Development Assessment Panel
Business Paper
date of meeting: |
|
Wednesday 11 December 2024 |
location: |
|
Port Macquarie-Hastings Council 17 Burrawan Street, Port Macquarie Function Room |
time: |
|
2:00 PM |
![]() |
Adopted: Ordinary Council 2022 09 15
To assist in managing Council's development assessment function by providing independent, transparent and expert determinations of development applications that fall outside of staff delegations.
· To review development application reports and conditions. The focus of the Panel’s review is to be on those issues raised in submissions received following exhibition of development applications;
· To determine development applications where there are 3 or more unique submissions or where an application is outside of staff delegations;
· To refer development applications to Council for determination where necessary;
· To provide a forum for objectors and applicants to make submissions on applications before the Development Assessment Panel(DAP);
· To maintain transparency in the determination of development applications.
Pursuant to Section 377 of the Local Government Act, 1993 delegation to:
· Determine (approve or refuse) development applications under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 having regard to the relevant environmental planning instruments, development control plans and Council policies.
· Vary, modify or release restrictions as to use and/or covenants created by Section 88B instruments under the Conveyancing Act 1919 in relation to development applications being considered by the panel.
· Determine Koala Plans of Management under State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 associated with development applications being considered by the Panel.
Noting the trigger to escalate decision making to Council as highlighted in section 5.2.
· 3 independent external members will be selected for each scheduled DAP meeting from an appointed pool of members. One of the independent external members to be the Chairperson. Independent members will be rostered onto meeting on a rotational basis where possible.
· Group Manager Development Services (alternate - Director Community, Planning and Environment or Development Assessment Planning Coordinator).
The independent external members shall have expertise in one or more of the following areas: planning, architecture, heritage, the environment, urban design, economics, traffic and transport, law, engineering, government and public administration.
3.2 Non-Voting Members Not applicable.
· Members must act faithfully and diligently and in accordance with this Charter.
· Members must comply with Council's Code of Conduct.
· Except as required to properly perform their duties, DAP members must not disclose any confidential information (as advised by Council) obtained in connection with the DAP functions.
· Members will have read and be familiar with the documents and information provided by Council prior to attending a DAP meeting.
· Members must act in accordance with Council's Workplace Health and Safety Policies and Procedures
· External members of the Panel are not authorised to speak to the media on behalf of Council. Council officers that are members of the Committee are bound by the existing operational delegations in relation to speaking to media.
The independent external members will be appointed for the term of 4 years or until such time as an expression of interest process to source panel members is completed for the proceeding 4 year term.
· A pool of independent external members (including the Chair) shall be appointed by the Chief Executive Officer following an external Expression of Interest process. Previous Panel members are eligible to be reappointed on the Panel following this expression of interest process.
· Independent members will be rostered on to Panel meetings on a rotational basis where possible to suit Panel member availability and Panel operational needs.
· Staff members on the Panel shall be appointed by the Chief Executive Officer.
· The Development Assessment Panel will generally meet on the 1st and 3rd Wednesday each month at 2.00pm at the Port Macquarie offices of Council. Meetings may be conducted on-line or a combination of in person and on-line.
· Special Meetings of the Panel may be convened by the Director Community, Planning and Environment Services with 3 days notice.
· At all Meetings of the Panel the Chairperson shall occupy the Chair and preside. The Chair will be responsible for keeping order at meetings.
· Meetings shall be open to the public.
· The Panel will hear from an applicant and objectors or their representatives. Speakers are required to register to speak by close of business on the day prior to the Panel meeting.
· The Panel shall have the discretion to ask the applicant and objectors questions relating to the proposal and their submission. There is no ‘right of reply’ for an objector or applicant.
· Where there are a large number of persons making submissions with common interests, the Panel shall have the discretion to hear a representative of those persons rather than multiple persons with the same interest.
· Council assessment staff will be available at Panel meetings to provide technical assessment advice and assistance to the Panel.
· Where considered necessary, the Panel will conduct site inspections prior to the meeting.
· Decisions are to be made by consensus. Where consensus is not possible on any item, that item is to be referred to Council for a decision.
· All development applications involving a proposed variation to a development standard greater than 10% under Clause 4.6 of the Local Environmental Plan will be considered by the Panel and recommendation made to the Council for a decision.
3 members must be present at a meeting to form a quorum.
5.4 Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson Independent Chair (alternate - independent member).
· The Director Community, Planning and Environment is to be responsible for ensuring that the Panel has adequate secretariat support. The secretariat will ensure that the business paper and supporting papers are circulated at least 3 days prior to each meeting. Minutes shall be appropriately approved and circulated to each member within 3 weeks of a meeting being held.
· The format of and the preparation and publishing of the Business Paper and Minutes shall be similar to the format for Ordinary Council Meetings.
Minutes will be limited to the recording of decisions of the DAP and how each member votes for each item before the Panel. Meetings may be recorded via an on-line platform where practical.
Not applicable.
· Members of the Panel must comply with Council’s Code of Conduct. It is the personal responsibility of members to comply with the standards in the Code of Conduct and regularly review their personal circumstances with this in mind.
· Panel members must declare any conflict of interest at the start of each meeting or before discussion of a relevant item or topic. Details of any conflicts of interest are to be appropriately minuted. Where members are deemed to have a real or perceived conflict of interest, it may be appropriate they be excused from deliberations on the issue where the conflict of interest may exist. A Panel meeting may be postponed where there is no quorum.
All members and applicants are to adhere to Council’s Lobbying policy. Outside of scheduled Development Assessment Panel meetings, applicants, their representatives, Councillors, Council staff and the general public are not to lobby Panel members via meetings, telephone conversations, correspondence and the like. Adequate opportunity will be provided at Panel inspections or meetings for applicants, their representatives and the general public to make verbal submissions in relation to Business Paper items.
All parties in attendance at a DAP meeting shall conduct themselves respectfully i.e. not disrupt the conduct of the meeting, interject, act courteously and with compassion and empathy and sensitivity and will not insult, denigrate or make defamatory or personal reflections on or impute improper motives to the DAP, Council staff or other members of the public.
Development Assessment Panel
ATTENDANCE REGISTER
Member |
18/10/23 |
15/11/23 |
7/02/24 |
6/03/24 |
5/06/24 |
17/07/24 |
16/10/24 |
20/11/24 |
David Crofts (Independent Chair) |
P |
P |
A |
|
|
P |
A |
P |
Chris Gee (Independent Member) |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
|
P |
P |
Michael Mason (Independent Member) |
P |
|
P |
P |
P |
P |
A |
A |
Dan Croft (Group Manager Development Services) |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
|
P |
P |
Tony McNamara (Independent Member) |
|
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
|
Other attendees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mayor Peta Pinson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Melissa Watkins (Director Community, Planning and Environment) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant Burge (Development Engineering Coordinator) |
|
|
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
Kerrod Franklin (Acting Development Engineering Coordinator) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Galbraith-Robertson (Development Planning Coordinator) |
|
|
|
|
P |
|
|
|
Steven Ford (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P |
Chris Gardiner (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
P |
|
|
|
P |
Vanessa Penfold (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
|
P |
|
P |
|
Clinton Tink (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Power (Act Development Engineer Coordinator) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beau Spry (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Roberts (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
P |
P |
|
|
|
|
P |
Kate Kennedy (Building Surveyor) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warren Wisemantel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Slater (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alton Dick (Stormwater Engineer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiona Tierney (Development Assessment Planner) |
P |
|
|
P |
|
P |
|
|
Nicholas Powers (Development Assessment Planner) |
|
|
|
P |
|
|
|
|
Key: P = Present, A = Absent With Apology X = Absent Without Apology
Development Assessment Panel
Meeting Dates for 2024
7 February |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
21 February |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
6 March |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
5 June |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
19 June |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
3 July |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
17 July |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
7 August |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
21 August |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
4 September |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
18 September |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
2 October |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
16 October |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
6 November |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
20 November |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
4 December |
Function Room |
2.00pm |
Wednesday 11 December 2024
Items of Business
Item Subject Page
01 Acknowledgement of Country............................................................................. 1
02 Apologies.......................................................................................................... 1
03 Confirmation of Minutes..................................................................................... 1
04 Disclosures of Interest....................................................................................... 1
05 DA2018 - 58.2 - Section 4.55 Modification to Design of Previous Approved Residential Flat Building including Swimming Pools and Strata Subdivision at Lot:6 Sec:60A DP:758842, No. 4 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie......................................................................... 1
06 DA2023 - 716.1 Residential Flat Building and Strata Subdivision including Clause 4.6 Variation to Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) Lot:1 DP:230726, No.7 School Street, Port Macquarie, including Works to Adjoining Building at No.9 School Street, Port Macquarie......................................................................................................... 1
07 DA2022 - 931.1 School (Stage 1 & 2) and Concept Application for Stage 3 Expansion of School at Lot 10 DP 1223845, No. 456 John Oxley Drive, Thrumster............................... 1
08 General Business
AGENDA
Development Assessment Panel
11/12/2024
Item: 01
Subject: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
"I acknowledge that we are gathered on Birpai Land. I pay respect to the Birpai Elders both past and present. I also extend that respect to all other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people present."
Subject: APOLOGIES
RECOMMENDATION
That the apologies received be accepted.
Subject: CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES
Recommendation
That the Minutes of the Development Assessment Panel Meeting held on 20 November 2024 be confirmed.
MINUTES
Development Assessment Panel Meeting
20/11/2024
PRESENT
Members:
David Crofts (Independent Chair)
Chris Gee (Independent Member)
Dan Croft (Group Manager Development Services)
Other Attendees:
Grant Burge (Development Engineering Coordinator)
Ben Roberts (Senior Development Assessment Planner)
Steven Ford (Development Assessment Planner)
Chris Gardiner (Senior Development Assessment Planner)
The meeting opened at 2.00pm. |
01 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY |
The Acknowledgement of Country was delivered. |
02 APOLOGIES |
CONSENSUS: That the apology received from Michael Mason be accepted. That the apology received from David Crofts for the meeting 16 October 2024 be noted and reflected in the attendance register. |
03 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES |
CONSENSUS: That the Minutes of the Development Assessment Panel Meeting held on 16 October 2024 be confirmed. |
04 DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST
|
There were no disclosures of interest presented. |
05 DA2022 - 995.1 Residential Flat Building including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Strata Subdivision at Lots 4 & 5 DP 17811, No. 18 & 20 Church Street, Port Macquarie |
Speakers: Michelle Chapman (applicant) Ben Rapley (applicant) Jamin Tappouras (applicant)
CONSENSUS: That DA2022 - 995.1 for a Residential Flat Building Including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Strata Subdivision at Lots 4 & 5, DP 17811, No. 18 & 20 Church Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions, with the following amendment:
Additional condition prior to release of the construction Certificate to read: Amended Plans Prior to release of a construction certificate amended plans are to be provided for the ground floor unit to provide for the foyer entry door to be provided as close to the nominated waste shute as possible;
Reason: To improve casual surveillance of the unit entry point. |
06 DA2024 - 407.1 Continued Use of and alterations to ancillary building associated with existing dwelling at Lot:5 DP:568349, No. 35 Grandview Parade Port Macquarie |
Speakers: Frank O’Rouke (Opposing the application) Darren Walsh (applicant)
CONSENSUS: That DA2024 - 407.1 for use of and Alterations to Ancillary building associated with existing dwelling at Lot 5, DP 568349, No. 35 Grandview Parade, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions with the following amendments:
Additional Condition prior to release of construction certificate to read: Landscaping Plan Prior to release of the construction certificate a landscaping plan is to be submitted to Council’s satisfaction providing for a mix of native shrubs that will provide for effective screening of the building from the adjoining property and view from kennedy Drive. The landscaping is to achieve a height of 5m at maturity. The plantings are to be provided on the southern, northern and western batters nominated on the plan (excluding the western batter for the length of the building). Reason: To reduce the visual impact of the building.
Additional Condition prior to release of construction certificate to read: Amended Plans Prior to release of the construction certificate amended plans are to be submitted to Council’s satisfaction providing for the building roof to be of a low reflectivity, mid-tone muted colorbond roofing material so as to minimise glare to the adjoining property. Reason: To reduce the visual impact of the building.’
Additional Condition prior to release of construction certificate to read: Amended Plans Prior to release of the construction certificate amended plans are to be submitted to Council’s satisfaction providing for timber surrounds to be provided to the false windows to match the existing dwelling. Reason: To reduce the visual impact of the building.’
General condition 2 be amended to read: Certificates The following certificates relevant to the development in accordance with Part 6 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 shall be obtained in the following order: • Construction Certificate and Occupation Certificate and • Building Information Certificate Condition Reason: To ensure that appropriate building certification is obtained. |
07 DA2021 - 964.2 Section 4.55 Modification to Demolition of Dwelling and Construction of New Dwelling and Swimming Pool at Lot:29A SEC:2 DP:24446, 976 Ocean Drive, Bonny Hills |
||||||||||||||||||||
Speakers: · Dave McDonald (Opposing the application) · Paul Galland (Opposing the application) · Tracey O’Dea (Opposing the application) · Paul Poleweski (Opposing the application) · Boyd Ison (applicant) · Derek Collins (applicant)
CONSENSUS: That the Section 4.55 modification to DA2021 - 964.2 for demolition of dwelling and construction of new dwelling and swimming pool at Lot 29A, DP 24446, No. 976 Ocean Drive, Bonny Hills, be determined by granting consent subject to changes to the following consent conditions: 1. Amend condition A1 to reference modified plans and revised BASIX Certificate as follows:
The development is to be carried out in accordance with the plans and supporting documents set out in the following table, as stamped and returned with this consent, except where modified by any conditions of this consent.
In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this development consent and the plans/supporting documents referred to above, the conditions of this development consent prevail. 2. Add condition A4 to reference incorporation of staging as follows: The development must only proceed in accordance with the approved stages as set out below: · Stage 1: Dwelling and associated site works. · Stage 2: Swimming pool and surrounds. · Stage 3: Boat shed and gym. Unless specified, the conditions of this consent will apply to all stages, with any decision on any discrepancy with conditions and associated staging resting with Council. Any decision to allow a change to staging will rest with Council along with applicable conditions. 3. Add condition B7 to require a detailed landscaping plan: A detailed landscape plan, drawn to scale, by a qualified landscape architect or landscape designer, shall be provided to the satisfaction of Council prior to release of the Construction Certificate. The plan shall provide a detailed plant schedule that includes species, location and quantities of each species, pot sizes and the estimated height at maturity. Landscaping shall provide screening and visual softening but is to also be of a mature height that minimises view loss.
4. Add condition E8 to require completion of landscaping: All landscaping detailed in the landscaping plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the accredited certifier prior to occupation or an Occupation Certificate being issued. 5. Add condition F2 to require maintenance of landscaping: Landscaping shall be maintained in good condition as so as to minimise view loss.
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
08 GENERAL BUSINESS |
Nil |
The meeting closed at 4.50pm |
AGENDA
Development Assessment Panel
11/12/2024
Item: 04
Subject: DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST
RECOMMENDATION
That Disclosures of Interest be presented
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION
Name of Meeting:
|
|
Meeting Date:
|
|
Item Number:
|
|
Subject:
|
|
I, the undersigned, hereby declare the following interest:
Pecuniary:
Non-Pecuniary – Significant Interest:
Non-Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest:
|
|
For the reason that:
|
|
Name:
Signed:
|
Date: |
Please submit to the Governance Support Officer at the Council Meeting.
|
(Refer
to next page and the Code of Conduct)
Pecuniary Interest
(a) your interest, or
(b) the interest of your spouse or de facto partner, your relative, or your partner or employer, or
(c) a company or other body of which you, or your nominee, partner or employer, is a shareholder or member.
(a) Your “relative” is any of the following:
i) your parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child
ii) your spouse’s or de facto partner’s parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child
iii) the spouse or de facto partner of a person referred to in paragraphs (i) and (i)
(b) “de facto partner” has the same meaning as defined in section 21C of the Interpretation Act 1987.
(a) if you are unaware of the relevant pecuniary interest of your spouse, de facto partner, relative, partner, employer or company or other body, or
(b) just because the person is a member of, or is employed by, a council or a statutory body, or is employed by the Crown, or
(c) just because the person is a member of, or a delegate of a council to, a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter, so long as the person has no beneficial interest in any shares of the company or body.
Non-Pecuniary
b) other relationships with persons who are affected by a decision or a matter under consideration that are particularly close, such as friendships and business relationships. Closeness is defined by the nature of the friendship or business relationship, the frequency of contact and the duration of the friendship or relationship.
c) an affiliation between the council official and an organisation (such as a sporting body, club, religious, cultural or charitable organisation, corporation or association) that is affected by a decision or a matter under consideration that is particularly strong. The strength of a council official’s affiliation with an organisation is to be determined by the extent to which they actively participate in the management, administration or other activities of the organisation.
d) membership, as the council’s representative, of the board or management committee of an organisation that is affected by a decision or a matter under consideration, in circumstances where the interests of the council and the organisation are potentially in conflict in relation to the particular matter
e) a financial interest (other than an interest of a type referred to in clause 4.6) that is not a pecuniary interest for the purposes of clause 4.1
f) the conferral or loss of a personal benefit other than one conferred or lost as a member of the community or a broader class of people affected by a decision.
a) by not participating in consideration of, or decision making in relation to, the matter in which you have the significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest and the matter being allocated to another person for consideration or determination, or
b) if the significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest arises in relation to a matter under consideration at a council or committee meeting, by managing the conflict of interest as if you had a pecuniary interest in the matter by complying with clauses 4.28 and 4.29.
SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION
This form must be completed using block letters or typed.
If there is insufficient space for all the information you are required to disclose,
you must attach an appendix which is to be properly identified and signed by you.
By [insert full name of councillor] |
|
|
In the matter of [insert name of environmental planning instrument] |
|
|
Which is to be considered at a meeting of the [insert name of meeting] |
|
|
Held on [insert date of meeting] |
|
|
PECUNIARY INTEREST
|
||
Address of the affected principal place of residence of the councillor or an associated person, company or body (the identified land) |
|
|
Relationship of identified land to councillor [Tick or cross one box.] |
The councillor has interest in the land (e.g. is owner or has other interest arising out of a mortgage, lease, trust, option or contract, or otherwise). An associated person of the councillor has an interest in the land. An associated company or body of the councillor has interest in the land. |
|
MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST[1]
|
||
Nature of land that is subject to a change in zone/planning control by proposed LEP (the subject land 2 [Tick or cross one box] |
The identified land. Land that adjoins or is adjacent to or is in proximity to the identified land. |
|
Current zone/planning control [Insert name of current planning instrument and identify relevant zone/planning control applying to the subject land] |
|
|
Proposed change of zone/planning control [Insert name of proposed LEP and identify proposed change of zone/planning control applying to the subject land] |
|
|
Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor or associated person [Tick or cross one box] |
Appreciable financial gain. Appreciable financial loss. |
|
[If more than one pecuniary interest is to be declared, reprint the above box and fill in for each additional interest]
Councillor’s Signature: ………………………………. Date: ………………..
This form is to be retained by the council’s Chief Executive Officer and included in full in the minutes of the meeting
Last Updated: 3 June 2019
Important Information
This information is being collected for the purpose of making a special disclosure of pecuniary interests under clause 4.36(c) of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW (the Model Code of Conduct).
The special disclosure must relate only to a pecuniary interest that a councillor has in the councillor’s principal place of residence, or an interest another person (whose interests are relevant under clause 4.3 of the Model Code of Conduct) has in that person’s principal place of residence.
Clause 4.3 of the Model Code of Conduct states that you will have a pecuniary interest in a matter because of the pecuniary interest of your spouse or your de facto partner or your relative or because your business partner or employer has a pecuniary interest. You will also have a pecuniary interest in a matter because you, your nominee, your business partner or your employer is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.
“Relative” is defined by clause 4.4 of the Model Code of Conduct as meaning your, your spouse’s or your de facto partner’s parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child and the spouse or de facto partner of any of those persons.
You must not make a special disclosure that you know or ought reasonably to know is false or misleading in a material particular. Complaints about breaches of these requirements are to be referred to the Office of Local Government and may result in disciplinary action by the Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government or the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
This form must be completed by you before the commencement of the council or council committee meeting at which the special disclosure is being made. The completed form must be tabled at the meeting. Everyone is entitled to inspect it. The special disclosure must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.
[1] Clause 4.1 of the Model Code of Conduct provides that a pecuniary interest is an interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person. A person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to the matter, or if the interest is of a kind specified in clause 4.6 of the Model Code of Conduct.
2 A pecuniary interest may arise by way of a change of permissible use of land adjoining, adjacent to or in proximity to land in which a councillor or a person, company or body referred to in clause 4.3 of the Model Code of Conduct has a proprietary interest
AGENDA
Development Assessment Panel
11/12/2024
Item: 05
Subject: DA2018 - 58.2 - Section 4.55 Modification to Design of Previous Approved Residential Flat Building including Swimming Pools and Strata Subdivision at Lot:6 Sec:60A DP:758842, No. 4 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie
Report Author: Development Assessment Officer (Planning), Patrick Galbraith-Robertson
Applicant: Stewart Architecture Pty Ltd Owner: 4 Clarence Street PM Pty Ltd Estimated Cost: $22.709M Parcel no: 47405 & 15017 Alignment with Delivery Program 4.3.1 Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation. |
That the Section 4.55 modification to DA2018 - 58.2 for a modification to design of previous approved residential flat building including swimming pools and strata subdivision at Lot 1, DP 1083291 & Lot 6 Section 60A DP 758852, No. 4 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the changes to the following consent conditions:
1. Condition A(1) to reflect the modified plans, landscaping plan, strata subdivision, revised BASIX certificate
Executive Summary
This report considers an application for a modification to the design of previous approved residential flat building and swimming pools at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
The proposed design changes to the current approved development are summarised as follows (including further amendments made during assessment):
· Façade articulation, materiality and detailing.
· Basement carparking layouts for the 2 levels of basement parking.
· Reduction in units from 48 to 46.
· Change in unit mix to provide an increased variety of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom layouts.
· Unit layouts including removing bedrooms facing common walkways.
· Reduced extent of common walkways on each floor level.
· Landscaping design changes.
· Strata subdivision changes.
Following exhibition of the application, 4 submissions were received. All submissions raised concerns with the proposal. Key issues raised in the submissions have been raised with the applicant for consideration in their application.
During assessment, the application was amended which includes the following changes to design and additional information provided:
· Architect’s Design Verification Statement.
· Architect’s Apartment Design Guide Compliance report.
· Draft strata subdivision plan included proposed parking allocation.
· Advice obtained from Council’s Water and Sewer Team in regards to the Water Management Act approvals process.
· Clarification of proposed maximum building height proposed and details of changes to built form and previous approved building height above the 19m standard height plane for the site.
· Clarification on proposed gross floor area and floor space ratio calculations.
· Traffic Assessment details from consultant Quantum Traffic which addresses carparking calculations and access widths and manoeuvring.
· Clarification of earthworks quantities and cut and fill.
· Additional details and responses to key issues raised in the submissions received addressing parking generation, vehicular access, privacy, noise, security, waterproofing and boundary construction methodologies.
· Clarification of design clearances to existing high voltage power network in Munster Street with Conductor Clearance Assessment prepared by Power Solutions.
· Amendments to design plans of eastern balcony walls including change from sliding screens to a solid wall on levels 6 and 7 adjoining the Focus Apartments particularly to improve privacy.
· Additional details to address and update view sharing impacts.
· Updated shadow diagrams including additional detail to particularly address the southern neighbouring property at 12 Munster Street.
· A more detailed conceptual landscaping plan which includes more details of existing and proposed cut levels in the rear deep soil zone proposed.
· Clarification that an existing Brushbox tree in Munster Street is to be retained and drawings updated.
· Individual access stairs to ground floor apartments recessed into the site and plan drawings updated.
· Changes to the windows on southern elevation to have window sills increased in height to improve privacy to the southern neighbours.
· Addition of fencing, basement entry garage door and secure entry gate to the south-west entrance along Munster Street. Plan drawings updated.
· Clarification of 3m floor to floor heights set in the design and relationship to the ADG requirements and existing consent.
· Clarification of apartment design dimensions and areas having regard to the ADG requirements.
The approved development has not been physically commenced and is reliant upon a State Government Covid-19 2 year consent extension until 28 November 2025 (new consent lapsing date).
The site is considered suitable for the proposed modified development and the proposal adequately addresses relevant planning controls. The modified development is considered to not be contrary to the public's interest and will not result a significant adverse social, environmental, or economic impact.
This report recommends that the application be approved subject to the above recommended consent condition changes (Attachment 1 provides a full list of conditions including proposed changes).
The reason for the application being referred to Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) is because 3 or more objections to the proposal have been received. A copy of the DAP Charter outlining the delegations and functions of the DAP is available on Council’s website.
1. BACKGROUND
Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development
The combined site area of 1782.57m2, frontage to Clarence Street of 31.035m and Munster Street of 57.22m.
The site is zoned R4 high density residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:
Existing buildings on the site include the four storey Waterview Units (motel), brick garages and pool.
The area is characterised by a mixture of high rise developments. A number of larger residential flat, tourist accommodation and shop top housing buildings exist in the immediate area.
The site has two(2) street frontages being Clarence Street and Munster Street, Port Macquarie.
Adjoining the site to the east is an existing residential flat building known as ‘Focus’.
Adjoining the site to the south is an existing residential flat building known as ‘Huxley Court’.
The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photographs (2012 and Nearmap July 2018):
2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
Key aspects of the modification include the following:
· Façade articulation, materiality and detailing.
· Basement carparking layouts for both levels of 2 levels of basement parking.
· Reduction in units from 48 to 46.
· Change in unit mix to provide an increased variety of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom layouts.
· Unit layouts including removing bedrooms facing common walkways.
· Reduced extent of common walkways on each floor level.
· Landscaping design changes.
· Strata subdivision changes.
Perspective extracts of the current approved and amended plans are shown below for reference and consideration:
Current consent
Proposed modified building (first one Clarence Street and second Munster Street facades
Refer to plans of the proposed modification development at the end of this report (Attachment 2).
Current approved plans are also provided for comparison (Attachment 5).
Application Chronology
· 13 November 2018 - Original development approved by Northern Region Planning Panel.
· 12 July 2024 - Subject modification lodged with Council.
· 19 July 2024 - Referral to Essential Energy.
· 25 July to 7 August 2024 - Neighbour notification.
· 1 August 2024 - Site inspection by assessing officer.
· 5 August 2024 - Advice received from Essential Energy.
· 2 September 2024 - Additional information requested from applicant and assessment update provided.
· 20 September 2024 - Clarification provided to applicant on additional information request.
· 23 September 2024 - Applicant advised working on all additional information requests.
· 22 October 2024 - Further additional information requested in regards to stormwater management.
· 24 October 2024 - Update from applicant on additional information requested.
· 25 October 2024 - Additional information received from applicant including amendments to the proposed modification application.
· 28 October 2024 - Clarification requested from applicant in regards to stormwater additional information requested.
· 30 October 2024 - Clarification on stormwater additional information requested.
· 12 November 2024 - Additional stormwater information received.
· 19 November 2024 - Referral to Essential Energy of additional information.
· 21 November 2024 - Essential Energy advice received.
· 22 November 2024 - Assessment update provided to applicant.
· 22 November 2024 - Materials and finishes architectural sheet submitted.
3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT
The application has been lodged pursuant to Section 4.55(2) on the basis that it is
substantially the same development to that which was originally consented to.
Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 enables the
modification of consents and categorises modifications into Section 4.55(1) for
modifications involving minor error, mis-description or miscalculation, Section
4.55(1A) are for modifications involving minimal environmental impact and Section
4.55(2) are for other modifications. Each type of modification must be considered as
being substantially the same to that which was originally consented.
In determining the modification application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the modification application relates:
Section 4.55(2)(a) Is the proposal substantially the same?
In considering the modification, an assessment of the following has been undertaken with a particular focus on the following:
· Comparison of the quantitative and qualitative differences between the original and modified development.
· Comparison of the material and essential features (critical elements) of the original and modified development.
· Comparison of the consequences of carrying out the modification with the original approval.
The applicant has submitted justification details for the proposal being substantially the same development from a legal firm Piper Alderman (Attachment 4) which is summarised as follows:
· Reference made to Land and Environment Court caselaw Moto project (No 2) Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council (1999) and Vacik Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council (1992).
· The proposal does not change the use of the approved development and alters the approved development without radical transformation. The development will remain essentially the same residential flat building with basement carparking and communal open space.
· There is no radical transformation to the building envelope or built form.
· The changes in unit mix increases the assumed number of residents by 4 which is insignificant and unlikely to have any amenity impacts.
· The proposal includes 7 additional car spaces which comfortably fit within the existing building envelope.
· The visual bulk and scale of the building will continue to present as 8 storeys on Clarence Street and 6 Storeys on Munster Street which is considered to be an essential element of the approved development.
· The proposed increase in gross floor area (GFA) and floor space (FSR) is a nominal increase and does not exceed the relevant maximum FSR standards under the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP).
· The totality of the proposed modifications will not cause any additional or worsening of any existing privacy, shadowing or amenity impacts generated by the approved development.
An assessment review of the details submitted and comparison on plans has been undertaken. The assessment has established that the modified proposal overall is substantially the same development to that originally approved.
Section 4.55(2)(b) Consultation with relevant Minister or Public Authority or approval body
No consultation with any public authority is required in relation to the proposed modification.
Section 4.55(2)(c) The application has been notified in accordance with the regulations and Council’s Community Participation Plan
Adjoining properties and previous submitters were notified of the modification application in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan.
Section 4.55(2)(d) Consideration of any submissions received
Following neighbour notification of the application, four (4) submissions were received.
The key issues raised in the submissions received have been forwarded to the applicant for consideration and a response has been provided during assessment which has resulted in part with amendments to the design of the proposal.
Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the DAP.
Key planning issues raised in the submissions received and comments are provided as follows:
Submission Issue/Summary |
Planning Comment/Response |
Inadequate on-site parking and impacts on street parking |
Following initial assessment and the neighbour notification process, the applicant has submitted a Traffic and Parking Assessment prepared by QuantumTraffic.
From a traffic perspective, this report has been reviewed by Council Engineering staff and is considered acceptable.
From an off-street parking perspective the parking provision is acceptable and does not warrant refusal of the application.
Refer to parking and traffic impacts later in this report (Attachment 6). |
Safety impacts to Munster Street and broader traffic and road functions |
|
Privacy concerns relating to the site and the adjoining existing Focus development to the east at 2 Clarence Street (Unit 13 in particular) |
Amendments have been made to the eastern balcony wall adjoining the Focus apartments which will provide an improvement in privacy between the Focus building and the subject site. There are also improvements in privacy separation when making a comparison to the current approved development.
The upper 2 levels of the existing approved DA had a stepped façade with entirely glass balustrades. While additional separation was proposed, these balconies would have provided more direct views between adjoining balconies, and therefore less privacy. Furthermore, the Focus apartment balconies were set forward of the proposed balconies, and despite fixed screening the Focus apartments would have had assumed direct sight lines into the proposed eastern balconies and living rooms.
The proposed amendment provides solid walls to the eastern boundary of the apartments adjoining the focus building, therefore mitigating any privacy concerns.
Middle levels (L2-4)– Privacy maintained: Middle levels provide the same boundary wall condition to the existing approved DA.
Lower Levels (LG-1): Additional battened screens have been provided to the eastern balconies. This has no impact on privacy as it adjoins the blank wall of the Focus building commercial tenancy. |
Noise concerns relating to the site and the adjoining existing Focus development to the east at 2 Clarence Street (Unit 13 in particular) |
The upper levels of the existing approved DA balconies had a 4.8m gap to the Focus building, however as noted above, the balconies protruded forward.
The proposed amendments (refer to amended plans post neighbour notification) provides solid wall separation with the front of balconies aligned which mitigates noise transfer between the 2 developments. Noise will be more likely directed away from each development towards Clarence Street. |
Security/balcony screens |
The change from sliding screens to a solid wall on levels 6 and 7 satisfactorily addresses potential security concerns. |
Gap between proposal and Focus Apartments to the east at 2 Clarence Street and future maintenance |
The proposed design layout and building position is the same as the existing DA. This is considered typical party-wall construction. Details to be resolved at Construction Certificate stage. |
Rainforest/rooftop garden waterproofing adequacy |
The applicant has advised that the rainforest and rooftop gardens is designed to provide vital green space to the development. Waterproofing details will be required to be adequately resolved at Construction Certificate stage. |
4.55(3) In determining an application for modification of a consent under this section, the consent authority must take into consideration such of the matters referred to in section 4.15(1) as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application. The consent authority must also take into consideration the reasons given by the consent authority for the grant of the consent that is sought to be modified.
Refer to updated section 4.15(1) assessment below as relevant and associated comments:
(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:
(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument
State Environmental Planning Policy (Planning Systems) 2021
This SEPP was introduced on 1 March 2022 after the consent was granted on 13 November 2018. The SEPP includes provisions to set out the planning pathway for what is Regionally and State Significant development and the appropriate determining authority.
The current approved development was determined by the Northern Region Planning Panel as Regionally Significant Development.
For the subject modification application, the following was considered:
· Clause 2.19 and Schedule 6 identifies development to which is regionally significant development. None of these provisions set out how to address modification applications.
· Under State Government guidelines making reference to clause 275 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, the following applies:
275 Functions exercisable by council on behalf of Sydney district or regional planning panel—the Act, s 4.7(2)(h)
(1) The determination of an application to modify a development consent under the Act, section 4.55 is prescribed as a function of a Sydney district or regional planning panel that must be exercised on behalf of the panel by the council of the area, except as provided by subsection (2).
(2) A council must not determine an application to modify a development consent under the Act, section 4.55(2) on behalf of a Sydney district or regional planning panel if the application is of a kind specified in the Instruction on Functions Exercisable by Council on Behalf of Sydney District or Regional Planning Panels—Applications to Modify Development Consents published on the NSW planning portal on 30 June 2020.
The instructions are per below
for reference:
· Having regard to the above, Council is the determining authority for the modification application as the development has a maximum calculated height no higher than currently approved and less than 10 unique submissions have been received.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021
This SEPP was introduced after the determination of the original DA and requires consideration.
The current approved development was considered under the previous State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65), the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) and the Design Quality Principles.
Chapter 4 Design of residential apartment development specifically applies to the modification proposal.
Clause 147 under this chapter 4 requires the following to be considered. Comments below each requirement are provided below:
147 Determination of development applications and modification applications for residential apartment development
(1) Development consent must not be granted to residential apartment development, and a development consent for residential apartment development must not be modified, unless the consent authority has considered the following—
(a) the quality of the design of the development, evaluated in accordance with the design principles for residential apartment development set out in Schedule 9,
The modified proposal been reconsidered against the design principles further below and is considered acceptable.
(b) the Apartment Design Guide,
The modified proposal been reconsidered against the requirements of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) particularly due the extent of design changes proposed further below and is considered acceptable.
(c) any advice received from a design review panel within 14 days after the consent authority referred the development application or modification application to the panel.
Council does not have a nominated Design Review Panel (DRP).
The below tables provide an updated assessment of the modified proposal in accordance with the design quality principles and Apartment Design Guide (ADG).
Design quality principles:
Requirement |
Proposed |
Principle 1: Context and neighbourhood character Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context is the key natural and built features of an area, their relationship and the character they create when combined. It also includes social, economic, health and environmental conditions.
Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of an area’s existing or future character. Well designed buildings respond to and enhance the qualities and identity of the area including the adjacent sites, streetscape and neighbourhood.
Consideration of local context is important for all sites, including sites in established areas, those undergoing change or identified for change. |
The applicant has stated that the modified proposal has been designed to appropriately respond to both frontages, as well as to water views and solar access to the north and maintains the approved bulk and scale.
The modified proposal remains to propose a part six (6) and part eight (8) storey residential flat building.
The modified building design is sufficiently compatible with existing development and the desired future character of the area. It is considered the modified building will contribute to the identity of the area. |
Principle 2: Built form and scale Good design achieves a scale, bulk and height appropriate to the existing or desired future character of the street and surrounding buildings.
Good design also achieves an appropriate built form for a site and the building’s purpose in terms of building alignments, proportions, building type, articulation and the manipulation of building elements.
Appropriate built form defines the public domain, contributes to the character of streetscapes and parks, including their views and vistas, and provides internal amenity and outlook. |
The applicant has stated and confirmed during assessment that the modified proposal does not exceed the maximum heights of the existing approved development which included a building height variation.
The height and bulk of the proposed modified building is considered to be acceptable in the streetscape and is adequately consistent with the future desired character of the area.
The modified building will achieve an appropriate built form and incorporates interesting building elements and treatments that will compliment the existing streetscapes.
The modified internal unit layouts provide for satisfactory internal amenity. The orientation of the block takes advantage of the northern and western outlooks. |
Principle 3: Density Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each apartment, resulting in a density appropriate to the site and its context.
Appropriate densities are consistent with the area’s existing or projected population. Appropriate densities can be sustained by existing or proposed infrastructure, public transport, access to jobs, community facilities and the environment.
|
The current approved floor space ratio (FSR 2.38:1, which complies with the maximum 2.5:1 FSR adopted in the LEP.
The modified proposal includes an increase in gross floor area and FSR and complies with the 2.5:1 maximum FSR.
The adopted FSR for the site is consistent with the objectives of the R4 zone and the modified building design is appropriate as justified within the immediate context.
The proposed modified density can be sustained having regard to availability of infrastructure, and public transport, proximity to services and community facilities and the environmental quality of the area. |
Principle 4: Sustainability Good design combines positive environmental, social and economic outcomes.
Good sustainable design includes use of natural cross ventilation and sunlight for the amenity and liveability of residents and passive thermal design for ventilation, heating and cooling reducing reliance on technology and operation costs. Other elements include recycling and reuse of materials and waste, use of sustainable materials and deep soil zones for groundwater recharge and vegetation.
|
The applicant has submitted details that the modified proposal has been designed to optimise the number of apartments receiving direct sunlight to living rooms and private open space at mid winter.
The number of natural cross-ventilated units is satisfactory and exceeds the Apartment Design Guide minimums.
An updated BASIX certificate has been provided demonstrating that the modified design satisfies acceptable energy and water efficiency measures.
Suitable revised landscaping areas are proposed on the ground floor level in addition to a rooftop photovoltaic alternative energy supply. |
Principle 5: Landscape Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, resulting in attractive developments with good amenity. A positive image and contextual fit of well designed developments is achieved by contributing to the landscape character of the streetscape and neighbourhood.
Good landscape design enhances the development’s environmental performance by retaining positive natural features which contribute to the local context, co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy, habitat values and preserving green networks.
Good landscape design optimises useability, privacy and opportunities for social interaction, equitable access, respect for neighbours’ amenity and provides for practical establishment and long term management. |
Satisfactory revised landscaping is proposed. The soil depth and area available is consistent the Apartment Design Guide requirements.
|
Principle 6: Amenity Good design positively influences internal and external amenity for residents and neighbours. Achieving good amenity contributes to positive living environments and resident well being.
Good amenity combines appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, outlook, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts and service areas and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility. |
The applicant has stated that the modified proposal has been designed to provide the maximum amenity to future residents and the protect the amenity of neighbours.
The modified building layout is sufficiently efficient, legible and promotes equitable access.
Each unit provides satisfactory amounts of private open space at all levels.
Adequate storage and outdoor space is provided throughout the building.
Accessibility is possible via ramps, stairs and lifts.
Communal open space areas remain satisfactory with the modified design. |
Principle 7: Safety Good design optimises safety and security within the development and the public domain. It provides for quality public and private spaces that are clearly defined and fit for the intended purpose. Opportunities to maximise passive surveillance of public and communal areas promote safety.
A positive relationship between public and private spaces is achieved through clearly defined secure access points and well lit and visible areas that are easily maintained and appropriate to the location and purpose. |
The applicant has advised that the modified design has considered a range of design strategies from entrance points to casual surveillance and security.
The basement parking area sufficiently secure and has been clarified in the amended design plans.
A review of the modified proposal has identified that adequate consideration has been given to the principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED).
|
Principle 8: Housing diversity and social interaction Good design achieves a mix of apartment sizes, providing housing choice for different demographics, living needs and household budgets.
Well designed apartment developments respond to social context by providing housing and facilities to suit the existing and future social mix.
Good design involves practical and flexible features, including different types of communal spaces for a broad range of people and providing opportunities for social interaction among residents.
|
The current approved proposal provides 2 bedroom apartments only.
The modified proposal incorporates a significant change in housing mix to a variety of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units which provides more desirable mix of housing choice.
The proposal adequately addresses social mix and adds to the housing choice in the locality. |
Principle 9: Aesthetics Good design achieves a built form that has good proportions and a balanced composition of elements, reflecting the internal layout and structure. Good design uses a variety of materials, colours and textures.
The visual appearance of a well designed apartment development responds to the existing or future local context, particularly desirable elements and repetitions of the streetscape. |
The modified plans provide satisfactory examples of colours, textures and finishes.
A variety of façade articulation is proposed in the modified building design which is satisfactory.
The colours and materials provided on the modified plans indicate a contemporary high quality design and finish. It is considered that the aesthetics of the modified building will respond appropriately to the surrounding environment and context of the existing and desired character of the locality. |
Apartment Design Guide (ADG):
Apartment Design Guide (ADG) Objective |
Design Guidance/Design Criteria (Italics) |
Proposed |
3A - 1 Site analysis illustrates that design decisions have been based on opportunities and constraints of the site conditions and their relationship to the surrounding context. |
Each element in the Site Analysis Checklist should be addressed (Appendix 1 of ADG) |
Revised satisfactory site analysis provided.
|
3B - 1 Building types and layouts respond to the streetscape and site while optimising solar access within the development. |
Buildings along the street frontage define the street, by facing it and incorporating direct access from the street (see figure 3B.1). Where the street frontage is to the east or west, rear buildings should be orientated to the north. Where the street frontage is to the north or south, overshadowing to the south should be minimised and buildings behind the street frontage should be orientated to the east and west (see figure 3B.2). |
The site is a corner site with its primary frontage to Clarence Street and secondary frontage to Munster Street.
The applicant has submitted that dwellings have been orientated to maximise the northern aspect to living spaces and capture key views. The majority of bedroom spaces are identified to be positioned on the east, west and south sides of the development.
The proposed modified building satisfactorily presents to Clarence Street and Munster Street with its ground floor pedestrian and driveway entries. The building satisfactorily orientates to and responds to the two street frontages and incorporates satisfactory pedestrian and vehicle access arrangements.
|
3B - 2 Overshadowing of neighbouring properties is minimised during mid winter. |
Living areas, private open space and communal open space should receive solar access in accordance with sections 3D Communal and public open space and 4A Solar and daylight access. Solar access to living rooms, balconies and private open spaces of neighbours should be considered. Where an adjoining property does not currently receive the required hours of solar access, the proposed building ensures solar access to neighbouring properties is not reduced by more than 20%. If the proposal will significantly reduce the solar access of neighbours, building separation should be increased beyond minimums contained in section 3F Visual privacy. Overshadowing should be minimised to the south or down hill by increased upper level setbacks. It is optimal to orientate buildings at 90 degrees to the boundary with neighbouring properties to minimise overshadowing and privacy impacts, particularly where minimum setbacks are used and where buildings are higher than the adjoining development. A minimum of 4 hours of solar access should be retained to solar collectors on neighbouring buildings. |
Likely overshadowing to the southern neighbour remains to be within acceptable amounts to meet the minimum requirements of this Guide.
The southern-most part of the building is setback 6.198 to 6.335m from the southern side boundary and the front setback is 4.94m.
Drawing numbers DA0305 and DA0300 submitted for the modified proposal provide details of the likely overshadowing impacts to No.12 Munster Street.
The shadow diagrams submitted provide a detailed breakdown hour by hour between the key dates and times of 9am to 3pm at mid winter for all neighbouring units.
Greater than 70% of the southern neighbour units receive the minimum required minimum 3 hours of direct sunlight in mid winter.
The shadowing impacts are varied at select times between 9am and 3pm however remain within acceptable amounts to not warrant refusal or design changes such as further increased southern setbacks beyond the current proposed 6.198 to 6.335m. |
3C - 1 Transition between private and public domain is achieved without compromising safety and security |
Terraces, balconies and courtyard apartments should have direct street entry, where appropriate. Changes in level between private terraces, front gardens and dwelling entries above the street level provide surveillance and improve visual privacy for ground level dwellings (see figure 3C.1). Upper level balconies and windows should overlook the public domain. Front fences and walls along street frontages should use visually permeable materials and treatments. The height of solid fences or walls should be limited to 1m. Length of solid walls should be limited along street frontages. Opportunities should be provided for casual interaction between residents and the public domain. Design solutions may include seating at building entries, near letter boxes and in private courtyards adjacent to streets. In developments with multiple buildings and/or entries, pedestrian entries and spaces associated with individual buildings/entries should be differentiated to improve legibility for residents, using a number of the following design solutions: - architectural detailing - changes in materials - plant species - colours Opportunities for people to be concealed should be minimised |
The modified proposal provides a satisfactory transition between the private and public domain having regard to the following satisfactory design elements:
· The main common entrance off Clarence Street has a clear and direct street access. A secure screened entry gate is proposed at the end of the first section of the common open entry way. · The courtyard walls, terraces, fencing and landscaping proposed will provide a satisfactory balance between privacy and contribute to street surveillance. · All of the 7 ground floor units have individual street access points to Clarence and Munster Streets. · Concealment opportunities have been limited.
|
3C - 2 Amenity of the public domain is retained and enhanced. |
Planting softens the edges of any raised terraces to the street, for example above sub-basement car parking. Mail boxes should be located in lobbies, perpendicular to the street alignment or integrated into front fences where individual street entries are provided. The visual prominence of underground car park vents should be minimised and located at a low level where possible. Substations, pump rooms, garbage storage areas and other service requirements should be located in basement car parks or out of view. Ramping for accessibility should be minimised by building entry location and setting ground floor levels in relation to footpath levels. Durable, graffiti resistant and easily cleanable materials should be used. Where development adjoins public parks, open space or bushland, the design positively addresses this interface and uses a number of the following design solutions: - street access, pedestrian paths and building entries which are clearly defined - paths, low fences and planting that clearly delineate between communal/private open space and the adjoining public open space - minimal use of blank walls, fences and ground level parking. On sloping sites protrusion of car parking above ground level should be minimised by using split levels to step underground car parking |
Satisfactory landscape planting opportunities are to be provided to the edge of the terraces to both streets. Mailboxes capable of being provided within entrance lobby area. Visual prominence of basement carpark will be minimal due to stepped landscaping and levels proposed. Carparking entrance is retained on the secondary frontage in a satisfactory location connecting to Munster Street. Substation location unresolved however indicatively proposed to be installed as a pole mounted substation. If this is unable to be achieved there is adequate space within the site in the southern side setback to make the installation. Direct access to main lobby provided from Clarence Street capable of meeting accessibility requirements and provision can be made for disabled parking spaces within basement parking area. |
3D - 1 An adequate area of communal open space is provided to enhance residential amenity and to provide opportunities for landscaping |
Design Criteria 1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site (see figure 3D.3) 2. Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid winter). Communal open space should be consolidated into a well designed, easily identified and usable area. Communal open space should have a minimum dimension of 3m, and larger developments should consider greater dimensions. Communal open space should be co-located with deep soil areas. Direct, equitable access should be provided to communal open space areas from common circulation areas, entries and lobbies. Where communal open space cannot be provided at ground level, it should be provided on a podium or roof. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, such as on small lots, sites within business zones, or in a dense urban area, they should: - provide communal spaces elsewhere such as a landscaped roof top terrace or a common room - provide larger balconies or increased private open space for apartments - demonstrate good proximity to public open space and facilities and/or provide contributions to public open space |
The site has a combined site area of 1782.57m2.
Communal areas have been modified to that of the original approved development and are approximately 32.5% of site area which is considered sufficient and accessible.
The modified building design is arranged around a central landscaped courtyard with open breezeways which are intended to serve as vertical connection between all units particularly above the ground floor level.
The ground floor courtyard communal area is expected to not achieve the desired 2 hours of direct sunlight to 50% of the area however it is noted that the site’s orientation and building height proposed make this difficult to achieve.
The modified proposal provides a second communal area for residents with modified level 6 communal garden, pool and spa areas. This area has been measured to approximately 250m2 in area. This area is considered to have good opportunity for solar access compared to the ground floor courtyard and is an acceptable design solution for amenity for future residents.
|
3D - 2 Communal open space is designed to allow for a range of activities, respond to site conditions and be attractive and inviting |
Facilities are provided within communal open spaces and common spaces for a range of age groups (see also 4F Common circulation and spaces), incorporating some of the following elements: - seating for individuals or groups - barbecue areas - play equipment or play areas - swimming pools, gyms, tennis courts or common rooms. The location of facilities responds to microclimate and site conditions with access to sun in winter, shade in summer and shelter from strong winds and down drafts. Visual impacts of services should be minimised, including location of ventilation duct outlets from basement car parks, electrical substations and detention tanks |
The ground level communal open space is consolidated in a well-designed and easily identifiable areas.
Level 6 communal open space is well designed and accessible from the building lifts.
Design elements of communal barbeque, seating both formal and informal are available.
The site is also within close walking distance to several large public open spaces including Town Beach and Town Green.
|
3D - 3 Communal open space is designed to maximise safety |
Communal open space and the public domain should be readily visible from habitable rooms and private open space areas while maintaining visual privacy. Design solutions may include: - bay windows - corner windows - balconies. Communal open space should be well lit. Where communal open space/facilities are provided for children and young people they are safe and contained |
The ground level communal open space can be casually supervised by the residents of the ground floor units who access directly onto that area and by residents coming down in the lifts into this area.
|
3D - 4 Public open space, where provided, is responsive to the existing pattern and uses of the neighbourhood |
The public open space should be well connected with public streets along at least one edge. The public open space should be connected with nearby parks and other landscape elements. Public open space should be linked through view lines, pedestrian desire paths, termination points and the wider street grid. Solar access should be provided year round along with protection from strong winds. Opportunities for a range of recreational activities should be provided for people of all ages. A positive address and active frontages should be provided adjacent to public open space. Boundaries should be clearly defined between public open space and private areas |
No public open space proposed.
|
3E - 1 Deep soil zones provide areas on the site that allow for and support healthy plant and tree growth. They improve residential amenity and promote management of water and air quality |
Design Criteria 1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum requirements: a) < 650m², no min dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. b) 650-1500m², 3m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. c) >1500m², 6m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. On some sites it may be possible to provide larger deep soil zones, depending on the site area and context: - 10% of the site as deep soil on sites with an area of 650m² - 1,500m² - 15% of the site as deep soil on sites greater than 1,500m². Deep soil zones should be located to retain existing significant trees and to allow for the development of healthy root systems, providing anchorage and stability for mature trees. Design solutions may include: - basement and sub basement car park design that is consolidated beneath building footprints - use of increased front and side setbacks - adequate clearance around trees to ensure long term health - co-location with other deep soil areas on adjacent sites to create larger contiguous areas of deep soil. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites including where: - the location and building typology have limited or no space for deep soil at ground level (e.g. central business district, constrained sites, high density areas, or in centres) - there is 100% site coverage or non-residential uses at ground floor level. Where a proposal does not achieve deep soil requirements, acceptable stormwater management should be achieved and alternative forms of planting provided such as on structure. |
The site has a combined site area of 1782.57m2.
The recommended deep soil provision is therefore to have a 6m dimension within a 7% site area deep soil zone.
More than 15% Deep soil zone provided with 22% of the site detailed to be available for deep soil zone primarily within the central courtyard area within a 11m wide area which is satisfactory.
Sufficient landscaping is proposed.
|
3F - 1 Adequate building separation distances are shared equitably between neighbouring sites, to achieve reasonable levels of external and internal visual privacy |
Design Criteria 1. Separation between windows and balconies is provided to ensure visual privacy is achieved. Minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows: a) Building height up to 12m (4 storey) need 6m setback to habitable and 3m to non habitable. b) Buildings up to 25m (5-8 storeys) need 9m to habitable and 4.5m to non habitable. c) Buildings over 25m (9+ storeys) need 12m to habitable and 6m to non habitable. Note: Separation distances between buildings on the same site should combine required building separations depending on the type of room (see figure 3F.2). Gallery access circulation should be treated as habitable space when measuring privacy separation distances between neighbouring properties Generally one step in the built form as the height increases due to building separations is desirable. Additional steps should be careful not to cause a 'ziggurat' appearance. For residential buildings next to commercial buildings, separation distances should be measured as follows: -for retail, office spaces and commercial balconies use the habitable room distances -for service and plant areas use the non-habitable room distances. New development should be located and oriented to maximise visual privacy between buildings on site and for neighbouring buildings. Design solutions include: -site layout and building orientation to minimise privacy impacts (see also section 3B Orientation) -on sloping sites, apartments on different levels have appropriate visual separation distances (see figure 3F.4). Apartment buildings should have an increased separation distance of 3m (in addition to the requirements set out in design criteria 1) when adjacent to a different zone that permits lower density residential development to provide for a transition in scale and increased landscaping (figure 3F.5). Direct lines of sight should be avoided for windows and balconies across corners. No separation is required between blank walls |
Building separation has been detailed by the applicant to be consistent with the existing approved development and in some parts achieve greater separation to adjoining buildings.
On the east side of the of modified building the proposal retains a blank wall to blank wall to the neighbouring ‘Focus’ building. No separation is required. Amendments to the wall detail and balustrade detail on Levels 2 to 7 has occurred during assessment of the application.
The eastern rear portion of the proposed modified building (beyond front building component) is setback particularly for the height where above 5 storeys in varied stepped manner between 7.55m to 11.525m. The only sections of the building within 9m are the common open breeze areas to the side of the lift wells on each level. The minimum distance is measured at 7.55m and 8.4m being 1.45m and 0.6m within the recommended setback for Levels 4, 5 and 6.
Given the existing setbacks of the Focus building to the east sufficient separation is proposed to be provided and no privacy mitigation required to the subject breezeway areas.
For the southern end of the modified building a side setback of 6.198 to 6.335m is proposed. The ground floor level, levels 1, 2 and 3 all achieve the recommended setback. Levels 4, 5 and 6 for the community open space level are within the 9m recommended setback for habitable areas. In this regard the southern elevation of the modified building on levels 4 and 5 only contain 1 highlight window to the living areas otherwise a blank wall. For the top level 6 the usable area is set in from the southern boundary to approximately 1.7m further than the building alignment equating to a 7.9m to 8.035m approximate setback. This 1m encroachment is considered acceptable as the adjoining building ‘Huxley Court’ has a 6.8m wide driveway on the northern side therefore providing a 14.7m separation distance and is set lower than the Level 6 - no direct views anticipated with set in usable area. No additional mitigation is recommended.
|
3F - 2 Site and building design elements increase privacy without compromising access to light and air and balance outlook and views from habitable rooms and private open space |
Communal open space, common areas and access paths should be separated from private open space and windows to apartments, particularly habitable room windows. Design solutions may include: - setbacks - solid or partially solid balustrades to balconies at lower levels - fencing and/or trees and vegetation to separate spaces - screening devices - bay windows or pop out windows to provide privacy in one direction and outlook in another - raising apartments/private open space above the public domain or communal open space - planter boxes incorporated into walls and balustrades to increase visual separation - pergolas or shading devices to limit overlooking of lower apartments or private open space - on constrained sites where it can be demonstrated that building layout opportunities are limited, fixed louvres or screen panels to windows and/or balconies. Bedrooms, living spaces and other habitable rooms should be separated from gallery access and other open circulation space by the apartment’s service areas. Balconies and private terraces should be located in front of living rooms to increase internal privacy. Windows should be offset from the windows of adjacent buildings. Recessed balconies and/or vertical fins should be used between adjacent balconies |
Privacy between communal areas and private open space areas and windows within units acceptable.
|
3G - 1 Building entries and pedestrian access connects to and addresses the public domain |
Multiple entries (including communal building entries and individual ground floor entries) should be provided to activate the street edge. Entry locations relate to the street and subdivision pattern and the existing pedestrian network. Building entries should be clearly identifiable and communal entries should be clearly distinguishable from private entries. Where street frontage is limited and multiple buildings are located on the site, a primary street address should be provided with clear sight lines and pathways to secondary building entries. |
Multiple building entries are provided to ensure an activated street frontage is achieved. Each access is clearly defined and articulated to the street. The primary pedestrian access is clearly identifiable with a double height breezeway entry to the lift and stairs. Outdoor steps and ramps have been satisfactorily integrated into the overall building and landscape design. |
3G - 2 Access, entries and pathways are accessible and easy to identify |
Building access areas including lift lobbies, stairwells and hallways should be clearly visible from the public domain and communal spaces. The design of ground floors and underground car parks minimise level changes along pathways and entries. Steps and ramps should be integrated into the overall building and landscape design. For large developments ‘way finding’ maps should be provided to assist visitors and residents (see figure 4T.3). For large developments electronic access and audio/video intercom should be provided to manage access |
The building access areas are clearly visible from the street and the ground floor is provided at grade and capable of compliance with the relevant accessibility standards.
|
3G - 3 Large sites provide pedestrian links for access to streets and connection to destinations |
Pedestrian links through sites facilitate direct connections to open space, main streets, centres and public transport. Pedestrian links should be direct, have clear sight lines, be overlooked by habitable rooms or private open spaces of dwellings, be well lit and contain active uses, where appropriate |
N/A - Site is not considered a large site requiring consideration to be given to a public pedestrian link between streets.
|
3H - 1 Vehicle access points are designed and located to achieve safety, minimise conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and create high quality streetscapes |
Car park access should be integrated with the building’s overall facade. Design solutions may include: - the materials and colour palette to minimise visibility from the street - security doors or gates at entries that minimise voids in the facade - where doors are not provided, the visible interior reflects the facade design and the building services, pipes and ducts are concealed. Car park entries should be located behind the building line. Vehicle entries should be located at the lowest point of the site minimising ramp lengths, excavation and impacts on the building form and layout. Car park entry and access should be located on secondary streets or lanes where available. Vehicle standing areas that increase driveway width and encroach into setbacks should be avoided. Access point locations should avoid headlight glare to habitable rooms. Adequate separation distances should be provided between vehicle entries and street intersections. The width and number of vehicle access points should be limited to the minimum. Visual impact of long driveways should be minimised through changing alignments and screen planting. The need for large vehicles to enter or turn around within the site should be avoided. Garbage collection, loading and servicing areas are screened. Clear sight lines should be provided at pedestrian and vehicle crossings. Traffic calming devices such as changes in paving material or textures should be used where appropriate. Pedestrian and vehicle access should be separated and distinguishable. Design solutions may include: - changes in surface materials - level changes - the use of landscaping for separation |
The basement driveway entry is located in the secondary frontage to Munster Street.
The carparking access is satisfactorily integrated into the overall façade design and materials palette for the building.
The vehicular entry is clearly separated from the main pedestrian entry with clear site lines provided.
|
3J - 1 Car parking is provided based on proximity to public transport in metropolitan Sydney and centres in regional areas Notes Port Macquarie is a nominated regional centre. In terms of using Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, Port Macquarie is a “sub-regional centre” as by definition it does not have access to rail. Medium density is 2 - <20 dwellings. High Density is 20 or more dwellings |
Design Criteria 1.For development in the following locations: a) on sites that are within 800 metres of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or b) on land zoned, and sites within 400 metres of land zoned, B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre the minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant council, whichever is less The car parking needs for a development must be provided off street. Where a car share scheme operates locally, provide car share parking spaces within the development. Car share spaces, when provided, should be on site. Where less car parking is provided in a development, council should not provide on street resident parking permits Guide to Traffic Generating Developments Medium density residential flat buildings require: - 1 space per unit + - 1 space for every 5 x 2 bedroom unit + - 1 space for every 2 x 3 bedroom unit + - 1 space for 5 units (visitor parking). High density residential flat buildings for metropolitan sub-regional centres require: - 0.6 spaces per 1 bedroom unit - 0.9 spaces per 2 bedroom unit - 1.40 spaces per 3 bedroom unit + - 1 space per 5 units (visitor parking) |
The current approved development provides 59 parking spaces off street.
The total carparking requirements have been initially recalculated using Council’s Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP) as follows:
8 x 1 bedroom units = 8 spaces 22 x 2 bedroom units = 22 spaces 16 x 3 bedroom units = 24 spaces Sub total = 54 spaces allocated Visitor parking at 1/4 units = 46 units = 12 visitors Parking required = 54 spaces assigned + 12 visitors. 66 parking spaces in total required under DCP.
69 carparking spaces are proposed with the modified building design across 2 basement parking levels which is an increase in parking provision to that which is currently approved.
7 of the 69 parking spaces are visitor parking. The remaining 62 spaces are to be allocated for units. The visitor parking numbers are 5 below the total recommended by the DCP however the total parking provision is 3 spaces above the minimum recommended 66 spaces.
The applicant has however submitted a traffic and parking assessment prepared by Quantum Traffic during assessment which considers the parking requirements in accordance with the Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Guide to Transport Impact Assessment (assumed to be the new version 4 November 2024 as the applicant refers to Guide to Traffic Generating Developments and the Metropolitian Centre rates could not be used) as follows:
8 x 1 bedroom units (0.4 spaces per unit) = 3 spaces 22 x 2 bedroom units (0.7 spaces per unit) = 15 spaces 16 x 3 bedroom units (1.2 spaces per unit) = 19 spaces Sub total = 37 spaces allocated to units Visitor parking at 1 space per 7 units = 46 units = 7 visitors Total parking required = 37+ 7 visitor spaces 44 spaces
The proposed 69 parking spaces in total numerically is considered satisfactory. The parking is satisfactory having regard to the Guide to Transport Impact Assessment.
The Consultant however has made a statement that ‘Under the NCC (BCA) the building would fall under ‘Class 2’ (Apartment Building). There is no disabled parking requirement for Class 2 buildings under the NCC.’
Council Certifiers have indicated a different view to this position in that several basements can be separately classified and require nominated accessible parking. In this regard given the parking numbers exceeding the minimum standard it is considered that this matter can be resolved at Construction Certificate stage.
|
3J - 2 Parking and facilities are provided for other modes of transport |
Conveniently located and sufficient numbers of parking spaces should be provided for motorbikes and scooters. Secure undercover bicycle parking should be provided that is easily accessible from both the public domain and common areas. Conveniently located charging stations are provided for electric vehicles, where desirable |
Nominated bicycle and motor bike parking areas in basement level.
|
3J - 3 Car park design and access is safe and secure |
Supporting facilities within car parks, including garbage, plant and switch rooms, storage areas and car wash bays can be accessed without crossing car parking spaces. Direct, clearly visible and well lit access should be provided into common circulation areas. A clearly defined and visible lobby or waiting area should be provided to lifts and stairs. For larger car parks, safe pedestrian access should be clearly defined and circulation areas have good lighting, colour, line marking and/or bollards |
Safe and secure parking proposed.
|
3J - 4 Visual and environmental impacts of underground car parking are minimised |
Excavation should be minimised through efficient car park layouts and ramp design. Car parking layout should be well organised, using a logical, efficient structural grid and double loaded aisles. Protrusion of car parks should not exceed 1m above ground level. Design solutions may include stepping car park levels or using split levels on sloping sites. Natural ventilation should be provided to basement and sub basement car parking areas. Ventilation grills or screening devices for car parking openings should be integrated into the facade and landscape design |
Two levels of basement – excavation minimised where possible.
The car parking areas are partly recessed and screened by the footpath levels and landscape treatments. The car park layout is efficient and to AS2890.1 standards. |
3J - 5 Visual and environmental impacts of on-grade car parking are minimised |
On-grade car parking should be avoided. Where on-grade car parking is unavoidable, the following design solutions are used: - parking is located on the side or rear of the lot away from the primary street frontage - cars are screened from view of streets, buildings, communal and private open space areas - safe and direct access to building entry points is provided - parking is incorporated into the landscape design of the site, by extending planting and materials into the car park space - stormwater run-off is managed appropriately from car parking surfaces • bio-swales, rain gardens or on site detention tanks are provided, where appropriate - light coloured paving materials or permeable paving systems are used and shade trees are planted between every 4-5 parking spaces to reduce increased surface temperatures from large areas of paving |
N/A – basement parking only |
3J - 6 Visual and environmental impacts of above ground enclosed car parking are minimised |
Exposed parking should not be located along primary street frontages Screening, landscaping and other design elements including public art should be used to integrate the above ground car parking with the facade. Design solutions may include: - car parking that is concealed behind the facade, with windows integrated into the overall facade design (approach should be limited to developments where a larger floor plate podium is suitable at lower levels) - car parking that is ‘wrapped’ with other uses, such as retail, commercial or two storey Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) units along the street frontage (see figure 3J.9). Positive street address and active frontages should be provided at ground level |
No exposed parking along street frontages.
|
4A - 1 To optimise the number of apartments receiving sunlight to habitable rooms, primary windows and private open space |
Design Criteria 1. Living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area and in the Newcastle and Wollongong local government areas. 2. In all other areas, living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter. 3. A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter The design maximises north aspect and the number of single aspect south facing apartments is minimised. Single aspect, single storey apartments should have a northerly or easterly aspect. Living areas are best located to the north and service areas to the south and west of apartments. To optimise the direct sunlight to habitable rooms and balconies a number of the following design features are used: - dual aspect apartments - shallow apartment layouts - two storey and mezzanine level apartments - bay windows To maximise the benefit to residents of direct sunlight within living rooms and private open spaces, a minimum of 1m² of direct sunlight, measured at 1m above floor level, is achieved for at least 15 minutes. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites. This includes: - where greater residential amenity can be achieved along a busy road or rail line by orientating the living rooms away from the noise source - on south facing sloping sites - where significant views are oriented away from the desired aspect for direct sunlight Design drawings need to demonstrate how site constraints and orientation preclude meeting the design criteria and how the development meets the objective. |
The applicant has reconfigured the design layout of all units previously approved with the subject modification.
Details have been submitted that the modified proposal has equivalent solar and daylight access to the existing approved development.
The applicant has advised that the design has sought to optimise the number of units received direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm mid winter and that there are no south facing dwellings. 57% of the 46 units receive 3 hours of sunlight at 9am to 3pm midwinter. The quantum of units receiving sunlight is similar to the solar access achieved for the current development at approximately 50% assumed (several technically not 3 hours as desired). As there are no south facing units, the site being a corner lot and all units achieving sunlight for period of time during the 9am to 3pm mid-winter period this is considered acceptable.
|
4A - 2 Daylight access is maximised where sunlight is limited |
Courtyards, skylights and high level windows (with sills of 1,500mm or greater) are used only as a secondary light source in habitable rooms. Where courtyards are used: - use is restricted to kitchens, bathrooms and service areas - building services are concealed with appropriate detailing and materials to visible walls - courtyards are fully open to the sky - access is provided to the light well from a communal area for cleaning and maintenance - acoustic privacy, fire safety and minimum privacy separation distances (see section 3F Visual privacy) are achieved. Opportunities for reflected light into apartments are optimised through: - reflective exterior surfaces on buildings opposite south facing windows - positioning windows to face other buildings or surfaces (on neighbouring sites or within the site) that will reflect light - integrating light shelves into the design - light coloured internal finishes |
It is considered that adequate daylight access is available to each of the proposed units due to their orientation being satisfactorily maximised where possible.
|
4A - 3 Design incorporates shading and glare control, particularly for warmer months |
A number of the following design features are used: - balconies or sun shading that extend far enough to shade summer sun, but allow winter sun to penetrate living areas - shading devices such as eaves, awnings, balconies, pergolas, external louvres and planting - horizontal shading to north facing windows - vertical shading to east and particularly west facing windows - operable shading to allow adjustment and choice - high performance glass that minimises external glare off windows, with consideration given to reduced tint glass or glass with a reflectance level below 20% (reflective films are avoided) |
The modified proposal incorporates satisfactory passive sun control elements and operable screens where appropriate.
|
4B - 1 All habitable rooms are naturally ventilated |
The building's orientation maximises capture and use of prevailing breezes for natural ventilation in habitable rooms. Depths of habitable rooms support natural ventilation. The area of unobstructed window openings should be equal to at least 5% of the floor area served. Light wells are not the primary air source for habitable rooms. Doors and openable windows maximise natural ventilation opportunities by using the following design solutions: - adjustable windows with large effective openable areas - a variety of window types that provide safety and flexibility such as awnings and louvres - windows which the occupants can reconfigure to funnel breezes into the apartment such as vertical louvres, casement windows and externally opening doors |
|
4B - 2 The layout and design of single aspect apartments maximises natural ventilation |
Apartment depths are limited to maximise ventilation and airflow (see also figure 4D.3) Natural ventilation to single aspect apartments is achieved with the following design solutions: - primary windows are augmented with plenums and light wells (generally not suitable for cross ventilation) - stack effect ventilation / solar chimneys or similar to naturally ventilate internal building areas or rooms such as bathrooms and laundries - courtyards or building indentations have a width to depth ratio of 2:1 or 3:1 to ensure effective air circulation and avoid trapped smells |
The majority of units are dual aspect. Corner units have north / north west aspect.
|
4B - 3 The number of apartments with natural cross ventilation is maximised to create a comfortable indoor environment for residents |
Design Criteria 1. At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building. Apartments at ten storeys or greater are deemed to be cross ventilated only if any enclosure of the balconies at these levels allows adequate natural ventilation and cannot be fully enclosed. 2. Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18m, measured glass line to glass line. The building should include dual aspect apartments, cross through apartments and corner apartments and limit apartment depths. In cross-through apartments external window and door opening sizes/areas on one side of an apartment (inlet side) are approximately equal to the external window and door opening sizes/areas on the other side of the apartment (outlet side) (see figure 4B.4). Apartments are designed to minimise the number of corners, doors and rooms that might obstruct airflow. Apartment depths, combined with appropriate ceiling heights, maximise cross ventilation and airflow |
74% of the modified units reconfigured are naturally cross-ventilated which exceeds the 60% recommended minimum. |
4C - 1 Ceiling height achieves sufficient natural ventilation and daylight access |
Design Criteria 1. Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are: Minimum ceiling height for apartment and mixed use buildings Habitable rooms = 2.7m Non-habitable = 2.4m For 2 storey apartments = 2.7m for main living area floor and 2.4m for second floor, where its area does not exceed 50% of the apartment area Attic spaces = 1.8m at edge of room with a 30 degree minimum ceiling slope If located in mixed use areas = 3.3m for ground and first floor to promote future flexibility of use These minimums do not preclude higher ceilings if desired. Ceiling height can accommodate use of ceiling fans for cooling and heat distribution. |
The modified design provides for ceiling heights at 2.7m minimum for main living and 2.4m for non-habitable. |
4C - 2 Ceiling height increases the sense of space in apartments and provides for well proportioned rooms |
A number of the following design solutions can be used: - the hierarchy of rooms in an apartment is defined using changes in ceiling heights and alternatives such as raked or curved ceilings, or double height spaces - well proportioned rooms are provided, for example, smaller rooms feel larger and more spacious with higher ceilings - ceiling heights are maximised in habitable rooms by ensuring that bulkheads do not intrude. The stacking of service rooms from floor to floor and coordination of bulkhead location above non-habitable areas, such as robes or storage, can assist |
The modified design provides for satisfactory proportioned rooms.
|
4C - 3 Ceiling heights contribute to the flexibility of building use over the life of the building |
Ceiling heights of lower level apartments in centres should be greater than the minimum required by the design criteria allowing flexibility and conversion to non-residential uses (see figure 4C.1) |
Standard floor to ceiling heights provided. |
4D - 1 The layout of rooms within an apartment is functional, well organised and provides a high standard of amenity |
Design Criteria 1. Apartments are required to have the following minimum internal areas: Studio = 35m² 1 bedroom = 50m² 2 bedroom = 70m² 3 bedroom = 90m² The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5m² each. A fourth bedroom and further additional bedrooms increase the minimum internal area by 12m² each. 2. Every habitable room must have a window in an external wall with a total minimum glass area of not less than 10% of the floor area of the room. Daylight and air may not be borrowed from other rooms. Kitchens should not be located as part of the main circulation space in larger apartments (such as hallway or entry space). A window should be visible from any point in a habitable room. Where minimum areas or room dimensions are not met apartments need to demonstrate that they are well designed and demonstrate the usability and functionality of the space with realistically scaled furniture layouts and circulation areas. These circumstances would be assessed on their merits |
Modified unit sizes achieve all minimum standards.
Windows provided and satisfactory size with not less than 10% of the floor area.
|
4D - 2 Environmental performance of the apartment is maximised |
Design Criteria 1. Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5 x the ceiling height. 2. In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window. Greater than minimum ceiling heights can allow for proportional increases in room depth up to the permitted maximum depths. All living areas and bedrooms should be located on the external face of the building. Where possible: - bathrooms and laundries should have an external openable window. - main living spaces should be oriented toward the primary outlook and aspect and away from noise sources |
Bedrooms are located on the external face of the building so as to satisfy the required environmental performance.
The applicant has advised that from a design perspective there is only 1 unit type in the proposal where the living, kitchen and dining area is 8.42m deep excluding the rear kitchen joinery. This is acceptable from an environmental performance perspective and it is noted that the majority of units are cross-ventilated and no units south-facing therefore the overall environmental performance of the building is maximised.
|
4D - 3 Apartment layouts are designed to accommodate a variety of household activities and needs |
Design Criteria 1. Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10m² and other bedrooms 9m² (excluding wardrobe space). 2. Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobe space). 3. Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of: • 3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom apartments • 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments 4. The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts. Access to bedrooms, bathrooms and laundries is separated from living areas minimising direct openings between living and service areas. All bedrooms allow a minimum length of 1.5m for robes. The main bedroom of an apartment or a studio apartment should be provided with a wardrobe of a minimum 1.8m long, 0.6m deep and 2.1m high. Apartment layouts allow flexibility over time, design solutions may include: - dimensions that facilitate a variety of furniture arrangements and removal - spaces for a range of activities and privacy levels between different spaces within the apartment - dual master apartments - dual key apartments Note: dual key apartments which are separate but on the same title are regarded as two sole occupancy units for the purposes of the Building Code of Australia and for calculating the mix of apartments - room sizes and proportions or open plans (rectangular spaces (2:3) are more easily furnished than square spaces (1:1)) - efficient planning of circulation by stairs, corridors and through rooms to maximise the amount of usable floor space in rooms |
The modified unit layouts allow for flexibility of use for household needs and activities. Bedroom dimensions comply.
|
4E - 1 Apartments provide appropriately sized private open space and balconies to enhance residential amenity |
Design Criteria 1. All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows: a) Studio apartments = 4m² b) 1 bedroom apartments = 8m² and 2m min depth. c) 2 bedroom apartments = 10m² and 2m min depth. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 12m² and 2.4m min depth. The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m. 2. For apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15m² and a minimum depth of 3m. Increased communal open space should be provided where the number or size of balconies are reduced. Storage areas on balconies is additional to the minimum balcony size. Balcony use may be limited in some proposals by: - consistently high wind speeds at 10 storeys and above - close proximity to road, rail or other noise sources - exposure to significant levels of aircraft noise - heritage and adaptive reuse of existing buildings In these situations, juliet balconies, operable walls, enclosed wintergardens or bay windows may be appropriate, and other amenity benefits for occupants should also be provided in the apartments or in the development or both. Natural ventilation also needs to be demonstrated |
All modified balconies and private open space areas comply and mostly exceed the minimum recommended dimensions and areas.
|
4E - 2 Primary private open space and balconies are appropriately located to enhance liveability for residents |
Primary open space and balconies should be located adjacent to the living room, dining room or kitchen to extend the living space. Private open spaces and balconies predominantly face north, east or west. Primary open space and balconies should be orientated with the longer side facing outwards or be open to the sky to optimise daylight access into adjacent rooms. |
The north and north-west facing balconies for each of the proposed modified units are located off a living area in a manner compliant with the design criteria.
The west facing balconies and private open space areas are configured and partly screened to shield from the late western sun and capture the north west sun earlier in the day.
|
4E - 3 Private open space and balcony design is integrated into and contributes to the overall architectural form and detail of the building |
Solid, partially solid or transparent fences and balustrades are selected to respond to the location. They are designed to allow views and passive surveillance of the street while maintaining visual privacy and allowing for a range of uses on the balcony. Solid and partially solid balustrades are preferred. Full width full height glass balustrades alone are generally not desirable. Projecting balconies should be integrated into the building design and the design of soffits considered. Operable screens, shutters, hoods and pergolas are used to control sunlight and wind. Balustrades are set back from the building or balcony edge where overlooking or safety is an issue. Downpipes and balcony drainage are integrated with the overall facade and building design. Air-conditioning units should be located on roofs, in basements, or fully integrated into the building design. Where clothes drying, storage or air conditioning units are located on balconies, they should be screened and integrated in the building design. Ceilings of apartments below terraces should be insulated to avoid heat loss. Water and gas outlets should be provided for primary balconies and private open space |
The modified balcony designs are considered to satisfactorily integrate into the architectural form of the building whilst providing views across the site, the streets and maintaining an acceptable internal level of visual privacy for occupants. The modified operable louvres and solid balustrades are considered to contribute to the provision of privacy whilst also ensuring a positive contribution to architectural form.
|
4E - 4 Private open space and balcony design maximises safety. |
Changes in ground levels or landscaping are minimised. Design and detailing of balconies avoids opportunities for climbing and falls. |
The private open space and balcony design provides a satisfactory level of safety. |
4F - 1 Common circulation spaces achieve good amenity and properly service the number of apartments |
Design Criteria 1. The maximum number of apartments off a circulation core on a single level is eight. 2. For buildings of 10 storeys and over, the maximum number of apartments sharing a single lift is 40. Greater than minimum requirements for corridor widths and/ or ceiling heights allow comfortable movement and access particularly in entry lobbies, outside lifts and at apartment entry doors. Daylight and natural ventilation should be provided to all common circulation spaces that are above ground. Windows should be provided in common circulation spaces and should be adjacent to the stair or lift core or at the ends of corridors. Longer corridors greater than 12m in length from the lift core should be articulated. Design solutions may include: - a series of foyer areas with windows and spaces for seating - wider areas at apartment entry doors and varied ceiling heights Design common circulation spaces to maximise opportunities for dual aspect apartments, including multiple core apartment buildings and cross over apartments. Achieving the design criteria for the number of apartments off a circulation core may not be possible. Where a development is unable to achieve the design criteria, a high level of amenity for common lobbies, corridors and apartments should be demonstrated, including: - sunlight and natural cross ventilation in apartments - access to ample daylight and natural ventilation in common circulation spaces - common areas for seating and gathering - generous corridors with greater than minimum ceiling heights - other innovative design solutions that provide high levels of amenity Where design criteria 1 is not achieved, no more than 12 apartments should be provided off a circulation core on a single level. Primary living room or bedroom windows should not open directly onto common circulation spaces, whether open or enclosed. Visual and acoustic privacy from common circulation spaces to any other rooms should be carefully controlled |
The modified building design changes the number of units on a single level having access to a lift to be a maximum of 4 which is compliant with the recommended maximum of 8 units.
Open access balconies are proposed to several of the modified units.
|
4F - 2 Common circulation spaces promote safety and provide for social interaction between residents |
Direct and legible access should be provided between vertical circulation points and apartment entries by minimising corridor or gallery length to give short, straight, clear sight lines. Tight corners and spaces are avoided. Circulation spaces should be well lit at night. Legible signage should be provided for apartment numbers, common areas and general wayfinding. Incidental spaces, for example space for seating in a corridor, at a stair landing, or near a window are provided. In larger developments, community rooms for activities such as owners corporation meetings or resident use should be provided and are ideally co-located with communal open space. Where external galleries are provided, they are more open than closed above the balustrade along their length. |
Direct and legible access is provided between vertical circulation points and entries for all modified units.
|
4G - 1 Adequate, well designed storage is provided in each apartment |
Design Criteria 1. In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms, the following storage is provided: a) Studio apartments = 4m³. b) 1 bedroom apartments = 6m³. c) 2 bedroom apartments 8m³. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 10m³. At least 50% of the required storage is to be located within the apartment. Storage is accessible from either circulation or living areas. Storage provided on balconies (in addition to the minimum balcony size) is integrated into the balcony design, weather proof and screened from view from the street. Left over space such as under stairs is used for storage |
The amount and size of available storage exceeds the minimum requirements for the modified building.
|
4G - 2 Additional storage is conveniently located, accessible and nominated for individual apartments |
Storage not located in apartments is secure and clearly allocated to specific apartments. Storage is provided for larger and less frequently accessed items. Storage space in internal or basement car parks is provided at the rear or side of car spaces or in cages so that allocated car parking remains accessible. If communal storage rooms are provided they should be accessible from common circulation areas of the building. Storage not located in an apartment is integrated into the overall building design and is not visible from the public domain. |
The amount and size of available storage exceeds the minimum requirements for the modified building.
|
4H - 1 Noise transfer is minimised through the siting of buildings and building layout |
Adequate building separation is provided within the development and from neighbouring buildings/adjacent uses (see also section 2F Building separation and section 3F Visual privacy). Window and door openings are generally orientated away from noise sources. Noisy areas within buildings including building entries and corridors should be located next to or above each other and quieter areas next to or above quieter areas. Storage, circulation areas and non-habitable rooms should be located to buffer noise from external sources. The number of party walls (walls shared with other apartments) are limited and are appropriately insulated. Noise sources such as garage doors, driveways, service areas, plant rooms, building services, mechanical equipment, active communal open spaces and circulation areas should be located at least 3m away from bedrooms. |
Adequate building separation is provided within the modified development and from neighbouring buildings.
The internal layout of the modified units has been designed so as to maximise acoustic privacy between apartments.
|
4H - 2 Noise impacts are mitigated within apartments through layout and acoustic treatments |
Internal apartment layout separates noisy spaces from quiet spaces, using a number of the following design solutions: - rooms with similar noise requirements are grouped together - doors separate different use zones - wardrobes in bedrooms are co-located to act as sound buffers Where physical separation cannot be achieved noise conflicts are resolved using the following design solutions: - double or acoustic glazing - acoustic seals • use of materials with low noise penetration properties - continuous walls to ground level courtyards where they do not conflict with streetscape or other amenity requirements |
Internal layouts of the modified units provide satisfactory separation of noisy spaces from quiet spaces. |
4J - 1 In noisy or hostile environments the impacts of external noise and pollution are minimised through the careful siting and layout of buildings |
To minimise impacts the following design solutions may be used: - physical separation between buildings and the noise or pollution source - residential uses are located perpendicular to the noise source and where possible buffered by other uses - non-residential buildings are sited to be parallel with the noise source to provide a continuous building that shields residential uses and communal open spaces - non-residential uses are located at lower levels vertically separating the residential component from the noise or pollution source. Setbacks to the underside of residential floor levels should increase relative to traffic volumes and other noise sources - buildings should respond to both solar access and noise. Where solar access is away from the noise source, nonhabitable rooms can provide a buffer - where solar access is in the same direction as the noise source, dual aspect apartments with shallow building depths are preferable (see figure 4J.4) - landscape design reduces the perception of noise and acts as a filter for air pollution generated by traffic and industry. Achieving the design criteria in this Apartment Design Guide may not be possible in some situations due to noise and pollution. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, alternatives may be considered in the following areas: - solar and daylight access - private open space and balconies - natural cross ventilation |
The subject site is not considered to be located within a noisy or hostile environment.
|
4J - 2 Appropriate noise shielding or attenuation techniques for the building design, construction and choice of materials are used to mitigate noise transmission |
Design solutions to mitigate noise include: - limiting the number and size of openings facing noise sources - providing seals to prevent noise transfer through gaps - using double or acoustic glazing, acoustic louvres or enclosed balconies (wintergardens) - using materials with mass and/or sound insulation or absorption properties e.g. solid balcony balustrades, external screens and soffits |
The building is not considered to front a significant noise source that would necessitate the installation of noise mitigation solutions.
|
4K - 1 A range of apartment types and sizes is provided to cater for different household types now and into the future |
A variety of apartment types is provided The apartment mix is appropriate, taking into consideration: - the distance to public transport, employment and education centres - the current market demands and projected future demographic trends - the demand for social and affordable housing - different cultural and socioeconomic groups Flexible apartment configurations are provided to support diverse household types and stages of life including single person households, families, multi-generational families and group households. |
The current approved proposal is for 2 bedroom units only.
The modified proposal changes to the unit mix significantly to introduce a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units which is satisfactory. |
4K - 2 The apartment mix is distributed to suitable locations within the building |
Different apartment types are located to achieve successful facade composition and to optimise solar access (see figure 4K.3). Larger apartment types are located on the ground or roof level where there is potential for more open space and on corners where more building frontage is available.
|
Refer to above. The mix of unit types is spread through the modified building.
|
4L - 1 Street frontage activity is maximised where ground floor apartments are located |
Direct street access should be provided to ground floor apartments. Activity is achieved through front gardens, terraces and the facade of the building. Design solutions may include: - both street, foyer and other common internal circulation entrances to ground floor apartments - private open space is next to the street - doors and windows face the street Retail or home office spaces should be located along street frontages. Ground floor apartment layouts support small office home office (SOHO) use to provide future opportunities for conversion into commercial or retail areas. In these cases provide higher floor to ceiling heights and ground floor amenities for easy conversion. |
Direct street access is provided to the modified building in a practical manner given the level differences proposed relating to the streets.
|
4L - 2 Design of ground floor apartments delivers amenity and safety for residents |
Privacy and safety should be provided without obstructing casual surveillance. Design solutions may include: - elevation of private gardens and terraces above the street level by 1-1.5m (see figure 4L.4) - landscaping and private courtyards - window sill heights that minimise sight lines into apartments - integrating balustrades, safety bars or screens with the exterior design Solar access should be maximised through: - high ceilings and tall windows - trees and shrubs that allow solar access in winter and shade in summer |
The design of ground floor apartments will provide satisfactory amenity and safety for residents. |
4M - 1 Building facades provide visual interest along the street while respecting the character of the local area |
Design solutions for front building facades may include: - a composition of varied building elements - a defined base, middle and top of buildings - revealing and concealing certain elements - changes in texture, material, detail and colour to modify the prominence of elements Building services should be integrated within the overall façade. Building facades should be well resolved with an appropriate scale and proportion to the streetscape and human scale. Design solutions may include: - well composed horizontal and vertical elements - variation in floor heights to enhance the human scale - elements that are proportional and arranged in patterns - public artwork or treatments to exterior blank walls - grouping of floors or elements such as balconies and windows on taller buildings Building facades relate to key datum lines of adjacent buildings through upper level setbacks, parapets, cornices, awnings or colonnade heights. Shadow is created on the facade throughout the day with building articulation, balconies and deeper window reveals. |
The applicant has provided details that the modified proposal provides a variety of façade articulation with precast concrete, light weight infill cladding and battened screening to balconies.
The proposed design provides a composition of varied building elements which will result in a building with variations in texture, material and detail. The proposal is considered compliant with the design criteria.
|
4M - 2 Building functions are expressed by the facade |
Building entries should be clearly defined. Important corners are given visual prominence through a change in articulation, materials or colour, roof expression or changes in height. The apartment layout should be expressed externally through facade features such as party walls and floor slabs |
The modified building entries are clearly defined from the street frontage via the provision of the access paths and variation of materials surrounding the entries. The modified proposal is considered compliant with the design criteria.
|
4N - 1 Roof treatments are integrated into the building design and positively respond to the street |
Roof design relates to the street. Design solutions may include: - special roof features and strong corners - use of skillion or very low pitch hipped roofs - breaking down the massing of the roof by using smaller elements to avoid bulk - using materials or a pitched form complementary to adjacent buildings Roof treatments should be integrated with the building design. Design solutions may include: - roof design proportionate to the overall building size, scale and form - roof materials compliment the building - service elements are integrated |
The modified roof design is acceptable and is integrated into the building design.
|
4N - 2 Opportunities to use roof space for residential accommodation and open space are maximised |
Habitable roof space should be provided with good levels of amenity. Design solutions may include: - penthouse apartments - dormer or clerestory windows - openable skylights Open space is provided on roof tops subject to acceptable visual and acoustic privacy, comfort levels, safety and security considerations. |
A suitable modified roof top communal terrace area is proposed.
|
4N - 3 Roof design incorporates sustainability features |
Roof design maximises solar access to apartments during winter and provides shade during summer. Design solutions may include: - the roof lifts to the north - eaves and overhangs shade walls and windows from summer sun. Skylights and ventilation systems should be integrated into the roof design |
The modified roof design is acceptable and is integrated into the building design.
Limited skylights are provided to the top-most units for the front balconies. |
4O - 1 Landscape design is viable and sustainable |
Landscape design should be environmentally sustainable and can enhance environmental performance by incorporating: - diverse and appropriate planting - bio-filtration gardens - appropriately planted shading trees - areas for residents to plant vegetables and herbs - composting - green roofs or walls Ongoing maintenance plans should be prepared. Microclimate is enhanced by: - appropriately scaled trees near the eastern and western elevations for shade - a balance of evergreen and deciduous trees to provide shading in summer and sunlight access in winter - shade structures such as pergolas for balconies and courtyards Tree and shrub selection considers size at maturity and the potential for roots to compete (see Table 4) Table 4 requires - For site area up to 850m² = 1 medium tree per 50m² of deep soil zone - Between 850 - 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 90m² of deep soil zone - Greater than 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 80m² of deep soil zone |
The landscape design for the modified development has been reconsidered in detail. Landscape design is satisfactory. There is capability for it to be environmentally sustainable and can enhance environmental performance of building. Select trees and shrubs are proposed. |
4O - 2 Landscape design contributes to the streetscape and amenity |
Landscape design responds to the existing site conditions including: - changes of levels - views - significant landscape features including trees and rock outcrops Significant landscape features should be protected by: - tree protection zones (see figure 4O.5) - appropriate signage and fencing during construction Plants selected should be endemic to the region and reflect the local ecology |
Landscape design satisfactory responds to the existing site conditions including changes of levels. |
4P - 1 Appropriate soil profiles are provided |
Structures are reinforced for additional saturated soil weight Soil volume is appropriate for plant growth, considerations include: - modifying depths and widths according to the planting mix and irrigation frequency - free draining and long soil life span - tree anchorage Minimum soil standards for plant sizes should be provided in accordance with Table 5. Table 5 requires - Large trees 12-18m high, up to 16m crown spread at maturity = need 150m³ of soil at a depth of 1,200mm and area of 10m x 10m or equivalent. - Medium trees 8-12m high, up to 8m crown spread at maturity = need 35m³ of soil at a depth of 1,000mm and area of 6m x 6m or equivalent. - Small trees 6-8m high, up to 4m crown spread at maturity = need 9m³ of soil at a depth of 800mm and area of 3.5m x 3.5m or equivalent. - Shrubs need soil depth of 500-600mm - Ground cover needs soil depth of 300-450mm - Turf needs soil depth of 200mm |
N/A
|
4P - 2 Plant growth is optimised with appropriate selection and maintenance |
Plants are suited to site conditions, considerations include: - drought and wind tolerance - seasonal changes in solar access - modified substrate depths for a diverse range of plants - plant longevity A landscape maintenance plan is prepared. Irrigation and drainage systems respond to: - changing site conditions - soil profile and the planting regime - whether rainwater, stormwater or recycled grey water is used |
Plant species are capable of being chosen for their suitability for the local environment and tolerance to the existing and proposed site conditions.
|
4P - 3 Planting on structures contributes to the quality and amenity of communal and public open spaces |
Building design incorporates opportunities for planting on structures. Design solutions may include: - green walls with specialised lighting for indoor green walls - wall design that incorporates planting - green roofs, particularly where roofs are visible from the public domain - planter boxes Note: structures designed to accommodate green walls should be integrated into the building facade and consider the ability of the facade to change over time |
The plant species are capable of being chosen for their suitability for the local environment and tolerance to the existing and proposed site conditions.
|
4Q - 1 Universal design features are included in apartment design to promote flexible housing for all community members |
Developments achieve a benchmark of 20% of the total apartments incorporating the Liveable Housing Guideline's silver level universal design features |
21% of the units have been designed to achieve the Silver Level design features which is satisfactory.
|
4Q - 2 A variety of apartments with adaptable designs are provided |
Adaptable housing should be provided in accordance with the relevant council policy Design solutions for adaptable apartments include: - convenient access to communal and public areas - high level of solar access - minimal structural change and residential amenity loss when adapted - larger car parking spaces for accessibility - parking titled separately from apartments or shared car parking arrangements |
The proposed modified units provide a layout and design that caters for adaptable apartments which include a satisfactory level of solar access.
|
4Q - 3 Apartment layouts are flexible and accommodate a range of lifestyle needs |
Apartment design incorporates flexible design solutions which may include: - rooms with multiple functions - dual master bedroom apartments with separate bathrooms - larger apartments with various living space options - open plan ‘loft’ style apartments with only a fixed kitchen, laundry and bathroom |
The proposed modified units contain open plan living, kitchen and dining areas which are suitable for a variety of adaptable uses.
|
4R - 1 New additions to existing buildings are contemporary and complementary and enhance an area's identity and sense of place |
Design solutions may include: - new elements to align with the existing building - additions that complement the existing character, siting, scale, proportion, pattern, form and detailing - use of contemporary and complementary materials, finishes, textures and colours Additions to heritage items should be clearly identifiable from the original building. New additions allow for the interpretation and future evolution of the building. |
N/A |
4R - 2 Adapted buildings provide residential amenity while not precluding future adaptive reuse |
Design features should be incorporated sensitively into adapted buildings to make up for any physical limitations, to ensure residential amenity is achieved. Design solutions may include: - generously sized voids in deeper buildings - alternative apartment types when orientation is poor - using additions to expand the existing building envelope Some proposals that adapt existing buildings may not be able to achieve all of the design criteria in this Apartment Design Guide. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, alternatives could be considered in the following areas: - where there are existing higher ceilings, depths of habitable rooms could increase subject to demonstrating access to natural ventilation, cross ventilation (when applicable) and solar and daylight access (see also sections 4A Solar and daylight access and 4B Natural ventilation) - alternatives to providing deep soil where less than the minimum requirement is currently available on the site - building and visual separation – subject to demonstrating alternative design approaches to achieving privacy - common circulation - car parking - alternative approaches to private open space and balconies |
N/A |
4S - 1 Mixed use developments are provided in appropriate locations and provide active street frontages that encourage pedestrian movement |
Mixed use development should be concentrated around public transport and centres. Mixed use developments positively contribute to the public domain. Design solutions may include: - development addresses the street - active frontages are provided - diverse activities and uses - avoiding blank walls at the ground level - live/work apartments on the ground floor level, rather than commercial |
N/A |
4S - 2 Residential levels of the building are integrated within the development, and safety and amenity is maximised for residents |
Residential circulation areas should be clearly defined. Design solutions may include: - residential entries are separated from commercial entries and directly accessible from the street - commercial service areas are separated from residential components - residential car parking and communal facilities are separated or secured - security at entries and safe pedestrian routes are provided - concealment opportunities are avoided Landscaped communal open space should be provided at podium or roof levels. |
N/A – no commercial |
4T - 1 Awnings are well located and complement and integrate with the building design |
Awnings should be located along streets with high pedestrian activity and active frontages. A number of the following design solutions are used: - continuous awnings are maintained and provided in areas with an existing pattern - height, depth, material and form complements the existing street character - protection from the sun and rain is provided - awnings are wrapped around the secondary frontages of corner sites - awnings are retractable in areas without an established pattern Awnings should be located over building entries for building address and public domain amenity. Awnings relate to residential windows, balconies, street tree planting, power poles and street infrastructure. Gutters and down pipes should be integrated and concealed. Lighting under awnings should be provided for pedestrian safety. |
Council’s Development Control Plan identifies desired future character elements along the frontage of 4 Clarence Street as mixed use and continuous awning requirement. In considering the requirement for continuous awning as expressed in the DCP Figure 43-3, it is noted that the adjacent Focus building does not have this element and the articulation/façade elements at the pedestrian frontage are 2 to 3 storeys in scale. It was previously assessed with the original proposal that an awning would likely result in an isolated section of awning clashing with the scale and articulation of the Focus building. |
4T - 2 Signage responds to the context and desired streetscape character |
Signage should be integrated into the building design and respond to the scale, proportion and detailing of the development. Legible and discrete way finding should be provided for larger developments. Signage is limited to being on and below awnings and a single facade sign on the primary street frontage. |
Signage will be limited to a street address and discrete building identification integrated into the concrete blade walls. A consent condition is in place to require approval for any signage other than signage that is exempt development.
|
4U - 1 Development incorporates passive environmental design |
Adequate natural light is provided to habitable rooms (see 4A Solar and daylight access). Well located, screened outdoor areas should be provided for clothes drying |
All modified units have north or north west facing living room windows, natural light, as opportunity to dry on a clothes airer inside north facing windows/sliding glass doors. |
4U - 2 Development incorporates passive solar design to optimise heat storage in winter and reduce heat transfer in summer |
A number of the following design solutions are used: - the use of smart glass or other technologies on north and west elevations - thermal mass in the floors and walls of north facing rooms is maximised - polished concrete floors, tiles or timber rather than carpet - insulated roofs, walls and floors and seals on window and door openings - overhangs and shading devices such as awnings, blinds and screens Provision of consolidated heating and cooling infrastructure should be located in a centralised location (e.g. the basement) |
The modified proposal provides a satisfactory level of passive solar design. The modified proposal has also been subject to a revised assessment against the requirements of BASIX and an updated BASIX submitted. |
4U - 3 Adequate natural ventilation minimises the need for mechanical ventilation |
A number of the following design solutions are used: - rooms with similar usage are grouped together - natural cross ventilation for apartments is optimised - natural ventilation is provided to all habitable rooms and as many non-habitable rooms, common areas and circulation spaces as possible |
Adequate natural ventilation is provided in the design of the modified units and minimises the need for reliance on mechanical ventilation. |
4V - 1 Potable water use is minimised |
Water efficient fittings, appliances and wastewater reuse should be incorporated. Apartments should be individually metered. Rainwater should be collected, stored and reused on site. Drought tolerant, low water use plants should be used within landscaped areas |
Water efficient fittings, appliances and wastewater reuse should be incorporated in accordance with requirements of BASIX. |
4V - 3 Flood management systems are integrated into site design |
Detention tanks should be located under paved areas, driveways or in basement car parks. On large sites parks or open spaces are designed to provide temporary on site detention basins. |
In accordance with Council’s AUSPEC requirements, the following must be incorporated into the stormwater drainage plan: · On site stormwater detention facilities. · Water quality controls
Existing consent conditions address these requirements. |
4W - 1 Waste storage facilities are designed to minimise impacts on the streetscape, building entry and amenity of residents |
Adequately sized storage areas for rubbish bins should be located discreetly away from the front of the development or in the basement car park. Waste and recycling storage areas should be well ventilated. Circulation design allows bins to be easily manoeuvred between storage and collection points. Temporary storage should be provided for large bulk items such as mattresses. A waste management plan should be prepared |
Storage area for rubbish bins in basement car park. Private waste collection service will likely be required. Substantial area allocated in plantroom/bin store and each unit has additional storage in basement car park. |
4W - 2 Domestic waste is minimised by providing safe and convenient source separation and recycling |
All dwellings should have a waste and recycling cupboard or temporary storage area of sufficient size to hold two days worth of waste and recycling. Communal waste and recycling rooms are in convenient and accessible locations related to each vertical core. For mixed use developments, residential waste and recycling storage areas and access should be separate and secure from other uses. Alternative waste disposal methods such as composting should be provided |
Waste recycling area bin store located in a convenient and accessible location to the vertical core adjacent the lift areas in basement car park.
|
4X - 1 Building design detail provides protection from weathering |
A number of the following design solutions are used: - roof overhangs to protect walls - hoods over windows and doors to protect openings - detailing horizontal edges with drip lines to avoid staining of surfaces - methods to eliminate or reduce planter box leaching - appropriate design and material selection for hostile locations |
Building design ensures all units have balcony access for reasonable maintenance of windows.
Appropriate material selection for the coastal environment to be finalised at detailed design phase.
|
4X - 2 Systems and access enable ease of maintenance |
Window design enables cleaning from the inside of the building. Building maintenance systems should be incorporated and integrated into the design of the building form, roof and façade. Design solutions do not require external scaffolding for maintenance access. Manually operated systems such as blinds, sunshades and curtains are used in preference to mechanical systems. Centralised maintenance, services and storage should be provided for communal open space areas within the building. |
Maintenance capable of being satisfactorily completed. |
4X - 3 Material selection reduces ongoing maintenance costs |
A number of the following design solutions are used: - sensors to control artificial lighting in common circulation and spaces - natural materials that weather well and improve with time such as face brickwork - easily cleaned surfaces that are graffiti resistant - robust and durable materials and finishes are used in locations which receive heavy wear and tear, such as common circulation areas and lift interiors |
Details to be confirmed at Construction Certificate stage.
Applicant advised that the building design employs robust materials which avoid applied finishes where possible. Each floor of the building can be accessed by maintenance staff is required. |
State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004
A BASIX certificate has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP. An existing condition is in place to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007
The proposal includes a rooftop solar energy system which is permissible in accordance with clause 7.
Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011
The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:
· Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R4 high density residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R4 zone landuse table, the proposed development for a ‘residential flat building’ remains as a permissible landuse with consent.
· Clause 4.3, this clause establishes the maximum “height of a building” (or building height) that a building may be built to on any parcel of land. The term “building height (or height of building)” is defined in the LEP to mean “the vertical distance between ground level (existing) and the highest point of the building, including plant and lift overruns, but excluding communication devices, antennae, satellite dishes, masts, flagpoles, chimneys, flues and the like”. The term “ground level (existing)” is also defined in the LEP to mean “the existing level of a site at any point”.
The building height limit for the site is identified on the Height of Buildings Map as being 19m. The immediate context of building height limits is shown below:
The proposal does not modify the maximum height, and is marginally lower than the existing approved DA. Therefore, there is no change to the clause 4.6 variation.
The existing maximum approved parapet height is RL39.760m, the proposed amended parapet height is RL39.750m. The parapet is also recessed in from the edge of the building by 1.98m on Munster Street and 3.2m on Clarence Street which also results in a minor reduction in the visual bulk and scale of the parapet at the edge of the building. In particular, the existing maximum approved lift overrun height was RL 40.05m and the proposed modified lift overrun height is RL40.00m. The proposed minor amendment does not increase the height of the existing approved DA.
The provision of the rooftop pergola on level 6 increases the height established by the existing pool fence by a minor amount, however it still remains under the
19m height plane and therefore does not impact the Clause 4.6 variation. The proposed lift overrun sits at the same height as the existing approved lift overrun
at with an RL of 37.10m, therefore remains the same as the existing approved height.
Refer to drawings DA2102 and DA2103 for additional details. These elevations satisfactorily demonstrate that there is no variation to the maximum height and height above the 19m height plane of the currently approved DA.
The building height was clarified during assessment to ensure that the maximum heights are not altered and therefore remains ‘substantially the same’ as the approved DA. The proposed maximum height above the standard 19m height plane is 5.95m, therefore complies with comments regarding proposed height in the assessment report for the current approved development representing a “variation of
6.0m or 31.5%.
The below image extract shows a representation of the height variation as a 3D height plane as viewed from the Clarence Street:
· Clause 4.4, the gross floor area (GFA) and corresponding calculated floor space ratio (FSR) of the modified proposal is proposing to increase from the current approved GFA of 4244m2 and FSR 2.38:1.0 to a GFA of 4379m2 and 2.47:1. The modified FSR complies with the maximum 2.5:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.
· Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements remain in place for provision of essential services including water supply, electricity supply, sewer infrastructure, stormwater drainage and suitable road access to service the modified development.
(a)(iii) Any DCP in force
Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:
DCP 2013: Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation and Mixed Use Development |
|||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
3.3.2.2 |
Satisfactory site analysis plan submitted. |
Satisfactory site analysis plan submitted. |
Yes |
3.3.2.3 |
Statement addressing site attributes and constraints submitted. |
Satisfactory statement and details addressing site attributes and constraints submitted. |
Yes |
3.3.2.4 |
Streetscape and front setback: · Within 20% of the average setback of the adjoining buildings. · 3m setback to all frontages if no adjoining development. · 2m setback to secondary frontages. · Max. 9m setback for tourist development to allow for swimming pool. |
No change.
|
Yes |
3.3.2.5 |
Balconies and building extrusions can encroach up to 600mm into setback. |
N/A |
N/A |
Buildings generally aligned to street boundary. |
No change. Buildings generally aligned to street boundary. |
Yes |
|
Primary openings aligned to street boundary or rear of site. |
No change. Primary openings aligned to street boundary or rear of site. |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.6 |
Side setbacks comply with Figure 3.3-1: · Min. Side setback 1.5m for 75% of building depth. · Windows on side walls min. 3m from side boundary. · 3m minimum where adjacent to existing strata titled building. |
No change to east side setback minimal setback. Rear southern section of building minor changes to setback to east however >3m. South side setback minimum 6.198m |
Yes |
Side walls adjacent to existing strata-titled buildings should be articulated and modulated to respond to the existing buildings. |
Minimal change. |
N/A |
|
Min. 6m rear setback (including sub basements) |
Corner lot – SEPP 65 requirements for southern side boundary setback |
N/A |
|
3.3.2.7 |
A party wall development may be required if site amalgamation is not possible and higher density development is envisaged by these controls. |
Equivalent eastern party wall length. No change. |
N/A |
3.3.2.8 |
Party wall development can occur only with the agreement and consent of the adjoining property owner. Exposed party walls should be finished in a quality comparable to front facade finishes. |
Equivalent eastern party wall length. No change. |
N/A |
3.3.2.9 |
Corner sites consolidated with adjacent land where possible. |
Deep soil zoned meets SEPP House ADG requirements |
N/A |
Where consolidation not possible a minimum setback of 6m should extend to secondary street (see Fig 3.3-2 and 3.3-3). |
Deep soil zoned meets SEPP House ADG requirements. 6.198m south side setback. |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.10 |
Where sites adjacent to open space are to be developed the edge of the open space should be defined with a public road and buildings address the open space. |
N/A |
|
3.3.2.11 |
Deep soil zones: · Extend the width of the site and have minimum depth of 6m. · Are contiguous across sites and within sites (see Fig 3.3-4). |
Deep soil zoned meets SEPP House ADG requirements. |
N/A |
3.3.2.12 |
Deep soil zones accommodate existing advanced trees, and allow for advanced tree planting. |
Deep soil zones capable of accommodating existing advanced trees, and allow for advanced tree planting. |
Yes |
3.3.2.13 |
Deep soil zones integrated with stormwater management measures. |
Deep soil zones can be integrated with stormwater management measures. |
Yes |
3.3.2.14 |
Sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties should not be reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 22. |
SEPP House ADG permits alternate calculation for retained sunlight to southern neighbours at Huxley Court in particular – refer discussion earlier in this report. |
N/A |
Where existing overshadowing by buildings and fences is greater than this, sunlight should not be reduced by more than 20%. |
|||
Buildings should not reduce the sunlight available to the windows of living areas that face north in existing adjacent dwellings to less than the above specification. |
|||
3.3.2.15 |
Internal clothes drying space provided (not mechanical). |
No change. |
Yes |
Ceiling fans provided in preference to air conditioning. |
No detail of ceiling fans however capable of providing |
Yes - capable |
|
Solar hot water systems (or equivalent technology) provided. |
None proposed – swimming pool heating though |
N/A |
|
Photovoltaic arrays installed where practical. |
Solar PV proposed |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.16 |
Landscape plan provided including: · 35% soft landscaping with minimum width of 3m. · Existing vegetation and proposed treatment. · Details of hard landscaping. · Location of communal recreational facilities. · Species not to obscure doors, paths, etc. · Street trees in accordance with Council’s list. |
Landscape plan acceptable |
Yes |
3.3.2.17 |
Existing vegetation to be retained and nutrient-rich water prevented from entering native gardens. |
Landscape plan acceptable |
Yes |
3.3.2.18 |
Landscape plan to demonstrate how trees and vegetation contribute to energy efficiency and prevent winter shading on neighbouring properties. |
Landscape plan acceptable |
Yes |
3.3.2.19 |
Street trees in accordance with Council’s list. |
Landscape plan acceptable |
Yes |
3.3.2.20 |
All dwellings at ground floor level have minimum 35m2 of private open space, including one area 4m x 4m at maximum grade of 5% and directly accessible from living area. |
Acceptable under Housing SEPP ADG |
N/A |
3.3.2.21 |
Where open space is of irregular shape, areas having a width less than 2m are excluded from calculated area. |
Dwellings above ground level have balconies with greater than minimum area 8m2 and minimum dimension 2m. |
Yes |
Dwellings not at ground level have balconies with minimum area 8m2 and minimum dimension 2m. |
|||
3.3.2.22 |
Fencing or landscaping defines public/communal and private open space. |
Landscaping defines public/communal and private open space. |
Yes |
3.3.2.23 |
Solid fences should be: · Max. 1.2m high, · Setback 1m, · Suitably landscaped, · Provide 3m x 3m splay. |
N/A |
N/A |
Where front fences higher than 1.2m: · Max. 1.8m high, · Landscaped recesses for 50% of frontage, or length of fence not more than 6m or 50% of street frontage. · Min. 25% transparent, · 3m x 3m splay for corner sites. · 900mm x 900mm splay at vehicle driveways. |
N/A |
N/A |
|
3.3.2.24 |
Fencing materials consistent with or complimentary to existing fencing in the street. |
N/A |
N/A |
3.3.2.25 |
Fences constructed of chain wire, solid timber or masonry and solid street not permitted, even if consistent with existing fencing in the locality. |
N/A |
N/A |
3.3.2.26 |
Building to be designed so that: · Busy, noisy areas face the street. · Quiet areas face the side or rear of the lot. · Bedrooms have line of site separation of at least 3m from parking areas, streets and shared driveways. |
Building layout design satisfactory |
Yes |
Openings of adjacent dwellings separated by at least 6m. |
Housing SEPP privacy provisions prevail. |
N/A |
|
3.3.2.27 |
Building designed so noise transmission between apartments is minimised. |
Building designed so noise transmission between apartments is minimised. |
Yes |
Uses are to be coupled internally and between apartments i.e. noisy internal and noisy external spaces should be placed together. (See Figure 3.3-6). |
Uses are to be coupled internally and between apartments |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.28 |
Development complies with AS/NZS2107:2000 Acoustic – Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors for residential development. |
Development capable of complying with AS/NZS2107:2000 |
Yes - capable |
3.3.2.29 |
Impact of noise from key public places to be considered. |
Impact of noise from key public places to be considered – elevated apartments from street level primarily |
Yes |
3.3.2.30 |
Direct views between living room windows to be screened where: · Ground floor windows are within 9m of windows in an adjoining dwelling. · Other floors are within a 12m radius. · Living room windows are within 12m radius of the principal area of private open space of other dwellings. |
No direct views between living room windows that need to be screened |
N/A |
Direct views may be screened with either a 1.8m high fence or wall, or screening that has maximum 25% openings. |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Windows in habitable rooms screened if >1m above ground level and wall set back <3m. |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Balconies, decks, etc screened if <3m from boundary and floor area >3m2 and floor level >1m above ground level. |
N/A |
N/A |
|
3.3.2.31 |
Developments to be designed in accordance with AS 1428. |
Developments capable of compliance with AS 1428. |
Yes |
3.3.2.32 |
Barrier free access to at least 20% of dwellings provided. |
Barrier free access to > 20% of apartments provided. |
Yes |
3.3.2.33 |
Developments located close to open space, recreation, entertainment and employment. |
Development location suitable for high density |
Yes |
Where LEP permits FSR > 1:1, FSR not less than 1:1 should be achieved. |
>1:1 FSR |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.34 |
Variety of types - studio, 1, 2, 3 and 3+ bedroom apartments |
Variety of unit types introduced compared to current approved development.
|
Yes |
Studio and 1 bedroom apartments not > 20% of total number of apartments. |
Yes |
||
Mix of 1 and 3 bedroom apartments at ground level. |
Yes |
||
3.3.2.35 |
Council’s Affordable Housing Strategy to be considered for residential flat buildings. |
Proposal will provide for mix of units in a suitable location |
Yes |
3.3.2.36 |
Lift over-runs and plant integrated within roof structures. |
Lift over-runs and plant integrated within roof structures. |
Yes |
Outdoor recreation areas on roof tops to be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens. |
Outdoor recreation areas on roof tops to be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens. |
Yes |
|
Outdoor roof areas oriented to the street. |
Outdoor roof areas oriented to the street. |
Yes |
|
Roof design to generate interesting skyline. |
Roof design to generate interesting skyline. |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.37 |
Facade composition should: · Have balance of horizontal and vertical elements. · Respond to environmental and energy needs. · Incorporate wind mitigation. · Reflect uses within the buildings. · Include combination of building elements. |
Façade composition acceptable and meets SEPP Housing ADG requirements |
Yes |
3.3.2.38 |
Building elements, materials and colours consistent or complimentary to those existing in the street. |
Building elements, materials and colours sufficiently consistent or complimentary to those existing in the street. |
Yes |
3.3.2.39 |
Entrances clearly identifiable from street level. |
Entrances clearly identifiable from street level. |
Yes |
Entries provide clear transition between public street and shared private circulation spaces/apartments. |
Entries provide clear transition between public street and shared private circulation spaces/apartments. |
Yes |
|
Entries provide clear line of sight between one circulation space and the next. |
Entries provide clear line of sight between one circulation space and the next. |
Yes |
|
Entries avoid ambiguous and publicly accessible small spaces in entry areas. |
Entries avoid ambiguous and publicly accessible small spaces in entry areas. |
Yes |
|
Entries sheltered and well lit. |
Entries sheltered and well lit. |
Yes |
|
Entries and circulation spaces sized for movement of furniture. |
Entries and circulation spaces sized for movement of furniture. |
Yes |
|
Corridors minimum 2.5m wide and 3.0m high. |
Primarily external passageways accessibly from lift connections to individual apartments |
Yes |
|
Corridor lengths minimised and avoid tight corners. |
No long corridors |
Yes |
|
Longer corridors articulated by: · Changing direction and width. · Utilising series of foyers. · Incorporating windows. |
No long corridors |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.40 |
Minimum 1 balcony per apartment. |
Each apartment has a balcony. |
Yes |
Main balcony accessible from living area. |
Main balcony accessible from living area. |
Yes |
|
Balconies take advantage of favourable climatic conditions. |
Balconies take advantage of favourable climatic conditions. |
Yes |
|
Balconies and balustrades balance privacy and views. |
Balconies and balustrades balance privacy and views. |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.41 |
Balconies include sunscreens, pergolas, shutters and operable walls. |
Balconies include sunscreens, pergolas, shutters and operable walls. |
Yes |
Balconies recessed to create shadowing to facade. |
|
|
|
Solid balustrades discouraged. |
Mixture of balustrade designs. Note Housing SEPP encourages solid balustrades. |
Yes |
|
Air conditioning units not visible from the street. |
Air conditioning units not proposed in application. |
N/A |
|
3.3.2.42 |
Secure open air clothes drying facilities that are: · easily accessible, · screened from public domain and communal spaces, · located with high degree of solar access. |
None provided. |
Yes |
3.3.2.43 |
Mailboxes integrated into building design and sighted to ensure accessibility and security. |
Mailboxes capable of being integrated into building design and sighted to ensure accessibility and security. |
Yes - capable |
3.3.2.44 |
Public and private space clearly defined. |
Public and private space clearly defined. |
Yes |
Entrances: · oriented to public street, · provide direct and well lit access between car parks, lift lobbies and unit entrances, · optimise security by grouping clusters (max. 8) around a common lobby |
Entrances oriented to public street and capable of being well lit |
Yes - capable |
|
Surveillance facilitated by: · views over public space from living areas, · casual views of common internal areas, · provision of windows and balconies, · separate entries to ground level apartments. |
Surveillance facilitated by design |
Yes |
|
Concealment avoided by: · preventing dark or blind alcoves, · providing lighting in all common areas, · providing graded car parking illumination (greater at entrances). |
Concealment areas avoided |
Yes |
|
Access to all parts of the building to be controlled. |
Access to all parts of the building capable of being controlled. |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.45 |
Accessible storage provided for tenants in basement car park or garages. |
Accessible storage provided for tenants in basement car park or garages. |
Yes |
One bike stowage space per dwelling provided. |
Bicycle storage facilities provided |
Yes |
|
3.3.2.46 |
For developments of < 6 dwellings individual waste management permitted. Designated area to be provided for storage of bins: · not visible from street, · easily accessible, · not adjoining private or communal space, windows or clothes drying areas, · on hard stand area, · close to street and a tap for washing, · maintained free of pests. |
Designated area to be provided for storage of bins |
Yes |
Communal bulk waste required where: · > 6 dwellings, or · Number of bins wouldn’t fit in street frontage, or · Topography would make street collection difficult. |
Communal bulk waste proposed |
Yes |
|
Communal bulk waste facilities integrated into development and located at ground or sub-basement level. · Not visible from street, · Easily accessible, · Can be serviced by collection vehicles, · Not adjoining private or communal space, windows or clothes drying areas, · Has water and drainage facilities for cleaning, · Maintained free of pests. |
Communal bulk waste facilities integrated into development |
Yes |
|
Evidence provided that site can be serviced by waste collection service. |
Private waste collection service required. |
Yes - capable |
|
3.3.2.47 |
Common trenching of utility services where possible. |
Common trenching of utility services capable. |
Yes - capable |
Above ground utility infrastructure integrated with building design. |
Above ground utility infrastructure integrated with building design including substation with amended plans |
Yes |
|
Site and individual units numbered. |
Individual units capable of being appropriately numbers at street access points. |
Yes – capable |
|
Common aerials and satellite dishes provided. |
Common aerials and satellite dishes capable of being provided. |
Yes – capable |
DCP 2013: General Provisions |
|||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
2.7.2.2 |
Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations |
The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The increase in housing density will improve natural surveillance within the locality and openings from each dwelling overlook common and private areas. |
Yes |
2.3.3.1 |
Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls |
Substantial excavation for basement however technically cut outside basement remains to be proposed in the south-east corner of the site greater than 1m outside the building.
No adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties subject to appropriate engineering design and certification. |
No – variation acceptable as previously approved. |
2.3.3.2 |
1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages |
N/A |
N/A |
Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer |
Engineering detail to be provided with Construction Certificate |
Yes |
|
2.3.3.8 onwards |
Removal of hollow bearing trees |
Nil |
N/A |
2.6.3.1 |
Tree removal (3m or higher with 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint |
Nil |
N/A |
2.4.3 |
Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater |
Refer to main body of report. |
Yes |
2.5.3.2 |
New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads. Existing accesses rationalised or removed where practical |
Driveway access proposed off secondary street frontage Munster Street |
Yes |
Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking |
Driveway crossing is minimal in number and width including maximising street parking |
Yes |
|
2.5.3.3 |
Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. |
Refer to comments earlier in this report under Housing SEPP - ADG. |
N/A |
2.5.3.5 |
On-street parking permitted subject to justification |
None required for calculated provision |
N/A |
2.5.3.7 |
Visitor parking to be easily accessible |
Visitor parking easily accessible |
Yes |
Stacked parking permitted for medium density where visitor parking and 5.5m length achieved |
Nil |
N/A |
|
Parking in accordance with AS 2890.1 |
Parking capable of compliance with AS 2890.1. |
Yes |
|
2.5.3.9 |
Bicycle and motorcycle parking considered and designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3 |
Dedicated bicycle and motorcycle parking area provided |
Yes |
2.5.3.10 |
Parking concessions possible for conservation of heritage items |
N/A – parking complies |
Yes |
2.5.3.11 |
Section 94 contributions |
Refer to main body of report. |
Yes |
2.5.3.14 |
Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified |
Sealed driveway surfaces – condition recommended |
Yes |
2.5.3.15 |
Driveway grades for first 6m of ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade (Note AS/NZS 2890.1 permits steeper grades) |
Driveway grades acceptable and capable of compliance with Australian Standards |
Yes - capable |
2.5.3.16 |
Transitional grades min. 2m length |
||
2.5.3.17 |
No direct discharge to K&G or swale drain |
No change to existing consent condition requirements. |
Yes |
2.2.2.1 |
Signage |
Minor building identification signage is only proposed. |
Yes |
(b) The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments and the social and economic impacts in the locality
View sharing
During the neighbour notification period of the original approved development concerns surrounding ‘view loss’ were raised by the adjoining property owners to the south at Huxley Court (12 Munster Street) and the Focus (2 Clarence Street) building to the east. No submissions have been received raising view sharing impacts with the modification proposed.
The notion of view sharing is invoked when a property enjoys existing views and a proposed development would share that view by taking some of it away for its own enjoyment. Taking all of a view away cannot be called view sharing, although it may, in some circumstances, be quite reasonable.
The following assessment comments have been updated to reflect the modification proposed.
Using the planning principles of NSW Land and Environment Court in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah 2004 NSW LEC 140, the following comments are provided in regard to the view impacts using the 4 step process to establish whether the view sharing is acceptable.
Step 1
Assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (e.g. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, e.g. a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured.
Comments:
The existing buildings on neighbouring properties and their views have not changes since original assessment. Several of the existing upper level units within adjoining southern property known as Huxley Court and the adjoining eastern property known as Focus having distant mountain views and be able to view sections of the Hastings River including the land and water interface.
Step 2
Consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.
Comments:
With regard to the views from upper level units within Huxley Court it is noted that there is currently a view corridor of the distant mountains and select sections of the Hastings River. An example of the views from a standing position on the deck enjoyed from one of the Units 5/12 Munster Street (Huxley Court) is shown below sourced from a recent real estate advertisement:
With regard to the views from upper level units within Focus it is noted that there is currently a view corridor of the distant mountains and select sections of the Hastings River across their western side boundary. An example of the views from a standing position on the deck enjoyed from one of the Units in the Focus building at 4/2 Clarence Street (Focus) is shown below sourced from a real estate advertisement:
Step 3
Assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.
Comments:
The proposed modified development will remain to significantly obscure the distant mountain and river views from the upper level units within Huxley Court and the rear upper level units within Focus. The view impacts of a design change on the south-western corner of the development was raised with the applicant during assessment. Drawing DA0307 has been submitted which demonstrates negligible change to views from Huxley Court.
The affected views from Focus are across a side property boundary and were previously assessed as being difficult to be retained having regard to the standard height control of 19m for the site (not-withstanding the higher height proposed above this). Views from neighbouring properties to the east and south will remain to be obscured under a compliant scenario to 19m or the proposed varied height proposed.
Step 4
Assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.
Comments:
In summary, similar to the current approved development, it would difficult for an alternative design to that which is proposed to reduce the extent of view loss. It is considered unreasonable to refuse the modification application on the grounds of view sharing impacts. Overall, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the above principles.
Access, Traffic and Transport
The proposed modification will not have any significant adverse impacts in terms access, transport and traffic. The existing road network will satisfactorily cater for any increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.
Parking and Manoeuvring
A total of 69 parking spaces (including 7 visitor spaces) have been provided on-site within the secure basement carparking area(s). Parking and driveway widths on site are capable of complying with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements.
Stormwater
The site naturally grades towards the street frontage and is currently serviced via a direct connection to the public piped drainage system.
The current consent conditions are not proposed to change for this development as follows:
Noise and vibration
Potential exists for noise to be generated from the rooftop communal area which is proposed to be modified in layout. A ‘Communal Recreation Facilities Management Plan’ was approved as part of the original development. The rooftop management plan is subject to a consent condition to give effect to the Plan.
Potential remains for noise generation from any pool pumps for the swimming pools. A standard condition is in place to manage noise from such likely pump installations.
No adverse impacts anticipated. Conditions remain in place for restrictions for construction to standard hours.
Construction
Given the extent of proposed excavation and scale of the development a specialist dilapidation report will be required. The following consent conditions are currently in place in this regard and not proposed to change:
No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.
Section 4.55(4) The modification of a development consent in accordance with
this section is taken not to be the granting of development consent under this
Part, but a reference in this or any other Act to a development consent includes
a reference to a development consent as so modified.
Noted.
4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE
The modification proposed includes a proposed reduction in units from 48 to 46. A change in unit mix is proposed to provide 8 x 1 bedroom, 22 x 2 bedroom and 16 x 3 bedroom units. There is a recognised credit of 1 x 1 bedroom and 9 x 2 bedroom units per the current approved development. The development contributions calculations have been reconsidered as applicable to the proposal having regard to the following:
· Development contributions will be required towards augmentation of town water supply and sewerage system head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.
· Development contributions will be required in accordance with Section 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.
· Development contributions have been recalculated and an updated Notice of Contributions estimate is included (Attachment 3).
5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON
The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.55 and 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the modification application have been considered in the assessment of the application. The proposal has been amended in response to several of the matters raised and where relevant, existing conditions are in place to manage several of the impacts attributed to these issues.
The proposed modified development does not raise any significant general public interest issues beyond matters already addressed in this report. Overall, the proposed development remains consistent with the provisions and objectives of the relevant planning controls and will have an acceptable impact on the surrounding natural and built environment. Approval of the application is considered to be in the public interest as it achieves the LEP objectives for development in the zone. No significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality have been identified. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.
Attachments
1⇩. 2⇩. 3⇩. 4⇩. 5⇩. 6⇩.
|
Development Assessment Panel
11/12/2024
Item: 06
Subject: DA2023 - 716.1 Residential Flat Building and Strata Subdivision including Clause 4.6 Variation to Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) Lot:1 DP:230726, No.7 School Street, Port Macquarie, including Works to Adjoining Building at No.9 School Street, Port Macquarie
Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Vanessa Penfold
Applicant: W E Ellis Owner: CJ Alexopoulos and PA Alexopoulos, NR Subbiah Estimated Cost: $4.1m Parcel no: 21809, 21810 Alignment with Delivery Program 4.3.1 Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation. |
|
That Development Application 2023 - 716 for a Residential Flat Building and Strata Subdivision including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 1, DP 230726, No. 7 School Street, Port Macquarie, and works to the adjoining building at Lot 2 DP230726, No.9 School Street, Port Macquarie, be recommended to Council for consent subject to the recommended conditions.
Executive Summary
This report considers a development application for a residential flat building and strata subdivision, and works to the existing adjoining building at the subject sites and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Following exhibition of the application on 2 separate occasions, 3 submissions were received.
The application has been amended through the assessment process. In particular, the applicant has provided details for works required in connection with the adjoining garage at 9 School Street, changes to the front façade to improve sight distance, updated details for the driveway access and stormwater drainage strategy and additional shadow diagrams, privacy information and updated Clause 4.6 variation request.
The site is considered suitable for the proposed development and the proposal adequately addresses relevant planning controls. The development is not considered to be contrary to the public's interest and will not result a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact.
This report recommends that the development application be approved subject to the attached conditions (Attachment 1).
The reason for the application being referred to Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) for consideration and recommendation to Council because three (3) objections to the proposal have been received and the application includes a Clause 4.6 exception to a development standard under the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 with a variation greater than 10%.
A copy of the DAP Charter outlining the delegations and functions of the DAP is available on Council’s website.
1. BACKGROUND
Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development
The site, known as 7 School Street, has a frontage to School Street and an area of 510.69m2. The site is occupied by a single dwelling and attached garage. The garage shares a common wall with a garage at 9 School Street, to the south.
The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:
The site has a maximum height of building of 14.5m in accordance with Clause 4.3 of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:
The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:
2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
Key aspects of the proposal include the following:
· Demolition of existing dwelling, ancillary structure and garage at No.7 School Street.
· Works adjacent to the property boundary at 9 School Street to ‘make good’ a common dividing wall of the garage.
· Construction of a residential flat building comprising 5 levels including lower level car parking, ground floor level communal facilities and swimming pool, and a 3 bedroom apartment with balcony and terrace areas at levels 1, 2 and 3.
Refer to plans of the proposed development at the end of this report (Attachment 2).
Plan extracts below:
Plan extract below: Drawing 1.12 Elevations East & West
Application Chronology
· 28 September 2023 - Application submitted to Planning Portal
· 4 October 2023 - Application accepted or lodgement
· 20 October 2023 to 2 November 2023 - Neighbour notification.
· 23 October 2023 - Referral comments received from Heritage NSW
· 7 November 2023 - Referral comments received from Essential Energy
· 16 November 2023 - Comments received form Council’s Heritage Advisor
· 20 November 2023 - Additional information requested from Applicant
· 7 December 2023 - Additional information and amended plans submitted
· 17 January 2024 - Further additional information requested from Applicant
· 9 September 2024 - Additional information and amended plans submitted
· 13 September to 1 October 2024 - Application re-notified
· 4 November 24 October 2024 - Further additional information requested from Applicant
· 5 November 2024 - Additional information and amended plans submitted
· 13 November 2024 - Additional information and amended plans submitted
· 23 November 2024 - Additional information submitted
3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT
Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration
In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:
(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:
(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021
Chapter 4 Koala Habitat Protection 2021
Clause 4.4 - This SEPP applies to all non-rural zoned land within the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Government Area.
Clause 4.10 - Council is not prevented from granting consent in this case for the following reasons:
1. The property is not subject to a KPOM, and
2. The site not considered to be core koala habitat.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 -
Chapter 4 Design of residential apartment development
Clause 144 - This chapter applies to development for the purpose of a residential flat building, shop top housing or mixed use development with a residential accommodation component if:
(a) the development consists of any of the following:
(i) the erection of a new building,
(ii) the substantial redevelopment or the substantial refurbishment of an existing building,
(iii) the conversion of an existing building, and
(b) the building concerned is at least 3 or more storeys (not including levels below ground level (existing) or levels that are less than 1.2 metres above ground level (existing) that provide for car parking), and
(c) the building concerned contains at least 4 or more dwellings.
Based on the above and the proposed development comprising 3 dwellings, the SEPP does not apply in this case.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021
Chapter 2 Coastal Management
Clause 2.5 - This SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.
Having regard to clause 2.8 (proximity to coastal wetlands or littoral rainforest) of this SEPP, the proposed development is not located within a proximity area.
The site is located within a coastal environment area.
Having regard to clauses 2.10 of the SEPP the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:
a) any adverse impact on integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment;
b) any adverse impacts coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes;
c) any adverse impact on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;
d) any adverse impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage, practices and places;
e) any adverse impacts on the cultural and built environment heritage;
f) any adverse impacts the use of the surf zone;
g) any adverse impact on the visual amenity and scenic qualities of the coast, including coastal headlands;
h) overshadowing, wind funnelling and the loss of views from public places to foreshores; and
i) any adverse impacts on existing public open space and safe access to and along the foreshore, beach, headland or rock platform for members of the public, including persons with a disability.
The bulk, scale and size of the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site is currently occupied by a dwelling and located within the R4 zone.
Clause 2.12 - The proposal is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on the land or other land.
Chapter 4 Remediation of Land
Clause 4.6 - Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022
Clause 4.2 - In accordance with the savings and transitional provisions, this policy does not apply to a development application submitted on the NSW planning portal but not finally determined before 1 October 2023.
Accordingly, the provisions of the former State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 will continue to apply as discussed below.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004
A BASIX certificate has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP. It is recommended that a condition be imposed to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021
Clause 2.48 - The proposal has been referred to Essential Energy in accordance with this clause. Essential Energy made the following comments as to potential safety risks arising from the proposed development:
The applicant has provided plans showing the minimum 1.85m setback is provided from the building to the nearest overhead power line. The applicant has been provided a copy of the advice regarding Safework clearance requirements.
Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011
The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:
· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned R4 High Density Residential.
· Clause 2.3(1) and the R4 zone land use table - The residential flat building will comprise 3 dwellings, communal facilities and car parking.
The objectives of the R4 zone are as follows:
· To provide for the housing needs of the community within a high density residential environment.
· To provide a variety of housing types within a high density residential environment.
· To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.
· To provide for tourist and visitor accommodation in key tourist precincts of urban areas of the Council area, while also encouraging increased population levels.
· To encourage development that has regard to the desired future character of streets and supports active and safe uses at pedestrian level.
· Clause 2.3(2) - The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as the development will contribute to the variety of housing types and densities to meet the housing needs of the community.
· Clause 2.7- The demolition requires consent as it does not fit within the provisions of SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.
· Clause 4.1 - The minimum lot size for subdivision does not apply to the proposal as it proposes a strata subdivision.
· Clause 4.3 - The clause establishes the maximum “height of a building” (or building height) that a building may be built to on any parcel of land. The term “building height (or height of building)” is defined in the LEP to mean “the vertical distance between ground level (existing) and the highest point of the building, including plant and lift overruns, but excluding communication devices, antennae, satellite dishes, masts, flagpoles, chimneys, flues and the like”. The term “ground level (existing)” is also defined in the LEP to mean “the existing level of a site at any point”.
· The building height limit for the site is identified on the Height of Buildings Map as being 14.5m. The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 16.34m which exceeds the height limit of 14.5m applying to the site by 1.84m, a 12.68% variation of the standard). Note: The calculated height variation has been assessed as higher than the variation referred to in the applicant’s request, being 11.26%. The matters raised in the written justification remain relevant regardless of the minor discrepancy in the calculation.
· The height variation relates to a majority of the roof plane behind the street frontage, the rear part of the level 3 dwelling and lift over-run. The height of the building at the street frontage to School Street is 13.65m above ground level (existing) and compliant with height controls at that part of the site as shown below. Refer to the request for variation to development standard under clause 4.6 below.
· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 1.03:1 which complies with the maximum 1.5:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.
· Clause 4.6 - This clause establishes a degree of flexibility for certain development standards in certain circumstances which have demonstrated that a better planning outcome will occur from that flexibility. Applications made and not determined prior to 1 November 2023 are considered under the historic clause provisions.
The proposal seeks a variation to the building height standard to the extent noted under Clause 4.3 above. Refer to the Applicant’s written request for an exception to the development standard at the end of this report (Attachment 3).
Assistance on the approach to variation to this standard is also taken from NSW Land and Environment Court and NSW Court of Appeal decisions in:
· Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) NSW LEC 827 (Wehbe);
· Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council (2015) NSWLEC 1009; and
· Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) NSWCA 245
The Applicant has submitted a request in writing to justify the contravention of the building height standard for the following reasons (as summarised):
1. The building height reflects the scale of development which is contemplated for the locality by development standards and provides a transition in built form from east to west.
2. The building design outcome is consistent with other development in the locality including the ‘Focus’ building to the north (corner of Clarence Street and School Street).
3. The building height complies with the development standard at the eastern elevation (School Street frontage) and will present as a 4 storey building.
4. The height exceedance occurs as a consequence of the topography of the site and the of lower level parking, that will be largely obscured from view.
5. The design includes modulation and articulation of the western façade of the building and increased setback of the building at the western boundary, to reduce perceptions of bulk.
6. The portion of the building that exceeds 14.5m will have negligible visual, privacy and amenity impacts as a result of the variation to the development standard, also noting that the building to the south is occupied by a medical centre and occupation expectations are different for commercial buildings
7. There is adequate separation provided to the multi-storey residential development to the west.
Having regard to specific requirements of Clause 4.6(3) and 4.6(4) the following assessment comments are provided:
Clause 4.6(3) Development consent must not be granted to development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority is satisfied the applicant has demonstrated 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.
Comments: Having regard to: Clause 4.6 (3) (a) whereby compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case:
The case of Wehbe v Pittwater Council established ‘five methods’ to test whether a compliance with the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary as follows:
1. The objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding the non-compliance with the numerical standard and therefore compliance is unreasonable and unnecessary.
2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary.
3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable.
4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.
5. The zoning of particular land was unreasonable or inappropriate so that a development standard appropriate for that zoning was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land and that compliance with the standard in that case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.
The Applicant’s written request seeks to justify that it is unreasonable or unnecessary to comply with the development standard on the basis that the objectives of the standard are still satisfied despite the variation.
Having regard to Clause 4.6 (3)(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard:
1. The proposed development will meet the objectives of maximum building height as discussed above and below.
2. The proposed variation will not result in a development which is out of character with that envisioned for the immediate locality.
Clause 4.6 (4) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:
(a) the consent authority is satisfied that:
(i) the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and
(b) the concurrence of Planning Secretary has been obtained.
Comments: It is considered that the Applicant’s clause 4.6 variation request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6 (3).
(ii) the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and
Comments: Consideration of the proposal’s consistency with the objectives of height of buildings standard (Clause 4.3) is provided as follows:
Clause 4.3(1)(a) to ensure that buildings are compatible with the height, bulk and scale of the existing and desired future character of the locality
The existing character of the locality is well described in the Applicant’s request that identifies a number of residential flat buildings in the vicinity of the site with heights ranging between 3 and 5 storeys.
Immediately to the east is Port Macquarie Primary School and to the south is a medical centre that occupies a former dwelling. Development to the north includes a motel and residential flat building.
The desired future character for the area is defined by the adopted building height and FSR controls and the DCP provisions for the precinct. In the immediate locality these controls envisage high density residential development.
Height of buildings planning controls for land adjoining the site to the west on Munster Street and to the north on Clarence Street are 19.0m. It is also noted that a residential flat building has been approved at No.4 Clarence Street, to the north-west of the site, above the 19.0m standard height limit for that site.
The site has also been excavated below natural ground level to allow for construction of the existing dwelling.
The proposal is considered to be sufficiently compatible with the existing and desired character for the area. The parts of the building exceeding the maximum building height are located behind the building line.
Clause 4.3(1)(b) to minimise visual impact, disruption of views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access to existing development
The visual impact of the height variation will not be significant due to the nature and location and disruption of views was not identified as a concern during notification.
Visual privacy is capable of being maintained to existing dwellings through separation, screening and location of windows.
Shadow diagrams submitted with the application show that the proposal will not not adversely impact solar access to the residential properties located immediately to the west (No.14 Munster Street) and south-west (No.16 Munster Street).
The proposal will overshadow the medical centre at No.9 School Street to the south of the proposed development at mid-winter due to the orientation of the lots, however it is noted that the building to the south is not used for residential purposes. The proposed height variation would not contribute to a significant additional impact to solar access to adjacent residential development.
Clause 4.3(1)(c) to minimise the adverse impact of development on heritage conservation areas and heritage items,
The site is identified as a local item of archaeological heritage, however a variation to height will not impact the item.
Clause 4.3(1)(d) to nominate heights that will provide a transition in built form and land use intensity within the area covered by this Plan.
Adjoining land shares the same R4 High Density Residential zoning and the development does not need to provide a transition in built form. It is noted, however, that the rear of the building will be less than the standard 19.0m height limit that applies to properties to the west on Munster Street and will provide an adequate transition to the higher buildings at that location, should redevelopment occur in the future.
The proposal is therefore considered to be consistent with the objectives of the height of buildings development standard and strict compliance with the development standard is unnecessary.
Consideration of the proposal’s consistency with the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential Zone is provided at LEP Clause 2.2(3) above. The proposal is considered consistent with the relevant objectives of the R4 zone.
Comment: The proposal is considered consistent with the public interest as it is consistent with the objectives for the standard and the objectives for the R4 zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.
The variation is considered acceptable in this case as follows:
· Compliance with the development standard is considered unnecessary as the proposed design remains consistent with intent of the standard and that envisaged for the area.
· There are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.
· The following additional matters are noted in addition to the applicant’s justification to the height of buildings variation:
o The development is consistent with the zone and height of buildings objectives of the LEP 2011 as justified and is unlikely to have any implications on State related issues or the broader public interest.
o The proposal remains consistent with that envisaged for the locality particularly given the transitional nature and planned density in the area. The adjoining land to the west has a maximum height of 19.0m
Having regard to the above requirements it is recommended that the building height variations using Clause 4.6 be supported.
· Clause 5.10 - The site is located with the broader area identified as Item A111 Archaeology of early European settlement under LEP 2011. State Heritage Register item Port Macquarie Government House site (SHR no.0157) is located to the north and will not be impacted by the subject development.
The application was supported by a baseline archaeological and referred to Heritage NSW for comment. The assessment report concluded that the site has low archaeological potential for relics that meet the threshold for local significance. No relics under the Heritage Act 1977 are known for the study site and therefore no heritage impacts are anticipated by the proposed development.
If unexpected or undocumented relics are discovered at the site during redevelopment, works must stop in that location and an archaeologist should assess the discovery. If considered a relic, Heritage NSW must be notified under Section 146 of the Heritage Act 1977 and the project must develop a heritage impact mitigation strategy with the archaeologist.
In summary, further investigation is not required and Heritage NSW recommended that a suitable condition be included to require notification of an unexpected discovery. A suitable draft condition has been included.
· Clause 7.7 - Airspace operations - a standard condition is recommended to require a controlled activity approval to be obtained for the operation of a crane.
· Clause 7.13 - Satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services including water supply, electricity supply, sewer infrastructure, stormwater drainage and suitable road access to service the development.
(ii) Any draft instruments that apply to the site or are on exhibition
No draft instruments apply to the site.
(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force:
Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:
DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management |
|
||||||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
|
|||
3 |
a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy. |
Satisfactory arrangements can be put in place for storage and collection of waste.
Standard condition recommended requiring private waste collection.
Standard condition recommended for construction waste management.
|
Yes |
|
|||
Cut and Fill Regrading
|
|
||||||
4 |
a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building). |
Excavation to accommodate parking level, access driveway ramp and stormwater detention.
The proposal does not include more than 1m of cut or fill outside the building footprint.
|
Yes |
|
|||
5 |
a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m. |
Suitable condition applied. |
Yes |
|
|||
b) Where a combination of a fence and a wall is proposed to be greater than 1.2m high: - be a maximum combined height of 1.8m above existing property boundary level; - be constructed up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 30% of the street frontage, whichever is less; − the fence component has openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; and − provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and - provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances. |
NA |
NA |
|
||||
6 |
a) Significant land reforming proposals where >10% gross site area or >1.0ha is to have surface levels changed by more than 5m or where earthworks exceed an average of 10,000m3 per ha.
|
Significant land reforming not proposed. |
NA |
|
|||
b) The use of high earthworks batters should be avoided. |
NA |
NA |
|
||||
c) Preliminary plans indicating the final landform are required to be submitted with any master plan or subdivision application. |
NA |
NA |
|
||||
d) The subdivision should be designed to fit the topography rather than altering the topography to fit the subdivision. |
NA |
NA |
|
||||
Environmental Management Areas and Buffers - are not proposed, Objective 7 to 9 do not apply.
|
|
||||||
Tree Management - Land to which State Environmental Planning Policy SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 Applies
|
|
||||||
10 |
a) Prescribed vegetation for the purposes of the SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 is any tree identified in Table 1 or is a mangrove or cycad and is: - 3 metres or higher in height, or - has a trunk diameter of 100mm measured at 1.0metre above ground level; or - a hollow bearing tree |
Removal of prescribed vegetation is not proposed. |
NA |
|
|||
|
|||||||
Tree Management – Private & Public Land - Objectives 11-13 do not apply
|
|
||||||
DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking |
|
||||||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
|
|||
23 |
a) New direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads is not permitted. Routes should differ in alignment and design standard according to the volume and type of traffic they are intended to carry, the desirable traffic speed, and other factors. |
NA |
NA |
|
|||
b) Existing direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads are rationalised or removed where practical. |
NA |
NA |
|
||||
c) Vehicle driveway crossings are minimal in number and width (while being adequate for the nature of the development), and positioned: − to avoid driveways near intersections and road bends, and − to minimise streetscapes dominated by driveways and garage doors, and − to maximise on-street parking. |
One vehicle driveway crossing is proposed to serve the development. It is located at the south-eastern corner of the site in the location of the existing garage.
|
Yes |
|
||||
Parking Provision
|
|
||||||
24 |
a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3.
1.5 spaces per each 3 or 4 bedroom unit + 1 visitor’s space per 4 units.
|
1.5 spaces x 3 dwellings plus 1 visitor space - 5.5 spaces rounded to 6 required.
5 spaces are required for the dwellings plus 1 visitor space.
6 spaces proposed. It is noted that the visitor space can only be used by arrangement and general public access is not available.
|
Yes |
|
|||
|
|
b) Where a proposed development does not fall within any of the listed definitions, the provision of on-site parking shall be supported by a parking demand study. |
NA |
NA |
|
c) Where a proposed development falls within more than one category Council will require the total parking provision for each category. |
NA |
NA |
|
|
25 |
a) A development proposal to alter, enlarge, convert or redevelop an existing building, whether or not demolition is involved, shall provide the total number of parking spaces calculated from the schedule for the proposed use, subject to a credit for any existing deficiency, including any contributions previously accepted in lieu of parking provision. |
Development does not involve conversion or redevelopment of an existing building. |
NA |
|
26 |
a) On street parking, for the purposes of car parking calculations will not be included unless it can be demonstrated that: − there is adequate on street space to accommodate peak and acute parking demands of the area; − parking can be provided without compromising road safety or garbage collection accessibility; − parking can be provided without jeopardising road function; and − that streetscape improvement works, such as landscaped bays and street trees are provided to contribute to the streetscape. |
On street parking is not counted in parking calculation, however it is noted only one crossover is proposed and 2 current on street parking spaces will be maintained on School Street. |
N/A |
|
b) On street parking is provided in accordance with AS2890.5. |
NA |
NA |
|
|
27 |
a) On street parking will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that: − parking does not detract from the streetscape; and − that streetscape improvement works, such as landscaped bays and street trees are provided. - |
NA |
NA |
|
Parking Layout
|
|
|||
28 |
a) Visitor and customer parking shall be located so that it is easily accessible from the street. |
The development includes sufficient parking in the basement for visitors, but in practice use of the visitor space would be by arrangement only.
|
Yes |
|
b) Internal signage (including pavement markings) should assist customers and visitors to find parking and circulate efficiently and safely through a car park. |
Capable of complying for residents and visitors by arrangement. |
Yes |
|
|
c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area. |
Parking located on the parking level below the ground floor and behind the building line. |
Yes |
|
|
d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking and AS 2890.6 - Off-street parking for individuals with a disability and AS/NZS 2890.2 - Parking facilities - Off-street commercial vehicle facilities. |
Capable of complying. Condition recommended requiring certification of design prior to Construction Certificate.
|
Yes |
|
|
e) Stack or tandem parking spaces will not be included in assessment of parking provision except where: − the spaces are surplus to that required; − in motor showrooms; − for home business; − for exhibition homes; − in car repair stations; − staff parking spaces are separately identified and delineated; − it is visitor parking associated with a dual occupancy multi dwelling and/or terrace housing, directly in front of the garage with a minimum depth of 5.5m. |
Stacked/ tandem parking is not proposed.
|
NA |
|
|
a) Parking is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking, AS/NZS 2890.2 - Parking facilities - Off-street commercial vehicle facilities, AS 1428 - Design for access and mobility and AS 2890.6 - Off-street parking for individuals with a disability. |
Capable of complying. Condition recommended requiring certification of design prior to Construction Certificate release. |
Yes |
|
|
30 |
a) Bicycle and motorcycle parking shall be considered for all developments. |
Bicycle parking for residents and visitors could be accommodated at the ground floor common facilities level. |
Yes |
|
b) Bicycle parking areas shall be designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3 - Parking facilities - Bicycle parking facilities. |
Capable of complying. |
Yes |
|
|
c) Motorcycle parking areas shall be 1.2m (wide) x 2.5m (long).
|
Specific area is not proposed, however visitor parking could accommodate motorcycles also. |
Yes |
|
|
|
DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention |
|||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
Social Impact Assessment
|
|||
42 |
a) A social impact assessment shall be submitted in accordance with the Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy. |
Not required for subject development. Land zoned R4 and high density development acceptable. |
NA |
Crime Prevention
|
|||
43 |
a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: − Casual surveillance and sightlines; − Land use mix and activity generators; − Definition of use and ownership; − Basic exterior building design; − Lighting; − Way-finding; and − Predictable routes and entrapment locations; − as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles. |
CCTV and lighting can be used for further security if required by the occupants/strata management. |
Yes |
DCP 2013: PART C - Development Specific Provisions - C2: Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation, and Mixed Use Development |
|||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
Site Design and Analysis
|
|||
57 |
a) A site analysis plan is required for all development and should illustrate: - microclimate including the movement of the sun and prevailing winds - lot dimensions - north point - existing contours and levels to AHD - flood affected areas - overland flow patterns, drainage and services - any contaminated soils or filled areas, or areas of unstable land - easements and/or connections for drainage and utility services - any existing trees and other significant vegetation, including major and significant trees on adjacent properties, particularly those within 9 m of the site - the location, height and use of buildings surrounding the site, and those across any road adjacent to the site, including their setback distances - heritage and archaeological features - the built form, scale and character of surrounding and nearby development, including fencing, boundaries and landscaping - pedestrian and vehicle access - views and solar access to surrounding residents - private open space and windows of habitable rooms of nearby properties which have an outlook to the site - difference in levels between the site and adjacent properties at their boundaries - street frontage features including poles, trees, kerb crossovers, bus stops and other services - heritage features and buildings of the surrounding locality and landscape - direction and distance to local facilities including local shops, schools, public transport and recreation and community facilities - characteristics of, and distance to any nearby public open space - any nearby bushland or environmentally sensitive land - any significant local noise, odour or pollution sources - any other notable features or characteristics of the site |
Adequate site analysis provided. |
Yes |
Site Layout
|
|||
58 |
a) All applications are to include a site plan, which annotates the manner in which site attributes and constraints have been considered, as follows: - appropriateness of built form and landscape in relation to the site context, topography and urban character - building arrangement and relationship to streets and open space - access ways within and beyond the site - location, function and opportunities for casual surveillance of open space - ongoing site management considerations (i.e. garbage, mail collection, stormwater etc) - location of existing and proposed stormwater and sewer pipes - private open space and security - parking arrangements and reduced dominance of driveways - heritage and conservation opportunities and constraints (where relevant) - energy efficiency in building design and siting - solar access to subject development and adjoining residences |
Site plan provided. |
Yes |
Streetscape and Front Setback
|
|||
59 |
a) In an established street, the primary setback should be within 20% of the average setback of the adjoining buildings in a R1 General Residential zone. |
Not located in R1 General zone |
NA |
b) A minimum setback of 3.0m is required from all street frontages in a R3 Medium Density Residential and R4 High-Density Residential zone. |
The setback from the boundary to the nearest part of the building (piers) is less than 0.5m at the ground floor level.
The proposed driveway gate is setback approx, 1.5m which is greater than the existing garage opening at approx. 1.0m from the boundary.
Part of front wall of the building at street level is located 3.5m from the street boundary and provides for an open forecourt area and weather protection at the entrance to the building.
The setback to front wall of the dwellings at level 1, 2 and 3 is 1.64m.
Variation to the front setback is acceptable based on other development in the vicinity that is also located either on or near the front boundary to School Street including the motel building to the north at 3-5 School Street and the ‘Focus’ apartment building at the corner of Clarence and School Streets.
The proposed setback is considered complementary to existing development.
|
No*
Refer to comment beside
Considered acceptable. |
|
c) Where tourist accommodation is proposed a maximum setback of 9 metres is permitted to allow for a swimming pool within the front setback. |
Not tourist accommodation |
N/A |
|
60 |
a) Balconies and other building extrusions may encroach up to 600mm into the required front setback. |
Balconies encroach into front setback and are aligned generally with the front boundary of the site.
A minimum setback of 2.4m is not achieved from the front boundary to balconies/ terraces at level 1, 2, and 3.
The front wall of the building at the dwelling level is located 1.64m from the boundary.
Council’s Heritage Advisor considered the character of the proposed development within the setting and provided the following comments:
‘The character of the proposed building is consistent with that already present within the vicinity of the site in terms of height, mass, scale, materiality and built form. The proposal’s urban design impact is low, given the current set backs, the position in School Street in the vicinity of similar height, and larger scaled and bulk buildings. The light colours proposed for the street edge and the light weight screening to the upper floor terraces to the east and north provide a perception of a lightweight veiled structure, whereas the solidity is provided in the south elevation. The west elevation is strongly horizontal in orientation and provides the opportunity for extensive planting and western screening. The proposal is considered a good fit on the site’.
The variation to the setback to balconies is considered acceptable. |
No*
Refer to comments beside.
Considered acceptable. |
b) Buildings should generally be aligned to the street boundary. |
Building is aligned to street boundary. |
Yes |
|
c) Primary openings on all developments are aligned to the street boundary or to the rear of the site. |
Primary opening aligned to street. |
Yes |
|
Side and Rear Setbacks
|
|||
61 |
a) The following setbacks apply to all sites, except where the side boundary is a secondary street frontage: - Buildings should be set back a minimum of 1.5m from side boundaries, for a maximum of 75% of the building depth.
- Windows in side walls should be set back 3m from side boundaries.
- Where the site is adjacent to an existing strata-titled building, buildings should be set back a minimum of 3m from side boundaries. |
Not achieved. Building located on boundary on southern side at parking level.
Considered acceptable because the variation occurs at the parking level only.
Windows in side boundary walls setback a minimum 3.0m from side boundaries excepting bedroom windows that are set at 90 degrees to the southern boundary to preserve privacy to adjoining property.
Part of site at south western corner of the property shares a boundary with an existing strata residential flat building A setback of 894mm in provided to the parking level and side setback of 2.11m is provided at the level 1 dwelling.
The variation is considered acceptable because the adjacent strata building at 16 Munster Street is located more than 6.0m to the shared boundary and there is adequate separation to avoid privacy impacts.
|
No* Refer to comments beside.
Yes/No* Refer to comments beside.
No* Refer to comment beside. |
b) Side walls adjacent to existing strata-titled buildings should be articulated and modulated to respond to the existing buildings. |
Adequate articulation is provided to the southern (side) wall of the proposed building. |
Yes |
|
c) A minimum rear setback of 6.0m from the building and sub basements is required. |
Minimum setback of 5.35m provided to rear boundary from parking level. - Ground level communal facilities terrace located at 6.0m from planter box (outer side) to boundary. - Level 1 terrace located 7.24 from planter box to boundary. - Level 2 & 3 terrace - located 9.54m from planter box to boundary
The encroachment of 0.65m into the rear setback at the lower parking level is considered acceptable on merit and would not result in any significant amenity or privacy impacts. There is adequate deep soil zone provided in the rear setback. It is noted that the Apartment Design Guide provides for less than 6.0m deep soil zone.
|
No* Refer to comments beside. |
|
62 |
a) A party wall development may be required if site amalgamation is not possible and higher density development is envisaged by these controls. |
The existing party wall between the garages at the subject site and property to the south.
A shared party wall is not proposed for the new development. |
Yes |
63 |
a) Party wall development can occur only with the agreement and consent of the adjoining property owner. Exposed party walls should be finished in a quality comparable to front facade finishes |
The exposed wall to existing garage to the south will be ‘made good’. New development will allow for the wall to be offset from boundary to allow for cross easement for garage wall.
Adjoining landowner’s consent has been provided. |
Yes |
64 |
a) Corner sites should be consolidated with adjacent sites, so that the building turns the corner. |
Subject site is not a corner lot. The adjoining lot is not proposed to be consolidated. |
NA |
b) If this is not possible, a minimum setback of 6.0m should extend to the secondary street. |
Not a corner allotment. |
NA |
|
65 |
a) Where sites adjacent to open space are to be developed, the edge of the open space should be defined with a public road and buildings should address the open space. |
Not adjacent to open space. |
N/A |
Deep Soil Zone (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
|
|||
66 |
a) Deep soils zones are to meet the minimum requirements set out below. |
No minimum dimension for lots under 650m2 - 7% of site minimum to be deep soil zone. |
Yes |
b) Deep soil zones are to be contiguous across sites and within blocks. |
Opportunity for contiguous deep soil zones on adjoining sites if redevelopment takes place. |
Yes |
|
67 |
a) Deep soil zones should accommodate existing advanced trees, and allow for advanced tree planting. |
Existing exotic garden trees to be removed. Landscape plan identifies areas for larger trees. |
Yes |
68 |
a) Deep soil zones should be integrated into the stormwater management measures for the development and the site. |
Opportunity for stormwater infiltration |
Yes |
Energy Conservation and Solar Access
|
|||
69 |
a) Where practical, sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties should not be reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 22. Where existing overshadowing by buildings and fences is greater than this, sunlight should not be reduced by more than 20%. |
The development will result in shadowing of the property to the south at No.9 School Street that is used as a medical centre. Private open space is generally associated with residential development and in this case there is no residential use immediately to the south at No.9.
It would not be practical to maintain 3 hours of sunlight at mid-winter at ground level of No.9 School Street, even with a significant reduction in the height of building at No.7 due to the orientation of the lots.
|
Yes/No* Refer to comments beside. |
b) Where practical, buildings should not reduce the sunlight available to the windows of living areas that face north in existing adjacent dwellings to less than the above specification. |
Living areas are generally associated with residential development and in this case the north facing windows of the adjacent building at No.9 School Street serve a medical centre and do not form part of a dwelling.
|
NA |
|
70
|
a) Apartments are to provide an internal clothes drying space to discourage the use of mechanical clothes drying.
|
Opportunity available for internal and external clothes drying areas. |
Yes |
Landscaping |
|||
71 |
a) Plans for the design and planting of open space areas should be submitted with the development application and include: |
Landscape plan submitted. |
Yes |
b) Existing vegetation and proposed general planting and landscape treatment (including species). |
Existing vegetation comprising garden trees and shrubs to be removed. |
Yes |
|
c) Design details of hard landscaping elements and major earth cuts, fills and any mounding. |
Details for planter boxes provided. |
Yes |
|
d) Location and design of any communal recreational facilities, including methods of protecting the privacy of nearby dwellings, where applicable. |
Communal recreation facilities located on ground floor with swimming pool, garbage storage and masonry wall separating adjacent dwelling to north. |
Yes |
|
e) Street trees in accordance with Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List. |
Street trees are not proposed. |
NA |
|
72 |
a) Existing vegetation is to be retained and habitat and ecology enhanced where practical. |
Existing garden vegetation to be removed. Rear landscaped area will enhance biology of the area. |
Yes |
73 |
a) Street trees are to be provided along the full frontage/s of the site, generally at a rate of 1 per 20m interval, in accordance with Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List. |
Street trees are not required. |
NA |
Private Open Space
|
|||
74 |
a) All dwellings at ground floor level are encouraged to have a total minimum area of 15m2 in one area with minimum dimension of 3m: - have a maximum grade of 5%; and - be directly accessible from a ground floor living area. |
NA - no dwellings at ground floor level. |
NA |
b) Private open space may include clothes drying and garbage storage areas. |
Noted |
Yes |
|
75 |
a) Dwellings located on or above the first floor are to have balconies with a minimum clear, unobstructed area and width according to apartment type as follows: - Studio - 4m2 - 1 bedroom - 8m2, minimum 2m wide - 2 bedroom - 10m2, minimum 2m wide - 3 bedroom - 12m2, minimum 2.4m wide |
Minimum balcony area/dimension is achieved for each dwelling. |
Yes |
76 |
a) Communal open space and private open spaces are separated by landscaping, fencing or some other means that indicates the change between public and private realm. |
Achieved. The ground floor level provides communal open space including pool area. |
Yes |
Fences and Walls
|
|||
77 |
a) Solid front fences built on or near boundaries should be: - setback 1.0m from the front boundary; - suitably landscaped to reduce visual impact, and. - provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites. |
Front fence is not proposed. |
Yes |
b) Front fences proposed to be more than 1.2m high should: - be a maximum of 1.8m in height, above existing front property boundary level and either: o include landscaped recesses having minimum dimensions of 1.8m long x 900mm deep which occupy no less than 50% of the total length of the fence, or o be erected up to the front boundary for maximum lengths of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage, whichever is less; and o have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; o provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and o provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances. |
Front fences are not proposed. |
NA |
|
78 |
a) Fences constructed of chain wire, solid timber or masonry and solid steel are not permitted along the primary road frontage even if it is consistent with the existing streetscape. |
NA |
NA |
b) For tennis courts or other similar areas, chain wire fences should be black or dark green plastic coated mesh. |
Tennis court is not proposed. |
NA |
|
c) Solid fences enclosing these facilities should not be permitted over 1.8m. |
Tennis court is not proposed. |
NA |
|
Acoustic Privacy
|
|||
79 |
a) Buildings are designed so that: - busy noisy areas within the apartment face the street; and - quiet areas face the rear or side of the lot - bedrooms have line of sight separation of minimum 3m from parking areas, streets and shared driveways. |
Suitable balance with access to acoustic privacy achieved. |
Yes |
b) Openings of adjacent dwellings should be separated by a distance of at least 6m. |
Openings of adjacent dwellings are adequately separated to the south.
Less than 6m separation provided to the dwelling to the north however, the openings are separated by boundary wall to the swimming pool and do not correspond with opening to the dwelling at Level 1 above and the variation is considered acceptable in this case.
|
Yes/No* Refer to comment beside. |
|
80 |
a) Uses are to be coupled internally and between apartments i.e. noisy internal and noisy external spaces should be placed together. |
Communal areas are combined on ground floor.
Apartment layouts provide for separation of noisy and quiet uses. |
Yes |
Visual Privacy |
|||
81 |
a) Direct views between living area windows of adjacent dwellings should be screened where: - ground and first floor windows are within a 9m radius from any part of the window of the adjacent dwelling; - other floor windows are within a 12m radius; - direct views from living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings should be screened or obscured where they are within a 12m radius. |
Direct views between living areas are not available. |
Yes |
b) Direct views described above may be reduced or obscured by one of the following measures (details to be submitted with the development application): - 1.8m high fence or wall between ground-floor level windows or between a dwelling and open space; - Screening that has 25% openings (max), is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials. |
NA |
NA |
|
c) A window in a dwelling(s) should have a privacy screen if: - It is a window in a habitable room, other than a bedroom, that has a floor level of more than 1m above ground level (existing), and - The wall in which the window is located has a setback of less than 3 metres from a side or rear boundary, and - The window has a sill height of less than 1.5m. |
Study windows 3.0m to boundary.
Northern windows 3.0m to boundary. |
Yes |
|
d) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or veranda should have a privacy screen if it: - Has a setback of less than 3m from a side or rear boundary, and - Has a floor area more than 3m2, and - Has a floor level more than 1 metre above ground level (existing). |
Northern terraces at Level 1, 2 & 3 are located at 2.2m, and less than 3.0m, to the boundary.
External adjustable screening is provided above the balustrade. It is recommended that the screening be fixed to a minimum height of 1.5m above floor level of the terrace to provide privacy to future development to the north. A suitable condition of consent is recommended. |
Yes* Capable of compliance with condition. Refer to comment beside |
|
Accessibility
|
|||
82 |
a) Developments should be designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS1428. |
Capable of compliance. Construction Certificate documentation will need to demonstrate compliance with relevant access standards. |
Yes |
83 |
a) Barrier free access to at least 20% of dwellings in the development is provided. |
Complies |
Yes |
Social Dimensions and Housing Affordability
|
|||
84 |
a) Developments should be located close to areas of open space, recreation and entertainment facilities and employment areas. |
The site is located on the periphery of Port Macquarie town centre and has excellent access to open space, recreation, entertainment and employment areas. |
Yes |
b) Where the Local Environmental Plan permits a floor space ratio greater than 1:1 a ratio of not less than 1:1 should be achieved. |
Greater than 1:1 achieved. |
Yes |
|
85 |
a) A variety of apartment types including studio, 1, 2, 3 and 3+ bedroom apartments are provided within the development. |
All units are 3 bedroom.
The development comprises 3 apartments only and this case a mix of apartment types is not considered practical. |
No* Refer to comments beside.
Variation considered acceptable. |
b) Studios and 1-bedroom apartments are not to exceed 20% of the total number of apartments within the development. |
Studio apartments are not proposed. |
Yes |
|
c) A mix of 1 and 3 bedroom apartments are provided on the ground level to cater for improved accessibility for disabled, elderly people or families with children. |
Ground level apartments are not proposed. |
NA |
|
86 |
a) Developments should consider the principles of the Council’s Affordable Housing Strategy in any application for a residential flat building. |
Not possible due to external forces (ie current market conditions). |
N/A |
Roof Form
|
|||
87 |
a) Lift over-runs and service plants should be integrated within roof structures. |
The over run is provided towards the centre of the roof. Minor protrusion, and considered acceptable |
Yes |
b) Outdoor recreation areas on flat roofs should be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens to encourage use. |
Not used |
NA |
|
c) Outdoor roof areas should be oriented to the street. |
Not used |
NA |
|
d) Roof design should generate an interesting skyline and be visually interesting when viewed from adjoining developments. |
Roof design considered acceptable. |
Yes |
|
Facade Composition and Articulation
|
|||
88 |
a) Facade composition should: - be designed with a balance of horizontal and vertical elements; - respond to environmental and energy needs, such as sun shading, light shelves and bay windows; - incorporate wind mitigation; - reflect the uses within the buildings. - include a combination of the following design elements: o defined base, middle and top levels; o a mixture of window types; o variation in floor height (particularly at lower levels); o balustrade detail that reflects the type and location of the balcony; o setting back the top levels of the building; o street level features that reinforce the human scale; and o balconies, awnings and recesses that create shadowing. |
Design acceptable. |
Yes |
Entries and Corridors |
|||
89 |
a) Entrances should be clearly identifiable from street level. |
Yes |
Yes |
b) Entries should provide a clear line of transition between the public street, the shared private circulation spaces and the residential apartments. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
c) Entries should provide clear line of sight between one circulation space and the next. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
d) Entries should avoid ambiguous and publicly accessible small spaces in entry areas. |
Yes |
|
|
e) Entries should be sheltered and well lit. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
f) Entries and circulation spaces should be sized appropriately to encourage adequate area for the movement of furniture. |
Adequate area available. |
Yes |
|
g) Lobby widths should be a minimum of 1.8m wide and 3.0m high. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
h) Lobby lengths should be minimised and avoid tight corners. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
i) Longer lobbies should be articulated by: - changing the direction or width of a corridor; - using a series of foyer areas; - providing windows along or at the end of corridor. |
Acceptable |
Yes |
|
Balconies |
|||
90 |
a) A minimum of one balcony (including enclosed balcony or terrace) is to be provided per apartment. |
Balconies provided to each unit. |
Yes |
b) The main balcony is to be directly accessible from the living area. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
c) The balconies should be designed to take advantage of favourable climatic conditions. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
d) Balconies and balustrades should be designed to balance views out of the building while affording adequate privacy to the residents of the apartment. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
91 |
a) Balconies should include sunscreens, pergolas, shutters and operable walls. |
Yes |
Yes |
b) Balconies should be recessed to provide shadowing to the facade of the building to create visual interest and articulation. |
Combination of screening and materials used to create interest. |
Yes |
|
c) Solid balustrades are discouraged but may be considered where it is demonstrated that outlook and privacy is achieved and that there is sufficient articulation or visual interest in the building facade to accommodate the solid element. |
Solid balustrades are proposed to the balconies at the north and south corners of the front façade. There is sufficient articulation and mix of materials to provide visual interest at the front façade. Solid balustrades are also provided at the northern elevation that are offset by use of shutters above. The use of solid balustrading on the northern façade is considered acceptable to provide a level of privacy for the proposed dwellings and future development that may occur to the north of the site. |
Yes |
|
Laundries and Clothes Drying Facilities
|
|||
92 |
a) Secure open air clothes drying facilities that: - are easily accessible; - are screened from the public domain and communal open spaces; and - have a high degree of solar access. |
Clothes drying area available on balconies. Area exists within communal areas. |
Yes |
Mailboxes
|
|||
93 |
a) Mailboxes should be integrated into building design and sighted to ensure accessibility and security. |
Yes, capable of complying. |
Yes |
Safety and Security
|
|||
94 |
a) Developments should establish a hierarchy of space and clearly define the transition from public through to private space. |
Yes |
Yes |
b) Entrances should: - be orientated towards the public street and encourage visibility between entrances, foyers and the street. - provide direct and well-lit access between car parks and dwellings, between car parks and lift lobbies, and to all unit entrances. - optimise security by grouping clusters to a maximum of eight, around a common lobby. |
Design funnels people to central entry. |
Yes |
|
c) Surveillance is to be facilitated by: - views over public open spaces from living areas where possible. - casual views of common internal areas, such as lobbies and foyers, hallways, recreation areas, and car parks. - the provisions of windows and balconies. - separate entries to ground level apartments |
Yes |
Yes |
|
d) Concealment should be avoided by: - preventing blind or dark alcoves which might conceal intruders particularly near lifts and stairwells, at the entrance and within indoor car parks, along corridors and walkways. - providing appropriate levels of illumination for all common areas. - providing graded car park illumination, with the lighting of entrances higher than the minimum acceptable standard. |
Acceptable. CCTV and lighting could be used to provide further protection. |
Yes |
|
e) Access to all parts of the building (including, apartments, different floors, balconies, common areas) is to be controlled. |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Site Storage |
|||
95 |
a) Accessible storage facilities provided as part of the basement or garage area should be secure and only accessible to the unit tenant. |
Storage units provided on ground floor. |
Yes |
b) One dedicated bike storage space should be provided per dwelling as part of the basement, garage area or dwelling area. |
Adequate area provided in storage bay for each unit. |
Yes |
|
Utilities
|
|||
96 |
a) Compatible public utility services are to be co-ordinated in common trenching in order to minimise excavations for underground services. |
Considered acceptable. |
Yes |
b) Above ground utility infrastructure such as substations, inspection cabinets are to be integrated into the design of the building or complementary to the building design in terms of colour, materials and design. |
Final details to be provided at CC stage - however adequate area available for services and inspection cabinets within the site. |
Yes |
|
c) The site and the individual dwellings are to be numbered for easy identification by visitors and emergency personnel. |
Capable of complying. |
Yes |
|
d) Common aerials and satellite dishes, with signal amplifiers are provided as appropriate. |
Capable of complying. |
Yes |
DCP 2013: Part D - Locality Specific Provisions - D2 Port Macquarie East: D2-1 East Port Neighbourhood |
|||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
Precinct Structure Plans
|
|||
224 |
a) Development is generally in accordance with the precinct structure plans shown in the previous section |
Generally consistent with Town Beach Precinct structure plan. |
Yes |
Lot Size and Frontage
|
|||
225 |
a) The minimum lot width for residential apartment buildings is: 18 metres where: - the proposed building height is not greater than 14.5 metres and minimum side setbacks are satisfied, or - the site has multiple street frontages, or - requirements for on-site parking, setbacks, separation and deep soil can be achieved, - OR 22 metres |
The site is 16.18m in width and does not meet the minimum lot width of 18.0m. In this case, the maximum building height is exceeded although the height at the street frontage is 13.65m and less than the maximum height of building for the site being than 14.5m.
Requirements for on-site parking, deep soil are generally achieved for the development and side setbacks to the building are varied at the lower parking level without amenity or privacy impacts.
Variation is considered acceptable because the proposal achieves the desired future development outcome for the R4 High Density Residential zoning notwithstanding limited site amalgamation opportunities in this case. |
No* Refer to comments beside. |
Building Height
|
|||
226 |
General |
|
|
a) Buildings do not exceed the maximum height of buildings shown in the local environmental plan maps. |
Refer to Clause 4.6 of LEP 2011 above |
No, but acceptable in this case. Refer to comments at Cl 4.6 above. |
|
b) Development from 2 to 10 Burrawan Street and from 5 to 9 Pacific Drive - Where buildings exceed three storeys, the upper storey is set back from the front facade of the building by three metres.
|
NA |
NA |
|
Streetscape and Front Setbacks
|
|||
227 |
a) Northern side of Clarence Street, east of Munster Street - Setback to Clarence Street is 3 metres. |
NA |
NA |
b) Southern side of Clarence Street, between Munster and School Streets - A zero street setback is provided |
NA |
NA |
|
c) Southern side of William Street, between Murray and Grant Streets - Setback to William Street is 2 metres. |
NA |
NA |
|
d) Development from 2 to 10 Burrawan Street - For lots with dual frontage to Burrawan and Windmill Streets, buildings are to address Burrawan Street as their primary frontage. |
NA |
NA |
|
e) Development from 5 to 9 Pacific Drive - Setback to Pacific Drive is a minimum of 6 metres. |
NA |
NA |
|
Side and Rear Setbacks
|
|||
228 |
a) Party wall development is to be used along the south side of Clarence Street where within the Town Beach Precinct. |
NA |
NA |
b) Party wall development is not appropriate in other areas within the East Port Neighbourhood. |
Party wall is not proposed. |
NA |
|
c) Where there is a zone change at the rear of the site to the R1 General Residential Zone, any storey above 11.5 metres in height is set back a further 3 metres from the rear boundary. |
There is no zone change from R1 for the adjoining properties. |
NA |
|
Waste Management
|
|||
229 |
a) Communal bulk waste facilities are required for residential apartment development where collection is proposed from Windmill Street regardless of number of dwellings. |
NA |
NA |
Based on the above assessment, the variations proposed to the provisions of the DCP are considered acceptable and the relevant objectives have been satisfied. Cumulatively, the variations do not amount to an adverse impact of a significance that would justify refusal of the application.
(iiia) 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
No planning agreement has been offered or entered into relating to the site.
(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations
Demolition of buildings AS 2601 - Clause 61
Demolition work on the site is capable of compliance with this Australian Standard and is recommended to be conditioned.
(b) The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts
on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality
Context and Setting
The proposal is considered to be sufficiently compatible with other development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.
The existing character of the locality is well described in the applicant’s site analysis which identifies a number of residential flat buildings and shop top housing with heights ranging between 3 and 6 storeys in the vicinity of the site.
Other development in the locality includes older housing stock that is likely to be re-developed in accordance with the current zoning and planning controls.
The proposal does not have any identifiable significant adverse impact on existing view sharing. There were no specific view sharing concerns regarding loss of views identified as part of the notification of the application.
The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.
There are no significant adverse privacy impacts. Privacy between the development and adjoining existing development has been addressed via screening and separation.
Solar Access
Shadow diagrams submitted with the application show that the proposal will not adversely impact solar access to the residential flat buildings located immediately to the west at No.14 Munster Street and south west at No.16 Munster Street. Refer to Drawing 1.15 of the plans.
Shadow diagrams submitted for the neighbouring land at No.9 School Street
show that the proposal will overshadow the site to the south and in particular the roofed deck/patient waiting area located behind the existing garage.
Retention of solar access to the deck at mid winter would not be practical under a medium to high density development scenario, as envisaged under the planning controls for the site, due to the orientation of the lots and proximity of the deck to the boundary of the site. It is also noted that the building at No.9 School Street is used as a medical centre and not used for residential purposes.
Access, Traffic and Transport
The site has road frontage to School Street. School Street is a bitumen sealed public road, with upright kerb and gutter under the care and control of Council. School Street is classified as a local urban road with an 11.5m road formation width within a 20m wide road reserve width.
A total of 6 car parking spaces have been provided. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements.
Due to the type of development, car park circulation is required to enable vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward manner. Site plans show adequate area is available and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. The single lane driveway will operate under a traffic signal system that will alert drivers that the driveway is in use.
Due to the type and size of development, additional works are required to include:
· Replacement of the existing driveway crossover with a heavy duty crossover as per Auspec standard drawing ASD202
· Replacement of kerb and gutter and reinstatement of any effected road pavement along the full frontage of the property (due to the proposed construction of stormwater drainage)
· Full width exposed aggregate footpath is required across the full frontage of the site.
The proposal will not have any significant adverse impacts in terms of access, transport or traffic increase. The existing road network will satisfactorily cater for any minor increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.
Water Supply Connection
Council records indicate that the development site has an existing metered water service. Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the development, as well as fire service in accordance with AS3500.
Each proposed unit will need to be separately metered for water, meters may be either located at the road frontage or internally with a master meter at the boundary. Internal water meters are to be located in foyer areas, secure and accessible for meter reading, otherwise a remote reading display facility shall be provided in an approved central location that is easily accessible. Details are to be shown on the engineering plans. All work will need to comply with the requirements of Council’s adopted AUSPEC Design and Construction Guidelines and Policies.
Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the s306 Notice of Requirements and Section 68 application. Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.
Sewer Connection
Council records indicate that the development site is connected to the sewer main that runs within the southern property boundary. Due to the scale of the development and the increased load on sewer infrastructure, it is necessary to discharge all sewage to a new or existing manhole.
Any abandoned sewer junctions are to be capped off at Council’s sewer main and Council notified to carry out an inspection prior to backfilling of this work. A sewer strategy and plans are required from a hydraulic consultant for the whole of the development on the site stage by stage.
Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application.
Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.
Stormwater
The site naturally grades towards the rear and is currently un-serviced by a stormwater system.
The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as direct connection to Council’s stormwater pit/pipeline within School Street.
Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via an extension of Council’s pit and pipe stormwater system within School St, which is consistent with the above requirements. Stormwater from the northern section of the roof of the exiting garage at No.9 School Street will also be connected to the piped system. A suitable easement to drain/overhang across No.7 will be required to cater for the new gutter along the northern edge of the building.
A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application and prior to the issue of a construction certificate.
Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.
Other Utilities
Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.
Heritage
The site is identified as an archaeological item A111 related to the early European occupation of Port Macquarie. A baseline archaeological assessment was submitted by the applicant and referred to Heritage NSW for comment.
The assessment report concluded that the site has low archaeological potential for relics that meet the threshold for local significance and that no relics under the Heritage Act 1977 are known for the study site and therefore no heritage impacts are anticipated by the proposed development.
If unexpected or undocumented relics are discovered at the site during development redevelopment, the Unexpected Finds Protocol must be followed. Works must stop in that location and the archaeologist should assess the discovery.
No known items of Aboriginal heritage significance exist on the property.
Suitable conditions regarding possible disturbance of subsurface archaeological items included.
Other land resources
The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.
Water cycle
The proposed development is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle. A separate approval for intersect the aquifer will be required. A suitable condition will be included in draft conditions.
Soils
The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.
Air and microclimate
The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will not result in any significant adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.
Flora and fauna
Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any native vegetation and therefore does not trigger the biodiversity offsets scheme. Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 is considered to be satisfied.
Waste
Satisfactory arrangements can be put in place for storage and collection of waste and recyclables. A private waste collection service will be required and a suitable conditions of consent is proposed in this regard.
A standard precautionary site management condition recommended for construction phase.
Energy
The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of BASIX.
Noise and vibration
Potential impacts will be managed during the construction phase. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.
Bushfire
The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.
Safety, security and crime prevention
The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. Adequate casual surveillance is available.
Social impacts in the locality
Given the nature of the proposed development and its location the proposal is not considered to have any significant adverse social impacts.
Economic impact in the locality
The proposal is not considered to have any significant adverse economic impacts on the locality. A likely positive impact is that the development will maintain employment in the construction industry, which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area.
Site design and internal design
The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality. No adverse impacts likely.
Construction
Construction impacts are considered capable of being managed, standard construction and site management conditions have been recommended.
Cumulative impacts
The proposed development is not considered to have any significant adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.
(c) The suitability of the site for the development
The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.
(d) Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations
Three written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the DAP.
Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments are provided as follows:
Submission Issue/Summary |
Planning Comment/Response |
The development exceeds the height limit of 14.5 metres at the rear. (11% over) |
Variation to the maximum height of buildings is discussed at Clause 4.6 above. The variation occurs behind the front building line and is considered acceptable in this case. |
The development should acknowledge the existence of the timber party wall that a cross easement for support that exists between the garages at No.7 and No.9 School Street. Landowner’s consent is required for works at No.9 - property to the south. |
The applicant has provided details of works proposed to retain the garage structure at No.9 and the adjoining landowner has provided consent to the lodgement of the DA during assessment.
The works are shown on Sheet 1.21 of the plan set.
|
A pre-demolition dilapidation report should be prepared as part of the DA confirming the details of measures to ensure the existing garage at No.9 will not be damaged by the proposed work. |
A suitable condition of consent has been included to require a dilapidation report to be prepared and submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to issue. |
An easement to drain stormwater is required to serve the garage at No.9 after the demolition of the garage at the subject site.
|
A suitable condition of consent has been included to require registration of an easement to drain stormwater prior to issue of an occupation certificate.
The easement to address overhang of guttering as required. |
Does not meet the minimum setback requirements from School Street. |
Variation to the front setback is acceptable based on other development in the vicinity that is also located either on or near the front boundary to School Street including the motel building to the north at 3-5 School Street and the ‘Focus’ apartment building at the corner of Clarence and School Streets. There are insufficient reasons to refuse the application based on streetscape.
|
Nil side setback is proposed at ground level. Concern is impact on pedestrian access to Medical Centre given proposed driveway to this proposed development. |
The driveway access is separated from the pedestrian access to the medical centre by the garage to be retained at No.9 School Street. |
Concern that insufficient parking is proposed because School Street contains a mix of uses that create demand on parking. |
6 car parking spaces are provided in the basement car parking area that meets the minimum requirement for 3 dwellings under DCP 2013. The proposal does not reduce the number of spaces available on street - 2 on-street car parking spaces to be maintained.
|
Safety concerns over driveway access. Due to the steep driveway to access the garage and minimal street setback of building. This minimises visibility and increases risk to pedestrians (primary school age children) and parents who park in this area both am and pm. The proposed driveway ramp to the basement does not appear to comply with AS2890.1 in that there is no transition area at the top of the ramp to allow for pedestrian safety. Considering the zero setback as shown on Drawing 1.10 and the lack of the transition area for the access ramp, the potential pedestrian safety risk created by vehicles exiting the proposed development is significant. A vehicle would need to be in the road reserve before the driver would have sight lines to approaching pedestrians. This is particularly important in a highly pedestrianised area adjacent to the busy medical practice at No. 9 School Street and the primary school on the eastern side of School Street. |
The driveway grades and location have been revied by Council’s Development Engineering team and the proposal is considered acceptable.
The driveway transition occurs within the site.
Management of use of the driveway is proposed via a ‘traffic light’ system to alert drivers and pedestrians that the driveway is in use.
Additional signage is proposed at the driveway entrance to alert pedestrians that vehicles are exiting the site.
|
Given proximity to former colonial Government House a heritage assessment should be required. |
An archaeological assessment was submitted with the application. The assessment includes consideration of the location of the former Government House site to the north. |
A traffic study needs to be completed to fully understand the dynamics of the am / pm school drop-off and pickup for the primary school children. School street appears to be a primary access for students with a disability and cars will be banked up waiting. This creates significant traffic hazards with parents and students crossing the road. |
The development comprises three dwellings. Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the proposal and is satisfied that the traffic generation from the proposed development is within the capacity of the existing road network in the area. A traffic study is not required in this case. |
Vehicular movement in the basement to access car parking does not appear achievable. Swept paths should be provided to demonstrate how vehicles will achieve ingress and egress without multiple point turns. |
Adequate manoeuvring area is available in the basement. |
The 3D perspectives are limited to the Shadow Diagram and should be provided in separate detail, with view angles from School Street, New Street and Munster Street. The 3D perspectives should also contain a projected existing ground level surface to the allowable building height to demonstrate more transparently the extent of the proposed noncompliance with the building height development standard across the subject property. |
Additional 3D perspective drawings were provided that demonstrate the extent of the height variation. An extract form Sheet 1.22 of the plan set is provided at Clause 4.3 above. |
Shadow effect on the medical centre in the winter months (May to August)Drawing No. 1.2 of the Architectural Set does not accurately show the location of the deck on No. 9 School Street. The Plan indicates that the deck (No.9) is setback from the boundary further than what it is. This also is the case for the setback of the brick building to the north of No. 7. The re-submitted Development Application should accurately assess the expected overshadowing impacts on the covered deck area attached to the dwelling and the garage on No. 9 School Street. The covered deck area is an important part of Dr Subbiah’s family medical practice currently providing a sunny open air waiting area for patients. The Shadow Diagrams – Drawing 1.14 as exhibited demonstrate that No. 9 School Street is significantly impacted by the proposed development. From mid-morning onwards, No. 9 School Street will receive little to no solar access during the winter solstice period. Further, the western boundary line for No. 9 School Street is not accurately depicted on the Shadow Diagrams, further misrepresenting the impact of the proposed development |
Updated shadow diagrams were submitted following the initial notification period that show the location of the covered deck at No.9 School Street.
The diagrams show that the proposal will overshadow the adjoining property and roofed deck patient waiting area located adjacent to the northern boundary of No.9 School Street at mid-winter. Maintenance of solar access to the deck under a medium to high density development scenario, as envisaged under the planning controls, would not be practical given the orientation lots and location of the deck adjacent to the boundary of the site.
The western boundary line has been amended on the shadow diagrams.
|
The site drains towards the western rear boundary. How will stormwater be conveyed from the proposed development considering there are hard surface levels below the ground level at School Street? |
The lower level car park will be served by a pump out system connected to the on-site stormwater detention tank located under the driveway. The OSD will be designed to drain to the upgraded piped system in School Street. |
(e) The Public Interest
The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls as justified and will not adversely impact on the wider public interest.
Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle
Ecologically sustainable development requires the effective integration of economic and environmental considerations in decision-making processes.
The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:
· the precautionary principle,
· intergenerational equity,
· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,
· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.
The principles of ESD require that a balance needs to be struck between the man-made development and the need to retain the natural vegetation. Based on the assessment provided in the report and with recommended conditions of consent, it is considered an appropriate balance has been struck.
Climate change
The proposal is not considered to be vulnerable to any risks associated with climate change.
4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE
· Development contributions will be required towards augmentation of town water supply and sewerage system head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.
· Development contributions will be required in accordance with Section 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.
· A copy of the contributions estimate is included (Attachment 4).
5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON
The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. In some cases amendments to the proposal have been made and where relevant conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.
The proposed development does not raise any significant general public interest issues beyond matters already addressed in this report. Overall, the proposed development is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the relevant planning controls and will have an acceptable impact on the surrounding natural and built environment. Approval of the application is considered to be in the public interest as it achieves the LEP objectives for development in the zone. No significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality have been identified. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.
Attachments
1⇩. 2⇩. 3⇩. 4⇩.
|
Development Assessment Panel
11/12/2024
Item: 07
Subject: DA2022 - 931.1 School (Stage 1 & 2) and Concept Application for Stage 3 Expansion of School at Lot 10 DP 1223845, No. 456 John Oxley Drive, Thrumster
Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Chris Gardiner
Applicant: Port Macquarie Steiner Limited Owner: Port Macquarie Steiner Limited Estimated Cost: $3,390,000 Parcel no: 65716 Alignment with Delivery Program 4.3.1 Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation. |
That DA2022 - 931.1 for a School (Stage 1 & 2) and Concept Application for Stage 3 Expansion of School at Lot 10, DP 1223845, No. 456 John Oxley Drive, Thrumster, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.
Executive Summary
The Development Assessment Panel previously considered this application at its meeting on 6 March 2024, with the consensus being:
“That DA2022 - 931.1 for a School (Stage 1 & 2) and Concept Application for Stage 3 Expansion of School at Lot 10, DP 1223845, No. 456 John Oxley Drive, Thrumster, be deferred to enable the applicant to undertake an arborist assessment of all trees to be retained on site and provide a tree management safety plan so as to manage the safety of future users of the school site.”
The Applicant has provided additional information in response to the deferral including an Arboriculture Risk Assessment Report, an amended Biodiversity Development Assessment Report, a Tree Safety Management Plan, and an amended Tree Removal Plan. The amended plans are included (Attachment 2). The amended proposal involves the removal of an additional 7 trees, dead wooding of retained trees in high traffic areas, and establishment of an exclusion zone around an existing tree on the neighbouring property that is not able to be managed by the proponent.
The amended plans and documents were re-notified between 24 October 2024 and 6 November 2024, with 4 additional submissions received.
The majority of the assessment matters remain unchanged following the deferral, and the original assessment report are included (Attachment 4). The additional relevant matters for consideration under Section 4.15(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 arising from the amended proposal are considered in this report. Development contributions are unchanged by the additional information and the original estimate are included (Attachment 3).
This report recommends that the development application be approved subject to the attached conditions (Attachment 1), which have been amended having regard to the additional arboriculture and ecological assessments.
STATUTORY ASSESSMENT
Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration
(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:
(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021
Chapter 4 Koala Habitat Protection 2021
Clause 4.8 - The land is subject to the Area 13 (Thrumster) Koala Plan of Management, and is identified as high use core koala habitat in that plan (see below).
The following comments are provided in relation to the working provisions in Part 3 and Part 6 of the KPoM:
Provision |
Comment |
3(C) Clearing of native vegetation |
A condition is recommended requiring a suitably qualified koala specialist to inspect all trees on the day that the clearing is proposed and provided written clearance before clearing commences. |
3(D) Protection of Koalas from undue disturbance |
A condition is recommended requiring clearing and/or earthworks to be suspended within 25m of any tree occupied by a koala until the koala has moved on of its own volition. |
3(E) Swimming pools |
The proposal does not include a swimming pool. |
3(F) Habitat Linkages and Buffers |
No habitat linkages or buffers traverse the site. |
3(G) Habitat restoration |
No habitat linkages or buffers traverse the site. Habitat restoration is not applicable. |
3(H) Koala Release Area |
Not applicable. The koala release area is not associated with the subject site. |
3(I) Roading |
No roads are proposed for the development. |
3(J) Community Education |
Noted, but not applicable to the proposal. |
5 Design Principles |
Design principles relate only to residential subdivisions and are not applicable to the proposed school. |
6(A) Road design standards |
No public roads are proposed for the development. |
6(B) Keeping of domestic dogs |
Having regard to the proposed use as a school, it is not considered likely that dogs would be kept on the premises. As a precaution, a condition is recommended confirming this restriction. |
6(C) Protection of preferred koala food trees |
The proposal does not include any residential allotments and this provision does not apply. |
6(D) Fencing |
While the subject site is not technically a residential allotment, it is recommended that site fencing be designed to not inhibit the movement of koalas.
The proposed new fencing to the northern and eastern boundaries of the site will be lapped and capped timber fences. The acoustic barrier located 0.5m inside the northern boundary will also include koala bridges every 40m.
Fencing to the John Oxley Drive frontage will be 1.2m high floppy top koala exclusion fencing.
The proposed fencing is consistent with the KPoM. |
6(E) Development in “High Use” areas |
This provision of the KPoM is not applicable to the proposal as it is not for the purpose of high density residential subdivision. |
6(G) Landscaping |
This provision of the KPoM is not applicable to the proposal as it is not for the purpose of residential subdivision. |
6(H) Variations |
The proposal does not seek any variation to 6(E) or 6(F) and this provision is not applicable to the proposal.
However, confirmation has been provided that the school has arranged for planting and ongoing maintenance of at least 12 koala food trees on a property located off Tall Timber Road, Lake Innes (Lot 2 DP 875785). |
(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force
Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013
DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management |
|||
DCP Objective |
Development Provisions |
Proposed |
Complies |
Tree Management – Private Land
|
|||
11 |
c) Where a tree listed in Table 1 is approved for removal it must be compensated with 2 x koala habitat trees. Significant large-scale development will require an advanced size koala food tree or habitat tree (primary Koala browse species) that meets AS2303:2015 Tree Stock for Landscape Use. The compensation tree is to be planted in a suitable location as determined by the Director of Development and Environment or their delegate. |
A total of 22 trees are proposed to be removed for the development, including 5 locally preferred koala food trees. The DCP notes that the offsetting provision does not apply where the land has an adopted Koala Plan of Management. |
N/A |
Tree Management - Hollow Bearing Trees
|
|||
13 |
a) All hollow bearing trees within the development area are to be accurately located by survey and assessed by an appropriately qualified ecologist in accordance with Council’s Hollow-bearing tree assessment (HBT) protocol |
The BDAR accurately locates and assesses each of the hollow bearing trees on the site |
Yes |
b) Any tree that scores less than 8 using the HBT assessment protocol may be considered for removal subject to compensatory measures specified below. |
No additional hollow bearing trees scoring less than 8 are proposed to be removed. |
N/A |
|
c) Any tree that scores 8-12 using the HBT assessment protocol may be considered for removal if management measures are ‘impractical to allow retention’ |
No additional hollow bearing trees scoring 8-12 are proposed to be removed. |
N/A |
|
d) Any tree that scores more than 12 using the HBT assessment protocol the assessment must be retained and afforded a development exclusion buffer or located within environmental lands. |
The Arboriculture Risk Assessment Report prepared by The Tree MD Pty Ltd identifies an additional 4 hollow bearing trees scoring more than 12 using the HBT assessment protocol that require removal due to safety risks. These trees include:
HBT 1 (tree 770): Blackbutt - multiple branch failures, cavity at base with significant decay, upper canopy and main stem with significant decay and cavities, limited sound wood supporting remaining branches.
HBT 8 (tree 738): Blackbutt - over-road branches with damage and dieback, and previous over-road branch failures observed.
HBT 9 (tree 742): Blackbutt - multiple branch failures, additional large branches with increased risk of failure in adverse weather conditions.
HBT 10 (tree 737): Blackbutt - subdominant elongated asymmetric growth and previous branch failures observed.
While the DCP prefers the retention of these trees, the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 is higher order legislation and provides a process for the scientific consideration of the impacts of the development through a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR). The Applicant has submitted a BDAR prepared by an authorised person. The report has been reviewed and it is considered that adequate measures have been taken to avoid or minimise impacts, and the development would not result in serious and irreversible impacts on biodiversity. Particularly, the development layout has been designed to minimise the loss of koala food tree species, and hollow-bearing trees. The loss of habitat from existing hollows will be offset by appropriate nest boxes and recruitment trees in accordance with the DCP requirements.
Additional ecosystem and species credits will be applicable due to the increased loss of hollows from the amended proposal. |
Acceptable on merit |
|
e) Where a development exclusion buffer is proposed it shall have a radius of 1.25 times the height of the tree measured from its base. |
A full development exclusion buffer has not been provided for all retained hollow bearing trees on the site. The Arboriculture Impact Assessment Report has demonstrated that it is possible to safely retain all the existing hollow bearing trees during the construction phase with appropriate tree and root protection measures.
The other objective of this provision is to ensure that retained trees are not later removed because they pose a risk of falling on buildings, access roads, parking areas, or occupants of the site.
Given the nature of the proposed use, it is not possible to exclude staff, students and parents from all areas of the site that are within proximity to the retained hollow bearing trees. An alternative management strategy has been proposed to reduce the risk posed by existing trees in a manner that does not require significant additional tree removal.
The submitted Tree Safety Management Plan includes the following recommendations:
Prior to the School Commencing Operation · Construct fence to delineate the low traffic area in the south-western corner and south-eastern corner. The low traffic area is only to be accessed for maintenance. Refer Tree Identification & Low Traffic Area Plan. · Dead wooding of all trees which overhang the driveway, car park and other areas outside of the low traffic area. · Remove the following trees: − 688 (small-fruited Grey Gum) − 697 (small-fruited Grey Gum) − 736 (Blackbutt) − 737 (Blackbutt) − 738 (Blackbutt) − 742 (Blackbutt) − 770 (Blackbutt).
During Operation of the School · Passive and formal active inspections by the School, being once a week and after adverse weather events. School staff to carry out an inspection of all trees outside the low traffic areas to identify any signs of loose limbs or structural instability. For trees identified as potentially hazardous, arrange an inspection by a qualified AQF 5 level arborists to determine any necessary action. · Quarterly tree health assessment by an AQF5 level arborist of all trees outside of the low traffic area. · Annual Tree Risk Assessment by an AQF5 level arborist who is a current QTRA or a VALID tree risk assessor.
An amended condition has been recommended in Attachment 1, requiring the implementation of the Tree Safety Management Plan. |
Acceptable on merit |
|
14 |
a) A strategy for tree removal (timing and methodology) that minimises impacts on native wildlife shall accompany any development that proposes the removal of HBTs. |
The submitted BDAR includes recommendations for tree removal methodology. |
Yes |
b) The removal of HBTs is to be offset by the retention of recruitment trees. Compensatory recruitment trees shall be provided at the rate of two for one for trees that scored 8-12, Development Control Plan 2013 page 25 and at the rate of one for one for trees that scored less than 8. A tree can be considered to be a compensatory recruitment tree under the following criteria: - Does not have any major structural defects or is suffering from disease that would lead to premature death; and - Is from the same vegetation community and same genus; and - Are to be located within environmental lands and managed in accordance with a VMP; and - Have a DBH of 50cm or greater and do not possess hollows. For Blackbutt Eucalyptus pilularis a DBH of 100cm or greater applies. |
The BDAR identifies the retention of at least 8 recruitment trees within the site that meet the DCP criteria. |
Yes |
|
c) The removal of HBTs are to be offset by the installation of nesting boxes of similar number and size as those to be removed. |
Given that the four HBTs contained 13 hollows between them, 13 replacement nest boxes or equivalent are required. The BDAR notes that these are to comprise: · 4 x microbat boxes · 6 x medium parrot/glider boxes · 3 x large salvaged hollow limbs (or large nest boxes if no limbs are salvageable). |
Yes |
|
d) Nesting boxes are to be installed like for like (both type and number, and host tree to genus level) and must be located within proposed open space or environmental lands. |
The above nest boxes will be like for like and are proposed to be installed within the retained vegetation on the school site. |
Yes |
|
e) Nesting Boxes are to be installed and maintained within environmental lands in accordance with a VMP. |
A VMP is not considered necessary as the nest boxes are the only offsets proposed within the site. The recommended conditions require installation of the nest boxes in accordance with the mitigation measures detailed in the BDAR, and the maintenance of the nest boxes in perpetuity. |
Acceptable on merit |
|
f) Nesting Boxes to be inspected and maintained by a qualified ecologist. |
|||
g) Any HBT that will not afford protection via an exclusion buffer or within environmental lands will attract the same offsetting requirements as if it was to be removed. |
An appropriate alternative management regime has been proposed for the HBTs with compromised exclusion buffer. Additional nest box offsets are not considered necessary. |
Acceptable on merit |
(b) The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality
Flora and fauna
The proposed development will impact an area of 0.84 hectares and will involve the removal or modification of 0.56 hectares of native vegetation (an increase from the original proposal of 0.34 hectares), with the remaining 0.28 hectares situated in areas previously cleared. The Biodiversity Offset Scheme applies due to the entire site being mapped on the Biodiversity Values Map and the Applicant has submitted an amended Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) addressing the likely impacts of the development.
The report has been reviewed by Council’s Ecologist and it is considered that adequate measures have been taken to avoid or minimise impacts, and the development would not result in serious and irreversible impacts on biodiversity. Particularly, the development layout has been designed to minimise the loss of koala food tree species and hollow-bearing trees, and to mitigate the loss of hollows through appropriate nest boxes and recruitment trees.
The development will require the retirement of additional ecosystem credits and species credits to offset the impacts of the development, as detailed in the table below:
Impacted plant community type |
Number of ecosystem credits |
IBRA sub-region |
Plant community type(s) that can be used to offset the impacts from development |
690-Blackbutt - Tallowwood dry grassy open forest of the central parts NSW North Coast Bioregion |
11 (previously 7) |
Macleay Hastings, Carrai Plateau, Coffs Coast and Escarpment, Comboyne Plateau, Karuah Manning, Macleay Gorges, Mummel Escarpment and Upper Manning. or Any IBRA subregion that is within 100 kilometres of the outer edge of the impacted site. |
Northern Hinterland Wet Sclerophyll Forests This includes PCT's: 3231, 3236, 3257, 3259, 3262 |
Impacted species |
Number of species credits |
IBRA sub-region |
Lathamus discolor / Swift Parrot |
16 (previously 11) |
Anywhere in NSW |
Conditions have been recommended requiring evidence of retirement of the relevant credits prior to the commencement of any clearing on the land.
The Biodiversity Development Assessment Report also includes a table of recommended management and mitigation measures for the construction and operational phases of the development. A condition is recommended requiring implementation of the measures at the relevant stages of the development.
(d) Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations
An additional 4 written submissions were received in response to the re-notification of the amended proposal. A summary of the key issues raised in the additional submissions received and comments on these matters are provided in the table below:
Submission Issue/Summary |
Planning Comment/Response |
The amended proposal still doesn’t provide for bus transport. Reliance upon private motor vehicles is not a sustainable option. |
Mode split data published by RMS (now TfNSW) notes that for primary schools in regional areas an average of 7% of students travel by bus in the morning and 4% travel by bus in the afternoon. Based on the maximum number of students proposed in the application, a public school bus service is not considered to be warranted. The internal loop road could be altered to accommodate a school bus if student numbers expanded significantly in the future. |
The installation of a stop sign at the Aspect Court intersection would cause further inconvenience for residents and delays for emergency responders. |
A stop sign at this intersection has not been proposed by the Applicant. Further the recommended conditions of consent don’t require the installation of a stop sign based on the staff assessment of traffic impacts. The existing ‘give way’ control remains appropriate.
It is noted that the SIDRA analysis in the Applicant’s Traffic Engineering Report has modelled future intersection performance based on a stop sign, which is more conservative than the existing conditions. |
The address of the site John Oxley Drive and access should not be permitted from Aspect Court. If access cannot be provided from John Oxley Drive, the development should not be approved. |
John Oxley Drive is an arterial road and direct accesses to individual properties are not desirable from a traffic safety and efficiency perspective. A limited number of road intersections have been planned for the Thrumster area, and access to individual sites will be from the local road network. |
The development has insufficient off-street parking. Overflow parking in Aspect Court will cause damage to residents’ lawns as the street is narrow. |
The parking proposed for the development exceeds the minimum requirements of Council’s DCP and RMS (now TfNSW) parking surveys. |
Council should not be required to pay for footpaths and other infrastructure with ratepayers’ money to facilitate the development. |
All infrastructure upgrades associated with the development would be at the developer’s expense. |
The amended proposal still doesn’t include a private bus service as originally proposed. |
The Traffic Engineering Report identifies a mini-bus of similar dimensions to a medium rigid vehicle as a “regular” service vehicle. The Applicant has indicated that this was intended to cover the use of a mini-bus for regular school excursions and a private bus service is not proposed. |
Vehicles will have to queue in the street while waiting for parking to be available, which will have traffic safety impacts. |
The internal loop road will provide for vehicles to circulate through the traffic lane and re-enter Aspect Court in the event that all parking and kiss-and-drop spaces are occupied. The internal loop road has storage capacity for approximately 20 vehicles. |
Council should stage a mock pick-up with 90 cars entering and exiting the street in a 15 minute period to understand the actual impacts of the proposal. |
A realistic trial of the traffic impacts is not possible without the construction of the loop road and parking areas.
Computer modelling of traffic impacts is an accepted practice for development assessment. |
Neighbours were originally told by a school representative that there would be no bells, PA or sound system of any type and the proposal now includes these items. These items will likely cause noise complaints and affect the sleep of neighbouring shift workers. |
The noise impact assessment notes that there are no specific noise requirements to govern bells and PA equipment for school announcements, as these occur sporadically and not for a prolonged length of time. The report recommends best-practice such as directional speakers or speakers aimed into the school grounds, rather than neighbouring properties.
A condition is recommended requiring any bell and/or PA system to be installed and operated in accordance with the Noise Impact Assessment. |
The projected noise from the school is based on a biased report prepared on behalf of the school. What will be the consequences if the school exceeds the projected noise levels? Can the school be relocated if there are constant breaches of noise levels? |
It is normal practice for specialist reports to be commissioned by the Applicant. The noise impact assessment has been reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Officer and is considered to have appropriately determined the applicable noise levels. The recommended mitigation measures are practical and achievable.
Noise limits have been recommended in the conditions and would be legally enforceable if the development is granted consent. If the school exceeded the relevant noise levels once operational, Council would have various enforcement options, which could include additional noise mitigation measures (for example, additional or improved acoustic barriers), reduction in the volume of bells and PA systems, replacement of plant, and/or changes to the way that the school operates.
Council could not force the school to relocate. |
No construction work should be permitted on weekends or before 7.00am on weekdays. |
The proposed conditions recommend that construction hours are restricted to between 7.00am and 6.00pm Monday to Saturday, with no work to be carried out on Sundays or public holidays. This is consistent with current noise legislation and guidelines. |
How is the planting and maintenance of koala food trees proposed to be monitored? |
No koala food tree offsets are proposed or required on the site. The impacts of the development are proposed to be offset through biodiversity credits. |
The additional loss of hollows will have a significant impact on the animals that use them. Research has shown that displaced animals don’t do well in artificial nest boxes. |
The significance of the impacts has been assessed in the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) in accordance with the requirements of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and it has been determined that the proposal would not significantly impact threatened species or ecological communities.
The BDAR has recommended salvage of the existing large hollows where possible, and a range of nest box sizes to suit the habitat that is proposed to be lost for the development. · 4 x microbat boxes · 6 x medium parrot/glider boxes · 3 x large salvaged hollow limbs (or large nest boxes if no limbs are salvageable).
Council’s Ecologist is satisfied that offsets proposed are appropriate. Nest boxes generally have a shorter lifespan than the original hollows, and a condition has been recommended requiring the ongoing maintenance and replacement (if necessary) of the nest boxes. |
The hollow bearing trees listed in the report cannot be removed. They may not be safe for a school but in the original DA for this piece of land, a single residential dwelling, these trees would remain and continue to provide a sustainable and long-term habitat. |
The assessment of the application does not require a comparison with the impacts of development that has previously been granted consent on the site. The proposed school needs to be assessed on its merits having regard to the relevant legislation. |
At the previous DAP meeting on 6 March 2024 suggested solutions to the proponent for managing tree safety. This was inappropriate and there are now concerns about bias towards the developer. |
It is a normal part of the assessment process for the consent authority to consider options for managing impacts identified through the assessment. This will often involve discussion and negotiation with the Applicant as there is generally more than one way that a particular issue can be resolved. |
Request that Council carries out an independent noise assessment for the school. |
It is up to the Applicant to provide the relevant specialist reports to support a development proposal. Council’s expert staff review these reports to confirm that they address the relevant legislation, policies, and guidelines and that the recommended mitigation measures are practical and achievable. |
The traffic assessment has relied upon inadequate or outdated traffic data. The assessment should be updated to include current traffic volumes as there has been further growth is Thrumster since the original report was prepared. |
The current traffic volumes determined for John Oxley Drive in the Traffic Engineering Report have been reviewed by Council staff having regard to recorded traffic counts and other recent traffic assessments in the area. The current traffic volumes used in the report are considered appropriate.
The Traffic Engineering Report accounts for 10 years of traffic growth at a rate expected for an urban release area (as is normal practice for such reports). The traffic volumes in John Oxley Drive are anticipated to increase from 6000 vehicles per day in 2023 to 8000 vehicles per day in 2033. It is not necessary for additional traffic counts to be carried out for 2024/2025 as the report already accounts for this growth. |
The fence between the development and northern neighbours should be 2.4m high, not 1.8m, as the development is for a multi storey building. |
The noise impact assessment determined that a 1.8m high acoustic barrier is sufficient to mitigate noise for Stages 1 and 2 of the development. The 2.4m high barrier is not required until Stage 3 of the development, which is subject to a separate development application.
However, the Applicant has agreed to construct the 2.4m high barrier at the outset of the development to reduce construction and operational noise impacts on neighbours. |
The acoustic fence should be constructed prior to any works or clearing commencing. |
The recommended conditions include a requirement for the acoustic fence to be constructed at the outset of the Stage 1 works, prior to any other building, civil, or earthworks commencing. |
The staggered pick up times proposed by the school would not be effective as many parents arrive at school early and park while they wait. |
The staggered pick up times proposed are expected to improve the functionality of the kiss and drop and parking areas and reduce waiting times. Ongoing education is likely to be required by the school to manage parents arriving early and parking prior to the designated pick up times.
An efficient pick up system is likely to discourage this type of behaviour as most parents will choose the most convenient option. |
It doesn’t appear that all the retained trees have been assessed for safety as required by the previous deferral of the application. |
The Arboriculture Risk Assessment Report prepared by The Tree MD Pty Ltd notes that the author inspected all trees within the proposed school grounds. Only the trees with an increased risk of injury to persons or damage to property were discussed in the detailed risk assessment and recommendations. All other trees were considered safe to remain on the site. |
There is conflicting information in the plans and documents about the number of trees that are proposed to be removed. |
The Arboriculture Risk Assessment Report only considers the additional trees within the school grounds that are required to be removed for safety reasons. The trees requiring removal for the access road, parking areas, and services were addressed in the original application.
The BDAR confirms the total extent of clearing proposed for the development, which is consistent with the amended tree removal plan. |
There is a fence proposed 500mm off the existing northern boundary fence. Is the proposal to remove all the small trees that are currently along the fence, or will the fence be moved? |
The alignment of the acoustic barrier has been reviewed and it has been determined that one of the trees identified for retention would be impacted if the acoustic barrier was constructed 500mm off the northern boundary as originally proposed. A condition has been recommended requiring amended plans to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate confirming the change of alignment around this tree.
A number of smaller trees within 500mm of the northern boundary are located at the rear of the stockpile mound. These trees have been assessed in the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report for removal for the Stage 2 car park. Appropriate ecosystem credits have been calculated for the impacts of these works. |
Request that a condition be imposed requiring that a bus be operating from the first day. |
There is no nexus for a bus to be operating for the number of students proposed. |
Request that a condition restrict any increase in student numbers (including temporary increases) until all the requirements for Stage 2A are completed. |
The recommended conditions include the following restrictions on student numbers at the relevant stages of the development: · Stage 1 - 30 students. · Stage 2A - 65 students. · Stage 2B - 72 students. · Stage 2C - 80 students. · Stage 2D - 95 students.
The number of students could not exceed 30 until the requirements for Stage 2A are completed. |
CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS
The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.
The proposed development does not raise any significant general public interest issues beyond matters already addressed in this report. Overall, the proposed development is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the relevant planning controls and will have an acceptable impact on the surrounding natural and built environment. Approval of the application is considered to be in the public interest as it achieves the LEP objectives for development in the zone. No significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality have been identified. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.
Attachments
1⇩. 2⇩. 3⇩. 4⇩.
|