14 October 2020

An Electronic meeting of the Cumberland Local Planning Panel will be held at 11:30a.m. via Zoom.

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

 

 14 October 2020

CONTENTS

Report No.  Name of Report                                                                                         Page No.

Development Applications

LPP049/20... Development Application for 234-236 Cumberland Road, Auburn............ 5

LPP050/20... Development Application for 78 Frances Street, Lidcombe..................... 209

LPP051/20... Modification Application for 39 - 41 Aurelia Street, Toongabbie............. 399

 

 14 October 2020

 

Item No: LPP049/20

Development Application for 234-236 Cumberland Road, Auburn

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Acting Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    DA2020/0080  

 

 

 

1.      Development Application 2020/0080 was received on 19 February 2020 for the demolition of existing structures, lot consolidation and the construction of a four storey mixed use development comprising of a commercial premise on the ground floor, nineteen apartments and two levels of basement car parking.

2.      The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of fourteen (14) days between Tuesday 17 March 2020 and Tuesday 31 March 2020. In response, there were no submissions received.

 

3.      The subject site adjoins a service station and a mechanic outlet and matters concerning State Environmental Planning Policy 33 “Hazardous and Offensive Development” and the “Liquefied Petroleum Gas Automotive Retail Outlets” Hazardous Industry Locational Guidelines No 1 prepared by the Department of Planning 1992 has been considered.

 

4.      The numerical variations are as follows:

 

 

5.      The development application is referred to the Panel as the proposal contravenes a development standard by more than 10% and is an apartment building of which State Environmental Planning Policy 65 “Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development” applies. 

 

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

 

 

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is legally known as Lot E in DP39440, Lot A in DP39440 and Lot B in DP 394400 also known as 234-236 Cumberland Road, Auburn. The three sites in combination forms a rectangular shape with an accessible handle. The site has a frontage to Cumberland Road of 24.38 metre and a 6.09m wide access handle to Wellington Road. The site occupies an area of 1,140 square metres.

 

The survey plan shows the site as being burdened by a 3.66 metre wide right away that connects the access handle on Wellington Road through Lot E. According to known records, the right of way benefits Lots A, B and D in DP 39440 and Lots 1 and 2 in DP 501969 (Former Lot C). The two front lots A and B are vacant while a two storey warehouse building is situated across much of Lot E. Vehicle access to the warehouse building is via a driveway access from Wellington Road.

 

The site including the adjacent corner site to the south are zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre and is completely surrounded by R2 Low Density Residential zoned land. There is a small convenience shop to the immediate south on Lot 1 in DP 501969 which is a separate allotment to the service station which faces Cumberland Road. 

 

There is a service station at 238 Cumberland Road situated on the corner with Wellington Road. There is also a mechanic outlet attached to the service station and a shop. The corner of Cumberland Road with Wellington Road is controlled by traffic signals.

 

All other properties surrounding the subject site are generally residential in nature being single storey and two storey dwelling houses.

 

The location of the site is shown below.

 

 

Photos of the site are provided below.

 

There is a service station and mechanic outlet situated immediately to the south of the site at 238 Cumberland Road as follows: -

 

Description of the Proposed Development

Development application 2020/0080 is proposing the demolition of existing structures, lot consolidation, and the construction of a four storey mixed use development comprising of a single commercial premise on the ground floor, an apartment building with two apartments on the ground floor and seventeen (17) apartments above and a two storey basement car park. The development is described in detail below.

Demolition work

The two storey warehouse building on Lot E (Rear allotment) will be demolished and the driveway access removed.

Excavation work

The site will be excavated to a depth of 6 metres and a basement car park measuring 27.4 metres x 23.4 metres will be constructed. At least 3,847 cubic metres of soil will need to be removed to facilitate construction of a basement car parking.

Construction of a basement car park

The basement car park will have adequate room for parking thirty five (35) vehicles across two levels. The basement car park incorporates the following: -

·        Vehicle access from Cumberland Road.

·        Room for parking thirty five (35) vehicles divided into: -

o   26 residential spaces including two spaces for people with disabilities.

o   5 spaces for the commercial premise including 1 space for people with disabilities.

o   4 spaces for visitor use.

o   5 bicycle parking bays.

o   19 storage cages.

o   Lift access.

o   Storage space for the commercial tenancy.

o   Two service rooms to support the building

Ground floor

The ground floor encompasses a large commercial tenancy occupying an area of 199.9 square metres with access from Cumberland Road, two one bedroom apartments and various services required to support the building including: -

·        A separate commercial and residential bin store.

·        Toilet.

·        Plant room.

·        Foyer and lift access.

·        A separate unloading area with access from Wellington Road.

There is a ground floor common area occupying 209 square metres along the northern curtilage of the site. The ground level common area is separate from the ground level private courtyards of the two ground floor apartments 1 and 2 via the use of a 1.8 metre high fence comprising a solid base with perforated steel slats above for privacy measures.

There is seating provided to ensure passive use of the space.

First floor

The first floor comprises six (6) apartments with five apartments having two bedrooms and 1 apartment having 1 bedroom. All the apartments are provided with a balcony. There is a courtyard facing south.

Second floor

The second floor comprises five (5) apartments all of which have two bedrooms. A sixth apartment is two storeys in height but is accessed from the third storey of the building. The apartment numbered Apartment 12 is provided with three bedrooms. The bedrooms are situated on level two while the living areas and balcony are situated on level three.

Third floor

The first floor comprises six (6) apartments with five apartments having two bedrooms and 1 apartment being two storeys in height and having three bedrooms. As discussed above, the three bedroom apartment is two storeys in height with the living areas on level three and the bedrooms situated on Level 2.

Roof area

The roof area incorporates a lift access, stair access, a toilet and a common area occupying 294.8 square metres. There are tables and chairs and a BBQ area to ensure the common area becomes useable space for the residents of the building. 

Other matters

The building is provided with the following: -

·        3 x 1 bedroom apartments.

·        15 x 2 bedroom apartments.

·        1 x 3 bedroom apartment which crosses two storeys.

·        1 x commercial premise.

·        A floor space ratio of 1.9:0

Lot consolidation

The development application includes the consolidation of the three allotments into one allotment.

Proposed signage

The development application is making provision for the erection of one business identification sign being a sign board to be situated above the shop front door entrance facing Cumberland Road with dimensions of 4.4 metres x 400 mm (Area 1.76 square metres). No details of wording is available on the grounds that a tenant has not been decided upon at the present time.

Proposed Sydney mural on the southern elevation

The southern elevation plan is showing a stencilled mural that depicts an image of Sydney. It will not be possible to add or showcase the stencilled image along the southern wall due to the presence of buildings along the southern side of the building that will obscure any works. This is not assessed and will be conditioned as part of any consent that it be deleted from the final plans. The applicant has been informed of this in correspondence dated 27 March 2020 and no objection to this has been raised.

History

The site has been the subject of two recent development applications for similar style of developments over recent years as follows: -

·        Development consent 175/2012 issued 10 April 2013 for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a three storey mixed use development comprising of one commercial/retail tenancy and 10 residential apartments over basement parking subject to conditions. This consent has lapsed and no work ever commenced.

·        Development application 282/2017 to demolish all existing structures and construct a four storey mixed use development comprising of 2 retail shops and 21 apartments with 2 levels of basement parking. The development application was refused on 13 June 2018 by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel. The matter was then appealed in the Land and Environment Court however the applicant withdrew the Court proceedings prior to the matter advancing beyond the planned S34 conference.

The current application is an improvement on the previous application. In this regard, the number of apartments are reduced from 25 to 19, the setbacks from the northern property boundary is increased which in turns improve the ground floor amenity of the development and the ground floor services are improved such as the position of the waste bin storage areas. 

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Think Planners and dated 10 February 2020 in support of the development 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 is generally satisfactory subject to conditions.

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 subject to conditions.

Waste

As per the comments dated 23/3/2020, the development application is satisfactory subject to conditions. It is identified as per an email dated 3/8/2020 that bins are able to be presented to the kerbside on Wellington Road if no dedicated area for waste bin collection is allocated.

External Referral

The site is not situated on or adjacent to a railway line and the development site is not impacted by power lines or power poles. As such, a referral to any Government Authority, or Ausgrid or the Police is not required.

Notwithstanding the above, the applicant has made requests to the energy provider to determine whether a substation is required to support the development. The applicant has provided evidence showing no reply following a request. It is considered appropriate to address this matter as a condition attached to any consent issued.

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 affected by the following State Environmental Planning Policies:

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

The requirement at clause 7 of SEPP No. 55 for Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development has been considered in the following table:

(b)     State Environmental Planning Policy 33 “Hazardous and Offensive Development”

State Environmental Planning Policy 33 “Hazardous and Offensive Development is being considered because there is a petrol station on an adjoining site to the south which includes the storage of above ground liquid petroleum gas cylinders along the northern side of the site. A petrol station and LPG storage and handling facilities are captured by the State Policy with the risk being liquid spills and fuel leaks for a petrol station and gas leaks for LPG storage and handling facilities. The possible impact of both during a worst case scenario is fire and an explosion.

A detailed assessment of the service station is not required given that the development application is not related to the service station.

Notwithstanding this, there are four (4) above ground liquid petroleum gas (LPG) tanks situated along the northern side of the site abutting the adjoining shop which would store approximately 1.5 to 2 cubic metres (Approximately 1 tonne) of LPG. This requires consideration given that LPG is classed as a 2.1 dangerous good. Consent authorities must refer to the New South Wales Department of Planning publication “Hazardous Industry Locational Guidelines No 1 Liquefied Petroleum Gas Automotive Retail Outlets”.

According to the risk screening method, the amount stored is significantly below 10 tonnes (16 cubic metres) and hence the storage of such a volume will not be hazardous for the site and or adjoining sites including 234 – 236 Cumberland Road.

In concluding the matter, the volume of gas stored is significantly below the threshold for assessment under the State Policy and as such, it is concluded that the intensity of use of the development is acceptable within the location.

(c)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure have been considered for the development application.

The site is not situated on or close to a major arterial road that carries more than 40,000 vehicles per day.

It is identified that Wellington Road is a Classified Secondary Road (Number 2096) that connects Park Road with Clyde Street. However, the road does not carry significant traffic volumes. It is determined that a detailed assessment of the application under Clause 101, 102 and 103 of the State Policy is not required in this instance.

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

The site is devoid of any significant vegetation or trees and as such, the proposal does not exceed the biodiversity offsets scheme threshold. Assessment using the state policy is not required.

(e)     State Environmental Planning Policy 64 “Advertising and Signage”

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 “Advertising and Signage” is relevant for the erection of the business identification sign facing Cumberland Road. A sign board with dimensions of 4.4 metres x 400 mm (Area 1.76 square metres) is proposed to be situated above the door entrance to the commercial premise / retail premise. No wording is available on the grounds that a tenant has not been chosen for the tenancy. When assessed under the State Policy, it is considered that the proposed sign is satisfactory under the relevant provisions.

A detailed assessed using the State Policy is provided at Appendix B which is attached to the report.

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

The applicant has submitted a BASIX Certificate covering all nineteen apartments. The development achieves a pass mark of 40 for water and 36 for energy use. The BASIX Certificate is assessed as being satisfactory for approval.

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

State Environmental Planning Policy 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.

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 Part 3E1 - Deep soil zone, Part 3F1 - Separation distances and Part 4A-1 - Maximum of 15% of apartments to receive no sunlight as follows.

As indicated in the compliance table above, the proposed development departs from Part 3E1 - Deep soil zone, Part 3F1 - Separation distances, Part 4A-1 - Maximum of 15% of apartments to receive no sunlight and Part 4C1 Ceiling heights. The variations to the above are addressed below.

Part 3E1 - Deep soil zone

A variation of 8.75% is identified. However, a variation is permitted where the site is within a centre, is constrained or within a CBD area. The site is situated within a Neighbourhood Centre B1 zone and the plans are showing a commercial premise situated on the ground floor and a basement car park to support the entire development. Additionally, there are support services for the commercial tenancy such as a loading bay, toilet and commercial waste storage area. The variation is generally consistent with the approaches adopted by the Apartment Design Guide.

Part 3F1 (Building Separation) - Visual Privacy.

Generally, the building achieves a majority of compliance with the provisions and setbacks are mostly satisfactory. A variation occurs to the three apartments numbered 3, 9 and 15 due to the presence of a living room window in each apartment being oriented to the north. All three windows are obscured by louvres.

The main living rooms of each apartment numbered 3, 9 and 15 are oriented to the west and street. It is considered most practical to increase the sill heights of the windows to 1.6 metres above the floor level of each affected apartment. Such action would address any potential privacy loss and may be addressed as a condition attached to any consent issued.

Part 4A-1 - Solar and Daylight Access.

A Maximum 15% of apartments to receive no direct sunlight which would equate to 2.85 apartments. The applicant has ensured that no more than three apartments being Apartments numbered 8, 14 and 19 receive no sunlight with the variation being minor in extent.

Part 4C-1 - Ceiling heights

It is identified that the ground floor and first floor apartments have floor to ceiling heights of 2.7 metres and not 3.3 metres. This creates a variation to the two ground floor apartments that faces north and the six apartments that are situated on Level 1.

A NatHERS energy statement for the development is showing Apartments Numbered 1 to 8 situated on the ground floor and level 1 are achieving a Star rating of between 6.3 and 7.6 out of 10. As such, residential amenity is generally satisfactory and no adverse impact in relation to ceiling height is identified.

A comprehensive assessment against SEPP 65 and the ADG is contained in Appendix A.

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

The Auburn Local Environmental Plan is applicable to the development. The development achieves compliance with most of the key statutory requirements of the Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010 except for the issue concerning Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings). The matter concerning height of buildings is addressed below.

(a)     Permissibility

The proposed development is defined as a mixed use development comprising a commercial premise (office or retail premise) and an apartment building with a basement car park. A commercial premise (including office or retail premise) and an apartment building is a permitted form of development on the site subject to consent.

The relevant matters to be considered under the Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive LEP assessment is contained in Appendix B.

Figure 1 - Auburn LEP Compliance Table

(b)     Clause 4.6 - Variation to Height of Buildings

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 Clause 4.3 (Height of buildings).

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 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:

The variation to the height limit is limited to a section of building comprising the lift over run situated within the central portion of the building and not directly visible from the public domain. As such, the lift over run is generally not seen from the streetscape. The habitable floor space is contained below the maximum building height line. The variation does not achieve additional yield within the site but is in response to the provision of additional amenity for the site being the roof top common area.

The proposed development is in the public interest as it remains consistent with the objectives of the B1 zone which are: -

·        "To provide a range of small scale retail, business and community uses that serve the needs of the people who live or work in the surrounding neighbourhood".

·        "To ensure development does not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood”.

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone, insofar as the development is not antipathetic to the zone. The development is consistent with the zone objectives noting that: -

·        The development will provide for small scale retail / business uses to meet the needs of people who live and work in the neighbourhood.

·        The development contributes to a variety of housing types.

·        The development does not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood and in particular the height variation is not visible from the street frontage.

·        The development is designed to minimize impact on amenity of the area and adjoining properties.

Planner’s comment

It is considered that the applicants response has merit as follows: -

·        The development is compliant with the stated objectives.

·        The development is not seen to have adverse amenity impacts towards adjoining properties. The service station and shop to the immediate south is not adversely impacted by the development. The degree of privacy to the north at 232 Cumberland Road is also considered to be satisfactory.

·        The development will provide a floor area for a business to operate which in turn will generate employment.

·        The development contributes to a variety of housing types.

·        The lift over run and roof top access is situated central to the building and as such, is generally not seen from the public domain.

A rooftop parapet wall also encroaches above the 14 metre height limit by as much as 400 mm. The parapet wall forms part of a barrier that is required for the rooftop common area. There are no significant planning or amenity issues to note and no changes to the conclusions made above.

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

Applicant’s justification

Compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case as the underlying objectives of the control and the objectives of the zone are achieved despite the variation to the numerical standard.

The objectives of the building height standard are: -

a)      To establish a maximum height of buildings to enable appropriate development density to be achieved, and

b)      to ensure that the height of buildings is compatible with the character of the locality.

The current development proposal is predominantly consistent with the building height with the exception of the fire stair structure and the lift over run. The development remains consistent with the objectives based on the following: -

·        The development proposal is consistent with the intent of the maximum height control with the proposed mixed use building contained below the maximum building height with the non compliance contained to the lift overrun. The variation is not discernibly different to a compliant form as viewed from the street given the location of the variation being central to the building. The building is four storeys when viewed from the public domain notwithstanding the variation.

·        The variation occurs because additional amenity is incorporated into the rooftop area which is appropriate being common open space.

The variation will not have any adverse amenity impacts as follows: -

·        The variation is not noticeable and will not impact on the physical bulk, height and scale of the building.

·        The variation will not result in a reduction of solar penetration on site or to adjoining sites nor lead to sunlight or overshading issues.

·        The proposed variation will not result in a loss of views or interrupt views to and from the site.

·        The proposed variation will not result in a loss of privacy afforded to existing properties or future residents of the development.

·        The development will not obstruct existing view corridors.

The site will be developed to its full potential whilst complimenting the future vision envisaged by the planning controls. A suitable address for future residents is being created.

The scale of the development is appropriate and will be consistent with the permitted building height to ensure a positive streetscape presentation.

The development is appropriate for the site and consistent with the desired character of the locality.

The scale of the development is appropriate noting that floor space ratio is complied with. The variation is limited to that part of the building that provides access to the common open space area on the rooftop area.

Given the above, it is considered that there are planning grounds to support the development.

Planner’s comment:

The comments stated above are relevant to the discussion and are supported as follows: -

·        A majority of the building is below 14 metres in height and compliant with the height limit applying to the site. The variation is limited to the lift over run, the common area access and part of a parapet wall facing Cumberland Road.

·        Generally, the building is four storeys in height when viewed from Cumberland Road which is generally consistent with the planning controls applying to the site.

·        Additional amenity is being incorporated into the building in the form of a roof top terrace. The terrace area is provided with seating and a BBQ which ensures the area will be used. It would be possible to achieve compliance by removing the amenity feature but in this instance, it is considered reasonable to support the variation knowing that residents are being given additional amenity in the form of additional common outdoor space.

·        There is no adverse impact on the physical bulk, height and scale of the building and the variation will does not contribute to any additional levels of overshadowing created.

·        The proposed variation will not result in a loss of views or interrupt views to and from the site.

·        The proposed variation will not result in a loss of privacy afforded to existing properties or future residents of the development.

·        The scale of the development is appropriate and will be consistent with the permitted building height to ensure a positive streetscape presentation is achieved.

·        The development is appropriate for the site and consistent with the desired character of the locality.

·        The floor space ratio is slightly less than that permitted being 1.9:1 whereas a floor space ratio of 2:1 is allowed.

On the grounds presented above, it is considered appropriate to support the development under the heading.

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

Applicant’s justification

·        The contravention of the height control does not raise any matter of significance for state or regional environmental planning given the nature of the proposed development.

·        There is no public benefit in maintaining the development standard as it relates to the current proposal. The variation is acceptable in the circumstances of the case given that the underlying objectives of the control are achieved and it will not set an undesirable precedent for future development within the locality as any future development on another site would require consideration of the relevant merits and individual circumstances.

Strict compliance with the prescribed building height requirement is unreasonable and unnecessary in the context of the proposal and the unique circumstances. The proposed development meets the underlying intent of the control and is a compatible form of development that does not result in unreasonable environmental amenity impacts.

The design response aligns with the intent of the control and provides for an appropriate transition to the adjoining properties.

The proposed development promotes the economic use and development of land consistent with the zone and its purpose.

Planner’s comment:

It is considered that strict compliance is unreasonable and unnecessary on the grounds that the development is fully compliant with the relevant objectives of the zone that applies to the site and the development standard. Additionally: -

·        A benefit is being provided in the form of additional common open space for the residents.

·        The additional benefit does not create adverse amenity issues such as privacy and overshadowing.

The proposed development is consistent with the planning intentions for the site and the development exhibits satisfactory design when viewed from the street.

 

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

The proposal remains consistent with the underlying objectives of the control and there are satisfactory planning grounds to support the variation.

The variation to the height control enables a suitable rooftop common open space area for the residents to maximise amenity and useability for residents appropriate for a B1 zone noting that the Apartment Design Guide encourages rooftop common open space in commercial areas.

Planner’s comment:

It is determined that the development is consistent with the relevant objectives and consistent with the Apartment Design Guide in relation to residential amenity and provision of services. It is considered that an adequate level of residential amenity is achieved. It is considered that there are adequate planning grounds to support the development.

Conclusion:

Council officers are satisfied that the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6 subclause (3). Council is further satisfied that the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

It is the view of Council Officers that the justification provided is satisfactory and having considered the application on its merit, the exception to the maximum building height limit, the 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 Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2020

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2020 (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 Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010 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 Auburn Development Control Plan 2010

The Auburn Development Control Plan 2010 (Residential Flat Buildings) is relevant to the development application. The development has been assessed using the Residential Flat Buildings Chapter and the following variations are identified. A comprehensive assessment is contained in Appendix D attached to the report.

 

 

As indicated in the compliance table above, the proposed development departs from Part 2.2 (Subpart D1), Part 2.10 (Subpart D1) and Part 3.3 (Subpart D1) relating to site coverage, dwelling size and deep soil zone as specified above. The variations are considered to be satisfactory for the following reasons: -

·        The Apartment Design Guide generally overrides Council's controls in relation to the above mentioned variations.

·        The site is located within the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone. The provisions stated above address apartment buildings within the R4 High Density Residential zones and do not address situations where commercial premises are incorporated into such developments at ground level.

·        The development is providing satisfactory amenity for residents and the proposed intensity of use is considered satisfactory for residents.

Irrespective of the variations, it is considered that the proposal performs adequately from an environmental planning viewpoint and may be supported. Furthermore, the development falls under the following chapters of the Auburn Development Control Plan 2010.

·        Local Centres.

·        Parking and Loading.

·        Stormwater Drainage.

·        Access and Mobility.

·        Waste.

The assessment demonstrates full compliance with the stated development control plan chapters although further assessment in relation to car parking numbers under the Parking and Loading Chapter of the Auburn Development Control Plan is required.

 

Parking and Loading Chapter

In relation to car parking, the development is required to have the following car parking provisions.

·        Residential car parking - 20 spaces.

·        Visitor - 4 spaces.

·        Commercial - 5 spaces.

For a total of 29 spaces.

The basement car park plans are showing the following: -

·        Residential - 26 spaces.

·        Visitor - 4 spaces.

·        Commercial - 5 spaces.

Plus 1 bay for loading and unloading purposes for vans.

For a total of 35 spaces plus 1 loading / unloading bay for vans.

There is a surplus of 6 spaces and it is possible to alter a car space to allow for the parking of motorbikes which would reduce the surplus by 1 space to 5 spaces. This may be addressed as a condition attached to any consent issued.

Further, there is a requirement to incorporate a vehicle turning bay into the basement car park to allow vehicles to be turned around and leave in forward motion. This is capable of being achieved and will result in a final surplus of 4 car parking spaces within the basement car park.

There is no objection to the surplus of four car parking spaces as the excess is not contributing to an excess size of the basement car park and there is no excess of bulk and scale to the overall development. It is considered appropriate to allow for a surplus of spaces given that the site is situated more than 1 km from the nearest railway station being the Regents Park Railway Station. While there is a bus stop within the vicinity of the site, residents will still be reliant on the use of a motor car to access the town centres and associated services. It is considered reasonable to support the development in this instance.

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))

Advertised (newspaper)                  Mail           Sign               Not Required

In accordance with Council’s Notification requirements contained within the Auburn Development Control Plan 2010, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of fourteen (14) days between Tuesday 17 March and Tuesday 31 March 2020. There were no submissions or objections to the development that is sought.

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. The development requires the payment of contributions in accordance with Section 7.11 of Cumberland Local Infrastructure Contribution Plans. A figure of $286,397 is calculated for 3 x 1 bedroom apartments, 15 x 2 bedroom apartments and 1 x 3 bedroom apartment. The figure is subject to indexation as per the relevant plan. The draft determination attached includes a condition requiring payment of the contribution prior to 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 and the following planning instruments:

·        State Environmental Planning Policy 33 “Hazardous and Offensive Development”.

·        State Environmental Planning Policy 55 "Remediation of Land".

·        State Environmental Planning Policy 64 "Advertising and Signage".

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

·        State Environmental Planning Policy "Infrastructure" 2007.

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

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

·        Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

·        Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2020.

·        Auburn Development Control Plan 2010.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone under the relevant provisions of the Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.

The proposal is 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.

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 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 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the development may be approved subject to conditions.

 

Report Recommendation: That Development Application 2020/0080 for  the demolition of existing structures, lot consolidation and the construction of a four storey mixed use development, comprising of a commercial premises on the ground floor, nineteen residential units and two levels of basement car parking on land at 234-236 Cumberland Road Auburn be approved subject to conditions as listed in the attached schedule.

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Elevations, Sections and Shadow Diagrams  

4.      Landscape Plan  

5.      Stormwater / Engineering Plans  

6.      4.6 Variation Request  

7.      Appendix A - ADG Compliance Table  

8.      Appendix B - State Environmental Planning Policy 64 Table  

9.      Appendix C - Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010 Compliance Table  

10.    Appendix D - Auburn Development Control Plan 2010  

11.    Appendix E - Auburn Development Control Plan 2010 - Local Centres  

12.    Refused Plans for DA2017/282   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 14 October 2020

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 14 October 2020

Attachment 3

Elevations, Sections and Shadow Diagrams

 14 October 2020

Attachment 4

Landscape Plan

 14 October 2020

Attachment 5

Stormwater / Engineering Plans

 14 October 2020

Attachment 6

4.6 Variation Request

 14 October 2020

Attachment 7

Appendix A - ADG Compliance Table

 14 October 2020

Attachment 8

Appendix B - State Environmental Planning Policy 64 Table

 14 October 2020

Attachment 9

Appendix C - Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010 Compliance Table

 14 October 2020

Attachment 10

Appendix D - Auburn Development Control Plan 2010

 14 October 2020

Attachment 11

Appendix E - Auburn Development Control Plan 2010 - Local Centres

 14 October 2020

Attachment 12

Refused Plans for DA2017/282

 14 October 2020

 14 October 2020

 

Item No: LPP050/20

Development Application for 78 Frances Street, Lidcombe

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Acting Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    REV2020/0004  

 

 

1.      Development Application No. REV2020/0004 was received on 12 June 2020 for the Section 8.3 Review of the Cumberland Local Planning Panel’s determination for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey boarding house development comprising two separate buildings and a total of 25 boarding rooms and 1 managers room, over basement car parking (State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009).

2.      The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 2 July 2020 and 16 July 2020. In response, Council received a total of 11 unique submissions.

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

4.      The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal is considered to be a contentious development.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is legally described as Lot 1 DP 170277 and is known as 78 Frances Street LIDCOMBE NSW 2141. The land is regular in shape with a frontage width of 15.24m and an average depth of 63.49m, resulting in a total site area covering 966.8m2. The site is located on the south eastern side of Frances Street. The site has a moderate slope towards the rear with a fall of approximately 1.8m.

The site is currently occupied by an existing single storey brick and fibro cottage with tile roof and associated outbuilding including 2 detached carports and 2 detached metal sheds located on the southern side of the site.

The character of the residential development in the locality is undergoing transition from modest single storey residential dwellings to larger two storey multi dwelling residential developments. The existing developments adjoining the site include a multi dwelling development directly to the south and a single storey dwelling house directly to the north. Further north of the site is another multi dwelling development at 84 Frances Street and several multi dwelling developments also exist on the opposite side of Frances Street. The site is situated in an R3 zoning and adjoins an R2 zone boundary to the rear.

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 12 June 2020 seeking a review of the CLPP’s determination of refusal for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey boarding house development comprising two separate buildings containing 25 boarding rooms and 1 manager’s room, over basement car parking. It should be noted that Council staff initially supported the application by way of a deferred commencement approval.

Specific works of the proposed development include:

·        Demolish existing single storey dwelling and ancillary structures including a detached fibro shed and carports along the southern side boundary.

·        Removal of five (5) trees including Council’s street tree.

·        Construct a 2x2 storey boarding house development containing 26 boarding rooms (comprising of 22 single rooms, 3 double rooms and 1 manager room) accommodating a total of 29 lodgers. Each room is self-contained being equipped with a kitchen, bathroom and laundry facility that is integrated into the kitchen. The development also provides a communal room, a manager’s room with separate courtyard attached and 3 boarding rooms which are nominated as accessible rooms (G09, 110 and 117). A lift is also proposed to allow access from the basement level to the ground & first floor levels.

·        Construct a basement level car park to accommodate 14 car spaces including 3 accessible spaces with a turning bay, 6 motorcycle spaces, stairs for egress and a new driveway via Frances Street.

·        Site drainage and landscaping works which include a communal open space area located in the central courtyard with direct access from the communal room and provision of 6 bicycle spaces.

The notable differences proposed between the previous design and the current design are as follows:

a)      Despite there being no difference in the number of boarding rooms proposed, it is noted that there is a slight decrease in the number of double rooms proposed from 7 to 3 and an increase in the number of single rooms proposed from 18 to 22 resulting in an overall reduction in the maximum number of occupants/lodgers that can be accommodated on site from 32 to 29.

b)      Changes to the architectural character of the building which now incorporates a pitched roof form as opposed to a roof parapet design including changes to the materials and finishes, additional fenestration and other façade design features.

c)      Increased rear building setback from 4m to 10m

d)      Removal of the stair link resulting from the change in level to the landscaped central communal open space area for level access.

e)      Enlarge the size of windows to the northern and southern side elevations with fixed obscured glazing to lower pane of 1.6m above finished floor level.

History

On 13 May 2020, the Cumberland Local Planning Panel resolved to refuse DA2019/286 for the construction of a 2x2 storey boarding house containing 26 rooms with basement level parking. The reasons for the refusal were as follows:

a)      The Panel is not satisfied that the design of the development is compatible with the character of the area, in particular:

i.     the elevations are institutional in character and inconsistent with the surrounding residential developments

ii.    the bulk of the building is located to the rear of the site

iii.   the lack of architectural merit with the front façade of the building is compounded by the dominant impact of the driveway

iv.   the materials and colours of the building materials

b)      The proposal has adverse shadowing impacts

c)      The amenity of the rooms is compromised by the desire to deal with privacy impacts on adjoining properties.

On 12 June 2020, Council received the subject s8.3 Review application seeking approval for the same development (i.e. demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey boarding house development comprising two separate buildings and a total of 25 boarding rooms and 1 manager’s room, over basement car parking). The proponent has sought to address the reasons for refusal by incorporating the following design amendments:

a)      Altering the architectural character of the proposed building elevations to respond to the residential nature, character and streetscape of the surrounding developments in the area so as to demonstrate compatibility which includes a new pitched roof form, changes to the materials and finishes that incorporates of a neutral palate and an increase in the rear building setback of 10m from the previous 4m.

b)      Submission of additional shadow study to demonstrate that the extent of shadow impact on the private open space associated with townhouse units 6-11 is largely due to the orientation of the site and therefore some level of overshadowing is unavoidable. However, the shadow study also indicates that solar amenity into the residential units on the northern side will not be lost as the morning sun will still penetrate into the living areas of those townhouses affected. Moreover, it is considered that the adjoining townhouse development would incur similar overshadowing impacts to that of any two storey townhouse development, if it were to be developed on the site instead.

c)      Changes to the fenestration details of the development to improve room amenity and outlook with the provision of larger size windows containing fixed obscured glazing to a minimum height of 1.6m. Appropriate conditions will be imposed to reinforce this.

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by MOMA Architects dated June 2020 and was received by Council on 12 June 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 and therefore can be supported subject to recommended deferred commencement 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 and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Landscape/Tree Management Officer

The development application was referred to Council’s Landscape/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.

Waste Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Waste 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

NSW Police

The application was required to be referred to NSW Police for comment. Council received formal correspondence on 6/07/2020 raising no objections to the proposed development subject to advisory conditions being recommended to be imposed should consent be granted.

Planning Comments

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

The proposed development is affected by the following Environmental Planning Instruments:

(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)     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.

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

BASIX Certificate 1036129M_02 dated issued on 12 June 2020 prepared by Outsource Ideas P/L has been submitted with Council and is considered to be satisfactory.

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

The relevant objectives and provisions of the ARHSEPP 2009 has been considered in the assessment of the application and the proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the boarding house provisions under Division 3 of the plan. A comprehensive assessment has been carried out and is provided in the compliance table below including a detailed discussion in relation to the design of the development being compatible with the local area is also considered.

Clause 30A Character of Local Area

Division 3 of the SEPP contains provisions and development standards that apply to the development for the purpose of a boarding house. The development as proposed is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions and development standards of the instrument at clause ‘30A Character of the local area’. This clause specifies that ‘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’.

In order to determine the compatibility of the proposal, an assessment of the character of the area and application of the ‘character test’ for development derived from the planning principle 11209 of 2005 Project Venture Development’s Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council has been undertaken.

Step 1 – Identify the local area:

The 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 shown in the aerial view provided earlier in the report.

Zoning Map of Locality

 

The site is located on the south eastern side of Frances Street and is situated within an established medium density residential area that is bounded by an R2 zoning interface. The immediate locality is predominantly characterized by detached residential dwellings interspersed with medium density housing and the existing building form consists primarily of 1 and 2 storey single dwelling houses and multi dwelling townhouses.

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

Subject Site

Adjoining Development to the South

Adjoining Development to the North

Development located directly opposite subject site

The subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential and is located on the southern side of Frances Street between Edith Street to the north and Maud Street to the south. The locality is characterised by a mix of residential land uses comprising of one and two storey detached single dwellings and two storey multi dwelling developments. The site is located approximately 800m to the south of the Lidcombe town centre and public transport services.

Immediately adjacent to the south side comprises of a two storey multi dwelling housing development and to the north is a single storey dwelling. Further north of the site contains another two storey multi dwelling development and several multi dwelling developments also exists on the opposite side of Frances Street. The site also borders an R2 zone boundary to the rear which contain single storey dwellings.

The character of the residential development in the immediate locality is undergoing transition from modest single storey dwellings to larger two storey dwellings and multi dwelling developments that is consistent with the R3 Medium Density Residential zone.

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

In order to determine the compatibility of the development with the established character of a local area, the ‘character test’ derived from the Land and Environment Court’s Planning Principle and case law – Project Venture Development’s Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council can be applied. The character test determines the compatibility of the development by asking whether the physical impacts of the proposal on surrounding development is in harmony with the buildings around it and the character of the area. These questions are discussed in detail below.

Are the proposal’s physical impacts on surrounding development acceptable?

The physical impacts include constraints on the development potential of surrounding sites.

The physical impacts of the proposal are assessed having regard to the impact of the development on the amenity of surrounding properties. Amenity in this instance generally include privacy, solar access, visual bulk and compatibility in the streetscape.

With regard to solar access, it is noted that the development will shadow some of the adjoining townhouses respective private open space immediately to the south (units 6-11). However, the scale of the impact is considered reasonable based on the orientation of the block (i.e. the townhouse development possesses a northern side boundary) and therefore some level of overshadowing is unavoidable. Moreover, it is considered that the adjoining townhouse development would incur similar overshadowing impacts to that of any two storey townhouse development, if it were to be developed on the site instead. Therefore, despite the overshadowing of the private open spaces associated with townhouse units 6-11 (as they are located along the northern boundary), it is noted that the north facing windows of those townhouse units will still receive at least 2 hours solar access between 9am and 11am as demonstrated in the shadow elevation plan provided. The other remaining 12 townhouses within the complex (units 1-5 and 12-20) are unaffected by the proposed development.

In terms of privacy, reasonable building separation (through setbacks), side windows placements/sizes and appropriate fencing is proposed to be provided to mitigate direct views and overlooking. Further, privacy screening is also proposed to external stairs adjacent to the lift so as to further minimise overlooking into adjoining buildings.

The site shares a rear common boundary to 57 and 59 Harry Avenue, zoned R2 which are currently occupied by one storey detached dwellings. It is noted that the development provides a greater setback of 10 metres from the rear boundary instead of the previous complying setback of 4m to address the concerns raised by the panel. In this regard, the visual bulk and scale of the development is considered to be compatible and not dissimilar to other two storey residential developments established in the area.

The northern neighbouring properties at 80 and 82 Frances Street (detached single dwelling houses) are located between the subject site and a multi dwelling housing complex at 84 Frances Street. The redevelopment of the site will not result in site isolation of the northern neighbouring properties as the two properties can be amalgamated and full development potential can still be achieved in the R3 Medium Density Residential zone.

Based on the above discussion, the physical impact of the proposal on surrounding developments is considered reasonable and therefore acceptable in this instance.

Step 4 - Is the proposal’s appearance in harmony with the buildings around it and the character of the street?

The main building types established in the local area are one and two storey residential detached single dwelling houses and multi dwelling developments. Given that the predominant future character of the immediate area is to maintain the medium density residential use in terms of use and building type, it is likely that there will be upgrades to the residential housing stock via alterations and additions, knock down rebuilds and new multi dwelling developments. As such, the proposed two storey building form, materials and finishes are considered to be consistent with the emerging development in the area and the proposal is therefore considered to be compatible with the existing and future desired character of the locality with minimal impacts on the neighbouring developments.

(e)     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).

(f)      Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010

The provision of the ALEP 2010 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the ALEP 2010 and the objectives of the R3 Medium Residential Density Zone.

(i)      Permissibility:-

The proposed development is defined as a ‘boarding house’ and is permissible in the R3 Medium Density Residential zone with consent.

A 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.

i)                

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

 

Figure 4 – Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010 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 2020 (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2020 (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.

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

Auburn Development Control Plan 2010

The Auburn DCP 2010 provides guidance for the design and operation of developments to achieve the aims and objectives of the ALEP 2010.

Whilst there are no specific controls under the ADCP 2010 that are directly relevant to a boarding house development, the following sections of the ADCP 2010 have been considered in the assessment:

·        Parking and Loading

·        Access and Mobility

·        Stormwater Drainage

·        Waste

·        Multi Dwellings

The proposal generally complies with the requirements of the ADCP 2010, with the exception of the following clauses of 2.1 and 2.8 of the Multi Dwellings section; relating to minimum frontage width and setback requirements for below ground structures, which are considered acceptable on merit as discussed in further detail below. Moreover, it should be noted that the Multi Dwellings section whilst relevant, is of limited application in so far as the development relates to a boarding house and not a multi dwelling development and therefore is used only to assist in guiding the development. The non-compliances noted are discussed below:

Multi dwellings:

2.1 – D1 Minimum frontage width for Multi dwelling housing is 18m.

The proposal is for a purpose-built boarding house development and as such is not considered to be directly relevant to the type of land use proposed. The site has a minimum frontage of 15.34m and the development is consistent with built form objectives in relation to the form, scale and height and therefore responds appropriately to the site characteristics and locality.

2.8 - D1 Below ground structures shall comply with a side setback of 1.2m to provide for deep soil planting and an adequate area for construction.

The development proposes a nil boundary setback in the basement level. Despite the non-compliance noted, the development still meets the objectives of this requirement for the purposes of providing deep soil planting which has been proposed at the front and northern portion of the site. A deep soil area of approximately 103sqm has been provided on site and is considered adequate and complies with the minimum 10% deep soil requirement.

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 Rag).

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 2 July 2020 and 16 July 2020. The notification generated a total of eleven unique (11) submissions in respect of the proposal with Nil disclosing a political donation or gift. Previous objectors who made submissions against the original application were also notified of the s8.3 Review application.

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

Figure 5 – 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:

The development requires the payment of contributions in accordance with Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plans (Auburn Development Contributions Plan 2007).

The calculation is based on:

·    26 x 1 bedroom, less credit for 3 bedroom = $75,643.15.

As at 14/09/2020, the fee payable is $75,643.15. This figure is subject to indexation as per the relevant plan. The draft determination attached includes a condition requiring payment of the contribution prior to 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, State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, Auburn LEP and Auburn DCP and is considered to be satisfactory for deferred commencement approval subject to conditions.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the R3 Medium Density Zone under the relevant provisions of the Auburn LEP 2010. The proposal is generally consistent with all statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the development. 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.

 

Report Recommendation: 1.      That Development Application No. REV2020/0004 for Section 8.3 Review of the Cumberland Local Planning Panel’s determination for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey boarding house development comprising two separate buildings and a total of 25 boarding rooms and 1 managers room, over basement car parking (State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009) on land at 78 Frances Street LIDCOMBE  NSW  2141 be approved as deferred commencement consent subject to conditions listed in the attached schedule. 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 including Shadow Plans and Evacuation Plan  

3.      Submissions Received  

4.      Plan of Management  

5.      Landscape Plans  

6.      Stormwater Plans  

7.      Acoustic Report  

8.      Survey Plan  

9.      (Refused) Architectural Plans for Reference   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 14 October 2020

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans including Shadow Plans and Evacuation Plan

 14 October 2020

Attachment 3

Submissions Received

 14 October 2020

Attachment 4

Plan of Management

 14 October 2020

Attachment 5

Landscape Plans

 14 October 2020

Attachment 6

Stormwater Plans

 14 October 2020

Attachment 7

Acoustic Report

 14 October 2020

Attachment 8

Survey Plan

 14 October 2020

Attachment 9

(Refused) Architectural Plans for Reference

 14 October 2020

 14 October 2020

 

Item No: LPP051/20

Modification Application for 39 - 41 Aurelia Street, Toongabbie

Responsible Division:                    Environment & Planning

Officer:                                              Acting Executive Manager Development and Building

File Number:                                    MOD2020/0169  

 

 

1.      Modification Application No. MOD2020/0169 was received on 4 June 2020 for the Section 4.55(2) modification for various modifications to approved shop top housing development including  reconfiguration of apartment mix and commercial space to provide 33 residential units and 3 commercial ground floor spaces, increase parking on-site to facilitate 52 cars, modify the rooftop open space, increase in floor levels and overall height and changes to the materials and finishes.

2.      The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 21 days between 25 June 2020 and 16 July 2020. In response, no submissions were received.

3.      The assessment of the application identified issues including ground floor layout, basement reconfiguration and parking and as such the application was deferred seeking additional information. Amended plans and information were provided to Council on 25 September 2020. The amended plans did not warrant re-notification.

4.      The application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65), Holroyd Local Environmental Plan 2013 (HLEP), Apartment Design Guide and Holroyd Development Control Plan 2013 (HDCP).

5.      The application involves the following non-compliances which are considered supportable as discussed in detail in the body of this report:

 

Note: Only new non-compliances have been discussed within the body of the report which are proposed under the subject modification application. The original consent with the approved architectural plans is attached at Attachment 3.

6.      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 modification.

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

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

Introduction

The site forms Lot 39 and Lot 38 Sec C DP 10697 and is known as 39 - 41 Aurelia Street TOONGABBIE  NSW  2146. The site has an area of  1393.5m2 and a frontage to Aurelia Street of 30.48m. The site is generally rectangular and flat. The subject site and neighbouring allotments directly to the north east and southwest are zoned B2- Local Centre. The rear of the site adjoins properties which front Junia Avenue and are zoned R4- High Density Residential.

The existing developments adjoining the site include 2 storey residential flat building to south west and a single storey detached dwelling house to the north east. A recently constructed 4 storey residential flat building is located to the north western boundary. Toongabbie Train Station is 300m (approx.) from the subject site. The site is located at the fringe of Toongabbie Town Centre.

Figure 1 – Aerial view of subject site

Figure 2 – Locality Plan of subject site

 

Figure 3 & 4 –  Subject site

Description of the Proposed Development

Council has received a modification application involving the following works:

·        Changes to the external treatment and minor changes to façade articulation;

·        Modification of the communal open space and provision of demarcated spaces, furniture, shading and improved planters;

·        Modification of the unit mix from 32 units to 33 units;

·        Changes to the units internal layout;

·        A reduction to the approved commercial floor area from 239.5m2 to 202.2m2

·        Reconfiguration of the basement and increase to the approved  parking spaces  from 41 to 54 car spaces.

·        Relocation of the vehicular access driveway approximately 9m south of the northern property boundary.

The following table provides a comparison of approved development and proposed modification:

 

Figure 6- Comparison of approved and proposed façade.

Figure 7- Comparison of approved and proposed roof top communal open space.

Figure 8- Photomontage

 

 

History

·        A pre lodgement meeting PDA/513 was held on 23 September 2015 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 5 storey shop top housing development comprising 34 residential units and 2 commercial tenancies over 2 basement levels of parking accommodating 34 car parking spaces;

·        Development Application 2015/627/1 was refused on 11 April 2017 for the Demolition of existing structures; consolidation of 2 lots into lot; construction of a 5 storey shop top housing development comprising 32 residential units; 5 ground floor commercial units above 2 levels of basement parking accommodating 46 carparking spaces; and

·        REV2015/627/1 was approved  on 11/10/2017 for S82A Review of Council's refusal for demolition of existing structures; consolidation of 2 lots into 1 lot; construction of a 5 storey shop top housing development comprising 32 residential units; 4 ground floor commercial units above 2 levels of basement parking accommodating 41 carparking spaces.

·        M2015/627/2 S4.55(1A) modification was approved on 5 April 2019 for alterations and additions in association with the proposed turntable within the loading zone of the approved shop top housing development.

·        Schedule “A” letter was issued on 9 October 2019.

·        A pre lodgement meeting PL2019/0072 was held on 13 February 2020 for alterations and additions to the approved shop top housing.

The history of the subject modification application is provided as below:

 

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Dickson Rothschild dated 19 June 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 having regard to stormwater management and the changes proposed to the basement reconfiguration, including parking provision, and the proposed modifications can therefore be supported, subject to recommended conditions of consent, which have been included in the 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 is satisfactory in terms of the proposed waste collection, and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent, which have been included in the recommended conditions of consent. 

Environmental Health Unit

The development application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health Unit for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to recommended conditions of consent, which have been included in the recommended conditions of consent. 

Planning Comments

Section 4.55(2):

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)

The requirement at clause 7 of SEPP 55 for Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development was considered under the original application. The proposed modifications do not raise any new concerns about potential contamination.

(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 revised design verification statement signed by registered architect Dickson Rothschild and Philip Perrie Architect was submitted with the s4.55(2) application.

A comprehensive assessment against the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) controls and SEPP 65 sets 9 design quality principles are provided at Attachment 4. The following table sets out the ADG non-compliances.

 

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

Tree removal on site has been approved in the original assessment. The proposal does not exceed the biodiversity offsets scheme threshold. Therefore, the proposed vegetation removal is considered acceptable.

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

A revised BASIX certificate no. 1097342M dated 12 May 2020 was submitted by the applicant. The certificate achieves target scores and is 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

Note: Will be superseded once Draft SEPP Environment comes into effect.

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

Holroyd Local Environmental Plan (HLEP) 2013

The provision of the Holroyd LEP 2013 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Holroyd LEP 2013 and the objectives of the B2 – Local centre zone.

(a)     Permissibility:-

The proposed development is defined as a ‘shop top housing’ and is permissible in the B2 – Local Centre zone with consent. The proposed modification will continue the use of the development as approved being a shop top housing.

The relevant matters to be considered under Holroyd LEP 2013 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive LEP assessment is contained in Attachment 5.

 

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 2020 (Draft CLEP)

The Draft Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2020 (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 relevant planning controls for the subject site, as contained within the Holroyd Local Environment Plan, 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 DCP. A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 7. 

The proposed development generally complies with the provisions of Holroyd DCP 2013 and is considered acceptable from an environmental planning view point.

The proposed modification to reconfigure car parking spaces within the basement  will result in the imposition of additional conditions by Council for the deletion of two proposed car spaces to provide compliant visitor spaces and to allow for sufficient manoeuvring area. The reduction in the numbers of car spaces from 54 to 52 will continue to comply with Holroyd DCP 2013 car parking rates as provided in Attachment 6.

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 25 June 2020 and 16 July 2020. The notification generated no submissions in respect of the proposal.

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

The development requires the payment of contributions in accordance with Holroyd Section 94 Contributions Plans.

The calculation is based on:

·        9x 1 bedroom units = $80,684.00

·        24 x 2 bedroom units = $363,869.00

·        Commercial area = $202.2m2

·        credit for the existing 2 x 3-bedroom dwellings = $40,000

As at 14 October 2020, the fee payable is $407, 201.00. This figure is subject to indexation as per the relevant plan. The draft determination attached includes a condition requiring payment of the contribution prior to issue of 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 as modified is appropriately located within the B2 – Local Centre zone under the relevant provisions of the Holroyd LEP 2013, however variation in relation to the additional building height 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 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.

 

Report Recommendation: That Modification Application No. MOD2020/0169 for Section 4.55(2) application for various modifications to an approved shop top housing development including reconfiguration of apartment mix and commercial space to provide for 33 residential units and 3 commercial ground floor spaces, increase parking on-site to facilitate 52 cars, modify the rooftop open space, increase in floor levels and overall height and changes to the materials and finishes on land at 39 - 41 Aurelia Street, Toongabbie  NSW  2146 be approved subject to attached conditions.

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Original Development Consent  

4.      SEPP 65 Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development  

5.      Holroyd LEP 2013  

6.      Holroyd Development Control Plan  

7.      Applicant's Justification to Building Height   

 

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 14 October 2020

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 14 October 2020

Attachment 3

Original Development Consent

 14 October 2020

Attachment 4

SEPP 65 Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

 14 October 2020

Attachment 5

Holroyd LEP 2013

 14 October 2020

Attachment 6

Holroyd Development Control Plan

 14 October 2020

Attachment 7

Applicant's Justification to Building Height

 14 October 2020