B99 and B85 vehicles can pass each other, this will alter the passing bay depth, but not the width.

 

For the reasons above, the proposed variation to maximum driveway width is considered to be acceptable in relation to satisfy the underlying objectives of this clause.

PC8.Landscaped area

 

DS8.1Landscaped area

 

 

 

 

DS8.2Minimum dimension

 

 

 

20% (400sqm)

 

 

 

 

 

2m

 

 

 

26.13% (522.12sqm) this includes landscaped areas located forward and behind the building line.

 

2m achieved.

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

PC9. Private Open Space:

 

DS9.1

3 bedroom

 

Area 3 bedroom

 

 

Access

 

 

 

 

 

Landscaping

 

 

 

 

 

 

6m x 4m

 

60sqm

 

 

Accessible from a main living room and 1:20 grade

 

 

 

Landscaped area to be provided between front boundary and front setback

 

 

 

 

Dwelling 1-6: 6m x 4m minimum achieved.

Dwelling s 1-6: 60sqm minimum achieved.

 

Accessible from main living rooms located on the ground floor, gradient 1:20 not exceeded.

 

Landscaping provided between dwelling 1 and front setback. As previously stated an additional design condition has been imposed for the removal of structures within the front setback to allow for greater opportunities for substantial planting.

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

PC10. Solar Access

DS10.1 Main living

 

 

DS10.2 3 Hours minimum solar access

 

 

DS10.3 Proposal to comply with BASIX

 

DS10.4 Windows to incorporate shading devices

Main living areas adjoin P.O.S

 

3 hours solar access achieved to adjoining properties.

 

Proposal complies with BASIX requirements.

 

 

Eaves provided.

Yes

 

 

No (3) refer to discussion below.

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

(3) Solar access

Council’s controls (PC10. Solar Access, DS10.2) prescribe 3 hours solar access is to be achieved to adjoining properties.

 

The adjoining southern property is most affected by the proposal. The subject site is located on a west to east axis which contains a frontage to Forest Road, Peakhurst. This is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·    The proposal complies with floor space ratio and height controls and generally conforms to the setback controls as previously discussed a 900mm setback is proposed for the garages of dwelling 2 and 3. 

 

·    The proposed variation of the setbacks to the southern side boundary do not result in any unreasonable overshadowing impacts to adjoining southern properties or which are considered to be difficult to retain solar access due to the inherent orientation of the site.

 

·    It is noted that the ground floor and first floor non-compliant setback of dwelling 1 along the northern side boundary does not result in adverse impacts to southern properties given the sitting and spatial separation proposed.

 

For the reasons above, the proposed variation to solar access is considered to be acceptable and is supported on planning merit.

PC11. Visual Privacy

DS11.1 Windows offset by 1m or screened or oriented to ensure visual privacy

Windows appropriately offset between dwelling and adjoining properties.

Yes

PC12. Noise

DS12.1 windows minimum 3m setback

No - windows proposed within 3m of the boundary.

No (4)

(4) Noise

Council’s controls (PC12. Noise, DC12.1) prescribe a minimum side setback of 3m for windows. Dwelling 1 which forms a two (2) storey townhouse seeks a variation to this control as a setback of 1,237mm is sought.  The windows along the northern side elevation form bathroom ensuite windows which are considered to be of a low habitable use which is considered to be acceptable. As these windows are not proposed to be obscured, a condition of consent forming a design change prior to issue of construction certificate has been imposed for these first floor bathrooms windows along the northern elevation to be frosted or obscured to provide an appropriate level of privacy between the subject site and adjoining northern property.

PC13. Streetscape

DS13.1 Roof 45 degrees attic, mixed roof forms, entrances of buildings contained porch, portico or similar

Less than 45 degrees, being a mixture of parapets and skillion roof forms with the entrances of buildings appropriately treated.

Yes

PC14. Front Fencing

DS14.1 1m max front fence height

Front fences and planter boxes are proposed in the front setback with hard surfaces to be deleted to allow for mature planting and improved sightlines for vehicles to and from the Forest Road.

Yes

PC15. Site facilities

Provision of electricity,

Can be provided on site, mail and garbage storage is also to be provided on site.

Yes

 

Section 5.6 Swimming Pool and Spas

82.      The proposal seeks the construction of an in-ground swimming pool as part of Dwelling 1 (front townhouse) which located within the rear setback of this dwelling. The swimming pool forms an “L” shape design with beach area with dimensions of 6.31m in length and 3.99m in width. The swimming pool seeks a range in water depth from 300mm (beach area) to a maximum of 1.8m. The proposal has been considered in accordance with the applicable controls within this subsection.

 

Table 4: Hurstville Development Control Plan Section 5.6 Swimming Pools and Spas Compliance Table

Applicable DCP Controls

Standards

Proposal

Complies

 PC1. Pool Siting and Noise Control

DS21.1 In-ground swimming pools shall be built so that the top of the swimming pool is as close to the existing ground level as possible. On sloping sites this will often mean excavation of the site on the high side to obtain the minimum out of ground exposure of the swimming pool at the low side.

The proposed swimming pool is proposed to be located at natural ground level.

Yes

 

DS1.2 Provided one point on the swimming pool or one side of the swimming pool is at or below existing ground level, then one other point or one other side may be up to 500 mm above existing ground level.

As stated above the proposed swimming pools is proposed to be located at natural ground level.

Yes

 

DS1.3 When consent is granted for a swimming pool having a height above natural ground level in excess of 500 mm, any landscaping treatment must be completed before the swimming pool is filled with water.

Largely at ground level.

Yes

 

DS1.5 Filling is not permitted between the swimming pool and the property boundary.

The proposal does not seek any fill between the northern side setback (closest boundary) adjoining this swimming pool.

Yes

 

DS1.6 The drainage of spill water from a swimming pool shall be designed so that it does not affect the natural environment of the subject site or adjoining properties.

The proposal seeks to adequately drain the pool water to the sewer. A condition to consent has been imposed to this effect.

Yes

 

DS1.7 Swimming pools are to be constructed so that the top of the bond beam is as close to ground level as possible

The proposed swimming pool is located close to the ground level.

Yes

 

DS1.8 Spas and swimming pools proposed to be constructed between the dwelling and the street will be considered by Council if the amenity of the area is not adversely impacted and the other requirements in this DCP are met.

The proposed swimming pool is proposed to be located behind the front building line of dwelling 1.

This will not be visible from the public domain as it will be visually obstructed by the built form of dwelling 1 which forms a two storey town house.

Yes

 

DS1.10 The swimming pool edge must be at least 1.5 metres from side and rear property boundaries.

The swimming pool seeks a side setback of 1.53m from the northern side boundary (forming the closest boundary). The swimming pool is more than 1.5m from the rear eastern boundary. 

Yes

 

DS1.11 The position of the swimming pool in relation to neighbours and other residents must be considered to reduce noise associated with activities carried out in the swimming pool or from associated the swimming pool equipment, such as cleaning equipment.

The proposed swimming pool is located sufficiently away from adjoining properties. It is noted that the swimming pool adjoins the front setback of 795-797 Forest Road, Peakhurst to the north.

Yes

 

DS1.12 Council may require mechanical equipment to be suitable acoustically treated so that noise to adjoining properties is reduced.

The mechanical equipment is to be acoustically treated.

Yes

 

DS1.13 The construction, location and use of the swimming pool are to be such that no nuisance is caused to any neighbouring residents by reason of noise, drainage, illumination or for any other reason.

The construction, location and use are not considered to result in any unreasonable impacts in consideration of the criterion within this clause.

Yes

 

DS1.14 Heated swimming pools must utilise energy for heating from renewable energy sources, such as solar heating, heat pumps and gas heating. Swimming pool covers should be used when the swimming pool is not in use.

The proposed swimming pool complies with BASIX Certificate commitments.

Yes

PC2 Landscaping

DS2.1 Tree and shrub planting is to be provided along the adjoining property boundary lines to achieve a reasonable level of privacy. Refer to Appendix 1 for recommended species to use.

Appropriate screen planting is proposed along the northern side boundary which is considered to be acceptable in minimising amenity impact to the adjoining northern property.

Yes

 

DS2.2 Paved and other impervious areas are to be minimised and designed to provide stormwater and swimming pool overflow infiltration.

The proposal seeks reasonable levels of paved areas immediately around the swimming pool. A skimmer is located along the eastern rear end of the pool.

Yes

 

 

DS2.3 Swimming pools are to be designed to ensure the retention of existing trees.

The proposed swimming pool location does not impact any trees on site or on adjoining properties.

Yes

 

DS2.4 Where a swimming pool is located close to an existing tree, elevated decks are preferred as the swimming pool coping to ensure minimal root damage.

As above.

Yes

 

DS2.5 Swimming pool water discharges must not in any circumstances be directed through bushland areas located on private or public land.

The proposed swimming pool is to discharge to the sewer.

Yes

 

DS2.6 Council does not approve trees to be removed based upon leaf drop or lack of solar access to a swimming pool.

The proposal does not seek the removal of any trees to accommodate the proposed pool in the location along the northern side boundary. 

Yes

As per the above table, the proposed swimming pool complies with the requirements of this subsection and is considered to be satisfactory.

 

Appendix 1 - 10. Building Heights

83.      The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the HLEP 2012 with a height of building of 9m within the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012. The indicative number of storeys prescribed within this section is 2 storeys. The proposal seeks a 2 storey built form for Dwellings 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 (front) and single storey built form for Dwelling 3 which is consistent for the envisaged number of storeys within this subsection.

 

Appendix 2 Council Codes and Policies

1. Drainage and On-Site Detention

84.      The proposal seeks to drain to the rear with on-site detention provided on site. The proposed stormwater disposal is supported by Council’s Development Engineer subject to deferred commencement to obtain an easement on a downstream property and extension of stormwater infrastructure within Dawn Street.

 

2. Fencing adjacent to public Roads

85.      The proposal seeks a 1m high front masonry fence and planter boxes along the front western boundary. To improve vehicular sight lines to and from the street, the proposed front fences and planter boxes are to be deleted as part of design condition prior to issue of construction certificate.

 

INTERIM POLICY GEORGES RIVER DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2020

86.      The proposed development is subject to the provisions of the Interim Policy Georges River DCP 2020. Only the applicable aspects have been assessed with respect to the Interim DCP. All other aspects have been thoroughly assessed under the Hurstville DCP No.1. The aim of an Interim Policy is to set a consistent approach for the assessment of residential development within the Georges River Local Government Area, until such a time as a comprehensive DCP is prepared and implemented. Comments are made with respect to the proposal satisfying the objectives and controls contained within the DCP.

 

Table 5: Interim Policy Georges River DCP 2020

Control

Standard

Proposed

Complies

Multi Dwelling Housing

Landscaping

Site area = 1,998sqm

20%

399.6sqm (min)

26.13% (522.12sqm) located forward and behind the building line of the site. The landscaping is reflective of resultant conditions.

Yes

 

87.      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.

 

88.      Whilst the Interim Policy has no statutory recognition in the assessment of a Development Applications pursuant to the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, the policy will be used as a guide as it is an endorsed position of the Council.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the interim policy.

 

IMPACTS

Natural Environment

89.      The subject site and immediate surrounding area has been historically used for residential purposes. The proposal seeks cut and fill commensurate to other multi dwelling housing residential developments within the locality. The proposal will result in the protection of the street tree, adequate stormwater disposal to the rear with appropriate tree and drainage conditions imposed. In this regard, proposed works will not materially impact the natural environment.  

 

Built Environment

90.      The built form of the proposed development is of a bulk and scale that is compatible with the immediate surrounding context. The proposed design is considered to be responsive to the allotment shape, dimensions, trees and drainage on site. The proposal for the most part complies with the prescribed planning controls. As previously discussed within this report, the proposal seeks minor variations to the controls relating to driveway width, side setbacks and overshadowing of which are not considered to result in any unreasonable material impacts.

 

Social Impact

91.      The assessment demonstrates that the proposal in its current form will not have an adverse impact on the character of the locality and the amenity of neighbouring residential properties. The environmental impacts on the social environment are considered to be not unreasonable and therefore the application is supported.

 

Economic Impact

92.      The proposal is not considered to result in unreasonable material economic impact given the residential use of the proposal.

 

93.      Suitability of the Site

The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential pursuant to the provisions contained within the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012. As previously addressed within the report, the proposal which forms multi-dwelling housing and was a permissible form of development in this zone at the time the application was lodged. Under clause 1.8A savings provisions apply. It is considered that the proposal will not have any unreasonable adverse impact on adjoining properties, streetscape or locality beyond in its current form subject to conditions of consent.

 

SUBMISSIONS, REFERRALS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST

94.      The application was notified and renotified to adjoining owners, occupiers for fourteen (14) days. In response, twenty five (25) submissions were received within and after the notification period. A summary of the key concerns raised within the submissions have been addressed below.

 

The proposal is not consistent with the previous approval granted by the Land and Environment Court whereby issues relating to drainage and trees have not been addressed

95.      Comment: This development application (DA2019/0431) being a new application requires a new assessment, there is no relationship to the previous Land and Environment Court approval. Impacts relating to stormwater and trees have been considered within this assessment report. The application is recommended for approval subject to a deferred commencement determination and relevant conditions of consent.

 

Stormwater issues into Dawn Street. Inadequate stormwater capacity. Increased impervious area. Drainage should be assessed by an independent Hydraulic Engineer

96.      Comment: Deferred commencement conditions imposed with appropriate details for the information to be prepared and submitted to Council for review and acceptance prior to the activation of the consent. It is noted that the original application was refused by Council and approved by the Land and Environment Court to satisfy drainage requirements. The proposal has been assessed and is supported by Council’s Development Engineer subject to the necessary drainage infrastructure provided to adequately control and discharge the stormwater from the site. Deferred Commencement Condition 1A and 1B and Condition 3 address these stormwater concerns. 

 

Information available for review. Inadequate information viewable

97.      Comment: The information provided on the DA Tracker for this application is consistent with the information displayed for all applications.

 

Removal of trees

98.      Comment: The proposal seeks to retain the four (4) trees on site along the southern side boundary and three (3) trees within the adjoining property at 53B Isaac Street, Peakhurst. This is supported by Council’s Consulting Arborist subject to conditions of consent. Condition 35 has been imposed to address tree protection.

 

99.      The landscaping plan details ten (10) trees and other vegetation is to be planted throughout the development to address the removal of trees.

 

Privacy and noise impacts from swimming pool and dwelling locations

100.    Comment: The proposed swimming pool and dwellings generally comply with setbacks with the exception of Dwelling 1 (N) and garages of Dwelling 2 (S), Dwelling 3 (S) and Dwelling 6 (N). Windows on the first floor are low habitable use rooms. Condition 25 has been imposed to delete the rear alfresco of Dwelling 3 to allow appropriate spatial separation to the rear adjoining properties and also allows for greater landscaped area.

 

Shadow impacts to adjoining properties

101.    Comment: The proposal is not considered to generate any unreasonable shadow impacts given the design and orientation of the site which is orientated on an east to west axis. As previously discussed within this report, the proposed variations to the side setbacks do not generate any unreasonable amenity impacts to adjoining properties to the south. In addition Dwelling 3 on the southern side at the rear is single storey to reduce overshadowing.

 

Car parking and vehicular impacts

102.    Comment: The proposal has provided fourteen (14) car spaces in accordance with Council’s controls, being two (2) spaces for each of the dwellings and two (2) visitor spaces. The proposal is supported by Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer and Infrastructure Design Engineer as the concerns raised regarding queuing have been addressed through the provision of a passing bay at the front of the site servicing Dwellings 2 - 6. Conditions 25 and 30 have been imposed to provide adequate vehicular access.

 

Overdevelopment of the site

103.    Comment: Concerns were raised regarding bulk and scale impacts. The proposal adopts a built from similar to that of approved multi dwelling development within the locality. As the proposal for the most part conforms with the key planning controls regarding floor space, height, landscaping and on site car parking, minor variations to the DCP setback criterion have been sought and addressed in detail earlier within this report. The variations are supported on planning merit. Condition 25 has been imposed for the deletion of the rear alfresco area of Dwelling 3.

 

No details of air conditioning dwellings

104.    Comment: The BASIX certificate details that no air conditioning dwellings have been provided, however the ducting will be installed should a connection be required in the future. No details on the potential location of condenser dwellings provided.

 

105.    Air conditioning dwellings may be undertaken under the provisions of Exempt Development under SEPP Exempt and Complying Development Codes 2008 subject to satisfying the legislative requirements contained within.

 

Excavation and ponding, seeping, dampness and mould affecting adjoining properties

106.    Comment: The proposal seeks excavation which is commensurate with that of other approved multi dwelling housing, no basement is proposed. A condition in relation to overland flow control has been imposed, as well as an easement created to control and discharge stormwater via a formalised drainage line into Dawn Street at the rear which will assist with addressing these issues from a site specific perspective.

 

Loss of solar access to western windows and impact on health and an asthmatic occupant

107.    Comment: The proposal whilst reducing solar access to adjoining allotments maintains compliant solar access to these properties in accordance with the assessment criterion.

 

No side passage fence shown on plans. Inconsistent information on the plans.

108.    Comment: The site has been inspected and adequate information has been provided for Council to undertake an assessment regarding material impact of the development proposed. The plans do not annotate fencing to boundaries is proposed.

 

On-site detention and drainage

109.    Comment: The development incorporates an OSD system which will drain via a lawful agreement through a down stream property to Dawn Street. Engineering conditions have been imposed in to ensure adequate stormwater disposal is provided as part of this development. Conditions 11, 12 and 13 have been imposed to address stormwater disposal.

 

Sewer overflow impacts

110.    Comment: Following the determination the construction certificate plans are required to be reviewed and stamped by a Sydney Water Agent with respect to sewer design and potable water connection, standard conditions have been imposed in this regard. Condition 29 has been imposed to address sewer overflow. The pool water is required to discharge to the sewer.

 

Removal of asbestos fibro shed

111.    Comment: The removal of asbestos is required in the quantity on site to be undertaken by a licensed contractor. Appropriate conditions have been imposed in relation to disposal and handling of asbestos being Conditions 37, 38 and 39.

 

Public interest

112.    Comment: The proposal will seek to manage and improve the existing condition regarding stormwater disposal. The development is not inconsistent with development in the immediate locality.

 

Precedent

113.    Comment: Multi dwelling housing was a permissible development form in the R2 zone when this application was lodged. However during the assessment of this application multi dwelling house became prohibited in the zone. Under the provisions of the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan a savings provision applies to this development type as the proposed was lodged prior to the prohibition coming into force. As a result of this prohibition there will be no further development of this type within the R2 zone therefore approval of this application will not result in a precedent.

 

Devaluation of properties due to flooding   

114.    Comment: Assessment of the impact of development on property values is not a planning consideration under the provisions of the Environmental planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

115.    The overland flow impacts have been addressed and managed as part of this application. An easement is required to drain water from the site to Dawn Street via an onsite OSD system.

 

Multi dwelling housing not permissible in the zone

116.    Comment: Multi dwelling housing at the time this application was lodged was a permissible form of development. During the assessment of this application the development form became a prohibited form of development. However the savings provisions apply to this application enabling the application to be favourably determined.

 

Notification

117.    Comment: The application was notified and renotified in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan criterion.

 

Applicant ASIC, concerns raised that company named CC Builders (NSW) Pty Ltd has been wound up.

118.    Comment: Based on research this company submitted an application for a winding up order 30/9/20. The applicant is now Monument Design Partnership.

 

Significant amendment

119.    Comment: Council has accepted the amended plans for this development application which was renotified for resident consideration.

 

Discrepancy regarding site area and density regarding survey

120.    Comment: Council’s assessment of this application is based on the site area as referenced in the DP being 1,998sqm. A minimum site area of 1,890sqm is required to accommodate six (6) multi – unit dwellings. The proposal satisfies the minimum allotment size for the number of dwellings proposed.

 

Council Referrals  

Development Engineer

121.    The proposal seeks to drain to the rear via an approved easement granted through 4 Dawn Street, Peakhurst via development consent DA2017/0326. This consent is currently not operational however it is valid until 30 August 2022. The proposed stormwater disposal and impacts have been considered by Council’s development engineer and is supported subject to deferred commencement conditions for the easement to be create and infrastructure in Dawn Street to be upgraded.

 

Consultant Arborist

122.    An arborist report was provided in support of the proposal which seeks to protect and protect four (4) trees on site and three (3) trees on 53B Isaac Street, Peakhurst Council’s consulting arborist has reviewed the proposal and has supported the retention and protection of trees subject to conditions of consent. The proposal is supported subject to appropriate tree replacement on site and within the frontage of the site to replenish the tree canopy.

 

Infrastructure

123.    Council’s Design Engineer supports the proposal subject to conditions of consent.

 

Senior Traffic Engineer

124.    Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer has commented that vehicles should enter and exit in a forward direction and that a passing bay should be able to facilitate access of a B99 and B95 vehicle simultaneously using this.

 

125.    Comment: Dwellings 2 - 6 are located at the rear of the site of which can enter and exit the site in a forward direction. Dwelling 1 functions more like a dwelling house as it has its own separate access to the two (2) car parking spaces which is considered be reasonable in terms of access. The proposal seeks a 1m high front masonry fence and planter boxes along the front western boundary. To improve vehicular sight lines to and from the street, the front fencing and planter boxes are to be deleted as part of design condition prior to issue of construction certificate. In addition the passing bay is to be amended to facilitate the passing of two (2) vehicles in accordance with the Australian Standards; this amendment is to be certified by an suitably qualified traffic engineer.

 

GIS

126.    The application was referred to Council’s GIS Department for street numbering. The street numbering has been imposed as a condition of consent.

 

Co-ordinator Environmental Sustainability and Waste

127.    Council’s Coordinator Environmental Sustainability and Waste raised concerns regarding deficiencies within the submitted waste management plan and inadequate waste storage facilities. To address these concerns, conditions of consent have been imposed to provide an adequate waste management plan, adequate on site waste storage locations and management of waste.

 

128.    Comment: In addition to the above, appropriate design conditions are imposed to remedy the adequate location and capacity of the waste storage areas on site. A design condition has been imposed prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate for the following:

 

129.    “The waste storage area for Dwelling 1 is to be relocated behind the building line. The proposal is to be amended to incorporate a waste storage area for Dwelling 3 within the common waste storage areas for Dwellings 2 – 4 in the centre of the site. This waste storage area is to be increased to accommodate the required capacity”.

 

External Referrals

Ausgrid

130.    The application was referred to Ausgrid as per Clause 45(2) of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 for consideration. In response, the proposal is supported subject to compliance with Ausgrid Network Standards and Safe Work NSW Codes of Practice for Construction Work near existing electrical assets. A condition of consent has been imposed to this effect.

 

Contributions

131.    In accordance with Council’s Section 7.11 are applicable to multi dwelling housing developments. A condition of consent requiring payment of the contribution has been imposed.

 

Table 6: Contributions

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

Hurstville

Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 - Residential (Community Facilities)

$87,610.00

Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 - Residential (Open Space, Recreation, Public Domain)

$12,390.00

 

CONCLUSION

132.    Development consent is sought for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a six (6) dwelling multi-dwelling housing development, associated vehicle accommodation, an in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and site works on land known as 799 Forest Road, Peakhurst. The proposal has been assessed with regard to the matters for consideration listed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The proposal is considered to be an appropriate response to the context of the site and will result in a reasonable planning and urban design outcome.

 

133.    The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies, Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1 and complies with the development standards of the Local Environmental Plan and meets the underlying objectives of Development Control Plan is worthy of support subject to deferred commencement and appropriate conditions of consent imposed.

 

DETERMINATION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS

Statement of Reasons

·     The proposed multi dwelling housing development formed a permissible use within the R2 Low Density Residential Zone within the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 at the time the application was lodged and is covered by the savings provision of the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012.

·     The amended design is suitable for the subject site as the objectives of the controls have been reasonably satisfied and conforms with the objectives of the applicable planning controls.

·     The amended proposal provides good levels of amenity for future occupants and results in minimal adverse material impacts on adjoining properties and surrounding development.

 

Determination

134.    THAT Pursuant to Section 4.16(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, the Georges River Local Planning Panel grant deferred commencement consent to DA2019/0431 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of six (6) dwelling multi-dwelling housing development, associated vehicle accommodation, an in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and site works on Lot 2, DP 210901 and known as 799 Forest Road Peakhurst, subject to the following conditions.

 

            Deferred Commencement Conditions

This Development Application is a Deferred Commencement Consent under Section 4.16(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (as amended) 1979.  Strict compliance is required with all conditions appearing in Schedule 1 within thirty six (36) months from the Determination Date of this consent. Upon confirmation in writing from Georges River Council that the Schedule 1 Conditions have been satisfied, the consent shall commence to operate as a Development Consent for a period of five (5) years from the Determination Date of this consent.

 

Schedule 1

 

1.         Deferred Commencement - Drainage - Pursuant to Section 4.16(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, this consent will not operate until such time as the following requirements are satisfied:

 

The following documents/plans are to be provided to and approved by Council:

 

A.    Deferred Commencement Condition - Registration of a Stormwater Easement - The person with the benefit of the consent must acquire an Easement to Drain Water of 1 metre (minimum) width - except where adjacent to existing buildings on site where 900mm is acceptable through a downstream property. The easement must allow for a piped, gravity fed system of stormwater drainage from the land the subject of this consent with direct, underground connection to Council's proposed kerb inlet pit directly in front of the Dawn Street property on which an easement is acquired.  The full costs of these works are to be borne by the developer.

 

The consent is not to operate until evidence of registration of the easement to drain water benefitting the land the subject of this consent and title of each other property/ies is provided to council.

 

              B.                                                                                                 Deferred Commencement Condition - The person with the benefit of the consent must obtain separate consent for all drainage works to be carried out within the ‘Easement to Drain Water’. The written consent of each of the owners of the property/ies burdened by the Easement will be required for each development application to carry out the drainage works on the burdened lot/s.

 

The consent is not to operate until development consent is obtained for the whole of the drainage works within the Easement(s) to drain water.

 

Documentary evidence as requested or the above information must be submitted within thirty six (36) months of the granting of this deferred commencement consent.  Activation of this Consent cannot commence until written approval by Council is given advising Schedule 1 is satisfied.

 

Subject to Schedule 1 above being satisfied the development is to be carried out subject to the following conditions as referenced in Schedule 2.

 

Schedule 2

 

Development Details

 

1.         Approved Plans - 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

Prepared by

Coversheet

DA.000

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Survey Plan

DA.001

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Demolition Plan

DA.002

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Context Analysis

DA.003

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Site Plan and Analysis

DA.004

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Ground Floor Plan

DA.005

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

First Floor Plan

DA.006

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Roof Plan

DA.007

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Sections

DA.008

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Elevations

DA.009

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Shadow Diagrams

DA.010

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Architectural visualisation

DA.011

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Schedule of Finishes

DA.012

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Window/Door Schedule + Nathers

DA.013

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

BASIX Commitments

DA.014

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Pool Detail

DA.015

19.12.19

A

Monument Design Partnership

Stormwater Plan

D1

01 Apr 20

Q

LMW Design Group

Stormwater Plan

D2

11 Mar 20

D

LMW Design Group

Stormwater Plan

D3

10 Mar 20

I

LMW Design Group

Stormwater Plan

D4

11 Mar 20

I

LMW Design Group

Stormwater Plan

SW1

10 Apr 20

D

LMW Design Group

Landscape Plans

14-2875 L01

14.04.2020

H

Zenith Landscape Designs

Landscape Plans

14-2875 L02

14.04.2020

H

Zenith Landscape Designs

Landscape Plans

14-2875 L03

14.04.2020

H

Zenith Landscape Designs

Landscape Plans

14-2875 L02

14.04.2020

H

Zenith Landscape Designs

Landscape Plans

14-2875 L02

14.04.2020

H

Zenith Landscape Designs

Arborist Report

MIAR 03/20

17th March 2020

 

NSW Trees

Car Park and Driveway Certification

N206341A

April 2020

1b

Motion Traffic Engineers

Access Report

19264

3rd April 2020

 

Access-i

BASIX Certificate

1044722M_02

 

09 April 2020

Greenworld Architectural Drafting

 

Separate Approvals Required Under Other Legislation

 

2.         Vehicular Crossing - Major Development - The following vehicular crossing and road frontage works will be required to facilitate access to and from the proposed development site:

 

The following vehicular crossing and road frontage works will be required to facilitate access to and from the proposed development site:

 

(a)   New 1.5m wide footpath to be constructed for full frontage of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications for footpath, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(b)   Construct a new 150mm high concrete kerb with 450mm wide gutter for the full frontage(s) of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications for kerb and guttering, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(c)   The thickness and design of the driveway shall be in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(d)   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.

(e)   Due to the increase in traffic that will be utilising the shared exit driveway onto Forest Rd, the applicant will be required to reconstruct the vehicular crossing on Council land of the shared driveway of number 801 Forest Road to a Heavy Duty driveway as per Council’s specifications, the applicant will be required to give the residents of number 801 Forest Road a minimum  4 weeks notice prior to any works commencing.

 

3.         Extension of Council’s Drainage System - Council’s drainage system shall be extended along Dawn Street, approximately 32m with a 375mm (min.) diameter pipeline and terminating in a kerb inlet pit directly outside the property through which an easement to drain water is to be acquired, with all costs borne by the developer.

 

4.         Section 138 Roads Act 1993 and Section 68 Local Government Act 1993 - Unless otherwise specified by a condition of this consent, this Development Consent does not give any approval to undertake works on public infrastructure.

 

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;

 

(a)     Placing or storing materials or equipment;

 

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

 

(c)     Erecting a structure or carrying out work

 

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

 

(e)     Pumping concrete from a public road;

 

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

 

(g)     Constructing a vehicular crossing or footpath;

 

(h)     Establishing a “works zone”;

 

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

 

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

 

(k)     Stormwater and ancillary to public infrastructure on private land; and

 

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

 

These separate activity approvals must be obtained and evidence of the approval provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

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.

 

Requirements of Concurrence, Integrated & Other Government Authorities

 

5.         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).  The proposal is to comply with Ausgrid Network Standards and SafeWorkNSW Codes of Practice for construction works near existing electrical assets. The “as constructed” minimum clearances to Ausgrid’s infrastructure must not be encroached by the building development. It also remains the responsibility of the developer and the relevant contractors to verify and maintain these clearances onsite.

 

6.         Connection to the network will be required prior to the release of any Occupation Certificate - Where works within the road reserve are to be carried out by the developer, a Road Opening Permit must be obtained from Council's Customer Service Centre before commencement of work.

 

7.         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.

 

8.         Notice of Requirements for a Section 73 Certificate - A Notice of Requirements of what will eventually be required when issuing a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 <http://legislation.nsw.gov.au/> 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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Prior to the Issue of a Construction Certificate

 

9.         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 Certifying Authority.

 

10.       On Site Detention - The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. Final detailed plans of the drainage system, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate.

 

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:

 

a)    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,

 

b)    at Annual Recurrence Intervals of 2 years and 100 years.

      

Refer to Flow Controls in Council's Draft/Adopted Stormwater Drainage Policy.

      

The OSD facility shall be designed to meet all legislated safety requirements and childproof safety fencing around the facility must be provided where the OSD facility is open or above ground when the design peak storage depth is greater than 300mm. A durable metal plate or similar sign is to be placed at the OSD facility and must bear the words:

 

"BEWARE: This is an on-site detention basin/tank for rainwater which could overflow during heavy storms."

 

Full details shall accompany the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

11.       Detailed Stormwater Drainage Design - The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. A detailed drainage design supported by a catchment area plan and drainage calculations (including a Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis) must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

 

12.       Stormwater Overland Flow - A design which provides for the capture of all stormwater runoff in a 1:100yr ARI storm event utilising a system of surface inlet pits (applying a 50% blockage factor for capture capacity) and underground pipeline (allowing a 50% blockage factor, and providing no offset allowance for the presence of an On Site Detention system) to provide a stormwater escape route shall be submitted. This design is to include any openings in existing or proposed fencing on the site to accommodate the overland flow.  Evidence from an appropriately qualified person that this design requirement has been met shall accompany the application for the Construction Certificate

 

13.       Support for Easement Pipes -

 

(a)     All footings within 2.0 metres of the drainage easement shall be designed in such a manner that they are supported by foundations set at a minimum of 300mm below pipe invert levels or founded on sound rock.

 

(b)     Alternatively, the footings of the building or any structure shall be designed not to affect the zone of influence taken from the invert of any pipe.

 

(c)     The walls of any dwelling, pool or structure adjoining the easement shall be designed to withstand all forces should the easement be excavated to existing pipe invert levels.

 

(d)     No building or other structure must be placed over the drainage easement or stormwater system or within the zone of influence taken from the invert of any pipe.

 

Evidence from an appropriately qualified person that this design requirement has been met shall accompany the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

14.       Damage Deposit - Major Works - In order to insure against damage to Council property the following is required:

 

a)      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: $22,532.28

 

b)      Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a non-refundable inspection fee to enable assessment of any damage and repairs where required: $155.00

 

c)      Submit to Council, before the commencement of work, a dilapidation report of the condition of the Council nature strip, footpath and driveway crossing, or any area likely to be affected by the proposal.

 

At the completion of work Council will review the dilapidation report and the Works-As-Executed Drawings (if applicable) and inspect the public works.

 

The damage deposit will be refunded in full upon completion of work where no damage occurs and where Council is satisfied with the completion of works. Alternatively, the damage deposit will be forfeited or partly refunded based on the damage incurred.

 

15.       Access for Persons with a Disability - Access and sanitary facilities for persons with disabilities must be provided to the premises/building in accordance with the requirements of the Premises Standards, the Building Code of Australia, and AS 1428.1. Details must be submitted with the Construction Certificate Application for approval.

 

16.       Geotechnical report - The applicant must submit a 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.  This is to be submitted before the issue of the Construction Certificate and is to include:

 

(a)     Investigations certifying the stability of the site and specifying the design constraints to be placed on the foundation, any earthworks/stabilization works and any excavations.

 

(b)     Dilapidation Reports on the adjoining properties including, but not limited to all adjoining properties prior to any excavation of site works.  The Dilapidation Report is to include assessments on, but not limited to, the dwellings at those addresses and any external paths, grounds etc.  This must be submitted to the PCA and the adjoining residents as part of the application for the Construction Certificate.  Adjoining residents are to be provided with the report five (5) working days prior to any works on the site.

 

(c)     On-site guidance by a vibration specialist during the early part of excavation.

 

(d)     Measures to minimise vibration damage and loss of support to other buildings. Where possible any excavation into rock is to be carried out with tools such as rock saws which reduce vibration to adjoining buildings and associated structures. Where a hydraulic hammer is to be used within 30 metres of any building (other than a path or a fence) the report shall detail the maximum size of hammer to be used and provide all reasonable recommendations to manage impacts.

 

(e)     Sides of the excavation are to be piered prior to any excavation occurring to reinforce the walls of the excavation to prevent any subsidence to the required setbacks and neighbouring sites.

 

17.       Car Wash Bays - Plans and specifications of the car washing system which has been approved by Sydney Water must be submitted with the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

All car washing bays shall be contained within a bunded car wash bay with pre-treatment approved by Sydney Water. The water from the car wash bay must be graded to a drainage point and connected to sewer.

 

If alternative water management and disposal options are proposed (i.e. where water is recycled, minimised or reused on the site), detailed plans and specifications of the water recycling system must be submitted with the application for the Construction Certificate for approval.

 

18.       Tree Removal prohibited - This consent does not approve the removal or pruning (branches or roots) of any trees on the subject property, Council’s public footway, public reserves or on neighbouring properties.

 

19.       NBN Connection - Prior to the issue of the Subdivision or Construction Certificate in connection with a development, the developer (whether or not a constitutional corporation) is to provide evidence satisfactory to the Certifying Authority that arrangements have been made for:

 

(i)    the installation of fibre-ready facilities to all individual lots and/or premises in a real estate development project so as to enable fibre to be readily connected to any premises that is being or may be constructed on those lots. Demonstrate that the carrier has confirmed in writing that they are satisfied that the fibre ready facilities are fit for purpose; and

 

(ii)   the provision of fixed-line telecommunications infrastructure in the fibre-ready facilities to all individual lots and/or premises in a real estate development project demonstrated through an agreement with a carrier.

 

(Note real estate development project has the meanings given in section 372Q of the Telecommunications Act).

 

20.       Fees to be paid - The fees listed in the table below 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).

 

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).

 

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.

 

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).

 

A summary of the fees to be paid are listed below:

 

Fee Type

Fee

GENERAL FEES

Long Service Levy (to Long Service Corporation) Or, provide evidence of Payment direct to the Long Service Corporation.  See https://portal.longservice.nsw.gov.au/bci/levy/

Builders Damage Deposit

$22,532.28

Inspection Fee for Refund of Damage Deposit

$155.00

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

HURSTVILLE

Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 - Residential (Community Facilities)

$12,390.00

Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 - Residential (Open Space, Recreation, Public Domain)

$87,610.00

 

General Fees

 

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.

 

Development Contributions

 

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.

 

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.

 

Timing of Payment

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

 

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.

 

21.       Site Management Plan - A Site Management Plan must be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate, and include the following:

 

a)      location of protective site fencing;

b)      location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

c)      location of building materials for construction, e.g. stockpiles

d)      provisions for public safety;

e)      dust control measures;

f)       method used to provide site access location and materials used;

g)      details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

h)      method used to provide protective measures for tree preservation;

i)       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

j)        location and size of waste containers/skip bins;

k)      details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

l)        method used to provide construction noise and vibration management;

m)     construction and demolition traffic management details.

 

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. A copy of the Site Management Plan must be kept on site and is to be made available upon request.

 

22.       BASIX Commitments - All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the BASIX Certificate No. 1044722M_02 dated 9 April 2020 prepared by Greenworld Architectural Drafting must be implemented on the plans lodged with the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

23.       Required design changes (engineering) - The following changes are required to be made and shown on the Construction Certificate plans:

 

Drawing Reference

Drawing Date

Revision

Drawing Description

Author

Job No. 838.14 Drawing No D1

07/4/20

Q

Ground Floor Stormwater Drainage Plan & Section Details

LMW Design Group Pty Ltd

Job No. 838.14 Drawing No D2

11/3/20

D

Section Details & Design Values

LMW Design Group Pty Ltd

Job No. 838.14 Drawing No D3

10/4/18

I

Stormwater Drainage plan, Longitudinal section & Section Details

LMW Design Group Pty Ltd

 

The following changes are required to be addressed in Architectural and Detailed Hydraulic (as applicable) to accompany the application for a Construction Certificate

 

(i)    (a)     A detailed stormwater catchment plan is to be submitted that includes all land (on and off site) contributing runoff in a 1:100yr ARI storm event to the drainage system for the proposed development site.

(b)     Detailed hydrologic and hydraulic calculations are to be provided for the determination of the default underground drainage system proposed to convey all overland flow from the site for the 1:100yr ARI event with a view to justifying why a larger size pipeline (i.e. 300mm (min.) diameter) should not be utilised in place of the proposed 225mm diameter at 1% grade, and making allowance for a 50% pipe blockage.

This evaluation needs to be based, for safety reasons, on a system that excludes any benefit from an On Site Detention system.

(ii)   The proposed weldmesh litter guard across the outlet pipeline in the chamber downstream of the OSD tank weir is to be deleted;.

(iii)  All design pipeline gradients are to be shown, in addition to the generic reference to ‘@ Min. 1%’.

(iv)  The pipe invert level at both ends of pipelines (main, and branch) are to be included.

(v)   All pipelines/conduits draining grated trench drains and surface inlet pits are to be 150mm diameter (min., or equivalent cross sectional area).

(vi)  A fully detailed analysis of the surface inlet pit capture capacity, with a 50% blockage factor, is to be provided demonstrating the ability to capture and manage the total runoff from a 1:100yr ARI storm event.

(vii) Plans shall specify concrete-encasement (150mm minimum thickness all around) for the stormwater pipeline where situated under buildings downstream of the On Site Detention tank.

(viii) Plans shall specify that all building loads over the stormwater pipeline downstream of the On Site Detention tank shall be transmitted to foundation material below the pipe invert level via a pier and beam type footing design - piers to be 600mm (min.) clear of the pipeline concrete encasement.

 

24.       Erosion & Sedimentation Control - Erosion and sediment controls must be provided to ensure:

 

(a)     Compliance with the approved Erosion & Sediment Control Plan

 

(b)     Removal or disturbance of vegetation and top soil is confined to within 3m of the approved building area (no trees to be removed without approval)

 

(c)     All clean water runoff 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)     All erosion and sediment controls are fully maintained for the duration of demolition, excavation and/or development works

 

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

 

(g)     All disturbed areas are rendered erosion-resistant by turfing, mulching, paving or similar

 

(h)     Compliance with Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction (Blue Book) produced by Landcom 2004.

 

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.

 

25.       Required design changes - The following changes are required to be made and shown on the Construction Certificate plans:  

 

Front Setback

Amended plans and details are required to delete structures, stepping stones and planter boxes within the front setback with the exception of the mailboxes forward of the building line of Dwelling 1 (Two storey townhouse fronting Forest Road, Peakhurst). Ground covers and a tree are to be provided as an alternative, with access to the dwelling to be via the driveway.

Waste Storage

The waste storage area for Dwelling 1 is to be relocated behind the building line.  The proposal is to be amended to incorporate waste storage area for Dwelling 3 within the common waste storage areas for Dwellings 2 - 4 at the centre of the site. This waste storage area maybe increased to accommodate the required capacity.

Rear setback

The rear pergola is to be deleted from the rear of Dwelling 3. Stairs are permitted to be constructed within the rear setback to provide access from the living areas to the rear yard.

Passing Bay

The vehicular passing bay is to be amended to allow a B85 and B99 to pass one another. Certification that this has been achieved must be prepared by a suitably qualified traffic engineer.

Dwelling 1 - Access

The floor finished floor levels and driveway gradient of Dwelling 1 are to be amended to allow compliant gradient access to and from the street.

Dwelling 1 - Windows

The first floor bathroom windows along the northern elevation to be frosted or obscured.

 

26.       Stormwater System - The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. Final detailed plans of the drainage system, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate.

 

The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. Final detailed plans of the drainage system, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate.

 

(a)   A detailed drainage design supported by a catchment area plan and drainage calculations (including a Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis), shall be prepared by a qualified practicing hydraulics engineer (with details of qualifications being provided) and submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate application.

 

(b)   All stormwater shall drain by gravity to the easement to drain water in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Standard ASINZS 3500.3: 2003 (as amended).

 

(c)   All stormwater conveyed in the pipe system in the easement to drain water shall drain by gravity to the upper level of Council's proposed kerb inlet pit which is to be located in front of the Dawn Street property through  which the easement is acquired; further, Council's drainage system is to be extended to this pit with a 375mm (min) diameter pipeline with all costs borne by the deveIoper.

      

(d)   Particular attention   shall  be  paid  to  that  element of the drainage system under building dwellings 5 and/or 6, downstream of the on-site detention tank and driveway area, which  is to be  designed  to  capture  and  convey(with a 50% blockage factor)  runoff from a 1:100yr ARI storm event for the total contributing catchment area.      

 

(e)   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.

 

27.       Stormwater Drainage Plan Details - Stormwater drainage plans including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, dimensions and types of drainage pits prepared by a professional engineering specialising in hydraulic engineering shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

 

These plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Australian Institute of Engineers Australian Rainfall and Runoff (1987) and Council's Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 which includes Appendix 2.

 

28.       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 Principal Certifying Authority for approval prior to construction of the specified works.

 

A copy shall be forwarded to Council where Council is not the PCA.

 

29.       Swimming Pools - Use and Maintenance - The following apply to the construction, use and maintenance of swimming pools and spas:

           

(a)     no ground level may be raised or filled except where shown specifically on the approved plans;

 

(b)     all pool/spa waste water is to be discharged to the sewer according to the requirements of Sydney Water;

 

(c)     the swimming pool must not be used for commercial or professional purposes;

 

(d)     drain paved areas to the landscaped areas or a suitable lawful drainage system; and

 

(e)     arrange any external pool/spa lighting to minimise glare nuisance to adjoining owners.

 

30.       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).

 

31.       Waste Management Plan - 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 PCA and Council, where Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

32.       Waste Management Plan - A revised waste management plan incorporating the following amended details is to be submitted to Council’s delegate demonstrating compliance with the following:

 

-      Details of waste management during demolition must be provided to Council for review, details of proposed facilities for the management of identified wastes.

 

This amended waste management plan and supporting information is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s delegate prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

33.       Waste Storage – Residential and Mixed Use Developments - The waste storage area shall be located within the lot/building in accordance with the approved plans.

 

The waste storage area shall be large enough to accommodate the required number of bins for the development and located in an area to suitably facilitate servicing on waste collection day.

 

Residential Waste

The development will require the provision of the following waste and recycling facilities:

 

(a)   Domestic Waste – 1 x 120 litre mobile bins per dwelling (serviced once weekly).

(b)   Domestic Recycling – 1 x 240 litre mobile bin per dwelling (serviced once fortnightly).

(c)   Green Waste – 1 x 240 litre mobile bin per dwelling (serviced once fortnightly).

The path of travel for bins must be demonstrated free from stairs and at an appropriate width/gradient for the movement of 240L bins.

 

34.       Landscape Plans - All landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved landscape plans and specifications, drawn by Zenith Landscape Designs, Ref No 14 - 2875 - LO1 - 03, Rev H and dated 14/4/20. The landscaping shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans in perpetuity, subject to the following -

 

a)    The proposed Ten (10) trees and plant species, pot/ bag size and quantities of plants shall be in accordance with the proposed plant schedule upon the landscape plan, drawn by Zenith Landscape design. If plant species, pot/ bag size and quantities cannot be sourced, Council shall be contacted for alternatives;

b)    All ten (10) trees proposed upon the approved landscape plan shall comply with AS 2303 - 2018, Tree Stock for Landscape use and NATSPEC Specifying Trees: a guide to assessment of tree quality (2003), and be planted and maintained in accordance with Councils standard specification;

c)    If the planted ten (10) trees and plants are found to be faulty, damaged, dying or dead within twelve (12) months of planting then they must be replaced with the same species. If the ten (10) trees are found dead before they reach a height where they are protected by Councils Tree Management Controls, they must be replaced with the same species and pot/bag size;

 

35.       Compliance with submitted Arborist Report - The recommendations outlined in the Arborist’s Report titled Arboricultural Impact Assessment prepared by NSW Trees dated 17 March must be implemented throughout the relevant stages of construction.  Details of tree protection measures, recommendations and Hold Points to be implemented must be detailed and lodged with the Construction Certificate application for approval and shall be in accordance with Section 4 - Australian Standard AS 4970-2009: Protection of trees on development sites.

 

The tree/s to be retained and protected are listed in the table below.

 

Tree Species

Location of Tree / Tree No.

Tree Protection Zone (metres) TPZ as per AS4970 - 2009 Fencing distance from trunk

T1 - Syzygium austral

53B Isaac Street back fence

2.0 metres

T2 - Syzygium austral

53B Isaac Street back fence

2.0 metres

T3 - Syzygium austral

53 B Isaac Street back fence

2.0 metres

T4 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

10.2 metres

T5 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

9.6 metres

T6 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

6.12 metres

T7 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

7.2 metres

Tree Protection Measures for all trees shall be in accordance with AS4970 -2009, 5.0 Discussion of Findings within Arborist Report and Hold Points forming part of this Consent. Trees 4, 5, 6 and 7 shall be protected with the one continuous tree protection fencing.

 

Tree Protection and Retention - The following trees shall be retained and protected:

 

Tree Species

Location of Tree / Tree No.

Tree Protection Zone (metres) TPZ as per AS4970 - 2009 Fencing distance from trunk

T1 - Syzygium austral

53B Isaac Street back fence

2.0 metres

T2 - Syzygium austral

53 B Isaac Street back fence

2.0 metres

T3 - Syzygium austral

53 B Isaac Sreet back fence

2.0 metres

T4 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

10.2 metres

T5 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

9.6 metres

T6 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

6.12 metres

T7 - Syncarpia glomulifera

Within site, rear south fence

7.2 metres

Tree Protection Measures for all trees shall be in accordance with AS4970 -2009, 5.0 Discussion of Findings within Arborist Report and Hold Points forming part of this Consent. Trees 4, 5, 6 and 7 shall be protected with the one continuous tree protection fencing.

 

(a)   The client shall engage a qualified Arborist who holds an AQF Level 5 or above in Arboriculture and who is a current practicing and financial member of an Arboricultural Association or Affiliation.

(b)   The engaged AQF 5 Arborist shall provide a letter of engagement for the entirety of the project to oversee and provide guidance throughout all stages of the project that may affect trees on the site, adjacent sites and Councils street trees and provide to the nom9inated PCA for compliance.

(c)   A certificate of compliance letter for tree protection measures shall be completed and forwarded to the PCA - Principal Certifying Authority, at three (3) stages being before works, during works and once all building works have been completed, that tree protection measures have been installed and maintained during the building process.

 

Tree Protection Measures

(a)   All trees on Council property, subject site and adjacent sites, to be retained shall be protected before site set up and maintained during demolition, excavation and construction of the site.

(b)   The outdoor pergola must be removed from the eastern portion of Dwelling 3, to minimise impacts to trees 6 and 7.

(c)   All boundary fencing type construction within the tree protection zones of trees 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 must be of post and rail type method, with no strip footings allowed.

(d)   Although trees may be on adjacent sites, the tree protection fencing must be placed on the nominated distances as per table above, out from the trees trunk, within the subject site to minimise impacts to neighbours trees and kept for the entirety of the project.

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

(f)    Details of the tree protection measures to be implemented must be provided with the application for a Construction Certificate by a qualified Arborist who holds an AQF Level 5 or above in Arboriculture and who is a current practicing and financial member of an Arboricultural Association or Affiliation.

(g)   The engaged AQF 5 Consulting Project Arborist must be present on-site during the stages of site set up, excavation, demolition and construction when works are being undertaken that could impact on the tree canopy or root zone within the tree protection zone of each tree.

(h)   In accordance with AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites, a protective fence consisting of 2.4 x 1.8 metres high, fully supported chainmesh fence shall be used. The distance of the fence out 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.

(i)    The Tree Protection Zone of each tree, to be protected, shall be watered thoroughly and regularly to minimise the effects of construction works.

(j)    No building products/ materials or services shall be installed within the TPZ of the tree/s 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.

 

Tree Protection Plan & Hold Points

Prior to a Construction Certificate, The engaged AQF 5 Arborist must provide a Tree Protection Plan upon A3, coloured and Hold Points in accordance with the Arborist report and AS4970 -2009, Section 5 - Monitoring and Certification. 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and forwarded to the nominated Principal Certifying Authority, based upon;

 

-        Details of Tree Protection Fencing, mulch and signage

-      In detail, provide tree protection measures for ground protection and to prevent compaction within the Tree Protection Zones of trees 4, 5, 6 and 7.

-      In detail and as per Arborist report, 5.0 Discussion, VIII) a, b and c, provide measures on how builders shall implement formwork and associated construction techniques to have Dwellings 2 and 3 elevated, so as a 200mm void between ground level and the underside of the finished floor slab shall be implemented.

-      A hold points table describing the timeline that the engaged AQF Arborist must attend site to certify compliance in accordance with AS4970 -2009, Protection of trees on development sites and signed off by both the engaged AQF 5 Arborist and nominated PCA.

 

Excavation works near tree to be retained

(k)   Excavations around the trees to be retained on site or the adjoining properties shall be supervised by the AQF 5 Project Arborist to ensure that the root system will not adversely be affected.

(l)    All excavations required for the installations of stormwater piping within the TPZ of trees 4, 5, 6 and 7 must only be conducted using a non-destructive type of excavation, being air spade and under the guidance of the engaged AQF 5 Arborist. No excavator bucket type of trench machinery is to be used within tree protection zones.

(m)  Where the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of trees on site or adjoining sites become compromised by any excavation works, the AQF 5 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.

(n)   Tree Protection Zones around the trees to be retained are not to have soil level changes, building product / materials stored 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.

 

Pier and Beam / Cantilever -

(a)   Prior to the Construction Certificate, Architectural and Engineers plans must demonstrate and depict pier and Beam type construction for Dwellings 2 and 3,  Dwelling 3 garage with 200mm ground clearance and the removal of the pergola to  Dwelling 3 and forwarded to the nominated PCA for compliance.

(b)   To preserve trees 4, 5, 6 and 7 the construction type for dwellings 2 and 3 and Dwelling 3 garage must be isolated pier and beam construction within their TPZ. The piers shall be hand dug and located such that no roots of a diameter greater than 30mm are severed or injured in the process of any site works during the construction period. The beam shall be located no less than 200mm above the existing soil levels.

(c)   Removal or pruning of any other tree (that would require consent of Council) on the site is not approved. All pruning must be undertaken by a qualified Arborist in accordance with AS4373 -2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees and Amenity Tree Industry, Code of Practice (SafeWork NSW August 1998).

 

NSW Trees, Findings and Recommendations to be implemented

(a)   At a minimum, the southern wall alignment of Dwelling 3 must be maintained at a 3.0m setback from T5, 6 and 7.

(b)   Dwelling 2 and 3 must be supported above grade, upon pier and beam type construction allowing for a 200mm void between ground level and the underside of the finished floor slab.

(c)   Piers must be hand dug under the supervision of the engaged AQF 5 Arborist with photographic evidence and video footage provided in report format to the nominated PCA, for compliance.

(d)   Minor pruning to trees 4 - 7 to provide building clearance only, under the guidance of the engaged AQF 5 Arborist and in accordance with AS4373- 2007, Pruning of amenity trees.  

 

All existing ground levels must be maintained for the entirety of the project

(a)   Removal or pruning of any other tree (that would require consent of Council) on the site is not approved. All pruning must be undertaken by a minimum certificate Level 3, Licenced and insured Tree surgeon / Arborist in accordance with AS4373 -2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees and Amenity Tree Industry, Code of Practice (SafeWork NSW August 1998).

           

            Street Tree Removal / Replacement by Council -

a)    One street tree of species to be determined must be provided in the road reserve fronting the site.

b)    Council shall be appointed to remove and plant 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.

c)    The fees must be paid in accordance with the conditions of this consent. The fee payable is to ensure that the development makes adequate provision for the demand it generates for public amenities and public services within the area.

d)    The fees payable 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 conditions set out in this consent.

 

Fee Type - Tree planting on public land

Number of trees

Amount per tree

Administration Fee and tree planting

X1

$452.00

Cost of tree removal

 

N/A

Cost of Stump Grinding

 

N/A

 

36.       Allocation of street addresses - In order to comply with AS/NZS 4819:2011 Rural and Urban Addressing, the NSW Addressing User Manual (Geographical Names Board of NSW) and Georges River Council’s requirements, the street address for the subject development is allocated as follows:

 

Primary Address

·     799 Forest Road PEAKHURST  NSW  2210

 

Dwelling Addresses

 

Dwelling numbers on DA Plans

Dwelling numbers and addresses allocated by Council

Dwelling No.

COMPLETE ADDRESS

Dwelling 1

Dwelling 1/799 Forest Road, PEAKHURST NSW 2210

Dwelling 6

Dwelling 2/799 Forest Road, PEAKHURST NSW 2210

Dwelling 5

Dwelling 3/799 Forest Road, PEAKHURST NSW 2210

Dwelling 4

Dwelling 4/799 Forest Road, PEAKHURST NSW 2210

Dwelling 3

Dwelling 5/799 Forest Road, PEAKHURST NSW 2210

Dwelling 2

Dwelling 6/799 Forest Road, PEAKHURST NSW 2210

 

Details indicating compliance with this condition must be shown on the plans lodged with any Construction Certificate for approval.

 

Additional comments (if applicable)

If there are modifications or changes to the number of dwellings during the DA process, please advise the GIS team before the final approval. Otherwise, please ensure the list of addresses is attached to the consent.

 

Prior to the Commencement of Work (Including Demolition & Excavation) 

 

37.       Demolition & Asbestos - 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 PCA prior to the commencement of works.

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

38.       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 multi unit  dwelling, 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.

 

39.       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.

 

40.       Registered Surveyors Report - During Development Work - A report must be submitted to the PCA at each of the following applicable stages of construction:

 

a)      Set out before commencing excavation.

 

b)      Floor slabs or foundation wall, before formwork or commencing brickwork.

 

c)      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.

 

d)      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.

 

e)      Completion of any Pool Formwork - Before concreting of pool shell, detailing the location of the pool relative to the adjacent boundaries and its height relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.

 

f)       Completion of any Roof Framing - Before roof covered detailing eaves/gutter setback from boundaries.

 

g)      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.

 

Work must not proceed beyond each stage until the PCA is satisfied that the height and location of the building is proceeding in accordance with the approved plans.

 

41.       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 the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council for their records.

 

42.       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.

 

During Construction

 

43.       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 Council's underground drainage system in Dawn Street.

 

44.       Development Engineering - Damage within Road Reserve and Council Assets - The owner shall bear the cost of restoring any footpath, roadway and any other Council assets damaged due to works at, near or associated with the site.  This may include works by Public Utility Authorities in the course of providing services to the site.

 

45.       Development Engineering - Public Utility and Telecommunication Assets - The owner shall bear the cost of any relocation or modification required to any Public Utility Authority assets including telecommunication lines and cables and restoring any footpath, roadway and any other Council assets damaged due to works at, near or associated with the site.

 

46.       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.

 

47.       Hours of construction for demolition and building work - 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.

 

48.       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.

 

49.       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.

 

50.       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.

 

Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

 

51.       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;

 

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.

 

Positive Covenants

 

1.    The registered proprietor of the lot(s) hereby burdened will in respect of the system:

 

a)    keep the system clean and free from silt, rubbish and debris

 

b)    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

 

c)    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

 

d)    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.

 

2.    Pursuant to Section 88F(3) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 the Council shall have the following additional powers:

 

a)    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 1(d) above

 

b)    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 (i) hereof. Such expense shall include reasonable wages for the Council’s employees engaged in effecting the work referred to in (i) 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.

 

52.       Maintenance Schedule - 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.

 

53.       Works as Executed and Certification of Stormwater works - Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the PCA 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 PCA and Council, from a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering.

 

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 PCA.

 

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):

 

(a)  The location of any detention tanks with finished surface levels;

(b)  Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals

(c)   Volume of storage available in any detention tank;

(d)  The location, diameter, gradient and material (i.e. PVC, RC etc.) of all stormwater pipes;

(e)  The orifice size/s.

 

54.       Development Engineering - Restriction on use of land for overland flow - An additional Restriction of Use of the Land is to be created using Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919 over the subject property on which this development is to be carried out.  This Restriction shall ensure that the stormwater overland flow-path/default surface inlet pit capture system and underground pipeline under building as required from the Applicant, be maintained free from obstructions at all times and shall be worded as follows:

 

In relation to the stormwater overland flow path/default surface inlet pit capture system and underground pipeline under dwellings 5 and 6 identified on the approved plans, for Development Application DA2019/0431, the following Restrictions on The Use of The Land will apply”:

 

(a)   Property boundary fencing is not to obstruct the free flow of surface waters across the overland flow path in any way.

(b)   no building structures, walls, fences, trees, shrubs, grass or other vegetation shall be erected or planted within the site of the overland flow path and/or easement to drain water (where existing or proposed on site), except with the approval of Council.

(c)   The existing natural ground levels of the site shall not be raised or lowered or retaining walls constructed unless specified detailed plans are first submitted to and approved by Council.

(d)   The overland flow path and underground pipeline system under dwelling 5 and 6  must be kept clear of obstructions at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of Council.

 

This Restriction shall benefit Georges River Council and Georges River Council is to be nominated as the Authority to release, vary or modify this Restriction. This Restriction on Use of Land shall be registered on the title of the land, prior to the issue of Any Occupation Certificate for the development (Interim or Final Occupation Certificate).

 

Documentary evidence of the registration of this Restriction on title is to be supplied to the Principal Certifying Authority when application for an Occupation Certificate is made.

 

55.       Requirements prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate - The following shall be completed and or submitted to the PCA 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)   A Section 73 (Sydney Water) Compliance Certificate for the Subdivision shall be issued and submitted to the PCA prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

(f)    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 PCA prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

(g)   The construction of the extension of Council’s drainage system in Dawn Street shall be completed in accordance with the conditions and specifications of the Section 68 Activity Approval [insert].

 

56.       Vehicular crossing & Frontage work - Major development - The following road frontage works shall be constructed in accordance with specifications issued under the ‘Application for Driveway Crossing and Associated Works on Council Road Reserve’ approval issued by Council’s Assets and Infrastructure Division:

 

(a)   New 1.5m wide footpath to be constructed for full frontages of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications for footpath, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(b)   Construct a new 150mm high concrete kerb with 450mm wide gutter for the full frontage(s) of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications for kerb and guttering, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(c)   The thickness and design of the driveway shall be in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(d)   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.

(e)   Due to the increase in traffic that will be utilising the shared exit driveway onto Forest Rd, the applicant will be required to reconstruct the vehicular crossing on Council land of the shared driveway of number 801 Forest Road to a Heavy Duty driveway as per Council’s specifications, the applicant will be required to give the residents of number 801 Forest Road a minimum 4 weeks notice prior to any works commencing.

 

A private contractor shall carry out the above work, at the expense of the applicant and in accordance with Council’s Specification for Driveway Crossings and Associated Works.

 

The driveway and road frontage works are to be completed before the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

57.       Completion of Major Works - Prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, the following works must be completed at the applicant’s expense to the satisfaction of Council’s Engineering Services section:

 

(a)  Stormwater pipes, pits and connections to public stormwater systems within the road related area;

(b)  Driveways and vehicular crossings within the road related area;

(c)   Removal of redundant driveways and vehicular crossings;

(d)  New footway verges, where a grass verge exists, the balance of the area between the footpath and the kerb or site boundary over the full frontage of the proposed development must be turfed.  The grass verge must be constructed to contain a uniform minimum 75mm of friable growing medium and have a total cover of turf predominant within the street.

(e)  New or reinstated kerb and guttering within the road related area; and

(f)    New or reinstated road surface pavement within the road.

 

Council’s Assets and Infrastructure Section must advise in writing that the works have been completed to their satisfaction prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. [Note: The damage deposit paid to Council will not be released until the works have been completed to Council’s satisfaction.

 

58.       Stormwater drainage works - Works As Executed - Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, stormwater 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 drainage system be exceeded in a storm event exceeding design limits (i.e. in this instance 1:100yr ARI storm event).

 

Council must advise in writing that they are satisfied with the Works-As-Executed relating to the extension of Council’s drainage system in Dawn Street prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

59.       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.

 

60.       Post Construction Dilapidation report - Private Land - 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 all adjoining properties.

 

The report is to be prepared at the expense of the applicant and submitted to the PCA prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.  In ascertaining whether adverse structural damaged has occurred to the adjoining premises, the PCA, must compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report required by conditions in this consent.

 

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 PCA prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

61.       Allocation of car parking spaces - Car parking associated with the development is to be allocated as follows:

 

(a)   Residential dwellings: dwellings 1 - 6: 2 car spaces for each dwelling

(b)   Residential visitors: 2 car spaces

(c)   Car wash bay: 1 can be shared with visitors space

 

62.       Driveways and parking spaces - Internal driveways and parking spaces are to be adequately paved with concrete or bitumen, or interlocking pavers to provide a dust-free surface.

 

63.       BASIX Compliance Certificate - A Compliance Certificate must be provided to the PCA regarding the implementation of all energy efficiency measures as detailed in the approved BASIX Certificate before any Occupation Certificate is issued.

 

64.       Completion of Landscape Works - All landscape works, the planting of ten (10) trees, street tree payment and the completed AQF 5 Arborists letter of compliance Hold points table for the entirety of the project, must be completed before the issue of the Final Occupation Certificate and to the satisfaction of Councils Tree Management Officers. In accordance with approved landscape plans and specifications, drawn by Zenith Landscape Designs, Ref No 14 - 2875 - LO1 - 03, Rev H and dated 14/4/20. The landscaping shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans in perpetuity, subject to the following –

 

a)    The proposed Ten (10) trees and plant species, pot/ bag size and quantities of plants shall be in accordance with the proposed plant schedule upon the landscape plan, drawn by Zenith Landscape design. If plant species, pot/ bag size and quantities cannot be sourced, Council shall be contacted for alternatives;

b)    All ten (10) trees proposed upon the approved landscape plan shall comply with AS 2303 - 2018, Tree Stock for Landscape use and NATSPEC Specifying Trees: a guide to assessment of tree quality (2003), and be planted and maintained in accordance with Councils standard specification;

c)    If the planted ten (10) trees and plants are found to be faulty, damaged, dying or dead within twelve (12) months of planting then they must be replaced with the same species. If the ten (10) trees are found dead before they reach a height where they are protected by Councils Tree Management Controls, they must be replaced with the same species and pot/bag size;

d)    A certificate of compliance for the planting of all ten (10) trees and shrubs proposed for the site. An AQF 5 Horticulturist shall be engaged and in writing certify that all ten (10) trees have been planted as per landscape plan and specifications and forwarded to the PCA - Principal Certifying Authority.

 

            Tree Protection Measures

(a)   A final certificate of compliance letter, forming part of the engaged arborists hold points, shall be forwarded, once all building and landscape works have been completed, from the engaged AQF 5 Consulting Arborist, that tree protection measures have been installed and maintained for the entirety of the project and report on the condition of the trees that as part of this Consent, were to be protected and retained.

 

Tree Replacement within subject site

a)    A minimum of 10 x 75 / 45 litre size trees as per landscape plan, which will attain a minimum mature height of nine (9) metres, shall be planted within the property. The trees are to conform to AS2303 - 2018, Tree stock for landscape use.

b)    If the planted ten (10) trees and all shrubs are found to be faulty, damaged, dying or dead within twelve (12) months of planting then they must be replaced with the same species. If the trees are found dead before they reach a height where they are protected by Councils Tree Management Controls, they must be replaced with the same species and pot/bag size.

c)    A copy of the Hurstville City Council’s Tree Removal and Pruning Guidelines and Kogarah City Council, Street Tree Management Strategy, Masterplan, and Tree Management Policy 2019, can be downloaded from Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au. .

 

65.       Notice to Council - Allocation of street addresses - Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, ‘as-built’ drawings detailing the installed and allocated street/ dwelling address and numbering must be submitted to the satisfaction of Council.

 

66.       Section 73 Compliance Certificate - A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 <http://legislation.nsw.gov.au/> must be submitted to the PCA prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

Operational Conditions (Ongoing)

 

67.       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).

 

68.       Lighting - General Nuisance - Any lighting on the site shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to other residences in the area or to motorists on nearby roads and to ensure no adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding area by light overspill or glare.

 

Flashing, moving or intermittent lights or signs are prohibited.

 

69.       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.

 

70.       Outdoor Lighting - To avoid annoyance to the occupants of adjoining premises or glare to motorist on nearby of outdoor lighting, roads, outdoor lighting must comply with AS 4282-1997: Control of the obtrusive effects

 

71.       Waste - Wheel In Wheel Out Service (WIWO) - The WIWO service is subject to a Risk Assessment after the site is operational. It is the responsibility for the Site/Building Manager to maintain the waste storage areas as clean and tidy. The WIWO service can be cancelled at Council’s discretion in which circumstance the site may be required to arrange bin presentation on the kerbside.

 

Not providing for bulky waste storage is acceptable if the following conditions are applied:

Responsibility of Owners Corporation

 

The Owners Corporation shall be responsible for ensuring any bulky waste material is presented in an approved manner, on the kerbside in accordance with Councils requirements, as published to residents prior to the provision of the service.

 

The Owners Corporation shall also be responsible for maintaining all shared or common 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.

 

Bulky Waste Service

Materials for disposal in Council’s bulky waste service must be stored within private property confines of each dwelling and only presented kerbside as per Council’s requirements for utilizing the service.

 

Operational Requirements Under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

 

72.       Requirement for a Construction Certificate - The erection of a building must not  commence until a Construction Certificate has been issued.

 

73.       Appointment of a PCA - The erection of a building must not commence until the      applicant has:

 

(a)   appointed a PCA for the building work; and

 

(b)   if relevant, advised the PCA that the work will be undertaken as an Owner -Builder.

 

If the work is not going to be undertaken by an Owner - Builder, the applicant must:

 

(a)   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

 

(b)   notify the PCA of the details of any such appointment; and

 

(c)   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.

 

An Information Pack is attached for your convenience should you wish to appoint Georges River Council as the PCA for your development.

 

74.       Notification Requirements of PCA - No later than two days before the building work commences, the PCA 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.

 

75.       Notice of Commencement - The applicant must give at least two days notice to the Council and the PCA of their intention to commence the erection of a building.

A Notice of Commencement Form is attached for your convenience.

 

76.       Critical Stage Inspections - The last critical stage inspection must be undertaken by the PCA.  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.

 

77.       Notice to be given prior to critical stage inspections - The principal contractor for a building site, or the owner-builder, must notify the PCA at least 48 hours before each required inspection needs to be carried out.

 

Where Georges River Council has been appointed as the PCA, 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.

 

78.       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 PCA appointed for the building work can issue the Occupation Certificate.

 

An Occupation Certificate Application Form is attached for your convenience.

 

79.       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.

 

80.       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.

 

81.       Clause 97A - BASIX Commitments - This Clause requires the fulfilment of all BASIX Commitments as detailed in the BASIX Certificate to which the development relates.

 

82.       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 PCA and the Principal Contractor.

 

83.       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.

 

84.       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.

 

Advice

 

85.       Review of Determination - Section 8.2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act confers on an applicant who is dissatisfied with the determination of the application the right to lodge an application with Council for a review of such determination. Any such review must however be completed within 6 months from its determination. Should a review be contemplated sufficient time should be allowed for Council to undertake public notification and other processes involved in the review of the determination.

 

Note: Review provisions do not apply to Complying Development, Designated Development, State Significant Development, Integrated Development or any application determined by the Sydney South Planning Panel or the Land & Environment Court.

 

86.       Appeal Rights - Part 8 (Reviews and appeals) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 confers on an applicant who is dissatisfied with the determination of the application a right of appeal to the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

 

87.       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.

 

88.       Compliance with Access, Mobility and AS4299 - Adaptable Housing - Should the Council be appointment as the PCA, the Construction Certificate Application must be accompanied by detailed working plans and a report or a Certificate of Compliance from an Accredited Access Consultant certifying that the building design and access to the adaptable units complies with Council’s DCP and AS 4299 Adaptable Housing.

 

89.       Building - Referral to FR NSW - Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the applicant may be required, under Clause 144 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation, 2000 to seek written comment from FR NSW about the construction of hydrant/booster pump and valve rooms, and any Fire Engineered Solution developed to meet the performance requirements under the Category 2 Fire Safety Provisions.

 

90.       Register your Swimming Pool - All swimming pools in NSW are required to be registered. Fines apply for pools that are not registered. To register please visit: swimmingpoolregister.nsw.gov.au.

 

91.       Long Service Levy - 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.

 

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.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Notification Plans - 799 Forest Rd Peakhurst

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 17 September 2020

LPP045-20              799 Forest Road Peakhurst

[Appendix 1]           Notification Plans - 799 Forest Rd Peakhurst

 

 

Page 66

 


 


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 17 September 2020

Page 78

 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 17 September 2020

 

LPP Report No

LPP046-20

Development Application No

DA2019/0314

Site Address & Ward Locality

54 and 54A Noble Street Allawah

Kogarah Bay Ward

Proposed Development

Demolition of existing structures, lot consolitation and the construction of a four (4) storey Residential Flat Building containing eight (8) apartments with basement car parking for twelve (12) vehicles, associated landscaping and site works

Owners

Sam Pambris and Mr E Kritikos

Applicant

Cornerstone Design

Planner/Architect

Cornerstone Design

Date Of Lodgement

24/07/2019

Submissions

Total of four (4) written submissions received

Cost of Works

$2,434,828.87

Local Planning Panel Criteria

The proposed development is subject to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy BASIX 2004, State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development, State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017,

Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020, Draft SEPP (Environment) 2017), Draft Remediation SEPP,

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 - Georges River Catchment, Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 

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

Amended Architectural Plans

Statement of Environmental Effects and updated Clause 4.6 Statement

Flood Study and Detailed Site Investigation Report

Updated Parking Assessment

Report prepared by

Senior Development Assessment Planner

 

 

Recommendation

That the application be granted a deferred commencement approval 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?

 

Yes, Two Clause 4.6 Statements have been submitted, one to vary the Height Control (Clause 4.3) and the other the Minimum allotment size for RFB’s (Clause 4.1A of the KLEP 2012)

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, Deferred Commencement conditions have been attached with design changes required.

 

Site Plan

Subject site outlined in blue

 

Executive Summary

Proposal

1.         The development application (DA2019/0314) was submitted to Council on 24 July 2019. The original proposal sought development consent for the construction of a four storey residential flat building (RFB) comprising of a total of eight (8) apartments, one (1) level of basement car parking catering for a total of twelve (12) vehicles, with an area of dedicated communal open space on the roof including landscaping and associated site works. A photomontage of the originally proposed building is provided as Figure 1 below.

 

Figure 1: 3D Montage of the originally proposed RFB (Courtesy: Cornerstone Design, June 2019 Issue A)

 

Planning Issues

2.         Council Officers raised concerns regarding the bulk and scale of the building in relation to its neighbours and streetscape. Council Officers met with the Applicant to discuss the outstanding concerns which in summary related to the following:

 

·      The scale and height of the building is inconsistent with the three to four storey scale of the existing adjoining RFB’s. The proposed scale is not in keeping with the general nature of development in the streetscape. The overall height exceeds the adjoining developments. It was recommended that the scale of the building be reduced.

 

·      The amount of excavation to accommodate the basement was considered to be excessive and there is no allowance made for any deep soil area at the rear of the site. The site has existing site constraints; it is burdened by a stormwater drainage easement along the north-western side of the site and is also flood prone which reduces the redevelopment potential of the site.

 

·    It is acknowledged that the site is “isolated” and unique in some sense and this provides the opportunity to redevelop the site for an RFB but it is considered that its full potential cannot be realised given the environmental constraints of the site and deficiencies and non-compliances in the design. The adjoining RFB at 56 Noble Street is a three storey walk up flat building with 4 apartments and ground floor parking. This building is located on a similar sized allotment with a similar frontage width. The scale and form of this development is a reasonable and acceptable planning response for this site.

 

·    The density is considered to be excessive considering the size of the site and the fact it fails to satisfy the minimum allotment size requirement of 1,000sqm for an RFB in the R3 Medium Density Residential zone. The site has an area of 613sqm. It was recommended that the number of apartments be reduced which would reduce the need for so many car parking spaces, hence reduce excavation and allow for a deep soil zone at the rear of some 2.7m to allow for more planting and vegetation to provide screening and green the development.

 

·      The development fails to satisfy the SEPP 65 minimum requirements for separation distances between buildings. It is acknowledged that the site is isolated and an infill development may be acceptable given the context of the area however the proposed built form, scale, bulk and density is considered too great for this site to accommodate.

 

3.         The Applicant considered the issues raised and on 27 April 2020 (Issue B) lodged amended plans which included the following changes:

 

·     The form of the building was amended to reduce the visual impact and scale of the building when viewed from Noble Street. This was achieved by setting the fourth floor back from the front of the building so that Unit 3.01 on Level 3 is setback over 8m from the edge of the balcony and the wall recessed further being 10.5m and reduced from a 3 bedroom unit to a 2 bedroom unit.

 

·     The south east elevation has been modified to remove the snorkel bedroom windows and the building wall has been ‘straightened up’ to increase the side setback from 1.87m to 3m.

 

·     The rear setback has been increased from 5.25m (to the wall of Bedroom 1) to 5.54m.

 

Figure 2 below shows the visual appearance of the amended scheme.

 

4.         The top level of the building being recessed and setback at the front presents better to the street as the top floor level is not as readily visible. It is recommended that the pergola structure above the third level balcony be deleted and the roof at this level include a maximum 1m eaves overhang to provide for some better articulation and protection from weather at this upper level. However the amended plans do not provide a deep soil zone at the rear as requested.

 

5.         Despite the amendments, the proposed development is still considered to be an overdevelopment of the site considering the site has a number of constraints, is  isolated in nature and is non-compliant with the off-street, car-parking provisions and minimum physical separation distances. The landscaping at the rear of the site is inadequate given that the basement extends to the rear boundary and the basement car parking arrangement is extremely tight and inefficient. The scale and form of the building is inconsistent with the form and character of the immediately adjoining 3-4 storey RFB’s. Given that the site includes a number of environmental constraints (being flood prone and accommodating a stormwater easement) and that the development fails to comply with a number of statutory controls (the minimum site area for RFB’s (Clause 4.1A) of the KLEP and exceeds the 15m Height of Buildings control (Clause 4.3)) and Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013, the proposal needs to be scaled back. This will involve the density being reduced to create a more carefully and sensitively designed development that is compliant with car parking provisions, enables an increase in the amount of deep soil landscaping at the rear and creates a building that is more sympathetic and consistent with the character and form of development in the streetscape and immediate medium density precinct.

 

6.         To achieve an improved scale and built form increase its compliance and be a more sympathetic development it is recommended that the rear Unit 3.02 shall be removed and the basement car parking be reorganised to improve its functionality and efficiency. This can be achieved through a Deferred Commencement determination which will require the reduction in density and improvement in the overall layout of the development. This would achieve a reduction in the visual bulk of the development when viewed from the rear and will ensure the building is compliant with the height control and will be more in keeping and sympathetic with immediately adjoining buildings.

 

Figure 2: 3D Montage of the proposed RFB as amended (Courtesy: Cornerstone Design, March 2020, Issue B)

 

7.         The development fails to comply with Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings control within the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 and also fails to satisfy Clause 4.1A – Minimum Lot sizes for multi-dwelling housing, residential flat buildings and seniors housing. The application is accompanied by two Clause 4.6 Statements justifying the extent of the variations. In this case, the Clause 4.6 for Minimum Lots size is reasonable and well-founded given the site cannot be physically amalgamated or consolidated with the adjoining sites. However the Clause 4.6 for the variation to the height control is not considered to be well founded nor is it supported as it does not satisfy the objectives of the control. Given that the deferred commencement seeks to remove an apartment, this redesign will create a building with a compliant height and there should be no ancillary structures or the like exceeding the height control. This is considered to be a reasonable planning and design outcome as it would result in a largely compliant built form and one which is of a more suitable scale and more in keeping with the adjoining properties.

 

8.         The areas of the building which exceed the 15m height control relate to ancillary structures in the form of the lift overrun, staircase and open style pergola structure on the roof. These elements will be visually dominating as they are not centrally located and will protrude above the roof of the immediately adjoining RFB’s (50-52 Noble Street and 56 Noble Street). In this case the relocation of the roof terrace in lieu of apartment 3.02 will ensure the building will be compliant with the height and will be more sympathetic to the siting and scale of the adjoining properties. A detailed assessment of the Clause 4.6 Statement’s is provided later in this report.

 

Flooding and Stormwater issues

9.         Originally Council’s Stormwater Engineer requested that the stormwater easement be enlarged to 2.4m however this would render the site undevelopable given the very narrow nature of the site. It was agreed that if the stormwater pipe was replaced with a new pipe of similar dimensions this would satisfy Council and upgrade this infrastructure. Standard stormwater and drainage conditions have been imposed to ensure the stormwater drainage arrangement and treatment of the easement is compliant with Council’s specifications.

 

10.      The application was referred to Council’s Stormwater and Drainage Engineers who have highlighted a number of concerns relating to the design of the development as the site is Flood Prone. They have noted that the two (2) lots proposed to be developed are identified as Flood Affected in the Kogarah Bay Creek Flood and Overland Flows Risk Management Study and Plan June 2009 and as such flood controls apply.

 

11.      Council’s Engineer specialising in Flooding has reviewed the Applicants Flood Study and amended plans and is not satisfied that it addresses Council’s requirements. The outstanding issues which remain in relation to this issue are;

 

1)   The ‘54 & 54A Noble Street Allawah – Flood Assessment’ dated 28 June 2019 the report will need to be amended to address the following:

a)    The report is to verify that the proposed ground floor level’s and design is appropriate with respect to its protection from flooding.  

b)   The report is to verify that the driveway ramp design with a crest at RL 34.25m AHD will protect the basement from flooding up to the 100 year ARI event. The report is to also specify the minimum levels or height above finished ground for any ventilation openings to the basement.      

 

3)    Further detail will need to be provided of the proposed details and levels of the proposed 300mm overflow pipe, including at the inlet and outlet point and through the basement showing that it can be installed without affecting the adjacent parking space(s).    

 

12.      These issues can be resolved through deferred commencement conditions and it may result in a slight increase in the building’s height by some 300mm. The height of the building should largely be compliant and remain within the height control. The proposed height of the building (when unit 3.02 is removed) will be RL48.30 (to the roof level above Unit 3.01) and the RL to the topmost part of the building at the 15m height limit is RL49.89 (taking the existing ground level of RL34.89). This leaves 1.6m to cater for any potential overruns and the potential increase to cater for some additional height dictated by changes to address flooding.

 

13.      In respect to stormwater and drainage, it has been agreed that the stormwater easement does not need to be widened to 2.4m (as originally requested by Council) and that the pipe will be replaced as an alternative and this infrastructure service upgraded. Conditions regarding compliance with Council’s controls regarding the new pipe and associated stormwater works have been included.

 

Site and Locality

14.      This application applies to land known as 54 and 54A Noble Street, Allawah which is legally described as Lot A and B DP 381675. The site includes a set of single storey semi-detached dwelling houses each with vehicular access off Noble Street. The site is a regular shaped allotment with a frontage of 15.24m to Noble Street, depth of 40.235m and a total site area of 613.2sqm.

 

15.      The site is burdened by a stormwater drainage easement located along the north western boundary which is highlighted on the amended survey plan dated 26 November 2018. A copy of the survey plan is shown at Figure 3 below.

 

16.      The site is isolated and sits between a larger 4 storey RFB (50-52 Noble Street) and a 3 storey RFB (56 Noble Street). The streetscape and immediate locality comprises of medium density developments predominantly residential in nature.

 

17.      The site is within close proximity to the Allawah Train Station and small commercial centre.

 

Figure 3: Amended Survey plan (Courtesy: W.Buxton, November 2018)

 

Zoning and Permissibility

18.      The principal local environmental planning instrument applying to the subject site is Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP), which came into force in February 2013. The LEP provides the local environmental planning provisions for land in the former Kogarah LGA in accordance with the relevant standard environmental planning instrument, as required under (the former) Section 33A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The height control for the site is 15m with a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 1.5:1.

 

19.      The subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential. The proposal is defined as a Residential Flat Building (RFB) which is permissible with consent in the zone. The proposal in its current form satisfies the zone objectives.

 

20.      A full and detailed assessment and consideration of the proposal against the key KLEP statutory planning provisions is provided later in this report.

 

Submissions

21.      The DA was notified to adjoining properties in accordance with the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP2013) for a statutory notification period of 14 days. A total of four (4) submissions were received in response.

 

22.      The concerns raised in the submissions related to the potential for direct overlooking, overshadowing, the bulk and scale of the building is inconsistent with the height and character of development in the street and the proposal removes on street car parking spaces. These issues are addressed in more detail later in this report.

 

23.      The amended plans were not renotified as they did not result in an increase in environmental impacts.

 

Reason for Referral to the Local Planning Panel

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

 

Conclusion

25.      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 amended built form design is considered to improve the visual appearance of the building when viewed from Noble Street. However, the bulk and scale of the building at the rear is still considered to be inconsistent with the character of the adjoining RFB’s as this building will be higher and taller than its neighbours and is pronounced given the allotment width.

 

26.      The development also fails to satisfy a number of planning controls, building height, minimum allotment size for RFB’s, the minimum off-street car parking requirements and minimum separation distances with the ADG. The basement car park has fundamental problems with manoeuvrability and accessibility and there is a lack of adequate deep soil landscaped area at the rear which would (if provided) create a natural buffer to the existing developments at the rear. In addition, the building exceeds Council’s height control and minimum site area requirements for RFB’s in the R3 Medium Density zone.

 

27.      To reduce the scale of the building and create a lower scaled and more appropriate built form, it is recommended that the apartment on the top level (3.02) be removed and replaced with communal area of open space at the roof level. This should ensure the building complies with the height control and will sit more sympathetically and respect the immediately adjoining RFB’s. It is also requested that the basement be redesigned to become more efficient, compliant and functional.

 

28.      The recommendation is for a Deferred Commencement consent to be issued with the Deferred conditions to include the following;

 

            Deferred Commencement Conditions

 

(1)  Deletion of Unit 3.02 - A full detailed set of amended architectural plans shall be prepared to include the following design changes;

(a)     Unit 3.02 shall be deleted and replaced with a roof top area of open space.

(b)     The new rooftop garden in lieu of Unit 3.02 shall have a maximum finished floor level of RL45.52 and shall be setback a minimum of 6m from the rear boundary.

(c)     The deletion of Unit 3.02 will remove the need for the current area of rooftop open space located at the fourth floor. The finished floor level of the non-trafficable roof level of the building shall be at RL48.30 and shall be a standard flat roof form with no direct access to the roof other than by an internal hatch from the foyer or from inside Unit 3.01 purely for maintenance.

(d)     A very small, standard overrun will be permitted for the staircase structure and lift structure but these elements must be located within the 15m height limit.

(e)     Photovoltaic panels shall be installed above Unit 3.01 to face north recessed and shall not to be visible from the street.

(f)      An open style pergola structure including BBQ and amenities WC can be included on the roof terrace but these are all to be small scale and situated within the height limit.

 

(2)  Basement redesign

(a)     Car space G.01 shall be deleted and the basement setback a minimum of 2.7m from the rear boundary.

(b)     The tandem spaces for Unit 3.02 shall be dedicated to Unit G.01

(c)     Car parking space 2.01 shall be enlarged to become an accessible space.

(d)     The visitor/car wash bay shall be converted to the waste room and the waste room will become a formal open lobby area with the lift entry located along the south eastern side.

(e)     The bollard with the aisle and adjoining the lift shall be removed and relocated to the new lobby space.

(f)      A Qualified Traffic Engineer shall formally certify that the basement plan, all accessways, aisles, car parking spaces and the manoeuvring arrangement complies with Council’s controls, Australian Standards for car parking and access and any other related regulations/standards.

 

(3)  Landscape design changes - A full detailed set of updated Landscape plans shall be prepared to include the following design changes;

(a)     The deep soil area at the rear resulting from the basement being setback from the rear boundary shall include a row of trees that will achieve a minimum height at maturity of 6m.

(b)     The area at the rear of the building at the ground floor shall be converted and dedicated as an area of communal open space. It shall include soft landscaping in the form of grass and a paving area with some seating included.

(c)     A fence shall be constructed adjacent to the wall of Bedroom 1 of Unit G.02 and extend to the side boundary of the site to differentiate the communal space from the southern courtyard area. The fence may need to include a cut out at the bottom to cater for any flooding and not to obstruct any overland flow paths.

(d)     The new rooftop area of communal open space in lieu of Unit 3.02 shall include a 1m wide (with minimum 600mm depth) planter box around the periphery of the area and shall include a variety of plants and shrubs.

(e)     The area of the stormwater easement adjoining the fire stairs on the ground floor shall include a small path providing access to the communal open space at the rear.

(f)      A large canopy tree reaching a height at maturity of 10-12m shall be included within the front setback.

 

(4)  Other design changes

(a)     A small Juliette style balcony shall be provided to the living room of Unit G.02 and access to the private ground floor courtyard shall be from the laundry and Bedroom 2.

(b)     The balustrade to the front ground floor balcony to Unit G.01 shall be redesigned so it is not solid but includes glazing and is designed to be consistent with the finishes of the upper level balconies.

(c)     The pergola above the balcony to Unit 3.01 shall be removed and a roof parapet can be extended by 1m to provide some additional cover, protection and complete the building.

(d)     Appropriate low scale sensor lights shall be installed along the main entry into the building.

(e)     A rainwater tank shall be installed at the rear of the building. It shall not be visible from the entry or the street. 

(f)      The rear balconies shall include a privacy screen along the south eastern and north western side having a minimum width of 1m and shall be full height.

(g)     The bottom pane of glass to any standard sized windows located along the north west or south eastern elevation will be constructed of obscure glazing. 

 

(5)  Flood planning - The issues relating to the management of flooding across the site have not been satisfied and the following information is required:

 

(a)     The Flood Assessment report dated 28 June 2019 will need to be amended to address the following:

i.   The report is to verify that the proposed ground floor level’s and design is appropriate with respect to its protection from flooding.  

ii.  The report is to verify that the driveway ramp design with a crest at RL 34.25m AHD will protect the basement from flooding up to the 100 year ARI event. The report is to also specify the minimum levels or height above finished ground for any ventilation openings to the basement.

 

In preparing this amended report it will need to take into consideration the flood depths Kogarah Bay Creek FRMS&P TUFLOW model on the driveway at 50-52 Noble Street that are significantly larger than those indicated along the north western setback and rear yard of the proposed developing site. It is also noted that there is a masonry wall separating the two properties that affect the overland flow through the site.

 

The report or an accompanying plan reference in the report will also need to include design spot ground levels for all areas within the site including adjacent to the building, along boundaries under the open structure at the rear of the building, on paths and landscaped areas, and at the top and bottom ends of the proposed 300mm overland flow diversion pipe.

 

(b)     Further detail will need to be provided of the proposed details and levels of the proposed 300mm overflow pipe, including at the inlet and outlet point and through the basement showing that it can be installed without affecting the adjacent parking space(s).  

  

(6)  Contamination certification

(a) The Environmental Consultants who have prepared the Detailed Site Investigation and RAP are to be fully certified contamination land consultants. Confirmation is to be provided to Council that they are fully certified environmental practitioner and their certification number supplied to Council. If they are not the DSI and RAP will need to be reviewed and signed off by a fully certified contaminated land consultant.

 

29.      It is felt that subject to these changes the proposal should be more consistent in form and scale with its neighbours and will create a more sympathetic form of development in the streetscape and this will also resolve a number of planning non-compliances.

 

Report in Full

Proposal

30. The DA seeks consent for the construction of a four (4) storey residential flat building development comprising of eight (8) apartments, one (1) level of basement car parking accommodating twelve (12) vehicles and associated landscaping on the rooftop in the form of a communal area of open space.

 

31.      Further details of the proposal are as follows; 

 

Basement Plan

A total of twelve (12) car parking spaces broken up into the following configuration;

-      Eleven (11) resident spaces including one (1) accessible space. Six (6) spaces are designed in a tandem form dedicated to apartments U1.01, U3.01 and U3.02.

-      One (1) Visitor space which doubles up as a car wash bay

-      Lift lobby and fire stair access

-      Space for storage and services

-      Garbage waste room

-      Bicycle parking for three (3) bicycles

 

Ground Floor Plan

-      Driveway entry along the south western side of the site

-      Pedestrian ramp at the front to an elevated access ramp along the north western side to the main entry lobby

-      1 x three (3) bedroom apartment (G.01)

-      1 x two (2) bedroom apartment (G.02)

 

First Floor (repeated)

-      1 x three (3) bedroom apartment (1.01)

-      1 x two (2) bedroom apartment (1.02)

-      Main lift lobby with stair access

 

Second Floor

-      1 x three (3) bedroom apartment (2.01)

-      1 x two (2) bedroom apartment (2.02)

-      Main lift lobby with stair access

 

Third Floor

-      2 x two (2) bedroom apartments (3.01 and 3.02)

-      Main lift lobby with stair access

 

Rooftop Level

-      Common open space area

-      Central lift and stair lobby area

-      BBQ including an open style pergola feature

 

32.      Figure 4 and 5 below show the elevations of the building as amended.

 

Figure 4: Amended North-western elevation (Courtesy: Cornerstone, March 2020)

 

Figure 5: Amended south-eastern elevation (Courtesy: Cornerstone, March 2020)

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND LOCALITY

33.      The subject site comprises of two (2) allotments known as 54 and 54A Noble Street Allawah comprising of a set of single storey semi-detached cottages which have the following legal description;

·     Lot A DP 381675 – 54 Noble Street. Single storey semi-detached cottage including a stormwater drainage easement along the northern side of the property. There is a small metal shed at the rear and a driveway crossing at the front with access to a small hardstand car parking space at the front of the property.

·     Lot B DP 381675 – 54A Noble Street. The other half of the pair of semi-detached cottages. This property has a metal shed at the rear and include a carport at the front of the dwelling.

 

34.      The site has a combined frontage to the Noble Street of 15.24m and depth of 40.235m with a total site area of 613.4sqm. The site falls from the rear with an RL35.99 to RL34.20 at the front being a level difference of 1.78m from the rear to the front.

 

Photo 1: The subject site, 54 Noble Street Allawah

 

35.      The site is burdened by a stormwater drainage easement along the north western side of the allotment which runs the length of the site. The easement cannot be built over, upon or within.

 

36.      The other site constraint of the site is that it is flood prone.

 

37.      Immediately to the east is a four storey RFB at 50-52 Noble Street which dates back to the 1960/70’s. To the west is a three storey RFB at 56 Noble Street and to the north at the rear is a three storey block of apartments located at 43-45 Illawarra Road. The rear yard of this property faces the subject site.

 

Photo 2: Adjoining development to the south, 56 Noble Street Allawah

 

Photo 3: Adjoining development to the north, 50-52 Noble Street Allawah

 

Photo 4: Development at the rear of the subject site.

 

38.      Across the road at 65 and 67 Noble Street are two and three storey blocks of apartments.

 

39.      Noble Street is tree lined and dominated by medium density RFB developments. One characteristic feature is that most of the buildings are constructed of red or white face brickwork and all constructed around the 1960’s, 70’s and the early 80’s. The immediate locality is characterised by medium density residential developments.

 

Photo 5: Adjoining development to the west, across the road from the subject development

 

40.      The site is accessible and is within walking distances to the Allawah Train Station and small commercial centre. It is located some 1.5km away from the Hurstville Town Centre.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

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

 

Table 1: Summary of SEPPs and general compliance

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 No 65 — Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

Partial non-compliance with some design standards

 

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

42.      The main aims and objectives of this plan are:

 

·     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,

 

43.      The proposed method of stormwater disposal from the basement includes a basement pumping well system which relies on a centrifugal drainage sump acting as a holding tank with an electric motor capable of discharging water to Noble Street.

 

This application has been referred to Council’s Engineering Section for comment. Council’s stormwater engineer requires some additional details and the stormwater easement and initially required the stormwater easement to be widened from 1.8m to 2.4m, however it was later agreed that the easement does not need to be widened but that a new pipe be installed and this infrastructure facility be upgraded and improved. Standard conditions have been included that provide details in respect to the new stormwater pipe requirements.

 

44.      The proposed plant species to be located along the easement will need to be amended and floor levels readjusted to cater for the flood levels. These issues have been addressed via Deferred Commencement conditions.

 

45.      The proposal however is not considered to have an adverse impact on the waterway and the Georges River catchment. The proposal aims to protect the existing water quality and use and functionality of the wider catchment.

 

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

46.      An updated BASIX Certificate has been issued for the proposal as amended. The BASIX Certificate No.101871M_02 is dated 21 April 2020 and the proposal in its amended form meets the minimum provisions and requirements of BASIX in terms of water, thermal comfort and Energy efficiency.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

47.      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.

 

48.      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. In accordance with SEPP 55 the site must be assessed and rated suitable for the proposed development prior to a determination being made.

 

49.      A Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) Stage 1 report was prepared by Alliance Geotechnical (AG), dated 27 June 2019. As part of the investigation a conceptual site model (CSM) was derived for the site which identified two potential areas of environmental concern (AEC’s) AEC01 and AEC02 which are shown in Figure 6 below.

 

Figure 6: Location of the two potential AEC’s on the site (Courtesy: Alliance Geotechnical, June 2019)

 

50.      The results of the report are summarised below as;

·     Two areas of environmental concern (AEC’s) have been identified for the site;

·     Proposed development would likely result in the removal of both AEC01 and AEC02 (positive outcome).

·     Site could be made suitable (from a land contamination perspective) for the proposed high-density residential land use setting, subject to the proposed fill excavation works across AEC01 and controlled demolition of AEC02 being undertaken.

 

51.      All historical evidence suggests the site has always been occupied and used for low density residential purposes. No other uses have been identified in the past. There was also no fill noted on the site by the site investigations conducted as part of the contamination assessment.

 

52.      The following recommendations were made by the report;

·     A waste classification assessment of the soil materials proposed to be excavated and

removed should be obtained from a suitably experienced environmental consultant prior to the excavation and disposal of the soil materials;

·     Fill soils proposed to be excavated across AEC01 should be disposed offsite in accordance with relevant NSW EPA waste classification guidelines;

·     A Hazardous Materials Survey of the dwelling associated with AEC02 should be undertaken by a qualified occupational hygienist prior to any demolition works;

·     Records of the transport and disposal of materials from AEC01 and AEC02 should be maintained; and

·     An asbestos clearance certificate should be obtained for AEC02 (if identified) from a suitably experienced occupational hygienist, following relevant hazardous materials removal works.

 

53.      AG considered that an “intrusive assessment of these AEC’s on the form of a Detailed Site Investigation is not warranted”. Despite this recommendation the report could not say that the site is suitable for the intended land use and development. Council’s Environmental Health Section requested that a Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) be conducted as a precautionary measure considering that some AEC have been identified.

 

54.      A Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) and Remediation Action Plan (RAP) was prepared by Canopy Enterprises and dated August 2020 and this report was referred to Environmental Health for comment. The report provided a detailed assessment of the site and potentially contaminated site material. It recommended the following;

 

55.      “On the basis of the work undertaken to date, the contaminants of concern are PAHs (specifically the carcinogenic PAHs) and potentially asbestos containing material (ACM) although it is noted that ACM has not been found in the soils on the site to date. Ash and slag material was noted in a sample obtained from fill material at the Site and although analysis of the material did not show heavy metals concentrations of concern, heavy metals should still be considered as a CoPC at the Site. Should fill material be encountered in any of the areas requiring sampling, the full range of suggested analytes as outlined above is required to be analysed.”

 

56.      The proposed methodology comprises the following sequence of steps:

 

•      Sampling, testing and validation of soil contaminants within areas of the footprint of the former building;

 

•      Confirmation of the classification of all filling and natural soils to be removed from the site prior to the commencement of excavation;

 

•      Excavation of soil/fill from within the basement area and disposal of the excavated materials at a suitably licenced facility;

 

•      Provide a Validation Report for the site and, where required, an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which includes any future long-term (ongoing) management requirements post development. Following the completion of the remediation works and the receipt of any related analytical results from the validation sampling, a Validation Report will be prepared in general accordance with the requirements of the NSW OEH Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites (2011).

 

57.      The recommendations and method of disposal for any potentially contaminated or hazardous material during demolition and excavation is a simple, standard procedure which will ensure these materials are appropriately disposed of and the site is “made good” or suitable for the intended residential land use. Conditions will be included to ensure the recommendations of the DSI and RAP are implemented during the construction process.

 

Draft Remediation of Land SEPP

58.      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.

 

59.      The main changes proposed to this SEPP 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.

 

60.      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 discussed in more detail above, the potential areas where some contamination seems to exist can be easily and safely removed in accordance with the recommendations of the DSI report. The recommendations are also included as conditions if consent is to be issued.

 

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

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

 

62.      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). 

 

63.      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.

 

64.      The subject site is currently does not include any significant plants, trees or vegetation. The development will therefore not remove any significant or important vegetation.

 

Draft Environment SEPP

65.      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.

 

66.      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.

 

67.      The proposal is consistent with the provisions of this Draft Instrument.

 

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

68.      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 Apartment Design Guide (ADG) to replace the Residential Flat Design Code. Given the nature of the development proposed, SEPP 65 applies.

 

69.      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 Apartment Design Guide.  

 

70.      The proposed development was referred to the Design Review Panel on 12 September 2019. The Panel raised no objection to the proposed development subject to some changes being made to the design. The Panel considered the development against each of the nine (9) Design Quality Principles (refer to Table 2) and also considered the provisions of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) which are summarised and addressed in Table 3 below.

 

71.      The proposal fails to satisfy a number of the Design Principles of the Apartment Design Guidelines mainly in relation to achieving minimum physical separation distances between buildings. Given the site is isolated and cannot be consolidated or integrated with an adjoining site the development is considered an “infill” development and will be assessed on its merits and whether the design outcome proposed does not adversely affect the amenity of neighbouring properties and the streetscape. The tables below provide a comprehensive assessment against the principles, objectives and controls of SEPP 65 and the ADG.

 

Table 2: Application of SEPP 65

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

3 - Definitions

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

Complies with the definition.

Section 4 (1) (Application of Policy) of the SEPP 65 states that the policy “applies to development for the purpose of a residential flat building, shop top housing or mixed use development with a residential accommodation component if:

(a)   the development consists of any of the following:

 

(i)     the erection of a new building,

(ii)    the substantial redevelopment or the substantial refurbishment of an existing building,

(iii)   the conversion of an existing building, and

 

(b)   the building concerned is at least 3 or more storeys (not including levels below ground level (existing) or levels that are less than 1.2 metres above ground level (existing) that provide for car parking), and

 

(c)   the building concerned contains at least 4 or more dwellings.”

Yes – the residential flat building (RFB) development satisfies the definition of SEPP 65.

 

The proposal is 4 storeys in scale (with the rooftop area acting as a fifth level) and contains 8 apartments.

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.

Construction of an RFB development which satisfies the SEPP’s definition of the proposed land use.

 

Refer to definition and explanation above in relation to the applicability of the Policy.

Yes

50 – Development Applications

Design verification statement provided by qualified designer

Registered Architect Name and Registration No.

Design Verification Statement provided by Registered Architect: Nicholas Lychenko (Registration No.3010)

Yes

 

Table 3: Part 2 Design Quality Principles under the SEPP

 SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings 

DRP Comment

Council Officers 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 in a tree lined street that falls gently from north to south, is dominated by three to four storey hip roofed walk up residential flat buildings.  Notably, buildings to both sides of the proposal have consistent, established front and rear setbacks.

 

 

The site is a regularly shaped allotment with a 15.24 metre frontage, which is less than the required frontage for residential flat buildings.  It has a 1.8 metre storm water easement to its northern boundary and it falls approximately 1.5 metres from the rear boundary to the front.

 

The site is also subject to significant one in one hundred year over land flow, which severely compromises the levels permissible and requires the development to accommodate a considerable volume of water in an open chamber between the basement and ground floor levels.

 

The proposal attempts to meet all of its flooding and easement constraints while providing an amenable built form despite its non-compliance with the DCP minimum site width and ADG separation requirements.

The site is isolated and there is no opportunity for consolidation or site amalgamation with any adjoining site as these are large strata subdivided sites.

 

It is acknowledged that the site has constraints given it is flood prone and the site is burdened by a stormwater easement.

 

Councils Engineer specialising in flooding has assessed the development and included a number of conditions to ensure that floor levels are above the 1:100 flood level which also ensures the overland flow path is not obstructed and the building does not obstruct this flow.

 

  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 built form proposed comprises a simple prism with roughly three metre setbacks from each side boundary, containing two apartments per floor over a single basement level of car parking.

 

While the proponent claims that the front and rear setbacks are compliant with DCP requirements, both the front and rear setbacks are not consistent with the clearly established setbacks of adjacent properties.  Considering at the proposal must demonstrate a good contextual fit and an amenable and consistent streetscape, the front and rear setbacks should match adjacent properties.  To achieve this objective AND meet brief requirements, it may be better to reduce the northern side setback to match the easement.

 

Building bulk and scale are exacerbated by flooding requirements, which significantly elevate ground floor levels.  This issue creates a poor outcome as it:

·   Increase its non-compliance with height

·   Increase its apparent bulk and scale

·   Necessitates ugly and cumbersome ramping

 

It is recommended that the flood levels are reviewed in order to minimise the height of the building off the ground.  It is also recommended that pedestrian ramping is removed from the front setback and replaced with a platform lift as required.

 

It is recommended that the driveway is moved to the northern side of the site.  Not only would this potentially decrease the ramp length it would also provide a 1.8m setback for boundary planting to the northern boundary which is a better driveway interface to an adjoining property.

 

The splayed window blades proposed appear over-scaled and visually intrusive.  It is therefore recommended that the windows provided are full height and a maximum width of 800mm.

 

It should be noted that balconies are considered habitable space and are therefore subject to ADG separation requirements.

The proposal fails to satisfy the ADG separation distances and given the scale and density these non-compliances are not considered acceptable given the context of the area and relationship to adjoining developments. Reducing the scale and density of the development will go some way to reduce the non-compliances and increase deep soil landscaped area at the rear. This issue is discussed in more detail in Table 3 below.

 

The amended proposal sets the upper level of the building back from the front which reduces the visual bulk and scale of the development however the building still exceeds the height limit which isn’t considered to be warranted in this case. In addressing the Panel’s issues the height in this case needs to be compliant and also the density needs to be reduced to create a more acceptable and reasonable planning and design outcome that reduces the visual bulk, scale and dominance of the structure and introduces some soft landscaped elements to the design.

 

The driveway can not be moved to the northern side as this is where the stormwater easement exists.

 

The windows can not be full height as this would increase the potential for overlooking given the development fails to satisfy the separation distances of 6m that are required. The smaller highlight windows are not the most ideal design solution and will adversely affect the visual amenity of the internal spaces however in this case full height windows are not a feasible option.

 

The balconies at the rear encroach on the required 6m setback. A condition will require privacy screens to be installed to provide some improvement and reduce the potential for overlooking to the rear.

Density 

Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each apartment, 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.

As an isolated site, the proponents are unable to achieve the permissible floor space ratio (FSR) and indeed may need to further reduce the FSR in order to comply with the above.

The Applicant has reduced the density by removing one bedroom from Unit 3.01 to create a 2 bedroom unit as opposed to a 3 bedroom unit. This change is considered an improvement to the front façade increasing articulation of the frontage. However a number of non-compliances exist and the DRP’s intention was clearly a more substantial reduction in the FSR given the site constraints.

 

It is therefore recommended through Deferred Commencement conditions that the rear unit 3.02 be removed and this area accommodates the relocation of the communal open space. Other components of the development will be improved and rearranged to achieve a better urban design and planning outcome for this site.

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.

With only two apartments per floor the proposal has good access to light and air and natural ventilation.  However, it is expected that a development with a non-complying site width must exhibit intelligently integrated sustainability initiatives, including:

 

·   rain water harvesting and re-use

·   deep soil planting (especially in front setback)

·   solar energy capture

·   re-use of storm water for toilet flushing

·   Provision of large trees in deep soil zones at front and rear.

The development does not incorporate any meaningful environmentally sustainable measures. By removing Unit 3.02 there is capacity for photovoltaic panels to be installed on the roof of Unit 3.01 and a rainwater tank could be installed along the northern side of the building.

 

The requirement to provide a more useable and functional area of deep soil at the rear (currently there is none proposed) will allow for the planting of some more substantial trees and vegetation.

 

Conditions will be imposed to ensure these environmentally sustainable measures are implemented as part of the design.

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. 

The landscape context of the surrounding block contains large trees and front setback zones and in some rear setbacks as noted above under Built Form it is critical that this landscape context is contained and built form strategy provides an appropriate capacity for trees. 

 

Other items that require further review are:

 

·   Provision of large trees within the site and in deep soil zones at front and rear appropriate species for this context would be Tallowoods or rough barked apple trees.  These are planted on the street.  Tree planting can also act as a screen along rear boundary.

·   The roof top communal open space should be single level.

·   Simple amenities (W.C., kitchenette, storage) should be provided to service the roof-garden area.

·   Boundary planting should be provided on side setbacks to maximise privacy this can also support the “Built Form” recommendations above.

·   Re-design of the front pathway system and ramps to remove excess hard stand and maximise garden space.

The site is constrained and the basement is designed with minimal if no setback from the southern and eastern sides. This limits the potential for any deep soil areas around the perimeter of the site. This issue was always of a serious concern to Council Officers and the Applicant was requested to redesign the building to include a deep soil zone at the rear. The amended plans have not addressed this issue as the density of the development has not been reduced and the density is too great generating the need for a large number of car parking spaces. This has dictated the basement design which is poor with respect to access and manoeuvrability resulting in an unacceptable design outcome.

 

The proposed deferred commencement conditions go some way in improving the issues raised by the DRP.

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 proposal creates a number of amenity issues which requires its substantial revision:

 

·   The revised built form should comply with predominant rear and side setbacks.

·   The entry to the building is very un-attractive, cumbersome and creates poor streetscape.  Ideally the entry should be incorporated into the street facing built form.

·   Rear facing balconies do not comply with the ADG’s separation requirements.

·   The windows in Unit one, bedroom 1 on each level, do not comply with the ADG. 

·   Basement lift features a bollard in the vehicular aisle, which is liable to create accidents.

·   The bollard location is close to tandem parking which will exacerbate this issue.

·   It is not clear if rubbish bins can be taken up one in four driveway ramp.

·   See Note above regarding split level communal terrace.

 

The amended plans fail to adequately address the panels concerns regarding the built form and proposed site planning. The Panel requested “substantial” changes or revisions. Council Officers believe the amended plans which reduce a 3 bedroom to a 2 bedroom unit, some window and elevation design changes are small scale modifications which do not address the Panels overriding concerns regarding density and bulk.

 

The amended design still fails to comply with the minimum rear setback, the basement car parking layout is poor and creates conflicts and difficulties in access and manoeuvrability creating an unsafe environment for motorists and pedestrians.

 

The Deferred Commencement conditions aim to amend the design which will go a long way to address the Panels concerns.

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.

 

The entry to the building is potentially un-safe.  It is recommended that the entry is directly accessed from the front setback and that all pedestrian ramping in this location is replaced with a well integrated platform lift.

 

See Note above regarding bollard in the basement.

 

It is not clear how rats and other vermin are prevented from entering and nesting in the overland flow chamber.  This issue must be thoroughly investigated and resolved.

 

 

 

The issue of the entry and its safety has not been specifically addressed but could be improved by the use of good lighting along the entry. A condition is included regarding the provision of some additional lighting along the entryway.

 

Given that you enter the block via the northern side adjoining Unit G.01 this is considered acceptable given that this unit will offer some natural surveillance and also many apartments at No.50-52 have balconies and window openings orientated towards the southern side.

Housing Diversity and Social Interaction 

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

 

Well-designed apartment 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. 

The Panel believes that on such a compact site it is not necessary to comply with Council’s requirements for a varied mix of units.

 

To promote social interaction, it is crucial that communal open space is well designed, amenable and most importantly accessible for all; hence the communal open terrace must be single level.

 

Considered acceptable.

 

The location and distribution of communal open space is recommended to be redistributed with an area at the rear on the ground floor dedicated for communal open space and an area on the roof top. This provides for two spaces for occupants and visitors to utilise. Given the small scale nature of the development these spaces are considered to be acceptable, functional and sufficient for the needs generated by the development.

 

It is requested through deferred commencement conditions to create an area of common open space at the rear of the development at the ground floor. This will provide for an area of some 84sqm and another area of some 70sqm on the roof (in lieu of unit 3.02).

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 apartment development responds to the existing or future local context, particularly desirable elements and repetitions of the streetscape. 

The Panel believes that a simple quiet expression is better in this context that features simple brick buildings, with hipped roofs and a tree lined streetscape. 

 

Currently the ground floor expression exacerbates the overbearing nature of the raised ground floor level.  It would be better if the ground level was expressed as a “base” – perhaps with a dark brick - with three levels above.

 

 

The materiality and aesthetics of the building has been improved by the amended scheme. The setback of the upper level provides a better transition and relationship to adjoining developments. The proposed pergola on the upper level at the front is still considered a dominating protruding feature which is requested to be removed and replaced with a small (500mm – 1m) parapet.

 

The base of the building is still too solid and visually dominating. It is requested that the balcony to Unit G.01 on the ground floor be softened and designed of glass to reflect the design of the upper level balconies. This is addressed via a Deferred Commencement condition.

 

72.      In conclusion “the Panel recommends that the above changes be made and be referred to the Panel for further consideration”. Council provided the Applicant with the opportunity to amend the scheme and address the Panel’s concerns. The amended plans did not address all the issues and concerns raised by the Panel. In the assessment of the proposal it is considered that the proposal in its amended form is still an overdevelopment of the site and the density needs to be reduced and the basement layout reconfigured and setback from the rear to create some soft landscaped area. It is recommended that through Deferred Commencement conditions many of the concerns raised by the Panel will be addressed and an improved built form will be achieved.

 

73.      Clause 28 and 30 of SEPP65 requires the consent authority to take into consideration the provisions of the Apartment Design Guide. Table 4 below assesses the proposal against these provisions.

 

Table 4: Compliance with Design Provisions in Part 3 and Part 4 of the ADG

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

Part 3 – Siting the development

3D-1

Communal and public open space

 

 

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

 

-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 apartments

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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)

A minimum area of 153.3sqm needs to be dedicated as communal open space.

 

The development caters for a large area of communal open space at the rooftop amounting to 133sqm. The additional area of 75sqm is located at the front of the site. It is questionable that this space is “communal” as it hasn’t been designed for that purpose.

The front setback area of any development is focused on providing a green, landscaped area that is formal, enhances the visual appearance of the building and includes some canopy trees which assist in screening the bulk and scale of the building.

 

It is recommended that the landscaped are and area of communal open space be redesigned in the following way;

 

·  Unit 3.02 shall be deleted and that area replaced with an area of communal open space which will amount to some 77.79sqm.

·  The rear area of open space at ground floor level is designed to be a private courtyard area for Unit G.02. This courtyard has a total area of 139sqm. It is recommended that the main area at the rear will become a communal area of open space for passive recreation and include two bench seats. This amounts to over 79sqm of communal open space and in total some 162sqm of communal open space which is 26% of the site.

·  In achieving this amended design Unit G.02 shall have a long private courtyard along the southern side and the living area shall include a small 1m wide Juliette balcony along the eastern side facing the communal area of open space.

·  It is recommended that direct access to the rear area of private open space be provided via the laundry.

 

The development in its current and suggested modified form will ensure greater than 50% of the area of communal open space will achieve a minimum of 2 hours of solar access during midwinter as the orientation of both spaces is facing north or north east which is an appropriate orientation.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

3E-1

Deep Soil Zones

 

 

1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum requirements:

Where the site is less than 650sqm a minimum deep soil area of 7% is required.

 

Based on the site area of 613.2sqm a minimum of 43sqm of deep soil area is required.

 

There are two small areas of nominated deep soil across the site. The first area is along the north western corner with an area of 25sqm (4m x 6.2m) and the second area is at the front which has an area of some 20sqm (4m x 5m). The site includes a stormwater drainage easement along the northern side which is intended to be planted out however this area is not included as any deep soil area given the constraints of the easement and the minimum dimension/width of 3m is not achieved.

 

On this basis the areas that are able to be included equate to a total area of 45sqm being 7%.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3F-1

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 rooms and balconies = 6m

Non-habitable rooms = 3m

 

North – along the northern side the building is setback between 3m to 3.47m. The design fails to achieve the 6m minimum.

 

South – along the southern side the building is setback between 2.42m- 4.05m. The design fails to achieve the minimum 6m separation distance between buildings.

 

Eastern (rear) – the building is setback between 3.9m – 5.5m. The building fails to meet the minimum 6m separation distance.

Due to the isolated nature of the site and its narrow width of the allotment, the design can not physically achieve the minimum separation distances. A detailed assessment of the non-compliance is discussed below.

No

 

 

 

 

 

No

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No

Non-compliance with separation distances

Objective 3F-1 of the ADG states that “Adequate building separation distances are shared equitably between neighbouring sites, to achieve reasonable levels of external and internal visual privacy”. Given that the site is isolated and cannot be integrated with any adjoining property, the visual and amenity impacts of the new built form will need to be very sensitively considered and treated. Council Officers were initially opposed to the scale and bulk of the development and its proposed density. It was requested that the height and scale be substantially reduced so that the visual appearance of the building is more in keeping with the scale and form of immediately adjoining three to four storey flat buildings. It was considered that this site is narrow and constrained (flooding and in this case cannot achieve the full development potential of the site.

 

Despite the purpose of the separation distances to protect and preserve privacy it also aims to provide adequate setbacks between buildings so there is space provided for the provision of meaningful landscaping elements and general separation so that the visual bulk and scale of the building is reduced. The design of the building has been modified to reduce the potential for overlooking by introducing highlight windows along the northern and southern elevations. Standard size windows remain in some rooms (Bedroom 1 to apartments G.01, 1.01, 2.01 and to the living room and Bed 1 of Unit 3.01). Given that these spaces are within 6m of the required setback and the fact that 50 -52 Noble Street include a series of windows along their south east and north west elevation which could contribute to some potential for overlooking. It is recommended that the standard sized windows to the rooms noted above will be conditioned so that the lower pane is constructed of obscure glass. This will reduce the potential for any direct overlooking. Along the southern side the windows to the bedrooms have been reorientated to face the north east or south western side on Level 1 with the windows to bedrooms becoming snorkel windows. This isn’t an ideal design solution for these spaces in terms of internal amenity and lack of solar access. However given this elevation is orientated to the south the snorkel windows should allow for more sunlight to access the room as opposed to a south facing highlight window which is the other alternative design solution.

 

On the third level, standard windows are proposed for Bedrooms 2 to apartments 3.01 and 3.02. With the removal of Unit 3.02 there will be no potential for any direct overlooking from any habitable spaces as this area will be replaced with a small roof terrace. It is requested that fixed external louvres are to be constructed to these spaces and a condition is included to ensure this occurs.

 

This is a unique site given that it is isolated and despite its isolation development to its full potential cannot be achieved given that it contains a number of environmental constraints coupled with the fact that the density and built form proposed will have adverse impacts onto adjoining properties in terms of overlooking and will also adversely affect the internal amenity and functionality of spaces.

 

The reduction in the density and reduced bulk, scale and height will create a more appropriate building for this site and will resolve some areas of non-compliance including creating a compliant height and scale which is going to be more reflective of the existing character and nature of development in the precinct. The provision of deep soil areas at the rear and the planting of some taller vegetation in this area will screen the lower levels of the building reducing the impact for overlooking. In addition privacy screens will be required to ensure overlooking from the rear balconies is minimised.

3J-1

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;

- 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 Guide to Traffic Generating Developments defines medium density development as

A medium density residential flat building is a building containing at least 2 but less than 20 dwellings. This includes villas, town houses, flats, semi-detached houses, terrace or row houses and other medium density developments. This does not include aged or disabled persons' housing.”

High density development relates to developments exceeding 20 dwellings.

 

In this case the development is within 800mm distance of the Allawah Train Station and therefore the medium density requirements area applicable.

 

This requires the following;

1 space per unit plus

1 space for every 5 x 2 bedroom apartments

1 additional space for every 2 x 3 bedroom apartments

1 space for every 5 apartments for visitor parking.

 

On this basis the following off-street parking is required;

 

8 apartments = 8 spaces plus

1 space for the 5 x 2 bedroom apartments = 1 space plus

1.5 spaces for the 3 bedroom apartments

Total residential = (10.5) 11 spaces

 

Total visitor spaces

8/5 = 2 spaces

 

A total of 13 spaces are required to be provided.

 

The development is short by 1 space however added to this non-compliance is the very tight nature of the car parking area and manoeuvrability into and around the development. The basement is very constrained and poorly designed. Swept path diagrams show the difficulty in manoeuvrability within the basement.  With the removal of Unit 3.02 this will remove the pressure on the parking layout and the development can comply numerically.

 

The removal of 1 x 2 bedroom unit will generate the need for the following parking numbers:

 

7 apartments = 7 spaces

4 x 2 bedroom = 4/5 = (0.8) 1 space

3 x 3 bedroom = (1.5) 2 spaces

10 spaces for the residential component

 

Visitor = 7/5 = (1.4) 2 spaces

 

Total of 12 spaces is required. Twelve (12) spaces are provided.

The site is located within an “accessible” area and the ADG provisions are applicable

 

No – the development is short of one space

ADG Car Parking Provisions

The ADG parking provisions are based on the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, 2002 provisions. The Guide assists in calculating the minimum car parking spaces required by the development and also calculates potential traffic generation. In respect to car parking numbers required, there are two categories that the proposal could fall under Medium Density Residential or the High-Density Residential development.

 

Medium Density development under the guide is defined as a Residential Flat Building containing less than 20 dwellings. The development falls within this category as the site is located within an “accessible” location. The ADG parking provisions are very generous and flexible as opposed to Councils parking requirements and this is due to the “accessible” nature of the site. The proposed development generates the need for 13 off-street parking spaces and only 12 spaces provided, being a shortfall of one space. This is not considered acceptable given the flexibility of the Policy and the need for parking in general.

 

Coupled with the numeric non-compliance with the parking provisions of the ADG, the basement parking design is inefficient, tight, constrained and unworkable. The swept path diagrams are inaccurate as they generate movements across and over the bollard which is a permanent structure providing protection for occupants and visitors accessing the lift from the basement. The narrowness of the driveway in sections of some 4m is unacceptable and manoeuvrability is unsafe and the general nature of the basement is dangerous and access poor. This is largely generated by the site constraints but also by the density which dictates and generates the need for spaces. The removal of Unit 3.02 will reduce the overall generation for spaces and create a compliant number of spaces.

 

Despite the numeric compliance this does not resolve the poor internal design of the basement. It is recommended that the basement be redesigned via deferred commencement conditions in the following manner:

 

·     No visitor car parking is to be provided. Given the tight configuration of the basement and provision of 1 visitor space (2 are technically required) it is considered that better use of this space is to utilise it as the waste room and reconfigure the lobby, lift in the basement and remove the bollard adjacent to lift which obstructs access and manoeuvrability.

·     The accessible space at the rear shall be deleted and space for Unit 2.01 shall be enlarged with a minimum width of 3.7m and this shall become a designated accessible space.

·     The basement shall be setback a further 2.5m (total setback of 2.7m) from the rear boundary to allow for a soft landscaping buffer at the rear

·     The two tandem spaces for Unit 3.02 shall be dedicated to Unit 1.01.

·     All 3 bedroom apartments will have two spaces and every two bedroom unit will have access to one space.

 

Given the tight nature of the basement and the fact the development is being conditioned to cater for 7 apartments the development in its current form and even this reduced density will not permit the visitor car parking spaces to be integrated given the narrow nature of the basement and the tandem parking spaces (which have to be dedicated to one unit). In this case it is considered more beneficial that the occupants of the building have access to car parking spaces as opposed to visitors. This is considered to be acceptable and reasonable outcome.

Part 4 – Designing the building

4A-1

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 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area

 

 

A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter

The solar access diagrams prepared by the Applicant are generally accurate and show that only 1 unit (G.01) does not receive a minimum of 2 hours during the day in midwinter. This means 88% of the development meets the solar access requirements.

 

Only 1 unit does not receive the minimum 2 hours of solar access during the day in midwinter which amounts to 13% of the development.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

4B-3

Natural Ventilation

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 All the apartments are cross ventilation as they have three orientations with openings along each side. The open plan nature of the living/dining spaces provides for effective cross ventilation. As a result 100% of apartments are cross ventilated in accordance with the provisions of objective 4B-3 of the ADG.

 

The development does not include any cross-over or cross through apartments. The maximum depth of the 3 bedroom apartments is 14.5m and the 2 bedroom apartment is approximately 14m.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4C-1

Ceiling heights

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

 

Habitable rooms  = 2.7m

 

Non-habitable rooms = 2.4m

Each residential level has a minimum floor to floor height of 3.1m, with the rooftop level having a height of 2.4m being the foyer area and pergola both non-habitable areas. The basement has a floor to floor height of 3.9m.

Yes

4D-1

Apartment size and layout

Apartments are required to have the following minimum internal areas:

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

G.02 – 2 bedroom = 80.68sqm

G.01 – 3 bedroom = 100.1sqm

1.01 – 3 bedroom = 104.06sqm

1.02 – 2 bedroom = 81.27sqm

2.01 – 3 bedroom = 104.06sqm

2.02 – 2 bedroom = 81.27sqm

3.01 – 2 bedroom = 7.60sqm

3.02 – 2 bedroom = 77.79sqm

 

Each unit has an additional bathroom in the form of an ensuite, this generates the need for the floor space of each apartment to be increased by 5sqm i.e. 2 bedroom apartments need to exceed 75sqm in internal area and 3 bedroom apartments are to exceed 95sqm. The apartments comply and exceed these minimum internal areas.

 

Each habitable room has at least one window with living spaces having up to three windows. Bedrooms have one window with the smallest window achieving an area of 2.04sqm with 10% of the space amounting to 1.19sqm (3m x 3.98m).

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

4D-2

Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5m 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

Within range.

 

apartments facing the street (south west) have maximum depths varying from 6m to 7.1m. The apartments at the rear have a depth of 5.7m from the kitchen to the living room window.

Yes

 

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)

 

Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a

minimum width of:

- 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments

Main bedrooms range in area from 10.8sqm, 10.77sqm, 11.94sqm and 12m. All other bedrooms have areas greater than 9sqm.

 

All bedrooms have minimum dimensions of 3m.

 

 

The living rooms have minimum width of 4m in all apartments.

Yes 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 4E-1

Private Open space and balconies

All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows:

 

Two bedroom = 10sqm/2m depth

Three-bedroom =

12sqm/2.4m depth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

G.01 (3 bed) = 14sqm balcony and private courtyard having an area of 30sqm by 2.87m

G.02 (2 bed) = 139sqm (private courtyard space) with a depth of 3m

1.01, 2.01 (3 bed) = 12.9sqm (depth 2.8m)

 

1.02, 2.02 and 3.02 (2 bed) = 10.8sqm (depth 2.68m)

Unit 3.01 (2 bed) = 16sqm in area and depth of 2.2m.

 

Yes – all ground floor apartments will satisfy the minimum requirements of 15sqm each area of private open space exceeding this minimum requirement. Minimum depths of 2.87m.

 Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4F-1

Common circulation spaces

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

There is one main lift lobby which provides access to two apartments on each level.

Yes

4G-1

Storage

In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms, the following storage is provided:

2 bedroom – 8m³

3 bedroom – 10m³

All apartments have internal storage cupboards and designated storage spaces within the laundry or some have separate storage cupboards. The internal storage spaces amount to approximately 3cubic metres. The cupboards within the basement would also amount to approximately 3m³.

 

The basement car park also includes storage cages above every parking space.

 

Given the constrained and narrow nature of the site it is difficult to integrate more storage within the development and across the site. There are some additional opportunities for storage such as small sheds within the ground floor courtyards for apartments G.01 and G.02.

The proposal is adequate in this regard.

Yes

 

4H

Acoustic Privacy

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

 

The development has been sensitively designed to respect the context of the area.

 

This application is not accompanied by an Acoustic report given the RFB proposes eight (8) new apartments within a residential environment which is considered to be a small scale redevelopment of a site.

 

The siting of the main living spaces which face the street is the most appropriate orientation and reduce overlooking and transmission of noise.

 

The apartments facing the rear have living spaces facing the rear which is appropriate however balconies are only setback 3.9m and the bedroom wall setback 5.5m.

 

Balconies along this elevation should be setback 6m in accordance with the ADG. The additional setback would provide additional physical separation reducing impacts in terms of noise and overlooking. A condition will be imposed to ensure the balconies at the rear are included with privacy screens to address this reduced setback.

Yes

4J

Noise and Pollution

Design solutions to mitigate noise include:

limiting the number and size of openings facing noise sources

providing seals to prevent noise transfer through gaps using double or acoustic glazing, acoustic louvres or enclosed balconies (wintergardens) using materials with mass and/or sound insulation or absorption properties e.g. solid balcony balustrades, external screens and soffits

Noise mitigation has been addressed by the provision of smaller window openings along the side elevations and orientation of balconies to the front and rear. The removal of Unit 3.02 will improve noise transmission by reducing the scale, density and impact of the development to the neighbouring apartments at the rear.

Yes

4K

Apartment Mix

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

The development has been modified from the originally proposed 4 x 2 bedroom unis and 4 x 3 bedroom apartments to a mix of 5 x 2 bedroom apartments and 3 x 3 bedroom apartments. The overall density has not been reduced and despite the very minor change which has created a 2 bedroom unit from a 3 bedroom apartment the still creates a very tight building and a non-compliant car parking arrangement. To minimise impacts of scale, bulk and visual dominance of the built form, improve amenity impacts and create a more functional basement car park it is recommended Unit 3.02 be removed via a deferred commencement condition. This will result in compliant height and create a more sympathetic building that is in scale with the character of neighbouring developments.

 

Although the development comprises of 2 and 3 bedroom apartments it is a lost opportunity to integrate 1 bedroom apartments.

Yes

4L

Ground Floor Apartments

Direct street access should be provided to ground floor apartments

Privacy and safety should be provided without obstructing casual surveillance.

Direct street access can not be achieved in this case as the ground floor is elevated due to the issues relating to flooding. The design is considered acceptable and reflective of similar adjoining properties (50-52 Noble that has its main entry along the northern side).

Yes

4M

Facades

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

The original design of the building was inconsistent with the character and nature of existing development in the street since the scale and height of the building was out of scale with the adjoining set of apartments. The proposed development exceeded the height limit and the four to five storey scale (including the rooftop level). The overall height of the building is not consistent with the natural topography of the site and would not sit comfortably in the street between 50-52 Noble Street and 56 Noble Street. Any new development needs to respect the siting of the adjoining properties and in this case with 56 Noble achieving an overall height of RL44.01 and 50-52 Noble Street achieving an overall height of RL49.57 the new development needs to step down and sit between these established heights. The proposal is much higher than both properties with the parapet alone achieving a height of some RL49.30. Structures on the roof are much higher. With the removal of Unit 3.02 and the existing rooftop communal open space relocated to the rear the clutter on the roof will be reduced and the visual dominance and inappropriate scale reduced and should be a little more sensitive to its immediate surroundings especially at the rear where the building will step down.

 

This is considered to be a better planning and urban design outcome which will achieve a compliant height and more sensitive scale and form.

Yes

4N

Roof

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 proposed flat roof form is contemporary in nature however is not considered to be characteristic of the roof forms in the street which are pitched in nature. As noted above the removal of the structures on the roof and the relocation of the communal area of open space this will create a compliant scale and height.

 

The proposal has been conditioned to be amended to relocate the roof terrace towards the rear which will utilise the roof space for passive recreational purposes but also reduce the scale and dominance of the built form. The building will step down and relate more closely to the heights of the immediately adjoining RFB’s.

Yes

4O

Landscape Design

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

The proposed landscape design at the front of the site is generally an acceptable response however, there is a lack of a landscaping buffer along the rear of the building which is unacceptable. It is proposed to redesign the basement so that it is setback a minimum of 2.7m from the rear boundary via a deferred commencement condition. This will enable the planting of more substantial trees along the rear boundary to create additional screen planting and reduce the visual dominance of the building.

 

The landscape plan will require modification to address this change, so to will the roof plan for the relocated area of communal open space where Unit 3.02 was originally proposed.

Yes

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

There are no raised planter boxes however the landscape plan will need to be amended to include a dedicated area with planter boxes around the perimeter of the roof top terrace area.

 

The landscape plan includes 1m wide planter boxes around the edges of the ground floor courtyard spaces.

Yes

4Q

Universal Design

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

 

Benchmark of 20% liveable dwellings.

The design of the apartments is relatively flexible allowing for a variety of different people and lifestyles to occupy the apartments.  Most of the 8 apartments can be classified as “liveable” as they are designed to accommodate an easy open plan and would be easily altered to become customised to meet the specific needs and requirements of occupants.

 

Unit 1.01 has been designed to be adaptable which equate to 13% of the development.

Yes

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

The development incorporates BASIX commitments in the design to provide appropriate energy efficiency features. A compliant BASIX certificate accompanies this application.

Yes

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

Development incorporates appropriate stormwater measures and Council’s Development Engineers are satisfied with the stormwater/drainage design.

Yes

4W

Waste Management

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

The basement includes a designated garbage room which caters for 8 garbage bins. This is considered satisfactory for the proposed scale of development.

 

A condition will require the provision of one (1) green bin which will cater for green waste.

Yes

4X

Building maintenance

Building maintenance – building design provides protection form weathering, enables ease of maintenance, material selection reduces ongoing maintenance cost

The design incorporates large expanses of brickwork which allows for minimal long term maintenance of the building. This is considered to be a durable, long-lasting finish.

Yes

 

74.      The main areas of non-compliance with the ADG (physical separation distances and car parking numbers) which are driven by the narrow width of the site. In the context of the street and site planning and layout of adjoining properties this site fails to achieve an acceptable level of design without reducing the density.

 

75.      It is accepted that this site is isolated and therefore can only accommodate a smaller scale medium density development that is very sensitively and carefully designed to ensure it respects the siting and scale of adjoining properties. The reduction in one unit and the reconfiguration of the basement car park (via deferred commencement conditions) aims to ensure the building is compliant and provides for some much needed buffer planting at the rear and goes some way to creating a more sympathetic, compliant and reasonable redevelopment of these sites.

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP)

Zoning

76.      The subject site is zoned R3 – Medium Density Residential pursuant to the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP). The proposed Residential Flat Building (RFB) is a permissible land use in the zone. The proposal in its current form is considered to be an overdevelopment and its density needs to be reduced to create a building of an acceptable scale, complies with car parking controls and one which reduces the bulk, scale and improves the visual and amenity impacts. The proposal generally satisfies the zone objectives which include;

 

·     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.

 

Figure 6 below is an extract of the zoning map showing the subject site which is outlined in blue.

 

Figure 6: Zoning map with the subject site outlined in red

 

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

 

Table 5: KLEP Compliance Table

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

2.3 – Zone objectives and land use table

R3 – Medium Density Residential

Generally consistent with the zone objectives and land use table.

Yes

4.1A – Minimum Lot Size

A minimum site area of 1,000sqm applies to RFB’s in the R3 Medium Density zone

The subject site is isolated and has a site area of 613sqm.

 

A Clause 4.6 Statement has been submitted to justify the non-compliance.

No - refer to (1) below

4.3 – Height of Buildings

15m as identified on Height of Buildings Map

 

The application is accompanied by a Clause 4.6 Statement to formally justify the non-compliance.

15.805m to 17.4m.

No - refer to (2) below

4.4 – Floor Space Ratio

1.5:1 as identified on Floor Space Ratio Map

The FSR has been reduced from that originally proposal and is now proposed to be 1.27:1. The GFA calculations have been confirmed to be accurate.

Yes

4.6 – Exceptions to development standards

Two formal written requests have been submitted to justify the statutory non-compliance with the minimum site area for RFB’s (Clause 4.1A) and non-compliance with the Height of Buildings standard (Clause 4.3).

Formal written requests lodged and addressed in detail as part of this assessment.

Yes - Clause 4.6 Statements address the relevant provisions of Clause 4.6 and are considered in (1) and (2) below

5.10 – Heritage Conservation

The site is not a designated heritage item and is not located within a Conservation Area

The Allawah Hotel at 270 Railway Parade is the closest heritage item (known as I1) however the subject site is not within the immediate vicinity or within the visual catchment of this item. The proposal will not alter or affect the historic significance of this item.

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 subject site is not affected by ASS.

Yes

6.3 – Flood Planning

The subject site is located within a flood prone area and is affected by the 1:100 floods.

 

The application is accompanied by a flood study and the building has been designed to allow for overland flow to travel through the site by the introduction of openings along the north-western side of the building at the ground floor level. The application has been referred to Council’s Engineer specialising in flood assessments.

Council’s Stormwater Engineer has reviewed the application and design of the stormwater/drainage system. Deferred commencement conditions are recommended as the design will need to be modified to ensure it is compliant.

 

Council’s Engineer specialising in flooding has not raised any issues in relation to the treatment proposed to assist with the natural overland flow path to be maintained following construction. Standard conditions are imposed if consent is to be granted.

Yes

 

(1)   Clause 4.6 Exception to Development Standards – Clause 4.1A (Minimum Lot sizes for Multi-unit dwelling housing, Residential Flat Building and seniors housing) Kogarah Local Environmental Plan (KLEP) 2012

78.      The proposed development seeks a variation to the development standard relating to minimum lot size stipulated as Clause 4.1A pursuant to KLEP 2012. Clause 4.1A requires a minimum site area of 1,000sqm for a residential flat building (RFB) in the R3 Medium Density zone. The subject site has an area of 613sqm which is below the requirement.

 

79.      A variation to the minimum lot size can be considered under Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to Development Standards in the KLEP. In assessing the variation, the provisions identified in Clause 4.6 need to be considered. The applicant’s town planning consultant, BMA Urban has provided a formal response which is detailed and considered below.

 

80.      Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

The objectives of Clause 4.6 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.

 

81.      In accordance with the provisions of Clause 4.6 the following issues need to be addressed:

 

Is the planning control in question a development standard?

82.      Yes, Clause 4.1A, the Minimum Lot Size control is a development standard.

 

What is the extent of the variation?

83.      The development control requires a minimum site area of 1,000sqm for an RFB proposed in the R3 zone. The site area in this case amounts to 613sqm which is a deficiency of 387sqm in area and a variation of 39% to the standard.

 

84. To achieve compliance with the control the subject site would need to be amalgamated with an adjoining site to achieve the minimum lot size. In this case all immediately adjoining properties have been redeveloped as medium density housing developments in the form of 3-4 storey walk up blocks of apartments and the opportunity for amalgamation in this case is impractical and unrealisable.

 

What is the underlying objective or purpose of the standard?

85.      The purpose of Clause 4.1A, is to establish a minimum lot size for particular developments, in this case it relates to the development of an RFB within the R3 – Medium Density Residential zone. The objective of the control is “to achieve planned residential density in certain zones.” In essence the intention is to have an appropriately sized site to cater for a larger scaled residential development in the R3 zone that is able to achieve other planning controls relating to design and amenity including achieving appropriate landscaped area, parking provisions, separation distance, setbacks and reduce impacts such as overlooking and overshadowing. The control assists in directing the desired future character of RFB development in the R3 zone and ensures consistency in the built form for the future.

 

Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

86.      Applicant’s comment:The primary objective of the minimum lot sizes for multi-dwelling housing, residential flat buildings and seniors housing is:

 

•      to achieve planned residential density in certain zones.

 

87.      This objective seeks to ensure that lot sizes for residential accommodation, more specifically residential flat building development is consistent with the strategic direction for planned residential density. In this regard, the proposal complies with the FSR standard and the height standard albeit a minor numerical non-compliance resulting from the provision of a communal open space area on the roof area of the building. The proposal is also largely consistent with the finer grain controls of the DCP particularly given the restrictions placed on the land by way of its isolation. In this regard, the proposed variation to the standard will have no bearing on the ability of the development in achieving the applicable LEP and DCP standards and controls, notwithstanding the numerical variation to the lot size standard. It is also submitted that the well-articulated building facade inclusive of the diverse range of material combinations, serve to provide a development scale and form congruous with the medium density scale and character of the setting. The design, layout and built form of the development is an appropriate response to the site and its context where it will remain in unity with the planned residential density envisaged for the area despite the shortfall in site area. When considered within the framework of these objectives, the purpose of the lot size standard also requires that appropriate consideration be given to the likely adverse amenity impacts of the development and amenity of the area. In response, the proposal has been designed as far as practical with the intent of mitigating any adverse impact on immediately adjoining lands in terms of solar access and privacy. This has been achieved despite the notable restrictions placed on the land by way of its isolation. The design itself is commensurate of the local character where it responds to its proximity to the Allawah Centre and Hurstville CBD providing opportunity for a contemporary and appropriately scaled residential flat building in the locality on a site that currently remains at odds with the scale of development observed within its immediate context. Furthermore, the built form characteristics of the proposal are not inconsistent with that observed by a number of recent identifiable developments within the sites local context approved in accord with the height and yield increases made available by the LEP. In this regard, it is anticipated that the built form and scale in this part of Noble Street and surrounding streets, will gradually change as properties are redeveloped commensurate with the 70 current allowable building height and floor space ratio development standards made available to the lands. On this basis, the proposal is consistent with this objective.”

 

88.      Assessment Officer’s comment: The objective of the control is to achieve a “planned” residential density in certain zones. The emphasis is on “planned” as this is the intended outcome for development. Sites should be large enough (minimum 1,000sqm) in order to comply with the planning controls and achieve good urban design and built form outcomes that can be translated across streetscapes and localities to maintain consistency in design and building envelopes. This control also assists in directing future development and creating a systematic approach to RFB development in the R3 zone.

 

89.      This site being “isolated” cannot be amalgamated with adjoining sites which have been redeveloped to achieve RFB’s of a medium density and are strata subdivided. A reasonable expectation is that purchasing these redeveloped sites is unviable and unreasonable. The issue then is to consider whether the development control is a prohibition or a development standard. In accordance with the judgement for Principal Healthcare P/L v Council of the City of RydeIt found that the instrument does not act to prohibit developments, but rather permit developments if certain criteria are met”. In this case the control is considered a development standard that can be varied as the land use proposed is permissible and this is one numerical standard that needs to be satisfied in order for the proposed RFB to be considered.

 

90.      Given that the site is isolated can an RFB be constructed on this smaller site? The site can be redeveloped for the purposes of an RFB but the design may need to be modified and the full redevelopment potential of the site may not be achieved on a smaller, constrained site like the subject site. A merit based assessment needs to be considered on all the other development controls and whether the proposed scheme complies with these. The amended design in summary is still considered to be an overdevelopment of this site given the size of the site and the other environmental constraints that burden it. These issues are considered to be separate to the argument of whether an RFB can be catered for on a smaller lot. It is concluded that this is an isolated site and given the nature of adjoining and surrounding development and the immediate context and location of the site an RFB could be constructed on this site as an infill development, subject to an appropriate design.

 

Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the policy and in particular does compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the obtainment of the objects specified in s5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act?

91.      The non-compliance must not “hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.”

 

92.      Section 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) provides:

 

The objects of this Act are…

   (a) to encourage

i.     the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, town and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment;

ii.    the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land;

         

93.      Assessment Officers comment: The proposed non-compliance with the minimum lot size should not obstruct the attainment of the objects nominated in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (“the Act”). The proposal represents an infill development that is generally anticipated within the streetscape and locality. To enforce strict compliance with Clause 4.1A of the KLEP will not promote the orderly or economic development of the land, as it would hinder the redevelopment of the site as an RFB.

 

94.      The proposed variation will not contravene these Objects of the Act. The variation to the numeric control does not assess or consider the other related impacts of the development of the site which are assessed and considered separately. In its current form the development is considered to be too dense and non-compliant with a number of planning controls resulting in adverse amenity impacts to neighbouring developments and the streetscape. This is not to say that a smaller scaled RFB will be a more reasonable and acceptable response to this smaller site.

 

95.      To enforce strict compliance with this control would be to compromise on the economic and social potential of the subject property. Strict compliance is therefore not consistent with the aims and objectives of section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.

 

96.      It is believed that the proposed development in a modified form (as recommended in this report) would satisfy the objective behind the Council’s minimum lot size control by creating a more sensitively “planned” residential density. 

 

97.      Non-compliance with the development standard does not raise any matter of local, state or regional environmental planning significance. Strict compliance with clause 4.3(2) of the Plan would hinder the attainment of the objects listed in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.

 

98.      Applicants comment: The Applicant has provided in a tabular form an assessment of the proposal against Section 5 of the EP and A Act (as amended). This is provided as an extract below at Figure 7.

 

Figure 7: Extract from Clause 4.6 Statement prepared by BMA Urban Planning

 

The proposal is in the public interest as it is consistent with the objectives of the standard and the zone objectives (Clause 4.6(4)(a)(ii)

99.      The recent Court decision Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118, Preston CJ further clarified the correct approach in the consideration of Clause 4.6 requests. This advice further confirms that the Clause (4.6) does not require that a development that contravenes a development standard must have a neutral or better environmental planning outcome than one that does not.

 

100.    As also held in Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings Pty Ltd [2016] NSWLEC 7 at [39], Preston CJ confirmed (at[25]) that the test in 4.6 (4)(a)(i) does not require the consent authority to directly form the opinion of satisfaction regarding the matters specified. Rather, it needs to do so only indirectly in forming its opinion of satisfaction that the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated.

 

By contrast, the test in cl4.6(4)(a)(ii) requires that the consent authority must be directly satisfied about the matter in that clause; namely that the development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the development standard and the objectives for development of the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

 

101.    The objectives of the R3 Medium Density Residential zone pursuant to KLEP are;

·     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 the residents.

 

102.    Applicant’s comment: “The proposal provides for eight (8) new dwellings in a residential flat building format in a well serviced location located in proximity to a variety of public transport options, expanses of public open space and services facilities. The siting arrangement, built form and architectural language of the development is consistent with that likely to be encountered in a medium density residential setting and is proportionate with that observed within the evolving context.

 

103.    The dwelling mix being 5 x 2 bedroom and 3 x 3 bedroom apartments is considered to be broad enough in that will cater for a variety of households within the local area. Moreover, the proposed development includes larger three (3) bedroom dwelling options that have been lacking in approved and current developments within the local and wider areas. The proposal does not offer the provision of other land uses on the land apart from eight (8) new dwellings in a residential flat building arrangement. Notwithstanding, access to services are located within proximity to the site both within the Allawah local centre and Hurstville CBD.

 

104.    Assessment Officer’s comment: The general nature of the proposed RFB satisfies the intentions for development in this zone and the associated objectives. The development (in an amended form) will satisfy the housing needs of the community within the existing medium density precinct. The development provides a mix of 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom apartments which will satisfy demand for this form of development in the area.

 

105.    The site is accessible and well located and although does not provide any other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents in the area it is very well located and serviced by the small Allawah Town Centre that is within walking distance from the site.

 

106.    As such the proposal is considered to be in the public interest given that it satisfies the objectives of the R3 zone.

 

Contravention of the standard does not give rise to any matter of significance for State or Regional Environmental Planning (Clause 4.6(5)(a)

107.    There is no identified outcome which would be prejudicial to planning matters of State or Regional significance that would result as a consequence of varying the development standard in this case.

 

There is no public benefit of maintaining the standard (Clause 4.6(5)(b)

108.    There is no public benefit in maintaining strict compliance with the development standard in this unique case given that doing so would unreasonably restrict the development potential of the site by way of sterilising a form of development that is encouraged and permitted by the zoning. The proposed isolated nature of the site will permit an infill RFB development of a reduced scale and form.

 

109.    In this case there is no public benefit in imposing the control as an RFB on the site will satisfy the objectives of the zone which including catering for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential setting. Importantly, the numerical shortfall in site area required for the provision of this form of development, will allow for a medium density development that will need to be designed to consider all the other planning and design controls that dictate development. In this case the type of development proposed is considered acceptable however its form is considered to be inappropriate for the site and will adversely impact on the nature of surrounding development and the streetscape. In this case it is considered acceptable and reasonable to vary the control and allow for an RFB development on this smaller site.

 

Any other matters to be taken into consideration by the Secretary Clause 4.6(5)(c):

110.    The Secretary of the Department of Planning and Environment issued a Notice (‘the Notice’) under cl. 64 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (the EP&A Regulation) on 21 February 2018 which delegated concurrence on behalf of the Secretary to the consent authority. Based on this notice, the Secretary’s concurrence can be assumed in this case.

 

111.    After careful consideration of the Clause 4.6 request it is considered that the non-compliance in this case is acceptable and the request is well founded and the variation will satisfy the objectives of both the zone and development standard and therefore satisfies the provisions of Clause 4.6 of the KLEP.

 

(2)       Clause 4.6 Exception to Development Standards - Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) KLEP 2012

112.    The proposed development seeks a variation to the development standard relating to the maximum building height pursuant to Clause 4.3 of the KLEP 2012. Clause 4.3 stipulates that a maximum 15m height limit applies to the any redevelopment on this site. Figure 8 below provides an extract of the height of buildings map which shows the height relative to the subject site.

 

113.    The proposed development seeks a variation to the development standard by proposing a building with a maximum height of between 805mm (roof shelter over entry foyer) to 1.445m (building parapet ancillary to common WC and fire stair) along the north-western elevation and 1.115m (aluminium pergola) to 2.405m (lift overrun) along the south-eastern side. The Applicant states that “Further ancillary structures are also provided to the roof of the development that exceed the allowable maximum height all of which are located within the minimum/maximum height range as identified. As a percentage, the extent of variation along the north-western elevation ranges from 5.3% (top of roof shelter over the COS) to 9.6% (building parapet ancillary to common WC and fire stair). Along the south-eastern elevation, the extent of variation ranges from 7.4% (aluminium pergola) and 16% (lift overrun).”

 

114.    The amended plans lodged with the application (Issue B) dated April 2020, have removed and reduced the pergola features on the roof which limits the non-compliance to only the staircase and lift overruns with a small pergola feature remaining at the rear. The numerical non-compliance remains technically the same just reduces the amount of structures on the roof level.

 

115.    A confirmation of the heights having regard to the survey plan have been conducted and the Applicant’s calculation of the variation is considered to be accurate.

 

Figure 8: Extract of the Height of Buildings map

 

116.    A variation to the minimum lot size can be considered under Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to Development Standards in the KLEP. In assessing the variation, the provisions identified in Clause 4.6 needs to be considered. The applicant’s town planning consultant, BMAUrban has provided a formal response which is detailed and considered below.

 

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

117.    The objectives of Clause 4.6 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.

 

118.    In accordance with the provisions of Clause 4.6 the following issues need to be addressed;

 

Is the planning control in question a development standard?

119.    Yes, Clause 4.3 Building Height control is a development standard.

 

What is the extent of the variation?

120.    The variation is between 805mm to a maximum of 2.405m which amounts to variation of between 5% up to 16%.

 

Figure 9: Elevations highlighting the extent of non-compliance with the height control (as amended)

 

Figure 10: 3D montage the extent of non-compliance with the height control (as amended).

 

What is the underlying objective or purpose of the standard?

121.    The objectives of Clause 4.3 are;

(a)  to establish the maximum height for buildings,

(b)  to minimise the impact of overshadowing, visual impact and loss of privacy on adjoining properties and open space areas,

(c)  to provide appropriate scale and intensity of development through height controls.

 

Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

122.    Applicant’s comment: “The objectives of height of building standard are as follows:

• To establish the maximum height for buildings

 

123.    The underlying purpose of this objective is to ensure that any future development is designed in a manner whereby any resulting building height will appropriately respond to both the existing and future context in a controlled manner. The resulting height breach which is limited to the rooftop communal open space and the services required to access this space, has been appropriately integrated into the built form envelope reducing its visual prominence from both neighbouring properties and the public domain.

It is evident that the siting and scale of the height breach, noting the natural slope of the land, will enable a foreseeable integration between visual built forms with that of neighbouring building’s serving as an affirmation of the objective, and not that of a building that abandons height controls.

 

• To minimise the impact of overshadowing, visual impact and loss of privacy on adjoining properties and open space areas

 

Overshadowing

124.    Comparative shadow diagrams prepared by Cornerstone Design accompany the architectural plan detail set. These diagrams demonstrate the extent of additional overshadowing anticipated to be cast by the height breach upon neighbouring development, specifically, the adjoining residential flat building to the south-east located at No.56 Noble Street. The expanse of additional shadow anticipated to be cast on this neighbouring development on the 22nd June is demonstrated in Figure 5 below. This elevational analysis affirms that the extent of additional shadowing that will be incurred by the height breach (highlighted in red), is negligible and limited to the solid building facades and or roof component. Figures 6 and 7 below also demonstrate the extent of additional shadowing envisaged to result from the height breach on 22nd March/September and 22 December. This analysis demonstrates that the extent of height breach will not result in any unreasonable shadowing impact to the neighbouring adjoining building to the south-east at No. 56 Noble Street across the day on the aforementioned dates.

 

Visual Impact

125.    The visual impact of the non-compliant height elements are not significant because:

•      The breaching height elements are suitably integrated into the overall design of the building and are of a form and materiality that do not create any unwarranted visual impact;

•      The rooftop building elements servicing the communal open space area that exceed the height standard, have been designed in a manner where they do not unreasonably contribute to the scale or intensity of development when viewed by the casual observer.

 

126.    Having regard to the above, the elements in breach of the height will be imperceptible when compared to a height compliant building on this site.

 

Privacy

127.    In terms of privacy, the variation to the height standard is well resolved. The trafficable component of the COS area is located below the height line while planter boxes are proposed along the accessible perimeters of the space further mitigating the ability for any direct overlooking into neighbouring properties. These design measures will further suppress the ability for privacy impacts to be incurred by neighbouring properties.

 

•      To provide an appropriate scale and intensity of development through the height controls

 

128.    The proposed development complies with the allowable FSR made available to the land and therefore, there is no identifiable nexus between the height variation and the extent of density afforded to the land.

 

129.    Further to the above, the breaching height elements are suitably integrated into the overall design of the building and are of a form and materiality that do not create any unwarranted visual impact. The areas that exceed the height standard are inconsequential when viewed from the public domain and do not contribute to the scale and density of the building in terms of its visual perception to contributing bulk. Where the rooftop building elements servicing the communal open space area exceed the height standard, they have been designed in a manner where they do not present as areas that add to the scale or intensity of the development. Overall, the building height breach continues to enable the provision of an appropriate building scale and intensity on the land, and therefore, the proposal aligns with this objective despite the height variation.”

 

130.    Assessment Officer’s comment: The objectives of the control aim to regulate the overall height and scale of buildings to ensure they are sympathetic with the surrounds compliment the form of neighbouring buildings and reduce amenity impacts such as the visual dominance and effect of the variation, overshadowing and any potential for overlooking.

 

131.    In this case, the exceedance with the height control is not considered to be acceptable even for the proposed ancillary structures as the scale and form of the development is inconsistent with adjoining developments. Objective (a) of the control establishes the maximum height for buildings with emphasis placed on “maximum”. This is the highest and tallest the building can go and in some circumstances a building may not be able to reach this height if there will be impacts generated from the proposed height. The five storey scale of the building is inconsistent with the scale of adjoining buildings all achieving lower heights. For example No.50-52 Noble Street is a three storey RFB achieving a maximum height of RL48.57 to the highest point. This building has a traditional double pitched roof form and therefore the highest point is recessed. The parapet of the roof is at RL45.63 (underside of the eave as taken from the updated Survey plan prepared by W.Buxton) which is a more prominent point when viewing the building from the street. No.56 Noble Street steps down and has a maximum height of RL43.80 and RL45.01 and this building also has a traditional pitched roof form so the highest point is a recessive element. Its parapet sits at RL41.90. Given that these adjoining sites are unlikely to be redeveloped any time in the immediate future and have largely reached their redevelopment potential, the subject site that sits in between these buildings needs to respect the existing building heights and scale. The proposed height of the building will protrude well above both these adjoining properties having a maximum RL52.30 to the top of the lift overrun along the southern side and RL51.40 to the top of the staircase along the northern side. Both these elements will be visible when viewed from the street. The proposed parapet sits at around RL48.30 which is substantially higher than both adjoining parapets to 50-52 and 56 Noble Street. The scale is also considered to be inconsistent as 50-52 Noble is a three storey RFB situated above an elevated ground floor parking level whilst 56 Noble Street is a two storey RFB situated above a raised ground floor parking area. This is characteristic of developments in the street. The proposed scale is a four storey RFB with additional structures on the rooftop that are visible elements. The form and scale is not characteristic of the nature of development and the additional rooftop features in this case add to the clutter and scale.

 

132.    The site is an isolated one with a number of environmental constraints, flood prone, burdened by a stormwater easement, non-compliance with separation distances and car parking including a sub-standard lot size, which all suggest that an infill development on this site is unlikely to be able to fulfil its maximum potential. A smaller scaled building is a potential option.

 

133.    In terms of meeting objective (b) of the control, the elements on the roof are not centralised and since they protrude above the adjoining properties will be visually dominating elements in the skyline especially the bulk and form of the lift overrun which exceeds the height up to 2.4m. In terms of achieving an appropriate scale and intensity of the development this is largely formed by the existing character of neighbouring developments. If these have been redeveloped then an established form is captured which in this case has occurred and therefore ques from the adjoining properties need to be considered. Relative heights assist with guiding future direction for development. Simply satisfying the numerical control may not be the best outcome for a site. In this case the exceedance in the height creates visual elements that add to the bulk and scale of the development which are not in keeping with the established form and character of adjoining buildings and the streetscape. It is recommended by way of a series of deferred commencement conditions to reduce the scale and form of the building which will bring it into compliance with the overall height, reduce the overall density and will improve the layout and functionality of the development. By achieving the deferred commencement conditions Unit 3.02 would be removed and replaced with a rooftop area of communal space and there will be no structures that will exceed the overall height habitable or otherwise. The scale especially when viewed from the rear will be substantially improved and the visual impact of the overall built form also improved.

 

134.    The Applicant provides some elevational shadow diagrams showing the impact of the height variation on shadowing impacts. Overshadowing diagrams are provided below with the additional shadowing shown in red by the variation. Although the Applicant claims the impacts from the non-compliance is “negligible” the objective requires shadowing and associated impacts to be “minimised” and it is not believed that this has occurred. If the staircase and lift are centralised impacts may be minimised but their location and siting on the edge of the building makes them more visible and some additional shadowing will occur.

 

 

Figure 11: Proposed shadow impacts (courtesy BMA Urban)

 

Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the policy and in particular does compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the obtainment of the objects specified in s5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act?

135.    The non-compliance must not “hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.”

 

136.    Section 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) provides:

 

The objects of this Act are…

   (a) to encourage

i.   the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, town and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment;

ii. the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land;

         

137.    Assessment Officers comment: The proposed non-compliance with height would not largely obstruct the attainment of the objects nominated in section 5(a)(i) & (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (“the Act”). The proposal represents an infill development in the form of an RFB that is generally anticipated within the streetscape and locality. However the proposed scale, height and density is considered to be inappropriate and unacceptable. There is no reason in this case that strict compliance with Clause 4.3 of the KLEP will not promote the orderly or economic development of the land, nor would hinder the redevelopment of the site as a RFB.

 

138.    The proposed variation will not contravene these Objects of the Act. The variation to the numeric control is largely a result of the development not being able to comply with other planning and design controls. For example the ADG provision for communal open space Objective 3B clearly prefers ground floor areas of communal space as opposed to areas on the rooftop. In this case the narrow and tight nature of the site restricts the provision of communal open space on the ground floor or a large degree of it and therefore the design forces this element up to the roof where it then fails to comply with the height as access to it exceeds the height control. In its current form the development is considered to be too dense and non-compliant with a number of planning controls resulting in adverse amenity impacts to neighbouring developments and the streetscape. This is not to say that a smaller scaled RFB will be a more reasonable and acceptable response to this smaller site.

 

139.    To enforce strict compliance with this control would not compromise on the economic and social potential of the subject property as an RFB with seven apartments can still be achieved on this site. Strict compliance is therefore considered important in these circumstances of the case and given the site constraints. Compliance with the control will still achieve the aims and objectives of section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.

 

140.    It is believed that the proposed development in a modified form (as recommended in this report) would satisfy the objective behind the Council’s height control by creating a more sensitively designed and compliant development. The strict compliance with clause 4.3(2) of the Plan would not hinder the attainment of the objects listed in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.

 

141.    Applicants comment: The Applicant has provided in a tabular form an assessment of the proposal against Section 5 of the EP and A Act (as amended). This is provided as an extract below at Figure 12.

 

 

Figure 12: Extract from Clause 4.6 Statement prepared by BMA Urban Planning

 

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

142.    Applicant’s comments: “Clause 4.6(3)(b) of the KLEP 2012, requires the consent authority to be satisfied that the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed clause 4.6(3)(b), by demonstrating:

 

143.    “That there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard”. The environmental planning grounds relied on in the written request under Clause 4.6 must be sufficient to justify contravening the development standard.

 

144.    The focus is on the aspect of the development that contravenes the development standard, not the development as a whole. Therefore, the environmental planning grounds advanced in the written request must justify the contravention of the development standard and not simply promote the benefits of carrying out the development as summarised in (Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118). In this instance, the relevant aspect of the development is the extent of variation to the building height standard which ranges from 5.3% (top of roof shelter over the COS) and 16% (lift overrun) being the maximum. Justification provided for the variation applies to this particular application and not environmental planning grounds that could apply to all lands zoned R3- Medium Density Residential Zone. The environmental planning grounds justification for the variation is as follows:

 

•      The habitable floor areas of the building are located within the 15m height limit. In this regard, there is no tangible nexus between the height non-compliance and overall land use intensity of the land. The non-compliance primarily relates to the roof level of the building and the ancillary structures used to service this area being the top of roof shelter over COS and part of the COS entry foyer and lift overrun;

•      The lift overrun, entry foyer, fire stair and WC ancillary to the COS provide a reasonable level of amenity and access to the rooftop common open space. The rooftop space facilities the orderly and economic use of the land with the provision of accessible communal open space with good solar access;

•      The roof shelter over the entry foyer and separate shade structure provided over the communal open space provide both shading and weather protection enabling the ongoing enjoyment of the area all year round;

•      The height variation predominately occurs as a result of the need to provide accessible and usable access to the rooftop communal area, noting that the remainder of the building remains under the height control;

•      The areas of non-compliance will not intensify the extent of impacts to neighbouring properties in terms of privacy or overshadowing; and

•      The development’s characteristics ensure that there is no potential for this development to have a jarring effect in the streetscape, given the appropriately sited massing arrangement proposed as part of the development, and the evolving area context”.

 

145.    Assessment Officers comment: In justifying the variation on environmental grounds the Applicant alludes to the importance of the structures (exceeding the height control) and their introduction and relationship to the overall amenity and functionality of the development. There is no question that these additional, ancillary structures improve and provide added benefits to the functioning of the building in the form of access to the roof terrace.

 

146.    These structures add value to the utilisation of the development and its roof space however they do not comply with the height objectives which seek to “minimise” visual impact and overshadowing and this cannot be said of the structures especially as they will protrude above the immediately adjoining RFB’s. There is no minimisation of impacts which is sought by the objectives of the clause and until these elements are designed in a way that they are well integrated into the building envelope, centralised and recessed this objective can not be satisfied by the proposal in its current form.

 

The proposal is in the public interest as it is consistent with the objectives of the standard and the zone objectives (Clause 4.6(4)(a)(ii)

147.    The recent Court decision Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118, Preston CJ further clarified the correct approach in the consideration of Clause 4.6 requests. This advice further confirms that the Clause (4.6) does not require that a development that contravenes a development standard must have a neutral or better environmental planning outcome than one that does not.

 

148.    As also held in Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings Pty Ltd [2016] NSWLEC 7 at [39], Preston CJ confirmed (at[25]) that the test in 4.6 (4)(a)(i) does not require the consent authority to directly form the opinion of satisfaction regarding the matters specified. Rather, it needs to do so only indirectly in forming its opinion of satisfaction that the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated.

 

By contrast, the test in cl4.6(4)(a)(ii) requires that the consent authority must be directly satisfied about the matter in that clause; namely that the development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the development standard and the objectives for development of the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

 

149.    The objectives of the R3 Medium Density Residential zone pursuant to KLEP are:

·     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 the residents.

 

150.    Applicant’s comment: The proposal provides for eight (8) new dwellings in a residential flat building format in a well serviced location located in proximity to a variety of public transport options, expanses of public open space and services facilities. The siting, arrangement, built form and architectural language of the development is consistent with that likely to be encountered in a medium density residential setting and is proportionate with that observed within the evolving context.

 

151.    The dwelling mix being 5 x 2 bedroom and 3 x 3 bedroom apartments is considered to be broad enough in that will cater for a variety of households within the local area. Moreover, the proposed development includes larger three (3) bedroom dwelling options that have been lacking in approved and current developments within the local and wider areas.

 

152.    The proposal does not offer the provision of other land uses on the land apart from eight (8) new dwellings in a residential flat building arrangement. Notwithstanding, access to services are located within proximity to the site both within the Allawah local centre and Hurstville CBD.”

 

153.    Assessment Officer’s comment: The general nature of the height variation does not go against the objectives of the zone. It is agreed that the development (in an amended form) will satisfy the housing needs of the community within the existing medium density precinct. The development provides a mix of 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom apartments which will satisfy demand for this form of development in the area.

 

154.    The site is accessible and well located and although does not provide any other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents in the area it is very well located and serviced by the small Allawah Town Centre that is within walking distance from the site.

 

155.    As such the proposal is considered to be in the public interest given that it satisfies the objectives of the R3 zone.

 

Contravention of the standard does not give rise to any matter of significance for State or Regional Environmental Planning (Clause 4.6(5)(a)

156.    There is no identified outcome which would be prejudicial to planning matters of State or Regional significance that would result as a consequence of varying the development standard in this case.

 

There is no public benefit of maintaining the standard (Clause 4.6(5)(b)

157.    There is a big public benefit in maintaining strict compliance with the development standard in this unique case given that allowing for the variation would establish an undesirable precedent in the area which is not in the public interest. Currently there are no known developments in the street that exceed the statutory height control and this would be the first. Allowing for the variation where it is not warranted and creates a poor urban design and planning outcome is not considered to be in the public interest.

 

158.    Given the site constraints and the number of non-compliances it is imperative that in this case the development satisfies the height control and in turn creates a more compliant and sympathetic form of development in the immediate streetscape. Despite the development satisfying the zone objectives it fails to satisfy the objectives of the development standard.

 

Any other matters to be taken into consideration by the Secretary Clause 4.6(5)(c):

159.    The Secretary of the Department of Planning and Environment issued a Notice (‘the Notice’) under cl. 64 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (the EP&A Regulation) on 21 February 2018 which delegated concurrence on behalf of the Secretary to the consent authority. Based on this notice, the Secretary’s concurrence can be assumed in this case.

 

160.    After careful consideration of the Clause 4.6 request it is considered that the non-compliance in this case is not considered to be acceptable and the request is  not considered to be well founded and the variation will not satisfy the objectives of the development standard namely to minimise the impact of overshadowing, visual impact and loss of privacy on adjoining properties and open space areas” as the proposal areas of exceedance do not “minimise” visual impacts and the dominance of the structures and elements that encroach above the height control are visually dominating. In this case the proposal fails to satisfy the provisions of Clause 4.6 of the KLEP; the variation can not be supported.

 

Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020

161.    In relation to this development site the zoning is proposed to change from R3 Medium Density Residential to R4 High Density Residential. The height and floor space ratio remain unchanged. The minimum lot size for subdivision is currently 850sqm pursuant to Clause 4.1 of the KLEP 2012 whilst it is proposed to become a minimum of 1,000sqm pursuant to the draft plan if subdivision is requested. The draft plans intended changes do not alter the permissibility of the development nor alter the assessment in any significant manner.

 

162.    Consideration is given to the provisions of Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 in the assessment this application.

 

163.    In this regard, the provisions have no determining weight as a result of proposed operation of Clause “1.8A Savings provisions relating to development applications” of the Draft Plan which provides “If a development application has been made before the commencement of this Plan in relation to land to which this Plan applies and the application has not been finally determined before that commencement, the application must be determined as if this Plan had not commenced.”  

 

 Development Control Plans

 KOGARAH DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO 2013 (KDCP)

164.    The proposal needs to address and satisfy the provisions of Part B – General Controls and Part C2 –Medium Density controls as part of the KDCP. These provisions are addressed in more detail below.

 

Table 6: Compliance with KDCP provisions

Part B General Controls

Control

Standard

Proposed

Complies

B1 Heritage Items and Heritage Conservation Areas

Ensure development protects and enhances the environmental and cultural heritage of Kogarah

The site is not a heritage item or located within a Conservation Area.

 

The closest item is the Allawah Hotel which is located within the small Town Centre of Allawah. The site is some distance from this property and will not affect the visual catchment or the significance of this item.

Yes

B2 – Tree Preservation and Greenweb

Development approval is required to ringbark, remove, cut down or destroy any tree that has a height greater than 3.5m or branch spread exceeding 3m in diameter.

 

This locality is within the habitat reinforcement corridor area of the Green Web. In this regard, the provisions of Part B2 Section 2 apply.

 

There are no significant trees existing on site that are proposed to be removed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The site is not located within a Green Web habitat.

 

Yes

 

B3 – Developments near busy roads and rail corridors

 

Acoustic assessments for noise sensitive developments as defined in clause 102 of the Infrastructure SEPP may be required if located in the vicinity of busy, arterial roads.

Noble Street is not a classified arterial road or main road so this provision is not applicable to this development,

N/A

B4 – Parking and Traffic

 

 

 

2 bedroom unit = 1.5 spaces/unit

 

3 bedroom unit = 2 spaces/unit

 

1 visitor space/5 units or part thereof, and

 

1 designated car wash bay which may also be a visitor space.

 

 

 

 

A minimum of 1% of the total number of car parking spaces within the development are to be designated “accessible” spaces for people with mobility impairments.

 

Bicycle parking 1 space per 3 dwellings plus 1 space per 10 for visitors

 

 

Internal car park layouts, space dimensions, ramp grades, access driveways, internal circulation aisles and service vehicle areas shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set out in AS 2890.1 (2004) and AS 2890.2 (2002) for off street parking and commercial vehicles.

Required

 

Residential

5 x 2 bedroom apartments = 7.5 spaces

 

3 x 3 bedroom apartments = 6 spaces

 

8/5 visitor spaces = 1.6 spaces

 

Total = 16 spaces required (14 resident and 2 visitor)

 

Provided = 12 spaces for the residential component

 

One (1) accessible space is required which is catered for and provided in the basement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

8/3 bicycle spaces = 3 spaces for residents. A minimum of 3 spaces are provided in the basement

 

 

The parking layout and arrangement is unsatisfactory and requires redesign. Deferred commencement conditions are imposed to improve the layout, manoeuvrability and functionality of the basement.

 

 

No

 

The site is located within an accessible area and therefore compliance with the ADG is required. The proposal is short by one space when assessed against the RMS provisions.

 

If the density is reduced as proposed by the reduction of one x 2 bedroom unit (3.02) a total of 12 residential parking spaces would be required (2 less).

 

 

 

 

 

 

B5 – Waste Management

Submit a Waste Management Plan (WMP).

The application was accompanied by a Waste Management Plan.  It is recommended that the garbage storage area be relocated to the space that occupies car parking space No.11 and the existing waste room become a formal pedestrian access space to enter the lift which is a much safer arrangement and would remove the need for the bollard along the western side and increase the driveway access point along this side of the basement.

 Yes

B6 – Water Management

Detention storage is to be provided that is equal to or greater than the specified Site Storage Requirements (SSR).

 

Rainwater tank installed to meet BASIX water conservation requirements will be given credit for SSR purpose.

 

Drainage easements servicing stormwater pipes and/or overland runoff from catchments upstream of the development site are to be managed according with Council’s guidelines.

 

Discharge of stormwater runoff from a development site is to be undertaken in accordance with the design practice note, Site Drainage and Flood Management regarding direct discharge to kerb, discharge to a Council owned stormwater conduit, discharge to natural areas, discharge through private property and discharge within the development site.

The subject site is located within a flood prone area. Council’s Drainage Engineer – Design, Survey and Drainage has suggested that the ground floor level may need to be further raised by up to 300mm. The amended Flood Study as prepared by the Applicant was still not considered to address Council’s issues and it is requested via deferred commencement conditions that the issue of flooding and treatment and arrangement for the overland flow be resolved prior to consent being issued.

 

 

No rainwater tank is proposed on the landscape plans. This will be addressed via a condition.

 

 

The general stormwater and drainage arrangement is considered satisfactory and standard conditions are imposed in relation to this issue.

 

Council’s Engineers initially wanted the stormwater easement to be enlarged from 1.8m to 2.4m but given the narrow nature of the site this would sterilise the site and would not permit redevelopment. It was agreed that the installation of a new pipe will upgrade the state of the infrastructure and the size/width of the easement can remain as it exists.