8 October 2025

A meeting of the Cumberland Local Planning Panel will be held at 11:30am at the Zoom on Wednesday, 8 October 2025. Business as below:

Yours faithfully

Peter J. Fitzgerald

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

6.      Closed Session Reports

 

 8 October 2025

CONTENTS

Report No.  Name of Report                                                                                         Page No.

Development Applications

ELPP020/25 Review Application - 5 Irwin Place, Wentworthville........................................ 5

ELPP021/25 Development Application -77 Warren Road, Woodpark............................ 233

ELPP022/25 Development Application - 297-301 & 305A Parramatta Road, Auburn. 319

ELPP023/25 Development Application - 459 Guildford Road, Guildford....................... 441

ELPP024/25 Development Application - 2-4 Gilba Road, Pendle Hill............................ 553

ELPP025/25 Development Application - 150 Hawkesbury Road, Westmead............... 751

ELPP026/25 Development application - 66 Irrigation Road, Merrylands....................... 911

 

 8 October 2025

Item No: ELPP020/25

Review Application - 5 Irwin Place, Wentworthville

Directorate:                                       Environment and Planning  

Responsible Officer:                       Executive Manager City Planning and Development   

 

 

1.  Review Application 2025/0006 was lodged on the 14 July 2025 being a Section 8.2 Review of the Refusal of DA2024/0515 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a five (5) storey co-living housing development comprising of 30 single rooms over basement parking including external building changes and reconfiguration of the basement parking and internal layout.

2.  The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 24 July 2025 and 7 August 2025. In response, 10 submissions were received.

3.  The subject site is not listed as a heritage item nor located within the heritage conservation area in the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021.

4.  The variations are as follows:

 

5.  The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal is considered to be contentious development, contravenes a development standard by more than 10% and 10 unique submissions were received.

6.  The application is recommended for deferred commencement approval subject to conditions as recommended in the Council’s assessment report.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site forms Lot 6 in DP 239558 and is identified as 5 Irwin Place, Wentworthville. A single storey older style dwelling currently occupies the site.

The site is an irregular shaped allotment located on the northern side of Irwin Place. The site has a frontage of 13.715m and has a site area of 627.9 sqm. The subject site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 (Cumberland LEP 2021).

Irwin Place Park is located to the north and west and a 5 storey residential apartment building lies to the east. Land to the south is zoned R2 Low Density Residential where a number of single and 2 storey dwelling houses exist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The location of the site is shown below edged in yellow.

Figure 1 - Locality Plan of subject site highlighted in yellow [Source: Intramap]

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2 - Aerial view of subject site highlighted in yellow [Source: Nearmap]

Figure 3 - Street view of subject site as seen from Irwin Place

Description of The Development

Council has received a Section 8.2A Review application for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a 5 storey co-living housing development comprising of 30 single rooms over basement car parking. The detailed breakdown of the proposal is shown below:

·    Demolition of all existing structures including the single storey dwelling, vehicular crossing and associated handstand surfaces. Removal of 7 trees with a maximum height of 17.5m including 4 trees within the subject site and 3 trees within the adjoining public open space.

·    Construction works as follows:

 

History

 

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a s8.2 Review - Statement of Environmental Effects dated 10 July 2025 prepared by Planning Ingenuity which was received by Council on the 10 July 2025 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 Engineering

The Review application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the proposal is considered satisfactory subject to conditions to amend the basement, ramp gradient and access design to comply with AS2890.1.

 

 

Environmental Health

The Review application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officer for comment who has advised that the acoustic report and plan of management are considered satisfactory subject to condition.

Public Spaces Planning and Design

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

Tree Management

The Review application was referred to Council’s Landscape and Tree Officer for comment who has advised that the development remains satisfactory subject to conditions. 

Waste Management

The Review application was referred to Council’s Waste Management Officer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is supported subject to conditions.

External Referrals

Endeavour Energy

The Review application was referred to Endeavour Energy for comment who has advised that the development proposal is supported subject to conditions.

Sydney Water

The Review application was referred to Sydney Water for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Planning Comments

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

Part 8 Reviews and appeals

 

Grounds for Refusal by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel of the Original Development Application and commentary:

The grounds for refusal of the original application are reviewed and addressed below:

State Environmental Planning Policies

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

 

Statement Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (Housing SEPP 2021) - Chapter 3 Diverse housing

The Housing SEPP 2021 applies to the development and a comprehensive assessment of the Housing SEPP 2021 is provided at Appendix A. An assessment has been undertaken against the relevant provisions identified in Chapter 3 Part 3 Co-living housing and the following numerical variations are identified:

·    Minimum lot size

Section 69(1)(b)(ii) - Development consent must not be granted for development for the purposes of co-living housing unless the consent authority is satisfied that the minimum lot size for the co-living housing is not less than 800sqm.

Planner’s comments: The site has an area of 627.9sqm, which is a shortfall of 172.1sqm of the minimum 800sqm. This presents a 21.51% variation to the numerical standard.

The subject site is an existing isolated site that is bounded by the Irwin Place Park to the west (side) and north (rear) and the existing 5 storeys residential apartment building to the east.

A Clause 4.6 Variation request is submitted and addressed below.

·    Setbacks

Section 69(2)(a)(ii) - Development consent must not be granted for development for the purposes of co-living housing unless the consent authority considers whether the front, side and rear setbacks for the co-living housing are not less than the minimum setback requirements for residential flat buildings under a relevant planning instrument.

Planner’s comments: The required rear setback under Part B3 of the Cumberland DCP 2021 for no less than 30% of the lot length is applicable to the site.

The subject site is irregular in shape and requires a variable rear setback of between 11.1m and 12.48m.

As shown on the architectural plans, the proposed co-living housing will provide a minimum 6.01m from rear property boundary (north) which presents a variation of between 45.86% and 48.16% to the standard.

This rear setback non-compliance is the consequence of the isolated nature and under-sized lot of the subject site. However, the numerical variations are considered acceptable in this case given the building provides a compliant front setback to ensure consistency with the streetscape as seen from Irwin Place. The subject site adjoins Irwin Place Park to the rear and the variation to the rear setback will not result in amenity issues to the neighbouring properties.

Therefore, the non-compliance is considered acceptable and can be supported for the reasons outlined above.

·    Building separation

Section 69(2)(b) - Development consent must not be granted for development for the purposes of co-living housing unless the consent authority considers whether the building will comply with the minimum building separation distances specified in the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) if the co-living housing has at least 3 storeys.

Planner’s comments: The ADG requires a 6m setback on the ground floor to Level 3 (fourth storey) for habitable rooms (up to 12m, 4 storeys) from the side and rear boundaries. The Level 4 (fifth storey) requires a 9m setback for habitable rooms (up to 18m, 8 storeys) from the side and rear boundaries.

The separation distance between habitable rooms / balconies of the proposed building and the eastern side boundary is 3.2m only on all levels and are less than the requirements stated.

Review of the approved building plans of the eastern adjoining residential flat building at 5 Bransgrove Road, Wentworthville (CC2022/0290) identifies that the building is constructed to provide a 7.4m setback on the ground floor level, 9.9m setback on Levels 1 to 3 and 10.22m on Level 4 from the western side boundary which is the common side boundary with 5 Irwin Place. This presents the building separation in accordance with the table below:

The east facing windows of the co-living rooms on Level 1 to 3 are setback 13.1m from the balconies of 5 Bransgrove Street which is considered adequate and acceptable in this instance.

Local Environmental Plans

Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021

The provision of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 (Cumberland LEP 2021) is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with most of the key statutory requirements of the Cumberland LEP 2021 and the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential zone.

(a)     Permissibility

The provision of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 is applicable to the development proposal.

The proposed development is defined as ‘co-living housing’

co-living housing means a building or place that—

(a) has at least 6 private rooms, some or all of which may have private kitchen and bathroom facilities, and

(b) provides occupants with a principal place of residence for at least 3 months, and

(c)  has shared facilities, such as a communal living room, bathroom, kitchen or laundry, maintained by a managing agent, who provides management services 24 hours a day,

but does not include backpackers’ accommodation, a boarding house, a group home, hotel or motel accommodation, seniors housing or a serviced apartment.

Note - Co-living housing is a type of residential accommodation—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary.

Pursuant to Section 67 of the Housing SEPP 2021, co-living housing development may be carried out with consent on land in a zone which development for the purposes of co-living housing, residential flat buildings and shop top housing is permitted under Chapter 5 or another environmental planning instrument. Residential Flat Buildings and shop-top housing are permitted with consent in an R4 High Density Residential zone under the Cumberland LEP 2021. Therefore, the proposed development is permissible pursuant to Section 67 of the Housing SEPP 2021.

The relevant matters to be considered under Cumberland LEP 2021 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive Cumberland LEP 2021 assessment is contained at Appendix B.

(b)     Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards

Clause 4.6 aims to achieve better design outcomes for and from development by allowing an appropriate degree of flexibility to development standards if particular circumstances are satisfied.

Consent may only be granted upon the consent authority being satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated in a document submitted with the application that (a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances and (b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

i.    Minimum Lot Size

The application seeks to vary the development standard for minimum lot size for co-living housing under section 69(1)(b)(ii) of the Housing SEPP 2021.

(a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances.

The decision of Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827, affirmed in Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 set out five common and non-exhaustive ways in which an applicant might demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. They were that:

i)  the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

ii) the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

iii) the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

iv) the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s decisions in granting development consents that depart from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

v) the zoning of the particular land on which the development is proposed to be carried out was unreasonable or inappropriate so that the development standard, which was appropriate for that zoning, was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land and that compliance with the standard in the circumstances of the case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

Applicant’s justification: The proposal satisfies the principles identified in the Housing SEPP 2021 and the Cumberland DCP 2021 in accordance with the Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827 despite the non-compliance to the numerical development standard.

The subject site is isolated and constrained with no opportunity to amalgamate with surrounding development. The proposed co-living housing development will “encourage” housing for more vulnerable members of the community that is compatible with the desired future character of the locality and consistent with the density envisaged by the R4 High Density Residential zone. The proposal is compliant with building height and FSR controls which helps shape the desired bulk, scale and character of the site. The variation to the standard does not result in site planning or building design, which is inconsistent with the desired future character, nor does it impact the amenity of future occupants or neighbouring properties.

In addition, the proposed development has been designed to minimise impacts on surrounding properties in terms of views, privacy, overshadowing and visual instruction. The proposal will provide consistent streetscape alignment, side setbacks and building height and the extent of view loss caused by the non-compliant of lot size would be acceptable.

Therefore, the site area is demonstrably capable of accommodating the development and is considered acceptable with regards to the assumed objective.

Planner’s comments: The variation to the minimum lot size for co-living housing on the site is supported by Council given the existing isolated nature of the site.

As discussed in the report, the amended proposal has incorporated sufficient communal open space on site and the excessive amount of communal living area to the proposed co-living housing development. In this regard, the proposed development is will provide a reasonable level of residential amenity with the locality.

(b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

In respect of there being sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard, Initial Action found that although the phrase ‘environmental planning’ is not defined, it would refer to grounds that relate to the subject matter, scope and purpose of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the objects in section 1.3. To be sufficient, the environmental planning grounds advanced in the written request must justify the contravention of the development standard, not simply promote the benefits of carrying out the development as a whole Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWCA 248.

Applicant’s justification: The applicant’s justification on environmental planning grounds is noted given the subject site is isolated and effectively rule out of any potential amalgamation with respect to the existing surrounding developments. It is also noted that co-living housing is an appropriate use and economic use for the subject site given it is highly accessible nature and proximity to services.

The social benefits of providing additional affordable housing within a highly sought after location should be given weight in the consideration of the variation request. It would be contrary to the public interest to deny the variation due the non-compliance and halt the delivery of much needed accommodation in an accessible and strategic location.

It is considered that there is an absence of any significant material impacts attributed to the breach on the amenity or the environmental values of surrounding properties, the amenity of future building occupants and on the character of the locality.

The above environmental planning grounds are unique circumstances to the proposed development, particularly given the isolated nature of the site with respect to the high density, ownership pattern of the neighbouring property to the east of the site. The proposal will provide for a better planning outcome than a strictly compliant development in many respects. Therefore, there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.”

Planner’s comments: The applicant’s justification is considered to be well founded and the proposal as amended can be supported by Council subject to a merit assessment given that the proposal has incorporated sufficient communal open space and communal living area on site despite the under-sized lot.

Therefore, Council is satisfied that the proposal in its current design is compatible with the future desire character of the area. Therefore, Council is satisfied that the variation request to the minimum lot size may be supported.

ii.   Height of Building

The application seeks to vary the development standard for height of building for under clause 4.3 of the Cumberland LEP 2021 that requires the height of buildings not to exceed 15m on the subject site.

(a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances.

The decision of Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827, affirmed in Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 set out five common and non-exhaustive ways in which an applicant might demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. They were that:

i)  the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

ii) the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

iii) the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

iv) the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s decisions in granting development consents that depart from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

v) the zoning of the particular land on which the development is proposed to be carried out was unreasonable or inappropriate so that the development standard, which was appropriate for that zoning, was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land and that compliance with the standard in the circumstances of the case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

Applicant’s justification: The Height of Buildings Map nominates a maximum height of 15m at the site. The proposed development exceeds the height of building standard by a maximum of 1.008m (6.72%) associated with the lift overrun. The lift overrun is setback from the front of the building and the edge as viewed from the street. This will ensure the built form will not be imposing or visually jarring to the streetscape.

Excluding the lift overrun, the roof and upper floor protrudes above the maximum building height standard by a maximum of 675mm and this is within the rear portion of the roof plate. The numerical exceedances are extremely minor and will not be noticeable when viewed from the streetscape, public reserve and neighbouring developments.

It is also noted that the existing building at No. 1 Irwin Place was approved with a height variation of approximately 1.35m associated with the lift overrun with a similar variation to the roof level to that proposed by the co-living development. It can therefore be argued that the appropriate density is influenced by the approved and constructed building at No. 1 Irwin Place which contravenes the 15m building height control to a greater extent than that proposed on the subject site.

The subject site is in transition to higher density development reflective of the applicable planning controls and the recently constructed development immediately to the north and east. The proposed development is considered to be compatible with the height, built form, bulk and scale of the recently approved and emerging character of the locality despite the height breach.

The proposal has been designed to ensure a compliant solar outcome for neighbouring properties. The building at No. 1 Irwin Place will be unimpacted between 9am and approximately 2pm and a portion of the public place to the west in the afternoon (12pm-4pm). Therefore, the extent of the variation will not result in any significant loss of solar access for surrounding properties.

In terms of privacy, along the eastern boundary, a minimum 3m setback has been provided to habitable windows on the upper level. A minor encroachment is noted with regard to a blank wall, providing a minimum setback of 2.87m. The residential flat building at No. 1 Irwin Place has a minimum setback of 10.3m and when adding the varying 2.8m eastern side setback for the subject site, the proposal reasonably satisfies ADG separation distances.

Planner’s comments: The proposed building has a maximum building height of 16.008m to the lift overrun and 15.675m to part of the habitable space of the communal living area and private rooms on Level 5. The variation is up to 6.72%.

The proposal has been amended to provide the minimum floor to floor height of 2.9m to all habitable area on all levels, the proposed 200mm thickness slab. As such, it is believed that the proposed development is providing a reasonable level of amenity for the future occupants of the co-living housing development.

(b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

In respect of there being sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard, Initial Action found that although the phrase ‘environmental planning’ is not defined, it would refer to grounds that relate to the subject matter, scope and purpose of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the objects in s.1.3. To be sufficient, the environmental planning grounds advanced in the written request must justify the contravention of the development standard, not simply promote the benefits of carrying out the development as a whole Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWCA 248.

Applicant’s justification: The maximum extent of variation sought is minor and is considered that there is an absence of any significant material impacts attributed to the breach on the amenity or the environmental values of surrounding properties, the amenity of future building occupants and on the character of the locality.

The non-compliant will not contribute to a loss of privacy but improve passive surveillance onto the public road and public reserve. The proposed height variation will not be visually dominant from the street frontages of the site, public reserves or adjoining properties given its minor in nature and the overshadowing caused by the proposed development is minor. Further, the built form is compatible with that of the recently constructed building at No. 1 Irwin Place any height variation is not a new element in the streetscape and will not appear out of context.

The height breach is in part, a result of the site topography, which has a fall of approximately 700mm over the length of the subject site. That is, with the exception of the lift overrun, the change in topography is greater than the greatest extent of the variation to the building (675mm). This is a specific condition that the Cumberland LEP 2021 height limit does not contemplate.

The subject site is isolated with respect to the existing development on surrounding properties and the proposed development is entirely compatible with the bulk, scale and building height of properties surrounding the subject site and as per the Cumberland LEP 2021 as discussed above.

Again, co-living housing is considered to be an appropriate form of development for the subject site given its highly accessible nature, proximity to numerous public transport options, services and facilities. The proposal will provide for much needed affordable housing in a strategic location in which co-living housing represents a suitable use for the site.

The proposed development meets the objectives of the development standard and meets the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential zone through the provision of a well-designed and located co-living development, inclusive of affordable and diverse housing. In fact, to request strict compliance would halt redevelopment and would be entirely antipathetic to the zone objectives.

Planner’s comments: The proposed 2.9m floor to floor height including the 200mm slab thickness is considered acceptable and comply with the requirement of the BCA.

Whilst the proposal exceeds the maximum allowable building height that applies to the site, the proposal as amended will unlikely adverse the amenity of the local area and the existing adjoining properties. In addition, the co-living housing is permissible and compatible form of development to this R4 High Density Residential zone land under the Cumberland LEP 2021.

Accordingly, as indicated in the commentary above, there are sufficient environment planning grounds to justify contravening the height of building standard.

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

Council has received a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal. As part of this approval, public exhibition of the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal has commenced. The public exhibition was carried out between the 4 March 2025 to 17 April 2025.

The Draft Planning Proposal seeks to revitalise Woodville Road by amending planning controls in the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) 2021 for 31 sites located around the three (3) precincts of Woodville North, Merrylands East and Woodville South.

The subject application was received on 14 July 2025 and the site does not fall within the Draft Woodville Road Corridor. Therefore, no further consideration is required.

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

Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 (Cumberland DCP 2021)

The Cumberland DCP 2021 does not specify any development control for co-living housing development within the local government area. However, given the subject site is zoned as R4 High Density Residential under the Cumberland LEP 2021, the residential flat building controls being Part B3 Residential Flat Building and Part F4-2(3) Finlayson Transitway Precinct and Part G Miscellaneous Development Controls of the Cumberland DCP 2021 are the most applicable development controls to inform the built form for this development.

The development fails to comply with the relevant provisions of the Cumberland DCP 2021, whilst non-compliances occur in relations to side and rear setback, building separation/visual privacy, access and basement design and considered unacceptable. A comprehensive Cumberland DCP 2021 assessment is contained in Appendix C.

 

As indicated in the compliance table above, the proposed development departs from controls in Parts B3 and G3 of the Cumberland DCP 2021. Having regard to site restrictions, it is considered that the proposal performs satisfactorily from an environmental planning viewpoint as detailed in the above table.

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

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

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

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (EP&A Reg).

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

All relevant issues have been considered in the assessment of this proposal.

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

The subject site and locality are known to be affected by flooding and overland flow. The design and site constraints together with being an under-sized lot for co-living housing are unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding residential properties. 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 Cumberland DCP, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 24 July 2025 and 7 August 2025. The notification generated 10 submissions in respect of the proposal with no submissions disclosing a political donation or gift.

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

Figure 7 - Submissions summary table

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

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

CUMBERLAND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS 2020

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

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution of $201,898.00 is payable, pursuant to Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act 1979, as calculated on the cost of works. A condition of consent has been imposed on the development approval the ensure this contribution payment would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

HOUSING AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CONTRIBUTION (HPC)

In accordance with s7.24, s7.26 and s7.28 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is subject to the payment of the HPC given co living housing is defined as commercial development under the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Housing and Productivity Contributions) Order 2024.

A condition of consent has been imposed on the development consent in accordance with Section 7.28 of the EP&A Act 1979 requiring the payment of the HPC.

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 (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 and Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the E1 Local Centre zone under the relevant provisions of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021. The proposal is 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 as a deferred commencement consent subject to conditions.

There are no consultation processes for Council associated with this report.

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

There are no policy implications for Council associated with this report.

The final outcome of this matter will be notified. The objectors will also be notified in writing of the outcome.

1.  That the Clause 4.6 variation request to contravene the minimum lot size development standard, pursuant to Section 69(1)(b)(ii) the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 be supported.

2.  That the Clause 4.6 variation request to contravene the height of building development standard, pursuant to Clause 4.3 the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 be supported.

3.  That the Review Application REV2025/0006 being a Section 8.2 Review of the Refusal of DA2024/0515 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a five (5) storey co-living housing development comprising of 30 single rooms over basement parking including external building changes and reconfiguration of the basement parking and internal layout on land at 5 Irwin Place, Wentworthville be approved as a deferred commencement consent subject to conditions as listed in Attachment A.

4.  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 and Landscape Plans  

3.      Stormwater/Engineering Plans  

4.      Redacted Submissions  

5.      Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Minimum Lot Size  

6.      Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Height of Building  

7.      Plan of Management  

8.      Appendix A - Housing SEPP 2021 Assessment  

9.      Appendix B - Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment  

10.    Appendix C - Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment   

 

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 2

Architectural and Landscape Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 3

Stormwater/Engineering Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 4

Redacted Submissions

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 5

Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Minimum Lot Size

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 6

Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Height of Building

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 7

Plan of Management

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 8

Appendix A - Housing SEPP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 9

Appendix B - Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP020/25

Attachment 10

Appendix C - Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

 8 October 2025

Item No: ELPP021/25

Development application -77 Warren Road, Woodpark

Directorate:                                       Environment and Planning  

Responsible Officer:                       Executive Manager City Planning and Development   

 

 

1.   Development Application No. DA2025/0449 was accepted on 6 July 2025 for the demolition of existing garage and pergola at rear and construction of a secondary dwelling pursuant to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021

2.   The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 16 July 2025 and 30 July 2025. In response, no submissions were received.

3.   There are no heritage items located on the subject site, nor is the site located within a Heritage Conservation Area. However, the site is located in close approximately of a heritage item known as Pipehead, water supply canal and associated works and is identified as item no. I01629 under Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021. The Pipehead, water supply canal and associated works is of State significance for its historic, associative, aesthetic, social, scientific, rarity and representative values. Historically, the Pipehead is significant for its importance in the history of water supply in Sydney, as one of the key components of the Upper Nepean System from 1913 until 1995.

4.   The subject application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (SEPP Housing 2021), the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021(CLEP 2021), and the Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 (CDCP 2021).

5.   Clause 53(2)(b) of the Statement of Environmental Planning Policy Housing (2021) stipulates that the number of parking spaces provided on the site is the same as the number of parking spaces provided on the site immediately before the development is carried out.  The proposal seeks approval for demolition of existing single garage and construction of a secondary dwelling under Housing SEPP 2021. It should be noted that one approved parking space currently exists on site.

 

6.   The variations are as follows:

 

7.   The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal contravenes a development standard by more than 10%. (Clause 53(2)(b) of the Statement of Environmental Planning Policy Housing (2021))

 

8.   The application is recommended for Approval subject to the conditions as recommended in Council’s assessment report.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The site forms Lot 11 DP 200128 and is known as 77 Warren Road Woodpark. The site has an area of 557.4 square metres and has a frontage to Warren Road of 15.24m. The site is fairly flat.

A site inspection of the premises, carried out on 31st of May 2024 confirmed that the site is currently occupied by a single storey dwelling with attached and detached ancillary structures including a detached garage and pergola, a driveway servicing Warren Road located on the south-east corner of the site and associated soft and hard paved areas. There are trees located the site and on council’s nature strip. There is an existing tree located at the rear that requires to be removed to facilitate the construction of the proposed development. Application is referred to the Council’s tree management officer who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory subject to recommended conditions of consent.

The site does not consist of any Council easement. However, council notes a Sydney water pipe traverses through the rear and front of the site. Therefore, conditions have been imposed requiring the plan to be submitted to the ‘Tap In’ portal to be reviewed.

The existing developments adjoining the site include single storey dwelling on north and side. The area is generally low-density residential character. The location of the site is shown below and edged in purple.

Figure 1 – Locality Plan of subject site

Figure 2 – Aerial view of subject site

Figure 3 – Street view of subject site and the existing garage at the rear

Description of The Development

Development application (DA2025/0449) was accepted on 6 July 2025 seeking approval for the demolition of existing garage and pergola at rear, construction of a secondary dwelling pursuant to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021. The detailed breakdown of the proposal is shown below:

·    Demolition of a single garage and a pergola located at the rear.

·    Construction of a secondary dwelling with an internal floor area of 60m2 consisting of:

o  Bathroom and laundry, open style living and kitchen area, two (2) bedrooms and a deck at the rear.

History

1.   Building application (74-150) was approved for garage on 14 Feb 1974

2.   Building application (84-935) was approved for addition to the existing dwelling on 25 Sep 1984

3.   DA1999/809/1 was approved for construction of pergola on 23 Feb 1999.

4.   Prelodgement meeting was conducted on 4 Feb 2025 for Demolition of existing garage and construction of a new carport and secondary dwelling

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Edith Makra dated 13 May 2025, received by Council on 28 June 2025 and a Clause 4.6 Variation Statement prepared by Natalie Richter dated 8 May 2025 which received by Council on 28 June 2025.

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 Engineering

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the development proposal is satisfactory subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Environmental Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officer for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Tree Management

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

External Referrals

The development application was referred to Sydney Water for comments who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to recommended conditions of consent.

 

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:

 

Statement Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021

The application has been submitted under Part 1 Division 2 of the Housing SEPP. It should be noted that the proposal fully complies with the key planning controls contained within the Housing SEPP, with the exception of Clause 53(b)(2), which states that “the number of parking spaces provided on the site is the same as the number of parking spaces provided on the site immediately before the development is carried out.”

Notwithstanding the variation noted above, the proposed development is considered acceptable from an environmental planning viewpoint and a comprehensive assessment against SEPP (Housing) 2021 and a discussion of the clause 4.6 request is provided below.

 

 

 

 

Local Environmental Plans

Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021

The provision of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 and the objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential Zone. 

a)   Permissibility:

The proposed development is defined as a secondary dwelling and is not permissible under the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan on R2 zone with consent. However, pursuant to Clause 50 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 the following applies:

“… development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling on land in a residential zone if development for the purposes of a dwelling house is permissible on the land under another environmental planning instrument.”

As per the definitions within this division of the SEPP, a residential zone includes the R2 Low Density Residential Zone. In this regard, a secondary dwelling is permissible with consent within the R2 zoned land under the provisions of the SEPP (Housing) 2021.

The relevant matters to be considered under Cumberland LEP and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive LEP assessment is contained in Attachment 4.

(b)     Clause 4.6 – Variation to Clause 53(2)(b) of SEPP (Housing) 2021 – Number of parking spaces

Clause 4.6 aims to achieve better design outcomes for and from development by allowing an appropriate degree of flexibility to development standards if particular circumstances are satisfied.

The application seeks to vary the development standard under section 53(2)(b) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 which requires that the number of parking spaces provided on site is to be the same as the number of parking spaces provided on the site immediately before the development is carried out. The approved car park space is a single garage, while the proposal does not provide any carpark space. The variation is 100%.

Consent may only be granted upon the consent authority being satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated in a document submitted with the application that (a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances and (b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

(a)     compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances.

The decision of Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827, affirmed in Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 set out five common and non-exhaustive ways in which an applicant might demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. They were that:

i)    he objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

ii)   the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

iii)  the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

iv)  the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s decisions in granting development consents that depart from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

v)   the zoning of the particular land on which the development is proposed to be carried out was unreasonable or inappropriate so that the development standard, which was appropriate for that zoning, was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land and that compliance with the standard in the circumstances of the case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

 

Applicant’s justification:

 

The applicant states that strict compliance with Clause 53(2)(b) of the Housing SEPP 2021 is unreasonable in this instance, as the existing rear garage requires to be removed to enable the proposed secondary dwelling to be appropriately sited having regard to setbacks, open space, access and flood levels. The replacement carport cannot be supported due to flooding constraints.

 

Planner’s comments:

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the Housing SEPP 2021, which seek to promote diverse housing types, address the needs of vulnerable members of the community, provide residents with a reasonable level of amenity, encourage housing in well-serviced locations, minimise environmental and climate impacts, ensure design compatibility that enhances the locality, support short-term rental accommodation, and prevent the loss of existing affordable rental housing. The proposed secondary dwelling also complies with the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021, the Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 (with the exception of the provision of covered parking spaces, discussed below), and Clauses 52 and 53 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021.

 

The development is suitable for the locality as the site meets the relevant controls relating to minimum lot size, landscaping, and site coverage. The design is compatible with the surrounding low-density residential character. As the proposed secondary dwelling located at the rear of the site, the proposal will not create adverse environmental or amenity impacts for neighbouring properties, nor will it result in a perception of overdevelopment along Warren Road.

 

The non-compliance relates to the provision of parking on the site. Neither the Housing SEPP 2021 nor the CDCP 2021 prescribe parking requirements for secondary dwellings. The existing driveway width of 2.5 metres, measured from the boundary to the principal dwelling wall, does not satisfy the 3 metres requirement under Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004 for B85 class vehicles. This constraint limits safe manoeuvring and the functionality of any garage or car space at the rear. Achieving compliance would require significant alterations to the existing principal dwelling, which are outside the scope of this application. The area in front of the proposed secondary dwelling is also unsuitable for parking, as it would be unsafe during major storm events, reduce floodplain storage capacity, and obstruct floodwater flows. In this regard, strict compliance with the control is not considered necessary, as the variation will not result in any adverse amenity or environmental impacts, and the proposal remains consistent with the objectives of the Housing SEPP 2021 and the CDCP 2021.

(b)     there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

In respect of there being sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard, Initial Action found that although the phrase ‘environmental planning’ is not defined, it would refer to grounds that relate to the subject matter, scope and purpose of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the objects in s.1.3. To be sufficient, the environmental planning grounds advanced in the written request must justify the contravention of the development standard, not simply promote the benefits of carrying out the development as a whole Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWCA 248.

Applicant’s justification:

The applicant states that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to support the variation, as the proposal facilitates the delivery of an affordable, low-scale dwelling that is consistent with the objectives of the Housing SEPP, CLEP 2021 and the R2 Low Density Residential zone. The development maintains residential amenity, privacy, solar access and landscaping, while providing additional housing supply within a serviced location. e. The applicant argues that strict compliance would produce an inferior outcome, whereas the variation achieves the objectives of the standard and broader policy aims and is therefore well founded.

Planner’s comments:

Strict compliance with Clause 53(2)(b) of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 in relation to the provision of a secondary dwelling is considered both unreasonable and unnecessary in the context of the subject application. The proposed development aligns with the key principles of the Housing SEPP and satisfies the objectives applicable to R2 Low Density Residential zoned land. Having regard to the nature of the proposed works and the pattern of similar development within the locality, the proposal is deemed appropriate in its context. The variation to the development standard concerning onsite parking provision is acceptable on environmental planning grounds, and the applicant’s written justification is well founded.

Conclusion

Council is satisfied that the applicant’s written request has appropriately addressed the requirements set out under Clause 4.6(3). Furthermore, Council is satisfied that the proposed development is in the public interest as it demonstrates consistency with both the objectives of the development standard in question and the objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zone in which the development is situated. Having assessed the application on its individual merits, Council officers are of the view that the justification provided in support of the variation is reasonable and well founded. Accordingly, the proposed variation to Clause 53(2)(b), relating to the number of on-site parking spaces, 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))

Council has received a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal. As part of this approval, public exhibition of the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal has commenced. The public exhibition was carried out between the 4 March 2025 to 17 April 2025.

The Draft Planning Proposal seeks to revitalise Woodville Road by amending planning controls in the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) 2021 for 31 sites located around the three (3) precincts of Woodville North, Merrylands East and Woodville South.

The subject application was received on 06 July 2025 and the site does not fall within the Draft Woodville Road Corridor and therefore no further consideration is required.

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

The Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 provides guidance for the design and operation of development to achieve the aims and objectives of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021. A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 5.

The development has been assessed using the following chapters:

·    Part B1 – Dwelling Houses and Secondary Dwellings

·    Part G3 – Traffic, Parking, Transport and Access (Vehicle)

·    Part G4 – Stormwater and Drainage

·    Part G5 – Sustainability, Biodiversity and Environmental Management

·    Part G7 – Tree Management and Landscaping

·    Part G8 – Waste Management

The following highlights a non-compliance with the CDCP 2021, which relates primarily to the number of parking requirements. The variations sought is considered satisfactory on merit in this instance:

Figure 4 – Cumberland DCP 2021 - Compliance Table.

Part G3 – Traffic, Parking, Transport and Access (Vehicle), Section 4.1 Parking and Site Access

Objective 1: Minimise visual and environmental impacts of car parking and access.

Control 1 of the CDCP 2021 which requires minimum 1 covered space per dwelling house.

Justification: The existing driveway width of 2.5 metres, measured from the boundary to the principal dwelling wall, does not satisfy the 3 metres required under Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004 for B85 class vehicles. This constraint limits safe manoeuvring and the functionality of any garage or car space at the rear. Achieving compliance would require significant alterations to the existing principal dwelling, which are outside the scope of this application. The area in front of the proposed secondary dwelling is also unsuitable for parking, as it would be unsafe during major storm events, reduce floodplain storage capacity, and obstruct floodwater flows. Consequently, achieving compliance with this control is not feasible. The proposed variations will ultimately keep the functionality of the development.

In conclusion, the variation is considered reasonable and will not compromise the overall amenity of the development or the surrounding area.

Part B1 –Dwelling House and Secondary dwelling, Section 2.21 Secondary dwellings

Objectives

O1: Ensure a secondary dwelling is integrated with the design of the principal dwelling house, and is subservient in size, scale and nature to the principal dwelling house.

O2: Ensure secondary dwellings does not detract from the amenity of adjoining neighbours.

O3: Ensure that room sizes within secondary dwellings are functional, of sufficient size and cater for the intended use of the secondary dwelling.

Control 10 of section 2.21 requires a maximum floor to ceiling height of 2.7m

Justification: The proposed secondary dwelling includes a floor-to-ceiling height exceeding the maximum 2.7m control at certain points, with the highest internal point reaching approximately 3.6m due to the skillion style roof. This represents a variation of approximately 33.34% (0.9m). However, the increased height is limited to part of the structure and arises naturally from the roof form rather than any additional bulk. The variation is internal in effect and is not visually distinguishable from the exterior.

The roof design has been intentionally articulated to improve internal amenity through enhanced access to natural light and ventilation. The elevated section reduces reliance on artificial lighting and improves passive environmental performance. Importantly, the proposed building height remains compliant with the overall height limit and does not result in adverse impacts on neighbouring properties in terms of overshadowing, visual bulk, or privacy.

The secondary dwelling remains well suited and appropriate in scale and form to the principal dwelling and is consistent with the objectives of the relevant development standards. Therefore, the proposed variation is considered reasonable and acceptable in this instance on merit basis.

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 Regulation 2021 (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))

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

Advertised (Website)

Mail

Sign

Not Required

In accordance with Council’s Notification requirements contained within the Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 16 July 2025 and 30 July 2025. The notification generated no submission in respect of the proposal with nil disclosing a political donation or gift.

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

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

CUMBERLAND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS 2020

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

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act, calculated on the cost of works. A total contribution of $19,084.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

HOUSING AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CONTRIBUTION (HPC)

In accordance with the HPC Order, the proposed development is exempt from paying a contribution as it does not generate additional infrastructure demand and is solely for the construction of a secondary dwelling with an attached pergola.

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, Statement Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 and Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 and is considered to be satisfactory for approval subject to the conditions of the development consent.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the R2 – Low Density Residential Zone under the relevant provisions of the Cumberland LEP 2021, however a variation in relation to the number of parking spaces on site under 53(2)(b) of the Statement Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 is sought.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposal from a merit perspective, Council may be satisfied that the development has been responsibly designed and provides for acceptable levels of amenity for future residents. It is considered that the proposal successfully minimises adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties. Hence the development, irrespective of the 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

There are no consultation processes for Council associated with this report.

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

There are no policy implications for Council associated with this report.

The final outcome of this matter will be notified. The objectors will also be notified in writing of the outcome.

1.   That the Clause 4.6 variation request to contravene the parking space requirement under Clause 53(2)(b) development standard, pursuant to the SEPP (Housing) 2021, be supported.

2.   That Development Application No. DA2025/0449 for Demolition of existing garage and pergola at rear, construction of a secondary dwelling pursuant to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 on land at 77 Warren Road WOODPARK  NSW  2164 be Approved subject to conditions listed in the attached schedule.

 

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Clause 4.6 Variation Report  

4.      Appendix A Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment  

5.      Appendix B Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment   

 

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP021/25

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP021/25

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP021/25

Attachment 3

Clause 4.6 Variation Report

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP021/25

Attachment 4

Appendix A Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP021/25

Attachment 5

Appendix B Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

 8 October 2025

Item No: ELPP022/25

Development Application - 297-301 & 305A Parramatta Road, Auburn

Directorate:                                       Environment and Planning  

Responsible Officer:                       Executive Manager City Planning and Development   

 

 

1.  Development Application 2025/0123 was lodged on the 7 March 2025 for the alterations and additions to the existing building to create a four (4) storey self-storage facility with ancillary office, at-grade parking and associated signage.

 

2.  The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 4 April 2025 and 18 April 2025. In response, no submissions were received.

3.  On the 23rd of July 2025 and 5th of August 2025, the applicant lodged amended plans and documents. The amended plans did not require re-notification as the environmental impact is insignificant.

4.  The subject site is not listed as a heritage item or located within the heritage conservation area within the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021. The subject site is in the vicinity of an archaeological site under the State Heritage List (item no. A4) and Schedule 5 of the Cumberland LEP (item no. I330) located at 312 Parramatta Road, Auburn.

5.  The variations are as follows:

 

6.  The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal contravenes a development standard by more than 10%.

7.  The application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions as recommended in the Council’s assessment report.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The site consists of 5 lots forming Lot 1 in DP 668936, Lot 1 in DP 316730, Lots B & C in DP 316729 and Lot 6 in DP 312763 and is known as 297-301 and 305A Parramatta Road, Auburn. The subject site is ‘rectangular’ in shape with a total area of 6,504.9 sqm, a street frontage of 57.54m to Parramatta Road and 61m to Short Street. The site is zoned E3- Productivity Support under the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 (CLEP) and forms part of the ‘Parramatta Road Precinct’.

The site currently comprises a freestanding industrial warehouse with a two-storey brick building to the southern boundary (Parramatta Road). Hardstand areas are located west and east of the warehouse. Existing vehicle access is provided along the northern boundary of the site from Short Street. The building is currently occupied by TORO Waste Equipment, a company which manufactures and supplies skip bins, waste bins and shipping containers. There are no significant trees on the site. It is noted that Sydney Water sewer main line traverses though the site.

The surrounding land uses of the site are predominantly commercial, industrial and retail uses. Duck River is located approximately 150m to the northwest of the site. To the north of the site is a Concrete batching Plant, to the east an (RV Store), to the south, the site adjoins Parramatta Road (classified road) and to the west is the Bingo head office and workshop.

The Parramatta Road commercial precinct locality is characterised by a mix of light/general industrial, warehouse and distribution centres, specialised retail premises, shopping centres and food and drink premises development immediately to the north, east, west and south of the site. The site is within proximity to major road corridors including the Western Motorway.

The site is shown below edged in red and purple below.      

Figure 1 - Locality Plan of subject site

Figure 2 - Aerial view of subject site

Description of The Development

Council has received a development application for alterations and additions to the existing building to create a four (4) storey self-storage facility with ancillary office, at-grade parking and associated signage. The detailed breakdown of the proposal is provided below:

Partial Demolition

-     The proposal involves the demolition of the existing office building, internal stairs, roller doors existing facilities, crane structures within the warehouse and minor demolition of façade to allow for the installation of openings.

-     Relocation of existing stormwater downpipes.

Proposed alterations and additions

-     Alterations and additions to the existing warehouse building including the construction of three floor slabs to create the four levels of self-storage facility comprising of around 654 storage units ranging in size from 9 sqm to 15 sqm.

 

Ground Floor

-     61 sqm of office space including an accessible toilet and a kitchenette.

-     Self storage area.

-     3 lift cores and 3 stair wells.

-     Loading dock and loading bays.

-     Bin room.

-     Hardstand areas along the eastern and western boundaries

-     30 car parking spaces along the eastern boundary including one accessible car space.

First - Third Floors (typical)

-     Self storage units.

-     3 lift cores and 3 stair wells.

Landscape works

-     Perimeter landscaping along the primary frontage and side boundaries including trees and shrubs.

Stormwater works

-     Retention of the existing stormwater pipes running from the western boundary of the site towards the northern boundary.

-     Installation of new pipes and pits and storm filter system.

Access

-     Access to the site is to be maintained via Short Street, featuring a 2-way entry/exit driveway along the western end.

-     The existing entry/exit driveway located on the eastern end of the Short Street site frontage is to be converted to an exit-only driveway.

Signage

-     3 business identification signs are proposed across the eastern and northern building elevations:

·   6.9m x 2.8m - Eastern elevation.

·   9m x 3m - Northern elevation.

·   2.41m x 1.18m - office entrance.

-     3 way finding signs are proposed across the eastern elevation:

·   6.9m x 1.6m.

·   2.75m x 0.64m.

·   6.26m x 0.64m.

Office Premises - Hours of Operation

-     Mondays to Saturdays 6:00am - 10:00pm.

-     Sundays 9:00am - 6:00pm.

Note: The self-storage facility will be open 24 hours daily.

History

-     On 12 February 1997, a development application (Development Consent No. 234/96) was approved under Deferred Commencement for additions, alterations and fit out of existing building at 297-301 Parramatta Road, Auburn.

-     On 28 February 2012, a development application (Development Consent No. 2011/135) was approved for alterations and additions to existing industrial development including the construction of 5 new buildings, signage and associated site works at 305A, Parramatta Road, Auburn.

-     On 2 May 2014, a development application (Development Consent No. 2012/348) was approved for the construction of an administration building and hard stand area for the purposes of storage of empty waste bins and truck parking 305A, Parramatta Road, Auburn.

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Gyde dated 27 February 2025 which was accepted by Council on 10 March 2025 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 Engineering

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 conditions of consent.

Environmental Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officer for comment who has advised that the 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 in terms of the proposed waste collection and therefore can be supported subject to recommended conditions of consent.

External Referrals

Ausgrid

Ausgrid has raised no concern with the proposal subject to the inclusion of conditions in any consent for the development to ensure the proposed driveways and any other works do not interfere with existing underground cables located in the vicinity of the development and that available electricity services are adequate for the development.

Sydney Water

In accordance with Section 78 of the Sydney Water Act 1994, the development was referred to Sydney Water for comment. Sydney Water has raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions.

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:

 

 

Local Environmental Plans

Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021

The provision of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that, with the exception of the Floor Space Ratio non compliance, the development generally satisfies the relevant provisions of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 and the objectives of the E3 - Productivity Support zone.

(a) Permissibility:

The proposed development comprises a ‘self-storage unit’ facility and or a storage premises, ancillary ‘office premises’ and ‘business identifications signs’ which are permitted with consent under the E3 Zone as follows:

Self-storage units is defined in the CLEP 2021 as “… premises that consist of individual enclosed compartments for storing goods or materials (other than hazardous or offensive goods or materials). Note: Self-storage units are a type of storage premises—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary.”

Storage premises means a building or place used for the storage of goods, materials, plant or machinery for commercial purposes and where the storage is not ancillary to any industry, business premises or retail premises on the same parcel of land, and includes self-storage units, but does not include a heavy industrial storage establishment, local distribution premises or a warehouse or distribution centre.

Office premises is defined in the CLEP 2021 as a building or place used for the purpose of administrative, clerical, technical, professional or similar activities that do not include dealing with members of the public at the building or place on a direct and regular basis, except where such dealing is a minor activity (by appointment) that is ancillary to the main purpose for which the building or place is used. Note: Office premises are a type of commercial premises—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary.”

Business identification sign is defined as: “a sign that identifies or names a building and that may include the name of a building, the street name and number of a building, and a logo or other symbol but does not include general advertising of products, goods or services.

Note- Building identification signs are a type of signage—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary”.

The proposed self-storage unit facility promotes businesses and provides employment uses (including the ancillary office) along Parramatta Road and is a use which is compatible with the surrounding uses. The development is consistent with the objectives of the E3 - Productivity Support Zone.

The relevant matters to be considered under CLEP 2021 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive CLEP assessment is contained in Attachment 7.

Cumberland LEP 2021 Compliance Table

Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards

Clause 4.6 aims to achieve better design outcomes for and from development by allowing an appropriate degree of flexibility to development standards if particular circumstances are satisfied.

The proposed change of use seeks to adapt the existing warehouse building into a four-storey self-storage facility by inserting additional internal floor slabs, generating a 27% exceedance of the maximum FSR.  In this regard, the application seeks to vary the development standard for floor space ratio under Clause 4.4 of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 by proposing an FSR of 1.27:1 resulting in a variation of 27% or 1,732.5 sqm.

Consent may only be granted upon the consent authority being satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated in a document submitted with the application that (a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances and (b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

(a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances.

The decision of Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827, affirmed in Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 set out five common and non-exhaustive ways in which an applicant might demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. They were that:

(i)         the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

(ii)        the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

(iii)       the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

(iv)       the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s decisions in granting development consents that depart from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

(v)        the zoning of the particular land on which the development is proposed to be carried out was unreasonable or inappropriate so that the development standard, which was appropriate for that zoning, was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land and that compliance with the standard in the circumstances of the case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

Applicant’s Justification:

The applicant relies on the Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) NSW LEC 827, claiming the following:

·    The objectives of Clause 4.4 of the CLEP 2021 are as follows:

 

(a) to establish a maximum floor space ratio to enable appropriate development density,

(b) to ensure that development intensity reflects its locality.      

·    The proposed FSR is considered to be appropriate in this particular case because the proposal overall relies entirely on the existing building envelope and footprint.

·    The proposal does not result in any further amenity impacts such as overshadowing. The additional traffic generation has been assessed by Varga Traffic Planning Pty Ltd and deemed to be negligible, largely because self-storage land uses are categorised as low intensity land uses. Therefore, as the proposal does not result in any unreasonable impacts, it is considered to be appropriate development density as sought by objective A, and reflective of the subject locality’s intensity as sought by objective B.

·    Any external alterations result in an improved streetscape presentation.

 

Planner’s comments: 

·    The proposal does not alter the existing building height, footprint or external envelope. The perceived bulk and scale from the public domain remain consistent with the existing warehouse form.

·    The FSR variation arises solely from internal subdivision of space by introducing additional floor slabs which increases the Gross Floor Area without enlarging the building.

·    A self-storage facility is a low-intensity land use that generates substantially less demand on traffic, parking and services compared with other forms of commercial or industrial development permissible on the site.

·    The development does not introduce additional overshadowing, overlooking or visual bulk impacts to adjoining properties.

·    The development delivers a compatible built form outcome, provides employment opportunities, and contributes to local economic activity while meeting the objectives of both the FSR development standard and the zone.

The applicant’s justification is therefore considered to be well founded.

(b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

In respect of there being sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard, Initial Action found that although the phrase ‘environmental planning’ is not defined, it would refer to grounds that relate to the subject matter, scope and purpose of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the objects in s.1.3. To be sufficient, the environmental planning grounds advanced in the written request must justify the contravention of the development standard, not simply promote the benefits of carrying out the development as a whole Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWCA 248.

Applicant’s justification:

·    The additional floor area is contained entirely within the existing building footprint and envelope. Subsequently, the development does not create any additional bulk, scale or amenity impacts.

·    Self-storage is a low-intensity use, as evidenced by its relatively low traffic generation. Varga Traffic Planning Pty Ltd has determined that the proposed development result in a slight reduction in the traffic generation potential of the site of approximately 5 vph compared to the existing use on the site.

·    Development with far greater FSR (i.e. between 1.5:1 to 3:1) is permitted on the site according to Clause 4.4(2B)(a) and (b) of the CLEP 2021.

·    Self storage is a low intensity use, this is demonstrated by the relatively low traffic generation.

·    Self-storage is becoming an increasingly residential use, supporting higher housing densities

Planner’s comments:

The additional floor space ratio does not alter the originally approved building bulk and scale and ‘as built’ building. The building alterations are mainly internal and the proposal does not unduly change the interrelationship of the development with either of the adjoining properties or the streetscape character. Further, the proposed alterations will not contribute to additional shadow impact on adjoining properties. The variation arises solely from internal floor slabs to create additional storeys within the existing volume of the building, with no changes to the building height, footprint, or external envelope.

Having regard to the above, the numerical floor space ratio departure is considered acceptable on merit.

Conclusion

Council is 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 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 justification provided is satisfactory and having considered the application on its merit, the exception to the floor space ratio development standards 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))

Cumberland Council | Woodville Road Corridor - Draft Planning Proposal

Council has received a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal. As part of this approval, public exhibition of the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal has commenced. The public exhibition was carried out between the 4 March 2025 to 17 April 2025.

The Draft Planning Proposal seeks to revitalise Woodville Road by amending planning controls in the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) 2021 for 31 sites located around the three (3) precincts of Woodville North, Merrylands East and Woodville South.

The subject application was accepted on 10 March 2025 and the site does not fall within the Draft Woodville Road Corridor. Therefore, no further consideration is required.

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

The Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 is relevant to the development proposal.

The development has been assessed using the following chapters:

-     Part C – Development in Business Zones.

-     Part G1 – Advertising and Signage.

-     Part G3 – Traffic, Parking, Transport and Access.

-     Part G4 – Stormwater and Drainage.

-     Part G5 – Sustainability, Biodiversity and Environmental Management.

-     Part G7 – Tree Management and Landscaping.

-     Part G8 – Waste Management.

The development is found to generally comply with the relevant provisions of the DCP.

A comprehensive assessment and compliance table is contained in Attachment 8.

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 Regulation 2021 (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 Cumberland DCP 2021, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 4 April 2025 and 18 April 2025. 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.

CUMBERLAND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS 2020

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

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.12 of the EP&A Act, calculated on the cost of works. If the development is approved, a total contribution of $84,261.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

HOUSING AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CONTRIBUTION (HPC)

In accordance with s7.24, s7.26 and s7.28 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposed development is subject to the payment of the Housing and Productivity Contribution (HPC).

A condition of consent has been imposed on the development consent in accordance with s7.28 of the EP&A Act 1979 requiring the payment of the HPC. The amount is calculated at $79,400.33.

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 (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021, Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 and is satisfactory for approval subject to conditions.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the E3 - Productivity Support Zone under the relevant provisions of the CLEP 2021. The proposal is generally consistent with most of the statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the development except for the floor space ratio. 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 a built form consistent with and appropriate to the desired future character of the site. Hence the development, irrespective of the departures in relation to floor space ratio, 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

There are no consultation processes for Council associated with this report.

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

There are no policy implications for Council associated with this report.

The final outcome of this matter will be notified. The objectors will also be notified in writing of the outcome.

1.  That the Clause 4.6 variation request to contravene the Floor Space Ratio development standard, pursuant to the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021, be supported.

2.  That Development Application No. DA2025/0123 for alterations and additions to the existing building to create a four (4) storey self-storage facility with ancillary office, at-grade parking and associated signage on land at 297- 301 and 305A Parramatta Road Auburn be approved subject to conditions listed in the attached schedule.

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Stormwater/Engineering Plans  

4.      Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Floor Space Ratio  

5.      Plan of Management  

6.      Appendix A - State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021  

7.      Appendix B - Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment  

8.      Appendix C - Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment   

 

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 3

Stormwater/Engineering Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 4

Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Floor Space Ratio

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 5

Plan of Management

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 6

Appendix A - State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 7

Appendix B - Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP022/25

Attachment 8

Appendix C - Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

 8 October 2025

Item No: ELPP023/25

Development Application - 459 Guildford Road, Guildford

Directorate:                                       Environment and Planning  

Responsible Officer:                       Executive Manager City Planning and Development   

 

 

1.  Development application 2025/0309 was lodged on the 22 May 2025 for demolition of existing structures erection of a co-living and residential flat building containing 44 co-living units and 5 residential flats of which 4 are nominated for infill affordable housing.

2.  The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between 5 June 2025 and 19 June 2025. In response, no submissions were received.

3.  The primary non-compliances are as follows:

 

4.  The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal is considered to be contentious development under Chapter 4 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021.

5.  The application is recommended to be refused for the reasons listed in the Council’s assessment report.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site forms Lot B in DP 171122 and Lot A DP 10962 and is identified as 459-461 Guildford Road, Guildford. The site is rectangular in shape with frontages of 26.82m to the northern side of Guildford Road and 37.795m to the eastern side of Berwick Street. The site occupies an area of 1,013.6 square metres. The site falls approximately 1.5m from the Guildford Road frontage to the rear (north) at a gentle to moderate grade of 4%. The site contains two single storey detached dwelling houses, a detached garage and several small to medium sized trees.   

Surrounding development comprises one and two storey dwelling houses, older style residential flat buildings of up to three storeys and new style residential flat buildings of up to four storeys. The site is located approximately 620 metres west of the entry to the Guildford railway station.

The location of the site is shown below edged in purple.

Figure 1 - Locality Plan of subject site highlighted in purple [Source: Intramap]

Figure 2 - Aerial view of subject site highlighted in purple [Source: Intramap]

Figure 3 - Street view of subject site as seen from Guildford Road

Description of The Development

Council has received a development application for the demolition of existing structures and erection of a co-living and residential flat building containing 44 co-living units and 5 residential apartments of which 4 are nominated as being infill affordable housing. The detailed breakdown of the proposal is shown below:

Demolition work

All structures on the site is earmarked to be demolished.

Construction work

The construction work is shown within the table below.

Level	Details
Basement Level	-     12 parking spaces inclusive of 1 accessible space. -     11 motorcycle parking spaces. -     12 bicycle parking spaces. -     Bin room with bulky waste storage area. -     Communications room. -     Pump room. -     5 storage rooms / cases, 1 each for the residential flats.
Ground Floor	-     8 double occupancy co-living rooms with 7 of the rooms having a ground level private open space area. -     2 communal living areas. -     Lobby areas, accessed through the front communal living area.
Levels 1 to 3.	-     12 double occupancy co-living rooms, inclusive of 1 accessible room. All rooms have a balcony.
Level 4	-     4 x studio units all with balconies and of which 3 are for affordable housing and 1 which is an adaptable unit. -     1 x 2 bedroom unit with balcony identified as being for affordable housing.

In addition to the above:

·    One lift will service all levels of the building.

·    There is a storage area on each of the ground floor and levels 1-4 to accommodate one garbage, one recycling and one green waste bin per level.

·    Vehicular access to the basement levels is via a single width ramp located proximate to the site’s eastern side boundary.

·    Pedestrian access to the ground level is proposed via a ramp from a point centrally located along the site’s Guildford Road frontage.

The Panel is informed that an appeal has been lodged in relation to the application for deemed refusal. A Section 34 conciliation conference is set to be held on Thursday, 11 December 2025.

History

Council records do not show any history relevant to the scope of this development.

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Planning Ingenuity dated 6 May 2025 and was received by Council on 22 May 2025 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 Engineering

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for comment who has advised that the driveway access should be relocated from Guildford Road to Berwick Street to improve vehicle safety and that a splay should be provided at the corner of Guildford Road and Berwick Street.

 

As a result, the development in its current form is not fully supported.

Environmental Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officer for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to conditions of consent.

Tree Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Tree Management Officer for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to conditions of consent (if approved).

Waste Management

The development application was referred to Council’s Waste Management Officer for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to conditions of consent (if approved).

External Referrals

Endeavour Energy

The development application was referred to Endeavour Energy for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to conditions of consent.

Sydney Water

The development application was referred to Sydney Water for comment who raised no objections to the development subject to conditions.

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 (Housing) 2021 Chapter 2 (Affordable housing) - Part 2 Development for affordable housing:

The development seeks consent for in-fill affordable housing pursuant to Chapter 2, Division 1. under Chapter 2 (Part 2) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021. As stated in the above table, no floor space ratio (FSR) or building height bonus under s.16 of State Environmental Planning Policy Housing (2021) (Housing SEPP) applies to the development. Therefore, no further assessment under this division has been made.

(b)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 Chapter 3 (Diverse Housing) - Part 3 Co Living Housing:

The development application has been submitted under Chapter 3 (Part 3) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021. As stated in the above table, there are three variations identified being:

 

·   Floor Space Ratio - No floor space ratio (FSR) bonus under s.16 of State Environmental Planning Policy Housing (2021) (Housing SEPP) shall apply to the development.

Section 68(2)(a)(ii) allows for a 10% bonus FSR if the additional floor space is used only for the purpose of co-living housing. The manner of assigning or attributing additional floor space to one particular use compared to another use, within the concept of gross floor area is arbitrary and uncertain. The applicant has not provided what it asserts to the additional floor area nor demonstrated that the purported additional area is used only for the purpose of co-living housing. For the shared floor space area being the ground floor lobby area from the front door to the lift, it is uncertain how the floor area is to be distributed amongst the co-living and the residential apartment building uses.

The co living part of the development has a floor space ratio that is calculated at 1.333:1 which exceeds the maximum permitted of 1.319:1 by 14 square metres.

No clause 4.6 submission has been lodged seeking variation to the standard and hence the application is incapable of being approved.

·   Car Parking - The proposed development does not provide car parking that complies fully with the requirements detailed under s.68(2)(e). The co living part of the development should be provided with 9 car parking spaces at a rate of 0.2 spaces per co living room. The submitted plans do not allocate parking to the co living rooms or to the other land use proposed.

·   Laundry Facilities - The proposed development has failed to provide adequate laundry facilities to service each room in accordance with s69(1)(f).

In addition to the above, there are no Clause 4.6 Variation requests submitted to enable any Council assessment to occur especially for the floor space ratio and laundry facility issue.

The issue of car parking could have been addressed if the applicant had allocated the car parking spaces accordingly to support the co living rooms.

(c)     State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 Chapter 4 Design of Residential Apartment Development:

The development application has been submitted under Chapter 4 (Part 3) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021. As per the above table, there is one variation identified that requires attention being car parking.

Car parking

Similar to what is stated above, the proposed development does not allocate car parking to either land use (Residential or co living rooms).

It is found that the building would need at a minimum 13 car parking spaces including at least 4 spaces to support the apartments. There is a shortfall of one car parking space to support the entire development.

This is a non discretionary requirement of the State Policy and thus a Clause 4.6 Variation request to cover any shortfall of car parking under either Chapter 3 or Chapter 4 has not been submitted for Council assessment. Hence, the development application cannot be supported by the Panel.

Local Environmental Plans

Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021

The provision of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development does not achieve compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 and the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential zone.

(d)     Permissibility:

The provision of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 is applicable to the development proposal.

The proposed development is defined as both ‘co-living housing’ and ‘residential flat building’

residential flat building means a building containing 3 or more dwellings, but does not include an attached dwelling, co-living housing or multi dwelling housing.

Residential flat buildings are permissible with consent in the R4 High Density Residential zone.

co-living housing means a building or place that—

(a) has at least 6 private rooms, some or all of which may have private kitchen and bathroom facilities, and

(b) provides occupants with a principal place of residence for at least 3 months, and

(c)  has shared facilities, such as a communal living room, bathroom, kitchen or laundry, maintained by a managing agent, who provides management services 24 hours a day,

but does not include backpackers’ accommodation, a boarding house, a group home, hotel or motel accommodation, seniors housing or a serviced apartment.

Note- Co-living housing is a type of residential accommodation—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary.

Pursuant to Section 67 of the Housing SEPP 2021, co-living housing development may be carried out with consent on land in a zone which development for the purposes of co-living housing, residential flat buildings and shop top housing is permitted under Chapter 5 or another environmental planning instrument. Residential Flat Buildings and shop-top housing are permitted with consent in an R4 High Density Residential zone under the Cumberland LEP 2021, and therefore the proposed development is permissible pursuant to Section 67 of the Housing SEPP 2021.

The relevant matters to be considered under Cumberland LEP 2021 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive Cumberland LEP 2021 assessment is contained in Attachment 7.

Figure 4 - Cumberland LEP 2021 Compliance Table

Development Standard	Compliance	Discussion
Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings Max. 15m	No	The maximum building height permitted under clause 4.3 of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2019 (LEP) is 15m.   The proposed height of 17.8m exceeds the maximum.
Clause 4.4 Floor Space Ratio Max. 1.2:1	No	The maximum FSR permitted under clause 4.4 of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2019 (LEP) is 1.2:1. The proposed FSR of 1.58:1 (1,585.13sqm / 1,013.6sqm) exceeds the maximum FSR.
Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards	No	No clause 4.6 submission has been lodged seeking variation to the above standards and hence the application is incapable of being approved.

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

Council has received a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal. As part of this approval, public exhibition of the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal has commenced. The public exhibition was carried out between the 4 March 2025 to 17 April 2025.

The Draft Planning Proposal seeks to revitalise Woodville Road by amending planning controls in the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) 2021 for 31 sites located around the three (3) precincts of Woodville North, Merrylands East and Woodville South.

The subject application was received on 8 May 2025 and the site does not fall within the Draft Woodville Road Corridor. Therefore, no further consideration is required.

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

The following parts of the Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 are of relevance to the proposed development:

·    A1  Introduction and Notification

·    A3 Site Amalgamation and Isolated Sites

·    B3  Residential Flat Buildings

·    B5  Adaptable Housing

·    G3  Traffic, Parking, Transport and Access (Vehicle)

·    G4  Stormwater and Drainage

·    G5  Sustainability, Biodiversity and Environmental Management

·    G7  Tree Management and Landscaping

·    G8  Waste Management.

A comprehensive Cumberland DCP 2021 assessment is contained in Attachment 6.

The development is found to comply with the relevant provisions except for the following:

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 Regulation 2021 (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 Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 5 June 2025 and 19 June 2025. No submissions were received in respect of the proposed development.

 

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

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

CUMBERLAND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS 2020

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

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act, calculated on the cost of works. A total contribution of $302,349.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate

HOUSING AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CONTRIBUTION (HPC)

In accordance with s7.24, s7.26 and s7.28 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposed development is subject to the payment of the Housing and Productivity Contribution (HPC).

If approved, a condition of consent would be imposed on the development consent in accordance with s7.28 of the EP&A Act 1979 requiring the payment of the HPC.

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 (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021 and Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021.

It is considered that the proposed development is unacceptable for the reasons outlined in this report. It is recommended that the development be refused, as outlined in the reasons for refusal.

There are no consultation processes for Council associated with this report.

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

There are no policy implications for Council associated with this report.

The final outcome of this matter will be notified. The objectors will also be notified in writing of the outcome.

That Development Application 2025/0309 for the demolition of existing structures erection of a co-living and residential flat building containing 44 co-living units and 5 residential flats, of which 4 are nominated for infill affordable housing on land at 459 Guildford Road Guildford be refused for the reasons listed in the attached schedule.

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Plan of Management  

4.      Housing SEPP 2021 & ADG Assessment  

5.      Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment  

6.      Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment   

 

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP023/25

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP023/25

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP023/25

Attachment 3

Plan of Management

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP023/25

Attachment 4

Housing SEPP 2021 & ADG Assessment

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP023/25

Attachment 5

Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP023/25

Attachment 6

Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment

 8 October 2025

 8 October 2025

Item No: ELPP024/25

Development Application - 2-4 Gilba Road, Pendle Hill

Directorate:                                       Environment and Planning  

Responsible Officer:                       Executive Manager City Planning and Development   

 

 

1.  Development Application 2024/0618 was lodged on the 13 November 2024 for the alterations and additions to the shop-top housing development including reconfiguration of basement levels 1 and 2, ground floor and levels 1 to 4, an additional basement level and two residential levels (levels 5 and 6), comprising in total two (2) commercial tenancies and kiosk on the ground floor and 44 residential units over three (3) levels of basement parking.

2.  The application was publicly notified to occupants and owners of the adjoining properties for a period of 14 days between the 28 November 2024 and the 12 December 2024. In response, 3 submission/s were received.

3.  The variations are as follows:

 

Control	Required	Provided	% variation
Height of building (Cumberland LEP 2021 and Housing SEPP 2021)	Maximum 22.1m	23.94m (lift overrun and stairs)	8.33%
Building separation (ADG)	-     6m (habitable) or 3m (non-habitable) for up to 4 storeys.                 -     9m (habitable) or 4.5m (non-habitable) for 5-8 storeys.	Ground floor -     3m to eastern side boundary.   Levels 1 to 3 -     0m to eastern side boundary.   Level 4 -     0m to eastern side boundary.   Levels 5 to 6 -     Min. 2.5m to north front boundary. -     3.3m to east side boundary from bedroom walls. -     4.5m to east side boundary from non-habitable room windows.	Existing non-compliance     Existing non-compliance     Existing non-compliance     44.44%     26.67%       complies

4.  The application is referred to the Panel as the proposal is sensitive development being a residential apartment development comprising more than four dwellings and with a height exceeding three storeys.

5.  The application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions as recommended in the Council’s assessment report.

Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is legally described as Lots 7 and 8 in DP 20186, with a street address of 2-4 Gilba Road, Pendle Hill. The site is within zone E1 Local Centre. The site is located on the southern side of Gilba Road and directly adjoins the R2 Low Density Residential zone to the west and south.

The R4 High Density Residential zone lies to the south-east and land zone E1 Local Centre lies to the east and north.

The site is a regular block with a combined frontage of 24.685m to Gilba Road and a depth of 80.46m with a total site area of 1,985.1sqm. The site is currently vacant and the existing dwellings on site have been demolished as part of the original development consent (DA2017/275/1) issued. 

The site is surrounded by residential properties comprising of low to medium density dwelling types.

The location of the site is shown below edged in purple.

Figure 1 - Locality Plan of subject site (source: Council Intramap)

 

Figure 2 - Aerial view of subject site (source: Nearmap)

Figure 3 - Street view of subject site (source: site inspection)

 

Description of The Development

Development Application DA2024/0618 is an amending development application that seeks alterations and additions to the shop-top housing development approved under DA2017/275 (as amended) including reconfiguration of basement levels 1 and 2, alterations to the ground floor and Levels 1 to 4, an additional basement level and two additional residential levels (Levels 5 and 6) pursuant to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021.

The development application is taking advantage of the additional floor space ratio (FSR) and additional height of building that provides for in-fill affordable housing under Chapter 2, Part 2, Division 1 In-fill affordable housing of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021.

It is identified that the lift overrun, stairs and a small part of the roof structure on Level 6 residential level are in breach of the height control provisions of the amended development. Such matters are discussed in detail within the assessment report below.

Key features of the development proposal including the original approved 5 storeys shop top housing and this amending development application are as follows:

·   Construction of a 7 storey shop top housing over basement parking incorporating: -

Basement – Three Levels

·    Construction of a new Basement Level 3 comprising:

-    38 residential car parking spaces (5 of which are accessible).

-    15 bicycle parking spaces.

-    1 car wash bay; and

-    Mechanical service room.

·    Amend the layout of the approved Basement Level 2 as follows:

-    4 x residential car parking spaces (2 of which are accessible).

-    20 x commercial car parking spaces (1 of which is accessible).

-    6 x bicycle parking spaces.

-    2 x bin storage rooms.

-    24 x storage compartments.

-    waste collection room.

-    waste collection loading/unloading bay; and

-    service room.

·    Amend the layout of the approved Basement Level 1 as follows:

-    12 x residential visitor car parking spaces (1 of which is accessible).

-    15 x bicycle parking spaces.

-    45 x storage compartments.

-    OSD tank; and

-    fire/hydrant pump room.

Ground Floor

·    Amend the approved medical centre to become 2 x commercial tenancies:

-    COM01 (rear) with access from the pedestrian access footpath; and

-    COM02 (front) with café space and direct access from Gilba Road;

·    Relocate the approved substation room; and

·    Amend the approved pedestrian access adjoins to the eastern side boundary of the site.

Level 1 and 2

·    Amend the layout and configuration of the residential level to provide 9 residential units comprising 2 x 1 bedroom units; 4 x 2 bedroom units; and 3 x 3 bedroom units.

Level 3

·    Amend the layout and configuration of the residential level to provide 9 residential units comprising 2 x 1 bedroom units; 5 x 2 bedroom units; and 2 x 3 bedroom units.

Level 4

·    Amend the layout and configuration of the residential level to provide 8 residential units comprising 2 x 1 bedroom units; and 6 x 2 bedroom units.

Level 5

·    Construction of new additional residential level to provide 7 residential units comprising 3 x 1 bedroom units; and 4 x 2 bedroom units.

Level 6

·    Construction of new additional residential level to provide 2 residential units comprising 2 x 3 bedroom units.

·    Construction of new hot water plant; and

·    Construction of new communal open space comprising rooftop lawn area, seating areas, planter boxes, BBQ and cooking facilities and pergola structure above.

The crucial elements of the whole development across are outlined within the table below:

History

Applicants Supporting Statement

The applicant has provided a Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by MMDC Pty Ltd dated 4 October 2024 (Revision A) and was received by Council on 30 October 2024 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 Engineering

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 conditions of consent.

 

Environmental Health

The development application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officer for comment who has advised that the development sought is satisfactory and therefore can be supported subject to conditions.

Tree Management

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

Waste Management

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

External Referrals

Endeavour Energy

The development application was referred to Endeavour Energy for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory and the conditions that imposed as part of the original development approval (DA2017/275) remains applicable. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the original approved 5 storeys shop-top housing can be supported without further conditions.

 

Sydney Water

The development application was referred to Sydney Water for comment who has advised that the proposal is satisfactory and therefore can be supported subject to conditions.

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:

State Environmental Planning Policies	Relevant Clause(s)	Compliance with Requirements
State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004	-	Commitments made under the original Development Approval DA2017/275 have been modified and a revised BASIX Certificate number 832384M_05, dated 11 June 2025 has been submitted and determined as being acceptable for the development application.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021.	Chapter 2 - Vegetation in non Rural Areas.	Due to the previous development approval (DA2017/275), this proposal will not result in any additional tree removal.   Therefore, the proposed vegetation removal which is previously approved is considered acceptable and not subject to change.
	Chapter 6 - Water Catchments.   Sydney Harbour Catchment.	It is determined that given the location of the site/development, a detailed assessment is not required given that there is no direct impact upon the catchment and no direct impact upon watercourses. As such, the development is acceptable under the provisions that came into effect on Monday 21 November 2022.
	Chapter 4 - Remediation of Land.   Part 4.6.	The matter addressing land contamination has been addressed within the processing of the original development application DA2017/275. As this application is relating to additional floors across original approved shop-top housing, additional contamination assessment is not required.   It is considered that the development application is satisfactory under Part 4.6 of Chapter 4 of the State Policy.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021.	Chapter 2 - Affordable housing.   Part 2, Division 1 In-fill affordable housing	As outlined throughout this report, the proposal is generally compliant with all non-discretionary development standards and design requirements with the exception of clause 16(3) relating to the building height.   A clause 4.6 variation request is provided to address the non-compliances. Refer to discussion following this table.   A comprehensive Housing SEPP 2021 assessment is contained in Appendix A.
	Chapter 4 – Design of residential apartment development	This chapter 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 Housing SEPP 2021 was prepared by the project architect. Integral to Chapter 4 of Housing SEPP 2021 is the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) which sets benchmarks for the appearance, acceptable impacts and residential amenity of the development.   Assessment against all relevant provisions of the ADG and development standards of chapter 4 of the Housing SEPP 2021 confirmed the proposal does not give rise to any non-compliance with the controls.   The comprehensive Housing SEPP 2021 and an ADG assessments are contained in Appendices A and B respectively.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021.	Chapter 3 – Advertising and Signage.	No signage is proposed as part of the development application and thus no assessment of signage is required.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021.	Chapter 2 – Coastal Management.	The subject site is not identified as a coastal wetland or ‘land identified as “proximity area for coastal wetlands” or coastal management area.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022	-	State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022 sets sustainability standards of buildings across NSW for residential and non-residential development. The Sustainable Buildings SEPP was notified on 29 August 2022 and came into effect on Sunday 1 October 2023.
	Chapter 2 – Standards for residential Development – BASIX	The proposal does not trigger any assessment against this chapter in accordance with the savings and transitional provisions in accordance with Clause 4.2(1)(c) of the Sustainable Buildings SEPP given the proposal is a BASIX development submitted on the NSW planning portal on or after 1 October 2023 with the BASIX certificate that was issued before 1 October 2023.   The original development application was approved with a shop-top housing that committed to the BASIX Certificate no. 832384M that was issued on the 29 June 2017.
	Chapter 3 – Standards for non-residential development	This chapter does not apply to this development as the estimated development cost of the proposed alterations and additions to the approved commercial tenancies on the ground floor is less than $5m.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021.	Chapter 2 – Infrastructure.	State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021 is relevant to the development application as follows:   Division 5 Subdivision 2 Clause 2.48   The existing overhead electricity power line is currently traverses within 5m distance parallelly along the Gilba Road frontage of the subject site. The comment received from Endeavour Energy dated 25 November 2024 confirmed the proposal can be supported and the conditions that imposed as part of the original development approval (DA2017/275) remain applicable.

(a)  State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 - Chapter 2 Affordable housing and Chapter 4 Design of residential apartment development

Following a detailed assessment of the proposal against the provisions of Chapter 4 of the Housing SEPP 2021 and the ADG, the proposal is generally considered compliant and therefore performs satisfactorily with the exception of the building height and building separation. These variations are discussed below:

 

Housing SEPP 2021 Clause 16 Affordable housing requirements

(1)  The maximum floor space ratio for development that includes residential development to which this division applies is the maximum permissible floor space ratio for the development on the land plus an additional floor space ratio of up to 30%, based on the minimum affordable housing component calculated in accordance with subsection (2).

(2)  The minimum affordable housing component, which must be at least 10%, is calculated as follows-

(3)  If the development includes residential flat buildings or shop top housing, the maximum building height for a building used for residential flat buildings or shop top housing is the maximum permissible building height for the development on the land plus an additional building height that is the same percentage as the additional floor space ratio permitted under subsection (1).

Commentary

The proposed gross floor area to the mixed use development on the site comprising the commercial tenancies and shop-top housing is 4,645.87sqm. The proposal shall provide a minimum 696.88sqm of in-fill affordable housing floor area on site which equates to 15% of total GFA proposed to receive the maximum 30% of additional Building Height.

The development will provide 716.45sqm of in-fill affordable housing floor among 8 residential apartments on Level 2 and Level 3 which equates to 15.42% of the overall gross floor area on site. Therefore, the development is entitled to receive the full 30% height increase benefit that also applies being 22.1m.

The overall mixed use development is proposed to be maximum 23.94m when measured from the existing natural ground level including the lift overrun and stairs. This presents a 1.84m exceed in the maximum allowable building height or 8.33% variation to the numerical standard.

A clause 4.6 variation of development standards prepared by MMDC Pty Ltd dated 22 August 2025 was submitted to address the variation for Council consideration and further discussed in detail under the heading ‘Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards’ of this report.

Apartment Design Guide Part 3F-1 - Visual Privacy

The separation distance between proposed building and the eastern side boundary are less than the requirements stated. In this regard, a building separation on level 5 and Level 6 of the shop-top housing is required to be minimum 4.5m from non-habitable rooms and minimum 9m from all habitable rooms.

The building separations of the stairs/lift of the proposed development are 2.6m to 3.3m and the bedroom walls/bathroom windows are 3.3m to 4.5m.

The architectural plans are showing that all the east facing bathroom windows are to be fixed windows which cannot be opened. This retains a satisfactory level of privacy for the future residential developments on all eastern adjoining properties facing Pendle Way. For this reason, the proposal is satisfactory.

The comprehensive assessments against Chapter 2 Division 1, Chapter 4 of the Housing SEPP 2021 and the ADG in Appendices A and B respectively.

 

Local Environmental Plans

Cumberland Local Environmental Plan 2021

The provision of the Cumberland LEP 2021 is applicable to the development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the key statutory requirements of the Cumberland LEP 2021 and the objectives of the E1 Local Centre zone with the exception to the height of building control which is considered acceptable.

(a)     Permissibility

The proposed development is defined as a ‘shop-top housing’ and is permissible in the E1 Local Centre zone under the Cumberland LEP 2021 with consent.

shop top housing means one or more dwellings located above the ground floor of a building, where at least the ground floor is used for commercial premises or health services facilities.

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

The relevant matters to be considered under Cumberland LEP 2021 and the applicable clauses for the proposed development are summarised below. A comprehensive LEP assessment is contained in Appendix C.

Figure 4 - Cumberland LEP 2021 Compliance Table

Floor space ratio

The floor space ratio for the development is governed by Chapter 2, Division 1, Clauses 16(1) and 16(2) of Housing SEPP 2021 which allows for increases providing that a compliant level of affordable housing is achieved within the development. The proposal provides the required affordable housing component being 716.45sqm representing (15.42%) whereas 696.89sqm (15%) is required and therefore is compliant.

Building height

In this regard, developments that are eligible for the additional floor space ratio is also eligible for a corresponding increase to the height of the building based on the percentage of the in-fill affordable housing component. In relation to this development, the maximum building height permitted on the site as per Clause 16(3) of the Housing SEPP 2021 is 22.1m. The proposal provides for a building height of maximum 23.94m including the lift overrun and stairs of the proposed shop-top housing, a variation of 8.33%. The breach to the building height is addressed in detail under the heading of ‘Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards’ below.

(b)     Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards

Clause 4.6 aims to achieve better design outcomes for and from development by allowing an appropriate degree of flexibility to development standards if particular circumstances are satisfied.

The application seeks to vary the development standard and non-discretionary development standard respectively for the maximum building height under Chapter 2, Division 1, Clause 16(3) of the Housing SEPP 2021.

Clause 16(3) Additional building height

Consent may only be granted upon the consent authority being satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated in a document submitted with the application that (a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances and (b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

 

 

(a) compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances.

 

The decision of Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827, affirmed in Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 set out five common and non-exhaustive ways in which an applicant might demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. They were that:

 

(i)      the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

(ii)     the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

(iii)    the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

(iv)    the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s decisions in granting development consents that depart from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

(v)     the zoning of the particular land on which the development is proposed to be carried out was unreasonable or inappropriate so that the development standard, which was appropriate for that zoning, was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land and that compliance with the standard in the circumstances of the case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

Applicant’s justification:

The applicant relies on the first Wehbe point: The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard, stating that:

It is contended that compliance with the maximum height of building standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case as the objectives of the standards are achieved nonetheless as follows:

1.   The variations are a result of the 2.2m cross-fall diagonally over the site from south (rear) to north (front) and requirement to achieve compliance with the flood planning level.

2.   The variation relating to the lift overrun/stairs is a minor point encroachment that will be virtually imperceptible from the street and adjoining lower density R2 zoned properties.

3.   The variation relating to Level 6 is well setback from the street and would be virtually imperceptible as viewed from the street and the proposed development would still be entirely consistent with the desired future built form anticipated for the locality.

4.   The lift overrun/stair encroachments relate to the potential future provision of rooftop open space and increased amenity for future occupants, which is consistent with the previously approved variation to enable rooftop communal open space under DA2017/275/1.

5.   The proposal does not result in additional yield or developable area given the proposal is well under the potential additional FSR permitted and the affordable housing component must be at least 10% and cannot be reduced any further.

6.   There are no adverse visual bulk impacts given the majority of the encroachments will not be visible from the street and generous side and rear setbacks are maintained from the adjoining lower density R2 zoned properties.

7.   There are no adverse amenity or solar access impacts within the proposed development or on adjoining properties. The design of the proposed development has ensured that privacy and solar access is achieved generally in accordance with the requirements of SEPP 65 and the Apartment Design Guide.

8.   The proposed development for shop top housing with commercial uses at the ground floor and higher density residential above is permissible in the E1 zone and consistent with the objectives of the zone. The proposed development achieves the objectives of the development standard and facilitates the delivery of new in-fill affordable housing on the site, which would not otherwise be achieved pursuant to the provisions of section 16 of the Housing SEPP.

Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal achieves the following objectives of the standard:

(a) to establish a maximum height of buildings to enable appropriate development density,

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

(c)  to minimise the visual impact of development,

(d) to ensure sufficient solar access and privacy for neighbouring properties.

15A Objective of division

The objective of this division is to facilitate the delivery of new in-fill affordable housing to meet the needs of very low, low and moderate income households. Furthermore, strict compliance through the deletion of Level 6 would prevent the development from proceeding and defeat or thwart the underlying purpose of the standard given the proposal is well under the permitted potential additional FSR and the affordable housing component must be at least 10% of total gross floor area and cannot be reduced any further.

Planner’s comments:

Council concurs with the applicant’s justification and considers strict compliance with the height provision to be unnecessary in this instance given that it does not result in any unreasonable impact on the adjoining neighbours or developments. The proposed development is consistent with the zone and associated zone objectives and provides a high degree of residential amenity within a local centre environment and provides for a variety of housing to meet the needs of the community including affordable housing.

(b) there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard.

In respect of there being sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the development standard, Initial Action found that although the phrase ‘environmental planning’ is not defined, it would refer to grounds that relate to the subject matter, scope and purpose of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the objects in s.1.3. To be sufficient, the environmental planning grounds advanced in the written request must justify the contravention of the development standard, not simply promote the benefits of carrying out the development as a whole Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWCA 248.

Applicant’s justification:

The proposed variation to the development standard has been considered in light of the abovementioned objectives and potential environmental impacts and hence, there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention of the standard as follows:

1.   The variations are a result of the 2.2m cross-fall diagonally over the site from south (rear) to north (front) and requirement to achieve compliance with the flood planning level.

2.   The variation relating to the lift overrun/stairs is a minor point encroachment that will be virtually imperceptible from the street and adjoining lower density R2 zoned properties.

3.   The variation relating to Level 6 is well setback from the street and would be virtually imperceptible as viewed from the street and the proposed development would still be entirely consistent with the desired future built form anticipated for the locality.

4.   The lift overrun/stair encroachments relate to the potential future provision of rooftop open space and increased amenity for future occupants, which is consistent with the previously approved variation to enable rooftop communal open space under DA2017/275/1.

5.   The proposal does not result in additional yield or developable area given the proposal is well under the potential additional FSR permitted and the affordable housing component must be at least 10% and cannot be reduced any further.

6.   There are no adverse visual bulk impacts given the majority of the encroachments will not be visible from the street and generous side and rear setbacks are maintained from the adjoining lower density R2 zoned properties.

7.   There are no adverse amenity or solar access impacts within the proposed development or on adjoining properties. The design of the proposed development has ensured that privacy and solar access is achieved generally in accordance with the requirements of SEPP 65 and the Apartment Design Guide.

8.   The proposed development for shop top housing with commercial uses at the ground floor and higher density residential above is permissible in the E1 zone and consistent with the objectives of the zone. The proposed development achieves the objectives of the development standard and facilitates the delivery of new in-fill affordable housing on the site.

9.   Furthermore, strict compliance through the deletion of Level 6 would prevent the development from proceeding and defeat or thwart the underlying purpose of the standard under section 16(3) of the Housing SEPP given the proposal is well under the permitted potential additional FSR and the affordable housing component must be at least 10% of total gross floor area and cannot be reduced any further.

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant statutory provisions of clause 4.6 and this written request has provided justification that compliance with the site width development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of this particular case and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention.

Planner’s comments:

Council concurs with the applicant’s justification and that there are sufficient planning grounds to justify the contravention to the height breach as the development does not result in any unreasonable impact on the adjoining neighbours or developments, provides a high degree of amenity which is improved by breaking the development into three separate buildings with each building having different design forms and building material finishes and the development is addressing the site constraints notably flooding.

 

It is also noted that the non-compliant only relates to the lift overrun and a small portion of the roof structure on the top level which is minor. No part of the habitable floor space is identified outside the maximum allowable 22.1m building height.

 

 

Conclusion

As the applicant’s justification has satisfied the test under clause 4.6, the application is capable of being approved, subject to a satisfactory merit assessment.

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

Council has received a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal. As part of this approval, public exhibition of the Draft Woodville Road Corridor Planning Proposal has commenced. The public exhibition was carried out between the 4 March 2025 to 17 April 2025.

The Draft Planning Proposal seeks to revitalise Woodville Road by amending planning controls in the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) 2021 for 31 sites located around the three (3) precincts of Woodville North, Merrylands East and Woodville South.

The subject application was received on 13 November 2024 and the site does not fall within the Draft Woodville Road Corridor. Therefore, no further consideration is required.

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

The Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021 is relevant to the development proposal.

The development has been assessed using the following chapters:

·    Part A1 - Introduction and General Controls.

·    Part A3 - Site Amalgamation and Isolated Sites.

·    Part C - Development in Business Zones.

·    Part F2-11 - Pendle Hill Town Centre.

·    Part G3 - Traffic, Parking, Transport and Access.

·    Part G4 - Stormwater and Drainage.

·    Part G5 - Sustainability, Biodiversity and Environmental Management.

·    Part G8 - Waste Management.

The development is found to comply with the relevant provisions except for the following:

The development is generally found to comply with the relevant provisions of the Cumberland DCP 2021, whilst non-compliances occur in relations to building height and building separation/visual privacy, they are generally overridden by the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 which allows for a bonus to the height and FSR of up to 30% if affordable housing is provided.

See discussions under Appendix D of this report.

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 1979 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 1979 s4.15 (1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (EP&A Reg 2021).

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP&A Act 1979 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 Cumberland Development Control Plan 2021, the proposal was publicly notified for a period of 14 days between 28 November 2024 and 12 December 2024. The notification generated 3 submissions in respect of the proposal with no submissions disclosing a political donation or gift. The issues raised in the public submissions are summarised and commented on as follows:

Figure 7 - Submissions summary table

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

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

 

CUMBERLAND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS 2020

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

In accordance with the Contribution Plan a contribution is payable, pursuant to Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act, calculated on the cost of works. A total contribution of $103,669.00 would be payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

HOUSING AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CONTRIBUTION (HPC)

In accordance with s7.24, s7.26 and s7.28 of the EP&A Act 1979, the proposed development is subject to the payment of the Housing and Productivity Contribution (HPC).

A condition of consent (Condition 38) has been imposed on the development consent in accordance with s7.28 of the EP&A Act 1979 requiring the payment of the HPC of $103.518.45 would be made payable prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

DISCLOSURE OF POLITICAL DONATIONS AND GIFTS

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

The development application has been assessed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, Cumberland LEP 2021 and Cumberland DCP 2021 and is considered to be satisfactory for approval subject to conditions.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the E1 Local Centre zone under the relevant provisions of the Cumberland LEP 2021, however variations in relation to the height of building under the is sought.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposal from a merit perspective, Council may be satisfied that the development has been responsibly designed and provides for acceptable levels of amenity for future residents. It is considered that the proposal successfully minimises adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties. Hence the development, irrespective of the 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.

There are no consultation processes for Council associated with this report.

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

There are no policy implications for Council associated with this report.

The final outcome of this matter will be notified. The objectors will also be notified in writing of the outcome.

1.  That the Clause 4.6 variation request to contravene the height of building development standard, pursuant to Clause 16 of the Housing SEPP 2021 be supported.

2.  That Development Application 2024/0618 for alterations and additions to the shop-top housing development including reconfiguration of basement levels 1 and 2, ground floor and levels 1 to 4, an additional basement level and two residential levels (levels 5 and 6), comprising in total two (2) commercial tenancies and kiosk on the ground floor and 44 residential units over three (3) levels of basement parking pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 2, Division 1 In-fill affordable housing of the Housing SEPP 2021 on land at 2-4 Gilba Road, Pendle Hill be approved subject to conditions listed in the attached schedule.

3.  Persons whom have lodged a submission in respect to the application be notified of the determination of the application.

1.      Draft Notice of Determination  

2.      Architectural Plans  

3.      Landscape Plans  

4.      Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Height of Building  

5.      Stamped Approved Plans Under DA2014/275  

6.      Stamped Approved Plans under MOD2022/0258  

7.      Redacted Submissions  

8.      Appendix A - Housing SEPP 2021  

9.      Appendix B - Apartment Design Guide  

10.    Appendix C - Cumberland LEP 2021 Assessment  

11.    Appendix D - Cumberland DCP 2021 Assessment   

 

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP024/25

Attachment 1

Draft Notice of Determination

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP024/25

Attachment 2

Architectural Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP024/25

Attachment 3

Landscape Plans

 8 October 2025

DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH
REPORT ELPP024/25

Attachment 4

Clause 4.6 Variation Request - Height of Building

 8 October 2025