NORTH SYDNEY COUNCIL · NORTH SYDNEY INDEPENDENT PLANNING PANEL – 04/10/17 Page No 3 Council’s notification of the Section 82A review application has attracted two (2) submissions

NORTH SYDNEY COUNCIL

Council Chambers

28 September 2017

I wish to inform you that a Meeting of the NORTH SYDNEY INDEPENDENT PLANNING

PANEL will be held in the Council Chambers, North Sydney at 2.00pm on Wednesday 4

October 2017 when your attendance is requested.

Your attention is directed to the accompanying statement of the business proposed to be

transacted at such meeting.

ADRIAN PANUCCIO

A/GENERAL MANAGER

BUSINESS

1. Minutes

Confirmation of Minutes of the previous Meeting held on Wednesday 6 September

2017.

(Circulated)

NSIPP COUNCIL CHAMBERS SEATING PLAN

PUBLIC GALLERY

Pane

l Mem

ber Panel M

ember

Panel Member Panel Member

Staf

f

Speaker/s

NORTH SYDNEY INDEPENDENT PLANNING PANEL – 04/10/17 Page No 2

2. IPP01: 9 Commodore Street, McMahons Point (W) -:DA 133/17

Applicant: Environet Consultancy Pty Ltd

Report of Marc Ellwood, Student Town Planner, 19 September 2017

This development application seeks NSIPP approval for a permanent aluminium frame

and containing a retractable awning above an existing deck to the west of the dwelling.

The application is referred to the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel for

determination due to the level of interest in the outcome from neighbouring

properties.

Notification of the proposal has attracted three (3) submissions raising particular

concerns about the obstruction of views from the end of Commodore Street as well as

loss of views from private residences situated on the Northern side of Commodore

Street.

The assessment has considered these concerns as well as the performance of the

application against Council’s planning requirements. The view impact to No. 8

Commodore Street has been considered in detail, with impacts with impacts to the

ground floor are assessed as moderate and the impact to the first floor area considered

to be negligible, with impact to the first floor area considered to be negligible. On

balance, the impact to views from adjacent properties is considered to be reasonable.

Impacts to views from the adjoining public domain has also been considered and these

impacts are considered to be minor and acceptable.

Following this assessment, the development application is considered to be reasonable

in the circumstances and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Recommending: PURSUANT TO SECTION 80 OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND

ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 (AS AMENDED)

THAT the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel, under the delegation of the

General Manager as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application

No. 133/17 for the installation of a retractable awning and associated permanent

aluminium frame to the western balcony of the existing dwelling on land at 9

Commodore Street, McMahons Point subject to the attached conditions: -

3. IPP02: 46 Murdoch Street, Cremorne (C) - DA348/16 (Section 82A review No.

5/17)

Applicant: Hargroves Design

Report of Kim Rothe, Acting Executive Planner, 26 September 2017

This application under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Act 1979 seeks a review of a determination made by Council staff for alterations and

additions to an existing detached dwelling including the construction of a first floor

addition at the rear, a basement garage with a new opening to an existing rock face on

land at No. 46 Murdoch Street, Cremorne. The application was refused under delegated

authority on 21 April 2017.

The reasons of refusal included:

1.Unacceptable impact to the public domain and loss of natural and built features of

significance to the Cremorne Conservation Area to achieve the basement garage.

2.Unacceptable impact to the local environment.

3.Unacceptable resolution of engineering matters.

4.Impacts upon view loss and privacy to adjoining properties.

5.Owners consent being withheld by Council’s property section for the public domain

works which would be required over Council owned land.

The application is referred to the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel for

determination pursuant to requests by Councillors to have the 82A application

reviewed by the NSIPP.


Council’s notification of the Section 82A review application has attracted two (2)

submissions. The objections raise particular concerns about excavation, impact to street

parking, interruption to pedestrian flows, preservation of topography, garbage

collection, overshadowing, loss of outlook/views and visual privacy, uncharacteristic

built form, non-compliant side setbacks and other issues.

The Section 82A plans submitted have not made amendments to the proposal as refused

or submitted any new information to the matters which formed the basis of the refusal.

Accordingly, there is limited scope for reconsideration of the matters which formed the

basis of the original refusal. Reassessment of the proposal concludes that the proposal

remains unacceptable with regard to Councils policies.

Having regard to the provisions of Section 82A and 79C of the Environmental Planning

& Assessment Act 1979 and the previous reasons of refusal, the application is

recommended for refusal.




Acting General Manager, confirms the refusal of Development Application No.

348/16 (Section 82A application 5/17) for alterations and additions to an existing

detached dwelling including the construction of a first floor addition at the rear, a

basement garage with a new opening to an existing rock face at No.46 Murdoch Street,

Cremorne for the following reasons:

The proposed garage and associated building and excavation works would have a

detrimental impact upon the significance of the Cremorne Conservation Area

Particulars:

(a)The proposed garage and associated vehicular crossing works would cause the loss

of part of the sandstone cliff, the removal of a section of the existing Depression era

rusticated fence on the western side of Murdoch Street that contributes to the overall

character within the view catchment of that part of the Cremorne Conservation Area.

(b)To maintain the character of low density residential areas and the conservation area,

basement garages are not supported within the front setback for detached dwellings.

(c)The introduction of an uncharacteristic built form within the Cremorne Conservation

Area with the proposed gabion walls on each side of the proposed garage entrance.

(d)The proposed removal of a large portion of the front garden above the proposed

garage would diminish the landscape setting of the subject Contributory item.

(e)Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the structural

integrity of the cliff would not be compromised by the proposed excavation works.

(f)The proposal is contrary to the following:

(i)Clause 1.2 – aims – (2)(a), (b)(i), (e)(i), (f); Clause 2.3 – Objectives for R2 – Dot

point 3; Clause 5.10 (1) (a, b); 5.10(4); 6.10(1), (3)(a, ii) in NSLEP 2013;

(ii)General aims of NSDCP 2013, Section 1.6 (a, b, e, f) in Part A of NSDCP 2013;

(iii)General objectives for residential development – Section 1.1.1 O4, O6, O8 in Part

B of NSDCP 2013;

(iv)Sections 1.3.1 (Topography) – O1, P3; 1.4.1 (Context) O1, P1; 1.4.3 (Streetscape)

– O1, P1; 1.5.4 (Car Parking) – P3, P10, P11 (c, d), P14; 1.5.7 (Excavation) – O1, O3,

P3 (b); 13 (Heritage) - 13.6.1 (General Objectives) – O1, O2, 13.6.2 (Form, Massing

and Scale) – P9; 13.9.4 (Materials) – O1, 13.9.5 (Garages and Carports) – O1, O2, P6;

20.5 (Footpaths) – 20.5.3 (Objectives) – O1, O4; 20.5.4 (Provisions) - P2; in Part B of

NSDCP 2013;

(v)Section 6.3 (Cremorne Conservation Area); 6.3.6 (Characteristic Built Elements) –

P4, P9, 6.3.7 (Uncharacteristic Elements) in Part C of NSDCP 2013.

2.The proposed garage and associated works would have an unacceptable impact

upon the environment of the locality

Particulars:


(a)The proposed vehicular crossing would require significant alterations to a section of

Murdoch Street footpath to the north of the crossing with steep gradient would have

adverse impact in terms of pedestrian access and safety.

(b)Insufficient information has been provided about impact of the proposed works on

the structural integrity of the existing rock wall.

(c)The proposed garage and the removal of a large portion of the front garden would

result in a significant reduction in landscaped area and an increase in unbuilt upon area

within the subject site.

(d)The proposal is contrary to the following:

(i)Clause 1.2 – aims – (2)(a), (b)(i), (e)(i); Clause 2.3 – Objectives for R2 – Dot point

3; 6.10(1), (3)(a, ii)(d) in NSLEP 2013;

(ii)General aims of NSDCP 2013, Section 1.6 (a, b, d, e, f) in Part A of NSDCP 2013;

(iii)General objectives for residential development – Section 1.1.1 O4, O5, O6, O8 in

Part B of NSDCP 2013;

(iv)Sections 1.3.1 (Topography) – O1, P3; 1.4.1 (Context) O1, P1; 1.4.3 (Streetscape)

– O1, P1; 1.4.7 (Built form Character) – O1; 1.5.3 (Safety and Security) – O1; 1.5.4

(Car Parking) – P3, P10, P11 (c, d), P14; 1.5.5 Site Coverage) – P1; 1.5.6 (Landscape

Area) – O1 (a, c, f, h); 1.5.7 (Excavation) – O1, O3, P2, P3 (b); 1.5.9 (Front Gardens)

– O2, P1; 20.5 (Footpaths) – 20.5.3 (Objectives) – O1, O4; 20.5.4 (Provisions) - P2; in

Part B of NSDCP 2013;

(v)Section 6.3 (Cremorne Conservation Area, 6.3.7 (Uncharacteristic Elements) in Part

C of NSDCP 2013.

3.The proposed rear addition would have an unacceptable impact upon the

amenity of the adjoining properties

Particulars:

(a)The proposed first floor balconies at the rear of the addition would cause a loss of

visual and acoustic privacy of the adjoining properties.

(b)The proposal is contrary to the following:

(i)Clause 1.2 – aims – (2)(a), (b)(ii), (c)(i); Clause 2.3 – Objectives for R2 – Dot point

3 in NSLEP 2013;

(ii)General aims of NSDCP 2013, Section 1.6 (a, d, e, f) in Part A of NSDCP 2013;

(iii)General objectives for residential development – Section 1.1.1 O4, O6, O8 in Part

B of NSDCP 2013;

(iv)Sections 1.3.8 (Acoustic Privacy) – O1; 1.3.10 (Visual Privacy) – O1, P3; in Part B

of NSDCP 2013;

The absence of land owners consent for the proposed works within Council

property

Particulars:

(a)Clause 49 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000.

(b)Council’s Encroachment Policy

4. IPP03: 22 Cairo Street, Cammeray (T) - DA262/17

Applicant: Rachel Bentley, Bentley Design

Report of Luke Donovan, Senior Assessment Officer, 22 September 2017

The applicant seeks NSIPP approval for substantial alterations and additions to the

existing semi-detached dwelling including a new basement level, first floor addition,

new roof, ground floor reconfiguration and a parking space within the front setback of

the site at No. 22 Cairo Street, Cammeray.

The subject application is reported to North Sydney Independent Planning Panel

due to the nature of the proposal and the non-compliance with the topographical

control in NSDCP 2013.

Council’s notification of the original proposal attracted one (1) submission against the

application. Council’s notification of the amended proposal also attracted one (1)

submission. The submission raised particular concerns about the extent of excavation,


proximity to common party wall and risk of structural damage to the adjoining

property.

The proposal is compliant with the building height control in NSLEP 2013. The

applicant has indicated that all new works will be independently supported of the party

wall that is shared with No. 20 Cairo Street.

Whilst the application proposes a considerable amount of excavation on a narrow site,

subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the excavation and the construction

of the basement level is unlikely to adversely impact the structural integrity of the

adjoining property at No. 20 Cairo Street. The proposed first floor addition is below

the existing ridge, setback 12.7m from the front boundary of the site and located behind

the front gable. The existing street tree would also assist in making the first floor

addition less visible from the public domain.

Council’s Conservation Planner considers that the proposal will have an acceptable

level of heritage impact to the primary built form and front façade of the Neutral Item

that is located within the Plateau Conservation Area.

The proposed parking space including two tyre strips is generally consistent with the

off street car parking along Cairo Street which is characterized by other similar

designed open car spaces as well as carports and garages within the front setback.

The proposal has been assessed having regard to Section 79(C) of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) and found to be satisfactory.

Accordingly, the proposal is recommended for approval subject to appropriate

conditions of consent.




A/General Manager as the consent authority, grant consent to Development

Application No. 262/17 for substantial alterations and additions to existing semi-

detached dwelling including a new basement level, first floor addition and new roof,

ground floor reconfiguration and a parking space in front setback on land at No. 22

Cairo Street, Cammeray subject to the following site specific and the attached

conditions of consent:-

C1Heritage Requirements

Prior to the issue of the construction certificate, the following amendments and

notations must be made to the architectural plans:

a)The front façade of the dwelling must be retained in-situ.

b)The exterior colours shall be complementary to the architectural style of the original

building, the attached semi-detached dwelling and sympathetic to the character of the

conservation area.

c)The proposed weatherboard shall have a painted finish, not stained in a visually

submissive colour that compliments the Federation style of the building and character

of the conservation area.

d)The weatherboard cladding is to be natural timber weatherboard or composite

material cladding equal to ‘Scyon Linear’ cladding, with traditional profile and paint

finish, 16mm thick and 180mm wide, laid in a horizontal pattern. No approval is given

for any other type of artificial weatherboards, or fibre cement cladding.

e)The new metal roof to the addition only is to have a traditional corrugated roof profile

equal to Custom Orb. No approval is given for min-orb or tray profile roof sheeting.

The colour shall be complementary to the architectural style of the original building

and sympathetic to the character of the conservation area.

f)All new windows and doors must have an aluminium or steel framing sections of a

width 45mm or wider, or are to be timber-framed.

The Certifying Authority must also ensure that the building plans and specifications

submitted, referenced on and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully

satisfy the requirements of this condition.


(Reason: To ensure the proposed colours and materials and complementary to the

Plateau Conservation Area).

C7Geotechnical Report

All recommendations of the geotechnical site investigation prepared Crozier

Geotechnical Consultants dated March 2017 must be complied with at all times.

The Geotechnical Engineer must confirm within the report that the existing rock

formations and substrate on the site is capable of:

a)withstanding the proposed loads to be imposed;

b)withstanding the extent of the proposed excavation, including any recommendations

for shoring works that may be required to ensure the stability of the excavation;

c)providing protection and support of adjoining properties; and

d)the provision of appropriate subsoil drainage during and upon completion of

construction works

must be submitted for approval by the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of any

Construction Certificate.

Building plans and specifications submitted for approval with any construction

certificate application must comply with (a), (b), (c) and (d) above and the certified

report, including any recommendations made in the said certified report.

The Certifying Authority must ensure that the building plans and specifications

submitted, referenced on and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully

satisfy the requirements of this condition.

(Reason: To ensure the structural integrity of the subject site and adjoining sites during

the excavation process)

E1Construction Sequence

The construction sequence prepared by Chapman Hutchison Pty Ltd dated 6/09/17

(Dwg No. 8575 S100B, S101A, S102B-S104B, S105A, S106B, S13B and S14B dated

6 September 2017) must be adhered to at all time during demolition, excavation and

construction works.

(Reason: To minimise any adverse impacts on the structural integrity of the adjoining

property at No.20 Cairo Street).

E8Progress Survey

In order to ensure compliance with approved plans, a Survey Certificate, to Australian

Height Datum, must be prepared by a Registered Surveyor as follows: -

a)After the installation of the 600mm x 300mm concrete panel (lower ground floor

level) confirming that it is independently supported of the existing stone footing.

b)After the installation of the stud walls to the first floor confirming that they are

independently supported of the common party wall.

c)After the laying of metal roof confirming that it is located wholly within their subject

site

Progress certifications in response to points (a) through (c) must be provided to the

Certifying Authority for approval at the time of carrying out relevant progress

inspections. In the event that such survey information is not provided or reveals

discrepancies between the approved plans and the proposed works, all works, save for

works necessary to bring the development into compliance with the approved plans,

must cease. Works may only continue upon notification by the Certifying Authority to

the Applicant that survey information (included updated survey information following

the carrying out of works to comply with the approved plans) complies with this

condition.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with approved plans)

G6Landscaping

The following landscaping must be completed prior to the issue of any Occupation

Certificate:

a)The hedge planting in the northern portion of the front garden indicated on Drawing

DA 05 Revision C dated 25/08/2017, prepared by Bentley Design.

b)Low ground cover plantings between the new paved driveway strips as indicated on

Drawing Number DA 15 Revision A dated 1/05/2017, prepared by Bentley Design.


c)Screen planting to a mature height of 3m and installed at 45L pot size must be planted

adjacent to the lower ground floor courtyard/lightwell or the existing palms are to be

retained.

d)One (1) small tree at 45L pot size must be planted in the front garden

The new landscaping required by this consent must be completed prior to the issue of

any Occupation Certificate. The specified landscape elements must be provided and

maintained in accordance with the requirements of this consent at all times.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this consent and to maintain the

landscape character of the locality)

5. IPP04: 562a - 564 Miller Street Cammeray (T) - DA.19/16/5

Applicant: Modog Pty Ltd

Report of Geoff Mossemenear, Executive Planner, 18 September 2017

This application seeks Council’s approval to modify the development consent for the

demolition of existing buildings and erection of a six storey residential flat building

with basement parking.

The approved development is currently under construction, and the recent excavation

has identified a number of variable geotechnical conditions in the north-eastern corner

of the site. Accordingly, the geotechnical engineer recommended the removal of the

loose material to establish a bedrock with sufficient strength to accommodate the

design of the building footprints in this portion of the site. The removal of the loose

material has effectively created a void below the approved building in the north-eastern

corner of the site, and the proposed amendment comprises the infill of that void with

two (2) additional apartments. The apartments are located directly below the lowest

floor of the approved building, and do not extend to the north beyond the approved

building footprint.

The application is referred to NSIPP due to the public interest with the proposal.

Council’s notification of the proposal has attracted five submissions raising particular

concerns about parking, privacy, removal of required landscape screening and damage

caused by extensive excavation. The assessment has considered these concerns as well

as the performance of the application against Council’s planning requirements.

Following this assessment the development application is considered to be reasonable


Recommending: THAT the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel, under delegation from the

General Manager, modify consent dated 11 July 2016 in respect of a proposal for the

demolition of existing buildings and erection of a multi storey residential flat building

with basement parking at 562a - 564 Miller Street Cammeray under the provisions of

Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act only insofar as will

provide for the following.

To delete condition A3, A4, C41 and C42 of the consent and insert in lieu thereof the

following new conditions namely:

External Finishes & Materials

A3.External finishes and materials must be in accordance with the submitted schedule

Drawings S96.10D and S96.11D, prepared by Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan,

and received by Council on 6 July 2017, unless otherwise modified by Council in

writing.

(Reason: To ensure that the form of the development undertaken is in accordance with

the determination of Council, Public Information)

Development in Accordance with Plans (S96 Amendments) A4. The development being carried out in accordance with plans identified in Condition

A1 of the consent and endorsed with Council’s approval stamp, except as modified by

the modifications shown by clouding on: Plan No. Issue Title Drawn by Received

S96.100 C Site plan Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016


S96.101 C Level 1 Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016






S96.107 C Roof Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016

S96.201 C Cross sections Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016

S96.301 C East elevation Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016

S96.302 C West elevation Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016

S96.303 C North & south

elevations

Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016

S96.401 C Materials & Finishes Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.09.2016

LPDA 16-

320/1

G Landscape Plan Conzept Landscape Architects 15.09.2016

LPDA 16-

320/1

C Landscape Plan

Detail

Conzept Landscape Architects 15.09.2016

as modified by the modifications shown by clouding on:

Plan No. Issue Title Drawn by Received

S96.01 C Site plan Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.03.2017







S96.08 C Roof Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.03.2017

S96.09 C Cross sections Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 15.03.2017

S96.10 C East & West

elevations


S96.11 C North & south

elevations


as modified by the modifications shown by clouding on:

Plan No. Issue Title Drawn by Received

S96.1.1 D Lower Ground Floor Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 6.07.2017

S96.1.2 D Ground Floor Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 6.07.2017

S96.03 D Level 1 Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 6.07.2017






S96.08 D Roof Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 6.07.2017

S96.09 D Cross sections Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonergan 6.07.2017

S96.10 D East & West

elevations


S96.11 D North & south

elevations


except as amended by the following conditions and this consent.

(Reason: To ensure that the form of the development undertaken is in accordance with

the determination of Council, Public Information)

Section 94 Contributions (Section 96 – DA.19/16/5) C40A. A monetary contribution pursuant to the provisions of Section 94 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, in accordance with the North

Sydney Council Section 94 Contribution Plan for the public amenities/ services

detailed in column A below and, for the amount detailed in column B below, must be

paid to Council. A B

Administration $ 125.62

Community Centres $ 570.27

Childcare Facilities $ 217.59

Library and Local Studies Acquisitions $ 106.40


Library Premises and Equipment $ 329.07

Multi Purpose Indoor Sports Facility $ 89.86

Olympic Pool $ 292.67

Open Space Acquisitions $ 3,586.65

Open Space Increased Capacity $ 7,109.39

Public Domain Improvements $ 281.02

Traffic Improvements $ 344.97

TOTAL $ 13,053.51

The contribution MUST BE paid prior issue of the Construction Certificate.

The above amount, will be adjusted for inflation by reference to the Consumer Price

(All Ordinaries) Index applicable at the time of the payment of the contribution.

A copy of the North Sydney Section 94 Contribution Plan can be viewed at North

Sydney Council’s Customer Service Centre, 200 Miller Street, North Sydney or

downloaded via Council’s website at www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au

(Reason: To retain a level of service for the existing population and to provide the same

level of service to the population resulting from new development)

Security Deposit/Guarantee Schedule C41. All fees and security deposits/ guarantees in accordance with the schedule below

must be provided to Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate: Security deposit/ guarantee Amount ($)

Street Tree Bond (on Council Property) 5,000.00

Drainage Damage Bond 6,500.00

Drainage Construction Bond 3,500.00

Engineering Construction Bond 35,000.00

TOTAL BONDS $50,000.00

Note: The following fees applicable

Fees

Section 94 Contribution $160,982.56

Section 94 Contribution (S96) $13,053.51

Affordable Housing Contribution $273,000.00

TOTAL FEES $447,036.07

(Reason: Compliance with the development consent)

BASIX Certificate C42. Under clause 97A(3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation

2000, it is a condition of this development consent that all the commitments listed in

BASIX Certificate No. 698075M_06 for the development are fulfilled. Plans and

specifications complying with this condition must be submitted to the Certifying

Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The Certifying

Authority must ensure that the building plans and specifications submitted, referenced

on and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully satisfy the requirements

of this condition.

(Reason: To ensure the proposed development will meet the Government’s

requirements for sustainability and statutory requirements)

6. IPP05: 47A King Street, Wollstonecraft - DA172/17

Applicant: Wise International C/-City Planning Works

Report of George Youhanna, Executive Planner, 19/9/2017

This development application seeks Council’s approval for demolition of the existing

dwelling and construction of a residential flat building containing six (6) dwellings,

with basement parking.

Council’s notification of the proposal has attracted 22 submissions raising particular

concerns about height, bulk and scale, character, traffic, parking, views, privacy, solar

access, non-compliances, overdevelopment and other issues. The assessment has

considered these concerns as well as the performance of the application against the


applicable planning requirements. This application is referred to the Panel due to the

public interest and due to the number of submissions exceeding ten (10).

Following this assessment, the development application is considered to be reasonable




THAT the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel, as the consent authority, assume

the concurrence of the Director General of the Department of Planning and invoke the

provisions of Clause 4.6 with regard to the exception to the development standard for

height, and grant consent to Development Application No. 172/17 subject to the

attached conditions.

7. IPP06: 58 Ancrum Street, Waverton (W) - DA125/17

Applicant: Nicholas Kough

Report of David Hoy, Team Leader Assessments, 20 September 2017

The application seeks consent for alterations and additions to 58 Ancrum Street,

Waverton; including demolition of the existing rear and original fabric, internal

reconfigurations and a two level addition to create a 4 bedroom, two-bathroom

dwelling.

The application is reported to North Sydney Independent Planning Panel for

determination due to interest by Councillor Baker and former Councillor Morris. Council’s notification of the proposal has attracted four (4) submissions and one (1)

petition raising issues pertaining to the impacts of the development on heritage

significance of the area, the over development of the site, solar access, bulk and scale,

non-compliant landscaped area, height and setbacks, privacy and loss of outlook.

The assessment has considered these concerns as well as the performance of the

application against Council’s planning requirements.

The proposal has been found to be inconsistent with a number of sections of the NSLEP

2013 and the NSDCP 2013.

The proposal is contrary to the aims of the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan

2013 and the zone objectives. The built form and scale of the proposed addition are

inconsistent, uncharacteristic and would overly dominate the existing characteristic

built form of the existing dwelling. The resultant development would have a significant

and detrimental impact on the Union, Bank and Thomas Street Conservation Area. The

proposed development also exceeds the maximum 60% site coverage control for the

subject site. The lack of consideration to the site coverage and density/scale of the

proposed dwelling does not align with LEP & DCP provisions.

Furthermore, the application is deficient and is not in the public interest.

Following this assessment, the development application is considered to be

unreasonable in the circumstances and is recommended for refusal.




General Manager as the consent authority, refuse development consent to

Development Application No. 125/17 for alterations and additions to a detached

dwelling including two (2) level rear addition on land 58 Ancrum Street, Waverton as

shown on plans identified in the table below, for the reasons as follows: Plan No. Issue Title Dated Drawn by Received

A_000 B COVER SHEET 19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_005 B SITE PLAN – PROPOSED 19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_090 B EXISTING + DEMO 19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_100 B FLOOR PLANS –

PROPOSED

19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017


Plan No. Issue Title Dated Drawn by Received

A_150 B ROOF PLAN -

PROPOSED

19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_210 B ELEVATIONS –

PROPOSED 1

19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_211 B ELEVATIONS –

PROPOSED 2

19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_212 A SECTIONAL

ELEVATION 1

19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_300 B SECTIONS 1 19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

A_301 B SECTIONS 2 19.06.2017 Kough Design 27.6.2017

REASONS FOR REFUSAL

1. Uncharacteristic Built Form, Scale and Adverse Heritage Impacts

The built form and scale of the proposed addition are inconsistent, uncharacteristic and

would overly dominate the existing characteristic built form of the existing dwelling.

The resultant development would have a significant and detrimental impact on the

Union, Bank and Thomas Street Conservation Area.

Particulars:

(a)The proposed rear addition extends substantially above the ridge line of the existing

cottage, by 2m and would have a highly uncharacteristic form and built character.

(b)The proposed development introduces a highly uncharacteristic built form with a

character that is inconsistent in scale with surrounding development and forms an

intrusive element within the streetscape.

(c)The character of this part of Ancrum Street is defined by modest, single storey

weatherboard cottages, similar in scale, form and character to the existing cottage on

the site, having hipped or gabled roof forms which originate from the significant era of

development of the Union/Bank/Thomas Conservation Area

(d)The folded skillion roof is a contemporary form is highly unsympathetic to the

character of the conservation area. A contemporary roof form would only be acceptable

if located where it was not visible from the public domain.

(e)The proposed addition will be visible from Ancrum Street and highly visible from

the adjacent public park. The resulting built form would be uncharacteristic within the

precinct.

(f)The proposal involves extensive demolition, including all but the two front rooms of

the original cottage on the site. This leaves the original chimney isolated from the

cottage, to be incorporated into an outdoor entertainment area. (g)The proposed scope

of demolition is considered inappropriate and the isolation of the chimney from the

main cottage form is not supported.

(h)The proposal would not satisfy the aims of the plan in clause 1.2(2) of the North

Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013. The proposal is considered to be out of scale

and out of keeping with the character of the heritage conservation area. The proposal

does not protect the natural or cultural heritage significance of the North Sydney Area.

(i)The proposal is inconsistent with the objectives for heritage conservation in clause

5.10 of the LEP as the development fails to conserve the environmental heritage of

North Sydney by significantly degrading the fabric of the conservation area and

introducing non-characteristic built elements.

The proposal does not satisfy the following provisions contained in the North Sydney

Development Control Plan 2013:

Inadequate setback from western and southern boundaries.

Section B1.4.5 (Setbacks) the extension/replacement of the 0m setback (boundary)

wall with No. 65 Euroka Street. No neighbours consent was received as part of the

application. The minimum side setback is 900mm unless P3 is specifically applied for.

The SEE did not include an application for varying the side setbacks in accordance with

P3.

Inadequate provisions in place to manage ‘nil’ 0m boundary setback to the southern

boundary with No 65 Euroka Street.


The proposed southern wall of the first floor, identified as ‘sloped roof’, contains

storage floor space (usable floor space) and is therefore considered a wall. The wall

does not meet the minimum 1.5m setback required.

Section B13.6.2 (Form Massing and Scale) the proposed development is

inconsistent with the provision of this control in that it does not reflect the bulk, mass,

scale, orientation, curtilage and setbacks of surrounding heritage and contributory

items, nor does it recognise and complement the predominant architectural scale and

form of the area. The development is considered to have a detrimental impact on the

characteristic built form of the area.

Section B13.6.3 (Roofs) the proposed folded skillion roof is a contemporary form

that is not characteristic to the area, and would only be acceptable if located in an area

where it was not visible from the public domain (below and behind the existing cottage).

The roof is highly visible from Ancrum Street and the adjacent public reserve to the

north of the site.

Section B13.6.4 (Additional Stories and Levels) the proposal fails to comply with

Council’s controls in relation to additional storeys and levels, which requires that

development within Conservation Areas ensures that the streetscape and context of the

heritage conservation area are respected, noting specifically that ‘additional storeys or

upper level additions are not supported in heritage conservation areas’ (13.6.4 P1).

The proposal to introduce an additional storey, 2m higher than the existing ridge line

and highly visible from the Ancrum Street frontage is inconsistent with these controls.

2.Aims and zone objectives The proposal is contrary to the aims of the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan

2013 and the zone objectives.

Particulars:

(a)The proposal would not satisfy the aims of the plan in clause 1.2(f) of the North

Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 as the development is not consistent with the

character of the conservation area and will adversely affect the built heritage of North

Sydney.

(b)The proposal is inconsistent with the objective for the R2 Low Density Residential

zone in clause 2.3 and Land Use Table of the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan

2013. The proposal is considered to be over sized in terms of levels, bulk and scale and

compromises the cultural heritage of the area.

3. Site Coverage & Density The proposed development exceeds the maximum 60% site coverage control for the

subject site. The lack of consideration to the site coverage and density/scale of the

proposed dwelling does not align with LEP & DCP provisions.

Particulars:

(a)The proposal would not satisfy the aims of the plan in clause 1.2(2) of the North

Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013. The proposal is considered to be out of scale

and out of keeping with the character of the conservation area and nearby heritage

items. This scale introduces unacceptable built form impacts being highly visible form

the public domain and not aligned with the desired future character of the area.

(b)The proposal does not satisfy the following provisions contained in the North

Sydney Development Control Plan 2013:

i.Section B1.5.5 (Site Coverage) the proposal does not meet the objectives of the site

coverage control. The site area is approx. 157.8m2. The site is required to have a

maximum site coverage of 60%, the existing dwelling has a site coverage of 46% the

proposal is for 61.2% site coverage. This results in a lack of functional private open

space (POS).

ii.Section B1.5.10 (Private and Communal Open Space) the proposal does not meet

the objectives of the Private and Communal Open Space (POS) control. There is no

portion of the site, outside the dwelling footprint with the minimum 4m dimension

required to constitute POS. This indicates an excessive building footprint that does not

respond to the site constraints.

4. Public Interest


The application is deficient and is not in the public interest. The matters raised in the

submissions warrant refusal of the application.

Particulars:

(a)The application is deficient in its current form and does not adequately respond to

the site constraints and context within the heritage conservation area. The lack of

consideration to the existing character and heritage significance of the area has not

enabled Council or others to clearly understand the nature of the proposal or the impacts

on surrounding land.

(b)A total of four (4) and one (1) petition containing 21 signatures submissions have

been received to the proposal. The issues raised in the submissions include the

following:

i. Bulk, scale and height of the development not being consistent with the conservation

area having impacts on neighbouring amenity

ii. Density of development/overdevelopment of the site including excessive site

coverage and the potetnialf0or drainage issues.

iii. Setbacks, particularly to the southern boundary impacting the adjoining neighbour

iv. Loss of outlook/sky views the bulk and visual prescience of the proposal could

diminish outlook and sky view form surrounding properties.

v. Loss of privacy both acoustic and visual

Reduced solar access

(c)The matters raised by the resident objectors, in so far as those matters coincide with

the Contentions above, are matters warranting refusal of the application.

N O R T H S Y D N E Y C O U N C I L

This is Page No 1 of the Minutes of the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel Meeting

held on 6 September 2017.

NORTH SYDNEY INDEPENDENT PLANNING PANEL

DETERMINATIONS OF THE NORTH SYDNEY INDEPENDENT PLANNING PANEL

MEETING HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, NORTH SYDNEY, ON 6 SEPTEMBER

2017, AT 2.00PM.

PRESENT

Chair:

Jan Murrell in the Chair.

Panel Members:

Peter Brennan, Panel Member

Ian Pickles, Panel Member

Francesca O’Brien, Panel Member

Staff:

Stephen Beattie, Manager Development Services

David Hoy, Team Leader Assessments

Robyn Pearson, Team Leader Assessments

Kim Rothe, Acting Executive Planner

Robin Tse, Senior Assessment Officer

Lucinda Varley, Conservation Planner/Heritage Officer

George Youhanna, Executive Assessment Planner

Melissa Dunlop, Governance Co-ordinator (Minutes)

Apologies: Nil.

1. Minutes of Previous Meeting

The Minutes of the NSIPP Meeting of 2 August 2017 were confirmed following that meeting.

2. Declarations of Interest

Francesca O’Brien – Non-pecuniary, non-significant. Item 6 - DA474/16/2, 29 Milray Avenue,

Wollstonecraft. Jeremy Swan (Planner) was known to her.

Note: Francesca O’Brien was only present for site inspections for Agenda Items 1 and 2. However, the

Charter requires a quorum of three.




3. Business Items

The North Sydney Independent Planning Panel under the Delegated Authority granted by North Sydney

Council and s.377 of the Local Government Act 1993 has considered the following Business Items and

resolves to determine each matter as described within these minutes.

ITEM 1

DA No:

187/17

ADDRESS:

70 Ellalong Road, Cremorne

PROPOSAL:

Alterations and additions to an existing single storey detached

dwelling including a two storey rear addition, a double garage and a

swimming pool.

REPORT BY NAME:

Robin Tse, Senior Assessment Officer

REASON FOR NSIPP

REFERRAL:

Further report to NSIPP due to non-compliance with DCP’s site

coverage control.

APPLICANT: Carol Maree Johnston

Public Submissions

Robert Johnston - owner

Kandace Lindeberg - planner

Business Item Recommendations

The Council Officer’s Report and Recommendation is generally endorsed by the Panel subject to an

amendment to the conditions requiring a 1.2 metre setback for the swimming pool on the north-eastern

boundary and a clear 10 metre rear setback to the two storey rear addition (this includes the first level

balcony and roof and the ground floor). As discussed with the applicant, the landscape plan is to be

amended to provide for a canopy tree to reach a mature height of approximately 10 metres in the rear

yard. Consequential amendments to the conditions AA1 and C2 are to reflect this.

(Panel Reason: The 10 metre and 1.2 metre requirements of Council’s DCP will be met by the above

changes. And given the circumstances of the case, the Panel is satisfied that the objectives of the site

coverage controls are met. The Panel noted that in the area zoned Residential including the R2 across

the road, the pool could be built as complying development whereas the E4 zone requires a

Development Application.)

Voting was as follows: Unanimous

Panel Member Yes No Panel Member Yes No

Jan Murrell Y Peter Brennan Y

Ian Pickles Y Francesca O’Brien Y




ITEM 2

DA No:

387/16/2

ADDRESS:

53 Reynolds Street, Cremorne

PROPOSAL:

Section 96 Application to modify DA387/16 with regards to the

relocation of the entries to houses 3 and 4, changes to lift, internal

changes to houses 3, 4, 5 and 6, addition of car park exhaust, air

conditioning condensers relocated to the roof of building A, toilet

added to the basement level and the skylights relocated on the roof.

REPORT BY NAME:

Luke Donovan, Senior Assessment Officer (Planning)

REASON FOR NSIPP

REFERRAL:

Public interest

APPLICANT: HJ Two Pty Ltd

Public Submissions

Andrew Vingilis - applicant

Kerry Gordon - planner


The Council Officer’s Report and Recommendation is endorsed by the Panel.




Ian Pickles Y Francesca O'Brien Y

ITEM 3

S.82A DA No:

Section 82A No. 1/2017 - DA430/16

ADDRESS:

66 Colin Street, Cammeray

PROPOSAL:

Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including a rear

two storey addition and a swimming pool in the rear setback of the

site.

REPORT BY NAME:

George Youhanna, Executive Assessment Planner

REASON FOR NSIPP

REFERRAL:

Review of determination under s.82A, where the DA was

determined by NSIPP.

APPLICANT: Clare Carter, Contemporary Architecture




Public Submissions

Simon Rainsford - submitter

Deborah Yong - submitter

Paul Johnston - owner

Clare Carter - applicant/architect


The Council Officer’s Report and Recommendation for approval subject to conditions, is endorsed by

the Panel subject to the following amendments:

Condition A4 is deleted.

Condition A6 is amended to delete the words, “to the rear addition only”.

(Panel Reason: The Panel considers that the Section 82A plans satisfactorily address amenity impacts

and the proposal generally complies with all of Council’s controls and guidelines. The Panel is of the

opinion that the additional overshadowing of the adjoining property at Nos. 62 and 64 would not warrant

refusal or further alterations to the plans as submitted. Reasonable solar access in accordance with the

DCP is maintained. Furthermore, the Panel is of the view that the alterations to the front façade of the

original dwelling will make a positive contribution to the conservation area.)




Ian Pickles Y

ITEM 4

DA No:

146/17

ADDRESS:

146 Atchison Street, Crows Nest

PROPOSAL:

Alterations to rear structure to use as garage.

REPORT BY NAME:

Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer

REASON FOR NSIPP

REFERRAL:

Councillor interest

APPLICANT: Tim Alexander

Public Submissions

Tim Alexander - applicant/architect

Andrew Scott - owner


The Council Officer’s Report and Recommendation is endorsed by the Panel subject to the following

notes or amendments to the conditions:




C1 – The applicant/architect is suitably qualified for the purposes of this condition.

C2 – Delete reference to property No. 144 Atchison Street.

C3 – Deleted.

C4 – Deleted.

C8 – Deleted.

E6 – Deleted.

G2 – Deleted.

G6 – Deleted.

(Panel Reason: To ensure that the conditions reflect the scope of works.)




Ian Pickles Y

ITEM 5

DA No:

127/17

ADDRESS:

160 Willoughby Road, Crows Nest

PROPOSAL:

Demolition of existing building, construction of 4-storey mixed use

building comprising ground floor commercial and nine (9)

apartments.

REPORT BY NAME:

Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer

REASON FOR NSIPP

REFERRAL:

Variation to building height control.

APPLICANT: LAK Australia Pty Ltd, c/ PBD Architects - Paul Buljevic

Public Submissions

Kristen Chan - PBD Architects

Jason Tran - PBD Architects


The Council Officer’s Report and Recommendation is endorsed by the Panel subject to a correction to

Condition C18 to reference an amount of $55,000.




Ian Pickles Y




ITEM 6

DA No:

474/16/2

ADDRESS:

29 Milray Avenue, Wollstonecraft

PROPOSAL:

Section 96(2) for various modifications to approval including extension

to sandstone wall, timber framed lych gate, extension and rendering

around pool walls, upper northern roof extension and general

landscaping modifications.

REPORT BY NAME:

Kim Rothe, Acting Executive Planner

REASON FOR NSIPP

REFERRAL:

Councillor Call Up (Councillors Marchandeau and Baker)

APPLICANT: Shane Ly

Public Submissions

Jeremy Swan - planning consultant on behalf of owner

Anthony Restuccia - submitter

Bill Tulloch – architect on behalf of submitter

Lyndal Hughes - owner


The Council Officer’s Report and Recommendation is endorsed by the Panel subject to Condition C26

being modified to provide for a low planter of a maximum of 600mm above the terrace level and 750mm

wide with additional balustrading to comply with the National Construction Code. Condition I1 shall

be amended to delete the first sentence. An additional condition is to be imposed requiring the southern

boundary to be re-surveyed prior to an Occupation Certificate.

(Panel Reason: The Panel is satisfied that the above conditions will provide for adequate privacy,

maintain reasonable solar access to No. 27 Milray Avenue and will ensure that all works will be done

wholly within the boundaries of the site.)




Ian Pickles Y

The public meeting concluded at 4.05pm.

The Panel Determination session commenced at 4.20pm.

The Panel Determination session concluded at 6.00pm.

Endorsed by Jan Murrell

North Sydney Independent Planning Panel

6 September 2017

Documents

NORTH SYDNEY COUNCIL · NORTH SYDNEY INDEPENDENT PLANNING PANEL – 04/10/17 Page No 3 Council’s notification of the Section 82A review application has attracted two (2) submissions