10 March 2021

An Electronic meeting of the Cumberland Local Planning Panel will be held via Zoom at 11.30am Wednesday, 10 March 2021.

Business as below:

Yours faithfully

Hamish McNulty

General Manager

ORDER OF BUSINESS

1.      Receipt of Apologies

2.      Confirmation of Minutes

3.      Declarations of Interest

4.      Address by invited speakers

5.      Reports:

          -        Development Applications

          -        Planning Proposals

6.      Closed Session Reports

 

 10 March 2021

CONTENTS

Report No.  Name of Report                                                                                         Page No.

Development Applications

LPP003/21... Development Application for 40-42 Ettalong Road, Greystanes.................. 5

LPP004/21... Development Application for 67 Pegler Avenue, South Granville............ 307

LPP005/21... Modification Application for 25-28 Joyce Street, Pendle Hill.................... 495

LPP006/21... Modification Application for 277-289 Woodpark Road, Smithfield........... 625

LPP007/21... Development Application for 9-15 Raphael Street and Laneway 429, Lidcombe       909

 

 10 March 2021

 

 10 March 2021

 

Item No: LPP003/21

Development Application for 40-42 Ettalong Road, Greystanes

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    DA2020/0292  

 

 

1.      Development Application No. DA2020/0292 was received on 21 May 2020 for the Demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey childcare centre with 76 places over basement car parking for 20 vehicles.

2.      The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 27 May 2020 and 10 June 2020. In response, 26 unique submissions and 1 petition including 55 signatures were received.

3.      Amended plans were received on 27 November 2020 to provide retracting awnings to the first floor outdoor play area. The information was publicly renotified to occupants, owners of the adjoining properties and objectors for a period of 14 days between 13 January 2021 and 27 January 2021. In response, 30 unique submissions and 1 petition including 55 signatures were received.

4.      Development Application No. DA2015/245/1 was previously refused by the Council for the subject site on 4 December 2015 for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 2 storey 44 place childcare centre accommodating 15 car parking spaces.

5.      The development as proposed by the applicant involves the following non-compliances:

 

6.      The application is referred to the Cumberland Local Planning Panel as the proposal is considered to be contentious development.

7.      The application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions as provided in the attached schedule.

i)                

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is Lot 3 in DP 221089, known as 40-42 Ettalong Road, Greystanes. The site has an area of 1,138m2 with a primary street frontage to Ettalong Road of 33.04m and a secondary street frontage to Hickory Street of 28.955m excluding the splay corner. It has a fall of approximately 2.63m from the front south-western splay corner to the rear north-eastern corner of the site. The existing improvements on site include a 1-2 storey dwelling house with detached outbuildings at the rear of the site. Vehicular access to the site is currently provided from Ettalong Road.

The site inspection confirmed no trees have been identified within Council’s nature strip for the entire street frontages. The existing developments adjoining the site consist of single and two storey residential dwellings and the subject allotment is zoned R2 – Low Density Residential under the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013.

 

Figure 1 – Locality Plan of subject site from MapInfo

Figure 2 – Aerial view of subject site from Nearmap

Figure 3 – Street view of subject site from Ettalong Road frontage

Description of the Proposed Development

Council has received a development application for demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey centre-based childcare centre for 76 children over basement car parking accommodating 20 parking spaces. Specific details as provided within the Statement of Environmental Effects are provided below:

Basement Level:

·        A total of 20 car parking spaces (inclusive of one accessible space); 

·        Stairs and lift access to upper levels; and

·        Garbage bin storage room.

Ground Floor Level:

·        Pedestrian access ramp and stairs located forward of the building line off Hickory Street frontage;

·        Entry foyer, meeting room, office/reception area to the middle of the building facing Hickory Street frontage;

·        Stairs and lift access to the basement car park and first floor;

·        Ambulant bathroom;

·        Playroom 1 (0-2-year-old) for 16 children with the indoor play area of 52.9m2 and associated cot room, nappy change area and store room;

·        Playroom 2 (2-3 year old) for 20 children with the indoor play area of 65.8m2 and associated store room and children bathroom;

·        An outdoor play area attached to the northern side of the building facing Ettalong Road frontage of 351.3m2;

·        Dual vehicular access and new crossover at Hickory Street frontage to access the basement car park;

·        Outdoor storage area of 12.8m3 in size;

·        1.8m - 2.2m high acoustic barrier around the outdoor play area;

First Floor Level:

·        Kitchen / Food preparation area;

·        Staff room;

·        Stairs and lift access to lower levels;

·        Ambulant bathroom;

·        Laundry area;

·        Playroom 3 (3-5 year old) for 20 children with the indoor play area of 65.1m2 and associated storage cupboard and children bathroom to share with Playroom 4;

·        Playroom 4 (3-5 year old) for 20 children with the indoor play area of 65.5m2 and associated store room;

·        An outdoor play area attached to the northern side of the building facing Ettalong Road frontage of 183.6m2;

·        1.6m - 2.4m high acoustic barrier around the outdoor play area;

·        Outdoor storage area of 10.04m3 in size;

·        Alternative stairs to access the ground floor play area;

Others

·        The proposed centre will operate from 7.00am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday excluding public holidays and will employ 13 staff;

·        A 900mm high feature wall located at the splay corner within the subject site;

·        One (1) business identification sign is proposed attached to the wall of the childcare centre facing Hickory Street with the dimensions of 2200mm x 600mm;

·        One (1) business identification sign is proposed attached to the feature wall at the splay corner within the subject site facing the junction of Ettalong Road and Hickory Street with the dimensions of 2400mm x 600mm.

History

A pre-lodgement meeting with Council was held 9 September 2014 (PDA/331) for construction of a part 1 part 2 storey centre-based childcare centre for 45 children with 16 car parking spaces with associated signage. The meeting minutes concluded that the subject site is considered unsuitable for the establishment of a childcare centre due to the location of a service station within 300m distance of the subject site.

Development application (DA2015/245/1) was refused by Council under staff delegation on 4 December 2015 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a 2 storey childcare centre for 44 children with 15 car parking spaces.

The primary reasons for refusal comprised:

·        Stormwater issues in relation to the provision of OSD;

·        Traffic issues including access to the site, car parking and pedestrian access;

·        Deficient landscaping provisions;

·        Inadequate Acoustic Report;

·        Inadequate information in relation to cut and fill.

Planner’s Comment:

Although the subject site is located within 280m of a service station, It is considered that the location of the service station on the opposite side of Ettalong Road on the corner of Ettalong and Old Prospect Road with a buffer of over 15 residential allotments, is sufficiently removed from the childcare centre to pose any appreciable environmental, health or safety risk to the proposed childcare centre.”

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Think Planners Pty Ltd dated 2 April 2020 and was received by Council on 21 May 2020 in support of the application.

Contact with Relevant Parties

The assessing officer has undertaken a site inspection of the subject site and surrounding properties and has been in regular contact with the applicant throughout the assessment process.

In view of the foregoing analysis it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set out, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public interest.

Internal Referrals

Development Engineer

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory with regards to stormwater disposal and traffic and car parking and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Children Service

The development application was referred to Council’s Children Services for comment who raised concerns in relation to insufficient outdoor play area on the upper level to service the number of children on the first floor level. The review of the proposal confirmed that the overall outdoor play area within the premises complies with the Educational SEPP 2017 and Child Care Planning Guideline. As such, a condition in the consent will be imposed so that the plan of management shall be amended so that the outdoor play area on the first floor level will have a maximum of 20 children at any one time as recommended in the Acoustic Report.

Environment Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environment and Health Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory in relation to the acoustic impacts and site contamination and the development application can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Waste Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Waste Management Officer for comment who has advised that the bin transfer path exceeds a slope of 1:8 and that an alternate bin transfer path or a bin tug should be proposed. In this regard, a condition of consent has been recommended requiring the provision of a bin tug storage area.

Tree Management Officer

The development application was referred to Council’s Tree Management Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

External Referrals

Department of Education

The development application was referred to the Department of Education for comment and concurrence in accordance with Clause 22(b) of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 and Regulation 108 of the Education and care Services National Regulations.  Concurrence was received on 17 December 2020 supporting the proposed simulated outdoor play area subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Endeavour Energy

The development application was referred to Endeavour Energy for comment who raised no objection to the development proposal subject to recommended conditions of consent.

PLANNING COMMENTS

State Environmental Planning Policies

The proposed development is affected by the following State Environmental Planning Policies:

(a)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development. The matters listed within Clause 7 have been considered in the assessment of the development application.

 

(b)     Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64)

The proposed signage is considered to be defined as a ‘business identification sign’ and is subject to the provisions of Part 2 of SEPP 64. Two (2) business identification signs are proposed to be erected on the site, facing Hickory Street frontage, on the building façades and the corner of Hickory Street and Ettalong Road.

The signs are integrated well into the R2 low density residential area when viewed from both streets and are compatible with the existing and desired character of the locality. As such, the signs are acceptable and are supported by Council.

A comprehensive assessment of the development proposal against the SEPP 64 has been considered and discussed at Appendix D to this report respectively.

(c)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP)

The relevant provisions of the ISEPP 2007 has been considered in the assessment of the development application as listed below: -

Clause 45 - Development likely to affect an electricity transmission or distribution network

The subject development is located within 5 metres of an overhead electricity power line. The application was referred to Endeavour Energy for comment who confirmed on 10 June 2020 that Endeavour Energy raised no objection to the development proposal subject to the imposition of conditions of the consent. 

(d)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 (Educational SEPP)

Integral to Education SEPP 2017 is the Child Care Planning Guideline (CCPG), which sets benchmarks for the appearance and acceptable impacts of the centre-based childcare facility within the existing locality.

The provisions and design quality principles of the Educational SEPP 2017 and CCPG have been considered in the assessment of the application. A comprehensive assessment of the development proposal against the Education SEPP 2017 and CCPG requirements has been considered at Appendix B and Appendix C to this report respectively.

 

 

(e)     Statement Environmental Planning Policy No 19 - Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19)

Not applicable. The proposal will not result in disturbance of any bushland.

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

Complies. The proposal is seeking consent to remove six (6) trees from the site to accommodate the basement car park on site to service the proposed new childcare centre. An Arboricultural Impact Assessment prepare by Redgum Horticultural dated 13 February 2020 (ref. 5671) was submitted as supporting document for the proposed tree removal. It is confirmed by Council’s Landscape Officer that the proposed tree removal is acceptable subject to the imposition of conditions in the consent.

(g)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

Not applicable. The subject site is not identified as a coastal wetland and/or land identified as “proximity area for coastal wetlands” and/or land identified as such by the Coastal Vulnerability Area Map.

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

Not applicable. The proposed development does not trigger the requirement of a BASIX Certificate.

Regional Environmental Plans

The proposed development is affected by the following Regional Environmental Plan:

(a)     Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The subject site is identified as being located within the area affected by the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. The proposed development raises no issues as no impact on the catchment is envisaged.

(Note: - the subject site is not identified in the relevant map as ‘land within the ‘Foreshores and Waterways Area’ or ‘Wetland Protection zone’, is not a ‘Strategic Foreshore Site’ and does not contain any heritage items. Hence the majority of this plan is not directly relevant to the proposed development).

Local Environmental Plans

(a)     Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 (Holroyd LEP)

The provisions of the Holroyd LEP 2013 are applicable to the development proposal. Development for the purpose of a centre-based childcare centre is permissible with consent in the R2 Low Density Residential zone.

centre-based childcare facility means—

(a)     a building or place used for the education and care of children that provides any one or more of the following—

(i)   long day care,

(ii)  (ii)   occasional childcare,

(iii) out-of-school-hours care (including vacation care),

(iv) preschool care, or

ii)         

(b)     an approved family day care venue (within the meaning of the Children (Education and Care Services) National Law (NSW)),

Note:

An approved family day care venue is a place, other than a residence, where an approved family day care service (within the meaning of the Children (Education and Care Services) National Law (NSW)) is provided.

but does not include—

(c)     a building or place used for home-based childcare or school-based childcare, or

(d)     an office of a family day care service (within the meanings of the Children (Education and Care Services) National Law (NSW)), or

(e)     a babysitting, playgroup or child-minding service that is organised informally by the parents of the children concerned, or

(f)      a child-minding service that is provided in connection with a recreational or commercial facility (such as a gymnasium) to care for children while the children’s parents are using the facility, or

(g)     a service that is concerned primarily with providing lessons or coaching in, or providing for participation in, a cultural, recreational, religious or sporting activity, or providing private tutoring, or

(h)     a child-minding service that is provided by or in a health services facility, but only if the service is established, registered or licensed as part of the institution operating in the facility.

Accordingly, development for the purpose of a centre-based childcare centre is permissible with consent in the R2 Low Density Residential zone.

It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Holroyd LEP 2013 and the objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zone. A comprehensive Holroyd LEP 2013 assessment is contained in Appendix E.

 

A summary of the major development standards is listed below:

 

The provisions of any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(ii))

(a)     Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment)

The draft SEPP relates to the protection and management of our natural environment with the aim of simplifying the planning rules for several water catchments, waterways, urban bushland, and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property. The changes proposed include consolidating the following seven existing SEPPs:

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

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

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

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

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

·        Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

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

The draft policy will repeal the above existing SEPPs and certain provisions will be transferred directly to the new SEPP, amended and transferred, or repealed due to overlaps with other areas of the NSW planning system.

Changes are also proposed to the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan. Some provisions of the existing policies will be transferred to new Section 117 Local Planning Directions where appropriate.

(b)     Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP) has been prepared by Cumberland Council to provide a single planning framework for the future planning of Cumberland City. The changes proposed seek to harmonise and repeal the three existing LEPs currently applicable to the Cumberland local government area, those being:

·        Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013,

·        Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, and

·        Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

The current planning controls for the subject site, as contained within the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013, are not proposed to change under the Draft CLEP.

The provisions of any Development Control Plans (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iii))

The Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 (Holroyd DCP) provides guidance for the design and operation of development to achieve the aims and objectives of the Holroyd LEP 2013.

Accordingly, Part A General Controls, Part B Residential Controls, Part F Advertising and Signage Controls and Part I Child Care Centre Controls are applicable to the proposed centre-based childcare centre located within the R2 Low Density Residential zone.

The proposal complies with all the relevant controls and requirements listed in the Holroyd DCP 2013 with the exception to the number of car parking, number of children, proximity to LG gas sites and the subject site fronting to an unsuitable collector and local road.

A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Appendix F.

The following table highlights non-compliances with the Holroyd DCP 2013, and the variations sought are considered satisfactory on merit in this instance:

 

Figure 6 – Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 Compliance Table

 

 

The provisions of any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4 (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(a)(iiia))

There is no draft planning agreement associated with the subject Development Application.

The provisions of the Regulations (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 (EP&A Reg).

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(b))

It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts in the locality.

The suitability of the site for the development (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(c))

The subject site and locality are not known to be affected by any natural hazards or other site constraints likely to have a significant adverse impact on the proposed development. Accordingly, it is considered that the development is suitable in the context of the site and surrounding locality.

Submissions made in accordance with the Act or Regulation (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(d))

In accordance with Council’s Notification requirements contained within Part E Public Participation of the Holroyd DCP 2013, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 27 May 2020 and 10 June 2020. During the course of the initial public notification, a total of 35 submissions were received including 1 petition with 55 signatures. 27 unique submissions were identified among the 35 submissions. 

The development application was further renotified for another 14 days between 13 January 2021 and 27 January 2021 to the public as amendments were made to the roof design on the first floor outdoor play area. Regarding the renotification, Council received a total of 11 submission letters containing 9 unique submissions.

It is noted that some objections have resubmitted their submissions several times and reviewing all submissions between both public notification periods confirmed a total of 31 unique submissions comprising 30 individuals and 1 petition with 55 signatures among the total 46 submissions.

The issues raised in the public submissions are summarised and commented on as follows:

The public interest (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(e))

The public interest is served by permitting the orderly and economic use of land, in a manner that is sensitive to the surrounding environment and has regard to the reasonable amenity expectations of surrounding land users. In view of the foregoing analysis, it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set out in the recommendation below, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public interest.

Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020

The development would require the payment of contributions in accordance with Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020.

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.12 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, calculated on the cost of works. A total contribution of $28,859.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts

The NSW Government introduced The Local Government and Planning Legislation Amendment (Political Donations) Act 2008 (NSW). This disclosure requirement is for all members of the public relating to political donations and gifts. The law introduces disclosure requirements for individuals or entities with a relevant financial interest as part of the lodgement of various types of development proposals and requests to initiate environmental planning instruments or development control plans.

The application and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political Donations or Gifts.

The development application has been assessed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage, State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017, Education and Care Services National Regulations, Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 and the Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 and is considered to be satisfactory for approval subject to conditions.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the R2 Low Density Residential zone under the relevant provisions of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013. The proposal is generally consistent with all statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the development. Minor non-compliances with Council’s controls have been discussed in the body of this report. The development is considered to perform adequately in terms of its relationship to its surrounding built and natural environment, particularly having regard to impacts on adjoining properties.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory having regard to the matters of consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the development may be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Landscape Plans  

4.      Stormwater Engineering Plans  

5.      Plan of Management  

6.      Redacted Submissions  

7.      Appendix A - Concurrence from Dept of Education  

8.      Appendix B - State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments & Child Care Facilities) 2017  

9.      Appendix C – Child Care Planning Guideline 2017 Compliance Table  

10.    Appendix D – Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage  

11.    Attachment E – Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013  

12.    Attachment F – Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013  

13.    Appendix G – Notice of Determination of DA20152451 and relevant copy of plans   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 10 March 2021

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 3

Landscape Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 4

Stormwater Engineering Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 5

Plan of Management

 10 March 2021

Attachment 6

Redacted Submissions

 10 March 2021

Attachment 7

Appendix A - Concurrence from Dept of Education

 10 March 2021

Attachment 8

Appendix B - State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments & Child Care Facilities) 2017

 10 March 2021

Attachment 9

Appendix C – Child Care Planning Guideline 2017 Compliance Table

 10 March 2021

Attachment 10

Appendix D – Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising And Signage

 10 March 2021

Attachment 11

Attachment E – Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013

 10 March 2021

Attachment 12

Attachment F – Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013

 10 March 2021

Attachment 13

Appendix G – Notice of Determination of DA20152451 and relevant copy of plans

 10 March 2021

 10 March 2021

Item No: LPP004/21

Development Application for 67 Pegler Avenue, South Granville

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    DA2020/0423  

 

 

1.      Development Application No. DA2020/0423 was received on 21 July 2020 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey boarding house comprising 24 boarding rooms and a manager's room over basement car parking.

2.      The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 21 days between 13 August 2020 and 3 September 2020. In response, Council received total of 35 submissions, including 1 petition with 100 signatures, in which 19 of these submissions are unique submissions.

3.      There are non-compliances with the proposed development having considered the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARH SEPP) and Parramatta Development Control Plan (PDCP) 2011, which are car parking rate and site isolation. The numerical variation is as follows:

 

Note: the development proposes 13 car parking spaces within the basement. Due to the issues with manoeuvring, 2 of the proposed car spaces will be required to be deleted.

4.      The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal is considered to be contentious development due to the number of submissions received.

5.      The application is recommended for deferred commencement approval subject to the conditions as provided in the draft notice of determination in Attachment 1.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The site forms Lot 18 DP 36280 and is known as 67 Pegler Avenue, South Granville, NSW 2142. The site has a total area of 758.1m2 and a frontage to Pegler Avenue of 14.63m. The site has a gradual fall to the rear and is located within the R4 High Density Residential.

Current improvements on the site comprise single storey clad and tile roof dwellings and associated outbuildings. There is also an existing vehicular crossing off Pegler Avenue, a tree within the front property setback of 67 Pegler Avenue and a street tree along the site’s frontage. 

Existing developments adjoining and surrounding the site include a mix of low to medium density residential development, with the area being in the process of transitioning to higher density land uses. The properties to the north of the site are located within the R4 High Density Residential zone and the properties to the south of 71 Pegler Avenue are located within the R3 Medium Density Residential zone. Despite the zoning of these lands, most of the properties along Pegler Avenue remain as single dwelling houses. The properties to the south known as 69 and 71 Pegler Avenue were approved under DA2019/171 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a 3 storey residential flat buildings pursuant to ARH SEPP 2009 by the Sydney Central City Planning Panel on 11 December 2019. Construction certificate for this development has been issued and the construction works have commenced on the site. Neighbourhood shops within the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone and local park are located approximately 200m walking distance towards the north on Dellwood Street and Blaxcell Street.  

Figure 1 – Locality Plan of subject site

Figure 2 – Aerial view of subject site

Figure 3 – Street view of subject site

Description of the Proposed Development

Council is in receipt of a development application on 21 July 2020 seeking approval for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey boarding house comprising 24 boarding rooms and a manager's room over basement car parking. The detailed breakdown of the proposal is shown below:

Demolition:

·    Single storey dwelling; and

·    Outbuildings at the rear.

Construction:

·    Basement:

o 13 car spaces (including 1 manager‘s and 2 disabled spaces);

o 6 bicycle spaces;

o 5 motorcycle spaces; and

o Circulation (lift and stairs).

·    Ground Floor:

o 4 single rooms (including 2 adaptable) with private open space;

o 1 manager’s room with private open space;

o Lobby;

o Waste storage area;

o Circulation;

o Communal room;

o Communal open space; and

o Drying area.

·    Level 1:

o 6 double rooms;

o 4 single rooms; and

o Circulation.

 

·    Level 2:

o 7 double rooms;

o 3 single rooms; and

o Circulation.

The total boarding rooms are 24 (11 single and 13 double) and 1 manager’s room, with the maximum number of lodgers proposed is 38.

Stormwater works are also proposed across Lot 43 in DP 36280, 70 Gordon Avenue, South Granville. The stormwater works proposed on this site comprise a 1.5 metre wide drainage easement traversing part of the property’s western rear boundary and the site’s northern side boundary.

History

DA2020/0025 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey boarding house comprising 24 boarding room and a manager's room over basement car parking was withdrawn by applicant on 6 May 2020.

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Rod Logan Planning dated 9 December 2019 and was received by Council on 21 July 2020 in support of the application.

Contact with Relevant Parties

The assessing officer has undertaken a site inspection of the subject site and surrounding properties and has been in regular contact with the applicant throughout the assessment process.

Internal Referrals

Development Engineer

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory in terms of car parking and stormwater management and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent. Due to the issues with manoeuvring, 2 of the proposed car spaces will be required to be deleted and condition is to be imposed accordingly.

Environment and Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environment and Health Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory in regard to the preliminary site investigation and acoustic impact assessment carried out on site and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Tree Management Officer

The development application was referred to Council’s Tree Management Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory in terms of the arboricultural impact assessment on site to retain and remove existing trees and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent. In this regard, the Landscape Plan needs to be amended to remove all trees, with the exception of Trees 10 and 11, and to incorporate the new and replacement trees within the nature strip and front setback of the property.

Waste Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Waste Management Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory in regard to the provision of waste management room and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

External Referrals

NSW Police

The development application was referred to NSW Police for comment on 7 August 2020. As of the time of writing this report no comments have been provided. Standard conditions addressing CPTED principles have been imposed accordingly.

PLANNING COMMENTS

The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instruments (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(i))

(a)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development. The matters listed within Clause 7 have been considered in the assessment of the development application.

 

(b)     Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65)

SEPP 65 does not apply to boarding house; however, the Parramatta DCP 2011 building envelope controls for residential flat buildings refers to the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) provisions, which is being used as a guide for the proposed development.

(c)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP)

The provisions of the ISEPP 2007 do not apply to the development application as the proposal does not result in a traffic generating development and the site is not located within 5m of an overhead electricity power line and within the proximity of a railway corridor or a busy/classified road.

(d)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARH SEPP)

The proposal is subject to the provisions of Part 2 (New affordable rental housing) Division 3 (Boarding houses) of the ARH SEPP.

Following is a discussion of the relevant Clauses, a detailed assessment is provided at Appendix A.

29(1)(c)(i) Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent

1) A consent authority must not refuse consent to development to which this Division applies on the grounds of density or scale if the density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio are not more than—

(c) if the development is on land within a zone in which residential flat buildings are permitted and the land 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—the existing maximum floor space ratio for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land, plus—

(i) 0.5:1, if the existing maximum floor space ratio is 2.5:1 or less,

A maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.8:1 is applicable to the subject site, pursuant to the provisions of PLEP 2011. This equates to a maximum gross floor area (GFA) of 606.48m². As the existing maximum FSR is less than 2.5:1, the FSR bonus of 0.5:1 is applicable to the development. This equates to a maximum permissible FSR of 1.3:1, or 985.53m². The development proposes a total GFA of 799m², which equates to a total FSR of 1.053:1. The proposal is compliant with the maximum FSR, subject to the ARH SEPP bonus.

It should be noted that the proposal fully complies with the key planning controls contained within the ARH SEPP including building height, landscaped area, solar access, private open space, accommodation size and prescribed standards for boarding houses.

29(2)(e)(iia)&(iii) Parking

(iia) in the case of development not carried out by or on behalf of a social housing provider—at least 0.5 parking spaces are provided for each boarding room, and

(iii)in the case of any development—not more than 1 parking space is provided for each person employed in connection with the development and who is resident on site.

The proposal is not carried out by or on behalf of a social housing provider. Therefore, 12 car spaces are required for the proposed 24 boarding rooms plus 1 manager’s car space. The proposal indicates that a total of 13 car spaces are to be provided within the basement level. However, during the assessment of the application, 2 of these car spaces could not be supported due to manoeuvring issues identified and will be recommended to be deleted. The maximum number of compliant car parking with the relevant Australian Standards requirements that could feasibly be accommodated on the site is 11 spaces.

Notwithstanding the above, there is a car parking requirement contained within the Parramatta Development Control Plan at Table 3.6.2.3 for boarding houses which is: -

·    1 space per 10 boarding rooms; plus

·    1 space per resident manager/caretaker (where applicable).

In this regard, the maximum number of car spaces to be provided on the site is 4 car parking spaces for 24 boarding rooms and 1 resident manager’s accommodation. This would result in a surplus of 7 car spaces in this instance. If the State Policy were to be applied, a shortfall of 2 spaces would be observed.

This development satisfies the minimum development control plan standard for car parking and as such, there is no scope to require additional parking to meet Clause 29(2)(e).

By virtue of Section 4.15(3A)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act reproduced below, Council may not require more onerous parking in this instance.

(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

In this situation, the applicant has complied with the development control plan regarding car parking. It is considered appropriate to support the development given that the applicant has complied with the car parking provision of the Parramatta Development Control Plan.

Furthermore, it is noted that the site is within an accessible area and is situated close to the neighbourhood centre/shops and local park that are located approximately 200m walking distance towards the north on Dellwood Street and Blaxcell Street, which have a range of retail, commercial and transport services.

30A 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 SEPP (ARH) does not contain any guidance for assessing whether a proposal is compatible with the character of the local area. However, a planning principle for assessing compatibility in the urban environment was established by Senior Commissioner Roseth of the Land and Environment Court in the judgement for Project Venture Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191. This involves asking the following two questions:

·        Are the proposal’s physical impacts on surrounding development acceptable? The physical impacts include constraints on the development potential of surrounding sites.

·        Is the proposal’s appearance in harmony with the buildings around it and the character of the street?

·        A merit assessment of the character of the local area should consider the following 3 steps:

·        Step 1 – Identify the ‘local area’.

·        Step 2 – Determine the character of the ‘local area’.

·        Step 3 – Determine whether the design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the ‘local area’.

An assessment against each step is provided below:

Step 1 – Identify the local area.

This assessment identifies the local area as primarily the visual catchment of the site as viewed from within the site and directly adjacent to the site on the street which is defined by the yellow outline in Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Local area catchment

Step 2 – Determine the character (present and future) of the local area.

The zoning of the broader locality and immediate area comprises R4 High Density Residential, R3 Medium Density Residential, R2 Low Density Residential, B1 Neighbourhood Centre and RE1 Public Recreation under the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011).

Present character of the area

The character of the local area comprises the visual catchment of predominantly regular shaped allotments viewed from and surrounding the subject site, which includes:

1.      Existing low to medium density built forms, including dwellings, multi-dwelling development and dual occupancy development opposite on the western side of Pegler Avenue, to the east of the site along Gordon Avenue and to the south of the site along Oakleigh Avenue.

2.      Low rise residential flat building under construction at 69-71 Pegler Avenue.

3.      A childcare centre located to the south of the site on the western side of Pegler Avenue at 76 Pegler Avenue, South Granville, also within the R4 land use zone. This development includes an attic component. There is also an approved childcare centre development under construction at 331 Blaxcell Street, South Granville, to the west of the site.

4.      Terrace style multi-dwelling Strata development to the west of the site at 335-339 Blaxcell Street, South Granville.

5.      Neighbourhood shops including a post office, newsagency, pharmacy and medical centre, dental surgery and bottle shop at the corner of Dellwood Street and Blaxcell Street, which corresponds with the B1 land use zone.

Future character of the area

Given the proximity of the subject site to the neighbourhood shops to the north-west and the R4 land use zoning of the site and surrounding land to the north and west, it is considered that the height, bulk and scale of the proposed development is not out of character with the intended future character of the area. The proposed scale and design of the development is considered to be consistent with the desired future character of the locality, having regard to the R4 High Density Residential land use zoning. 

The R3 Medium Density Residential land immediately to the east and south of the site presents a transition from the higher density built forms envisaged to the north and west; in proximity to the neighbourhood shops, through to the R2 Low Density Residential land further south along Oakleigh Avenue and on the eastern side of Blaxcell Street. 

Step 3 - Determine if the development is compatible with the character of the local area.

In accordance with the Land and Environment Court’s ‘Planning Principle’ and case law compatibility is best defined as ‘capable of existing together in harmony’. In order to test compatibility two questions are to be considered. These questions, as well as a response to each, are provided below:

·        Are the proposal’s physical impacts on surrounding development acceptable? The physical impacts include constraints on the development potential of surrounding sites.

The building height, FSR, building setbacks, deep soil and landscaping of the proposed development are designed to maintain the harmony within the streetscape, whilst contributing to the site context and constraints. The proposal being a permissible land use, meets the FSR requirement (in accordance with ARH SEPP) and contributes to the provision of affordable housing within close proximity of public transport and the neighbourhood centre. Appropriate setbacks and privacy treatments are provided to minimise any adverse impacts to the adjoining properties.

·        Is the proposal’s appearance in harmony with the buildings around it and the character of the street?

To be compatible, a development should contain or at least respond to the key aesthetic elements that make up the character of the surrounding area. The size of the basement maximises landscaping and deep soil zones on site. The front setback proposed is consistent with the existing streetscape, a condition is to be imposed for the planting of mature tree, and the replacement of the street tree at the site’s Pegler Avenue frontage to ensure the continuity of the established street tree pattern lining Pegler Avenue. The proposal is considered to maintain an appropriate residential character which is consistent with the streetscape.

In conclusion, the proposal will maintain the harmony within the general streetscape, and suitably fits in the local character of the locality.

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

The proposal does not exceed the biodiversity offsets scheme threshold. Therefore, the proposed vegetation removal is considered acceptable. Please refer to the DCP compliance table for further discussion.

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

BASIX Certificate 1051839M_02 dated issued on 17 July 2020 prepared by Building & Energy Consultant Australia has been submitted with Council and is considered to be satisfactory.

Regional Environmental Plans

The proposed development is affected by the following Regional Environmental Plans:

(a)     Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The subject site is identified as being located within the area affected by the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. The proposed development raises no issues as no impact on the catchment is envisaged.

(Note: - the subject site is not identified in the relevant map as ‘land within the ‘Foreshores and Waterways Area’ or ‘Wetland Protection zone’, is not a ‘Strategic Foreshore Site’ and does not contain any heritage items. Hence the majority of the SREP is not directly relevant to the proposed development).

Local Environmental Plans

Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (PLEP) 2011

The provision of the Parramatta LEP 2011 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Parramatta LEP 2011 and the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential zone.

(a)     Permissibility: -

The proposed development is defined as a ‘boarding houses’ and is permissible in the R4 High Density Residential zone with consent.

boarding house means a building that—

(a)     is wholly or partly let in lodgings, and

(b)     provides lodgers with a principal place of residence for 3 months or more, and

(c)     may have shared facilities, such as a communal living room, bathroom, kitchen or laundry, and

(d)     has rooms, some or all of which may have private kitchen and bathroom facilities, that accommodate one or more lodgers, but does not include backpackers’ accommodation, a group home, hotel or motel accommodation, seniors housing or a serviced apartment. The relevant matters to be considered under Parramatta LEP 2011 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below.

A comprehensive LEP assessment is contained in Appendix B.

Figure 11 – Parramatta LEP 2011 Compliance Table

The provisions of any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(ii))

(a)     Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment)

The draft SEPP relates to the protection and management of our natural environment with the aim of simplifying the planning rules for a number of water catchments, waterways, urban bushland, and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property. The changes proposed include consolidating the following seven existing SEPPs:

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

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

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

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

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

·        Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

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

The draft policy will repeal the above existing SEPPs and certain provisions will be transferred directly to the new SEPP, amended and transferred, or repealed due to overlaps with other areas of the NSW planning system.

Changes are also proposed to the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan. Some provisions of the existing policies will be transferred to new Section 117 Local Planning Directions where appropriate.

(b)     Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP) has been prepared by Cumberland Council to provide a single planning framework for the future planning of Cumberland City. The changes proposed seek to harmonise and repeal the three existing LEPs currently applicable to the Cumberland local government area, those being:

·    Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013,

·    Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, and

·    Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

The current planning controls for the subject site, as contained within the Parramatta LEP 2011 are not proposed to change under the Draft CLEP.

The provisions of any Development Control Plans (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iii))

The Parramatta DCP 2011 provides guidance for the design and operation of development to achieve the aims and objectives of the PLEP 2011. A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Appendix C.

The following compliance table highlights non-compliances with the DCP controls, which relate primarily to site frontage, side setbacks and building separation, deep soil, and landscaping. These controls however relate to the preliminary building envelope designed for residential flat buildings and not specifically for boarding houses. The development controls under Table 3.1.3.7 of Parramatta DCP 2011 should be used as a guide, given that the assessment against the character of the local area carried out under the ARH SEPP section has considered the built form compatibility and that the site constraint due to the inability of the applicant to purchase the site to the north has been assessed under the site isolation principles below. The variations sought are considered satisfactory on merit, in this instance, as discussed in the following table.

 

 

Figure 12 –Parramatta DCP 2011 Compliance Table

 

Irrespective of these departures, for the reasons discussed above, it is considered that the proposal performs adequately from an environmental planning viewpoint and may be supported.

The provisions of any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4 (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(a)(iiia))

There is no draft planning agreement associated with the subject Development Application.

The provisions of the Regulations (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 (EP&A Reg).

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(b))

It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts in the locality.

The suitability of the site for the development (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(c))

The subject site and locality are not known to be affected by any natural hazards or other site constraints likely to have a significant adverse impact on the proposed development. Accordingly, it is considered that the development is suitable in the context of the site and surrounding locality.

Submissions made in accordance with the Act or Regulation (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(d))

In accordance with Council’s Notification requirements contained within the Parramatta DCP 2011, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 21 days between 13 August 2020 and 3 September 2020. The notification generated 35 submissions, including 1 petition with 100 signatures, in which 19 of these submissions are unique submissions in respect of the proposal and with none disclosing a political donation or gift. The issues raised in the public submissions are summarised and commented on as follows:

Figure 13 – Submissions summary table

 

The public interest (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(e))

In view of the foregoing analysis it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set out in the recommendation below, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public interest.

Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020

The development would require the payment of contributions in accordance with Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020.

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act, calculated on the cost of works. A total contribution of $127,723.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. Condition will be imposed accordingly.

Disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts

The applicant and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts.

The development application has been assessed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, SEPP 55, ARH SEPP, BASIX SEPP, SREP 2005, Draft Cumberland LEP, PLEP 2011 and PDCP 2011.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposal from a merit perspective, Council may be satisfied that the development has been responsibly designed and provides for acceptable levels of amenity for future residents. It is considered that the proposal successfully minimises adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties. Hence the development, irrespective of the departures from the ARH SEPP and PDCP 2011, is consistent with the intentions of Council’s planning controls and represents a form of development contemplated by the relevant statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the land.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory having regard to the matters of consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the development may be approved subject to deferred commencement approval.

 

Report Recommendation: 1.      That Development Application No. DA2020/0423 for Demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey boarding house comprising 24 boarding rooms and a manager's room over basement car parking on land at 67 Pegler Avenue SOUTH GRANVILLE  NSW  2142 be approved as deferred commencement consent subject to attached listed in Attachment 1. 2.      Persons whom have lodged a submission in respect to the application be notified of the determination of the application.

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Landscape Plans  

4.      Stormwater Plans  

5.      Plan of Management  

6.      Redacted Submissions  

7.      Appendix A - ARH SEPP Compliance Table  

8.      Appendix B - Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 Compliance Table  

9.      Appendix C - Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011 Compliance Table   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 10 March 2021

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 3

Landscape Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 4

Stormwater Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 5

Plan of Management

 10 March 2021

Attachment 6

Redacted Submissions

 10 March 2021

Attachment 7

Appendix A - ARH SEPP Compliance Table

 10 March 2021

Attachment 8

Appendix B - Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 Compliance Table

 10 March 2021

Attachment 9

Appendix C - Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011 Compliance Table

 10 March 2021

 10 March 2021

Item No: LPP005/21

Modification Application for 25-28 Joyce Street, Pendle Hill

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    MOD2020/0296  

 

 

Summary:

1.       Development application DA2015/21/1 was determined by way of deferred commencement approval by Council on 4 January 2016 for demolition of existing structures, consolidation of 2 lots into 1 lot, construction of a 4 storey shop top housing development over 2 levels of basement car parking accommodation 18 residential units, 2 commercial tenancies and 31 carparking spaces.

2.       Council issued a deferred commencement letter on 19 March 2019 stating the consent was operative and expires on 19 March 2023.

 

3.       Modification application MOD2020/0263 was approved by Council on 11 September 2020 for amendment to the wording of condition no. 38 to allow for submission of a site validation report in lieu of a site audit statement.

4.       Modification Application MOD2020/0296 was received on the 7 September 2020 being a Section 4.55(2) modification to reconfigure the internal layout of apartments, alter floor levels, increase height of building to facilitate lift overrun and associated rooftop facilities, introduce rooftop communal open space and facade and built form amendments.

5.       The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 21 days between 23 September 2020 and 14 October 2020. In response, two submissions were received.

6.       The variations are as follows:

 

 

Note: Only new non-compliances have been discussed within the body of the report which are proposed under the subject modification application.

7.       The application is being reported to the Cumberland Local Planning Panel (CLPP) for determination as it is a development that contravenes a development standard by more than 10% and exceeds Council’s delegation in relation to the determination of a modification.

8.       The application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions in the draft notice of determination at Attachment 1.

Report:

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is known as 25-28 Joyce Street, Pendle Hill and is legally described as Lot 41 In DP668657 and Lot 42 in DP657067. The site has an area of approx. 935.9m2 and has a frontage to Joyce Street of 31.16m, a western boundary of 29.5m, an eastern boundary of 32.18m and a rear boundary of 31.89m.

A construction certificate was issued on 16 November 2020 by a Private Certifier and as a result, demolition of the site is complete. Construction work has commenced on the project and works are progressing.

The subject site is zoned B2 - Local Centre and, to the rear (southern elevation), the sites are zoned R4 – High Density Residential. The site to the east at 29 to 33 Joyce Street comprises a recently completed four storey mixed use retail / apartment building which includes a basement car park for 63 vehicles.

Directly adjoining the site to the west is a single storey dwelling used as a surgery centre and further to the west is the Pendle Hill commercial area. There are older 3 storey apartment buildings and newer 4 storey apartment buildings situated on various allotments to the rear. A railway line is situated to the north of Joyce Street and the Pendle Hill Railway Station is close by.

The location of the site is shown below:

Figure 1 – Locality Plan of subject site indicated by purple outline.

Source: Cumberland City Council Intramaps

Figure 2 – Aerial view of subject site as of 27 December 2020 outlined in purple Source: Cumberland City Council Intramaps

 

 

Description of the Proposed Development

Council has received a modification application to reconfigure the internal layout of apartments, alter floor levels, increase height of building to facilitate lift overrun and associated rooftop facilities, introduce rooftop communal open space and facade and built form amendments.

The proposed changes include the following:

 

There are no changes to the apartment mix or the number of apartments. In this regard, the number of apartments remain at eighteen (18) comprising of 15x 2 bedroom apartments and 3 x 1 bedroom apartments, including 3x adaptable apartments.

There are no changes proposed to any building setback as a result of the above modifications.

Parking layout

The proposed modifications to the parking layout are outlined in the table below. The proposed modifications result in the reduction of 1 commercial parking space and the addition of 1 residential visitor space. The overall number of parking spaces therefore remains the same at 31 spaces for all commercial, residential visitor and residential unit owner spaces and 12 bicycle spaces.

 

 

History

 

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Urbanaplan dated 20 August 2020 and was received by Council on 7 September 2020 in support of the application.

Contact with Relevant Parties

The assessing officer has undertaken a site inspection of the subject site and surrounding properties and has been in regular contact with the applicant throughout the assessment process.

Internal Referrals

Development Engineer

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who advised on 28 January 2021 that the modification development proposal is satisfactory and therefore can be supported subject to conditions and amendments in yellow to Basement 2 architectural plan.

External Referrals

Sydney Trains

The modification development application was referred to Sydney Trains under clause 85 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. Sydney Trains responded on 13 January 2021 advising that the modification is satisfactory subject to one condition for certification to be provided from a qualified Geotechnical and Structural Engineer stating that the proposed works are to have no negative impact on the rail corridor and associated rail infrastructure.

PLANNING COMMENTS

Section 4.55(2):

The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instruments (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(i))

State Environmental Planning Policies

The proposed development is affected by the following State Environmental Planning Policies:

(a)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development. The matters listed within Clause 7 have been considered in the assessment of the original development application and no changes to the conclusions made are identified.

(b)     Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65)

SEPP 65 applies to the development as the building is 3 storeys or more and contains more than 4 dwellings. A design statement addressing the design quality principles prescribed by SEPP 65 was prepared by the project architect and submitted with the modification application. Integral to SEPP 65 is the Apartment Design Guide (ADG), which sets benchmarks for the appearance, acceptable impacts and residential amenity of the development.

Following a detailed assessment of the proposal against the provisions of SEPP 65 and the ADG, the proposal is generally considered compliant and therefore performs satisfactorily with respect to building amenity.

It is noted the original development application being DA2015/21/1 was lodged with Council on 23 January 2015 and as such was assessed against the previous Residential Flat Design Code; however, following a detailed assessment of the proposal against the provisions of SEPP 65 and the ADG, it is considered the proposal is generally compliant, with the exception of maximum habitable room depth, bedroom minimum dimensions and minimum balcony depth.

 

A comprehensive assessment against SEPP 65 and the ADG is contained in Attachment 5 and the above variations are all considered acceptable based on merit. It is noted that the original application was assessed based on the superseded residential flat design code.

(c)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP)

The provisions of the ISEPP 2007 have been considered in the assessment of the original development application and the modification was referred to Sydney Trains in accordance with clause 85 of the ISEPP as the subject site is in or adjacent to a railway corridor.

Sydney Trains provided Council a response on 13 January 2021 raising no objections subject to one condition for certification to be provided from a qualified Geotechnical and Structural Engineer stating that the proposed works are to have no negative impact on the rail corridor and associated rail infrastructure.

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

No additional trees or vegetation is proposed to be removed as part of the subject modification application.

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

A revised BASIX Certificate was submitted as part of the modification application being Basix Certificate number 595716M_03, dated 26 August 2020 and is generally consistent with the architectural plans.

 

Regional Environmental Plans

The proposed development is affected by the following Regional Environmental Plans:

(a)     Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The subject site is identified as being located within the area affected by the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. The proposed modification development raises no issues as no impact on the catchment is envisaged.

(Note: - the subject site is not identified in the relevant map as ‘land within the ‘Foreshores and Waterways Area’ or ‘Wetland Protection zone’, is not a ‘Strategic Foreshore Site’ and does not contain any heritage items. Hence the majority of the SREP is not directly relevant to the proposed development).

Local Environmental Plans

Holroyd Local Environmental Plan (HLEP) 2013

The provision of the HLEP 2013 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development generally complies with the key statutory requirements of the HLEP 2013 and the objectives of the B2 – Local Centre zone.

(a)     Permissibility: -

The proposed development is defined as ‘Shop Top Housing’ and is permissible in the B2 – Local Centre zone with consent.

Shop top housing is defined as, ‘one or more dwellings located above ground floor retail premises or business premises’.

The relevant matters to be considered under HLEP 2013 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive LEP assessment is contained in Attachment 3.

Figure 3 – Holroyd LEP 2013 Compliance Table

 

(b)     Variation to Height of Buildings Development Standard

Height variation sought

In accordance with the height of buildings development standard within the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan, a maximum building height of 17m applies to the subject site. The original development application proposed a maximum height of 16.4m.

The proposal seeks to contravene the development standard by a maximum of 2.1m to propose a maximum height of 19.1m which represents a variation of 12.35%. The breach of the maximum building height development standard is limited to the proposed lift overrun, two air lock rooms and the proposed communal open space rooftop area, all of which are located towards the centre of the building and Joyce Street frontage.

Figure 4 – Northern elevation along Joyce Street frontage showing extent of height variation sought. Source: Designcorp.

Whilst a clause 4.6 variation is not required for a s4.55 modification application, the applicant provided a clause 4.6 variation request which provided justification stating:

-        The proposal is consistent with the desired future character of the area.

-        The rooftop communal open space will provide residents with an exceptional standard of amenity.

-        The built form that exceeds the height limit will not adversely impact upon the bulk and massing of the building as proposed to be located towards the centre of the building footprint to avoid any additional overshadowing to neighbouring properties and minimise their presence when viewed from the surrounding streetscapes.

-        The site is situated on a site within the Pendle Hill precinct and the development is for shop-top housing that will provide retail facilities at the ground floor level. The land is zoned B2 Local Centre and provides for higher density development close to Pendle Hill train station.

 

Conclusion:

The proposed modifications that contravene the height development standard will allow for greater amenity to future occupants of the residential units through the introduction of rooftop communal open space and have been designed to have minimal adverse amenity impacts to the adjoining properties via overshadowing or overlooking and minimal impact upon the streetscape. The design of the building ensures that the habitable floor space is contained below the maximum building height line and the building remains four storeys.

It is the view of Council Officers that having considered the application on its merit, the variation to the maximum building height development standard is considered acceptable in this instance.

The provisions of any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(ii))

(a)     Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment)

The draft SEPP relates to the protection and management of our natural environment with the aim of simplifying the planning rules for a number of water catchments, waterways, urban bushland, and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property. The changes proposed include consolidating the following seven existing SEPPs:

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

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

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

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

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

·        Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

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

The draft policy will repeal the above existing SEPPs and certain provisions will be transferred directly to the new SEPP, amended and transferred, or repealed due to overlaps with other areas of the NSW planning system.

Changes are also proposed to the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan. Some provisions of the existing policies will be transferred to new Section 117 Local Planning Directions where appropriate.

(b)     Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP) has been prepared by Cumberland Council to provide a single planning framework for the future planning of Cumberland City. The changes proposed seek to harmonise and repeal the three existing LEPs currently applicable to the Cumberland local government area, those being:

·    Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013,

·    Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, and

·    Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

The current planning controls for the subject site, as contained within the HLEP, are not proposed to change under the Draft CLEP.

The provisions of any Development Control Plans (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iii))

The Holroyd DCP 2013 provides guidance for the design and operation of development to achieve the aims and objectives of the HLEP 2013.

The proposed modifications do not raise any new non compliances with Holroyd Development control Plan 2013 from the original development application being DA2015/21/1 and is considered satisfactory in this regard.

A comprehensive DCP assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 4.

The provisions of any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4 (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(a)(iiia))

There is no draft planning agreement associated with the subject Development Application.

The provisions of the Regulations (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 (EP&A Reg).

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(b))

It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts in the locality.

The suitability of the site for the development (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(c))

The subject site and locality is not known to be affected by any natural hazards or other site constraints likely to have a significant adverse impact on the proposed development. Accordingly, it is considered that the development is suitable in the context of the site and surrounding locality.

Submissions made in accordance with the Act or Regulation (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(d))

 

In accordance with Council’s Notification requirements contained within the Holroyd DCP 2013, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 21 days between 23 September 2020 to 14 October 2020. It is noted that no submissions were received for the original development application. There were two submissions received in respect of the proposed development which are outlined below.

Submissions summary table

The public interest (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(e))

In view of the foregoing analysis it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set out in the recommendation below, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public interest.

Section 7.11 (Formerly S94) Contribution Towards Provision or Improvement of Amenities or Services

This part of the Act relates to the collection of monetary contributions from applicants for use in developing key local infrastructure.

Comments:

Contribution fees were determined in accordance with the previous Holroyd Contribution Plan during the assessment of the original development application being, DA2015/21/1 and the modification development application does not require any modifications to the payment of contributions.

Disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts

 

The applicant and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts.

Conclusion:

The modification application has been assessed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65), State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, Holroyd LEP 2013 and Holroyd DCP 2013 and is considered to be satisfactory for approval subject to conditions.

The development as modified is appropriately located within the B2 – Local Centre Zone under the relevant provisions of the Holroyd LEP 2013; however, a variation in relation to the Height of Buildings development standard under the Holroyd LEP 2013 is sought.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposal from a merit perspective, Council may be satisfied that the development has been responsibly designed and provides for acceptable levels of amenity for future residents.

It is considered that the proposal successfully minimises adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties. Hence the development, irrespective of the departure noted above, is consistent with the intentions of Council’s planning controls and represents a form of development contemplated by the relevant statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the land.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory having regard to the matters of consideration under Section 4.15 and 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the modified development may be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

Attachments

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural and Landscape Plans  

3.      Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 Assessment  

4.      Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 Assessment  

5.      Apartment Design Guide Compliance Table  

6.      Clause 4.6 Statement  

7.      Redacted Submissions Recieved  

8.      Original Application - DA2015/21/1 - Stamped Architectural Plans   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 10 March 2021

Attachment 2

Architectural and Landscape Plans

 10 March 2021

Attachment 3

Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 Assessment

 10 March 2021

Attachment 4

Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 Assessment

 10 March 2021

Attachment 5

Apartment Design Guide Compliance Table

 10 March 2021

Attachment 6

Clause 4.6 Statement

 10 March 2021

Attachment 7

Redacted Submissions Recieved

 10 March 2021

Attachment 8

Original Application - DA2015/21/1 - Stamped Architectural Plans

 10 March 2021

 10 March 2021

 

Item No: LPP006/21

Modification Application for 277-289 Woodpark Road, Smithfield

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    MOD2020/0147  

 

 

1.      Development application DA2018/321/1 was approved by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel on 5 November 2019 for the extension of hours of operation of an existing manufacturing & warehouse use to carry out internal manufacturing 24 hours a day Monday to Friday and 7.00am to 3.00pm Saturday, and truck & external forklift movements 7.00am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday and construction of an acoustic wall.

2.      Modification application MOD2020/0147 was received on the 21 May 2020 which seeks to extend the operating hours on Saturdays for manufacturing operations; external truck and forklift movements between the two buildings and elsewhere on-site; alter the site layout to improve functionality and vehicle movement; and reduction of on-site parking.

3.      The modification application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 27 May 2020 and 10 June 2020. In response, 5 submissions were received. In addition, Council received 7 additional unique submissions throughout the assessment period for a total of 12 unique submissions.

4.      The modification application is being reported to the Cumberland Local Planning Panel (CLPP) for determination due to number of submissions received and due to seeking to modify conditions of development consent DA2018/321/1 which were imposed by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel in the determination of DA2018/321/1.

5.      The variations are as follows:

 

Control	Required	Proposed	Variation
Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 – Part D, Section 4, Control C3	The Council, under normal circumstances, restricts the hours of industrial operations to the hours of: Monday to Friday: 7.00am to 7.00pm. Saturday: 7.00am to 12:00pm Sunday: No work permitted.	24 hour operation Monday – Friday; & 12am to 10pm Saturdays; No work on Sundays and public holidays   Refer to condition 66 of draft modification consent for all proposed operation hours.	12 hours each day Monday to Friday   Saturday: 17 hours

6.      The application is recommended for conditional approval subject to the conditions as provided in the attached schedule.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The site forms Lot 1 of DP1024505 and is known as 277-289 Woodpark Road Smithfield. The site has an area of 3.934ha and has a frontage to Woodpark Road Smithfield of approximately 201.17m. The site is located on the northern boundary of the Smithfield Industrial precinct with industrial uses located to the south, east and west and R2 – Low Density Residential zoned land to the north (rear of site). The current use of the premises was approved by Council on the 12 August 1999 under DA 2000/43.

The site is currently used by two separate businesses with the site being owned by ALS Limited and leased by a separate business being Jalco. The subject modification application relates to the areas of the site utilised by Jalco only. The site is occupied by two large warehouses. The smaller warehouse located on the western portion is used entirely by Jalco and comprises offices fronting Woodpark Road, Smithfield, and is used for production purposes by Jalco including the manufacturing of powder and liquid products. The finished products are then transported by forklifts and stored within the adjacent larger warehouse building to the east until distribution occurs.

The front portion (fronting Woodpark Road, Smithfield) of the larger eastern warehouse building is separately used by the Australian Laboratory Services (ALS) (approved under DA 2000/309). Access to the ALS portion of the site is via separate vehicular crossover and carpark fronting Woodpark Road.

DA2018/321/1 stated that for the subject business, Jalco, approximately 250 staff are employed at the subject site which is broken down to approximately 110 staff during day hours, 80 during afternoon and 60 staff overnight.

Figure 1 – Aerial view of subject site 277-289 Woodpark Road, Smithfield outlined in purple.

Figure 2 – Locality map of 277-289 Woodpark Road, Smithfield outlined in purple.

The subject premises and adjoining residential zoned sites are subject to a ‘buffer area between industrial and residential zones’ under section 6.9 of Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 along the northern boundary of the subject site situated between the residential zoned land and industrial zoned land. The acoustic wall constructed in accordance with DA2018/321/1 is located within the buffer area between industrial and residential zones”.

No change to the acoustic wall is proposed as part of the current modification application. The buffer area is highlighted green on Figure 3 on the following page and the constructed acoustic wall is shown on Figures 4 and 5 below.

Figure 3 – Industrial-Residential buffer area highlighted green and subject site 277-289 Woodpark Road Smithfield outlined in purple.

Figure 4 – Aerial view of the approved acoustic wall as part of DA2018/321/1

Figure 5 – The constructed acoustic wall and associated tree plantings for screening approved as part of DA2018/321/1

 

Figure 6 – Existing tree plantings for screening between industrial and residential zoned land located between the rear boundary of residential properties and the acoustic wall.

History of the Site

1.      Development application DA: 2000/43 was approved by the former Holroyd City Council on 12 August 1999 for ‘Minor alterations and use of the existing industrial premises for the warehousing of household laundry, cleansing and personal care products’. The development application included a condition (Condition No.31) which states that the hours of operation are restricted to 6:00am to 6:30pm Monday to Friday, 7:00am to 4:00pm Saturday and no work Sunday. In this regard, all truck movements are to occur within the approved hours’.

2.      The premise is subject to an Environmental Protection Licence (licence no. 2746) issued by the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).

3.      Development Application DA 2000/263 was approved by the former Holroyd City Council on the 4 February 2000 for rationalisation & consolidation of associated activities relating to the manufacture and warehousing of household detergents and cleaning products on adjoining sites. In addition, alterations and additions on the respective sites to facilitate the rationalisation, including an extension in manufacturing activities to include liquid products.

4.      Condition No. 86 of development consent DA 2000/263 restricted the hours of operation as under:

Manufacturing Hours

Monday to Friday: 24 hours

Saturday: 7:00am to 3:00pm

Sunday and Public Holidays: No Work

Transport (Truck and external fork-lift movements)

Monday to Friday: 7:00am to 7:00pm

Saturday: No Work

Sunday and Public Holidays: No Work

The above condition further stated that following the end of a 12 month trial period, the applicant may lodge a fresh application seeking approval to continue the extended hours. If not, or if the fresh application is refused, the use will revert back to Council’s standard hours of operation being 7:00am to 6:00pm Monday to Friday, 7:00am to 12 Noon on Saturdays and no work on Sundays and Public Holidays.

The applicant failed to lodge a fresh application to continue the extended hours of operation and continued to operate under the extended trial period hours. Council’s compliance section took regulatory action against the operator of the premises and, as a result, DA2018/321/1 was lodged with Council.

5.      Development Application DA2018/321/1 was approved by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel on the 5 November 2019 for, ‘Extension of hours of operation of existing manufacturing & warehouse use to carry out manufacturing 24 hours a day Monday to Friday and 7.00am to 3.00pm Saturday, and truck & external forklift movements 7.00am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday and construction of an acoustic wall’.

6.      In accordance with Environment Planning and Assessment Act 1979 – Section 10.17 – COVID-19 pandemic – Ministerial Orders and State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008, Division 4 – Special Provisions- COVID19, the premises is identified as a retail supply chain premises (warehouse or distribution centre) for the purpose of supplying goods directly or indirectly to retail premises and this currently permits the subject premises to operate outside the hours of operation of DA2018/321/1 regarding truck movements, permitting 24 hour a day, 7 days a week truck movements. This is set for repeal on the 25 March 2021.

7.      A pre lodgement meeting was lodged with Council and feedback notes were issued to the applicant on the 1 May 2020. The pre lodgement meeting discussed the works proposed as part of the subject modification application.

Description of the Proposed Development

Council has received a modification application to extend the hours of operation, modify vehicle movements and various external operation changes which are listed below. 

The modification application MOD2020/0147 seeks the following external physical modifications as follows: -

-        Car parking space layout changes across the site including a reduction in car parking spaces from 189 car spaces to 176 car spaces.

-        Modification to the vehicular crossing kerb of the central and western driveways to improve truck manoeuvring.

-        Change in traffic direction for both warehouses including to propose entry for western production warehouse to be via central driveway and exit via western driveway. This maintains forward in and forward out on site and traffic is to move in one direction on site.

-        Introduction of a wash bay area towards the north west corner of the site. This does not propose any physical works.

-        Install a pallet transit storage area located towards the northern rear boundary approximately between the two warehouses.

-        Introduction of three truck waiting areas with one area located between the two warehouses, one located towards the northern rear boundary and one located towards the north western portion of the site.

-        Install a material staging area to be situated between the two warehouses.

-        Install a compactor and bailed item staging area to be located between the two warehouses.

-        Install a bailed item and empty drum staging area to be located adjacent to the rear of western warehouse.

-        Install an empty drum staging area located towards the rear of the site.

-        Install a raw material storage area to be located on the western elevation of the building.

-        Install a metal waste bin and general waste bin along western elevation of the warehouse building.

-        Install two transit storage areas with one situated between the two warehouses and one situated on the western elevation of the warehouse.

The modification application MOD2020/0147 additionally seeks to amend condition 66 of DA2018/321/1 to extend hours of operation including external forklift movements between the two warehouses as the applicant has stated that this is an essential business process to permit produced goods within the western warehouse to be transported to the adjacent eastern warehouse until required to be dispatched off site and is required to be the same hours as permitted for internal operations. Refer to table below:

Due to the proposed amended hours of operation, various other conditions of DA2018/321/1 are also proposed and required to be amended to align with the amended proposed hours of operation and the Noise Impact Assessment report submitted as part of the modification which supersedes the previous Noise Impact Assessment of DA2018/321/1.

As a result of the changes sought, the following conditions are also required to be modified or deleted: -

A.      Condition 2 to be amended relating to endorsed documentation

B.      Condition Number 7 to be amended relating to limitation on consent

C.      Condition 8 relating to recommendations of acoustic report is to be deleted and reworded as part of condition 59 as condition was previously satisfied and due to Noise Impact Assessment Report being superseded as part of the modification.

D.      Condition 9 relating to acoustic wall is to be deleted as condition is satisfied and due to Noise Impact Assessment Report being superseded as part of the modification.

E.      Condition 12 relating to Plan of Management is to be deleted as satisfied and modification includes an amended Plan of Management included in condition 69A. 

F.      Condition 55 relating to acoustic measures is to be deleted as the NSW EPA stated the condition is satisfied and condition 59A is imposed as part of the modification.

G.      Condition 57A is added relating to waste from the site.

H.      Condition 57B is added relating to air emissions

I.        Condition 57C is added relating to water pollution.

J.       Condition 59 is amended relating to Noise Impact Assessment Report

K.      Condition 59A is added relating to Noise controls within Noise Impact Assessment Report.

L.      Condition 59B is added to incorporate the NSW EPA EPL.

M.     Condition 60 relating to Noise is deleted and replaced with condition 59B of modification.

N.      Condition 61A is added for the requirement of an Operational Management Plan.

O.      Condition 66 is amended relating to hours of operation.

P.      Condition 67 relating to forklift refuelling hours is deleted and replaced under condition number 66 of the modification.

Q.      Conditions 68 and 69 are amended relating to locking of vehicle access gates and roller doors.

R.      Condition 69A is added relating to Plan of Management.

S.      Condition 70 is amended relating to use of car spaces.

T.      Condition 70A is added regarding swept path analysis for vehicle movements.

U.      Conditions 71 and 72 are amended for services to be line marked

V.      Condition 73 is amended regarding vehicle idling on site.

W.     Condition 74 is amended regarding parking space numbers on site.

X.      Condition 75 is amended regarding signage for vehicle movements.

Y.      Condition 78 and 79 are amended to reflect amended site operation plan vehicle movements and operational storage.

Z.      Conditions 79A and 79B are added regarding chemical storage and hazardous chemical storage.

AA.   Condition 80 is amended to reflect amended site plan.

BB.   Condition 81 is amended to include the modification.

History of the Modification Development Application

Applicants Supporting Statement

 

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Mecone dated May 2020 and was received by Council on 21 May 2020 in support of the application.

Contact with Relevant Parties

Council has been in regular contact with the applicant, internal referral units and externally with the NSW EPA as well as providing updates and addressing concerns raised by the general public throughout the assessment process.

 

Internal Referrals

Development Engineer

The modification application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the modification application is satisfactory subject to one condition regarding vehicular crossings which is a recommended condition of modification consent.

Environment Health Unit

The Modification application was referred to Council’s Environment Health Unit for comment who advised that the modification application is satisfactory subject to conditions.

Tree Management Officer

The modification application at time of lodgement included the proposed removal of one tree located within the middle of the western vehicular crossover and as such was referred to Council’s Tree Management Officer for comment who advised that since lodgement of the modification application, a Tree Application (Council reference: TA2020/0178) had been approved on 16 June 2020 and as such no comments were required and the removal of the tree no longer formed part of the modification application.

Waste Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Waste Management Officer for comment who has advised that the modification application is satisfactory.

External Referrals

New South Wales Environment Protection Authority (NSW EPA)

The site is bound by a NSW EPA Environment Protection Licence being licence number 2746 and the modification application was identified as integrated development. As such, the modification application was referred to the NSW EPA for comment on 27 May 2020.

The NSW EPA raised concerns on 23 June 2020 regarding the Noise Impact Assessment Report, including inconsistencies between proposed operation hours, non-assessment of all proposed modifications, discrepancies between predicted noise levels from DA2018/321/1 Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) report and NIA of subject modification application, and the feasibility of a proposed recommendation to increase the wall height of the rear acoustic wall from 4m to 7m for partial length of the acoustic wall. 

Following discussions between the applicant, Council and the NSW EPA throughout the assessment of the subject modification application, including the submission of an amended Noise Impact Assessment report, the NSW EPA provided a response in support of the modification application on the 22 January 2021 subject to conditions including:

-     A condition of consent to implement the controls listed in the NIA which relate to the use of the tanker blowers, horn use from forklifts, and the closure of doors in the warehouse and production building (included as draft condition 59A)

-     That noise from the development must not exceed levels at the times and locations stated within Environment Protection Licence No. 2746” (included as draft condition 59B)

-     That the premises shall implement and adhere to the operational configurations and noise controls outlined in the NIA. This is including, but is not limited to, the preparation of an operational noise management plan which would detail how the operational configurations and noise controls will be implemented on site, and how to manage them to ensure optimal environmental performance into the future (included as draft condition 61A).

In addition to the above, the NSW EPA completed a variation to the Environment Protection Licence on 15 December 2020.

 

Planning Comments

Section 4.55(2):

 

The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instruments (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(i))

The proposed development is affected by the following State Environmental Planning Policies:

(a)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development. The matters listed within Clause 7 have been considered in the assessment of the original development application. It is identified that there is no excavation work or penetration of the underlying pavement / concrete slab. As such, no detailed assessment is required.

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

No additional trees or vegetation is proposed to be removed as part of the subject modification application.

Regional Environmental Plans

The proposed development is affected by the following Regional Environmental Plans:

(a)     Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2 – Georges River Catchment

The subject site is not affected by acid sulphate soils, does not disturb the bank or foreshore along the Georges River tributaries and will not cause land degradation by way of erosion, sedimentation, pollution, salinity or acidity. The proposed modifications are not expected to cause adverse impacts to the sensitive natural environments within the Catchment area. It is determined that a detailed assessment using the planning instrument is not required in this instance.

Local Environmental Plans

Holroyd Local Environmental Plan (HLEP) 2013

The provision of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 is applicable to the modification application. It is noted that the modified development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 and the objectives of the IN1 – General Industrial zone.

(a)     Permissibility:

The site is situated within the IN1 General Industrial zone under the provisions of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013.

In accordance with Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013, General Industry means a building or place (other than a heavy industry or light industry) that is used to carry out an industrial activity.

The use undertaken on site is defined as ‘general industry’ which is a permitted land use / development pursuant to the provisions of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013.

Alterations and additions to a general industry are permitted with consent on the site.

The provisions of any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(ii))

(a)     Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment)

The draft SEPP relates to the protection and management of our natural environment with the aim of simplifying the planning rules for a number of water catchments, waterways, urban bushland, and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property. The changes proposed include consolidating the following seven existing SEPPs:

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

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

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

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

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

·    Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

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

The draft policy will repeal the above existing SEPPs and certain provisions will be transferred directly to the new SEPP, amended and transferred, or repealed due to overlaps with other areas of the NSW planning system.

Changes are also proposed to the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan. Some provisions of the existing policies will be transferred to new Section 117 Local Planning Directions where appropriate.

(b)     Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP) has been prepared by Cumberland Council to provide a single planning framework for the future planning of Cumberland City. The changes proposed seek to harmonise and repeal the three existing LEPs currently applicable to the Cumberland local government area, those being:

·    Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013,

·    Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, and

·    Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

The current planning controls for the subject site, as contained within the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013, are not proposed to change under the Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan.

The provisions of any Development Control Plans (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iii))

The Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 (Holroyd DCP 2013) provides guidance for the design and operation of development to achieve the aims and objectives of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013. A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 3.

The modification application has been assessed against the relevant controls of Part A (General Controls) and Part D (Industrial Controls) and the following variations are identified.

As indicated in the compliance table above, the proposed development departs from the standard hours of industrial operations provision of Council’s Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013.

Irrespective of this departure, it is considered that the proposal performs adequately from an environmental planning viewpoint and may be supported for the reasons stated: -

·        An acoustic wall has been constructed at an appropriate location to address noise impacts between the industrial / warehouse building and nearby residents.

·        Council’s Environment and Health Unit has concluded that the modified use is capable of operating without adverse impact to the locality.

·        The subject site is bound to operate within the confines of an NSW EPA Environmental Protection Licence (Licence number 2746) which provides rigorous conditions of operation that addresses noise, maintenance, pollution controls and vehicle movements within the site.

·        The NSW EPA has not raised any objections to the proposed hours of operations subject to conditions that have been included in the draft notice of determination in Attachment 1.

The proposed operational modifications will improve functionality of the use of the site as a manufacturing and warehouse entity and encourage employment opportunities within the IN1 – General Industrial zoned land.

The provisions of any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4 (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(a)(iiia))

There is no draft planning agreement associated with the subject Development Application.

The provisions of the Regulations (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 (EP&A Reg).

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(b))

It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts in the locality.

The suitability of the site for the development (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(c))

The subject site and locality is not known to be affected by any natural hazards or other site constraints likely to have a significant adverse impact on the proposed development. Accordingly, it is considered that the development is suitable in the context of the site and surrounding locality.

Submissions made in accordance with the Act or Regulation (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(d))

In accordance with Council’s notification requirements contained within the Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 27 May 2020 and 10 June 2020. The notification generated 5 submissions in respect of the proposal. In addition, Council received 7 additional unique submissions throughout the assessment period for a total of 12 unique submissions with nil disclosing a political donation or gift. It is noted that Council has received ongoing concerns regarding the premises throughout the assessment period of which the issues raised are summarised and commented in the following table:

Submissions Summary Table

Concern	Response
Visual aspect from rear of residential properties if height of acoustic wall is increased by 3m to an overall height of 4m   Is there a need for additional height to the acoustic wall as house is directly behind the factory “noise area” where the forklifts operate and owner does not have any noise issues with the situation as it currently is.	The applicant has withdrawn this from the modification and works sought.   Furthermore, it is noted that the amended Acoustic Report, supported by Council’s Environmental Health Unit and the NSW EPA, has not recommended increasing the height of the existing acoustic wall.
Metal poles exist to a height of 7m in anticipation of proposed height to the acoustic wall being approved.	Council’s regulatory section has been notified that the premises has installed metal support poles to a height of 7m to the existing acoustic wall. This does not form part of the modification application and no change to the acoustic wall is proposed as part of the modification application.
Residential structures must not be more than 8.5m above the natural ground level however the application proposes a structure within the buffer zone that would be at least 1.5m over this restriction.	The applicant has withdrawn this from the modification sought and as such, no changes to the acoustic wall is proposed.   The site is zoned IN1 – General Industrial which is not restricted by any height limit in accordance with Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013.
Effectiveness of landscaping in front of acoustic wall in terms of screening the acoustic wall from residential properties.   Planting along the acoustic wall noted in statement of environmental effects however no landscape plan submitted.	The modification application does not propose any plantings in addition to those required as per DA2018/321/1, which included conditions to screen the acoustic wall from residential properties and to ensure the plantings were maintained for the lifetime of the development. In this regard, no amended landscape plan was required to be submitted with the modification application.   Further, the modification application does not propose any changes to the acoustic wall or the buffer zone separating the industrial area from the residential area.
Increased hours of operation impact on quality of life in that the continual noise and air quality will affect residents everyday living   Extension of hours of operation will have significant impact on residential amenity including use of rear decks/yard.   Does the Noise Impact Assessment report consider noise to second storey areas of two storey dwellings.	The applicant submitted a Plan of Management and Traffic Management Plan with the modification application to manage noise in addition to the Noise Impact Assessment report.   All documentation including an amended Noise Impact Assessment report was reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Unit and the NSW EPA who raised no objections, subject to conditions which are included in the draft notice of determination to restrict any adverse impact to residential amenity.   Further, the NSW EPA have amended the Environmental Protection Licence for the premises to include noise limits and requirements regarding pollution, including air and noise.
Significant increase in noise since uptake in production due to COVID-19 and concern regarding ongoing health and wellbeing of residents.   Understanding that hours of operation can be extended during covid-19 order however other conditions are not being complied with.	The site is subject to a current Ministerial Order which permits truck movements 24 hours a day 7 days a week, which is currently due to expire on 25 March 2021.   The modification application addresses noise in a satisfactory manner and an assessment determined that the changes sought are not likely to pose unacceptable amenity impact on the locality.
Location of noise monitoring unit as indicated in Noise Impact assessment report.	An amended Nosie Impact Assessment report, which included noise monitoring locations, was submitted with the modification application which has been extensively assessed by Council and the NSW EPA. It is determined that the report is generally satisfactory.
Proposed external forklift movement area between two buildings to be enclosed to reduce noise impacts on residential properties.	An amended Noise Impact Assessment report was submitted with the modification application which has been extensively assessed by Council and the NSW EPA. It is determined that the report is generally satisfactory with regards to the proposed operating hours and forklift movement between the two buildings.
Application should be a new development application and not a modification application	The modification sought has been assessed as being consistent with Clause 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in relation to modification applications.
Address new changes to the site under the current DCP and not addressed under existing development or modification to DA2018/321.	All proposed changes have been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 and is determined as being acceptable.   Refer to Attachment 3 for Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 assessment of the modification.
Trucks from 6am whilst sleeping not a desired outcome	All truck movements into and out of the site are required to occur between 7 am to 10 pm Monday to Saturday in accordance with draft conditions in the notice of determination and the Traffic Management Plan submitted with the modification application.
Site operations are continually changing, and further noise impacts are being proposed	The changes sought have been assessed as being generally satisfactory and not likely to pose unacceptable impact on the amenity of adjoining residential uses.
Demolition orders be enforced for removal of the Reverse Pulse Dust Filter entirely	Council’s compliance section has previously investigated concerns regarding reverse dust pulse filters at the site.   In accordance with the submitted amended Noise Impact Assessment report, a reverse dust pulse filter located at the rear (northern elevation) of the site has been removed. Separate reverse pulse dust filters located on the western elevation are proposed to be restricted to operate between 7:00am to 10:00pm and a 1.8m barrier has been installed at the top of the taller silo to restrict noise.   Council and the NSW EPA reviewed the amended Noise Impact Assessment report and it was determined that the report is generally satisfactory.
Traffic management plan and vehicle swept path be revised as documentation does not show any truck movements in the North Western corner of the site adjacent to the ISO Tanker unloading. Tankers accessing this area will need to reverse into position. The constant beeping of reversing trucks has been raised numerous times by residents to council and the EPA.    Reversing trucks overnight/early hours of mornings.   The acoustic report sound modelling should be updated to reflect the impact of reversing vehicles within the site, particular at the rear of the site adjacent to residential properties.	The ISO Tanker unloading area located towards the north west corner of the site requires the reversing of the truck to access the dedicated area. The ISO Tanker unloading area was approved previously by DA2000/263 and is not part of the modification application.   A condition is imposed for an amended swept path analysis to be submitted to Council to include truck movements to the ISO Tanker unloading area as car parking spaces are proposed adjacent to the area.   To protect residential amenity, a condition is imposed in the modification consent for truck movements to the ISO Tanker unloading area to be restricted between 7:00am and 6:00pm Monday to Saturday.   The beeping by reversing trucks is a requirement of Safework NSW and noise limits for the site are to comply with the noise limits set by the NSW EPA and contained within the Environmental Protection Licence for the site.
Issue of loud exhaust compression sounds.   Assessment of the modelled scenarios within Noise Impact Assessment report and determine if they are realistic or as stated in the acoustic report “worst case scenario”.	The Noise Impact Assessment report has been assessed by Council and the NSW EPA and is determined as being generally satisfactory.   The Environmental Protection Licence (number 2746) for the site contains noise limits for the site.   Should concerns arise regarding the noise form the premise, the NSW EPA should be contacted together with the 24/7 phoneline for the premise.
Council should undertake independent sound modelling to indicate effect of acoustic wall	Council and EPA have reviewed the documentation submitted with the modification application, including the amended Noise Impact Assessment report which included modelling of the effectiveness of the existing acoustic wall in mitigating noise transmission from the subject site.   The modelling methodology was considered satisfactory and there is no requirement to undertake independent modelling.   The EPA amended the Environmental Protection Licence for the premises to include noise limits which the site is bound to operate within the confines of at all times.
DA200/263 included a scope of works document and should be assessed as part of the modification.	The scope of works from DA2000/263 are indicated on the previous site plans approved under DA2000/263 and are not relevant to the modification application.
Fire assessment of site to ensure compliance	The site is subject to an annual fire safety certificate and conditions are proposed for the modification regarding chemical and hazardous storage.
The Traffic Management Plan or Vehicle Swept Path does not indicate how a truck entering the central driveway will leave/enter the site after 10pm.  Acoustic report sound modelling be amended to indicate truck movements during the night operation period.	The modification application does not propose any truck movements into and out of the site after 10pm.
The current Acoustic report does not take into consideration the Reverse Pulse Dust Filters being in operation during the Night Period.	The Noise Impact Assessment reviewed by the NSW EPA (prepared by Benbow Environmental, report number: 201048_NIA_Rev11, revision 11 dated 21 January 2021) does not propose to use the reverse pulse dust filters outside the day and evening hours for the site. Day hours are 7am to 6pm Monday to Saturday and evening hours are listed as 6pm to 10pm in accordance with the NSW EPA Environmental Protection Licence.
Previous acoustic report and other supporting documents used in DA2018/321 be reassessed and if the documents are found to not disclose the true impact to residential properties, the operation hours be reverted to councils normal hours of industrial operations to the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm, Monday to Friday; 7.00am to 12 noon, Saturday and no work on Sunday.	Previous documentation is not required to be reassessed as part of the modification application.   The modification application was submitted with an amended Noise Impact Assessment report which was reviewed by the NSW EPA and considered satisfactory. The NSW EPA has amended the Environmental Protection Licence for the site. Conditions of consent are imposed regarding operations of the site and the site contains an Environmental Protection Licence limiting noise limits to protect residential amenity.
The LPG storage tank has not been noted as being approved in DA2000/43, DA2000/263 or the current DA2018/321.   The LPG refill tank should be relocated away from residential properties. Hybrid forklifts should be used and enforced on the site to reduce the impact of additional forklift movements at the rear of the site	The LPG tank is shown on a previous site layout plan approved as part of DA2000/263 (prepared by PDF Process Design & Fabrication Pty Ltd, 352.50-0106, revision D, drawing number A1).   The position of the tank does not form part of this application and no further assessment is required.
Trucks accessing the site from 6am and after 7pm would considerably impact residential amenity.   The reversing of trucks and beeping forklifts during the day and early mornings will Impact upon residents.   Increased number of larger trucks will also affect residential amenity as they are required to operate at the rear of the site adjacent to residential properties   Condition 68 regarding vehicle access gate hours is inconsistent with condition 66.   The gates should remain locked prior to 7am and after 7pm to prevent trucks and staff parking at the rear of the site in the evening and early morning to protect residential amenity.	Trucks are proposed to enter and exit the site during the hours of 7:00am to 10:00pm Monday to Saturday.   The Noise Impact Assessment report was reviewed by the NSW EPA and considered satisfactory.   Strict conditions of consent and conditions within the Environmental Protection Licence for the site to protect residential amenity, including restrictions on truck movements to the rear ISO tanker unloading area adjacent to residential properties and noise limits contained within the Licence.   A condition is included for a Compliance report to be submitted to Council quarterly, starting from end of May 2021. This is to ensure truck and forklift movements are complying with the conditions of consent and the Noise Impact Assessment report. The Compliance report is also conditioned to include a complaint register addressing breach concerns raised and the outcome.   Condition 68 regarding vehicle gate access hours of is required to be modified to reflect the changes made.
Smell/odour from the premise	The NSW EPA Environmental Protection Licence contains conditions addressing pollution from the premise. A new condition being condition 57B is also provided for any consent issued addressing odours.
Roller doors closed outside proposed hours of operation	Condition 69 as amended by the modification application addresses the opening and closing times of the roller shutter doors.
The applicant’s vehicle swept path plan does not show the turning circle of a B Double within the Eastern Driveway and Council claims that this has previously been approved.   The previous plan shows a “Truck” turning circle but does not specify a B double.	A previous site layout plan approved as part of DA2000/263 (prepared by PDF Process Design & Fabrication Pty Ltd, 352.50-0105, revision D, drawing number A1), states that the most eastern driveway is to be widened to meet route assessment guidelines for B Doubles.   The proposed operational site layout plan (Drawing number: JHF-SM-011-03) Revision 3, dated 17 August 2020), demonstrates an alteration to the truck turning circle.   The modification application was submitted with a traffic management plan, including swept path analysis, which was reviewed by Council’s Development Engineer and no objections were raised.
Plan of management regarding external storage, external loading/unloading, parking and operations to the rear of the site does not comply with previous and current DA conditions of consent	The proposed site operations plan and all other documentation submitted to Council has been assessed as being generally satisfactory and consistent with the modification sought.
Operations stated within plan of management have never been previously approved.	The plan of management submitted with the modification application has been reviewed by Council and the NSW EPA and is considered satisfactory.   All operations indicated on the modification operations site plan, were either previously approved under DA2000/263, DA2000/43, DA2018/321/1 or are proposed as part of MOD2020/0147.
The plans submitted with the modification application incorrectly labels the storage areas as “Previously approved” however, this is incorrect.   If condition 80 of DA2018/321/1 is to be amended to state the latest existing plan, there would be a number of items noted on the plans that have not been assessed by council in DA2000/43, DA2000/263 or DA2018.321 including the liquid storage tank, the liquid storage shed, DAF, LPG tank and the external roller door opening onto the central driveway.	The storage areas, DAF area and LPG tank and external roller doors opening onto the central driveway referred to have been approved by Council under development consent 2000/263 and no significant change is occurring.   The proposed operational site layout plan (Drawing number: JHF-SM-011-03) Revision 3, dated 17 August 2020), indicates two existing liquid storage areas and a bulk powder storage area on the western elevation as well as an existing liquid storage shed, DAF area, LPG area and another liquid storage area to the rear of the site.   The above areas are existing as per a previous site layout plan approved as part of DA2000/263 (prepared by PDF Process Design & Fabrication Pty Ltd, 352.50-0105, revision D, drawing number A1).
Relocate waste storage areas proposed as per the Modification application, to be located inside either of the 2 warehouses minimising external forklift movements near residential properties and in accordance to current and previous conditions of consent.	The site operations plan, including waste storage areas, submitted with the modification application and submitted associated documentation was reviewed by Council and the NSW EPA and considered satisfactory, subject to conditions of consent and conditions within the Environmental Protection Licence to protect residential amenity.
There is a reduction of car parking spaces from 189 spaces to 124 spaces.	The reduction in car parking has been assessed in accordance with Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013. The number of car parking spaces is being reduced from 189 spaces to 176 spaces (a reduction of 13 spaces). The number of spaces on site still complies with the Holroyd Development Control Plan.
There is an increase in the width of the driveway at the kerb.	The modification to the driveway has been assessed by Council’s engineers as being satisfactory and is conditioned to be subject to a separate application in accordance with Council’s procedures.
A mature Gum tree which is located on Western Driveway is required to be removed to accommodate larger trucks entering and exiting the site.	Tree Application (Council reference: TA2020/0178) was approved by Council on the 16 June 2020 for the removal of the tree in question. The trees have since been removed and is not a relevant matter for consideration as part of the application.
Modifications to the Waste-Water Treatment process proposed including installation of an Underground Retention Tank	This does not form part of the modification application and as such is not relevant to the assessment process.   The Environmental Protection Licence contains requirements for wastewater and pollution as does a Sydney Water Trade Waste Agreement for the site.
Residents selling/moving due to increased noise from the site	This is not a requirement for assessment under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

The public interest (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(e))

In view of the foregoing analysis it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set out in the draft notice of determination, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public interest.

Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020

 

The modification development application does not require the payment of contributions in accordance with Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020.

Disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts

The applicant and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts.

The development as modified is appropriately located within the IN1 – General Industrial zone under the relevant provisions of the Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013; however, variations in relation to the standard hours of industrial operation under the Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 are sought.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposal from a merit perspective, Council may be satisfied that the modified development has been responsibly designed and provides for acceptable levels of amenity for adjoining business and residential properties, subject to compliance with the NSW EPA Environmental Protection Licence and conditions of consent. It is considered that the proposal successfully minimises adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties. Hence the development, irrespective of the departures noted above, is consistent with the intentions of Council’s planning controls and represents a form of development contemplated by the relevant statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the land.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory having regard to the matters of consideration under Section 4.15 and 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the modified development may be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Amended Plan - Revised Operational Site Plan  

3.      Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 Assessment  

4.      Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 Assessment  

5.      Noise Impact Assessment Report  

6.      Plan of Management - Traffic Management Plan  

7.      Waste Management Plan  

8.      Swept Path Analysis  

9.      Stormwater/Tradewaste Diagram  

10.    NSW EPA Environmental Protection License 2746  

11.    Submissions Recieved Redacted   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 10 March 2021

Attachment 2

Amended Plan - Revised Operational Site Plan

 10 March 2021

Attachment 3

Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 Assessment

 10 March 2021

Attachment 4

Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 Assessment

 10 March 2021

Attachment 5

Noise Impact Assessment Report

 10 March 2021

Attachment 6

Plan of Management - Traffic Management Plan

 10 March 2021

Attachment 7

Waste Management Plan

 10 March 2021

Attachment 8

Swept Path Analysis

 10 March 2021

Attachment 9

Stormwater/Tradewaste Diagram

 10 March 2021

Attachment 10

NSW EPA Environmental Protection License 2746

 10 March 2021

Attachment 11

Submissions Recieved Redacted

 10 March 2021

 10 March 2021

 

Item No: LPP007/21

Development Application for 9-15 Raphael Street and Laneway 429, Lidcombe

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    DA2020/0461  

 

 

1.      Development Application No. DA2020/0461 was received on 7 August 2020 for the construction of a 12 storey mixed use development with 5 levels of basement car parking, comprising ground floor commercial and residential units above including landscaping, associated site works and site amalgamation of 9-15 Raphael Street, Lidcombe with land known as Laneway 429.

2.      The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 11 September 2020 and 25 September 2020. In response, no submissions were received.

3.      The application includes a Clause 4.6 variation request to vary the maximum 32m building height standard applicable to the site. The variation request is not supported by Council, as discussed in the body of this Report.

4.      The proposal seeks the following non-compliances which are considered supportable as discussed in detail elsewhere in the report:

 

5.      The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal is sensitive development to which State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design of Residential Apartment Development applies.

6.      The application is recommended for a deferred commencement approval subject to the conditions as provided in the attached schedule.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is legally described as Lots 9-12 in DP 397, more commonly known as 9-15 Raphael Street, Lidcombe. The subject site also includes the existing public laneway between 15 Raphael Street and 21-23 James Street which is subject to road closure and identified as Laneway 429.

The site is zoned B4 Mixed Use and is located within the ‘Lidcombe Town Centre’ within the Marsden Street Precinct, as identified in the Local Centres section of the Auburn Development Control Plan 2010 (ADCP). The site is located approximately 500 metres south-east from the Lidcombe train station.

The total site area is 1,912.2m² [9-15 Raphael Street (1,761m²) + Laneway 429 (151.2m²)]

The site is adjoined by a 4 storey residential flat building to the west (7-19 James St), and a part 10 part 11 storey residential flat building to the south (21-23 James St).

Land directly opposite the subject site, on the eastern side of Raphael Street, are zoned IN2 Light Industrial and are occupied by industrial premises. Land on the northern side of Davey Street, immediately opposite the subject site, is zoned RE1 Public Recreation and is earmarked for acquisition in the ALEP 2010 for public park purposes with Friends Park and Jewish Park.

It is noted that construction of the basement levels has been carried out in accordance with DA-280/2017.

Figure 1 – Locality Plan of subject site indicated in red outline.

Figure 2 – Aerial view of subject site indicated in red outline (NearMap 24 January 2021)

Figure 3 – View of subject site as seen from the corner of Raphael St & Davey St.

Left: Industrial premises at 9 East St.

Background: Residential flat building at 21-23 James St.

Right: Residential flat building at 7-19 James St.

 

Figure 4 – View of adjoining 4 storey residential flat building at 7-19 James St (Davey St frontage).

 

 

 

 

 

Description of the Proposed Development

 

Council has received a development application for a mixed-use development comprising commercial units and residential apartments and associated works at 9-15 Raphael Street, Lidcombe and Laneway 429.

 

Specifically, the consent is sought for the following works:

·        Construction of a twelve (12) storey building with a maximum building height of 38.99m and a Floor Space Ratio of 4.98:1;

·        Provision of a five-level basement car parking comprising 193 car spaces to be accessed from Raphael Street; - The 5 basement levels have been constructed on site in accordance with DA2017/280. The internal layout and configuration of the 5 basement levels forms part of the subject development application.

·        Ground floor level will comprise of two (2) commercial tenancy fronting Raphael Street and Davey Street, waste storage room, 2 residential lobbies, service room and motorcycle and bicycle parking.

·        Levels 1-11 will comprise a mix of residential units and includes 112 apartments in the following configuration:

o   47 x 1 bedroom;

o   63 x 2 bedroom;

o   2 x 3 bedroom.

·        Provision of communal open space on Level 1 and Level 9 for use by residents.

·        A 2.5m and 2m wide pedestrian footpath and widened carriageway will be dedicated to Council along the Raphael Street and Davey Street frontages respectively.

·        A 2.5m x 2.5m splay at the corner of Davey Street and Raphael Street will be dedicated to Council.

·        Council is currently in the process of finalising the sale of the laneway to the Applicant, which forms part of the subject site.

iii)   

iv)  Note: Deferred commencement conditions are imposed within the Draft Notice of Determination requiring the following amendments to be made to bring the proposal in line with the maximum 32m building height standard:

·        Levels 10 and 11 be deleted in their entirety;

·        The deletion of all 8 residential apartments on Level 9; and

·        The conversion of Level 9 to communal open space in the form of a roof top terrace.

A total of 24 residential apartments will be deleted from Levels 9, 10 and 11 to satisfy recommended deferred commencement conditions. As a result, the amended proposal would comprise a total of 88 residential apartments.

 

History

 

On 7 March 2018, the Sydney (West) Central City Planning Panel granted consent to DA2017/280 for demolition of existing structures and construction of 10 storey residential flat building consisting of 117 units with 4 levels of basement parking.

 

On 21 January 2020, Section 4.55(1A) modification application (MOD2019/5271) granted consent under delegated authority for the addition of a fifth level of basement car parking to an approved residential flat building. A total of 199 car parking spaces were approved as part of this modification.

 

On 12 May 2020, a pre-lodgement meeting (PL2020/0022) was held with the Cumberland Design Excellence Panel (DEP) for the proposed demolition of existing structures, construction of a 12 storey mixed use development with basement car parking. Pre-lodgement advice and DEP minutes were issued on 3 August 2020.

 

On 5 June 2020, Section 4.55(1A) modification application (MOD2020/0117) to DA2017/280 granted consent to stage the construction of the approved residential flat building. Stage 1, being the construction of the basement has been completed and it is the Applicant’s intention to surrender DA2017/280 upon obtaining development consent for the development proposed by this application (DA2020/0461). A condition of consent requiring the surrender of DA2017/280 has been recommended.

 

The pre-lodgement application (PL2020/0022) discussed with Council officers proposed a 38m high building whereby the applicant was relying on the increased height standard proposed in the Draft Cumberland LEP. The applicant was advised then, and during the course of the assessment of the subject application, that the Draft CLEP was not imminent and therefore cannot be considered by Council at this stage. The applicant was encouraged to withdraw the application and resubmit at a later date. However, they have subsequently advised that they wanted to continue construction works based on the subject plans (DA2020/0461) rather than the currently approved plans (DA2017/280).

 

The applicant was further advised and accepted a deferred commencement condition will be imposed requiring the proposal to be amended to demonstrate compliance with the maximum 32m building height standard as prescribed in Auburn LEP 2010 which incorporate the following:

·        The deletion of Levels 10 and 11 in their entirety,

·        The deletion of the 8 residential apartments on Level 9;

·        Conversion of Level 9 as communal open space in the form of a roof top terrace.

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by The Planning Hub dated 4 August 2020 and was received by Council in support of the application.

Contact with Relevant Parties

The assessing officer has undertaken a site inspection of the subject site and surrounding properties and has been in regular contact with the applicant throughout the assessment process.

Internal Referrals

Design Excellence Panel

The development application was referred to the Cumberland Design Excellence Panel (DEP) in accordance with the Design Excellence Panel Procedures, which requires any building over 25 metres in height to be referred to the DEP for comment.

The Cumberland DEP has advised that the development is satisfactory subject to the recommended conditions, which address amendments to the building fabric and colours as well as amendments to the communal open space area and landscaping design of the development.

Development Engineer

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory with respect to stormwater disposal, traffic and car parking, and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Environment and Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environment and Health Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory with respect to contamination, acoustic measures, and environmental impacts, subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Waste Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Waste Management Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal should be provided with garbage chutes. The proposal seeks to provide an alternative method for transportation of garbage from each level to the waste storage room, which is considered satisfactory. A space has been allocated for waste vehicles within the boundaries of the site for waste collection. The waste arrangements proposed are considered acceptable and appropriate conditions are imposed within the Draft Notice of Determination.

 

External Referrals

Ausgrid

The proposal was referred to Ausgrid in accordance with Clause 45(2) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. Correspondence received on 1 October 2020 from Ausgrid outlined that no objections are raised with respect to the proposed development and conditions are recommended to be imposed relating to the undergrounding of cables.

PLANNING COMMENTS

The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instruments (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(i))

State Environmental Planning Policies

The proposed development is not specifically affected by any relevant State Environmental Planning Policies.

(a)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development. The matters listed within Clause 7 have been considered in the assessment of the development application.

 

(b)     Statement Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65)

SEPP 65 applies to the development as the building is 3 storeys or more, and contains more than 4 dwellings. A design statement addressing the design quality principles prescribed by SEPP 65 was prepared by the project architect. Integral to SEPP 65 is the Apartment Design Guide (ADG), which sets benchmarks for the appearance, acceptable impacts and residential amenity of the development.

A comprehensive assessment against the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) controls is provided at Attachment 5.

The following table sets out the ADG non-compliances.

 

(c)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP)

The provisions of the ISEPP 2007 have been considered in the assessment of the development application.

Clause 45 - Development likely to affect an electricity transmission or distribution network

The subject development occurs within 5 metres of an overhead electricity power line. As such, the proposal was referred to Ausgrid in accordance with Clause 45(2) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. Correspondence received on 1 October 2020 from Ausgrid outlined that no objections are raised with respect to the proposed development and conditions are recommended to be imposed relating to the undergrounding of cables.

(d)     Statement Environmental Planning Policy No 19 - Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19)

The subject site is located adjacent to land zoned and reserved for public open space. The proposed development does not result in disturbance to land zoned RE1 Public Recreation, Friends Park or Jewish Park. 

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

Tree removal carried out in accordance with previous approval – DA-280/2017.

(f)      State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

Not applicable. The subject site is not identified as a coastal wetland and/or land identified as “proximity area for coastal wetlands” and/or land identified as such by the Coastal Vulnerability Area Map.

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

BASIX Certificate No. 1109427M_02 dated 23 June 2020 has been submitted with Council and is considered to be satisfactory.

Deferred commencement conditions are imposed within the Draft Notice of Determination requiring Levels 10 and 11 be deleted from the proposal, and the conversion of Level 9 to a communal rooftop terrace, to bring the proposal in line with the maximum 32m building height standard. Subsequently a condition requiring the submission of a revised BASIX Certificate corresponding with the amended proposal is also included.

Regional Environmental Plans

The proposed development is affected by the following Regional Environmental Plans:

(a)     Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The subject site is identified as being located within the area affected by the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. The proposed development raises no issues as no impact on the catchment is envisaged.

(Note: - the subject site is not identified in the relevant map as ‘land within the ‘Foreshores and Waterways Area’ or ‘Wetland Protection zone’, is not a ‘Strategic Foreshore Site’ and does not contain any heritage items. Hence the majority of the SREP is not directly relevant to the proposed development).

Local Environmental Plans

Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010

The provisions of the Auburn Local Environmental Plan (ALEP) 2010 are applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development generally achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the ALEP 2010 and the objectives of the B4 Mixed Use zone.

A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 6.

(a)     Permissibility: -

The proposed development is defined as a shop top housing development and is permissible in the B4 Mixed Use land use zone, with consent.

shop top housing means one or more dwellings located above ground floor retail premises or business premises.

Note: Shop top housing is a type of residential accommodation—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary.

The relevant matters to be considered under ALEP 2010 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below.

(b)     Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings

The proposal seeks a variation to Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings that stipulates that the height of building is not to exceed 32m on the subject site.

The proposed building has an overall height of 38.99m (RL66.550) to the roof of the lift core and stairwell. The proposal breaches the height by 6.99m to the roof of the lift core, representing a significant variation of 21.84%. The majority of the height breach is a result of the inclusion of Levels 10 and 11 as part of the proposed development, which comprises of 16 residential apartments. The height breach also comprises of the 2 lift overruns.

Figure 5 – Plan showing extent of height variation in yellow – Eastern / Raphael St elevation.

Figure 6 – Plan showing extent of height variation in yellow – Northern / Davey St elevation.

Figure 7 – Plan showing extent of height variation in yellow – Southern elevation.

Figure 8 – Plan showing extent of height variation in yellow – Western elevation.

(c)     Clause 4.6 – Variation to Building Height

Clause 4.6 allows the consent authority to vary development standards in certain circumstances and provides an appropriate degree of flexibility to achieve better design outcomes. The consent authority may grant the exception as the Secretary’s concurrence can be assumed where clause 4.6 is adopted as per the Department of Planning Circular PS 18-003, dated 21 February 2018.

The applicant has submitted a written request to vary the development standard for building height – Refer to Attachment 3.

Based on various case laws established by the Land and Environment Court of NSW such as Four2five P/L v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 9, Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings P/L [2016] NSW LEC7 and Zhang and anor v Council of the City of Ryde [2016] NSWLEC 1179, a 3 part assessment framework for a variation request proposed under clause 4.6 has been considered and an assessment of the proposed variance, following the 3 part test is discussed in detail below.

The three (3) preconditions which must be satisfied before the application can proceed are as follows:

1.      Is the proposed development consistent with the objectives of the zone?

Applicant’s justification:

·        To provide a mixture of compatible land uses

The proposed development provides a compatible land use that is consistent with the future character of the Lidcombe Town Centre. It proposes a high density residential and commercial development designed to contribute to the vitality of the town centre.

·        To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling

The proposed development provides high density mixed-use development in an accessible location that maximises public transport patronage and encourages non-vehicular transport.

·        To encourage high density residential development

The proposal consists of a high-density residential development that is consistent with the future character of the area, whilst providing for the housing needs of the wider community.

·        To encourage appropriate businesses that contribute to economic growth

The proposed development will generate demand and opportunities for businesses to service the area and contribute to the economic growth of the area. The commercial tenancies within the development will provide additional floor space for businesses in the growing Lidcombe Town Centre.

·        To achieve an accessible, attractive and safe public domain

The proposed development contributes to creating an accessible, attractive and safe public domain. The development will provide opportunities for passive surveillance and create a vibrant street.

Planner’s comment:

Whilst the proposed use of the site for commercial and residential purposes is consistent with the objectives of the zone, the proposed height of other development is inconsistent with height of other developments within the immediate vicinity.

2.      Is the proposed development consistent with the objectives of the development standard which is not met?

Applicant’s justification:

·        To establish a maximum height of buildings to enable appropriate development density to be achieved

The proposal consists of a high-density mixed-use development that meets the desired future character of the area. The height exceedance is due to the built form response to the future height control for the subject site under the Cumberland LEP which is expected to be adopted this year. The future height control will allow the development to achieve the desired development density onsite as outlined by the applicable Floor Space Ratio of 5:1.

·        To ensure that the height of buildings is compatible with the character of the locality

The height of the proposed development is consistent with the changing character and desired character of the Lidcombe Town Centre and has been designed to respond to the future height control of the site.

Planner’s comment:

The objectives of the building height standard are to enable appropriate development density to be achieved and to ensure that the height of the building is compatible with the character of the locality.

It is noted that the exhibited Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) proposes to increase the maximum building height standard applicable for development at the subject site to 38m. However, there is no evidence provided to Council to suggest that the Draft CLEP is imminent at this stage.

The proposed building height exceedance includes habitable floor area, being 16 residential apartments on Levels 10 & 11 in their entirety, and associated lift overruns. Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposal provides a compliant FSR, the significant exceedance to the applicable 32m building height standard pursuant to ALEP 2010 is considered to be contrary to the objectives of the clause, having regard to the uncertainty of the increased height standard.

Furthermore, the exceedance is not consistent with the existing established principal 10 storey building height of the residential flat building immediately adjoining the site to the south at 21-23 James St, Lidcombe, which only comprises encroaching maisonette elements within the 11th storey.

3.      A) Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case? And;

Applicant’s justification:

As detailed in the section above, the proposal maintains the future higher density-built form that is at a scale comparative to neighbouring buildings of the site's location within the Lidcombe Town Centre. The numeric increase in building height for the proposed development is approximately 6.99m and 0.99m once the new control is adopted which is a result of designing the development to respond to the future building heat control for the site. This increase is considered reasonable in the context of the site and its ability to result in no adverse impacts on adjoining neighbours or visual impacts on the public domain.

The proposed development, including the proposed building elements that exceed the height limits, will continue to achieve the objectives of the standard. It is therefore considered that the objectives of the development standard are met notwithstanding the breach of the height of buildings standard.

Planner’s comment:

The application of the development standard is considered reasonable and necessary in this instance, given the established building height of the adjoining site and immediate areas. The assertion that the building height exceedance is made to correspond with the numeric increase in building height as identified in the Draft Cumberland LEP is not adequate grounds for the variation of the development standard, as the adoption of the Draft Cumberland LEP is not imminent at this stage.

b) Are there sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard and therefore is the applicant’s written justification well founded?

Applicant’s justification:

It is our opinion that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the building height standard in this instance. These are as follows:

·        The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the zone and the objectives of the building height control.

·        The proposal does not result in any adverse impact from adjoining properties.

·        The height variation once the Cumberland LEP is adopted will only include a minor portion of the building and will be a maximum exceedance of 0.99m.

·        The area of exceedance once the Cumberland LEP is adopted will only consist of lift overruns and will not contain any habitable floor space.

It is considered the objectives of the LEP height standard are achieved in this instance where the proposal produces a high quality-built form that ensures a high level of amenity for residents.

Whilst the built form exceeds the building height control applicable to the site, it is considered that the proposed design does not unreasonably detract from the amenity of adjacent residents or the existing quality of the environment as demonstrated in architectural plans prepared by UrbanLink.

Strict compliance with the building height development standard would result in a development that does not achieve the desired development density for the site and would be inconsistent with the future building height control for the site.

Planner’s comment:

Having regard to the justification provided for the contravention of the development standard, the variation to the maximum building height is not supported. The proposed increase in the building height standard from 32m to 38m identified in the Draft Cumberland LEP is not adequate grounds to justify the height of building exceedance sought by the proposal. The proposed building height is considered unnecessarily excessive for the site, given the height breach includes 2 entire levels of habitable floor space plus associated lift overruns.

Conclusion:

Council is not satisfied that the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6 subclause (3).

Council is not satisfied that the proposed development will be in the public interest, given the extent of the height breach.

It is the view of Council Officers that the justification provided is not satisfactory and having considered the application on its merit, the exception to the maximum building height development standard is not supported in this instance and a deferred commencement condition of consent has been recommended requiring the following amendments to be made to bring the proposal in line with the maximum 32m building height standard:

o Levels 10 and 11 be deleted in their entirety;

o The deletion of all 8 residential apartments on Level 9; and

o The conversion of Level 9 to communal open space in the form of a roof top terrace.

The applicant has been advised of the above deferred commencement condition recommended to be imposed, should consent be granted, and has raised no objections.

 

The provisions of any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(ii))

(a)     Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment)

The draft SEPP relates to the protection and management of our natural environment with the aim of simplifying the planning rules for a number of water catchments, waterways, urban bushland, and Willandra Lakes World Heritage Property. The changes proposed include consolidating the following seven existing SEPPs:

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

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

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

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

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

·    Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

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

The draft policy will repeal the above existing SEPPs and certain provisions will be transferred directly to the new SEPP, amended and transferred, or repealed due to overlaps with other areas of the NSW planning system.

Changes are also proposed to the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan. Some provisions of the existing policies will be transferred to new Section 117 Local Planning Directions where appropriate.

(b)     Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (Draft CLEP) has been prepared by Cumberland Council to provide a single planning framework for the future planning of Cumberland City. The changes proposed seek to harmonise and repeal the three existing LEPs currently applicable to the Cumberland local government area, those being:

·    Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013,

·    Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, and

·    Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

The current planning controls for the subject site, as contained within the ALEP 2010 are not proposed to change under the Draft CLEP, with exception of the maximum building height standard.

A maximum 32m building height standard is applicable to the subject site pursuant to ALEP 2010. The Draft Cumberland LEP seeks to increase the maximum building height standard for development at the subject site to 38m. As the adoption of the Draft CLEP is not imminent, the proposed height variation sought is not supported, as discussed in detail in the body of this report.

The provisions of any Development Control Plans (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iii))

The Auburn Development Control Plan 2010 (ADCP 2010) provides guidance for the design and operation of development to achieve the aims and objectives of the ALEP 2010.

A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 7.

The following table highlights non-compliances with the ADCP in relation to building envelope, building depth, site coverage, deep soil zone provisions, which are considered satisfactory on merit in this instance as outlined below:

 

The provisions of any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4 (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(a)(iiia))

There is no draft planning agreement associated with the subject Development Application.

The provisions of the Regulations (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 (EP&A Reg).

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(b))

It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts in the locality.

 

The suitability of the site for the development (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(c))

The subject site and locality is not known to be affected by any natural hazards or other site constraints likely to have a significant adverse impact on the proposed development. Accordingly, it is considered that the development is suitable in the context of the site and surrounding locality.

Submissions made in accordance with the Act or Regulation (EP&A Act s4.15 (1)(d))

In accordance with Council’s Notification requirements contained within the Auburn DCP 2010, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 11 September 2020 and 25 September 2020. No submissions were received in response to the proposed development. 

The public interest (EP&A Act s4.15(1)(e))

In view of the foregoing analysis it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set out in the recommendation below, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public interest.

Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020

The development would require the payment of contributions in accordance with Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020.

In accordance with the Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020, a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act, calculated on the number of residential apartments.

Subject to the deferred commencement condition recommended to reduce the building height, a total contribution of $1,076,208.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts

The applicant and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts.

The development application has been assessed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, SEPP 55, SEPP 65, ISEPP 2007, BASIX SEPP, Draft Environment SEPP, Draft Cumberland LEP, ALEP 2010 and ADCP 2010 and is considered to be satisfactory for approval subject to deferred commencement conditions.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the B4 Mixed Use land use zone under the relevant provisions of the ALEP 2010. The proposal is generally consistent with all statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the development. Minor non-compliances with Council’s controls have been discussed in the body of this report and addressed through the recommended deferred commencement conditions of consent. The development is considered to perform adequately in terms of its relationship to its surrounding built and natural environment, particularly having regard to impacts on adjoining properties.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory having regard to the matters of consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the development may be approved subject to deferred commencement conditions.

 

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Accompanying Clause 4 6 Variation Request to Building Height  

4.      Landscape Plans  

5.      ADG Compliance Table  

6.      ALEP 2010 Compliance Table  

7.      ADCP 2010 Compliance Table  

8.      Original Consent - DA2017/280  

9.      Approved Architectural Plans  

10.    Approved 5th Basement Level Plans