item 2. da0304-419-04 - 78 marlborough road … committee meeting 9 october 2012 item 2....

ATTACHMENT 1

PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING 9 OCTOBER 2012

ITEM 2. DA0304/419/04 - 78 MARLBOROUGH ROAD, HOMEBUSH WEST

____________________________________________________________________________ 2.1

SUMMARY PROPERTY: 78 Marlborough Road, Homebush West – Lot 1 DP

883804, Lot 2 DP 881461 and Lots 49, 52-54 DP 11427 DA NO.: 0304/419/4 APPLICATION TYPE: Section 96 modification – modify building envelope and

internal layouts of building 16. REPORT BY: James Lidis – consultant planner RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL SUBMISSIONS: One written submission was received. ZONING: Residential 2(b) DATE APPLICATION LODGED: 22 March 2012 APPLICANT: Lansari Pty Limited OWNER: Telmet Ventures Pty Limited INTRODUCTION Pursuant to s.96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 approval is sought for the modification of Development Consent No. 0304/419. The application seeks to modify the approved building envelope and internal layout of building 16. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject site is located at 78 Marlborough Road, Homebush West. The site has a curvilinear shape and has an area of approximately 6.9 hectares. The site is traversed in part by a 20-30 metre wide easement that accommodates a high voltage electricity easement over part of the site to the south, an easement of approximately 3 metres in width for gas which extends from Courallie Avenue to the southern boundary and a sewer easement owned by Sydney Water. Substantial works have commenced at the site but it is yet not occupied by any completed residential development. The site is bordered to the south and west by the western railway line, and is located approximately halfway between Lidcombe (1.3km) and Flemington (700 metres) Railway Stations. The immediately surrounding area comprises industrial development with a small amount of residential development to the east. As such, the site is substantially isolated from other business and retail development and other residential development.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.2

PROPOSAL The application seeks Council approval to alter the internal layout and apartment mix of Building 16 of Stage 1A, as follows:

Increase the number of basement parking spaces from 87 to 103;

Delete all one-bedroom apartments;

Maintain approximate number of two bedrooms;

Increase number of three and four bedroom apartments; and

Change the commercial tenancies proposed to the ground floor to retail tenancies and food and drink premises.

A site plan and elevations are attached (2). BACKGROUND In terms of the relevant consent history, the following applications are considered applicable to the subject proposal:- DA 95/67 was approved in 1995 for “substantial remediation works” to the site. DA 95/135 was approved on 17 December 1996 “to implement environmental management

measures to the old tip to ensure the environment is protected”. This relates to Lot 2, Mandemar Avenue (the old Ford tip site) and part of the subject site.

DA 9899/446 was approved in September 1999 for construction of access from Marlborough

Road. DA 9900/402 was approved in April 2001 for earthworks and drainage works to the site

including construction of a detention basin and stormwater detention tank. On 1 October 2002 Council resolved to adopt Strathfield LEP 103 to rezone the site from

Industrial 4 to Residential B. The LEP amendment was gazetted on 17 January 2003. On 1 October 2002 Council resolved to adopt Strathfield Development Control Plan No. 25

which controls the future development of various sites known as 79 Courallie Avenue, but corresponds with the subject site referred to as 78 Marlborough Road.

DA 0304/203 was approved in January 2004 for “an application proposing a masterplan for

a future residential development of 79 Courallie Avenue”. The Master Plan approved four stages. Stage 1 was to comprise 128 units; Stage 2, 160 units, Stage 3, 96 units and Stage 4, 117 units.

DA 304/419 sought approval for Stage 1A of the development. It was formally refused on 9

August 2005, but upheld on appeal in Creed v Strathfield Council [2006] NSWLEC 497 by the L&EC.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.3

S96 304/419/01 was approved on 17 October 2007 to modify the approved “gatehouse” building.

S96 0304/419/02 sought to delete Condition 4 which imposed s.94 contributions. The

application was appealed to the L&EC where the s. 94 contributions were reduced from $840,002.45 to $125,000.

S96 0304/419/03 was refused on 4 March 2009. It sought to delete conditions 134 and 135,

which require the disclosure of the following in any contract of sale.

The adjoining land being Lot 2 in DP879285 which is known as the “Ford Tip Site” is a former quarry pit that was filled with waste materials including putrescible waste and chemical waste. A leachate and gas management system has been installed on Lot 2 in DP879285. The primary purpose of the gas management system is to remove odorous materials from the landfill gas that is generated on Lot 2 in DP879285. Despite the install of the gas management system on Lot 2 in DP879285 the land may be the source of detectable odours from time to time.

DA 0405/160 was submitted on 24 November 2004, seeking consent for Stages 1B and 1C;

including: 40 x one-bedroom units; 305 x two-bedroom units, 37 x three-bedroom units and four town house buildings with basement car parking. The application was refused by Council on 8 May 2007 for the same reasons cited for DA 304/419 above, notwithstanding the successful court proceedings.

On 12 June 2007, the Planning Committee granted approval to DA405/176 for a multi-unit

housing development comprising 389 units. This is referred to as Stage 1D and 1E. The Applicant submitted a S82A review application for the refusal of 0405/160 that was

considered by the Planning Committee on 10 July 2007. The determination for refusal was rejected and the application approved on 18 July 2007.

S96 0405/160/01 sought to delete Condition 4 which imposed s. 94 contributions. The

application was appealed to the L&EC where the s. 94 contributions were reduced. S96 0405/160/02 sought an additional storey to the Stage 1B component of the approved

application over four blocks of units and deletion of three blocks of townhouses and units. The application also sought to modify Stage 1C though adjustments to floor plans and deletion of buildings 11A, 11B, 12A and 12B and replacement with three storey town houses.

The application was partially approved on 14 March 2011, approving the changes to Stage 1B but refusing those to Stage 1C.

S96 0405/160/03 sought to delete conditions 101 and 102 which state the same as

conditions 134 and 135, noted above in respect of 0304/419/03 but were likewise refused. S96 0405/160/04 was approved on 14 August 2012 and relocated communal facilities of

Building 15 of Stage 1B from basement level one to basement level two and incorporated four two-bedroom apartments at the available space at basement level one.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.4

S96 0405/160/05 was approved on 14 August 2012 and approved revised internal layout and external appearance of Building 10 and 13 of Stage 1C.

The subject application was lodged on 22 March 2012. Section 96(2) Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Pursuant to Section 96(2)(a) the Council is satisfied that the consent as proposed to be modified is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted. The application proposes minor amendments to the overall appearance of the building where the number of units will remain the same, albeit, with an increase in bedroom numbers and increase in number of available car parking spaces, that is, the development as proposed to be modified is substantially the same as that originally approved. ASSESSMENT - Pursuant to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 The application has been assessed pursuant to the heads of consideration of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and the relevant matters described in Sub-section (1)(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of Section 79C have been considered within this report. (a) (i) Environmental Planning Instruments:

BASIX

In accordance with the BASIX SEPP all new housing in NSW is required to meet a designated target for energy and water reduction. Clause 115(6) and (7) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 require a modified BASIX Certificate to accompany the proposed modification application if the development application was originally required, or was voluntarily, accompanied by a BASIX Certificate. The development application to which the modification relates was not required to, nor was it voluntarily accompanied by a BASIX Certificate and is therefore not required as part of this application. State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land The site is located in an area of investigation identified in Map 2 in Part K of the Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan, 2005 (SCDCP, 2005). The subject land was rezoned from Industrial 4 to Residential B in 2003. As part of that process, SEPP 55 requires that consideration be given to whether the land is contaminated and if so, whether it can be remediated for the purposes for which the land is to be zoned.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.5

Work was carried out as noted above to remediate the site, and subsequent approvals have been granted for use for residential purposes. The land is therefore considered suitable for the proposed use. State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings (SEPP 65) aims to improve the design quality of residential flat development in New South Wales. The SEPP requires the consent authority in determining development applications for residential flat buildings to take into consideration the design quality of the proposal when evaluated against the ten (10) design quality principles in the SEPP and the ‘rules of thumb’ guidelines of the Residential Flat Design Code. Furthermore, SEPP 65 requires a qualified designer to confirm in writing that they have directed or carried out the design of the proposal in accordance with the design quality principles of the SEPP (referred to as a design verification statement). A design verification statement has been received from the Architect however as Strathfield Council is not subject to a Design Review Panel constituted under the SEPP, the proposal is assessed against the relevant design quality principles and the Residential Flat Design Code as follows:

Principle 1: Context Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context can be defined as the key natural and built features of an area. Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of a location’s current character or, in the case of precincts undergoing a transition, the desired future character as stated in planning and design policies. New buildings will thereby contribute to the quality and identity of the area. Comment The revised building is considered to respond adequately to the built environment.

Principle 2: Scale Good design provides an appropriate scale in terms of the bulk and height that suits the scale of the street and the surrounding buildings. Establishing an appropriate scale requires a considered response to the scale of existing development. In precincts undergoing a transition, proposed bulk and height needs to achieve the scale identified for the desired future character of the area. Comment There is no significant change to existing scale.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.6

Principle 3: Built form Good design achieves an appropriate built form for a site and the building’s purpose, in terms of building alignments, proportions, building type 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. Comment There is no significant change to the built form. Principle 4: Density Good design has a density appropriate for a site and its context, in terms of floor space yields (or number of units or residents). Appropriate densities are sustainable and consistent with the existing density in an area or, in precincts undergoing a transition, are consistent with the stated desired future density. Sustainable densities respond to the regional context, availability of infrastructure, public transport, community facilities and environmental quality. Comment There is no significant change to density. Principle 5: Resource, energy and water efficiency Good design makes efficient use of natural resources, energy and water throughout its full life cycle, including construction. Sustainability is integral to the design process. Aspects include demolition of existing structures, recycling of materials, selection of appropriate and sustainable materials, adaptability and reuse of buildings, layouts and built form, passive solar design principles, efficient appliances and mechanical services, soil zones for vegetation and reuse of water. Comment There is no change to the waste management procedures. Principle 6: Landscape Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, resulting in greater aesthetic quality and amenity for both occupants and the adjoining public domain. Landscape design builds on the existing site’s natural and cultural features in responsible and creative ways. It enhances the development’s natural environmental

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.7

performance by co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy and habitat values. It contributes to the positive image and contextual fit of development through respect for streetscape and neighbourhood character, or desired future character. Landscape design should optimise useability, privacy and social opportunity, equitable access and respect for neighbours’ amenity, and provide for practical establishment and long term management. Comment There is no change to approved landscaping. Principle 7: Amenity Good design provides amenity through the physical, spatial and environmental quality of a development. Optimising amenity requires appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts and service areas, outlook and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility. Comment The proposed rooms are consistent with the approved layouts and are appropriately designed. Some of the bedrooms directly adjoin living areas of adjoining apartments, but are separated by a concrete wall. This is considered sufficient to maintain the acoustic amenity of those bedrooms. Bedroom three of units 3.04 and 3.10 are located directly across from bedroom one of unit 4.01 and 4.02 respectively. The proposed frosting of the windows for units 4.01 and 4.02 is inappropriate and it would be preferable if the windows of 3.04 and 3.10 were sufficiently offset and fixed angled louvres installed to at least one third of each opposing window to protect visual privacy. Principle 8: Safety and security Good design optimises safety and security, both internal to the development and for the public domain. This is achieved by maximising overlooking of public and communal spaces while maintaining internal privacy, avoiding dark and non-visible areas, maximising activity on streets, providing clear, safe access points, providing quality public spaces that cater for desired recreational uses, providing lighting appropriate to the location and desired activities, and clear definition between public and private spaces.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.8

Comment The design will continue to provide passive surveillance within and external to the site thereby contributing to a safe and secure environment. Security access points will regulate access into the site and the provision of front fencing and use of external materials defines the entrance to the site and delineates between public and private property.

Principle 9: Social dimensions Good design responds to the social context and needs of the local community in terms of lifestyles, affordability, and access to social facilities. New developments should optimise the provision of housing to suit the social mix and needs in the neighbourhood or, in the case of precincts undergoing transition, provide for the desired future community. Comment There is a reduction in the number of smaller apartments. As this application relates only to a small portion of the overall development it is considered satisfactory. Principle 10: Aesthetics Quality aesthetics require the appropriate composition of building elements, textures, materials and colours and reflect the use, internal design and structure of the development. Aesthetics should respond to the environment and context, particularly to desirable elements of the existing streetscape or, in precincts undergoing transition, contribute to the desired future character of the area. Comment There is no significant change to the existing building. The proposed external treatment is similar to that previously approved and so is satisfactory. Strathfield Planning Scheme Ordinance, 1969 The subject site is identified as being within the 2B zone under Strathfield Planning Scheme Ordinance, 1969 (SPSO). Multi-unit housing (residential flat building) is identified as a permissible land use within the zone pursuant to the provisions of Clause 22 of the SPSO. The site has a width of more than 15m and an area of 6,500m² which satisfies the minimum standards for the erection and subdivision of a residential flat building in accordance with Clause 41.

The proposed development is for alterations to an approved multi-unit housing development. The bulk and scale of the proposed development is consistent with that previously approved on the site. Furthermore, the proposed development is considered

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.9

to be compatible with the existing and future scale of development in the locality, thus satisfying the requirements of Clause 32(a) of the SPSO.

The proposed design of the units ensures that reasonable levels of privacy will be maintained between properties.

The proposed development satisfies each of the relevant Clauses of the SPSO and overall is considered satisfactory.

Section 94 Contributions The total number of units within the building remains at 68, the new unit mix increases the number of bedrooms within some of those units thereby increasing the applicable Section 94 Contributions. In this instance, the proposed modification in accordance with the Strathfield Direct Development Contributions Plan 2010-2030, requires an additional fee of $56,042 and condition 4 shall be amended to include condition 4B as follows: Provision of Community Facilities $ 7,273.80 Provision of Major Open Space $35,008.20 Provision of Local Open Space $11,631.60 Provision Roads and traffic Management $ 638.00 Administration $ 1,490.40

TOTAL $56,042.00

Accordingly it is recommended that Condition 4 be amended to include the additional Section 94 contributions.

(ii) Draft Environmental Planning Instruments:

Draft Strathfield LEP 2011

Statutory public exhibition for the Draft Strathfield LEP 2011 was undertaken between 31 January – 23 March 2012. The Council considered a report on the Draft LEP at the Extraordinary Council meeting on 24 July 2012 and endorsed minor amendments prior to seeking gazettal from the Department of Planning. After making these amendments the Draft LEP and Section 68 Report will be forwarded to the Department of Planning for review and gazettal. The subject site is proposed to be zoned R3 Medium Density Residential, with a maximum height of 17 metres and FSR of 1.2:1. Multi-unit housing, defined in the Draft LEP as residential flat buildings will continue to be permissible in the zone. The modification is considered to be generally consistent with the objectives of the zone and provisions of the Draft Strathfield LEP 2011.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.10

(iii) Development Control Plans: Strathfield Development Control Plan No. 25 – 79 Courallie Avenue, Homebush West Strathfield DCP No. 25 is a site specific DCP that applies to the subject site. It also incorporates Part C – Multi-Unit Housing, Part H – Waste Management and Part I – Provision of Off Street Parking Facilities of the Council’s Consolidated DCP 2005. If there is any inconsistency between the consolidated DCP and the site specific DCP, the provisions of the site specific DCP prevail. Table 1 – DCP No. 25

Section Development Control Required Proposed Compliance 3.2.2 Building Height Maximum building height

is 4 storeys. No change. N/A

3.2.5 Parking 1.5 spaces per 2 bedroom dwelling, 2 spaces per 3 bedroom dwelling.

103 spaces to basement, 28 required by Condition 10 to street level. So total of 131 spaces.

115 spaces required for residential and 30 spaces for commercial residential. A total of 145. Shortfall of 15 spaces consistent with the original approval so satisfactory.

3.2.6 Environmental Amenity Acoustic and visual privacy.

Dwellings are appropriately separated and designed.

Yes.

3.2.7 Open Space and Landscaping

Minimum requirements No change to existing approvals in this regard.

Yes.

3.2.8 Private Open Space 12sqm balconies for two-bedroom apartments and 15sqm for three bedroom apartments.

Generally complies.

Yes.

3.2.10 Safety and Security (a) The security aspects of all development shall be considered… (b) External common areas such as pathways…shall be provided with appropriate artificial light.

Generally complies.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.11

Table 2 - Part C – ‘Multi-Unit Housing’ of the Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan (DCP) 2005

Section Development Control Required Proposed Compliance

2.2 Density, Bulk, Scale Site size, setbacks, height.

Similar to approved, additional height.

Yes, as noted in Table 1 above.

2.3 Dwelling Unit and Building Design

Minimum unit sizes, adaptable housing.

The application will not adversely affect the existing, compliant approval in this respect.

Yes.

2.4 Energy efficiency and water conservation.

Solar access, passive heating and cooling, water saving devices, energy smart appliances.

The development consent the subject of the modification is not affected by BASIX so will not be applied in this case.

Layout similar to previous approval so acceptable.

2.5 Streetscape and building orientation.

Compatible with existing.

No significant change from previous approval but for additional height.

Additional height to corner buildings acceptable.

Part H – ‘Waste Management’ of the Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan (DCP) 2005

The proposed units would be subject to the existing approved arrangements as to waste and recycling management.

(iiia) Planning Agreements (or draft agreements):

The proposed development is not subject to a planning agreement pursuant to Section 93F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

(iv) Matters Prescribed by the Regulations

There is no matter prescribed by the Regulation relevant to the proposed modification.

(b) Likely Impacts:

There is unlikely to be any adverse impact as a result of the proposed modification.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.12

(c) Suitability of the Site:

The site is subject to approval for multi-unit housing. This proposal involves minimal design changes to the approved building and will not result in any changes as to the suitability of the site from that approved.

(d) Submissions:

The application and plans were notified in accordance with Part L of the Strathfield Consolidated DCP 2005 from 16 May 2012 to 31 May 2012. One written submission was received. The submission raised matters detailed the contamination of the adjoining Ford tip site. This matter has previously been addressed in previous development applications and will have no adverse impact upon the proposed modification.

(e) Public Interest: Approval of the proposal is not contrary to the public interest. INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT There are no approvals required by other authorities pursuant to the Integrated Development provisions, of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. INTERNAL REFERRALS The proposed changes are considered minor and did not warrant any further comment from other departments within Council. CONCLUSION The proposal satisfies s.96(2)(a) of the Act in that the proposed modified development will remain substantially the same as that originally approved. The proposed development is permissible in the subject zoning and is consistent with the relevant provisions and objectives of the Strathfield Planning Scheme Ordinance, 1969 and Strathfield Draft Local Environmental Plan, 2011. The proposal generally complies with the development controls of DCP No. 25 and the Strathfield Consolidated DCP 2005 and will provide a high level of amenity to future residents without significantly compromising the amenity of adjoining owners. The Application satisfies the relevant heads of consideration under s. 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. RECOMMENDATION That s.96(2) modification application for alterations to the approved multi-unit housing development at 78 Marlborough Road, Homebush West be approved subject to the following additional/modified conditions:

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.13

CONDITIONS OF CONSENT PART B - OTHER CONDITIONS Modify Condition 1 to include new plans as follows

6223 S96 01 Issue B Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 04 Issue B Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 05 Issue B Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 06 Issue B Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 07 Issue C Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 08 Issue C Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 09 Issue C Received 18 September 2012 6223 S96 10 Issue B Received 18 September 2012 Construction Certificate must be obtained either from Council or a privately accredited person before commencement of any construction/demolition associated with this consent. The Principal Certifying Authority must be appointed prior to work commencing to supervise the work and authorise occupation/use of the building when completed.

Insert new Condition 1A

Bedroom three of units 3.04 and 3.10 are located directly across from bedroom one of unit 4.01 and 4.02, respectively. The proposed frosting of the windows for units 4.01 and 4.02 is to be deleted and the windows of 3.04 and 3.10 are to be offset from those opposite and angled louvres installed to at least one third of each opposing window to protect visual privacy.

Insert new Condition 1B

Fitout and use of the ground floor retail tenancies / food and drink premises requires further development consent for any future use.

Insert new Condition 4B (1) In accordance with the provisions of Section 94(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and

Assessment Act 1979 and Strathfield Direct Development Contributions Plan 2010-2030, an additional contribution in the form of cash, cheque or credit card (financial transaction fee applies) shall be paid to Council for the following purposes:

Provision of Community Facilities $ 7,273.80 Provision of Major Open Space $35,008.20 Provision of Local Open Space $11,631.60 Provision Roads and traffic Management $ 638.00 Administration $ 1,490.40

TOTAL $56,042.00

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.14

(2) The total amount of the contribution is valid as at the date of determination and is subject to annual indexation. If the contribution is paid after 1st July in any year, the amount of the contribution under this condition shall be indexed in accordance with clause 2.14 of the Strathfield Direct Development Contributions Plan 2010-2030.

The required contribution shall be paid prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate

or as otherwise specified in writing by Council.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT



____________________________________________________________________________ 2.15

Extent of Notification

Subject development site

Submissions

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1. Locality map. Key:

2. Site plans and elevations. 3. Letters of objection.

RECIRCULA

TED REPORT

item 2. da0304-419-04 - 78 marlborough road … committee meeting 9 october 2012 item 2....

Documents