AGENDA R

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Council Meeting

 

TUESDAY 27 SEPTEMBER 2016

 

6:30pm

 


Pre-Registration to Speak at Council Meetings

 

Council is encouraging members of the public to pre-register their interest to speak at Council Meetings as the Meeting venues have a maximum number they can hold. Members of the public can pre-register up until 2pm of the day of the Meeting.

If you wish to register your interest please fill in a Register to Speak Form, available from the Inner West Council website, including:

·      your name;

·      contact details;

·      item on the Agenda you wish to speak to; and

·      whether you are for or against the recommendation in the agenda.

 

Members of the public who pre-register will be asked to show photo ID upon entry to verify the pre-registration application.

 

What happens after I submit the form?

Your request will then be added to a list that is shown to the Chairperson on the night of the meeting.

 

Are there any rules for speaking at a Council or Committee Meeting?

The following rules apply when addressing a Council or Committee meeting:

·      keep your address to the point, the time allowed for each speaker is limited to three minutes with one extension of not more than three minutes with the approval of the Council/Committee. This time limit applies, no matter how many items are addressed by the speaker;

·      when addressing the Meeting you must speak to the Chairperson;

·      the Chairperson may curtail public participation where the information being presented is considered repetitive or irrelevant.


Where Items are deferred, Council reserves the right to defer speakers until that Item is heard on the next
occasion.

 

Accessibility

Inner West Council is committed to ensuring people with a disability have equal opportunity to take part in Council and Committee Meetings. If you have any access or disability related participation needs and wish to know more ring 9335 2222.

 

 

 

Persons in the public gallery are advised that under the Local Government Act 1993, a person may NOT tape record a Council meeting without the permission of Council.

 

Any persons found recording without authority will be expelled from the meeting.

 

“Record” includes the use of any form of audio, video and still camera equipment or mobile phone capable of recording speech.

 

An audio recording of this meeting will be taken for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the minutes.

 

 

 


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

 

 

AGENDA

 

 

1          Acknowledgement of Country

 

 

2          Disclosures of Interest (Section 451 of the Local Government Act
and Council’s Code of Conduct)

 

 

3          Tabling of Pecuniary Interest Return

 

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                         Page

Minutes of 23 August 2016 Council Meeting                                                                5

 

 

5          Administrator’s Minutes

 

Nil at the time of printing.

 

 

6          Staff Reports

 

C0916 Item 1      Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee Meeting held on 13 September 2016   15

C0916 Item 2      Development Application - 33 Smith Street, Summer Hill                         21

C0916 Item 3      Development Application - 66 Constitution Road, Dulwich Hill                196

C0916 Item 4      Development Application - 351 Trafalgar Street, Lewisham                    264

C0916 Item 5      Development Application - 308-314 Stanmore Road, Petersham           317

C0916 Item 6      Development Application - 106 Carlton Crescent, Summer Hill              362

C0916 Item 7      Section 82A Review Application - 669 King Street, St Peters                  449

C0916 Item 8      Planning Proposal for 55-63 Smith Street, Summer Hill                          467

C0916 Item 9      Planning Proposal for 100-102 Elliott Street, Balmain                              516

C0916 Item 10    Establishment of an Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for the Inner West Council                                                                                                      581

C0916 Item 11    Stronger Communities Fund Major Projects Program                             606

C0916 Item 12    Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 1 September 2016                 610

C0916 Item 13    Anti-Poverty Week 2016 Grants                                                               640

C0916 Item 14    The Metropolitan Orchestra - Fee Waiver Request                                  642

C0916 Item 15    Request for Chrissie Cotter Gallery Fee Waiver - AGNSW Staff Charity Exhibition      646

C0916 Item 16    Expenses and Facilities Policy for the Administrator                                650

C0916 Item 17    Expenses and Facilities Policy for IAG/LRAC Members                         662

C0916 Item 18    Summary of Resolutions - Publishing on Website                                    670

C0916 Item 19    Proposed Changes to the Schedule for Council Meetings 2016              672

C0916 Item 20    Inner West Council Investments as at 31 August 2016                            673

 

 

 

 

 

7          Reports with Confidential Information

 

Reports appearing in this section of the Business Paper are confidential in their entirety or contain confidential information in attachments.

 

The confidential information has been circulated to Council separately.

 

C0916 Item 21    Affordable and Supported Living Housing over Hay Street Car Park, Leichhardt     715

C0916 Item 22    Cooks River Parklands - Draft Plans of Management and Master Plans 2016-2026: Feedback from Public Exhibition                                                              718

C0916 Item 23    SSROC Tender for Improving Recycling and Contamination Management in Multi Unit Dwellings (MUDs)                                                                                     926

C0916 Item 24    SSROC Tender for the Provision of Tree Pruning Services                    928

C0916 Item 25    Tender T06-16 - Rehabilitation of Regent Street, Leichhardt Stormwater Line Project     930

C0916 Item 26    Formation of an Audit & Risk Committee of Inner West Council             933

C0916 Item 27    WestConnex - Advice from Senior Counsel                                             948

C0916 Item 28    Live Streaming of Council Meetings                                                         949

C0916 Item 29    ICT System Consolidation                                                                        957

 

  


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

Minutes of Council Meeting
held at Ashfield Service Centre on 23 August 2016

 

Meeting commenced at 6.32pm

 

Present:

 

Richard Pearson

Administrator

Vanessa Chan

Interim General Manager

Simone Schwarz

Director Service Delivery

Phil Sarin

Director Planning and Environment

Cathy Edwards-Davis

Director Public Works

Peter Gainsford

Director Corporate Services

Wal Petschler

Director Major Projects and Engineering

Josephine Bennett

Director Community Services

Popy Mourgelas

Manager Corporate Governance, Ashfield

Jennifer Anderson

Governance Officer (Minute Taker)

 

 

1.      Acknowledgement of Country by Chairperson

 

We meet tonight on the traditional land of the Cadigal and Wangal people of the Eora nation.  I acknowledge the terrible wrongs committed against the Aboriginal peoples of this country and their care of the land over many generations.  I celebrate their ongoing survival and achievements in today's society.

 

2.      Disclosures of Interests:

Nil.

 

3.      Confirmation of Minutes

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on Tuesday, 26 July 2016 be confirmed.

 

 

4.      Staff Reports:

 

C0816 Item 1      Minutes of Local Representation Advisory Committee and Implementation Advisory Group Meetings held in August 2016

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the Minutes of the Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville Local Representation Advisory Committee Meetings and the Implementation Advisory Group Meeting held in August 2016 be received and recommendations be adopted with the following exceptions:

 

1.       A number of recommendations relate to items that are being presented to this Council meeting, as separate reports.  These recommendations are noted but will not be adopted as resolutions, as they are subject to specific and separate discussion tonight.  Specifically,

 

  • Item 10 Allocation of sport ground booking (former Marrickville)
  • Item 11 Tempe Reserve Olympic Park Redevelopment
  • Item 12 Affordable Housing over Ha Street Car park
  • Item 15 Restaurant café – Elliot Street café
  • Item 16 Clubs and Community grants allocation (former Marrickville)
  • Item 18 Elkington Park Cottage

 

2.       Ashfield LRAC – the minutes be amended to show Monica Wangmann absented herself from the meeting during discussion of Item 2 – Aquatic Centre Redevelopment.

 

3.       Leichhardt LRAC – the recommendations are adopted with the following exception:

 

·    That Committee recommendation on Item 1 relating to Point 6, C118/16 be changed to note that this provision (to arrange a demonstration/rally at Callan Park in relation to Council’s skatepark proposal) be deferred until the Council have met again with OEH about an alternate site in the event that Council is unable to negotiate a successful outcome with OEH.

·    I will not be adopting the recommendation Item 1 – points 1, 2 of C2322/16 (Bays Precinct Affordable Housing Study) noting instead that the GM has commissioned a detailed affordable housing study and the development of supporting policy instruments across the whole LGA, and this includes a specific assessment of Bays Precinct.

·    In relation to Item 1, the ethical investment policy and non-fossil fuel targets – I note that this matter will be considered by a joint LRAC meeting but I consider it premature for Council to ‘resolve’ to move to 100% non-fossil fuel investment without proper study and before a policy framework is developed – this recommendation will not be adopted.

·    Item 3 LPAC Olympic Pool Starting Blocks – I am not accepting the Committee recommendation.  Instead I am resolving in favour of the recommendation of the Council officers in their report to the Committee that the removal of the existing concrete starting blocks and replacements with new Anti-wave starting platforms be considered in the early phase of the LPAC Masterplan works.

 

4.       Marrickville LRAC – the recommendations are adopted with the exception of Item 6 Local Government Election – where instead I determine to write to the Premier and Minister for Local Government advising them of the request of the Marrickville LRAC that the next election for the Inner West Council be conducted in March 2017.

 

 

C0816 Item 6      Development Application - 2-20 Weston Street, Balmain East

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the application be approved in accordance with the recommendation of the Leichhardt Planning Panel subject to the hours of operation of the proposed café being amended as follows:

 

  • Monday to Sunday including public holidays: 7.00am to 5.00pm.

 

 

C0816 Item 3      Development Application - 2-32 Smith Street Summer Hill

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       Council will not make a submission to the Sydney East Joint Regional Planning Panel.

 

2.       That a a condition requiring dilapidation reports for adjoining properties shall be added to the recommended conditions of consent.

 

 

 

 

C0816 Item 5      Development Application - 75 Milton Street, Ashfield

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the application be granted a deferred commencement approval in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

 

C0816 Item 8      Development Application - 23 Croydon Street, Petersham

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the development application to demolish part of the premises and carry out alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building fronting Croydon Street (Building A) containing 4 dwellings with a communal kitchen and BBQ area and the construction of a new 3 storey residential flat building to the rear (Building B) containing 18 dwellings with basement car parking be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed on pages 485-508 of the business paper, with the exception of condition 1 which is to be amended to refer to the updated plan references for DA04, Revision M, DA05, Revision K and DA11, Revision K.

 

 

C0816 Administrator's Minute:  WestConnex Community Engagement Forums

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

Council notes progress in ensuring that local and state forums are established to address the concerns of inner west residents in relation to WestConnex.

 

 

C0816 Item 2      Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 4 August 2016

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 4 August 2016 be received and the recommendations be adopted.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 12    Affordable Housing over Hay Street Car Park, Leichhardt

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       the Report be received and noted;

2.       Council pursue the acquisition of Lot 3 DP227326 from Ausgrid subject to the price being reasonable (as determined by an independent valuation), noting that a new kiosk substation will be included elsewhere on the car park site as part of the affordable housing development;

3.       Council enter into discussions with owners of properties fronting Parramatta Road and adjacent to the car park about the possibility of granting rights of way, for market value to those properties, provided that this does not adversely affect the proposed affordable housing development on the Hay Street car park; and

4.       Council apply for possessory title of the strip of land known as Chancery Lane which is incorporated into the car park.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 7      Development Application - Longport Street, Lewisham (2 - 32 Smith Street, Summer Hill)

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

Council will not make a submission to the Panel in relation to this proposal.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 4      Development Application - 317-331 Liverpool Road, Ashfield

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

the application be granted a deferred commencement approval in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 9      Amendment to Approved Voluntary Planning Agreement - Grove Street, Dulwich Hill

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

Council enter into the Amended Voluntary Planning Agreement documented in Attachment 2.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 10    Seasonal Allocation of Sports Grounds in the former Marrickville Area for the 2016/17 Summer Season

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.   in relation to Arlington Reserve, Camdenville Park, Henson Park, HJ Mahoney Reserve, Marrickville Oval and Steel Park:

a.   Council approves the 2016/17 summer season sports ground allocations for training and match play applicable from 29 August 2016 to 26 March 2017 inclusive, as proposed in the schedule at Attachment 1, subject to provision of all information requested in the application form, field condition and payment of, or agreement to a repayment plan for, any outstanding fees;

b.   pursuant to s337(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council delegates to the General Manager the power to execute 2016/17 summer season sports ground licences; and

2.   Council in its capacity as reserve trust manager of Petersham Park (P500070), considers this report and decides to enter into summer season sports ground licences for the 2016/17 summer season with the clubs proposed to use Petersham Park (P500070) as detailed in the schedule at Attachment 1 for training and match play from 29 August 2016 to 26 March 2017 inclusive subject to the provision of all information requested in the application form, field condition and payment of, or agreement to a repayment plan for, any outstanding fees;

3.   Council in its capacity as reserve trust manager of Camperdown Park (R8205 & D500444), considers this report and decides to enter into summer season sports grounds licences for the 2016/17 summer season with the clubs proposed to use Camperdown Park (R8205 & D500444) as detailed in the schedule at Attachment 1 for training and match play from 29 August 2016 to 26 March 2017 inclusive subject to the provision of all information requested in the application form, field condition and payment of, or agreement to a repayment plan for, any outstanding fees;

4.   Council in its capacity as reserve trust manager of Mackey Park (R80566), considers this report and decides to enter into summer season sports grounds  licences for the 2016/17 summer season with the clubs proposed to use Mackey Park (R80566) as detailed in the schedule at Attachment 1 for training and match play from 29 August 2016 to 26 March 2017 inclusive subject to the provision of all information requested in the application form, field condition and payment of, or agreement to a repayment plan for, any outstanding fees;

5.   Council in its capacity as reserve trust manager of Tempe Recreation (D500215 & D1000502), Reserve considers this report and decides to enter into summer season sports ground licences for the 2016/17 summer season with the clubs proposed to use Tempe Recreation (D500215 & D1000502) Reserve as detailed in the schedule at Attachment 1 for training and match play from 29 August 2016 to 26 March 2017 inclusive subject to the provision of all information requested in the application form, field condition and payment of, or agreement to a repayment plan for, any outstanding fees; and

6.   the Interim General Manager is delegated authority to enter into short term casual licence arrangements subject to availability and in accordance with the criteria for seasonal sports grounds allocation adopted by Council.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 11    Tempe Reserve Sydney Olympic Park Redevelopment

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       Council agrees to extend the exclusive dealing period with Sydney Olympic Football Club until 31 December 2016;

2.       Council discuss with Sydney Olympic Football Club the matters recommended by the Marrickville LRAC at its 3 August 2016 meeting, and adopted by the Administrator, as follows

·         that Sydney Olympic Football Club presents their Community Engagement Plan to Council staff before public engagement;

·         that all feedback received through the engagement and consultation process be fed back through Council staff.

·         That the hall/community facility be managed by Council for community access.

3.       Council authorises the General Manager to implement the agreement referenced in resolution 1 and ancillary matters referenced in this report.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 13    Application for Road Closure and Sale - Part White Creek Lane behind 84 Ferris Street Annandale

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       Council apply to the Department of Lands for closure of the part of Whites Creek Lane at the rear of 84 Ferris Street as indicated generally on the plan attached to the report and undertake the consultation and advertising required for the application;

2.       if the application is successful, the closed part of the road be sold to the owner of 84 Ferris Street Annandale for market value, having regard to the amount by which it increases the value of his current property, as assessed by an external valuer, plus GST and reimbursement of the costs of and in connection with the road closure and sale; and

3.       authority is delegated to the General Manager to sign all applications, contracts for sale, transfers and other documents consistent with and to give effect to the above resolutions.

 

C0816 Item 14    Proposed Easement - Elkington Park, Balmain - Cockatoo Island Service Upgrade

 

The Administrator determined that Council:

 

1.       grants an easement in favour of Sydney Federation Harbour Trust (or other appropriate authority) burdening Elkington Park to allow underground pipes, conduits or other connections  for connecting Cockatoo Island and other similar adjoining properties to facilities of public utility providers;

2.       delegates authority to the General Manager to review environmental reports and decide their acceptability; to negotiate the location of the easement site, the nature, timing and other conditions of the works to be done, and the on-going conditions of the easement; and to sign for and on behalf of Council all documents required to give effect to these resolutions; and

3.       negotiates with the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust to have the proposed accessible entry to Elkington Park included as part of the Trust’s works at its cost.

4.       the matter be referred to the Leichhardt LRAC prior to determination by the General Manager.

 

 

C0816 Item 15    Restaurant/Café at 107 Elliott Street, Balmain

 

The Administrator determined that Council:

 

.         terminates its current lease from Roads and Maritime Services (“RMS”) of lot 26 DP850832 being part of the site known as 107 Elliott Street, Balmain;

2.       prepares and lodges a development application for demolition of the current restaurant building and terrace;

3        seeks a new licence from RMS at its minimum licence fee of lot 26 DP850832 for public open space to connect Paringa Reserve and the proposed open space to be dedicated at 102 Elliott Street;

4.       lodges an Application for Pre-DA advice for construction of a replacement café/restaurant on Council land only, with outdoor seating on RMS’ land, and use of the new structure as a licensed café/restaurant (noting that concept plans and supporting reports have already been obtained); and

5.       then receives a further report.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 16    Club Grants Allocations and Community Grants Program 2016

 

The Administrator determined that Council:

 

1.       receives and notes the Allocations for Club Grants contained in Attachment 1 of this report for transparency;

2.       approves the allocation of Community Grants, as contained in Attachment 3 of this report, under Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993;

3.       advises each organisation of Council’s decision for Community Grants; and

4.       holds a small evening function during Anti-Poverty Week to award the Community Grants and celebrate the success of funding recipients.

 

 

C0816 Item 17    Endorsement of Floodplain Risk Management Committee Charter

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       Council adopts the Flood Management Advisory Committee Terms of Reference (Attachment 1); and

2.       Council staff seek expressions of interest from residents to be community representatives on the Flood Management Advisory Committee.

 

3.       Clause 4.2 of the Terms of Reference be amended to add the following paragraph:

 

          For the purposes of this charter the term “elected representatives” includes elected members of Council and, where there are no elected members of Council, persons that have been nominated by Council as members of Local Representation Advisory Committees.

4.       Clause 6.3, point 6 of the Terms of Reference be amended to read as follows:

 

          Council’s role is to note the Committees minutes and to consider recommendations made by the Committee.  Such recommendations will be highlighted for the attention of Council.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 18    Elkington Park Cottage, Balmain - Possible Conversion to Cafe

 

The Administrator determined that:

1.       the report be received and noted; and

2.       the results of the first round of community consultation be placed on the website, with the Parking and Traffic Impact Assessment and other supporting documents, and that Council advise this to all who completed a survey or made a submission.

3.       That investigation of this project be pursued further by:

·  Exhibiting an amended Plan of Management for Elkington Park which more expressly allows the adaptive re-use and for the cottage to be leased for a café, once the LEP is amended – with the draft brought to LRAC prior to exhibition;

·  Preparing and lodging a Pre-DA application to establish acceptability of the proposed work and the chair numbers and hours of operation, with the Pre-DA supported by the concept plans, a Conservation Management Plan, Heritage Impact Statement, Accessibility Report, Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment and Noise Impact Assessments; and

·  Finalising the Business Plan.

4.       That further information be brought to Council on the potential of the café providing employment pathways of the disadvantaged.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 19    Whites Creek Community Orchard Management Plan

 

The Administrator determined that:

 

Council adopt the draft plan of management which has been prepared for the Whites Creek Valley Park Community Orchard and provide funding support of $5,000 a year to support the growth and development of the Community Orchard.

 

 

 

C0816 Item 20    Inner West Council Investments as at 31 July 2016

 

The Administrator determined that:

the report be received and noted.

 

 

The Administrator moved into closed session at 10.20pm to consider items of business containing confidential information.

 

The Administrator returned to open session at 10.26pm to resolve as follows in relation to Items 21, 22 and 23.

 

 

5.      Reports with Confidential Information

 

C0816 Item 21    Proposed Airspace Lease Smidmore Street Marrickville

The Administrator determined that Council:

 

1.    endorses the proposal for an Agreement to lease the airspace above Smidmore Street Marrickville; and

 

2.    delegates authority to the General Manager to negotiate the terms and conditions of an Agreement to lease airspace above Smidmore Street Marrickville in accordance with Roads Act 1993 Section 149, and to sign for and on behalf of Council all documents required for the Agreement to lease. 

 

 

C0816 Item 22    SSROC Tender for the Provision of Tree Pruning Services

The Administrator determined that:

 

consideration of the matter be deferred to a future Council meeting.

 

C0816 Item 23    Sale of Land for Unpaid Rates

 

The Administrator determined that Council:

1.       resolves that Confidential Attachment 1 of the report be treated as confidential in accordance with section 11(3) of the Local Government Act 1993, as it relates to a matter specified in section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 and as such is to be treated as confidential;

2.       endorses the proposed process as outlined in the body of this report in relation to the property owner listed in Confidential Attachment 1;

3.       pursuant to Section 713 of the Local Government Act 1993, resolve to sell the property listed at Confidential Attachment 1 for unpaid rates and charges; and

4.       delegates authority to the General Manager to appoint an auctioneer, to set the reserve price (in consultation with the appointed auctioneer) and to sell the property by private treaty if it fails to sell at auction.

 

 

 

The Meeting closed at 10.28pm.

 

 

 


 

Public Speakers

 

 

Confirmation of Minutes of Council 26 July 2016

·  Rochelle Porteous

·  Beth Taylor, Marrickville

·  John Lozano, Haberfield

 

 

 

Item 1:

Minutes of Local Representation Advisory Committee and Implementation Advisory Group Meetings held in August 2016.

·  Lucille McKenna OAM, Ashfield LRAC

·  Max Phillips, Marrickville LRAC

·  John Stamolis Leichhardt LRAC

·  Jo Alley

·  Mark Drury Ashfield LRAC

·  Rochelle Porteous Leichhardt LRAC

·  Monica Wangmann Ashfield LRAC

 

 

 

Item 2:

Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 4 August 2016

·  Catherine Gemmell, Leichhardt

·  Phillip Bull, Broadway

 

 

·  Rene Holmes

 

 

 

Item 3:

Development Application - 2-32 Smith Street Summer Hill

·  Alex Lofts, Ashfield LRAC

·  Craig Sandwell, Summer Hill

 

 

·  Grant Flanagan, EG Funds

 

 

 

Item 5

 

Development Application - 75 Milton Street, Ashfield

·  Anthony Semarni

·  Carmello Barta on behalf of A&T Scavo

 

 

 

Item 6

 

Development Application - 2-20 Weston Street, Balmain East

·  John Jobling, Leichhardt LRAC

·  Frank Breen, Leichhardt LRAC

·  John Stamolis, Leichhardt LRAC

·  Eve Russell

·  Garry Saunders

·  Robin Sandell

·  Ray Cooper

·  Josephine Davidson

·  Loretta Piccone

·  Simon Emsley, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

 

Item 8

 

Development Application - 23 Croydon Street, Petersham

·  Liza Miller, Petersham

 

 

·  Jeff Mead, Miranda

 

 

·  Shaun Carter, Summer Hill

 

 

·  Bianca Azzapardi

 

 

 

Item 12

 

Affordable Housing over Hay Street Car Park, Leichhardt

·  John Stamolis, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

·  Simon Emsley, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

·  Bill Holliday, Lilyfield

 

 

·  Gillian Leahy

 

 

 


 

 

Item 13

 

Application for Road Closure and Sale - Part White Creek Lane behind 84 Ferris Street Annandale

·  Gillian Leahy

 

 

 

Item 14

 

Proposed Easement - Elkington Park, Balmain - Cockatoo Island Service Upgrade

·  Frank Breen, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

 

Item 17

 

Endorsement of Floodplain Risk Management Committee Charter

·  Frank Breen, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

 

Item 18

Elkington Park Cottage, Balmain - Possible Conversion to Cafe

·  Frank Breen, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

·  John Stamolis, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

·  Simon Emsley, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

 

Item 19

 

Whites Creek Community Orchard Management Plan

·  Gillian Leahy

 

 

 

Item 21

 

Proposed Airspace Lease Smidmore Street Marrickville

·  Victor Macri, Marrickville LRAC

 

 

·  Simon Emsley, Leichhardt LRAC

 

 

 

 

 


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

Item No:         C0916 Item 1

Subject:         Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee Meeting held on 13 September 2016  

File Ref:         16/4718/108310.16         

Prepared By: Rad Miladinovic - Coordinator Governance and Administration, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Peter Gainsford - Director, Corporate Services

 

SUMMARY

A meeting of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee was held on 13 September 2016.  This report presents the minutes of the meeting to Council.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the minutes of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee Meeting held on 13 September 2016 be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

This report presents to Council the minutes of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee meeting held on 13 September 2016.  The minutes of the meeting are provided at Attachment 1.

It is recommended that the minutes of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee meeting be received and noted.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Minutes - 13 September 2016 Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee Meeting

  


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

Item No:         C0916 Item 2

Subject:         Development Application - 33 Smith Street, Summer Hill 

File Ref:         16/4718/106737.16        

Prepared By: Philip North - Specialist Planner, Ashfield 

Authorised By: Phil Sarin - Director, Planning and Environment

 

SUMMARY

This proposal is for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of a part 2/3 storey infill affordable housing development comprising 17 dwellings under SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The proposed development complies with the applicable development standards and controls. The site planning focusses the dwellings towards a central internal courtyard or to the street and successfully avoids overlooking of adjacent properties. The street presentation has been designed to respond to the traditional built form prevailing in the locality and nearby conservation areas and heritage items.

A large rooftop terrace, which is proposed on the rear building, is likely to result in overlooking of adjacent properties and is not considered appropriate. Given that the proposal provides adequate communal open space, it is not required and a condition of consent has been recommended which requires its deletion.

There remain some technical stormwater drainage issues which can be resolved by way deferred commencement conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the development be granted deferred commencement consent.

 

 

 

 

Overview of Report

 

1.0       Description of Proposal

Pursuant to Clause 78A(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act 1979 (as amended) this application seeks Council’s consent for demolition of existing dwellings and construction of a part 2/3 storey infill affordable housing develp0ment under SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 comprising 17 dwellings over basement car parking for 11 cars.

 

2.0       Application Details

Applicant                                 :           Habitation Design

Owner                                     :           Drummoyne Building Service Pty Ltd

Value of work                          :           $3,681,938

Lot/DP                                     :           Lot 1, DP 120491

Date lodged                             :           01/03/2016

Building classification              :           2

Application Type                     :           Local

Construction Certificate          :           No

 

3.0       Site and Surrounding Development

The subject site is located on the northern side of Smith Street in Summer Hill between Fleet Street to the west and Chapman Street to the east.  The site area is approximately 918 square metres.  The site is occupied by three dwellings.  Surrounding development comprises low and medium density residential.  Refer to Attachment 1 for a locality map.

 

The site consists of the following lot:

 

Street Address

Lot No.

Deposited Plan

Title System

Site Area

33 Smith Street, Summer Hill

1

120491

Torrens

918m2

 

4.0       Development History

 

Previous building and development applications submitted to Council for the subject site include:

 

No.

Determination Date

Proposal

Determination

10.2010.003.1

04.10.2010

Multi-unit housing

Refused

06.1978.455.1

29.11.1978

Carport

Approved

06.1963.4551

16.07.1963

Conversion to 3 flats

Approved

 

The following table shows the background to the current application:

 

Application Milestones

Date

Event

File no

02.03.2015

Pre-lodgement Application lodged

9.2015.06

19.03.2015

Pre-lodgement meeting held at Council

9.2015.06

06.05.2015

Pre-lodgement Letter sent to applicant raising following issues:

·   The proposed zero wall to boundary setback is not considered compatible with development in the area. The front building line is not consistent with the building lines of the adjoining properties. The facade and design generally does not satisfy SEPP 65 or the character test as such Council’s officers cannot support its approval in its current form.

·   The proposed development does not provide for a mix of apartment sizes as required by clause 4.11 of Part C5 of IDAP.

·   It is noted that the proposed building extends up close to the boundaries. This will cause extensive overshadowing to properties in the vicinity in Smith Street in particular.

·   The building should be setback off the boundary to improve solar access and to allow access for future maintenance of the building. The building setbacks should be consistent with the prevailing building setbacks in the area.

·   The proposed development must maintain privacy to adjoining properties. In this regard upper floor balconies should be sited to minimise direct overlooking of adjoining and nearby properties.

·   Communal open space shall be provided exclusive of any drying or service areas.  The communal area should be adapted for active and passive recreation and may include children's play areas, barbeque areas and the like. Communal open space can be on the roof and/ or and ground level. The Communal open space area shall be a single open  space of at least 10m x12m and increased by 5m2 for each unit in excess of 6.

·   The development is for a multi-unit building with basement car parking containing 33 single bedroom units which has a parking requirement of 33 resident spaces plus 7 visitor spaces and a car wash bay, i.e. a total of 41 spaces. The proposed development provides 14 car parking spaces which is only a third of the requirement. Given the high on-street parking demand in the vicinity of this site the level of undersupply is considered unacceptable. 

·   The submitted plans show no visitor spaces. This is considered unacceptable. Visitor spaces should be in an area which is, or can be, accessed by non-residents.

·   The interim development assessment policy requires that car parking for people with disabilities be supplied at a rate of 5 spaces per 100. For a parking requirement of 41 spaces 2 of those spaces would need to be allocated for disabled use. Those spaces should conform with the requirements of AS2890.6. The current proposal is deficient in that none of the parking spaces are shown for disabled use.

·   Bicycle parking should be provided at a rate of 1 per 10 flats for residents plus 1 per 10 flats for visitors i.e. 7 bicycle parking spaces. The preliminary plans show 4 bicycle storage areas within the basement carpark. It is unclear how many bicycles may be stored in each area and this should be clarified in the DA submission. Bicycle parking for visitors should be in an area which is, or can be, accessed by non-residents.

·   No Motorcycle parking spaces have been shown on the submitted plans for a parking requirement of 41 spaces an additional 2 motorcycle parking spaces are required.

·   The submitted plans are deficient in terms of resident, visitor, disabled, motorcycle and possibly bicycle parking. It is considered that the parking supply is not acceptable however if such a significant undersupply of parking is to be pursued a Traffic and Parking Assessment Report should be submitted with the development application to justify why Council should consider approval

·   The submitted plans should show removal of the redundant vehicle crossing and reinstatement of kerb and gutter, footpath and nature strip.

·   The alterative option for the driveway location showing the driveway at the western edge of the property is less preferable to the submitted plan. The driveway in the alternative proposal is sited closer to the intersection with Spencer St and egress from the site would be partially impeded by a traffic island on approach to the intersection. 

·   Please note that the proposal if submitted in its current form is unlikely to be supported by Council Staff and it is suggested that a further meeting be arranged to discuss an amended proposal. 

9.2015.06

22.06.2015

Pre-lodgement Application lodged

9.2015.25

23.07.2015

Pre-lodgement meeting held at Council

9.2015.25

20.08.2015

Letter sent to applicant raising following issues:

·   The proposed zero wall to boundary setback is not considered compatible with the pattern of development in the area. The front building line is not consistent with the building lines of the adjoining properties. The facade and design generally does not satisfy SEPP 65 or the character test under SEPP (ARH) 2009 and as such Council’s officers will not support the proposal in its current form.

·   Compliance with SEPP(ARH) a minimum of 12 car spaces comprising of 4 for the studio apartments, 3 for the 1 bedroom apartments and 5 for the 2 bedroom apartments. The plans show only 10 car spaces therefore the proposal fails to comply.

·   The one bedroom units are less than 50m2 as such do not comply with the minimum required dwelling size.

·   The height of building map under the ALEP 2013 allows a maximum height of 9m. The proposal does not comply.  Any proposal must comply as Council officers will not support any variation.

·   It is noted that the proposed building extends up close to the boundaries. This will cause extensive overshadowing to properties in the vicinity on Smith Street in particular.

·   The building should be setback off the boundary to improve solar access and to allow access for future maintenance of the building. The building setbacks including the front setback should be consistent with the prevailing building setbacks in the area.

·   The proposed development must maintain privacy to adjoining properties. In this regard upper floor balconies, open stairs and lobby areas should be screened or sited to minimise direct overlooking of adjoining and nearby properties.

·   Communal open space shall be provided exclusive of any drying or service areas.  The communal area should be adapted for active and passive recreation and may include children's play areas, barbeque areas and the like. Communal open space can be on the roof and/ or and ground level subject to maintaining an adequate level of privacy to any adjoining property. The Communal open space area shall be a single open  space of at least 10m x12m and increased by 5m2 for each unit in excess of 6.

·   The secondary exit stair from the basement has not been drawn correctly, and that there appears to be no thought given with regards to mechanical ventilation, in terms of exhaust risers and hydraulics to the premises.

·   Please note that the proposal if submitted in its current form is unlikely to be supported by Council Staff and it is suggested that a further meeting be arranged to discuss an amended proposal.

9.2015.25

14.12.2015

Provisional Development Application lodged

17.2015.372

07.01.2016

Letter sent to applicant raising following issues:

·   The proposal fails to comply with the minimum 12m separation distance between habitable rooms/balconies.  The proposal should be amended to comply.

·   The proposal fails to comply with Part C1 with respect to universal accessible design and in particular the failure to provide accessible bathrooms to all units.

·   Concern is raised regarding privacy impacts from the communal roof terrace.  This could be address by way of wider / higher planters, screening devices or a combination of these.  Amended details are to be submitted.

·   The application will be reviewed by Council’s Heritage Advisor on 11 January 2016, any comments received will be sent separately.

·   A direct connection into Sydney Water pipe network is required.  Sydney water approval will need to be obtained for both the pipe connection and the OSD storage volume. 

·   The proposed communal open spaces should be functional and provide for greater range of recreation activities in accordance with the requirements of the Apartment Design Guide.

17.2015.372

12.01.2016

Letter sent to applicant raising following issues:

·   The character of the front fencing is split between masonry piers with infill and what appears to be metal framed glass panelled balustrade.  The glass panelled fences should be replaced with a more sympathetic design and this should ideally be coordinated with the front masonry / infill frontage fence. 

·   The proposed fences should be carefully coordinated with the balustrade to the front upper and lower verandahs, which should not be framed glass.  It is suggested that the fencing and balustrades be designed around a timber or steel design using plain verticals and understated posts.

·   The fenestration is shown traditionally proportioned as openings, but the windows themselves, particularly under the gable, should resemble traditionally proportioned sash windows instead of the tall awkwardly proportioned casement windows shown.  The front hipped roof with gable, resembling a traditional Victorian house format, is awkwardly linked to the rear flat roof block via a sloping skillion which is shown landing at the main cross ridge of the house.  This is very unusual and ruins the attempt to make the new front element look like a house.  It should be revised so that the connection is located behind and below the main transverse ridge and not clumsily visible. 

17.2015.372

01.03.2016

Development Application lodged

10.2016.044.1

13.04.2016

Letter sent to applicant advising of the following issues with application:

·   The separation distance between the north and south blocks of the proposal is not in accordance with the recommendations of the Apartment Design Guide.

·   The rooftop terrace on the rear building is likely to result in adverse acoustic privacy impacts.

·   The eastern side setback and pedestrian access is excessively narrow.

10.2016.044.1

14.07.2016

Amended plans received addressing the majority of issues raised.

10.2016.044.1

 

 

5.0       Zoning/Permissibility/Heritage

The site is zoned R3 medium density residential under the provisions of Ashfield LEP 2013 and is adjacent to a heritage item and a heritage conservation area.

The proposed works are permissible with Council consent.

 

 

6.0       Section 79C Assessment

The following is an assessment of the application with regard to the heads of consideration under the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

6.1       The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument

6.1.1    Local Environmental Plans

Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013

Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013 (ALEP 2013) was gazetted on 23 December 2013 and applies to the proposal. The following table summarises the compliance of the application with ALEP 2013.

 

Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013

Summary Compliance Table

Clause No.

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

2.3

Zone objectives and land use table

Zone R3 Medium density residential

Residential flat building

Yes

4.1

Minimum subdivision lot size

N/A

No change

N/A

4.3

Height of buildings

9m

9m

Yes

4.4

Floor space ratio

0.7:1 plus a 50% bonus by virtue of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) for provision of affordable rental housing:

 

Max. Permitted: 1.03:1

0.988:1

Yes

5.10

Heritage Conservation

Located adjacent:

·  Conservation Area C-44

·  Conservation Area C-51

·  Heritage Item I-620 (39 Smith Street)

5.10(5)

Heritage assessment

The consent authority may, before granting consent to any development:

(a)        on land on which a heritage item is located, or

(b)        on land that is within a heritage conservation area, or

(c)        on land that is within the vicinity of land referred to in paragraph (a) or (b), require a heritage management document to be prepared that assesses the extent to which the carrying out of the proposed development would affect the heritage significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area concerned.

Heritage management document has been submitted.

Assessed as satisfactory by Council’s Heritage Advisor.

Yes

 

As demonstrated in the above table, the proposal complies fully with Ashfield LEP 2013.

 


6.1.2    Regional Environmental Plans

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

An assessment has been made of the matters set out in Clause 20 of the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.  It is considered that the carrying out of the proposed development is generally consistent with the objectives of the Plan and would not have any adverse effect on environmental heritage, the visual environmental, the natural environment and open space and recreation facilities.

 

6.1.3    State Environmental Planning Policies

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of land

Given the long and continuous history of residential use, it is not considered likely that the site is contaminated.

 

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

The proposed development is also a residential flat building as defined by the SEPP in that it comprises 3 or more storeys and contains 4 or more dwellings. The proposal is therefore subject to the provisions of the SEPP. The proposal is accompanied by a suitable Design Verification Statement as required by The Regulations.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65:

Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

28

Determination of Development Applications

28(1)

After receipt of a development application for consent to carry out development to which this Policy applies (other than State significant development) and before it determines the application, the consent authority is to refer the application to the relevant design review panel (if any) for advice concerning the design quality of the development.

The application has been referred to Council’s SEPP 65 review officer for comment.

Yes

 

28(2)

In determining a development application for consent to carry out development to which this Policy applies, a consent authority is to take into consideration (in addition to any other matters that are required to be, or may be, taken into consideration):

(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.

Yes


 

28(2)(b)

The design quality principles

1.

Principle 1: Context and neighbourhood 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 proposal responds appropriately to the context and neighbourhood character:

·   The form of the front building is designed to respond to the traditional streetscape and nearby heritage items and conservation areas with a traditional massing and roof form.

Yes

2.

Principle 2: 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 scale is generally appropriate for the context:

·   It presents two storeys to the street consistent with surrounding development;

·   It rises to three storeys at the rear in accordance with the nominated height limits for the locality.

Yes

3.

Principle 3: 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.

The density at 0.988:1 is consistent with the FSR nominated for the site by SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

Yes

4.

Principle 4: 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.

The proposal has been accompanied by a BASIX certificate demonstrating compliance with fundamental sustainability requirements.

 

Yes

5.

Principle 5: 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 landscaping of the site is satisfactory and provides:

·   An adequately sized communal open space area and courtyard in the centre of the site;

·   A landscaped front setback area consistent with the streetscape character;

 

 

Yes

6.

Principle 6: 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 provides:

·   adequate communal open space for residents.

·   Well laid out and functional internal planning;

·   Adequate levels of privacy and solar access, subject to removal of the roof terrace.

Yes

7.

Principle 7: 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.

Safety and security is adequate due to good passive surveillance of both the street and internal circulation spaces.

Yes

8.

Principle 8: 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 proposal provides a suitable mix of one and two bedroom units as well as studio units.

 

 

 

 

Yes

9.

Principle 9: 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 aesthetic resolution is satisfactory in the context of the site.

Yes

28(2)(c)

Apartment Design Guide

Part 3

Siting the development

3B

Orientation

On merit.

 

Orientation to the street is appropriate in the context.

Yes

3C

Public domain interface

On merit.

 

Appropriate in the context

Yes

3D-1

Communal open space

Communal open space: min. 25% site area:

230m2

230m2

25%

Yes

 

 

Solar access to communal open space

Adequate solar access to communal open space.

Yes

3D-3

Communal open space is designed to maximize safety

Safety

Excellent passive surveillance.

Yes

3E-1

Deep soil zones

7% min dimension 3m:

64m2

198m2

22%

Yes

3F1

Building Separation

(up to four storeys)

12 metres between habitable rooms/balconies and side boundaries

12m

 

Yes

3F-2

Privacy

 

Communal open spaces adequately separated from private open spaces and windows.

Yes

3J-1

Car parking

· 800m of railway or light rail station; or

· In or within 400m of B3/B4 land

SEPP (Affordable rental housing) 2009 prevails:

· 11 spaces

11 spaces

Yes


Part 4

Designing the Building

4A-1(1)

Solar & daylight access

70% of living rooms and private open spaces: min. 2 hours solar access between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.

12/17=71%

Yes

4A-1(3)

Solar & daylight access

No direct sunlight at the above time: max. 15%

0%

Yes

4B-3(1)

Natural ventilation

Natural cross ventilation: min. 60% of apartments

100%

Yes

4B-3(2

Natural ventilation

Maximum depth of cross through apartments: 18m glass to glass

Do not exceed 18m

Yes

4C-1

Ceiling heights

· Habitable rooms: 2.7m

· Non-habitable: 2.4m

· 2 storey: 2.4m 2nd storey

· Attics: 1.8m at edge of room with 30 deg slope

· Commercial: 3.3m ground and first floor.

Complies.

Yes

4D-1(1)

Apartment size and layout

Minimum internal areas:

· Studio: 35m2

· 1 bed: 50m2

· 2 bed: 70m2

· 3 bed: 90m2

Complies.

Yes

4D-1(2)

Apartment size and layout

All habitable rooms to have window in external wall min. 10% floor area.

Complies.

Yes

4D-2

Apartment size and layout

Max. Habitable room depth: 8m

Complies.

Yes

4D-3(1)

Apartment size and layout

Min areas:

· Master bedroom: 10m2

· Other bedrooms: 9m2

Complies.

Yes

4D-3(2)

Apartment size and layout

Min. Bedroom dimension (excl. Robe): 3m

Second bedrooms have min. dimension of 2.7 but comply with the minimum area.

Satisfactory


 

4D-3(3)

Apartment size and layout

Min. Living room dimension:

· 1 Bed Unit: 3.6m

· 2 Bed Unit: 4.0m

All apartments comply.

Yes

4E-1(1)

Private open space & balconies

Min. Balcony size/depth:

· Studio: 4m2/-

· 1 Bed: 8m2/2m

· 2 Bed: 10m2/2m

· 3 Bed: 12m2/2.4m

All apartments comply.

Yes

4E-1(2)

Private open space & balconies

Min. Courtyard size/depth:

· 15m2/3m

All apartments comply.

Yes

4F-1(1)

Common circulation spaces

Max. apartments off a single core: 8

3

Yes

4F-1(2)

Common circulation spaces

Max. apartments sharing single lift: 40 (10 storeys and over)

9

Yes

4G-1(1)

Storage

Minimum storage:

· Studio: 4m3

· 1 Bed: 6m3

· 2 Bed: 8m3

· 3 Bed: 10m3

50% to be in apartment (not bedroom/kitchen)

Adequate total storage in units and basement combined.

Yes

4H-1

Acoustic privacy

Noise transfer is minimised through the siting of buildings and building layout.

Suitable site planning adopted.

Yes

4H-2

Acoustic privacy

Noise impacts are mitigated within apartments through layout and acoustic treatments.

Suitable layout adopted.

Yes

4J-1

Noise and pollution

In noisy or hostile environments the impacts of external noise and pollution are minimised through the careful siting and layout of buildings.

Not a hostile acoustic environment.

N/A

4J-2

Noise and pollution

Appropriate noise shielding or attenuation techniques for the building design, construction and choice of materials are used to mitigate noise transmission.

Not a hostile acoustic environment.

N/A

4K-1

Apartment mix

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

Apartments range in size from studio to two bedroom.

Yes

4L-1

Ground floor apartments

Street frontage activity is maximised.

The ground floor front apartment suitably addresses the street with an active frontage.

Yes

4L-2

Ground floor apartments

Private courtyards elevated above the street by 1m-1.5m

The front ground floor apartment is suitably configured with an elevated terrace.

Yes

4M-1

Facades

Building facades provide visual interest and respect character of local area.

The building facade is appropriate to the character of the locality.

Yes

4M-1

Facades

Building functions are expressed on the facade.

The facade is appropriately designed.

Yes

4N-1

Roof design

Roof treatments are integrated into the building design and positively respond to the street.

The roof treatment of the front building is appropriate to the context.

Yes

4N-2

Roof design

Opportunities to use roof space for residential accommodation and open space are maximised.

The rear roof space is proposed as a component of the communal open space.

Yes

4N-3

Roof design

Roof design incorporates sustainability features.

Roof design incorporates solar panels and garden area.

Yes

4O

Landscape design

 

Landscape design is appropriate for the development.

Yes

4P-1

Planting on structures

Min. Soil depths:

· 12-18m trees: 1.2m deep & 10m x 10m

· 8-12m trees: 1.0m deep & 6m x 6m

· 6-8m trees: 0.8m deep & 3.5m x 3.5m

· Shrubs: 0.5m – 0.6m deep

· Ground cover: 0.3m – 0.45m deep

· Turf: 0.2m deep

Appropriate soil depths are provided for planter boxes.

Yes

4Q-1

Universal design

20% of apartments to achieve Livable Housing Guidelines silver level design features.

All units are accessible. Conditions will be applied to ensure compliance at detail design stage.

Yes

4Q-2

Universal design

Adaptable housing in accordance with Council policy.

All units are accessible. Conditions will be applied to ensure compliance at detail design stage.

Yes

4R-1

Adaptive reuse

New additions to existing buildings are contemporary and complementary and enhance an area’s identity and sense of place.

No reuse proposed.

N/A

4S-2

Mixed use

Residential uses of the building are integrated within the development, and safety and amenity is maximised for residents.

No mixed use proposed.

N/A

4T-1

Awnings and signage

Awnings are well located and complement and integrate with the building design.

No awnings or signage proposed.

N/A

4T-2

Awnings and signage

Signage responds to the context and desired streetscape character.

No awnings or signage proposed.

N/A

4U

Energy efficiency

 

Application has been submitted with a BASIX certificate which is considered to satisfy this section.

Yes

4V

Water management

 

Application has been submitted with a BASIX certificate which is considered to satisfy this section.

Yes

4W

Waste management

 

Waste management appropriate for the building type.

Yes


 

4X-3

Building maintenance

Material selection reduces ongoing maintenance costs.

Building materials consist of rendered and painted masonry which is generally appropriate for the context. However, it is considered that dark coloured face brick would be a more durable material for high exposure areas such as the front fence, walls below ground floor level and the driveway ramp walls. Condition recommended.

Condition

 

As identified in the above table, the proposal satisfies the provisions of the SEPP.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

                

The proposal has been lodged under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 to provide in-fill affordable housing. As such, the provisions of Division 1 of the SEPP apply and the compliance is measured in the following table:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

Part 2: New Affordable Rental Housing

Summary Compliance Table

Division 1: In-fill affordable housing

Clause No.

Standard

Proposed

Complies

10

Development to which Division applies

10(1)

This Division applies to development for the purposes of dual occupancies, multi dwelling housing or residential flat buildings if:

Residential flat building.

Yes

10(1)(a)

the development concerned is permitted with consent under another environmental planning instrument, and

Permitted in the zone.

Yes

10(1)(b)

the development is on land that does not contain a heritage item that is identified in an environmental planning instrument, or an interim heritage order or on the State Heritage Register under the Heritage Act 1977.

Land does not contain a heritage item.

Yes

10(2)

Despite sub-clause (1), this Division does not apply to development on land in the Sydney region unless all or part of the development is within an accessible area.

The land is located in an accessible area.

Yes

10(3)

Despite sub-clause (1), this Division does not apply to development on land that is not in the Sydney region unless all or part of the development is within 400 metres walking distance of land within Zone B2 Local Centre or Zone B4 Mixed Use, or within a land use zone that is equivalent to any of those zones.

Located in the Sydney Region.

N/A

13

Floor space ratios

13(1)

This clause applies to development to which this Division applies if the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is to be used for the purposes of affordable housing is at least 20 per cent.

32.5% of the gross floor area is proposed to be affordable housing.

Applies

13(2)

The maximum floor space ratio for the development to which this clause applies is the existing maximum floor space ratio for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land on which the development is to occur, plus:

N/A

N/A

13(2)(a)

The maximum floor space ratio for the development to which this clause applies is the existing maximum floor space ratio for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land on which the development is to occur, plus:

(a)  if the existing maximum floor space ratio is 2.5:1 or less:

(i)  0.5:1—if the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is used for affordable housing is 50 per cent or higher, or

(ii)  Y:1—if the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is used for affordable housing is less than 50 per cent,
where:

AH is the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is used for affordable housing.

Y = AH ÷ 100

      or

LEP FSR: 0.7:1

Bonus:   0.33:1

Total Permissible FSR: 1.03:1

 

Proposed FSR: 0.988:1

Yes

13(2)(b)

if the existing maximum floor space ratio is greater than 2.5:1:

(i)  20 per cent of the existing maximum floor space ratio—if the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is used for affordable housing is 50 per cent or higher, or

(ii)  Z per cent of the existing maximum floor space ratio—if the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is used for affordable housing is less than 50 per cent,
where:

AH is the percentage of the gross floor area of the development that is used for affordable housing.

Z = AH ÷ 2.5

Not applicable.

N/A

13(3)

In this clause, gross floor area does not include any car parking (including any area used for car parking).

Noted.

Noted.

14

Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent

14(1)

Site and solar access requirements

14(1)(b)

site area
if the site area on which it is proposed to carry out the development is at least 450 square metres,

Site area: 918m2

Yes

14(1)(c)(i)

landscaped area
if:

(i)  in the case of a development application made by a social housing provider—at least 35 square metres of landscaped area per dwelling is provided, or

 

N/A

N/A

14(1)(c)(ii)

in any other case—at least 30 per cent of the site area is to be landscaped,

 

Required:  275m2

261m2

28%

 

The deficiency can be made up by minor changes to the landscape plan which can be addressed by way of a condition.

Condition

14(1)(d)

deep soil zones

if, in relation to that part of the site area (being the site, not only of that particular development, but also of any other associated development to which this Policy applies) that is not built on, paved or otherwise sealed:

 

14(1)(d)(i)

there is soil of a sufficient depth to support the growth of trees and shrubs on an area of not less than 15 per cent of the site area (the deep soil zone), and

 

Required: 138m2

202m2

 

22%

Yes

14(1)(d)(ii)

each area forming part of the deep soil zone has a minimum dimension of 3 metres, and

Some portions of the deep soil zones are 1.5m in width, however, they comprise a minority and do not impact on overall compliance.

Satisfactory

14(1)(d)(iii)

if practicable, at least two-thirds of the deep soil zone is located at the rear of the site area,

 

Required: 92m2

151m2

Yes

14(1)(e)

solar access
if living rooms and private open spaces for a minimum of 70 per cent of the dwellings of the development receive a minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.

70% of the dwellings of the development receive a minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.

Yes

14(2)

General

A consent authority must not refuse consent to development to which this Division applies on any of the following grounds:

14(2)(a)

parking
if:

14(2)(a)(i)

in the case of a development application made by a social housing provider for development on land in an accessible area—at least 0.4 parking spaces are provided for each dwelling containing 1 bedroom, at least 0.5 parking spaces are provided for each dwelling containing 2 bedrooms and at least 1 parking space is provided for each dwelling containing 3 or more bedrooms, or

N/A

N/A

14(2)(a)(ii)

in any other case—at least 0.5 parking spaces are provided for each dwelling containing 1 bedroom, at least 1 parking space is provided for each dwelling containing 2 bedrooms and at least 1.5 parking spaces are provided for each dwelling containing 3 or more bedrooms,

Minimum of 11 Spaces required.

 

11 spaces provided (incl. 2 accessible)

Yes

14(2)(b)

dwelling size
if each dwelling has a gross floor area of at least:

14(2)(b)(i)

35 square metres in the case of a bedsitter or studio, or

Complies.

Yes

14(2)(b)(ii)

50 square metres in the case of a dwelling having 1 bedroom, or

Complies.

Yes

14(2)(b)(iii)

70 square metres in the case of a dwelling having 2 bedrooms, or

Complies.

Yes

14(2)(b)(iv)

95 square metres in the case of a dwelling having 3 or more bedrooms

N/A

N/A

14(3)

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

15

Design requirements

15(1)

A consent authority must not consent to development to which this Division applies unless it has taken into consideration the provisions of the Seniors Living Policy: Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development published by the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources in March 2004, to the extent that those provisions are consistent with this Policy.

 

N/A

15(2)

This clause does not apply to development for the purposes of a residential flat building if State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Flat Development applies to the development.

SEPP 65 applies therefore cl. 15(1) is not applicable.

Noted

16

Continued application of SEPP 65

16

Nothing in this Policy affects the application of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Flat Development to any development to which this Division applies

SEPP 65 applies and the proposal has been assessed in accordance with the Policy.

Noted

16A

Character of local area

 

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

The proposal is considered compatible with the character of the local area, in particular in respect of the traditional built form of the front building facing the street.

Yes

17

Must be used for affordable housing for 10 years

17(1)

A consent authority must not consent to development to which this Division applies unless conditions are imposed by the consent authority to the effect that:

17(1)(a)

for 10 years from the date of the issue of the occupation certificate:

If approved, suitable conditions will be applied.

Condition

17(1)(a)(i)

the dwellings proposed to be used for the purposes of affordable housing will be used for the purposes of affordable housing, and

If approved, suitable conditions will be applied.

Condition

17(1)(a)(ii)

all accommodation that is used for affordable housing will be managed by a registered community housing provider, and

If approved, suitable conditions will be applied.

Condition

17(1)(b)

a restriction will be registered, before the date of the issue of the occupation certificate, against the title of the property on which development is to be carried out, in accordance with section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919 that will ensure that the requirements of paragraph (a) are met.

If approved, suitable conditions will be applied.

Condition

17(2)

Sub-clause (1) does not apply to development on land owned by the Land and Housing Corporation or to a development application made by, or on behalf of, a public authority.

N/A

N/A

18

Subdivision

 

Land on which development has been carried out under this Division may be subdivided with the consent of the consent authority.

Subdivision is not proposed.

N/A

 

As demonstrated in the above table above table, the proposed development satisfies the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

 

6.2       The provisions of any Draft Environmental Planning Instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority.

 

No draft environmental planning instruments apply to the site.

 

6.3       The provisions of any Development Control Plan.

 

The Ashfield Interim Development Assessment Policy IDAP 2013 applies to the site. Please see Section 7.8 below.

 

6.4       Any matters prescribed by the regulations that apply to the land to which the development application relates.

 

These matters have been considered as part of the assessment of the development application.

 

6.5       The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts on the locality.

 

These matters have been considered as part of the assessment of the development application.  It is considered that the proposed development will not have any significant impacts upon the adjacent properties in respect of privacy or overshadowing, subject to deletion of the roof terrace.

 

6.6       The suitability of the site for the development

 

These matters have been considered as part of the assessment of the development application. There are no natural hazards or other site constraints that are likely to have a significant adverse impact upon the proposed development.

 

6.7       Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations

 

The proposal was notified to all adjoining and nearby affected property owners and occupants and Councillors from 8 March 2016 until 29 March 2016. Notification was checked during site inspection and was acceptable.

 

Summary of submissions

 

Forty submissions including one petition of 111 signatures (Attachment 3) were received during the notification of the development application.

 

Submissions

1. 

Petition of 111 signatures.

Head petitioner: J. Balgi & H. Foo

Address withheld on request

2. 

C. & D. Ally - Summer Hill NSW 2130

3. 

L. Alvis - Summer Hill NSW 2130

4. 

J. Balgi & H. Foo

Address withheld on request (3 letters)

5. 

L. Alvis - Summer Hill NSW 2130

6. 

C. & D. Ally - Summer Hill NSW 2130

7. 

M. Barr & S. Blakeman - Summer Hill NSW 2130

8. 

M. Bresic - Summer Hill NSW 2130

9. 

M. Chochula & L. Drozak - Summer Hill NSW 2130

10

T. Chrisafis - Summer Hill NSW 2130

11

R. Dabb - Summer Hill NSW 2130

12.

L. Findlay

13

M. Geason - Summer Hill NSW 2130

14

H. Gidding - Summer Hill NSW 2130

15.

P. Goodhew & L. McKendry - Summer Hill NSW 2130

16

B. Gray - Summer Hill NSW 2130

17.

Y.Q. Han & A.L. Xu - Summer Hill, NSW 2130

18

Jo Haylen MP for:

·    J. Balgi & H. Foo

Marrickville NSW 2204

19. 

Jo Haylen MP for:

·    R. Dabb

Marrickville NSW 2204

20. 

Jo Haylen MP for:

·    T. Moulton

Marrickville NSW 2204

21. 

Jo Haylen MP for:

·    C. & D. Ally

·    M. Barr & S. Blakeman

·    H. Gidding

·    Y. Han & A. Xu

·    S. Loy-Wilson & M. Sriravindrarajah

·    K. May

Marrickville NSW 2204

22.

C. Herscovitch - Summer Hill NSW 2130

23.

E. Hing - Summer Hill NSW 2130

24.

B. Hopkinson - Summer Hill NSW 2130

25.

D. & L. Horrigan - Summer Hill NSW 2130

26.

H. Hu & P. Yu - Summer Hill NSW 2130

27.

J. Humphrey

28.

M. Lean - Summer Hill NSW 2130

29.

S. Loy-Wilson & M. Sriravindrarajah - Summer Hill NSW 2130

30.

“Victoria Gardens” - Summer Hill NSW 2130

31.

K. May - Summer Hill NSW 2130

32.

M. Mendez, A, D, P. & R. Svoronos - Summer Hill NSW 2130

33.

T. Moulton - Summer Hill NSW 2130

34.

J. O’Connor - Summer Hill NSW 2130

35.

E. Sodergen - Summer Hill NSW 2130

36.

Anonymous

37.

C. Stoney - Summer Hill NSW 2130

38.

Unified Lawyers - Marrickville NSW 2204

39.

Y. Yao - Summer Hill NSW 2130

40.

Anonymous

 

 

Submission Issue

Assessing Officer’s Comment

Excessive scale.

The scale is less than that permitted under the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) and, as such, is acceptable. It is noted that the scale has been reduced during the assessment process.

Inadequate size of communal open space.

The communal open space has been increased in size to comply.

Inadequate front setback.

The front setback, though less than that of the immediately adjacent properties, is significantly greater than the predominant setback in the street.  It is noted that the controls require that the proposal “be consistent with the predominant setback of the buildings in the street” – not consistent with the immediately adjacent dwellings.


 

Not compatible with heritage character.

The proposal presents a very traditional two storey built form to the street and utilises a traditional material palette to relate appropriately to the context of historical buildings in the streetscape.

Rooftop terrace will create adverse visual and acoustic privacy impacts.

The rooftop terrace will be deleted by way of condition of consent.

Adverse traffic impacts.

Council’s traffic engineer has reviewed the proposal and not raised objection on the basis of traffic generation.

Inadequate parking and consequent impacts on on-street parking.

The proposal provides parking consistent with the requirements of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing). It is not open to Council to refuse the application on this basis.

Unacceptable overshadowing.

The extent of overshadowing is fully compliant with Council’s controls.

The scale will be disproportionate in the streetscape.

The front of the development has been designed to present as two storeys to the street with the larger and taller three storey elements concealed at the rear.

It is unreasonable that this development permits significantly greater FSR than the nearby heritage conservation area and other adjacent sites.

It should be noted that the additional FSR on this site is permitted by way of the State Government planning policy SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) which overrides the floor space controls contained in Council’s local environmental plan.

Inadequate landscaped area.

The proposal has been amended to provide a compliant amount of landscaped area. In addition, conditions will be applied to require additional canopy tree planting.

Privacy impacts of rear balconies on 8 Fleet Street.

Rear facing balconies do not look directly into 8 Fleet Street and have been provided with full height walls on their sides to minimise sideway views. This will be augmented by requirements for canopy tree planting along the rear boundary by condition of consent to further protect privacy.

Noise during construction.

Conditions will be applied to ensure that construction noise is within acceptable limits.

Dust during construction.

Conditions will be applied to ensure that construction dust is within acceptable limits.

Stormwater runoff.

Conditions will be applied to ensure that stormwater runoff is compliant with Council’s standards.

Privacy impacts of internal balconies.

These balconies face inwards into the development and are fully screened on their sides. They would have only very acute angled views (rather than direct) into any adjacent properties. This is considered acceptable in a medium density context.

Unsuitable unit mix.

The mix of units is consistent with the applicable planning controls.

Excessive height.

The proposal is consistent with the applicable height limits of Council’s planning controls.

“In-fill affordable housing” is a misleading definition as not all of the dwellings are affordable.

“In-fill affordable housing” is the correct land use definition under SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing).

Side setbacks inadequate.

The side setbacks of 1.5m are consistent with the setback pattern in the streetscape as well as applicable controls.

 

6.8       The public interest

 

Matters of the public interest have been taken into consideration in the assessment of the application.

 

The proposal is subject to the provisions of Ashfield Interim Development Assessment Policy 2013. A summary compliance table follows below:

 

Ashfield Interim Development Assessment Policy 2013

Part C1: Access, Adaptability and Mobility

Summary Compliance Table

(Design Checklist 2)

No.

Standard

Required

Proposed

Complies

Part C1

Access, Adaptability and Mobility

2.3(iii)

Universal Accessible Design

Residential flat building or shop top housing, 3 storeys or higher with lifts, which may or may not be part of a mixed development, must have all their apartments complying with universal accessible design principles as required by Design Checklist 2.

Residential flat building.

Noted

2.4

Adaptable Housing

10%

11%

Yes

2.5

Variations to Universal Accessible Design Requirements

Site conditions

No variations proposed under this clause.

N/A

7.2

Universal Accessible Design

Residential flat buildings higher than 3 storeys with ground level commercial and lifts, shall be “accessible” as required in the Building Code of Australia and in addition have a universal accessible design for the interior design of the dwellings that meets the requirements of Section 7.

All apartments are accessible.

Yes

7.3

Construction

In order to achieve an implementation principle”, that considers design issues at Development Application stage in sufficient detail to ensure that at construction certificate stage and during construction compliance is achieved

Adequate detail provided.

Yes

7.4

Access from street to dwelling entry

Access from the street into the lift lobby area, to lifts and to apartments entries requires:

(a) A continuous path of accessible travel from the street to lift lobbies.

(b) Lift shafts sizes minimum required to take a lift which is large enough to accommodate a person in a wheelchair.

(c) The lift lobby shall have a minimum clear finished circulation width of 1500mm, and which takes into account wall finishes and building tolerances.

(d) An intercom at the visitor parking level and external ground level entry point.

All dimensions are consistent with these requirements.

Yes

7.5

Interior dwelling design

The interior elements of all apartments shall be adequately sized to allow wheelchair circulation.

No apartments (except the adaptable unit) are adequately sized to allow wheelchair access in respect of:

·   Corridor widths

·   Bathrooms

·   Kitchens and

·   Laundries

This can be addressed by way of condition of consent.

Condition

7.6

Access to private balcony

(a) Balcony dimensions shall accommodate a person in a wheelchair being able to turn on the balcony including allowing an area for a small table and have a minimum internal width of 2.0m and minimum length of 3m.

All private balcony areas are accessible.

Yes

7.7

Access to car parking

Access to and from the car parking area for people with a disability by lift.

Lift access with waiting area outside lift provided.

Yes

7.8

Access to communal garden space

Where there is communal open space on the site, it must be accessible from all dwellings required to have a universal accessible design, and by all visitors to the site.

All communal open space is accessible.

Yes

7.9

Access to Ground Level Commercial areas and circulation within Commercial

Levels

Access must be compliant with the BCA.

No commercial area proposed.

N/A

 

Ashfield Interim Development Assessment Policy 2013

Part C5: Multi-unit Development in Residential Flat Zones

Summary Compliance Table

Clause No.

Standard

Required

Proposed

Complies

3

Preferred Development

3.2

Ashfield’s Housing Character

Developments must meet the following criteria:

a) the defining characteristics of the site, its streetscape, community, and neighbourhood locality are understood;

b) the proposed architectural style is suitable for the site;

c) the proposed development has the potential to contribute to Ashfield’s housing heritage.

The form and character of the proposal is satisfactory and consistent with the character of surrounding buildings.

Yes

3.5(a)

Building Appearance and Neighbourhood Character

Buildings at the front must be orientated to the principal street frontage, and dwellings adjacent to a public street must address the street by having a front door or living room or kitchen windows facing the street;

The character of the proposal is consistent with the streetscape.

Yes

3.5(b)

 

The building generally conforms with the building line on adjoining land and in the immediate locality;

The front setback of 6.7m is greater than those prevailing in the street, in particular:

·   25 Smith St (<5m)

·   41 Smith St (<5m)

·   45 Smith St (<5m)

·   47 Smith St (<5m)

·   49 Smith St (<5m)

and:

·   The majority of properties on the opposite side of Smith Street which are less than 4m.

Yes

3.5(c)

 

Building facades are to have:

·   a clearly defined base-middle-top;

·   well-balanced vertical and horizontal proportions;

·   modulation, including breaking up large horizontal facades into smaller articulated sections, which are also compositionally integrated with the whole building;

·   architectural features which give human scale at street level, such as entry porches, pergolas and fences.

The building is well articulated.

Yes

3.5(d)

 

Building design, roof form, detailing and materials visible from public areas and adjoining properties should not be in strong visual contrast with any positive and characteristic features of neighbouring properties. Generally the materials and finishes of the building to be similar to the traditional finishes predominating in Ashfield. Buildings to usually be in bichromatic (two colour) face brick with gabled/hipped terra cotta tiled pitched roof forms with no reflective materials that may cause glare.

The finishes and materials are generally sympathetic to the character of the locality.

 

The roof tiles, however, appear to be of a charcoal colour and it is considered that unglazed terracotta would be a more appropriate material in the context.

Condition proposed to use terracotta tiles

3.5(e)

 

Building design enables individual dwellings to be identified from public streets.

Not applicable due to the configuration of the site.

N/A

3.5(f)

 

Carports and garages to be compatible with the building design and not dominate the street frontage.

All parking located in basement garage.

N/A

3.5(g)

 

Entries to underground parking not to be visible from the street front.

The basement ramp is well camouflaged from the street due to its use of dark, recessive materials. Conditions recommended to reinforce this approach.

Yes &

Condition

3.6

Fences and walls

 

 

 

3.6(a)

 

Front fences and walls to be compatible with the streetscape.

The proposed front fence would be more appropriate if constructed from dark face brick with larger openings between timber panels. A condition has been recommended.

Yes &

Condition

3.6(b)

 

Front fences and walls to be no more than 1.2m high if solid and forward of the building line. Height may be increased to 1.8m if the fence has openings which make it not less than 50% transparent;

Front fence is of a suitable height.

Yes

4

Housing Density

4.3

Floor Space Ratios

0.7:1

(1.03:1by virtue of the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing)

0.988:1

Yes

4.10

Subdivision

Strata subdivision size will be considered on its merits

Strata subdivision not proposed in this application.

N/A

4.11

Maximum dwelling size

Maximum gross floor area of a dwelling should not exceed 125m2. Smaller apartments are encouraged.

No dwellings exceed this size.

Yes

5

Siting, Building Height and Solar Access

5.4

Front Setback

To be consistent with the predominant setback of the buildings in the street.

The front setback of 6.7m is greater than those prevailing in the street, in particular:

·   25 Smith St (<5m)

·   41 Smith St (<5m)

·   45 Smith St (<5m)

·   47 Smith St (<5m)

·   49 Smith St (<5m)

and:

The majority of properties on the opposite side of Smith Street which are less than 4m.

Yes

5.6

Orientation and Siting

Side and rear setbacks to be determined by amenity and urban design.

Development should not significantly affect adjoining property or resident amenity by:

a) increased overshadowing,

b) reduction in the level of privacy,

c) obstruction of views,

d) reduction in levels of daylight and ventilation.

Generally satisfactory in the local context.

 

Side setbacks are consistent with those of adjacent properties and consistent with the streetscape. Privacy issues are addressed by way of avoidance of side facing balconies and use of highlight windows on side elevations.

Yes

5.8

 

Rear setbacks to allow adequate provision of green space between adjoining properties.

Generally consistent with surrounding properties.

Yes

5.9

Building Height

9m as per height for R3 Medium Density Residential Zones, Code M in Ashfield LEP 2013.

9m

Yes

5.9(a)

 

3 storeys maximum height

3 storeys

Yes

5.9(b)

 

Maximum roof pitch of 30 degrees may contain a 4th attic storey,

No fourth storey proposed.

N/A

5.11

 

Height of the first floor no to exceed

3.4m.

Less than 3.4m for all but the front units where they are 4m at street frontage due to natural fall of land towards street.

Satisfactory

5.12

 

Additional 4th storey in roof space permitted subject to:

a) consistent with any conservation area listing;

b) space wholly contained within a roof not exceeding 30º (excepting dormer windows); no lower than 22dand roof ridge does not exceed the maximum building height.

c) sunlight, privacy, views and ventilation protected; and

d) compliant with LEP height limit.

No fourth storey proposed.

N/A

5.13

 

No increased wall heights or larger than average dormer windows permitted to achieve the additional level permitted under cl. 5.12.

N/A

N/A

5.15

Solar Access

80% of units to have at least one living room window with a northerly aspect

71%

This is considered reasonable given the context of the site. A greater percentage would be unachievable. In addition, it is compliant with SEPP 65.

Satisfactory

5.16

 

Maximum amount of overshadowing:

5.16(a)

 

Sunlight to at least 50% (or 35m² with minimum dimension 2.5m, whichever is the lesser

area) of the principal private area of ground level private open space of adjacent properties not to be reduced to less than three (3) hours between 9am and 3pm on 21 June. Where existing overshadowing by buildings and fences is greater than this, sunlight is not further reduced by more than 20% at any one time.

No principal areas of private open space on adjacent properties would be overshadowed unacceptably by the development.

Yes

5.16(b)

 

Private courtyards within a development to receive 3 hours of sunlight over 50% of area, between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

Adequate solar access to courtyards.

Yes

5.16(c)

 

Existing solar access should be maintained to at least 40% of the glazed areas of any neighbouring north facing living room/dining room windows, for at least 3 hours between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter (on 21 June). If existing solar access is already less than this standard, it should not be further reduced by more than 20% at any time.

No impact upon north facing living room windows of buildings to the south.

Yes

5.16(d)

 

North facing windows within a new development should achieve the same standard of solar access.

All north facing windows would receive solar access consistent with these requirements.

Yes

6

Privacy, Views and Outlook

6.3

Visual privacy

Visual privacy is required to meet the following standards, both within developments as well as across boundaries:

6.3(a)

 

Ground level direct facing windows to be a minimum of 9 metres apart or, where screening devices or planting is used, 6 metres apart. Direct facing includes an arc of 45º on either side of a window. If screening is used, the view of the area overlooked must be restricted within 9 metres and beyond an angle of 45º from the plane of the wall containing the opening, measured from a height of 1.7m above floor level.

Windows which look into each other within the development are at least 12m apart and separated by the proposed landscaping in the central communal open space.

Yes

6.3(b)

 

As an alternative to 6.3 (a), windows to have minimum sill heights of 1.7m above floor level, or have fixed obscure glazing in any part of the window below 1.7m above floor level.

All side facing windows are highlight windows.

 

Yes

6.3(c)

 

Balconies, terraces and decks to be placed a minimum 12 metres away from any facing window or other balcony.

Min 12m separation across internal courtyard.

Yes

6.3(d)

 

Windows and balconies not to overlook adjoining areas of private open space. An outlook from windows, balconies, stairs, landings, terraces and decks or other private, communal or public areas within a development to be obscured or screened where a direct view is available into adjoining areas of private open space.

Windows and balconies either look into the internal courtyard area or to the front or rear. There are no side facing windows or balconies.

 

The rooftop terrace on the rear building, however, is not considered appropriate (nor necessary) due to privacy concerns of adjacent properties and is recommended for deletion.

Yes &

Condition

6.3(e)

 

No screening is required where:

·   windows are in bathrooms, toilets, laundries, storage rooms or other non-habitable rooms and they have translucent glazing or sill heights of at least 1.7m;

·   windows are in habitable rooms and they have sill heights of 1.7m or more above floor level or translucent glazing to any part of a window less than 1.7m above floor level.

These measures are not necessary.

Yes

6.4

 

these standards must be achieved within developments, as well as across boundaries.

Privacy is adequate across boundaries.

Yes

6.5

Acoustic Privacy

The level of acoustic privacy is required to meet the following standards, both within developments as well as across boundaries:

6.5(a)

 

bedroom windows are to be at least 3 metres from shared streets, driveways and parking areas of other dwellings.

Complies.

Yes

6.5(b)

 

bedrooms of one dwelling are not to share walls with living rooms or garages of adjacent dwellings.

Complies.

Yes

6.8

Views and outlook

Distant views available from neighbouring properties should be maintained where possible, in keeping with principles of view sharing.

Complies.

Yes

6.9

 

High walls in close proximity to neighbours’ windows or open space should be reasonably set back, irrespective of shadowing or privacy impacts.

Setbacks are appropriate and consistent with those on the streetscape.

Yes

6.10

 

All dwellings should have an open outlook to an area of landscaping or open space not compromised by privacy measures.

All dwellings look into the street, the central courtyard or onto the rear landscaped area.

Yes

8

Open Space and Landscaping

8.6

Private and Communal Open Space

Each dwelling to have a private outdoor area which:

a) does not encroach upon the front setback;

b) is directly related to a main living area;

c) is private and protected from overlooking;

d) meets solar access standards;

e) minimises overlooking of neighbours;

f) accommodates various uses;

g) is accessible by someone with a disability.

All dwellings have adequately sized balcony areas.

Yes

8.7

 

If at ground level,

·   Minimum area: 35m²

·   Minimum width 3m:

37m2

Yes

8.8

Balcony Size

If no private outdoor area at ground level, to be provided by a balcony or deck, with a minimum area of 10m², and a minimum dimension of 2m.

All balconies are at least 10m2 in area.

Yes

8.9

Communal Open Space

Communal open space exclusive of any drying or service areas to include a single open area with minimum dimensions of 10 metres by 12 metres.

If more than 6 units, the area to be increased by 5m2 per unit. Area should be adapted for active and passive recreation and may include children’s play areas, barbeque areas and the like.

 

Required: 175m2

12m x 15.24m

 

182m2

 

 

Yes

8.10

Landscaping Standards

Minimum landscaped area:

35% of the site area.

To be at finished ground level with a minimum width of 2 metres.

35%

Yes

8.11

Tree Preservation

A Tree Preservation Order covers all trees over 5 metres in height with a trunk girth of 350mm at ground level, (excluding Leyland Cypress Pine, Privet, Oleander, Umbrella trees, Cotoneaster, Rubber trees, Citrus and Mulberry trees.

No significant tree removal proposed.

Yes

8.13

 

Retain sufficient curtilage around existing trees to ensure their retention.

No significant tree removal proposed.

N/A

8.14

 

Avoid removal or significant modification of any existing street tree along the frontage of the site.

No significant tree removal proposed.

N/A

9

Safety and Security

9.2

Security

Buildings adjacent to public or communal streets or open space to have at least one habitable room window with an outlook to that area.

All buildings overlook all communal circulation areas.

Yes

9.3

 

Visitors should be visible without the need to open the front door.

Complies.

Yes

9.4

 

Shared entries to serve a maximum of eight dwellings and be lockable.

Shared entries serve no more than 6 dwellings.

Yes

10

Design for Climate

10.1

Energy Conservation

BASIX Certificate must be provided.

BASIX Certificate has been provided.

Yes

10.2 – 10.7

Water Conservation

BASIX Certificate must be provided.

BASIX Certificate has been provided.

Yes

10.8

Air movement

Harness breezes and provide fresh air indoors

All units have excellent cross ventilation.

Yes

10.11

Services, lighting and appliances

Dwelling design should encourage energy efficiency.

BASIX Certificate has been provided.

Yes

10.16

Noise on rail/traffic routes

Where road or rail noise is an issue, buildings to be sited to:

· minimise the infiltration of noise into the buildings and the lot;

· provide an acoustic barrier for private and communal open space;

· reduces reflection of noise on to other buildings;

· ensure affected windows are acoustically treated from road or rail noise.

The development is well separated from the road and rail line and as such should experience minimal road or rail noise.

Yes

11

Stormwater Drainage

11.1

Objectives

a) to provide safety for the public in major storm events, and protect property from damage by flooding;

b) to ensure adequate stormwater detention and run-off controls are provided for site drainage;

c) to improve urban amenity through maintenance of natural drainage lines;

d) to protect & maintain existing infrastructure of the LGA.

Some minor issues have been identified by Council’s engineer which can be addressed by way of deferred commencement conditions of consent.

 

Condition has been applied.

12

Site Facilities

12.8

Storage

Must be adequately screened from frontage.

All storage is well concealed in basement.

Yes

12.9

Mailboxes

To be located close to each ground-floor dwelling entry or close to the major pedestrian entrance to the site.

Mailbox location has not been nominated.

Condition has been applied.

12.10

Clothes drying

Communal clothes drying facilities to be easily accessible to all residents and screened from streets and communal recreational areas.

Location of clothes drying facilities has not been nominated.

Condition has been applied.

12.11

 

External clothes-drying area shall to be provided at the rate of 1.5 square metres per unit.

Location of clothes drying facilities has not been nominated.

Condition has been applied.

12.12

Television aerials

Only one television reception device per strata title development screened from public view.

Not nominated but can be conditioned.

Condition has been applied.

 

Ashfield Interim Development Assessment Policy 2013

Part C12: Public Notification

Summary Compliance Table

No.

Standard

Required

Proposed

Complies

Section 2

Notification Process

 

The application was notified in accordance with this part.

Yes

 

Ashfield Interim Development Assessment Policy 2013

PartD1: Planning for Less Waste

Summary Compliance Table

No.

Standard

Required

Proposed

Complies

 

Bin Numbers

 

Residential (9 dwellings):

·   1 x 240L garbage bin/2 dwellings=9 bins

·   1 x 240L recycling bin/9 dwellings=5 bins

·   TOTAL: 18 bins

Residential:

·   12 x 240L garbage bins

·   12 x 240L recycling bins

TOTAL: 24 bins

 

Yes

 

Bin Presentation

 

Adequate kerb space to present 5 waste bins along the kerb.

Yes

 

It is considered the application generally complies with the parts as indicated and achieves the aims and objectives of the AIDAP 2013. Of concern, however, is the rooftop terrace of the rear building; this is not considered appropriate or necessary and will be deleted by way of condition. Some other minor detailed matters may also be addressed by way of appropriate conditions of consent.

 

7.0       Referrals

 

Referrals

Referral

Comments

Support

Building Surveyor

Supported subject to conditions.

Yes

Traffic Engineer

Supported subject to deferred commencement conditions.

Yes

Drainage Engineer

Supported subject to deferred commencement conditions.

Yes

Heritage Advisor

Supported.

Yes

Environmental Health Officer

Supported subject to conditions.

Yes

Tree Officer

Supported subject to conditions.

Yes

Waste Management

Supported subject to conditions.

Yes

 

8.0       Building Code of Australia (BCA)

 

A Construction Certificate will be required to be applied for by condition of consent.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

See 7.0

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

See 6.7

 

 

CONCLUSION

The application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as amended with all matters specified under Section 79C (1) Clauses (a) to (e) having been taken into consideration.

As noted previously, the proposal generally complies with the applicable development standards and controls and subject to some recommended modifications, is an acceptable form of infill development for the subject land. The proposal is therefore recommended for deferred commencement consent.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Locality Map

2.

Plans of Proposal

3.

Submissions

4.

Conditions

  


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator

 

 


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

27 September 2016

 

Item No:         C0916 Item 3

Subject:         Development Application - 66 Constitution Road, Dulwich Hill 

File Ref:         DA201600079/10/105841.16        

Prepared By: Dimitiri Gotsis - Town Planner Development Assessment, Marrickville 

Authorised By: Phil Sarin - Director, Planning and Environment

 

SUMMARY

This report concerns an application to demolish existing improvements and construct a 6 storey residential flat building containing 15 dwellings with basement car parking and associated landscaping works.  The application was notified in accordance with Council's notification policy and 28 submissions were received. 

The development results in a departure of 413.3m² (65.01%) from the FSR development standard contained in Clause 4.4 of Marrickville Local Environmental Plan (MLEP) 2011. The proposal also results in a 2.5 metre departure (14.7%) from the building height development standard contained in Clause 4.3 of MLEP 2011. The application was accompanied by a written request under Clause 4.6 of MLEP 2011 in relation to the variation for building height and FSR which is supported for the reasons outlined in this report.

The site is located in the Hoskins Park Planning Precinct (Precinct 9.11) under MDCP 2011. The site sits within ‘Site 4’ of the Hoskins Park Masterplan area (MA 11.1) which consists of 66, 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road. ‘Site 4’ envisages the amalgamation of the 4 allotments to achieve a desired amalgamation pattern and building envelopes for future development. The application seeks a variation to the required amalgamation pattern for ‘Site 4’ to develop in isolation to the 3 remaining sites (68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road).  The applicant has made genuine efforts to acquire the adjoining site (68 Constitution Road) in accordance with the NSW Land and Environment Court Planning Principles for site amalgamation/site isolation.

As the site proposes to develop in isolation within ‘Site 4’ and adjoining buildings in the ‘Arlington Grove’ development have been approved in close proximity and locations contrary to the original suggested amalgamation pattern in the Masterplan area, the site is constrained in its ability to comply with required solar access and building envelope provisions contained within MDCP 2011. In response to the constraints of the site, the height of the development has been increased above the maximum height required for development within ‘Site 4’ of the Masterplan area in an effort to improve solar access to units. The non-compliant height of the development is considered an appropriate response for an isolated development within ‘Site 4’ given the location of the site between the 8 storey ‘Arlington Grove’ development to the north-west, the 4 storey development envisioned for the remainder of sites within ‘Site 4’ (68 – 72 Constitution Road) and the recently approved 7 storey shop top housing development on the opposite side of road at 62 Constitution Road. 

The application is referred to Council for determination in view of the extent of the departure from the maximum FSR and Height development standards, which exceed officer’s delegations.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the application be approved subject to the impositions of conditions in accordance with Part E of this report, and including endorsement of actions B and C contained therein.

 

 

 

PART A - PARTICULARS

 

Location:                     North-east side of Constitution Road, Dulwich Hill between Grove Street and Light Rail Corridor.

 

Image 1: Location Map

 

D/A No:                        201600079

 

Application Date:        2 March 2016. Additional information submitted on 15 July 2016 and 2 September 2016  

 

Proposal:                     To demolish existing improvements and construct a 6 storey residential flat building containing 15 dwellings with basement car parking and associated landscaping works

 

Estimated Cost:          $3,895,000

 

Applicant:                    Nino Urban Planning + Development

 

Zoning:                        R1 - General Residential

 

 

PART B - THE SITE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT

 

Improvements:            Single storey dwelling house and warehouse outbuilding

 

 

                                  Image 2: The Site

 

 

Current Use:               Residential and ancillary warehouse/storage structure

 

Prior Determinations:          No prior determinations of relevance

 

Environment:              Residential, light industrial/warehousing, public recreation and rail  infrastructure.

 

 

PART C - REQUIREMENTS

 

1        Zoning

Is the proposal permissible under zoning provisions?                                      Yes

 

2        Development Standards (Statutory Requirements):

Type                                       Required                                                           Proposed

Height of Buildings (max)      17 metres                                                           19.5 metres

Floor Space Ratio (max)       1.3:1                                                                   2.146:1

 

3        Departures from Development Control Plan:

Type                                       Required                                                           Proposed

Solar Access                          See Body of Report

Parking                                   See Body of Report

Landscaped Area                   See Body of Report

Dwelling Mix                           See Body of Report

Site Coverage                        See Body of Report

Site Amalgamation                 See Body of Report

Building Envelope                  See Body of Report

 

4        Community Consultation:

Required:             Yes (newspaper advertisement, on site notice and resident notification)

Submissions:       28 submissions

 

5        Other Requirements:

ANEF 2033 Affectation:                                                                                                Not affected

Marrickville Section 94/94A Contributions Plan 2014

          State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land

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

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

          State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

 

PART D - ASSESSMENT

 

1.       The Site and Surrounds

 

The site is legally defined as Lot 2 in DP86920 and is known as 66 Constitution Road, Dulwich Hill. The site is a rectangular shaped allotment with a frontage of 13.565 metres to Constitution Road, a depth of 36.59 metres and a rear boundary width of 13.145 metres. The site has an area of approximately 489sqm.

 

The site currently accommodates a single storey period dwelling house with a side driveway accessed off Constitution Road. In addition, at the rear of the site there is a large warehouse /storage structure which abuts the rear and side boundaries.

 

 

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential under the MLEP 2011. The site is not identified as a heritage item and not within a heritage conservation area. The site is identified as being within a masterplan area in the Hoskins Park Planning Precinct under Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011. The site is one of 4 sites within ‘Site 4’ of the Hoskins Park Masterplan area, being the subject site and the adjoining three single storey terraces, known as 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road Dulwich Hill.

 

The Hoskins Park Masterplan area includes the recently approved development at 6-26 Grove Street and 60-64 Constitution Road Dulwich Hill, known as ‘Arlington Grove’. Formally an industrial site, the ‘Arlington Grove’ development comprises 3 x 8 storey buildings and 3 x 4 storey buildings with approximately 250 apartments and 1 café. The approved building footprint of ‘Arlington Grove’ is shown in Image 6 below.

 

To the north-west, the site adjoins 64 Constitution Road which previously contained a single storey dwelling house that was recently demolished and now forms part of ‘Arlington Grove’. The adjoining building under construction is known as building A1 and includes a 8 storey residential flat building and café forming part of ‘Site 3’ in the Hoskins Park Masterplan area. A new ‘right of way’ (South Lane) is being constructed between building A1 and the subject site along its side north-west boundary. South Lane will provide an exit only onto Constitution Road adjoining the site with entry only access from Grove Street (see Image 6 below).

 

 

 

Image 3: 60-64 Constitution Road (60-64 Constitution Road – ‘Arlington Grove’

 development)

 

 

At the end of Constitution Road further to the north-west and approximately 25 metres from the site is the entrance to the Arlington Light Rail Station.

 

 

Image 4: Arlington Light Rail Station viewed towards the north-west on Constitution Road

 

 

To the south-east, the site adjoins 68 Constitution Road which accommodates a single storey semi-detached dwelling house and is 1 in a row of 3 semi-detached dwellings from 68-72 Constitution Road. The subject site and the 3 adjoining sites in this row form ‘Site 4’ of the Hoskins Park Masterplan area.

 

 

Image 5: 68 -72 Constitution Road

 

To the north-east of the site, the site adjoins South Lane which is under construction as part of ‘Site 3’ in the ‘Arlington Grove’ development with South Lane being constructed along the rear boundary (see Image 6 below).

 

Image 6 shows the site (marked in red) in the context of the required amalgamation pattern within the Hoskins Park masterplan area and the approved ‘Arlington Grove’ development to the north (rear) and north-west (side) of the site. Note: The DCP amalgamation pattern has not been realised as part of the proposed development nor in the approved adjoining ‘Arlington’ Grove development. 

 

 

Image 6: MDCP 2011 Masterplan (MA 11.1) & site footprint & adjoining approved development

 

Opposite the site to the south-west (front) is 62 Constitution Road which currently contains a 3 storey warehouse building. A 7 storey shop top housing development was recently approved on the site by the Land and Environment Court (see Image 7 below). 62 Constitution Road does not form part of the Hoskins Park Masterplan area.

 

 

Image 7: Existing warehouse and approved 7 storey development – 62 Constitution Road

 

 

The immediate surrounds of the site are in transition from a mix of light industrial and low density residential development to a mix of low to high density residential development. There are two parks within the surrounding area: J.F. Laxton Reserve approximately 120 metres to the south-east of the site across the light rail corridor and Johnson Park approximately 65 metres to the east across the light rail corridor.

 

 

Image 8: Surrounding context and land uses (Source: Nino Urban Planning & Development)

 

To the north-east across the light rail corridor is the former Waratah Flour Mills residential development.

 

2.       The Proposal

 

Approval is sought to demolish existing improvements and construct a 6 storey residential flat building containing 15 dwellings with basement car parking, associated landscaping works and public domain works to Constitution Road.

 

The development is further summarised as follows:

 

Basement Level

 

·          Vehicle ramp accessed from South Lane;

·          Lift core;

·          Fire stairs;

·          6 car parking spaces;

·          15 bicycle spaces; and

·          Storage cages.

 

Ground Floor

 

·          Driveway access from South Lane;

·          Pedestrian entry lobby;

·          Lift core;

·          Open space/deep soil planting (101sqm);

·          Garbage room (27.5sqm);

·          Unit G01 – 1 Bed (52sqm); and

·          Unit G02 – 2 Bed (81sqm).

 

 

First Floor

 

·          Lift core, garbage chute & lobby;

·          Unit 101 – 1 Bed (50sqm);

·          Unit 102 – 1 Bed, adaptable (84sqm); and

·          Unit 103 – 2 Bed (84sqm).

 

Second Floor

 

·          Lift core, garbage chute & lobby;

·          Unit 201 – 1 Bed (50sqm);

·          Unit 202 – 1 Bed, adaptable (84sqm); and

·          Unit 203 – 2 Bed (84sqm).

 

Third Floor

 

·          Lift core, garbage chute & lobby;

·          Unit 301 – 1 Bed (50sqm);

·          Unit 302 – 1 Bed, adaptable (84sqm); and

·          Unit 303 – 2 Bed (84sqm).

 

Fourth Floor

 

·          Lift core, garbage chute & lobby;

·          Unit 401 – 1 Bed (50sqm);

·          Unit 402 – 1 Bed, (84sqm); and

·          Unit 403 – 2 Bed (84sqm).

 

Fifth Floor

 

·          Lift core, garbage chute & lobby;

·          Communal roof terrace (33sqm) and storage; and

·          Unit 501 – 2 Bed (78sqm)

 

Public Domain Works

 

Public domain works are included (to be carried out by the applicant) by way of:-

 

·          Paving of Constitution Road to Grove Street; and

·          Removal of 2 power poles and relocation of power lines underground.

 

The public domain works have been included in a detailed landscape plan.

 

A copy of the site plan, floor plans, elevations and sections of the development submitted with the application are reproduced below:

 

 

Image 9: Render of the development viewed to the north-east from Arlington Light Rail Station

 

 

 

Image 10: Site Plan

 

 

 

 

 

Image 11: Basement Level

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 12: Ground Floor


 

 

 

Image 13: First Floor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 14: Second Floor

 

 

Image 15: Third Floor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 16: Fourth Floor


 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 17: Fifth Floor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 18: Roof Plan

 

 

Image 19: North West Side Elevation (South Lane)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 20: South East Side Elevation

 

 

Image 21: South West Elevation (Front – Constitution Road)

 

 

Image 22: North East Elevation (Rear – South Lane)

 

Image 23: Section

 

 

 

Image 24: Landscape Plan & Public Works Plan (Constitution Road)

 

 

3.       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) provides planning guidelines for remediation of contaminated land. Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 (MDCP 2011) provides controls and guidelines for remediation works. SEPP 55 requires that remediation works must be carried out in accordance with a Remediation Action Plan (RAP) as approved by the consent authority and any guidelines enforced under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997.

The site is currently occupied by a residential building, however previous uses, degrading buildings and parking of vehicles warranted a Detailed Site Investigation to be undertaken. This was submitted with the application. The detailed site investigation concluded the following:

 

·        Detailed Site Investigation complies with the NSW EPA's Guidelines for Consultants: Reporting on Contaminated Sites

·        The site and surrounding areas were free of statutory notices issued by the EPA under the

Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997;

·        There is no evidence of underground or aboveground storage tanks;

·        Five bore samples collected across the site identified hot spot contamination of Benzo(a)pyrene in excess of adopted HIL B limits at three locations that requires additional investigations for delineation and remediation;

·        Groundwater investigations were not undertaken and are recommended for further investigation

 

Upon the request of Council, the applicant prepared a Remedial Action Plan for the site with remediation of the site proposed to be undertaken after demolition of existing structures.

 

The detailed site investigation and remedial action plan adopted HIL B investigation levels for the site. This is suitable for the residential component of the development; however this is not suitable for the 101m2 deep soil planting and common space area on the northern portion of the site.

 

More conservative investigation levels should be adopted, being HIL C, as it is assumed that occupants may have substantial opportunity for exposure to this portion of the site, and as such any potential contaminants that may be present. This is recommended in the NEPM 1999 which states Landscaped/playground (including sandpit) areas used for recreation within a high-density development should be assessed on the basis of the more conservative HIL C values” (National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999, Schedule B7, 3.2.2).

 

Conditions are included in the recommendation addressing HIL C investigation levels and further RAP requirements. Subject to compliance with the above, the proposal is considered acceptable having regard to the provisions of SEPP 55.

 

4.       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (Amendment 3)

 

The development is subject to the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65). SEPP 65 prescribes 9 design quality principles to guide the design of residential apartment development and to assist in assessing such developments. The principles relate to key design issues including context and neighbourhood character, built form and scale, density, sustainability, landscape, amenity, safety, housing diversity and social interaction and aesthetics.

 

A statement from a qualified Architect was submitted with the application verifying that they designed, or directed the design of, the development. The statement also provides an explanation that verifies how the design quality principles are achieved within the development and demonstrates, in terms of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG), how the objectives in Parts 3 and 4 of the guide have been achieved.

 

The development is generally acceptable having regard to the 9 design quality principles as:-

 

·        The development is a site specific response presenting appropriate density, scale and built form within a masterplanned precinct;

·        Resource, energy and water efficiency has been addressed through lodgement of a BASIX certificate;

·        Adequate deep soil planting and landscaping is provided;

·        The development provides good amenity for the dwellings;

·        The development improves the safety and security of the street and is acceptable when considered against CPTED principles; and

·        Council’s Architectural Excellence Panel supports the contemporary development.

 

Apartment Design Guide

 

The ADG contains objectives, design criteria and design guidelines for residential apartment development. In accordance with Clause 6A of the SEPP the requirements contained within MDCP 2011 in relation to visual privacy, solar and daylight access, common circulation and spaces, apartment sizes and layout, ceiling heights, private open space and balconies, natural ventilation and storage have no effect. In this regard objectives design criteria and design guidelines set out in Parts 3 and 4 of the ADG prevail.  

 

The development has been assessed against the relevant design criteria within Part 3 and 4 of the ADG as follows:

 

Communal and Open Space

 

The ADG prescribes the following requirements for communal and open space:

 

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

·        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).

 

The development provides a total of 134sqm of open space equal to 27% of the site. The communal open space consists of 101sqm of open space on the ground level and 33sqm on level 5.

 

The principal communal open space used by occupants is likely to be the ground floor open space to the rear of the site abutting South Lane.

 

Due to the proximity of approved heights of development to the north and west (‘Arlington Grove’) the ground floor open space will not receive a minimum of 2 hours solar access between 9:00am and 3:00pm mid-winter.

 

Given that the approved heights of the adjoining developments limit solar access on the ground floor for any potential development on site, an additional area of communal open space has been provided level 5 which is likely to receive the minimum solar access required. In this regard, the non-compliant level solar access received to the principal area of communal open space on the ground floor is acceptable in this instance. 

 

Deep Soil Zones

 

The ADG prescribes the following minimum requirements for deep soil zones:

 

Site Area

Minimum Dimensions

Deep Soil Zone

(% of site area)

Less than 650m2

-

 

 

7%

650m2 - 1,500m2

3m

Greater than 1,500m2

6m

Greater than 1,500m2 with significant existing tree cover

6m

 

The site has an area less than 650sqm and provides 101sqm of deep soil area, equal to 20% of the site area and therefore complies with the prescribed ADG requirements for deep soil zones.

 

Visual Privacy/Building Separation

 

The ADG prescribes the following minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries:

 

Building Height

Habitable rooms and balconies

Non-habitable rooms

Up to 12 metres (4 storeys)

6 metres

3 metres

Up to 25 metres (5-8 storeys)

9 metres

4.5 metres

Over 25 metres (9+ storeys)

12 metres

6 metres

 

A 12.7 metre rear setback to South Lane has been provided with resulting separation between the approved 4 storey ‘Arlington Grove’ building to the rear complying with the above rear setback requirement.

 

On the north western side of the site, the adjoining building A1 within the ‘Arlington Grove’ development was approved at 8 storeys in height with a 6 metre setback to the boundary of the subject site which was a departure from the 7 metre setback required by Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011.

 

Building A1 contains habitable areas at 6 metres measured to the side boundary of the site from level 1 to level 8.

 

Levels 4 and 5 of the proposed development consequently do not achieve the required 9 metre side setback from the adjoining habitable areas of building A1 with a 7.4 metre setback proposed between the habitable rooms of the adjoining building and the habitable rooms of the development on level 5 and balconies on level 6.

 

Despite the building separation non-compliance of levels 4 and 5, the development will maintain adequate visual privacy as:-

 

·        The building has been designed in an orientation so that apartment sightlines are directed away from building A1 of the ‘Arlington Grove’ development; and

·           Screens have been provided to balconies and openings where necessary and highlight windows are provided on the north-west elevation with opaque glazing.

 

Solar and Daylight Access

 

The ADG prescribes the following requirements for 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 9.00am and 3.00pm at mid-winter.

·        A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm at mid-winter.

 

The proportion of units which comply with the minimum solar access requirements of the ADG is 9 of 15, being 60%, with 1 unit (0.66%) receiving no direct sunlight mid-winter.

 

Due to the orientation of the site and the height and siting of approved buildings to the side and rear of the site, achieving 2 hours of solar access to the internal and external living areas of 70% of the dwellings is difficult.

 

In response to the external site constraints posed by adjoining development, living areas and glazing have been orientated to maximise solar access and the height of the development has been increased to an appropriate transition point between the approved building to the north-west and potential future development at 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road in order to provide units with good solar access on levels 4 and 5.

 

Further, an independent solar access report prepared by Steven King was commissioned by the applicant. The report included thorough solar access 3D modelling of the development and shadow impacts of approved development surrounding the site. The report notes that the development would be capable of achieving 70% of apartments receiving 2 hours solar access in mid-winter had the adjoining 8 storey development been approved with side setbacks above 5 storeys at the required distance in accordance with the ADG. The report concludes that achieving 60% of apartments receiving 2 hours solar access in mid-winter is a result of significant design effort in response to site constraints. 

 

On balance, the design is well considered having responded to site constraints and a variation to the required number of units receiving a minimum of 2 hours of solar access in mid-winter is considered acceptable in this instance.

 

Natural Ventilation

 

The ADG prescribes the following requirements for natural ventilation:

 

·        At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first 9 storeys of the building.

·        Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18 metres, measured glass line to glass line.

 

The plans indicate that 10 of the 15 units, being 66%, will allow for natural ventilation. No balcony servicing a cross through unit contains a balcony of depth greater than 18 metres.

 

Ceiling Heights

 

The ADG prescribes the following minimum ceiling heights:

 

Minimum Ceiling Height

Habitable Rooms

2.7 metres

Non-Habitable

2.4 metres

 

The ceiling height of each storey will be a minimum 2.7 metres throughout each apartment.

The ground floor has a ceiling height of 3.05 metres which allows for increased solar access to the lower level apartments.

 

Apartment Size

 

The ADG prescribes the following minimum apartment sizes:

 

Apartment Type

Minimum Internal Area

Studio apartments

35m2

1 Bedroom apartments

50m2

2 Bedroom apartments

70m2

 

All units comply with the minimum area as stipulated under the ADG.

 

 

Apartment Layout

 

The ADG prescribes the following recommendations for apartment layouts:

 

·        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.

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

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

·        Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10m2 and other bedrooms 9m2 (excluding wardrobe space).

·        Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3 metres (excluding wardrobe space).

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

§ 3.6 metres for studio and 1 bedroom apartments.

§ 4 metres for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments.

·        The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments are at least 4 metres internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts.

 

Room depths, room sizes and dimensions and window sizes for each unit complies with the ADG.

 

Units 102, 202, 302, and 402 propose a width of 3.3 metres for the combined living and dining rooms falling 300mm short of the 3.6 metre depth recommended by the ADG. As the depth and resulting amenity for future occupants of these units is considered satisfactory, the minor variation is considered acceptable in this instance.

 

Private Open Space and Balconies

 

The ADG prescribes the following sizes for primary balconies of apartments:

 

Dwelling Type

Minimum Area

Minimum Depth

Studio apartments

4m2

-

1 Bedroom apartments

8m2

2 metres

2 Bedroom apartments

10m2

2 metres

Note: The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1 metres.

 

The ADG also prescribes that for apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space area is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15m2 and a minimum depth of 3 metres.

 

All units provide a balcony of the required size and dimension as recommended by the ADG. Units G01 and G02 on the ground floor provide a terrace area of 15sqm and 28sqm respectively.

 

Storage

 

The ADG prescribes the following storage requirements in addition to storage in kitchen, bathrooms and bedrooms:

 

Apartment Type

Minimum Internal Area

Studio apartments

4m3

1 Bedroom apartments

6m3

2 Bedroom apartments

8m3

           

Note: At least 50% of the required storage is to be located within the apartment.

In addition to storage within units, storage cages have been provided on the basement level. All units are provided with an area of storage greater than the minimum area recommended by the ADG.

 

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

 

A BASIX Certificate was submitted with the application indicating the proposal achieves full compliance with the BASIX requirements. Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation to ensure the BASIX Certificate commitments are implemented into the development.

 

6.       State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

The site is located within 25 metres of a rail corridor. Clause 86 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (Infrastructure SEPP) requires the consideration of potential effects to the ongoing operation and safety of the rail corridor for development within 25 metres. Clause 87 of the SEPP relates to the impact of rail noise or vibration on non-rail development, and for a development for the purpose of a building for residential use, requires appropriate measures are incorporated into such developments to ensure that certain noise levels are not exceeded.

 

The proposal was referred to Sydney Trains for comment. Conditions of consent were provided including the requirement for an Acoustic Assessment Report to be provided before the issue of a Construction Certificate.  Those conditions are included in the recommendation.

 

 

7.       Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

(i)      Land Use Table and Zone Objectives (Clause 2.3)

 

The site is zoned R1 – General Residential under the provisions of MLEP 2011. The development is permissible with Council's consent under the zoning provisions applying to the land.

 

The development is acceptable having regard to the objectives of the R1 - General Residential zone.

 

(ii)      Demolition (Clause 2.7)

 

Clause 2.7 of MLEP 2011 states that the demolition of a building or work may be carried out only with development consent. The application seeks consent for demolition works. Council’s standard conditions relating to demolition works are included in the recommendation.

 

(iii)     Height (Clause 4.3)

 

A maximum building height of 17 metres applies to the land under MLEP 2011. The development has a maximum building height of 19.5 metres which does not comply with the development standard.

 

A written request, in relation to the development’s non-compliance with the building height development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 (Exception to Development Standards) of MLEP 2011, was submitted with the application. That request is discussed later in this report under the heading “Exceptions to Development Standards (Clause 4.6)”.

 

(iv)    Floor Space Ratio (Clause 4.4)

 

A maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 1.3:1 applies to the development under MLEP 2011.

The development has a gross floor area (GFA) of 1049.4sqm which equates to a FSR of 2.09:1 on the 489sqm site which does not comply with the development standard.

 

A written request, in relation to the development’s non-compliance with the FSR development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 (Exception to Development Standards) of MLEP 2011, was submitted with the application. That request is discussed later in this report under the heading “Exceptions to Development Standards (Clause 4.6)”.

 

(v)     Exceptions to Development Standards (Clause 4.6)

 

Clause 4.6 contains provisions that provide a degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development.  Under Clause 4.6(2), Development consent may be granted for development even though the development would contravene a development standard imposed by this or any other environmental planning instrument.

 

The development exceeds the maximum building height development standard prescribed under Clause 4.3 of MLEP 2011 and floor space ratio development standard prescribed under Clause 4.4 of MLEP 2011. A written request in relation to the contravention to the building height and floor space ratio development standards in accordance with Clause 4.6 (Exceptions to Development Standards) of MLEP 2011 was submitted with the application.

 

Building Height

 

The applicant considers compliance with the building height development standard to be unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard for the following reasons:

 

·        The site is located adjacent to an approved 8 storey building with a height of 27.53 metres with substantial overshadowing of the subject site expected in addition to adjoining terraces on Constitution Road. This presents a site constraint for any development on site and the development is required to be taller in order to achieve increased solar access into units. A reduction in height to a compliant level would reduce solar access and it will be difficult to achieve a development of acceptable standard and amenity;

 

·        The proposed height is contextually appropriate as it provides a height transition between the approved 8 storey building to the north-west and potential future 4 storey development envisaged by Part 9.11 of MDCP for development at 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road. The height transition is well balanced and proportional to the site and is supported by Professor Peter Webber, Steve King and Council’s AEP. In this regard, the development is a better planning outcome as a reduction in height to achieve numerical compliance would not provide appropriate height transition between developments and would be disproportionate in scale;

 

·        The 17 metre height control is reasonably capable of accommodating a 5.5 storey building. The half storey component is represented by limiting the sixth storey to one apartment, which is setback from the front and located to the centre of the floor plate. This limits the visibility of the apartment from the street level and provides a recessed sixth floor;

 

·        The height protrusion is attributed to the sixth floor, with the primary non-complying element being the lift over-run and fire stair in addition to the top floor 2 bedroom apartment. If the apartment were to be deleted, the height variation would remain, as the lift over-run and fire stair will still be required to provide access to the roof terrace. The top floor apartment is setback and recessed and is not highly visible from the street level. Therefore, there would be no discernible benefit of deleting the top floor apartment, as it would not result in compliance with the height standard;

 

·        Shadow diagrams submitted with the application demonstrate that the shadow cast by the subject development is smaller than the shadow cast by the adjoining approved 8 storey building to the north-west. Therefore, the proposal will not generate any a greater shadow than the shadow that will be created by the 8 storey building. In this regard, the proposal does not generate any adverse shadow impact;

 

·        Consideration has been given to visual and acoustic privacy. The building is designed in a north-east, south-west orientation with apartments directed away from the adjoining approved buildings. A substantial rear setback is provided to increase building separation and improve solar access. Screens have been provided where necessary and high-light windows are provided in opaque glazing for daylight. The proposal is a considered response to the context and does not generate any privacy impact to adjoining development;

 

·        The streetscape plan submitted with the application illustrates that the proposal provides a contextually appropriate height transition within an emerging high density residential area. The building is well articulated and composes quality materials such as dry-pressed bricks, decorative brickwork on side façades and use of vertical elements that are balanced with horizontal banding. The building is a carefully designed high-quality development that exhibits design excellence and will deliver visually interesting building that compliments the streetscape and immediate area;

 

·        The proposed height of the development provides amenity to future occupants that is considered to be a better planning outcome than that of a compliant proposal and is of a superior urban outcome in the context of surrounding approved development;

 

·        The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the height of building standard and the objectives would be thwarted if compliance was required; and

 

·        The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives;

 

The justification provided in the applicant’s written submission is considered to be well founded and worthy of support.  It is considered that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds as to why the height development standard should be varied in this particular circumstance based on the outcomes of planning law precedents such as those contained in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC827, Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC90 and Moskovich v Waverley Council [2016]

 

As demonstrated in the assessment provided in this report, the additional dwelling does not result in adverse amenity impacts for residents of adjoining properties and the architectural form proposed responds appropriately to the future context of the site. 

 

Floor Space Ratio

 

A written request in relation to the contravention to the FSR development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 (Exceptions to Development Standards) of MLEP 2011 was submitted with the application. The applicant considers non-compliance with the FSR development standard to be acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·        The proposed bulk, mass and density of the development is contextually appropriate and rationalises the height and FSR standards. In this context, the FSR standard of 1.3:1 is a disconnect with the 17 metre height standard, and in the circumstances of this case, the proposed FSR of 2.146:1 provides a rationalisation and better relationship with the height standard and height of adjoining approved development;

 

·        Due to the substantial overshadowing as result of the adjoining approved 8 storey development to the north west, an increase in height is required to improve solar access. In order to achieve this increase in height, flexibility is required to the FSR standard. This will enable a development that achieves better amenity for future occupants than a development that would strictly comply with the FSR. This demonstrates that the benefits of varying the FSR and height are distinct and particular to the application;

 

·        The development is consistent with the desired future character of the locality and the design of the development is considered to be a better urban outcome that will compliment future adjoining development;

 

·        The proposed residential flat building will provide an improved streetscape presentation and building form that includes good quality finishes and materials and will contribute positively to the locality;

 

·        The proposal does not result in any undue or adverse environmental planning impacts in terms of shadow, amenity, privacy, traffic, view loss or streetscape presentation;

 

·        The proposed development is compatible with the approved development in the immediate vicinity and is not considered to detract from the streetscape of Constitution Road. The proposal is exemplary of the desired future character of the area, as established through the land use zone under MLEP 2011 and planning precinct provisions in MDCP 2011 and surrounding recently approved development;

 

·        The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the FSR standard; and

 

·        The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives.

 

The justification provided in the applicant’s written submission is considered to be well founded and worthy of support.  It is considered that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds as to why the FSR development standard should be varied in this particular circumstance based on the outcomes of planning law precedents such as those contained in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC827, Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC90 and Moskovich v Waverley Council [2016]

 

As demonstrated in the assessment provided in this report, the additional FSR does not result in adverse amenity impacts for residents of adjoining properties, results in improved amenity for future occupants and the architectural form proposed responds appropriately to the adjoining site context and future character of the masterplan area.

 

(vi)    Preservation of Trees or Vegetation (Clause 5.9)

 

Clause 5.9 of MLEP 2011 concerns the protection of trees identified under Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011.

 

There are no trees on the property covered by and protected under Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011. However, the neighbouring property at 68 Constitution Road contains a Norfolk Pine which is of high retention value and may be impacted by the proposed development due to its proximity to the common boundary.

 

Council’s Tree Management Officer recommended that the tree be retained and protected during construction. Despite the likelihood of future removal of the tree due to redevelopment and associated remediation works of the neighbouring property, conditions of consent are included in the recommendation requiring the retention and protection of the tree during construction.

 

 

(vii)    Earthworks (Clause 6.2)

 

Clause 6.2 of MLEP 2011 requires the consent authority to have regard to certain matters where earthworks that require development consent are proposed. The development includes excavation for a basement level, which subject to conditions which have been included in the recommendation, is unlikely to have a detrimental impact on environmental functions or processes, neighbouring sites, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land.

 

(viii)   Flood Planning (Clause 6.3)

 

The land is not identified as land that is shown as “Flood planning area” on the MLEP 2011 Flood Planning Area Map; however, the site is subject to flooding.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer who advised that South Lane is subject to flooding and that amended driveway access and ground floor levels are required to ensure the site is not impacted by floodwaters.

 

Due to the location of the driveway access point and entry lobby on South Lane, the driveway height and floor levels of the lobby and ground floor units were subsequently modified.

 

Council’s Development Engineer raised no concerns with respect to the amended plans subject to the imposition of conditions that have been incorporated into the recommendation.

 

(ix)    Terrestrial Biodiversity (Clause 6.4)

 

The land is identified as “Biodiversity” on the MLEP 2011 Natural Resource - Biodiversity Map.

 

 

The land is also located in the Bandicoot Protection Area as identified in the Biodiversity Map contained in Appendix 3 of Part 2.13 of MDCP 2011 being an area identified as a potential habitat for the Long-nosed Bandicoot. The property has a site area which is greater than 450sqm.

 

The development was referred to Council’s Biodiversity Officer who provided conditions of consent addressing any potential impact on biodiversity during demolition, construction and throughout the use of the development. Those conditions are included in the recommendation.

 

8.       Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011

 

An assessment of the development having regard to the relevant provisions of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 (MDCP 2011) is provided below.

 

 

PART 2 – GENERIC PROVISIONS

 

(i)      Urban Design (Part 2.1)

 

The development is acceptable having regard to the relevant aspects of the 12 urban design principles.

 

The application was also referred to Council’s Architectural Excellence Panel (AEP) who support the proposal. It is also noted that the proposal responded favourably to the AEP’s feedback at Pre –DA stage and DA stage in:

 

·        Altering the design to ensure that the streetscape presentation be improved with increased articulation features to the Constitution Road elevation; and

·        Increasing the presence of the entry lobby with an increased opening to South Lane.

(ii)      Site and Context Analysis (Part 2.3)

 

A site and context analysis was submitted with the application and is acceptable.

 

(iii)     Equity of Access and Mobility (Part 2.5)

 

The development would require a minimum of 3 adaptable dwellings and 3 accessible resident parking spaces. In addition, all areas of the development are required to be accessible by persons with a disability.

 

The development provides 3 adaptable dwellings, accessible entry and continuous path of travel within the development in accordance with the requirements of MDCP 2011. An Access Report was submitted with the application and demonstrates compliance with relevant access requirements.

 

The matter of accessible car spaces is discussed below in this section of the report under the heading ‘Parking (Part 2.10)’.

 

Further assessment of the application under the Premises Standards will occur at Construction Certificate stage. Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation to ensure compliance.

 

(iv)    Acoustic and Visual Privacy (Part 2.6)

 

The development would maintain a high level of acoustic and visual privacy for the adjoining approved development within the Masterplan area and adjoining residential dwellings on Constitution Road and ensures a high level of acoustic and visual privacy for future occupants of the development itself. The following points are noted:

 

·        Private open space areas have been provided in the form of balconies in a north-east and south-west orientation to avoid overlooking of the adjoining ‘Arlington Grove’ development to the north west and south east;

·        The balconies have been articulated and constructed with blade walls/screens to minimise potential overlooking of adjoining residential development and to provide privacy for future occupants;

·        The highlight windows to the north-west façade do not generate any privacy issues, as they are opaque windows that allow for daylight and ventilation and are not transparent;

·        The rear of the building is substantially setback from the boundary which minimises potential for overlooking of the approved development to the rear across South Lane;

·        Balconies and habitable rooms facing Constitution Road are articulated and screened to minimise potential for overlooking of the approved development at 62 Constitution Road;

·        Areas of common open space are not likely to generate unreasonable levels of noise out of character with what is expected of a residential use; and

·        A condition of consent has been included requiring any noise from plant and equipment (i.e. – air conditioning units) to not exceed 5dBa above background noise.

 

(v)     Solar Access and Overshadowing (Part 2.7)

 

Overshadowing

 

The shadow diagrams submitted with the application illustrate the extent of overshadowing to surrounding properties and demonstrate that proposal does not create any greater shadow than the shadow that is generated by the approved 8 storey building to the north west. As a result, the development does not generate any shadow that will reduce solar access to adjoining properties to the south.

 

Therefore, the development is not considered to be unreasonable in the circumstances and would not cause any unreasonable amenity impacts for surrounding residential development.

Solar Access

 

Solar access has been discussed above in section 4 of this report.

 

(vi)    Community Safety (Part 2.9)

 

Part 2.9 of MDCP 2011 contains objectives relating to community safety. The proposal provides clear visible entrances to the building from Constitution Road and South Lane, secure parking, habitable rooms overlooking Constitution Road and design features which would allow for casual surveillance of along both street frontages. Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation regarding lighting and anti-graffiti treatment to the development.  

 

(vii)    Parking (Part 2.10)

 

Car, Bicycle and Motorcycle Parking Spaces

 

The site is located in Parking Area 2 under Part 2.10 of MDCP 2011. The following table summarises the car, bicycle and motorcycle parking requirements for the development:

 

Component

Control

Required

Proposed

Complies?

Car Parking

Resident Car Parking

0.4 car parking space per studio

N/A

6

No

0.5 car parking spaces per 1 bedroom unit

6 x 1 bed unit (non-adaptable)

= 3 spaces

1 car parking space per 2 bedroom unit

6 x 2 bed unit

= 6 spaces

1.2 car parking spaces per 3 bedroom unit

N/A

1 car space per 1 adaptable dwelling

3 accessible spaces

 

TOTAL REQUIRED:

 12 spaces

 

 

Visitor Car Parking

0.1 car parking space per unit

15 units

= 1.5 spaces

0 spaces

No

1 accessible visitor’s car parking space per 4 accessible car parking spaces

0 accessible space

 

 

TOTAL: 1.5

Bicycle Parking

Resident Bicycle Parking

1 bicycle parking space per 2 units

15 units

= 8 spaces

15 spaces

Yes

Visitor Bicycle Parking

1 bicycle parking space per 10 units

15 units

= 1.5 spaces

Motorcycle Parking

Motorcycle Parking

5% of the total car parking requirement

N/A

-

-

 

The application proposes the provision 6 car parking spaces which does not comply with the requirements set out in the above table.

 

The applicant has indicated that the 6 parking spaces are to be allocated to the 6 x 2 bedroom units resulting in no allocated parking spaces for the 9 x 1 bedroom units.

 

Part 2.5 of MDCP 2011 requires the provision of 1 car space per adaptable unit, therefore the proposal is required to provide a total of 3 adaptable spaces and no adaptable parking spaces are proposed.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed basement is considerably constrained and limited in size, the provision of accessible parking is necessary to ensure the adaptable units are adequately catered for. It is considered the proposal could provide for 2 accessible car spaces with minimal loss of parking. The provision of 2 accessible parking spaces would result in the loss of 1 car space to provide for a shared zone resulting in a total of 5 on-site car parking spaces. This is considered to be a better outcome for the site and its potential tenants.

 

Having regard to the limited space within the proposed car park, space 5 as shown on the basement plan could be deleted and converted to a ‘shared area’ to accommodate 2 accessible parking spaces on either side (spaces 4 & 6). A condition of consent is included in the recommendation to this effect.

 

The parking shortfall is considered moderate and it is noted that due to the amended location of the basement access off South Lane (an amendment made at the request of Council), one additional on street parking space will be provided in place of the existing and redundant driveway to the site off Constitution Road.

 

Despite the car parking space shortfall, the development is considered acceptable for the following reasons:-

 

·        The development is within 25 metres of the Arlington Light Rail Station which will assist in mitigating car ownership, particularly for occupants travelling to and from the CBD;

 

·        The development is within 280 metres walking distance to Old Canterbury Road and 700 metres walking distance to the Dulwich Hill Town Centre both of which provide well serviced bus stops; and

 

·        The site size is constrained and any further parking would require a further excavation for additional parking which is not considered a reasonable outcome given the minimal benefit in additional car spaces and appropriateness of further excavation on the small site.

 

Further, the applicant submitted a Traffic and Parking Assessment Report which concludes that the proposed development is a moderate trip generator for the weekday peak times and will not negatively impact the ongoing use and function of the surrounding road network and intersections.

 

On balance, the development contributes to urban renewal in an emerging compact urban centre close to multiple public transit networks in the interest of supporting compact urban form, economic viability and sustainable transport. The development is therefore considered to be acceptable having regard to the objectives of Part 2.10 of MDCP 2011.

 

(viii)   Landscaping and Open Spaces (Part 2.18)

 

Part 2.18.11.5 of MDCP 2011 prescribes landscaped area, private and common open space controls for residential flat buildings. 

 

Landscaped Area

 

The development provides landscaping to the front of the site abutting Constitution Road and 101sqm of landscaped area at ground level located at the rear of the site. Although the landscaped area provided does not comply with the required provision for 45% landscaping of the site area required by MDCP 2011, the area is considered sufficient in size and function as it is provided as deep soil and is of a size which is considered appropriate given the relatively small nature of the development and expected occupancy rate.

 

A landscape plan and maintenance schedule was not submitted with the application. A condition is included in the recommendation requiring the submission of a landscape plan and maintenance schedule.

Private and Common Open Space

 

The units are provided with private open space in accordance with the required sizes in Part 2.18 of MDCP 2011. The common open space on ground level and level 5 are considered to afford a good level of amenity for future occupants. The development satisfies Part 2.18 in this regard.

 

(ix)    Site Facilities and Waste Management (Part 2.21)

 

2.21.2.1           Recycling and Waste Management

 

A Recycling and Waste Management Plan (RWMP) was submitted with the application and is considered to be adequate. In accordance with Part 2.21 of MDCP 2011, development with 4 or more storeys requires a garbage chute or waste storage room for waste disposal on each floor. The development provides a chute on each floor.

 

2.21.2.5           Residential Waste

 

Residential waste facilities have been provided on the ground floor level with direct access to Constitution Road.  The garbage room has an area of 27.5sqm which is considered of a sufficient size to accommodate the required 14 x 240 litre bins for waste and recycling. 

 

A condition of consent is included in the recommendation requiring adequate bin management for collection periods as to minimise the impact of bins left out on the street on collection days.

 

2.21.3.1           Clothes drying facilities

 

Under the provisions of Part 2.21.2 of MDCP 2011, external clothes drying areas are required at a rate of 3.75m² per dwelling, with a minimum 6 metres of clothes line for each dwelling.

 

The balconies proposed for each dwelling are considered to be capable of accommodating suitable clothes drying facilities for future occupants.

 

2.21.3.2           Public utilities

 

A condition is included in the recommendation advising the person acting on the consent to liaise with the relevant authorities/service providers for public utilities (Sydney Water Corporation, Ausgrid, AGL and Telstra) concerning the provision of water and sewerage, electricity, natural gas and telephones respectively to the property.

 

2.21.3.3           Mail Boxes

 

A condition is included in the recommendation to ensure that suitable letterbox facilities are provided in accordance with Part 2.21.4 of MDCP 2011.

 

2.21.3.4           Building identification numbers

 

A condition is included in the recommendation requiring appropriate numbering details to be submitted in accordance with Part 2.21.5 of MDCP 2011.

 

2.21.3.5           Telecommunication facilities

 

A condition is included in the recommendation requiring the provision of suitable telecommunication facilities in accordance with Part 2.21.6 of MDCP 2011.

 

(x)     Stormwater Management (Part 2.25)

 

The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer who provided conditions to be included in the recommendation to address stormwater management.

Part 4 - RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

 

Part 4.2 – Multi Dwelling Housing and Residential Flat Buildings

 

The site is located within the Hoskins Park Planning Precinct pursuant to Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011. Many of the controls and objectives contained within Part 4.2 are effectively superseded by the controls contained within Part 9.11. The following assessment is in regards to controls which are not replicated within Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011:

 

(i)      General Controls (Part 4.2.3)

 

Part 4.2.3 of MDCP 2011 prescribes the following unit mix requirements for residential flat buildings containing 6 or more dwellings:

 

Dwelling Type

Proposed

Required (%)

Studio

4 dwellings (18%)

5-20%

1 bedroom

11 dwellings (50%)

10-40%

2 bedroom

7 dwellings (31%)

40-75%

3 bedroom

0 dwellings (0%)

10-45%

 

The development includes 0 x studio dwellings (0 % of 15), 9 x 1 bedroom dwellings (60 % of 15), 6 x 2 bedroom dwellings (40 % of 15) and 0 x 3 bedroom dwellings (0% of 15) which does not comply with the abovementioned unit mix requirements. Notwithstanding, there is considered to be an acceptable range of dwelling sizes and types to meet the future needs of the area across the precinct. The variation is not considered to warrant refusal of the application. 

 

(ii)      Built Form and Character (Part 4.2.4)

 

4.2.1.1 Floor Space Ratio and Site Coverage

 

The floor space ratio of the development has been discussed earlier in this letter under the provisions of MLEP 2011.

 

Part 4.2.4.1 MDCP 2011 specifies the following maximum site coverage controls for residential flat buildings:

 

Development Type

Maximum Site Coverage

Residential flat building

45% for one storey

35% for two storey

30% for three or more storeys

 

The site coverage for this proposal, measured in accordance with the above, equates to 42% of the site area which does not comply with such requirement. Notwithstanding, the variation is considered acceptable given the site accommodates a sufficient deep soil area and an acceptable area of landscaping and common open space as discussed above in Section 8 of this report.

 

4.2.4.2 Building Heights

 

This matter has been discussed earlier in this letter under the provisions of MLEP 2011.

 

(iii)     Streetscape, General Appearance and Materials (Part 4.2.5)

 

The development is considered acceptable with regards to the streetscape design parameters prescribed under Part 4.2.5 of MDCP 2011. The original application was reviewed by the AEP who found the proposal to be of an overall high design standard with an appropriate use of colours and materials. Minor amendments to the entry area and lobby off South Lane and the architectural expression facing Constitution Road were recommended. These amendments were undertaken and amended plans were submitted.

 

In summary, the design of the development is of a high standard in terms of its architectural expression, use of colours and materials, its relationship with the public realm and internal amenity for future occupants.

 

PART 9 – STRATEGIC CONTEXT

 

The site is located in the Hoskins Park Planning Precinct (Precinct 9.11) and the Hoskins Park Masterplan area (MA 11.1) under MDCP 2011.

 

Part 9.11 of the DCP prescribes the following site specific planning controls to achieve the desired future character for the Hoskins Park Planning Precinct:

 

 

Image 25: Figure 11.1b –  (MA 11.1) Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011

 

 

(i)      Masterplan Area (MA 11.1) – (Part 9.11.5.1)

 

Site Amalgamation

 

The site is 1 of 4 properties within ‘Site 4’ as shown in ‘Image 23’ above and further demonstrated in ‘Image 19’ below.

 

 

 

Image 26: Site 4 (Site 4 marked red & subject site marked in blue)

 

 

In accordance with Control C15 and C17 under Part 9.11.5.2 of MDCP 2011, the site is required to be amalgamated with 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road in accordance with the pattern prescribed for ‘Site 4’. 

 

The development does not propose to amalgamate with 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road. Documentation provided to Council indicates genuine attempts to amalgamate with the adjoining sites have been made and have been unsuccessful to date.

 

In support of the development without amalgamation with the adjoining sites within ‘Site 4’, the application was accompanied by alternative masterplan outcomes relating to remaining lot amalgamation opportunities. Modelled development outcomes to develop the adjoining 3 properties in isolation were provided to justify the proposed departure. This was undertaken by the applicant by:-

 

·    The submission of detailed modelling of potential built form outcomes on the alternative amalgamated sites (68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road) and demonstrating how the sites could be amalgamated and redeveloped to be compliant with relevant planning policy controls; and

 

·    demonstrating how they fit with the underlying intentions and objectives of the master plan, in the overall context of the Masterplan area.

 

 

 

In consideration of the evidence provided by the applicant, Council is satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that the NSW LEC Planning Principles for site amalgamation/site isolation have been satisfied. 

 

Building Height

 

The building does not comply with the building height development standard in MLEP 2011.

 

Further to this, Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011 prescribes a height limit expressed in storeys, being a 3 storey podium with a 4th storey setback 3 metres.

 

The subject development proposes a 5 storey podium with a setback 6th storey.

 

In assessing the appropriateness of these height departures, consideration is given to the scale of the development in the context of surrounding approved buildings to the north west (building A1, ‘Arlington Grove’ – 8 storeys) and to the south west (62 Constitution Road – 7 storeys). In addition, consideration is given to the sites’ constraints in terms of ability to provide complaint solar access for future occupants due to the proximity of the site to the adjoining approved 8 metre building to the north-west and the 4 storey building to the north.

 

Although the height of the development is non complaint, both numerically and when expressed as a number of storeys, the development provides a suitable visual transition between surrounding development to the north west and south west (‘Arlington Grove’ and 62 Constitution Road), the expected 4 storey height envisaged by Part 9.11 for 68, 70 and 72 Constitution Road and residential dwellings to the east on Grove Street. This is demonstrated in ‘Image 21 and Image 22’ below:-

 

 

 

Image 27: Constitution Road streetscape elevation – height transition between approved 8 storey building, the subject site and possible future development at 68 – 72 Constitution Road

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 28: Sketch Up model of the development in the context of surrounding existing and approved development

 

 

Although the subject proposal has six levels, the single unit at the top is recessed so that the new building would read as only five storeys from the street level.

 

The proposed height on the constrained site allows for better amenity for future occupants by providing good solar access to the upper 5th and 6th storey where as a reduced and compliant height would not allow for overall adequate solar access to units. It is noted that the approved 4 storey building to the north was not positioned in accordance with the prescribed building pattern within the Masterplan area. Open space is prescribed in the Masterplan area in the location of the approved 4 storey building. This has reduced the opportunity for good solar access for lower level units for any potential development on the subject site. 

 

It is therefore considered that the height and number of storeys of the development presents a suitable transition between the 8 storey development to the north-west and the existing and potential future residential buildings to the south east.

 

Boundary Setbacks/Upper Floor & Roof Setbacks

 

Figure 11.1b in Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011 below, shows required boundary and upper floor/roof setbacks for a building where the suggested site amalgamation for ‘Site 4’ has been achieved.

 

 

Image 29: Site 4 Boundary Setbacks/Upper Floor & Roof Setbacks

 

As the site has not been amalgamated as suggested for ‘Site 4’, the ability for the development to achieve the required setbacks is compromised. The development proposes to vary required side and front setbacks with a nil side setback to South Lane and 68 Constitution Road and a 1.5 – 2 metre front setback to Constitution Road. The upper level (level 5) is compliant with the exception of the south east side boundary shared with 68 Constitution Road. The required rear setback has been achieved with a proposed 12.7 metre setback to South Lane.

 

Side Setbacks

 

The proposed nil side setbacks provides for development at a suitable width whilst maintaining privacy to adjoining development, having orientated balconies and habitable rooms to the north east and south west. As per the suggested setbacks and heights shown above, a compliant development would not benefit from better solar access and privacy, therefore the proposed alternative side setback is considered an acceptable response to the sites’ constraints given it does not reduce potential for good amenity to units. Further, the remaining 3 sites within ‘Site 4’ have opportunity for future redevelopment on the boundary shared with the site.

 

Rear Setback

 

The development proposes a rear setback of almost double the required setback as shown in Image 22 above. This has been undertaken to improve solar access to rear facing units and has resulted in a reduced front setback of 1.5 – 2 metres to Constitution Road.

 

Front Setback

 

Pre-DA advice was provided to the applicant by the AEP and suggested that the front setback be reduced to improve solar access to rear facing units and amenity to the rear open space. A reduced front setback was also suggested to promote a more solid presence for the building to Constitution Road in light of the approved 7 storey building at 62 Constitution Road which opposes the site. If the development were to be setback as shown in Image 22 above, the solar access, rear open space and streetscape presence of the development would be significantly compromised. It is therefore considered that the development is a better outcome for development on site. Further, it is likely that the 3 adjoining sites to the south east will redevelop with a similar front and rear setback to that of the subject development to achieve similar solar access, open space and streetscape outcomes.

 

Upper Floor & Roof Setbacks

 

The required 3 metre setback to level 5 and its roof has been provided with the exception of the south east side which abuts the boundary shared with Constitution Road. This is an appropriate response as the adjoining site at 68 Constitution Road is likely to be redeveloped with nil side setbacks.

 

Sustainable Envelope and Occupant Amenity

 

The objective of the sustainable envelope and occupant amenity control is to achieve a form of development that results in the future occupants of the building achieving adequate amenity, while protecting the amenity of the adjoining properties. The proposed development is considered to achieve this objective through orientating the majority of the internal and external living areas to the north east and south west, providing adequate solar access, cross-ventilation and providing a separation from adjoining properties to mitigate any overlooking. The development is considered acceptable in this regard.

 

Articulation Zones

 

The proposal generally complies with the articulation zones prescribed within Part 9.11 of MDCP 2011 to the front and rear. The development provides a 6 metre setback from the Constitution Road frontage to the building facade, however, includes the provision of balconies within the 6 metre setback.

 

The proposal provides good articulation on front and rear elevations which breaks up the visual massing of both elevations when viewed from and beyond Constitution Road and South Lane. The application is considered acceptable in this regard.

 

Domain Interface and Structure

 

The proposal generally complies with the controls relating to the domain interface and vehicle access location. Public domain works to Constitution Road, being works to Constitution Road for a ‘Shared Zone’ and grounding of power lines along Constitution Road and Grove Street, form part of this application. The proposed public domain works are considered to provide a good urban design outcome for the site and surrounding development and public land uses.

 

 

Concluding Remarks

 

The proposal seeks significant variations to the Strategic Context Controls contained within Part 9.11 of the MDCP 2011.

 

In March 2013, changes to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, changed the status of Development Control Plans through the introduction of Sub-Section 79C(3A) that as follows:

 

(3A)       Development control plans

If a development control plan contains provisions that relate to the development that is the subject of a development application, the consent authority:

(a)     if those provisions set standards with respect to an aspect of the development and the development application complies with those standards - is not to require more onerous standards with respect to that aspect of the development, and

 

 

(b)     if those provisions set standards with respect to an aspect of the development and the development application does not comply with those standards - is to be flexible in applying those provisions and allow reasonable alternative solutions that achieve the objects of those standards for dealing with that aspect of the development, and

(c)     may consider those provisions only in connection with the assessment of that development application. In this subsection, standards include performance criteria.

 

 

The intent of the above is to ensure that the application of controls contained within a DCP is done in a manner that allows flexibility and complements the development standards of the prevailing Local Environmental Plan (LEP).

 

In this instance, the controls of Part 9.11 of the MDCP 2011 constrain the development potential of land by imposing development controls that conflict with those permitted under the provisions of MLEP 2011.

 

As such, based on the intent of sub-section 79C (3A)(b), Council is required to be flexible in the application of the development controls and allow an alternative solution that achieves the objectives of the standard.

 

As stated above, the proposed development is supported in respect to variations to the prevailing development standards contained in MLEP 2011 and does not contravene the objectives of the development controls contained in MDCP 2011. As such the alternative solution proposed is considered acceptable for the site.

 

 

9.       Public Domain Works

 

The adjoining ‘Arlington Grove’ development approval included paving works to South Lane and on Constitution Road from the Arlington Station entrance to approximately 1 metre past the boundary of the subject site up Constitution Road. The Arlington Grove approval also required the establishment of a ‘Shared Zone’ on Constitution Road to its intersection with Grove Street.

 

To complete the paving required for the future ‘Shared Zone’, the application proposes to pave the remaining length of Constitution Road in contrasting colours comprising replacement of all asphalt with pavers to match South Lane and Arlington Grove works. Works are to be undertaken from the ‘Arlington Grove Plaza’ to the corner of Constitution Road and Grove Street. This shall continue the plaza type finish at the Constitution Road interface and will enable the shared zone to continue.

 

To further improve the public domain and site frontage, the application proposes the removal of 2 power poles and the undergrounding of power lines.

 

Public domain works proposed are shown in ‘Image 30 below:


 

 

Image 30: Public Domain Works to Site Frontage

 

 

 

10.     Marrickville Section 94/94A Contributions Plan 2014

 

The carrying out of the development would result in an increased demand for public amenities and public services within the area. A contribution of $222,931.28 would be required for the development under Marrickville Section 94/94A Contributions Plan 2014.  A condition requiring that contribution to be paid is included in the recommendation.

 

11.     Community Consultation

 

The application was advertised, an on-site notice displayed on the property and residents/property owners in the vicinity of the property were notified of the development in accordance with Council's policy. 28 submissions were received raising the following concerns which have already been discussed throughout the main body of this report:

 

(i)      Height;

(ii)      FSR;

(iii)     Solar Access & Overshadowing;

(iv)    Privacy;

(v)     Traffic;

(vi)    Parking;

(vii)    Site Isolation;

(viii)   Variation to the Masterplan Site;

(ix)    Garbage Bins/Disposal; and

(x)     Unit sizes

 

In addition to the above, the submissions raised the following concerns which are discussed under the respective headings below:

 

(i)      Further Setback or landscaping and architectural articulation should be provided to the north west elevation to reduce the visual impact of the development when viewed from Building A1 (‘Arlington Grove’).

 

Comment:

A variation to the required side setback is supported for the reasons discussed above in this report. The architectural expression on side boundaries was reviewed by the AEP and no objection was raised. Additional articulation to the north-west elevation would compromise the design and would likely require reduced internal floor plates and would impact the amenity of units.

 

(ii)      The Traffic Report submitted with the application contains a number of errors including address names and adjoining development parking numbers.

 

Comment:

Council notes the discrepancies listed in the Traffic Report; however, the impact of the development on traffic and parking has not been impacted by the discrepancies and has been assessed against relevant controls and policies. 

 

(iii)     There is not enough parking for the units and there is no visitor parking. The application should be refused on this basis or more parking spaces/less units should be provided.

 

Comment:

Whilst it is acknowledged that there is likely to be some occupants and visitors that will not have a parking space to use on site, appropriate conditions are included in the recommendations specifying that the residents and therefore visitors of the development will not be eligible for any resident parking schemes. In addition, the overall impact of the development on parking is considered minimal for a 15 unit development within close proximity to public transport services and the parking impacts are not such to warrant refusal of the proposal.

 

(iv)    There is a large accumulative traffic impact associated with approved surrounding development in Arlington Grove and other developments within the surrounding locality. The development will contribute to this and the application should address this.

 

Comment:

Issues of cumulative impacts are considered when planning controls are established and through the Masterplanning process. The proposal will lead to minimal increased traffic generation. The traffic impacts associated with the proposal are not considered of such significance to warrant refusal of the proposal, particularly when the anticipated redevelopment of the site given the planning controls is considered and the 15 unit development contains only 6 parking spaces that will generate minimal increased traffic.

 

(v)     Pedestrian safety will be at risk due to a driveway located across a high pedestrian area footpath.

 

Comment:

The position of the driveway was relocated to the rear of the site off South Lane with an exit from South Lane to Constitution Road being established as a shared zone subject to construction works by the applicant and developer of ‘Arlington Grove’.

 

(vi)    Public transport, schools and childcare centres are at capacity and will be degraded due to the population increase.

 

Comment:

Any upgrade of these facilities need to be instigated by the relevant provider(s).

 

(vii)    There is not enough space in the road for construction vehicles

 

Comment:

During construction, all necessary permits will be applied for by the applicant in accordance with conditions included in any consent issued.

 

(viii)   Structural damage to surrounding buildings as a result of large clay and soft sandstone on the site. Residents have experienced some damage to houses from construction at Arlington Grove. Dust and pollution will also impact surrounding houses and cars during construction.

 

Comment:

Construction related impacts are able to be appropriately regulated through the recommended conditions of consent.

 

(ix)    A dilapidation report should be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate extending to 74A constitution Road and a Geotechnical Report should include this property.

 

Comment:

It is considered unreasonable to extend the requirement of a dilapidation report and Geotechnical Report to a property of approximately 32 metres from the site.  

 

(x)     It is not clear what the VPA for the development includes and how it will benefit surrounding residents.

 

Comment: A VPA no longer forms part of this application.

 

All relevant matters raised in the submissions able to be considered under the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act have been discussed in the report.

12.     Conclusion

 

The application seeks consent to demolish existing improvements and construct a 6 storey residential flat building containing 15 dwellings with basement car parking and associated landscaping works.

 

The heads of consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as are of relevance to the application, have been taken into consideration in the assessment of this application. The proposal results in departures with the storey limit contained in MDCP 2011 and the FSR and height development standard in MLEP 2011. Notwithstanding this, the extent of the proposed non-compliances is not considered to result in adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining development or the future character of the Hoskins Park Planning Precinct.

 

The application is suitable for approval subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

 

 

 

PART E - RECOMMENDATION

 

A.      THAT the development application to demolish existing improvements and construct a 6 storey residential flat building containing 15 dwellings with basement car parking and associated landscaping works be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

 

 

GENERAL

 

1.       The development must be carried out in accordance with plans and details listed below:

 

Plan, Revision and Issue No.

Plan Name

Date Issued

Prepared by

Date Submitted

DA002, Rev G

Site Plan

07/09/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

07/09/16

DA101, Rev G

Basement Floor Plan

07/09/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

07/09/16

DA102, Rev G

Ground Floor Plan

07/09/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

07/09/16

DA103, Rev F

First Floor Plan

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

DA104, Rev F

Second Floor Plan

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

DA105, Rev F

Third Floor Plan

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

DA106, Rev F

Fourth Floor Plan

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

DA107, Rev F

Fifth Floor Plan

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

DA108, Rev F

Roof Plan

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

DA 201,Rev F

Section AA

07/09/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

07/09/16

DA301 Rev G

North-West & North East Elevations

07/09/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

07/09/16

DA302, Rev G

South West & South East Elevations

07/09/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

07/09/16

DA601, Rev F

Materials & Finishes Schedule

16/02/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

02/03/16

DA602, Rev F

Brick Pattern Wall Detail

16/02/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

02/03/16

1/2, Issue C

Landscape Plan

14.07.2016

Paul Scrivener

02/09/16

2/2, Issue C

Landscape Plan

14.07.2016

Paul Scrivener

02/09/16

             -

Driveway Ramp Detail

02/05/16

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan

15/07/16

No. 698525M

BASIX

22 February 2016

Greenwood Architectural Drafting

02/03/16

-

Access Report

17 February 2016

Ergon Consulting

02/03/16

E785/2

Remedial Action Plan – 66 Constitution Road

15 July 2016

Benviron Group

02/09/16

Report No. P2016-003-G133, Rev 0

Geotechnical Investigation Report

January 2016

Benviron Group

02/03/16

 

and details submitted to Council on 2 March 2016, 15 July 2016, 2 September 2016 and 7 September 2016 with the application for development consent and as amended by the following conditions.

Reason:     To confirm the details of the application submitted by the applicant.

 

2.       Where any plans and/or information forming part of a Construction Certificate issued in relation to this consent are inconsistent with:

 

a)      the plans and/or information approved under this consent; or

 

b)      any relevant requirements of this consent,

 

the plans, information and/or requirements of this consent (as the case may be) shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

 

All development approved under this consent shall be carried out in accordance with the plans, information and/or requirements of this consent taken to prevail by virtue of this condition.

Reason:     To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with this Determination.

 

3.      The materials and finishes of the building constructed pursuant to this consent must be strictly in accordance with the materials and finishes identified in Drawing Nos. DA601 and DA602, dated 16 February 2016, prepared by Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan. No changes may be made to these drawings except by way of an application under section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Reason:     To ensure the final built development has an appearance that accords with the approved materials and finishes.

 

4.      Where units or dwellings are provided with separate individual hot water systems, these must be located within the internal area of the unit/dwelling and not on any balcony or terrace.

Reason:   To ensure the aesthetics of the building and architecture are maintained.

 

 

5.      The development must be carried out substantially in accordance with, Remediation Action Plan 66 Constitution Road, Dulwich Hill NSW, E785/2, dated 15 July 2016, prepared by Benviron Group and submitted to Council on 17 May 2016 with the application for development consent and as amended by the following conditions.

Reason:     To confirm the details of the application as submitted by the applicant.

 

6.      The premises must be used exclusively as a residential flat building and not be adapted for use as a backpackers’ accommodation, serviced apartments or a boarding house and must not be used for any industrial or commercial purpose.

Reason:     To ensure that the premises are used exclusively as a residential flat building.

 

7.       5 off-street car parking spaces must be provided, paved, linemarked and maintained at all times in accordance with the standards contained within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Parking.

Reason:     To ensure practical off-street car parking is available for the use of the premises.

 

8.      2 car parking spaces, for persons with a disability, required as part of the total parking required under this Determination must be provided and marked as disabled car parking spaces.

          Reason:     To ensure that disabled car parking spaces are provided and marked accordingly and that disabled persons are advised and directed to such parking.

 

9.       All parking spaces and turning area thereto being provided in accordance with the design requirements set out within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Parking, and must be used exclusively for parking and not for storage or any other purpose.

Reason:     To ensure adequate manoeuvrability to all car parking spaces and that the spaces are used exclusively for parking.

 

10.    A minimum of 3 adaptable dwellings must be provided in accordance with Part 2.5 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Equity of Access and Mobility.

          Reason:     To make reasonable provision in the development to provide residential accommodation suitable for people with a disability.

 

11.    The use of any plant and equipment must not give rise to:

 

a)      transmission of unacceptable vibration to any place of different occupancy;

 

b)      a sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background (LA90) noise level in the absence of the noise under consideration by more than 5dB(A). The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq,15min and adjusted in accordance with Environment Protection Authority guidelines for tonality, frequency weighting, impulsive characteristics, fluctuations and temporal content as described in the NSW Environment Protection Authority's Environmental Noise Control Manual and Industrial Noise Policy 2000 and The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW).

 

Reason:     To prevent loss of amenity to the area.

 

12.     The owners of the property appointing a designated person(s) responsible for moving waste bins from their usual storage space in the basement to the place to the collection point for the storage of domestic bins being in accordance with details to be submitted to Council’s satisfaction. The bins shall only be placed in the approved collection point after 7.00pm on the day prior to collection and are to be returned to their storage location within the building within two (2) hours of the bins being collected by Council. The owner's corporation shall be responsible to ensure compliance with this condition. Should the above conditions not be adhered to, Council reserves the right to reconsider servicing the site for garbage collection. The person acting on this consent shall advise any purchaser or prospective tenant of this condition.

Reason:     To ensure the appropriate collection and disposal of waste generated on the site and to ensure that the use does not interfere with the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood.

 

13.    Noise and vibration from the use and operation of any plant and equipment and/or building services associated with the premises must not give rise to "offensive noise' as defined by The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW).  In this regard the roller door to the car parking entry is to be selected, installed and maintained to ensure its operation does not adversely impact on the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood.

Reason:     To protect the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood.

 

14.    The developer must liaise with the Sydney Water Corporation, Ausgrid, AGL and Telstra concerning the provision of water and sewerage, electricity, natural gas and telephones respectively to the property.

                   Reason:     To ensure that the development is adequately serviced.

 

15.    All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the National Construction Code (Building Code of Australia).

          Reason:     To ensure the work is carried out to an acceptable standard and in accordance with the National Construction Code (Building Code of Australia).

 

16.    No encroachments onto Council’s road or footpath of any service pipes, sewer vents, boundary traps, downpipes, gutters, stairs, doors, gates, garage tilt up panel doors or any structure whatsoever is permitted. Any encroachments on to Council road or footpath resulting from the building works will be required to be removed before occupation of the site.

Reason: To ensure there is no encroachment onto Council’s road.

 

17.    Any adjustment or augmentation of any public utility services including Gas, Water, Sewer, Electricity, Street lighting and Telecommunications required as a result of the development must be at no cost to Council and undertaken before occupation of the site.

Reason: To ensure all costs for the adjustment/augmentation of services arising as a result of the redevelopment are at no cost to Council.

 

 

18.    Owners and occupants of the proposed building shall not be eligible to obtain parking permits under any existing or future resident parking scheme for the area. The person acting on this consent shall advise any purchaser or prospective tenant of this condition. In addition the bylaws of any future residential strata plans created for the property shall reflect this restriction.

Reason: To ensure the development does not reduce the amount of “on street” parking currently available.

 

19.    All stormwater drainage being designed in accordance with the provisions of the Australian Rainfall and Runoff (A.R.R.), Australian Standard AS3500.3-2003 ‘Stormwater Drainage’ and Marrickville Council Stormwater and On Site Detention Code. Pipe and channel drainage systems shall be designed to cater for the twenty (20) year Average Recurrence Interval (A.R.I.) storm in the case of low and medium residential developments, the twenty (20) year A.R.I. storm in the case of high density residential development and commercial and/or industrial developments and the fifty (50) year A.R.I. storm in the case of heavy industry. In all cases the major event surface flow paths shall be designed to cater for the one hundred (100) year A.R.I. storm.

Reason: To provide for adequate site drainage.

20.    Should the proposed development require the provision of an electrical substation, such associated infrastructure shall be incorporated wholly within the development site. Before proceeding with your development further, you are directed to contact Ausgrid directly with regard to the possible provision of such an installation on the property.

          Reason:    To provide for the existing and potential electrical power distribution for this

                            development and for the area.

 

21.    All reasonable directions by the project arborist in relation to tree management and tree protection shall be complied with.

Reason:     Council requires details of the project arborist to facilitate communication if required.

 

22.    Sydney Trains and Transport for NSW are entitled to inspect the site of the approved development and all structures to enable it to consider whether those structures on that site have been or are being constructed and maintained in accordance with these conditions of consent, on giving reasonable notice to the principal contractor for the approved development or the owner or occupier of the part of the site to which access is sought.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

23.    No work is permitted within the rail corridor at any time unless prior approval or an Agreement has been entered into with Sydney Trains.  Where the Applicant proposes to enter the rail corridor, the Principal Certifying Authority shall not issue a Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from Sydney Trains confirming that its approval has been granted.

          Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

24.    No scaffolding is to be used facing the rail corridor unless prior written approval has been obtained from Sydney Trains.  To obtain approval the proponent will be required to submit details of the scaffolding, the means of erecting and securing this scaffolding, the material to be used, and the type of screening to be installed to prevent objects falling onto the rail corridor. Unless agreed to by Sydney Trains in writing, scaffolding shall not be erected without isolation and protection panels.

          Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

 

 

BEFORE COMMENCING DEMOLITION, EXCAVATION AND/OR BUILDING WORK

 

For the purpose of interpreting this consent, a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) means a principal certifying authority appointed under Section 109E(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Pursuant to Section 109E(3) of the Act, the PCA is principally responsible for ensuring that the works are carried out in accordance with the approved plans, conditions of consent and the provisions of the National Construction Code (Building Code of Australia).

 

25.    No work must commence until:

 

a)      A PCA has been appointed.  Where an Accredited Certifier is the appointed, Council shall be notified within 2 days of the appointment; and

b)      A minimum of 2 days written notice given to Council of the intention to commence work.

 

Reason:     To comply with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

26.    A Construction Certificate must be obtained before commencing building work.  Building work means any physical activity involved in the construction of a building.  This definition includes the installation of fire safety measures.

Reason:     To comply with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

27.    Sanitary facilities must be provided at or in the vicinity of the work site in accordance with the WorkCover Authority of NSW, Code of Practice ‘Amenities for Construction’.  Each toilet must be connected to the sewer, septic or portable chemical toilet before work commences.

 

Facilities must be located so that they will not cause a nuisance.

 

Reason:     To ensure that sufficient and appropriate sanitary facilities are provided on the site.

 

28.    All demolition work must:

 

a)      Be carried out in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS 2601 ‘The demolition of structures’ and the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations; and

b)      Where asbestos is to be removed it shall be done in accordance with the requirements of the WorkCover Authority of NSW and disposed of in accordance with requirements of the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water.

 

Reason:     To ensure that the demolition work is carried out safely.

 

29.    Where any loading, unloading or construction is to occur from a public place, Council5 must be contacted to determine if any permits or traffic management plans are required to be obtained from Council before work commences.

Reason:     To protect the amenity of the area.

 

30.    All services in the building being demolished must be disconnected in accordance with the requirements of the responsible authorities before work commences.

Reason:     To ensure that the demolition work is carried out safely.

 

31.    The site must be enclosed with suitable fencing to prohibit unauthorised access. The fencing must be erected as a barrier between the public place and any neighbouring property, before work commences.

Reason:     To secure the area of the site works maintaining public safety.

 

32.    A rigid and durable sign must be erected in a prominent position on the site, before work commences.  The sign must be maintained at all times until all work has been completed.  The sign is to include:

 

a)      The name, address and telephone number of the PCA;

b)      A telephone number on which Principal Contractor (if any) can be contacted outside working hours; and

c)      A statement advising: ‘Unauthorised Entry To The Work Site Is Prohibited’.

 

Reason:     To maintain the safety of the public and to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations.

 

33.    A Soil and Water Management Plan must be prepared in accordance with Landcom Soils and Construction, Volume 1, Managing Urban Stormwater (Particular reference is made to Chapter 9, “Urban Construction Sites”) and submitted to and accepted by the PCA.  A copy of this document must be submitted to and accepted by PCA before work commences.  The plan shall indicate:

 

a)      Where the builder’s materials and waste are to be stored;

b)      Where the sediment fences are to be installed on the site;

c)      What facilities are to be provided to clean the wheels and bodies of all vehicles leaving the site to prevent the tracking of debris and soil onto the public way; and

d)      How access to the site will be provided.

 

All devices must be constructed and maintained on site while work is carried out.

 

Reason:      To prevent soil erosion and sedimentation of the stormwater network.

 

34.    The person acting on this consent is responsible for arranging and meeting the cost of dilapidation reports prepared by a suitably qualified person.  The reports are to include colour photographs and must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction, with a colour copy being provided to Council and the respective property owner(s) of the identified properties, before work commences, on the buildings on the adjoining properties at 64 Constitution Road and 68 Constitution Road, if the consent of the adjoining property owner(s) can be obtained.  In the event that the consent of the adjoining property owner(s) cannot be obtained copies of the letter/s that have been sent via registered mail and any responses received must be forwarded to the PCA before work commences.

Reason:      To catalogue the condition of the adjoining properties for future reference in the event that any damage is caused during work on site.

 

35.    Before commencing works the person acting on this consent must provide a contact number for a designated person to be available during the demolition and construction for residents to contact regarding breaches of consent or problems relating to the construction.

Reason:     To provide a person that residents can contact.

 

36.    Where it is proposed to carry out in public roads or Council controlled lands, a road opening permit must be obtained from Council before the carrying out of any works in public roads or Council controlled lands. Restorations must be in accordance with Council's Restorations Code. Failure to obtain a road opening permit for any such works will incur an additional charge for unauthorised openings in the amount as provided for in Council’s adopted fees and charges.

Reason:     To ensure that all restoration works are in accordance with Council's Code.

 

37.    The person acting on this consent must apply as required for all necessary permits including crane permits, road opening permits, hoarding permits, footpath occupation permits and/or any other approvals under Section 68 (Approvals) of the Local Government Act, 1993 or Section 138 of the Roads Act, 1993.

Reason:     To ensure all necessary approvals have been applied for.

 

38.    A detailed Traffic Management Plan to cater for construction traffic must be submitted to and approved by Council before commencement of works. Details must include proposed truck parking areas, construction zones, crane usage, truck routes etc. All construction traffic complying at all times with the approved Traffic Management Plan. The developer must ensure that all construction workers and contractors are fully aware of the approved Traffic Management Plan.

Reason:     To ensure construction traffic does not unduly interfere with vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or the amenity of the area.

 

39.    The person acting on this consent must provide details of the means to secure the site and to protect the public from the construction works. Where the means of securing the site involves the erection of fencing or a hoarding on Council’s footpath or road reserve the person acting on this consent must submit a hoarding application and pay all relevant fees before commencement of works.

Reason:     To secure the site and to maintain public safety.

40.    Alignment levels for the site at all pedestrian and vehicular access locations must be obtained from Council before the commencement of construction. The alignment levels must match the existing back of footpath levels at the boundary. Failure to comply with this condition will result in vehicular access being denied.

Reason:     In accordance with Council’s powers under the Roads Act, 1993, alignment levels at the property boundary will be required to accord with Council's design or existing road and footpath levels.

 

41.    All street trees adjacent to the site not approved for removal must be protected at all times during demolition and construction, in accordance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order. Details of the method(s) of protection of such trees must be submitted to and be approved by Council before commencing works.

Reason:     To ensure that all street trees are appropriately protected during demolition and construction works.

 

42.    All approved protection measures must be installed prior to commencing any work and must be maintained for the duration of construction.

Reason:     To ensure that all trees are appropriately protected during demolition and construction works.

 

43.    Where scaffoldings or hoardings are to be erected, street trees must be protected during construction works as follows:

 

a)      Tree trunk and major limb protection must be undertaken prior to or during the installation of any hoarding or scaffoldings. The protection must be installed by a qualified Arborist (AQF 2 or 3) and must include:

 

(i)      An adequate clearance, minimum 250mm, must be provided between the structure and tree branches, limbs and trunk at all times;

(ii)     Tree trunk/s and/or major branches, located within 500mm of any hoarding or scaffolding structure, must be protected by wrapped hessian or similar material to limit damage;

(iii)     Timber planks (50mm x 100mm or similar) must be placed around tree trunk/s. The timber planks must be spaced at 100mm intervals, and must be fixed against the trunk with tie wire, or strapping. The hessian and timber planks must not be fixed to the tree in any instance, or in any fashion, and

(iv)    Tree trunk and major branch protection must remain in place for the duration of construction and development works, and must be removed at the completion of the project.

 

b)      All hoarding support columns must be placed a minimum of 300mm from the edge of the existing tree pits. Supporting columns must not be placed on any tree roots that are exposed.

 

c)           Materials or goods, including site sheds, must not be stored or placed:

 

(i)  around or under the tree canopy; or

(ii) within 2 metres of tree trunks or branches of any street trees.

 

d)      Any damage sustained to street tree/s as a result of the erection of hoardings, scaffolding, or due to the loading/unloading of vehicles adjacent the site, must be immediately reported to the Council's Tree Management Officer on (9335 2242, in order to determine the appropriate action for maintaining the health and structural integrity of any damaged street tree.

 

Reason:     To ensure that all street trees are appropriately protected during demolition and construction works.

44.     a)      The consent from Council must be obtained prior to the undertaking of any street           tree pruning works. Only minor pruning works will be approved by Council.

 

b)      Any pruning that is required to accommodate hoardings, scaffolding, or to accommodate the loading/unloading of vehicles, and has been approved by Council, must be carried out by a qualified Arborist (AQF3), and must be in accordance with AS4373 Australian Standards 'Pruning of Amenity Trees'.

 

c)      The removal of any street tree approved by Council must include complete stump removal and the temporary reinstatement of levels so that no trip or fall hazards exist until suitable replanting occurs. Those works must be completed immediately following the trees removal.

 

Reason:     To ensure that all street trees are appropriately protected during demolition and construction works.

 

45.    If a new street number or a change to the street number (this includes unit and shop numbers) is required, a separate application must be made to and approved by Council prior to that street number being displayed.

Reason:     To ensure that the building is easily identifiable.

 

46.    Prior to commencement of any excavation, demolition or construction work, all workers on the work site are to be made aware of the potential presence of Long-nosed Bandicoots as part of the site induction (including what they look like).

          Note: To the untrained eye, a Long-nosed Bandicoot may be mistaken for a rodent.

Reason:     To avoid direct physical harm to Long-nosed Bandicoot, it is important that workers are aware of the potential for their presence and conservation significance

 

47.    The person acting on this consent shall submit a dilapidation report including colour photos showing the existing condition of the footpath and roadway adjacent to the site before commencement of works.

Reason:     To ensure the existing condition of Council's infrastructure is clearly documented.

 

48.    Prior to the commencement of works, on the completion of works, or at any time during the works period deemed necessary by Sydney Trains or Transport for NSW, a joint inspection of the rail infrastructure and property in the vicinity of the project is to be carried out by representatives from the requesting Agency and the Applicant. These dilapidation surveys will establish the extent of any existing damage and enable any deterioration during construction to be observed.  The submission of a detailed dilapidation report will be required unless otherwise notified by Sydney Trains.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

49.    Prior to the undertaking of works or the issuing of a Construction Certificate (whichever occurs first), the Applicant must hold current public liability insurance cover for a sum to be determined by Sydney Trains.  This insurance shall not contain any exclusion in relation to works on or near the rail corridor, rail infrastructure.  The Applicant is to contact Sydney Trains Rail Corridor Management Group to obtain the level of insurance required for this particular proposal.  Prior to issuing the Construction Certificate the Principal Certifying Authority must witness written proof of this insurance in conjunction with Sydney Trains written advice to the Applicant on the level of insurance required.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

50.    Prior to the undertaking of works or the issuing of a Construction Certificate (whichever occurs first), the Applicant is to contact Sydney Trains Rail Corridor Management Group to determine the need for the lodgement of a Bond or Bank Guarantee for the duration of the entire works.  The Bond/Bank Guarantee shall be for the sum determined by Sydney Trains.  Prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate the Principal Certifying Authority must witness written advice from Sydney Trains confirming the lodgement of this Bond/Bank Guarantee.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

51.    Before commencing works, a project arborist with a minimum AQF level 5 qualification in arboriculture and who does not remove or prune trees in the Inner West local government area shall be engaged to provide an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) report with respect to the methods for retention and tree protection measures of the Araucaria heterophylla (Norfolk Island pine) in the neighbouring property at 68 Constitution Road. The AIA report shall comply with the requirements outlined in Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011, Section 2.20, Appendix 1. 

          Reason:     To provide protection for the neighbouring tree and its root zone and ensure its ongoing viability is not compromised.

 

52.    The contact details of the project arborist shall be advised to council before work commences and maintained up to date for the duration of works.  If a new project arborist is appointed details of the new project arborist shall be notified to council within 7 days.

Reason:     Council requires details of the project arborist to facilitate communication if required.

 

53.    The tree protection measures identified in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) report shall be established before work commences.

Reason:     To ensure that the stability and ongoing viability of the neighbouring tree being retained is not compromised.

 

54.    The project arborist shall inspect tree protection measures and certify in writing to the Principal Certifying Authority the measures comply with those detailed in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) report before work commences.

Reason:     The project arborist shall provide guidance and oversight of tree protection and management to ensure that the stability and ongoing viability of trees being retained are not compromised.

 

 

BEFORE THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

For the purpose of interpreting this consent the Certifying Authority (Council or an Accredited Certifier) is that person appointed to issue a Construction Certificate.

 

55.    The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent to determine whether the development will affect any Sydney Water wastewater and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easement, and if any requirements need to be met. Plans will be appropriately stamped.

Please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au for:

·        Quick Check agents details - see Plumbing, building and developing then Quick Check agents and

·        Guidelines for Building Over/Adjacent to Sydney Water Assets – see Plumbing, building and developing then Plan submissions

or telephone 13 20 92.

The stamped plans must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure compliance with Sydney Water requirements.

 

56.    A statement from a qualified Architect, verifying that the plans and specifications achieve or improve the design quality of the development for which development consent was granted, having regard to the design principles set out in Schedule 1 of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason:     To comply with the requirements under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development.

 

57.    Details of an anti-graffiti treatment to the front, rear and north-west side elevation(s) of the development must be submitted to and approved by Council before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure the proposed development remains free of graffiti.

 

58.    a)           Landscaping for the whole site (including rooftop gardens) must consist of only local native plants to consist of a grassy understorey with dense shrub layer and associated canopy that utilises a diverse and representative range of species from the Sydney Turpentine-Ironbark Forest (STIF).

a)      Final landscape plans must be reviewed and approved by Council’s Acting Team Leader Biodiversity before the issue of a Construction Certificate .

Note:          Further advice and information on relevant species can be found in the GreenWay Revegetation Plan 2011 (attached) and Council’s DCP 2.18 – Landscaping and open spaces p11).

          Reason:     To ensure that provision of foraging opportunities and habitat for the endangered Long-nosed Bandicoot population has been considered

 

59.    Bicycle storage with the capacity to accommodate a minimum of 15 bicycles must be provided in accordance with the requirements set out within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Parking, in accordance with details to be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason:     To ensure sufficient bicycle storage facilities are provided on the site.

 

60.    Details regarding all hard paved areas within the development must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.  In this regard the materials used should be chosen to break up the extent of hard paving and enhance the appearance of the development.

Reason:     To ensure all hard paved areas within the development are sympathetic to and enhance the appearance of the development.

 

61.    A detailed plan showing the height, colour and material of all fencing within the development in accordance with Part 2.11 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 – Fencing must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason:     To ensure all fencing is in keeping with the character of the area and maintains adequate privacy.

 

62.    Letterboxes and mail collection facilities must be provided and adequately protected in accordance with details to be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure adequate mail collection facilities are provided.

 

63.    Adequate outdoor clothes drying areas must be provided for the development in accordance with details to be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure adequate outdoor clothes drying facilities are provided.

 

64.    Lighting details of the pedestrian areas, parking areas and all entrances must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure appropriate lighting is provided to create a safe living environment.

 

65.    Plans fully reflecting the selected commitments listed in BASIX Certificate submitted with the application for development consent must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Note:                 The application for the Construction Certificate must be accompanied by either the BASIX Certificate upon which development consent was granted or a revised BASIX Certificate (Refer to Clause 6A of Schedule 1 to the Regulation).

 

Reason: To ensure that the BASIX commitments are incorporated into the development.

66.    Noise attenuation measures must be incorporated into the development complying with State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 and with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Development Assessment Guideline titled “Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads - Interim Guidelines” in relation to interior design sound levels and in accordance with details being submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate together with certification by a suitably qualified acoustical engineer that the proposed noise attenuation measures satisfy the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 and with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Development Assessment Guideline titled “Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads - Interim Guidelines”.

          Reason:     To reduce noise levels within the development from rail noise

 

67.    Section 94 Contribution

 

          a)      This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

b)      Before the issue of a Construction Certificate or issue of a Subdivision Certificate, whichever comes first, the Council must be paid a monetary contribution of $222,931.28 indexed in accordance with Marrickville Section 94/94A Contributions Plan 2014 (“CP”).

 

The above contribution is the contribution applicable as at 04 September 2016.

 

*NB   Contribution rates under Marrickville Section 94/94A Contributions Plan 2014 are indexed quarterly (for the method of indexation refer to Section 2.15 of the Plan).

 

The indexation of the contribution rates occurs in the first week of the months of February, May, August and November each year, following the release of data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

 

          (CONTRIBUTION PAYMENT REFERENCE NO. DC001578)

 

b)      The contribution payable has been calculated in accordance with the CP and relates to the following public amenities and/or services and in the following amounts:

 

Community Facilities $24,813.64

Plan Administration $4,371.19

  Recreation Facilities $190,704.33

Traffic Facilities $3,042.12

 

d)      A copy of the CP can be inspected at Council’s offices at 2-14 Fisher Street, Petersham or online at http://www.marrickville.nsw.gov.au.

 

e)      The contribution must be paid either in cash, by unendorsed bank cheque (from an Australian Bank only), via EFTPOS (Debit only) or credit card*.

 

*NB          A 1% credit card transaction fee applies to all credit card transactions.

 

Reason:     To ensure provision is made for the increase in demand for public amenities and services required as a consequence of the development being carried out.

 

68.    Evidence of payment of the building and construction industry Long Service Leave Scheme, must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction before the issue of a Construction Certificate. (The required payment can be made at the Council Offices).

 

NB:   The required payment is based on the estimated cost of building and construction works and the long service levy rate, set by the Long Service Payments Corporation. The rate set by the Long Service Payments Corporation is currently of 0.35% of the cost of the building and construction work.

 

          For more information on how to calculate the amount payable and where payments can be made contact the Long Services Payments Corporation.

          http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/levy_information/?levy_information/levy_calculator.stm

 

Reason:     To ensure that the required levy is paid in accordance with the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act.

 

69.    Before the issue of a Construction Certificate an amended plan must be submitted to the Certifying Authority’s satisfaction indicating the following:

a)      A minimum of 2 car parking spaces must be provided for people with a disability that are directly accessible to the entrance to the building.  The car parking must be designed to comply with AS 1428.1 - 2009 ‘Design for access and mobility - General requirements for access - buildings’ and AS 2890.1 1 ‘Off-street car parking’.

Reason:     To ensure that the premises provide equitable access to all persons.

 

70.    Before the issue of a Construction Certificate the owner or builder must sign a written undertaking that they are responsible for the full cost of repairs to footpath, kerb and gutter, or other Council property damaged as a result of construction of the proposed development. Council may utilise part or all of any Building Security Deposit (B.S.D.) or recover in any court of competent jurisdiction, any costs to Council for such repairs.

Reason:     To ensure that all damages arising from the building works are repaired at no cost to Council.

 

71.    The person acting on this consent shall provide to Council a bond in the amount of $18,892.40 and pay the related Section 138 (Roads Act) inspection fee of $206.00 (GST inclusive) before the issue of a Construction Certificate to ensure the proper completion of the footpath and/or vehicular crossing works required as a result of this development.

Reason:     To provide security for the proper completion of the footpath and/or vehicular crossing works.

 

72.    Before the issue of a Construction Certificate the owner or builder shall sign a written undertaking that they shall be responsible for the full cost of repairs to footpath, kerb and gutter, or other Council property damaged as a result of construction of the proposed development. Council may utilise part or all of any Building Security Deposit (B.S.D.) or recover in any court of competent jurisdiction, any costs to Council for such repairs.

Reason:     To ensure that all damages arising from the building works are repaired at no cost to Council.

 

73.    All plumbing and ductwork including stormwater downpipes must be concealed within the outer walls of the building so they are not visible. Plans and elevations detailing the method of concealment must be submitted to and approved by Council before the issue of a Construction Certificate. Any variation to this requirement requires Council approval.

Reason:     To ensure the aesthetics of the building and architecture are maintained.

74.     In order to provide satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access, drainage, landscaping and aesthetic improvements to the public domain adjacent to the site, the following works shall be undertaken at no cost to Council:

i.        The public domain along all frontages of the site inclusive of footpath paving, kerb, street trees, landscaping, street furniture, etc. shall be reconstructed and upgraded in accordance with the Street Tree Masterplan, the Draft Marrickville Public Domain Code and Draft Technical Manual or Council’s standard plans and specification in place at the time the works are undertaken;

ii.       The construction of heavy duty vehicular crossings to all vehicular access locations and removal of all redundant vehicular crossings to the site;

iii.      New kerb and gutter along the frontage of the site. The kerb type (concrete or stone) shall be consistent with the majority of kerb type at this location. Council may be able to assist with the supply of stone if required. Please contact Council’s Infrastructure Services Division on 9335 2000; and

iv.      Alignment levels to be provided at the boundary at a minimum distance of every 5m and at all pedestrian and vehicular access locations.

·  Full detailed construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to Council for approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 before the issue of a Construction Certificate with all works completed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

Reason:     To provide for essential improvement works to the public domain consistent with Council’s desired future character for the area

 

75.    The Stormwater Drainage Plans 15328 Sheets 1 to 5 (Issue 1 dated 26/2/16) submitted by CK Engineering Services shall be amended and/or additional information provided before the issue of a Construction Certificate as follows;

a)    Details and procedures for the maintenance of the stormwater treatment system (WSUD maintenance plan) including access arrangements, maintenance schedule and recording procedure;

b)    The plans shall be amended to suit the new architectural plans and vehicular access arrangement including flood protection measures; and

c)    Construction details for the proposed new kerb inlet pit and Council stormwater pipe to be installed in Constitution Road. Details shall include a long section of the pipe detailing all utility services, bedding and road restoration detail.

Reason:     To provide for satisfactory site stormwater drainage and to ensure that the quality of stormwater discharged off site is improved.

 

76.    As identified in the Flood Impact Assessment for 2-24 Grove Street, Dulwich Hill by WMA Water dated 25/10/13 the site is affected by adjacent overland flows during a 1 in 100 year storm event. The top water level of overland flows adjacent to the site has been determined to be of RL 22.25m AHD. The following flood protection measures shall be undertaken as follows:

a)      The underground carpark must be protected to a minimum height of RL 22.55m AHD providing a minimum 300m freeboard. All penetrations into the underground carpark including stairs, elevators, shutters and louvers shall be set at or above RL 22.55m AHD; and

b)      The ground floor dwellings must be protected to a height of RL 22.55m AHD providing a minimum 300mm freeboard.

 

Amended plans complying with the above requirements shall be submitted to and approved by Council before the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason:     To protect the site and occupants from stormwater overland flows during a 1 in 100 year storm event.

 

 

77.    Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the person acting on this consent is shall prepare and provide to Sydney Trains for approval/certification the following items:

 

(i)   Final Geotechnical and Structural report/drawings that meet Sydney Trains requirements.  The Geotechnical Report must be based on actual borehole testing conducting on the site closest to the rail corridor. 

(ii)  Final Construction methodology with construction details pertaining to structural support during excavation. 

(iii) Final cross sectional drawings showing ground surface, rail tracks, sub soil profile, proposed basement excavation and structural design of sub ground support adjacent to the Rail Corridor.  All measurements are to be verified by a Registered Surveyor.

(iv) Detailed Survey Plan showing the relationship of the proposed developed with respect to Sydney Trains land and infrastructure.

(v)  If required by Sydney Trains, an FE analysis which assesses the different stages of loading-unloading of the site and its effect on the rock mass surrounding the rail corridor.

(vi) Final drainage details based on the final approved development.

 

Any conditions issued as part of Sydney Trains approval/certification of the above documents will also form part of the consent conditions that the Applicant is required to comply with. 

 

          Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

78.    Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the person acting on this consent is to engage an Electrolysis Expert to prepare a report on the Electrolysis Risk to the development from stray currents.  The Applicant must incorporate in the development all the measures recommended in the report to control that risk.  A copy of the report is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

79.    The design, installation and use of lights, signs and reflective materials, whether permanent or temporary, which are (or from which reflected light might be) visible from the rail corridor must limit glare and reflectivity to the satisfaction of the light rail operator.  The Principal Certifying Authority is not to issue the Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from Sydney Trains confirming that this condition has been satisfied.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

80.    Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Risk Assessment, Rail Safety Management Plan, and detailed Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) for the proposed works are to be submitted to Sydney Trains for review and comment on the impacts on rail.  The Principal Certifying Authority shall not issue the Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from Sydney Trains confirming that this condition has been satisfied.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

81.    Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the person acting on this consent is to submit to Sydney Trains a plan showing all craneage and other aerial operations for the development and must comply with all Sydney Trains requirements.  The Principal Certifying Authority shall not issue the Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from Sydney Trains confirming that this condition has been satisfied.

Reason: To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

 

82.    Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the person acting on this consent is to submit to Sydney Trains the demolition, excavation and construction methodology and staging for review and endorsement.  The Principle Certifying Authority is not to issue the Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from Sydney Trains confirming that this condition has been satisfied.

Reason:To clarify the terms of Sydney Trains Concurrence

 

 

SITE WORKS

 

83.    All excavation, demolition, construction and deliveries to the site necessary for the carrying out of development must be restric