item - reports...report of susanna cheng, senior assessment officer page 6 re: 6 east crescent...

Item ____IPP03_______ - REPORTS -______04/06/2014_________

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

NSIPP MEETING HELD ON 04/06/2014 Attachments:

1. Site Plan 2. Architectural drawings

3. Summary of submissions 4. Clause 4.6 variation

5. View analysis 6. Shadow diagrams

REPORT TO THE GENERAL MANAGER ADDRESS/WARD: 6 East Crescent Street, McMahons Point (V) APPLICATION No: DA 367/13 PROPOSAL: Alterations and additions to convert duplex into 3 apartments

with new lower floor and additional floor PLANS REF: Drawings numbered DA001(C), DA101(C), DA102(C),

DA103(C), DA104(C), DA105(C), DA106(AA), DA201(C.2), DA202(C.2), DA203(C.2) & DA204(AA), DA205(B), DA301(A), dated 24/2/14, 16, 19, 21 & 23/5/14, drawn by Mark Hurcum Design Practice, and received by Council on 24 February and 20, 21 & 23 May 2014

OWNER: Lavender Grey Pty Ltd Sawjin Tew APPLICANT: Sawjin Tew c/- Mark Hurcum Design Practice AUTHOR: Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer DATE OF REPORT: 27 May 2014 DATE LODGED: 21 October 2013

AMENDED: 24 February (amended) in May 2014 (further amended) SUBMISSIONS: 19 (original DA) and 9 (amended DA) RECOMMENDATION: Approval

Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer Re: 6 East Crescent Street, McMahons Point

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This development application seeks Council’s approval for alterations and additions to convert a duplex into 3 apartments with new lower floor and additional floor level, and is reported to North Sydney Independent Planning Panel for determination due to public interest. Council’s notification of the original DA attracted 19 submissions raising particular concerns about characterisation of the proposal; front building line; site coverage; heritage and character; view loss; privacy; and overshadowing. An amended DA, including increased front setbacks, reduced balconies, and a lower basement extension, was renotified and attracted 9 submissions. Further amendments have since been made to reduce the size of the front balconies at the front alignment. The submitters’ concerns have been assessed in relation to the relevant controls and addressed in this report. The application is characterised and assessed as a new building, however, with substantial retention of existing building fabric and setting, having regard to the quantitative and qualitative considerations, in accordance with the principles established by the Land & Environment Court in Coorey v Municipality of Hunters Hill [2013] NSWLEC 1187. The development will substantially comply with the 12m building height limit. The elements in breach are the south eastern corner of the proposed roof awning and the 2nd floor balcony privacy screen. It is recommended (via condition) that these be pulled back toward the building line in order to minimise shadow impacts. The proposal has been substantially amended in order to reduce view impacts on the north-adjoining apartment block. The primary front building line has been pulled back to be within the established average front alignment with adjoining buildings and 1.6m of the existing building line; balconies have been reduced in size, relocated and reconfigured; and the basement extension has been lowered. A detailed view analysis has been carried out which concludes that 3 units in the adjoining building will experience moderate to severe view impacts. These units are located on the lower levels at the rear of the adjoining property to the north and rely on views across a side boundary. Nevertheless, the impacts can be reasonably reduced by increasing the setback of the northern wall of the second floor addition (via condition). The privacy impacts from the balconies have been adequately addressed by reducing the size of the balconies and relocating them to the south eastern corner of the building with privacy screens. The primary orientation of the balconies will be southeast toward the Harbour Bridge, and separations from neighbouring apartments adequate in a high density residential context. The proposed bulk and scale, including front and side setbacks, are acceptable in consideration of the adjoining multi-storey apartment blocks within a high density residential area. Following this assessment the development application is considered to be reasonable in the circumstances and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer Re: 6 East Crescent Street, McMahons Point LOCATION MAP

Property/Applicant Submitters - Properties Notified


DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The application is for alterations and additions to convert a duplex into three (3) apartments with new lower floor and additional floor (Figure 1 & Attachment 2).

Figure 1 – Perspective sketch of proposed building

The proposal includes the following works:

Lower Ground Floor • Demolition of front basement • New studio apartment (“Unit 1”) • Landscape works in front yard Ground Floor • Demolition of front section, rear wing, and internal walls • Alterations and additions to create new 3-bedroom apartment (“Unit 3”) • Entry at rear of building to upper level apartment (“Unit 2”) including lift • Demolition of 2 x single carports and construction of new single garage, single

carport and driveway • Landscape works in rear yard First Floor • Demolition of front section, rear wing, and internal walls • Alterations and additions to create new 4-bedroom apartment over two levels (“Unit

2”) Second Floor • New floor level containing upper level of “Unit 2” Roof • Metal deck roof with solar panels • Lift overrun • Architectural roof feature


The proposal includes strata subdivision, and the proposed unit mix is as follows:

Existing Proposed Studio Nil - 1 (Unit 1) 33% 2-bedroom 1 50% Nil - 3-bedroom 1 50% 1 (Unit 3) 33% 4-bedroom Nil - 1 (Unit 2) 33% 2 units 3 units

Characterisation of the proposal as “alterations and additions” or new building The proposed development involves extensive works. As such, it is important to establish at the outset whether the application is for alterations and additions to an existing building, or a new building. The planning principle established by the Land and Environment Court in Coorey v Municipality of Hunters Hill [2013] NSWLEC 1187 for determining if a development application should be described as being for additions and alterations rather than a new development, is applied as follows: The first question to be considered is “what is the purpose for determining whether this application should be characterised as being for additions and/or alterations to an existing structure rather than an application for a new structure?” The proper characterisation of the proposal has implications on the comparative analysis of existing and proposed impacts of development, and the reasonableness of any proposed variations from the provisions in the LEP and DCP. In determining whether an application is appropriate to be regarded as for additions and/or alterations or not, it is appropriate to follow, by broad analogy, the process discussed by Bignold J in Moto Projects (No 2) Pty Limited v North Sydney Council [1999] NSWLEC 280; (1999) 106 LGERA 298 – namely undertaking both a qualitative and a quantitative analysis of what is proposed compared to what is currently in existence. In this consideration, regard should be had to such of the matters in the following lists of matters as are relevant to the enquiry: Qualitative issues • How is the appearance of the existing building to be changed when viewed from public

places? The appearance of the building will be transformed. The bulk and scale of the building will be enlarged, including an additional level. The traditional pitched-roof building will become a flat-roofed contemporary style building with a modern facade.

• To what extent, if any, will existing landscaping be removed and how will that affect the setting of the building when viewed from public places? The landscape setting of the building as viewed from public places will not be significantly altered. A front garden setting will be retained. The rear garden will be discernible from Middle Street behind parking structures, as existing.


• To what extent, if any, will the proposal impact on a heritage item, the curtilage of a heritage item or a heritage conservation area? The development will not have any detrimental impact on heritage items in the vicinity of the site or the conservation area, as discussed in the Heritage Referral section in this report.

• What additional structures, if any, in the curtilage of the existing building will be demolished or altered if the proposal is approved? The front section of the building will be demolished, extended and balconies added. The single storey rear wing will be demolished and reconstructed to three storeys. The pitched roof will be demolished and replaced with a flat roofed new level.

• What is the extent, if any, of any proposed change to the use of the building? The residential use will be maintained; however, intensified from 2 residential units with a total of 5 bedrooms to a 3 units containing a total of 8 bedrooms.

• To what extent, if any, will the proposed development result in any change to the streetscape in which the building is located? The traditional pitched roof building with timber fenestration will be changed into a contemporary style building with flat roof. However, the streetscape continue to be dominated by the two multi-storey apartment blocks adjoining the site.

• To what extent, if any, are the existing access arrangements for the building proposed to be altered? The external rear stairs to the upper duplex will be demolished. However, access arrangements to the units will generally be retained; each unit will have ground level access, via the southern side setback and from the rear.

• To what extent, if any, will the outlook from within the existing building be altered as a consequence the proposed development? The primary outlook from the building toward the harbour will be retained and significantly improved by the provision of larger openings and front balconies.

• Is the proposed demolition so extensive to cause that which remains to lose the characteristics of the form of the existing structure? The characteristic form of the building will be lost by the proposed demolition of the front section of the building and the pitched roof.

Quantitative issues • To what extent is the site coverage proposed to be changed?

The proposed site coverage will increase by 22.5m2, from 177m2 (39%) to 199.5m2 (44%). The 5% increase is not considered to be significant, and the existing front and rear garden setting will largely be retained.

• To what extent are any existing non-compliances with numerical controls either increased or diminished by the proposal? The existing building complies with the 12m height limit. The development will breach the height control by up to 8%, however, localised at the roof awning at its south eastern corner (13m) and a 2nd floor privacy screen on the south elevation (12.2m).


• To what extent is the building envelope proposed to be changed? The building envelope will be significantly enlarged compared to existing, particularly at the front and rear of the building. However, the existing building fabric will be substantially retained, including most external walls and demolition of floor area being 81m2 (38%) compared to 135m2 (62%) to be retained. It is proposed to retain the external wall at the northern boundary which may potentially be affected by an African Olive Tree growing within the adjoining property at No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street. In support of the proposed retention of the wall, the applicant has submitted advice from consulting engineers, in letter dated 21/5/14, that:

The wall appeared to be intact and in good condition. No cracking was observed internally, externally or below ground to the wall or foundations. There was also no visible evidence of roots extending into the area below ground. Given the above observations, we cannot conclude that the tree is of current structural concern to the boundary wall.

• To what extent are boundary setbacks proposed to be changed?

The setback of the primary front building line at ground floor and above will be reduced by 1.6m compared to existing. The front boundary setback will be reduced at lower ground level from 13.5m to a variable setback of 6.7m to 7.2m. The additions at the rear will generally be to the same alignment as the existing rear wing to be demolished.

• To what extent will the present numerical degree of landscaping on the site be changed? Technical landscape area (as defined in NSDCP 2013) will be reduced by 33.3m2, from 175m2 to 142m2, being a 7% reduction from 38% to 31% of site area. The front and rear garden settings will be largely retained, and the variation is not considered to be significant.

• To what extent will the existing floor space ratio be altered? The conversion of the duplex into 3 dwellings will involve the addition of 151m2 of floor area. The existing FSR will be increased from 0.45:1 (198m2) to 0.8:1 (349m2).

• To what extent will there be changes in the roof form? The roof form will be entirely altered from a pitched roof to a flat roof.

• To what extent will there be alterations to car parking/garaging on the site and/or within the building? The site will be able to accommodate 3 cars within a garage, carport and driveway, compared to the existing two carports.

• To what extent is the existing landform proposed to be changed by cut and/or fill to give effect to the proposed development? The landform will be maintained generally as existing, with excavations relatively localised to extend the existing lower ground floor.


• What relationship does the proportion of the retained building bear to the proposed new development? The existing structure will be entirely subsumed within the proposed building, and no longer be legible in its current form.

Having considered all of the listed matters, it is concluded that the proposal is correctly characterised as new building with substantial retention of, and alterations and additions to, the existing structure. While existing building fabric will be substantially retained, the development will add significantly to the floor area and building envelope. Furthermore, the structure will be transformed in character from a pitched roof building with traditional detailing to a contemporary building. The proposal as described in the notification documentation, as “substantial alterations and additions to convert a duplex into 3 apartments with new lower floor and additional floor” is consistent with the nature of the proposed development as characterised and assessed. STATUTORY CONTROLS NSLEP 2013

• Zoning – R4 High Density Residential • Subdivision lot size – None specified • Height of building – 12m • FSR – None specified • Item of Heritage – No • In Vicinity of Item of Heritage – Yes (No’s. 7, 11, 15 & 19 East Crescent Street) • Conservation Area – No • FSBL – No

S94 Contribution Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 SEPP (BASIX) 2004 SEPP No. 55 – Contaminated Lands SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 Local Development POLICY CONTROLS NSDCP 2013 DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY The site is located on the western side of East Crescent Street between Parker & Warung Streets. It is rectangular in shape with 8.5m frontages to East Crescent Street and Middle Street at rear, depth of 53.5m, and site area of 456.8m2. The site is occupied by a 2- & 3-storey duplex with a single level rear wing (Figures 1 & 2). Car parking and vehicular access is obtained from Middle Street (Figure 3).


Figure 2 – Rear of duplex

Figure 1 – Site Figure 3 – Rear access at Middle Street

The area is predominantly residential in character, comprising a mix of residential buildings. The site is adjoined to the south by a 10-storey apartment building at No’s. 2-4 East Crescent Street and a 7-storey apartment building at No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street to the north (Figures 4 & 5). On the eastern side of East Crescent Street opposite the site are 3-storey flat buildings (Figure 6). The section of Middle Street in the vicinity of the site is characterised by garages and carports (Figure 7).

Figure 4 – No’s.2-4 adjoining to the south Figure 5 – No’s.8-10 adjoining to the north


Figure 6 – No’s. 5 & 7 opposite East Crescent St Figure 7 – Middle Street streetscape

RELEVANT HISTORY Pre-lodgement meeting A pre-lodgement meeting was held on 19/9/13 for a proposal substantially the same as the subject DA. The key issues of discussion are summarised as follows:

• Characterisation

•

: The extent of demolition appears to go beyond the meaning of “alterations and additions” as established in Edgar Allan Planning Pty Limited v Woollahra Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 790. The proposed building would be within the meaning of “residential flat building” under NSLEP 2013. Views

•

: The proposed development will breach the envelope controls contained in the DCP and give rise to view impacts, in particular, on the north-adjoining residential flat building at No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street. Any breaches of the envelope controls should be minimised and any variation sought fully justified by way of detailed view analysis in accordance with the view sharing principles established in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council [2004] NSWLEC 140. Privacy

•

: Any non-compliances with the setback and/or building separation requirements of the DCP sections B1.3.10 & B1.4.6 are to be identified on the drawings, and any amelioration measures shown. Overshadowing

•

: Breaches of the building envelope controls should be minimised and shadow diagrams prepared to demonstrate compliance with section B1.3.7 of the DCP which seeks to ensure a minimum 3 hours solar access to adjoining dwellings at midwinter. Heritage

•

: The application should consider impacts on the heritage items in the vicinity of the site and the McMahons Point South Conservation Area adjoining to the west. Car parking/vehicular access

•

: Vehicular access must comply with relevant policies and standards. Stormwater

: Council supports installation of a rainwater tank.

Subject DA The DA was lodged on 21/10/13. A commitment table for efficient use of resources was requested by Council on 24/10/13, and received on 29/10/13.


At site inspection on 31/10/13, Council Officer requested a view assessment. Relevant affected apartments would be identified as Council receives submissions during the notification period (1 to 15/11/13). On 17/12/13, Council Officer provided to the applicant a summary of issues identified in the submissions, including the following, and with a request for the issues to be addressed by way of amended design and/or additional information:

• View impacts

•

, with a request for the erection of height poles and detailed view assessment by visiting the affected properties; Privacy

•

impacts arising from oversize balconies forward of the “established” building line and lack of building separation; Streetscape

• Characterisation of the development as “ impacts arising from the front setback;

alterations and additions

•

” rather than new building; Landscape

•

impacts, with a request for an arborist report including an assessment of impacts on the vegetation adjacent the southern boundary; and Construction

management.

Height poles for the purpose of view assessment were erected by the applicant in early February 2014 and site inspections of submitters properties conducted in February. The applicant’s view analysis was submitted on 5 & 21 March 2014. An amended DA was received on 24/2/14 and key changes are identified as follows:

• Front balconies reduced, reconfigured and relocated generally from the north eastern corner to the south eastern corner of the building;

• Northern setback of the ground floor balcony balustrade increased by 2m from 1m to 3m, and the balustrade will be glazed rather than solid;

• Building height reduced from 13.4m to 11.9m (at Section A-A); • Lower ground floor lowered by 550mm; and • Front setback of the first & second floor level balconies at first & second floor

levels increased to 11m compared to 7.1m to 10m in the original DA, and the northern side setback of the balconies have been increased from 1m to 3.1m.

Further amendments and additional information were received by Council in May 2014 including:

• Provision of further setbacks and reduction in size to the front balconies; • Updated view diagrams • Window amendments to address the separation requirements of Ausgrid in relation to

the south-adjoining substation; • Amended Strata Plan; • Amended BASIX; and • Consulting engineer’s advice in relation to the impact of the African Olive Tree

growing in No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street on the northern side wall to be retained.


REFERRALS Ausgrid The development was referred to Ausgrid who advised that the development must have a minimum fire rating and clearance of 3m from the substation to any glass windows or panels on the building, and 6m clearance to any ventilation inlets/outlets. Amended drawings, including deletion of the southern window return of unit 1, were received by Council in May 2014 to address these requirements. Building The proposal was referred to Council’s Senior Building Surveyor who has recommended conditions of consent, including BCA, fire upgrade and strata subdivision requirements. Engineer The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer who did not raise any objections to the proposal, subject to conditions including requirements for dilapidation reports and a geotechnical certificate. Heritage The application was referred to Council’s Conservation Planner who advised as follows:

The property is not listed as a heritage item and is not located within a Conservation Area. It was listed as a heritage item in NSLEP 2001, however, its significance was reviewed in the 2009 Heritage Review, which recommend it be removed from the heritage schedule. This downgrade is reflected in NSLEP 2013, which is now in force. However, the property is located within the vicinity of heritage items at 7, 11, 15, and 19 East Crescent Street (across road), and the McMahons Point South Conservation Area bounds the subject property at the west. Therefore, the proposal has been assessed in terms of its impact in the heritage items in the vicinity and conservation area at the rear. The proposal involves large alterations and additions to the existing building, to create 3 apartments. An extension to the front and new upper level is proposed. The existing building is located between two existing apartment buildings that are much larger in scale than the proposed development. The proposal will not impact on the curtilage of the nearby heritage items. It will not impact on views to or from the heritage items and is therefore not considered to have a detrimental impact on the significance of the heritage items. The part of the McMahons Point South Conservation Area in this part of Middle Street is characterised by intrusive elements and little original character remains in the vicinity of the rear of the subject property, with large uncharacteristic apartment buildings either side. Accordingly, it is not considered that the proposed development will have a detrimental impact on the significance or character of the McMahons Point South Conservation Area.


Accordingly, no objections are raised to the proposal on heritage grounds. Should the application be approved, the following conditions are recommended to be placed on the approval: D1 Photographic Survey, E2 Reuse of Sandstone

Landscaping The development was referred to Council’s Landscape Development Officer who advised as follows:

I am in agreement with all the observations and recommendations contained within the Arborists Report, including the removal of all existing trees and shrubs from the property and the minor impact the works may have on a self-sown wild Olive Tree growing on the adjoining property [No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street]. Furthermore he has provided appropriate protocol (seeking the neighbour’s permission for pruning works) and protective measures for the tree. The submitted landscape plan provides a good selection of primarily native shrubs and the turf species selected is appropriate. No Council trees are in the vicinity of the development, therefore there will be no Council trees affected by the proposed works.

Conditions have been recommended. SUBMISSIONS The owners of adjoining properties and the Lavender Bay Precinct were notified of the proposed development for a 14-day period between 1 & 15 November 2013, and of the amended DA between 14 & 28 March 2014. The original notification resulted in nineteen (19) submissions, and the notification of the amended DA resulted in nine (9) submissions. A summary of the submissions is provided in Attachment 3. The key concerns raised are in relation to characterisation as alterations and additions; front building line; site coverage; heritage and character; view loss; privacy; and overshadowing. The issues are addressed in this report. Further design amendments received by Council since re-notification are considered to be of same or lesser impact, in particular, by virtue of the provision of increased front building setbacks and reductions in the size of balconies. Accordingly, re-notification of later minor amendments is not required, in accordance with section A4 of NSDCP 2013. CONSIDERATION The relevant matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, are assessed under the following headings:


NORTH SYDNEY LEP 2013 1. Permissibility within the zone The site is identified under the LEP as being included within the R4 High Density Residential zone. The proposed building is characterised as “multi dwelling housing” as defined in NSLEP 2013, being three attached dwellings on one allotment, each with access at ground level. The proposal is permissible in the zone. Demolition is permissible with consent, pursuant to clause 2.7 of the new Plan. 2. Residential Zone Objectives It is considered that the development satisfies the specific aims of the plan and the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential zone contained in clause 2.3 & Land Use Table in NSLEP 2013. In particular, the development will provide for the housing needs of the community, contribute to the variety of housing types, and maintain a reasonable level of amenity within a high density residential environment, as discussed in this report. 3. Subdivision No change is proposed to the existing allotment size of 456.8m2. The proposed strata subdivision will provide for 3 dwellings on a single allotment. Subdivision is permissible with consent, pursuant to clause 2.6 of NSLEP 2013. 4. LEP 2013 Compliance The application has been assessed against the relevant principal development standards in NSLEP 2013 as indicated in the following compliance table. More detailed comments with regard to key issues are provided later in this report.

STATUTORY CONTROL – North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 Site Area – 456.8m² Existing Proposed Control Complies R4 High Density Residential

Height of buildings (cl.4.3(2)) (max)

Up to 11.4m

Up to 13m (2nd floor roof awning) 12m No

12.2m (2nd floor privacy screen) 5. Height of building The proposed building will exceed the building height limit of 12m provided for in clause 4.3(2) of NSLEP 2013. The extent of the variation of up to 1m (8%) will be relatively localised at the south eastern corner of a roof awning and privacy screen (Figure 8). The development will otherwise largely comply with the height control, as shown in Figure 9, with the breach occuring as a result of the site’s topographical features.


Figure 8 – South elevation showing location of height non-compliance

Figure 9 – Long section showing compliance with 12m height control in section

The applicant seeks to vary the building height development standard pursuant to clause 4.6 of the LEP (Attachment 4). The impacts of the non-compliance are examined against the objectives in clause 4.3 of the LEP, as follows:

(a) To promote development that conforms to and reflects natural landforms, by stepping development on sloping land to follow the natural gradient. The front facade will step down to East Crescent Street, consistent with the fall of the land (Figure 9).


(b) To promote the retention and, if appropriate, sharing of existing views. The breach of the height limit by the front roof awning and easternmost extremity of the privacy screen will not cause any material view impacts; rather, the view impacts are largely attributable to the proposed balconies which are height-compliant. Detailed assessment is provided in the Views section of the DCP Compliance Table.

(c) To maintain solar access to existing dwellings, public reserves and streets, and to promote solar access for future development. The development will cast additional shadows on apartments on the lower levels of the south-adjoining building at No’s. 2-4 East Crescent Street. A condition is recommended to pull back the awning and privacy screen in order to minimise shadow impacts to those of a generally height-compliant scheme. Detailed assessment is provided in the Solar Access section of the DCP Compliance Table.

(d) To maintain privacy for residents of existing dwellings and to promote privacy for residents of new buildings. The windows and balconies of the proposed development will be below the maximum height limit. Privacy impacts arising from the proposed setbacks and building separations are discussed in the Privacy section of the DCP Compliance Table.

(e) To ensure compatibility between development, particularly at zone boundaries. The proposed breach of the height limit is toward the eastern (front) of the site, well separated from the adjoining R3 Medium Density Residential zone adjoining to the west (rear) of the site. The proposed height at the rear of the building complies and will be adequately set back from the dwellings on the western (opposite) side of Middle Street.

(f) To encourage an appropriate scale and density of development that is in accordance with, and promotes the character of, an area. The substantially height-compliant 3- to 4-storey building will remain significantly lesser in scale and density compared to the adjoining multi-storey apartment blocks (Figure 10), and compatible in scale to the 3- & 4-storey units on the eastern side of East Crescent Street.

Figure 10 – Proposed bulk and scale in context


The development will be substantially within the maximum building height limit, with the proposed breaches relatively minor and localised at the front roof awning and privacy screen. The building will be substantially within the maximum building height limit, with breaches relatively minor and localised at the front roof awning and privacy screen which will not materially increase amenity impacts compared to a height-compliant scheme. The objectives of the building height control will be achieved provided the roof awning and privacy screen are reduced in order to minimise shadow impacts (via condition, as discussed in the Solar Access section). These amendments would render the development generally height-compliant. 6. Architectural roof features Clause 5.6(2) of NSLEP 2013 provides that architectural roof features, including those that exceed the height limit, may be carried out with development consent. The proposed architectural roof feature, being a pole affixed on the lift overrun at the rear of the building, satisfies the objectives of the provision, discussed as follows:

(a) To permit variations to maximum building height standards for roof features of visual interest. The roof feature will not exceed the building height limit.

(b) To ensure that roof features are decorative elements and that the majority of the

roof is contained within the maximum building height standard. The roof feature will be a decorative element installed at the rear of the building where the roof will be entirely within the height control.

(c) To maintain solar access to new and existing buildings, public reserves and

streets. The roof feature will be a slender pole which will not result in any material shadow impacts.

(d) To promote the retention and, if appropriate, sharing of existing views. The

slender pole will not materially obstruct any views. 7. Preservation of trees or vegetation Clause 5.9 of NSLEP 2013 seeks to preserve the amenity of an area, including biodiversity values, through the preservation of trees and other vegetation. As discussed in the Landscape Referrals section, no objection is raised to the removal of existing vegetation on the site, subject to conditions requiring implementation of the submitted landscape plan in accordance with the arborist’s report. 8. Heritage conservation The application was referred to Council’s Conservation Planner who has conducted an assessment of the proposed works in terms of part 5 clause 5.10 (Heritage Conservation) of the North Sydney LEP 2013 and section 13 (Heritage and Conservation) of the North Sydney DCP 2013.


As discussed in the Heritage Referrals section, the Conservation Planner has determined the proposal to be satisfactory. In particular, the development will not have any impact on the curtilage of the nearby heritage items or views to or from those items. The development will also not have any detrimental impact on the McMahons Point South Conservation Area adjoining to the west, in consideration of the existing intrusive elements and lack of original character in this part of Middle Street. The proposal is generally consistent with Council’s heritage conservation objectives in clause 5.10(1), to conserve the environmental heritage and the significance of heritage items and conservation areas of North Sydney. 9. Earthworks Earthworks are permissible with consent, pursuant to clause 6.10 of the LEP. The development has been assessed in relation to the objectives and relevant provisions in clause 6.10(1) & (2) and found to be satisfactory; in particular:

(a) The likely disruption of, or any detrimental effect on drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality of the development, and natural features of, and vegetation on, the site and adjoining land. The proposed excavations will be limited generally to the area of an existing lower ground level and front patio, with some minor works to rationalise levels along the side access path. The rock outcrop within the front setback (Figure 11) is not identified as a landscape element of any significance; as such, its retention is not considered warranted. The existing fall of the land and drainage patterns will be maintained. Conditions are recommended by Council’s Development Engineer to ensure soil stability.

Figure 11 –Rock outcrop to be demolished

(b) The effect of the development on the likely future use or redevelopment of

the land. The extent and location of the earthworks are such that they will not likely impact on future use or redevelopment of the land.


(c) The quality of the fill or the soil to be excavated, or both. Given the residential history of the site, the soil to be excavated is unlikely to be contaminated. The development will not require extensive fill.

(d) The effect of the development on the existing and likely amenity of adjoining properties. Excavations will generally be limited to the creation of a lower ground floor unit, adequately set back at least 980mm from the side boundaries. The structural integrity and amenity of adjoining properties will not be adversely affected by the earthworks, subject to conditions as recommended by the Development Engineer.

(e) The source of any fill material and the destination of any excavated material. The development will not require extensive fill material, and the destination of any excavated material can be dealt with via condition.

(f) The likelihood of disturbing Aboriginal objects or relics. The site is not identified as being likely to contain Aboriginal artefacts.

(g) The proximity to, and potential for adverse impacts on, any waterway, drinking water catchment or environmentally sensitive area. The site is not within or in close proximity to any identified environmentally sensitive areas. The Development Engineer has recommended stormwater conditions.

(h) Any appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the development. The impacts of the earthworks can be minimised by way of conditions, including requirements for geotechnical certification and the preparation of dilapidation reports for potentially affected properties.

SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development SEPP 65 applies to the conversion of an existing building to a “residential flat building”, which is defined as a building comprising 3 or more storeys and 4 or more self-contained dwellings. The proposed conversion of a duplex into a building containing three dwellings is not within the meaning of “residential flat building” as defined; therefore, the SEPP does not apply. SEPP 55 and Contaminated Land Management Issues The provisions of SEPP 55 require Council to consider the likelihood that the site has previously been contaminated and to address the methods necessary to remediate the site. Given the residential history of the site, there is unlikely to be any issues of soil contamination that would require remediation. SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 The site falls within the Sydney Harbour Catchment Area and is subject to the provisions of the Policy. Clause 25 of the SREP outlines matters to be taken into consideration in relation to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of the scenic quality of foreshores and waterways.


The visual qualities of Sydney Harbour will be maintained as the development will be set back from the foreshore and be of significantly lesser bulk and scale compared to adjoining development. The front facade will be well modulated with materials and colours compatible with the built form context. As such, the development will not have any detrimental impact on the character or scenic quality of foreshores and waterways. NORTH SYDNEY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 The proposal is generally consistent with Section B1 of the DCP relating to residential developments and section C9 & C9.6 being the character statement for the McMahons Point Neighbourhood within the Lavender Bay Planning Area.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments B1.2 Social Amenity Population mix Maintaining residential accommodation

Yes The development will contribute to the diversity of the residential population.

B1.3 Environmental Criteria Topography Yes The earthworks will generally be limited to the basement

extension and rationalisation of access steps and levels. Conditions are recommended to ensure the protection of adjoining properties. The small rock outcrop within the front setback (Figure 11 above) is not identified as a landscape element of any significance; as such, its retention is not considered warranted. Overall, the natural topography and landform will be maintained, which satisfies the objectives of the clause.

Views Yes Views from public places Views to Lavender Bay from public lookouts as identified in the character statement (CS9.6.1 P6) will not be obscured by the development.

Yes View sharing The main issue raised in the submissions received by Council relate to potential view loss to units in the apartment building at No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street which adjoins the site to the north. The affected views are identified as iconic views of the Harbour Bridge and Opera House, views of the city skyline, Walsh Bay, and land/water interface. The view losses are generally attributable to the proposed increase in the building envelope at the front of the building.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Views (continued)

The following view analysis utilises the planning principles adopted by the NSW Land & Environment court in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah [2004] NSWLEC 140 and the view loss standards applicable under NSDCP 2013. The analysis is informed by the view diagrams submitted by the applicant, public submissions, and Council officer’s visits to the potentially most affected properties, being 11 units within No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street as shown in Figure 12.

Figure 12 – Location and outlooks of units in 8-10 East Crescent Street in relation to the proposal


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Identification of views and extent of impacts Unit 1 (Level 0) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are of the upper portion of the Harbour Bridge and

city skyline (Figure 13).

Figure 13 – Existing & proposed views from unit 1 (level 0) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street

(ii) From where are the views obtained: Primary frontal views are from a ground level patio to the

southeast toward the Harbour Bridge. Views of the western city skyline are obtained looking south toward the side end of the patio, over and above a rock outcrop and across a side boundary.

(iii) Extent of impact: The development will impact on a peripheral part of the overall vista looking

across the side end of the patio and across a side boundary, while allowing for retention of the majority of the views and outlook to the top of the Harbour Bridge and city skyline from various central locations on the patio looking southeast, being the primary orientation (Figure 14). . On balance, the impact is considered to be minor.

Figure 14 – Views to city skyline from patio, looking southeast


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Unit 2 (Level 1) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are of the Harbour Bridge, Walsh Bay, city skyline

and a part of the land/water interface (Figure 15).


(ii) From where are the views obtained: Primary frontal views are from the living room and front

balcony, to the south and southeast. Views to Walsh Bay and the western city skyline are obtained to the south, looking across the side end of the balcony, across side boundaries.

(iii) Extent of impact: A glimpse of the land/water interface will be lost behind the proposed first floor

balcony; however, the iconic view of the Bridge, water and city skyline will remain (but for tree foliage). The balcony will continue to enjoy a high level of view amenity, with views of Lavender Bay and Harbour Bridge, looking to the east (Figure 16). On balance, the impact is assessed to be minor.

Figure 16 – Views of Harbour Bridge & Lavender Bay maintained


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Unit 3 (Level 1) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are of the Harbour Bridge, Walsh Bay, city skyline

and a part of the land/water interface (through foliage) (Figure 17).




(iii) Extent of impact: There will be loss of water glimpses; however, the iconic view of the Harbour

Bridge and city skyline will be substantially maintained in its setting, as well as views to Lavender Bay. The overall impact is assessed to be minor.

Unit 4 (Level 1) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The view is a part of the arch of the Harbour Bridge (Figure

18).

Figure 18 – Glimpse of Harbour Bridge from Unit 4 on Level 1


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments (ii) From where are the views obtained: The views are obtained looking directly out from a ground

level patio across a side boundary from a unit that is located at the rear of the building. (iii) Extent of impact: The view loss compared to existing view will be minor. Unit 5 (Level 2) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are of the Harbour Bridge, Walsh Bay, city skyline

and a part of the land/water interface (Figure 19).




(iii) Extent of impact: The loss will be primarily at the land/water interface. The unit will continue to

have a high level of view amenity, including iconic views of the Harbour Bridge, water and city skyline will remain largely intact (Figure 20). On balance, the impact is assessed to be minor.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments


Unit 6 (Level 2) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are primarily of the Harbour Bridge, Walsh Bay,

city skyline, and water/land interface (Figure 21).




(iii) Extent of impact: Iconic views of the Harbour Bridge, water and city skyline will remain intact,

with a part of Walsh Bay maintained as part of the panoramic view. Overall, the impact is assessed to be moderate.




Unit 7 (Level 2) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: But for the Wild Olive Tree growing within the site of the

affected apartment block, the view from unit 7 would be of the north western Bridge pylon and a glimpse of the Bridge arch (Figure 23).


(ii) From where are the views obtained: The views are obtained looking directly out from the living

room and balcony on level 2 across a side boundary from a unit that is located at the rear of the building.

(iii) Extent of impact: The erosion of an existing limited view is assessed to be moderate impact.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Unit 9 (Level 3) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are of the Harbour Bridge, Opera House, Walsh

Bay, city skyline, and water/land interface (Figure 24).




(iii) Extent of impact: The iconic view of the Harbour Bridge, Opera House, city skyline and

water/land interface will be generally maintained, including full frontal views when not looking across the subject site (Figure 25). Overall, the impacts are assessed to be minor.

Figure 25 – Frontal views of Harbour Bridge maintained


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Unit 10 (Level 3) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The view is of the north western Bridge pylon and part of the

Bridge arch (Figure 26).


(ii) From where are the views obtained: The views are obtained looking directly out from the living

room and balcony on level 3 across a side boundary from a unit that is located at the rear of the building.

(iii) Extent of impact: The further erosion of an already limited view of the Harbour Bridge arch is

assessed to be a severe impact.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Unit 12 (Level 4) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The unit has sweeping views of Sydney Harbour, including

the Bridge, Opera House, city skyline and Walsh Bay (Figure 27).




(iii) Extent of impact: There will be some loss of view on the western periphery of the vista, partly

below the balcony balustrade at the southern end of the balcony. However, the iconic view of the Harbour Bridge, Opera House, Walsh Bay and city skyline, as well as views of Lavender Bay, will be maintained (Figure 28). The roof awning will not materially impede the panorama and the unit will continue to enjoy excellent view amenity. The impact is assessed to be negligible.

Figure 28 – Views of Lavender Bay and frontal views of Harbour Bridge maintained


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Unit 13 (Level 4) No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street (i) Assessment of views to be affected: The views are of the Harbour Bridge and Sydney Harbour,

and a glimpse of the Opera House (Figure 29).


(ii) From where are the views obtained: The views are obtained looking directly out from the balcony

on level 4 across a side boundary from a unit that is located at the rear of the building. (iii) Extent of impact: The development will reduce views of the water and Opera House glimpses;

however, the full arch of the Bridge and its pylons will generally be maintained. The overall impact is assessed to be moderate. It is also noted that the apartment has western water and district views from the rear living room balcony, such that the unit will continue to enjoy high levels of view and outlook amenity (Figure 30).

Figure 30 – Western district views from rear living room balcony


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Other views from units 1, 3, 6, 9 & 12 The south eastern units within the apartment block at No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street have harbour views, including the Harbour Bridge and Opera House, from the kitchen and/or bedrooms (Figure 31).

Figure 31 – Views from side windows of non-primary living areas

The views from secondary habitable spaces are obtained from windows that are located in the centre of the unit block, along acute sightlines, and across a side boundary (Figure 32). There is a lower expectation that the views, from non-primary living areas set deep into a side setback, can be maintained. The impacts are assessed to be minor, in consideration that, overall, the south eastern units will otherwise and overall maintain adequate to high levels of view amenity from primary living spaces, as discussed above.

Figure 32 – Location of kitchen and bedroom windows within side setback in relation to the site



Reasonableness of proposal that is causing impact

Overall, the view impacts arising from the development are considered to be reasonable, having regard for the following: • The proposal substantially complies with the 12m height limit, and the proposed height does not

exceed the existing ridge height; • The balconies on the upper levels have been pulled back to be within the average front setback

alignment and relocated and reconfigured to allow for equitable view sharing across the site; • Existing views which are affected are limited to units at the extreme rear of the adjoining residential

flat building, where views are obtained over a side boundary; • The primary building line on the upper levels will be consistent with the established average front

building alignment, and the proposed 1.6m forward extension from the existing front building line is relatively modest;

• The ground floor balcony balustrade has been set back from the parapet of the lower ground unit and will be visually recessive and permeable metal rails; and

• The lower ground extension will be accommodated within a partly excavated area of the site, generally below and behind an existing rock outcrop, with a floor to ceiling height minimised to 2.6m.

However, the north eastern section of the 2nd floor addition will result in severe view impact on unit 10, and the design is considered unreasonable at this location by virtue of a significant breach the northern side setback (building height plane) provision in section B1.4.6 of the DCP attributable to a new level of the building, as discussed in the Setbacks section.

Conclusions regarding view impacts

The view -impacts will be negligible to minor for 8 of the11 assessed units in No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street. The moderately affected unit 7 (level 2) will retain views of the north western pylon of the Harbour Bridge, and unit 13 (level 4) will retain the arch span of the bridge, despite their location at the rear of the unit block, for which preservation of views is less strong. The impacts on these units are reasonable in the context of the site and do not warrant refusal or major amendments to the design. One of the assessed units (unit 10) will, however, be severely impacted in terms of views. While the unit is located at the rear on level 3 and relies on a side setback for view amenity, the part of the development that is causing the impact is considered to be unreasonable by virtue of the breach of the northern building height plane in the DCP. The view impact can be reasonably reduced by increasing the setback of the front north eastern corner of the 2nd floor addition (via condition), as discussed in the Setbacks section. On balance, the development will provide for equitable view sharing, in accordance with the objectives of section B1.3.6 of the DCP, subject to condition. Solar access Yes The development will result in additional shadows on the

south-adjoining apartment building at No’s.2-4 East Crescent Street. Elevational shadows in midwinter are shown in Figure 33 below (unit numbers per strata plan on file).



Figure 33 –Midwinter shadows on No’s.2-4 East Crescent Street


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Solar access (continued)

The following is an assessment of the overshadowing impacts of the proposal on these units, in accordance with the principles established by the Land and Environment Court in The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1082.

Density The affected apartments are located on the lower levels of the building along a side boundary within a high density residential zone.

Overshadowing by fences, roof overhangs and changes in level The affected apartments are subject to extensive existing overshadowing by the subject building and the 7-storey apartment block at No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street. Identification of additional shadows & extent of impacts

Amount of sunlight lost & retained Size & proportion of glazed area Impact

Unit 11 (1-bed)

Additional midwinter afternoon shadows will fall on the lower portion of the balcony. The bedroom window will maintain afternoon sun.

Approximately half of the lower portion of the balcony door (below balustrade) will be affected by proposed late afternoon shadows.

Minor

Unit 13 (1-bed)

Additional morning and afternoon shadows will render the balcony in shadow through the day. The bedroom window will retain afternoon solar access.

The entirety of the balcony will be impacted by the proposed morning and afternoon shadows. No additional shadows will fall on the bedroom window at midwinter.

Signif-icant

Unit 20 (studio)

Additional midwinter afternoon shadows will fall on the lower portion of the living room window; however, the window will generally maintain afternoon solar access.

The lower half of the living room window will be affected by the proposed shadows at noon in midwinter.

Mod-erate

Unit 21 (1-bed)

Morning solar access to the balcony will be lost. The bedroom window be impacted by additional morning & noon shadows; however, will generally maintain afternoon solar access.

The entirety of the balcony will be impacted by the proposed morning and afternoon shadows. Morning shadows will affect one third of the bedroom window, and half the glazing at midday.

Signif-icant

Design The design can be refined to reduce shadow impacts similar to those of a fully height-compliant scheme. Morning shadows can be reduced (via condition) by pulling back the south eastern corner of the roof awning 1m towards the proposed building line, and limiting the privacy screen to the extent of the front building line. (The reductions would still allow for weather protection and adequate privacy for the balcony.)


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Subject to the above design amendment (via condition),

the development is considered reasonable, on the balance of the following considerations: • The affected units are on the lower floors of the

apartment building oriented to the side boundary towards the site, for which the expectation of retaining existing sunlight access is less strong;

• Moderate to severe shadow impacts will affect up to 3 units within a complex of some 76 dwellings (or 4%) which is not excessive in the existing built form context within a high density residential zone;

• The affected units will generally maintain adequate daylight access by virtue of their northern orientation and adequate separation from the subject site; and

• The development is substantially height-compliant; the shadow impacts of the non-compliant elements can be adequately reduced as discussed above in the Design section of shadow assessment.

Acoustic privacy Visual privacy

No The proposed balconies and some new windows do not achieve the minimum separation distances of 9m &12m from the adjoining apartment buildings; however, the separations are considered to be satisfactory as they will provide a reasonable level of privacy despite the numerical variations, assessed as follows:

No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street

Proposed separation

Habitable rooms

Min. 12m Gd

Min. 8m (balcony to balcony)

The balcony will not give rise to unreasonable privacy impacts, having regard to the following: • The ground level will be below and not overlook the

apartments in No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street, many of which are enclosed, and the actual vertical separations between balconies will exceed 8m;

• The balconies will not be oriented directly toward each other; the location of least separation has been measured between the side ends of the proposed and neighbouring balconies; and

• The primary use and orientation of the balcony will be toward the south eastern corner of the deck where it will be at its widest and adjacent the street and substation, rather than back toward the neighbouring apartment block.

5.6m (living room window to balcony)

Views to and from the ground level living room window will be highly restricted by the narrow 900mm width of the window and privacy shutters.

7.2m (bedroom window to balcony)

The ground level window is existing, 900mm wide and associated with a bedroom.



1st floor


The proposed balcony size, at 10m2, is not excessive, and the balcony will be configured so that the location of least separation from the side end of neighbouring balconies will be at its narrowest northern tip. The actual main deck area will be at least 10m horizontal distance to the neighbouring balconies, and the majority of the trafficable deck will be on the southern side, separated from those balconies by the proposed building structure.

5.6m (living room window to balcony)

Views to and from the 1st floor lounge room window will be highly restricted by the narrow 900mm width and use of privacy shutters.

2nd floor


The L-shape configuration is such that the majority of the trafficable area will be on the southern side of the living room, and the main orientation will be to the southeast rather than back toward No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street.

Habitable balconies

& non-habitable

rooms Min. 9m

All levels

Min. 7m (bathroom to balcony)

The separation is adequate given the bathroom use, small openings and high density context.

No’s. 2-4 East Crescent Street Proposed separation

Habitable rooms

Min. 12m

Gd 12m (balcony to balcony) Complies.

1st floor

10.1m (balcony to balcony)

The 1st floor balcony will have a fixed privacy screen at its southern balustrade to restrict views to neighbouring balconies.

10.5m (study to balcony)

The existing small window associated with a study will not give rise to any material privacy impacts.

2nd floor

9.6m (balcony to balcony)

The 2nd floor balcony will have a fixed privacy screen at its southern balustrade, and its primary orientation will be southeast to the iconic views rather than southwest back across the side boundary to the neighbouring apartment block.

Habitable balconies

& non-habitable

rooms Min. 9m

All levels

9.6m (halls, stairs, lobbies, etc., to

windows & balconies)

Complies.

B1.4 Quality Built Form Context Yes The additions have been designed to maintain reasonable

view sharing and privacy between properties, as discussed in this report.

Subdivision pattern Yes The existing and proposed lot size of 456.8m2 is generally in accordance with the character statement CS9.6.1 P9.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Streetscape Yes The building will be set back with a skewed alignment to

the street frontage, in accordance with the character statement CS9.6.1 P14. However, it is recommended (via condition) that the parapet of the garage be reduced to a maximum height of 3.5m, in order to reduce bulk and scale to Middle Street and in accordance with the building height plane provision in section B1.4.6.

Siting Yes The building will be centrally located on the site, with front and rear building lines comparable to adjoining buildings, and with provision for front and rear gardens. The orientation of units toward the street and to the Harbour will be maintained.

Setbacks No Front setback The primary building line at ground, 1st & 2nd floor levels, and the balconies at 1st & 2nd floor levels will align with the average front setback of adjoining properties, in accordance with section B1.4.6 P1. However, the lower ground extension and the deck atop it will extend beyond the average building alignment, as shown in Figure 34.

Figure 34 – Development in relation to average front setback alignment with adjoining buildings


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Setbacks (continued)

The proposed front setbacks are nevertheless supported as the objectives of the provision are achieved despite the variation at the lower ground level; in particular: • Overall. the building will substantially match the

average setback alignment and not be materially closer to the street boundary compared to the existing or adjoining buildings;

• The variation of the average front alignment at lower ground level where there is limited visibility from the street, will not add significantly to the bulk and scale of the building;

• Adequate building separations will be maintained, as discussed in the Visual & Acoustic Privacy section;

• The front alignment at lower ground level will not have any material impacts in terms of privacy, ventilation, views and shadowing, as discussed in this report.

No Northern side setback (adj. 8-10 East Crescent St)

The proposed 980mm side setback at the lower ground floor extension does not comply with the minimum 1.5m setback provision; however, the setback is nevertheless assessed to be satisfactory, on the balance of the following considerations: • The northern wall of the front extension will be 6.4m in

length, located at lower ground level following the fall of the land, and adjoining an established hedge and rock platform on the adjoining property at No’s.8-10 East Crescent street (Figure 35);

• The deck above the basement extension will be set back 3m from the side boundary, which complies;

• The new wall to the front extension will be set back further from the northern side boundary than the existing wall to be demolished which is currently 340mm from boundary; and

• Increasing the basement setback to 1.5m from the northern boundary will not materially reduce view impacts.



a

b Figure 35 – Location of basement extension adjacent

northern side setback Setbacks (continued)

The northern wall at the front extension will breach the 450 building height plane (BHP) at 3.5m above existing ground level by up to 6.6m at the 2nd floor level. The setback in this location is considered to be satisfactory only insofar as it will not have any adverse impacts on streetscape amenity having regard to the existing built form context and topography of the site, and the balconies have been relocated to generally within the northern BHP so as to provide adequate privacy separation. However, the breach of the northern BHP at 2nd floor level will give rise to severe view impacts on unit 10 in No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street, and is not considered reasonable given the magnitude of the breach. However, the impacts can be adequately ameliorated by reducing the extent of non-compliance; in this regard, it is recommended (via condition) that the northern wall of the 2nd floor kitchen/living/dining room be set back 1m to the south, to provide for a 2.1m setback from the northern boundary. (It is noted that the proposed unit 2 will maintain a high level of amenity as it is a 2-level apartment with two large primary living areas.) Alterations to the northern wall at the rear extension will provide for a side setback of 1.46m at ground level, which substantially complies with the minimum 1.5m provision. The 2nd floor will breach the 450 building height plane (BHP) at 3.5m above existing ground level; however, provision of a 1.58m setback for the uppermost level is adequate given that it will not give rise to any material streetscape or amenity impacts.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Setbacks (continued)

No Southern side setback (adj. 2-4 East Crescent St) The proposed 1m southern setback at the lower ground extension is considered adequate by virtue of its location adjacent a substation and limited visibility from the street. The ground floor extension will be set back 3m from the southern side boundary which complies, and its balcony will be within the 450 BHP at 3.5m above existing ground level. The southern wall at the front extension will breach the BHP by up to 6.6m at the 2nd floor level. The breach is nevertheless be supported in the particular circumstances of the case, being that the proposed side setback will not have any adverse impacts on streetscape amenity having regard to the bulk and scale of adjoining buildings, and the balconies will not give rise to any material privacy impacts by virtue of adequate separations and primary south eastern orientation away from neighbouring units. Alterations to the southern wall at the rear extension will provide for a side setback of 906mm which will be in breach of the BHP by 4.8m at 2nd floor level. The proposed southern side setback is nevertheless supported as there will be no streetscape impacts, and the additions will be adequately separated from the adjoining apartment to not result in any material privacy or shadow impacts, as discussed in Privacy and Solar Access sections. A condition is recommended to limit the height of the garage parapet to be 3.5m in accordance with the BHP. The provision of nil side setback for the garage is satisfactory as the garage will replace an existing carport that adjoins the southern side boundary. The length of the garage, including storage area within, will be 8.4m and of durable masonry construction with drainage into the subject site. However, the garage will breach the BHP by up to 400mm at the parapet. A condition is recommended to reduce the parapet height of the garage to a maximum of 3.5m.

Yes Rear setback The primary rear building line will generally be in the location of the existing rear wing and have a greater setback compared to the adjoining apartment blocks. The garage will maintain the existing setback of the southern carport and is comparable to numerous parking structures in the vicinity of the site.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Form, massing & scale Yes The proposed floor to ceiling height of the lower ground

extension and second floor level have been minimised to 2.6 & 2.7m, respectively. The building will substantially comply with the height control and remain significantly lesser in scale compared to adjoining buildings.

Built form character Yes The proposed contemporary style building is compatible with the modern apartment blocks adjoining the site and will not detrimentally affect the curtilage of nearby heritage items, as discussed in the Heritage Referrals section. The layout and access to the multi-dwelling units respond appropriately to the dual street access and topography of the site.

Dwelling entry Yes Units 2 and 3 will have accessible entries from Middle Street, in accordance with section B1.4.9 P6.

Roofs Yes The low roof profile is consistent with adjoining buildings and will minimise shadow and view impacts.

Colours & materials Yes The proposed sandstone base, masonry walls and timber detailing are consistent with the character of the area. The contemporary building will sit between two modern apartment blocks, and not detract from the heritage items on the opposite side of East Crescent Street. Glazing on the street elevation will be incorporated into an adequately modulated front facade. The metal balcony balustrades are supported as they will be of narrow profile, achieve a high degree of visual permeability, and have no reflectivity compared to glass balustrades. A condition is recommended to require black balustrade rails, to ensure the rails are as recessive as possible.

Balconies – apartments Yes The balconies will provide functional private open space for the units.

B1.5 Quality Urban Environment High quality residential accommodation

Yes The units will have a high level of internal amenity, in terms of size, solar access and natural airflow.

Safety and security Yes Secure entries from East Crescent and Middle Streets will be provided.

Vehicular access & car parking

Yes Existing driveway access will be maintained at Middle Street. The development will be capable of accommodating up to 3 cars, which is adequate for the proposed three dwellings, and in consideration of the nearby public transport services. The replacement of two carports at the street alignment with a single garage will improve the streetscape, subject to a condition requiring the reduction of the parapet height to 3.5m.

Site coverage Yes The proposal complies with the maximum site coverage control.

Existing Proposed Control (max) Complies



Site Coverage (multi-dwelling housing) (cl.B1.5.5) (max)

39% (177m2) 44% (199.5m2) 50% (228.4m2) Yes

The development satisfies the objectives of the site coverage provision, discussed as follows: O1. To ensure that development is balanced and in

keeping with the optimum capacity of the site with no over development. The proposed increase in site coverage is largely associated with the extension of an existing basement to create a studio unit, which is not an overdevelopment of the site.

O2. To ensure that development promotes the existing or desired future character of the neighbourhood. The conversion of a duplex into multi-dwelling housing is consistent with the high density residential area.

O3. To control site density. The density of the site will generally be maintained.

O4. To limit the building footprint so as to ensure adequate provision is made for landscaped area and private open space. The proposal complies with minimum landscape area and the units will have adequate private open space.

Landscape area No The development complies with minimum landscape area;

however, exceeds the maximum un-built upon area provision.

Existing Proposed Control Complies Landscape Area (multi-

dwelling housing) (cl.B1.5.6) (min)

38% (175m2) 31% (141.7m2) 30% (137m2) (min) Yes

Un-built Upon Area (multi-dwelling housing) (cl.B1.5.6) (max)

23% (105m2) 25% (115.6m2) 20% (91.4m2) (max) No


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Landscape area (continued)

The development will increase un-built upon area by 10.6m2 which is largely attributable to the new driveway connecting to the carport behind the garage. The variation is considered to be minor and the objectives of the landscape area provision are satisfied despite the variation, discussed as follows: (a) Promote the character of the neighbourhood: A

landscaped front and rear garden setting will be substantially retained.

(b) Provide useable private open space for the enjoyment of residents: The driveway will adjoin the rear lawn and can function as part of useable private open space when not occupied by a car.

(c) Provide a landscaped buffer between adjoining properties: The driveway will be located in the area of an existing carport. Perimeter soft landscaping at the northern and southern side boundaries will provide for adequate buffering between properties.

(d) Maximise retention and absorption of surface drainage water on site: Soft landscaped areas of 83.7m2 and 55.3m2 will be provided at the rear and front setbacks, respectively, and the proposal includes a 5,000L rainwater tank.

(e) Minimise obstruction to underground water flow: The proposed earthworks are up to 1.5m and localised generally in the area of the basement extension.

(f) Promote substantial landscaping, that includes the planting of trees that when mature will have significant canopy cover: The proposed shrubs are appropriate for the site, providing soft buffers while maintaining view amenity.

(g) Control site density: Site density will generally be maintained.

(h) Minimise site disturbance: Earthworks will generally be limited to the area of the basement extension.

(i) Contributes to streetscape and amenity: The replacement of a rear carport with a driveway will improve the Middle Street streetscape. The replacement of two small trees with a row of small shrubs at the front boundary will maintain streetscape amenity at East Crescent Street.

(j) Allows light to penetrate between buildings: Light penetration between buildings will be maintained.

(k) Encourage the provision of space for biodiversity conservation and ecological processes: Soft landscape areas and native plantings are proposed.

Excavation Yes Earthworks will generally be located in the area of an

existing patio and rock outcrop and will not have any significant impact on vegetation. Conditions are recommended to ensure the structural integrity of adjoining properties.


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013 R4 Residential Development Complies Comments Landscaping Front gardens

Yes The proposed landscape plan is satisfactory to Council’s Landscape Development Officer. The selection of low shrub perimeter plantings is appropriate and will not give rise to any amenity impacts on adjoining properties, particularly in regards to views.

Private & communal open space

Yes The development complies with the minimum open space requirements in section B1.5.10, as follows:

Proposed Control (min) Complies

Private Open Space Ground 139m2 105m2 (35m2/dw) Yes

Above ground

Unit 2: 25m2

Unit 3: 10.7m2 8m2/dw Yes

Garbage storage

Yes

The proposal includes a bin store area with direct access to Middle Street.

Site facilities Yes The development will have adequate storage within units and in the garage, and a clothes line is provided in the rear yard.

B1.6 Efficient Use of Resources Energy efficiency Yes BASIX commitments for new multi-dwelling include solar

panels and a 5,000L rainwater tank. Passive solar design Yes The units will have adequate passive solar access by virtue

of the primary dual orientation to the southeast. Thermal mass & insulation Yes Masonry wall construction is proposed. Natural ventilation Yes All habitable rooms will have window openings. All

primary living spaces will have dual aspects. Colours & materials Yes External walls will be predominantly white. Hotwater systems Yes Gas instantaneous hotwater system, as per BASIX. Water conservation Stormwater management

Yes 5,000L rainwater tank and indigenous plantings, per BASIX.

Waste management & minimisation

Yes Existing building fabric will be substantially retained.

B10 Car Parking & Transport Parking provision No The proposed garage and carport will be allocated to units

2 & 3, with nil allocation to the studio, which complies. However, the proposal does not include a visitor car space.

Control Proposed Complies

Parking provisions Studio Max.1 space (1 space/u @ 1u) Nil Yes 3+ bed Max.3 spaces (1.5spc/u @ 2u) 2 Yes Visitor Min. 1 space Nil No

The conversion of a duplex into 3 dwellings will materially increase on-street parking demand. The non-provision of a visitor space is reasonable for a small scale development. The site is within 200m walking distance to bus services on Blues Point Road, and reasonable walking distance to the McMahons Point ferry to the south and North Sydney railway station to the north.


SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS The development would result in the creation of new residential floor space; accordingly Section 94 contributions apply. In accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule 2013/14, the contribution amount for the multi dwelling housing is $38,186.01. Despite any other provision in Council's Contributions Plan, a condition must not be imposed on a development consent pursuant to section 94(1) or section 94(3) of the EP&A Act that will result in a contribution exceeding $20,000 per residential dwelling. This is required under the Direction issued by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 28 August 2012 under section 94E of the Act. The contributions include a credit for existing dwelling units and have been calculated in accordance with the Ministerial Direction, as shown in the table below.

Section 94 Contributions Residential * Administration $367.45 Child Care Facilities $636.52 Community Centres $1,668.27 Library Acquisition $311.16 Library Premises and Equipment $962.66 Multi Purpose Indoor Sports Facility $262.83 Olympic Pool $856.15 Open Space Acquisition $10,492.24 Open Space Increased Capacity $20,797.49 Public Domain Improvements $822.12 Traffic Improvements $1,009.12

Total Contributions $38,186.01 * Proposed multi-dwelling housing (1 x studio, 1 x 3-bedroom & 1 x 4-

bedroom unit), NET of existing duplex (1 x 2-bedroom & 1 x 3-bedroom) ALL LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT All likely impacts of the proposed development have been considered within the context of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL CONSIDERED 1. Statutory Controls Yes 2. Policy Controls Yes 3. Design in relation to existing building and Yes natural environment 4. Landscaping/Open Space Provision Yes 5. Traffic generation and Carparking provision Yes 6. Loading and Servicing facilities Yes


7. Physical relationship to and impact upon adjoining Yes development (Views, privacy, overshadowing, etc.) 8. Site Management Issues Yes 9. All relevant S79C considerations of Yes Environmental Planning and Assessment (Amendment) Act 1979 SUBMITTERS CONCERNS The issues raised in the submissions are addressed below. (a) New building rather than alterations and additions

Comment

: The development is characterised as new building, however, with substantial retention of, and alterations and additions to, the existing structure. Structural engineering advice has been submitted by the applicant in support of the structural integrity and retention of the wall on the northern boundary. The development has been assessed in accordance with relevant controls for a new building, however, allowing for concessions where the variations do not result in any material impacts. Where breaches have been identified as excessive and giving rise to significant impacts, conditions have been recommended to reduce the extent of variations and impacts to reasonable levels, on the balance of the considerations.

(b) Height, setbacks, bulk & scale, overdevelopment

Comment

: The development substantially complies with the 12m building height limit and will not exceed the ridge height of the existing building. The front building alignment will be generally within the established front setback with adjoining buildings, except for the lower ground floor extension which will not add significantly to the bulk and scale of the building, or have any material view impacts. The elements in breach of the height control, being the south eastern corner of the roof awning and 2nd floor balcony screen, will be required to be pulled back (via condition) in order to reduce shadow impacts similar to a height-compliant scheme. The proposed balconies have been reduced, reconfigured and relocated to the south eastern corner of the building, and will achieve adequate separations from adjoining balconies. To the extent that the breach of the northern side boundary building height plane will cause severe view impacts on the rear apartments of the adjoining building, a condition has been recommended to further set back the northern wall of the 2nd floor level. The possibility of locating building bulk toward the rear of the site is noted; however, this option is not the subject of the application, and would likely give rise to similar or other impacts. The conversion of the existing 2-3 storey duplex into a 3-4 storey building containing 3 dwellings is not an overdevelopment of the site. The building will be substantially lesser in scale than the adjoining multi-storey apartment blocks which dominate the streetscape.


(c) Heritage and character

Comment

: The 2009 Heritage Review recommended that the site be removed from the heritage schedule, and the downgrade is reflected in the LEP 2013 which is in force. Council’s Conservation Planner has considered the substantial alterations to the building and concluded that the proposal will not have any detrimental impact on the significance or curtilage of the nearby heritage items, nor will the development have any detrimental impact on the McMahons Point South conservation area for which little original character is left in this part of Middle Street. The building will have well-modulated facades and remain significantly lesser in scale compared to the adjoining multi-storey apartment blocks.

(d) Privacy

Comment

: The balconies have been reduced in size, relocated and provided with privacy screening to the extent necessary to achieve adequate separation distances and reasonable privacy in a high density residential setting. The primary deck areas and orientation of the balconies will be to the southeast across East Crescent Street, rather than north or southwest toward neighbouring units across side boundaries.

(e) View impacts

Comment

: The development has been assessed in accordance with the view sharing principles established by the Land & Environment Court. The impacts on the majority of neighbouring dwellings are assessed to be negligible to minor, with these units maintaining existing high levels of view amenity. The front balconies have been minimised, including a further 700mm setback to the ground floor balustrade, generally in accordance with the submission of the Body Corporate of No’s.8-10 East Crescent Street, which would achieve an acceptable level of view impact on units 3, 6 & 9. The expectation of retaining views to the most affected units 7, 10 & 13 is less strong, as they are located at the rear of the apartment block on lower levels and rely on a side setback for views. Nevertheless, a condition will require the northern wall of the new second floor level to be further set back from the side boundary, in order to allow for reasonable view sharing.

(f) Overshadowing

Comment

: The development is substantially height-compliant, and as such, its shadow impacts will be similar to those of a height compliant scheme. The affected units at No’s. 2-4 East Crescent Street are located on the lower levels of the multi-storey apartment block within a high density residential zone, for which the expectation of maintaining solar access is less strong. Those elements in breach of the height limit, being the roof awning and second floor balcony screen will be required to be pulled back, to lessen shadow impacts. The affected units are well set back from the proposed development and north-facing, and will continue to have high levels of daylight amenity despite the development.


(g) Parking

Comment

: The provision of 2 car spaces for the two larger units, and no parking for the studio unit, complies with Council’s maximum parking rates. The lack of on-site visitor parking is acceptable, in consideration of the small scale of the development and the accessibility of the site by public transport.

(h) Site coverage and landscaping

Comment

: Site coverage will be increased, however, will remain compliant with the DCP. Front and rear garden settings will be maintained. Arborist’s reports have been submitted, including special protection measures for the Olive Tree and camellias growing in No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street. A condition has been recommended for implementation of the protection measures.

(i) Number of units

Comment

: The development is proposed and assessed as multi-dwelling housing containing 3 units. On the evidence of the submitted strata plan and deletion of the kitchen on the first floor level, Council is satisfied that unit 3 will be for a single occupancy, and as such, lift access to both levels of the unit can be retained to maximise residential amenity to the dwelling.

(j) Accuracy of documentation

Comment

: The view assessment contained in this report is based on the applicant’s view analysis and supporting statement of methodology, as corroborated by Council officer’s visits to neighbouring properties and site photos. Site coverage calculations have been checked and found to be accurate and in accordance with definitions in the DCP. Council’s Conservation Planner heritage assessment does not rely solely on the submitted Heritage Impact Statement which may contain errors; rather includes an examination of other heritage and property information in Council’s files.

CONCLUSION The development application has been assessed against the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 and the North Sydney Development Control Plan 2013. The application is characterised as new building, however, with substantial retention of, and alterations and additions to, the existing structure, and the planning controls and provisions have been applied accordingly. The proposal is substantially height-compliant and its primary front building alignment is within the established average front setback with adjoining buildings. The bulk and scale of the proposed building is significantly less than the adjoining buildings, and will not have any detrimental impacts on the streetscape. The development will have reasonable privacy, shadow and view impacts, subject to conditions requiring design amendments.


The concerns raised by the submitters have been addressed in the report. Substantiated issues are addressed by way of condition. RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 80 OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979 (AS AMENDED) A. THAT the North Sydney Independent Planning Panel, under the delegation of the

General Manager as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application No. 367/13 for multi dwelling housing comprising alterations and additions to convert a duplex into 3 apartments with new lower floor and additional floor, subject to the attached standard conditions and following site specific conditions:

Design amendments A5. The development is to comply with the following:

(a) The northern wall of the second floor kitchen/living/dining room is to

be set back 2.1m, as measured from the external wall to the northern side boundary, and with a commensurate increase in the setback of the northern parapet and roof. (Reason: To achieve equitable view sharing)

(b) The south eastern corner of the roof awning above the second floor balcony is to be set back 1m from the eastern edge. (Reason: To minimise shadow impacts)

(c) The privacy screen on the southern side of the second floor balcony is to be reduced by 2m so that it does not extend east of the front (eastern) building alignment. (Reason: To minimise shadow impacts)

(d) The height of the parapet of the garage is not to exceed 3.5m from finished footpath level on Middle Street. (Reason: To reduce bulk and scale for streetscape amenity to Middle Street)

(e) The balcony balustrades are to be black in colour. (Reason: To minimise visual impacts)

The Certifying Authority must ensure that the building plans and specifications submitted by the Applicant, referenced and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully satisfy the above.


Ausgrid requirements A6. The developer must demonstrate compliance with Ausgrid’s Netword

Standard NS113 in relation to fire segregation requirements from the adjacent substation, in particular, with regard to clearance distances to glass windows and ventilation outlets/inlets. In this regard, written certification from Ausgrid must be obtained and a copy provided to the Certifying Authority, prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. (Reason: To satisfy Ausgrid requirements and public safety)

Service adjustments E27. Where required, the adjustment or inclusion of any new utility service

facilities must be carried out by the person acting on the consent and in accordance with the requirements of the relevant utility authority. These works shall be at no cost to Council. It is the Applicant’s full responsibility to make contact with the relevant utility authorities to ascertain the impacts of the proposal upon utility services at the appropriate stage of the development (including water, phone, gas and the like). Council accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any matter arising from its approval of this application involving any influence upon utility services provided by another authority. (Reason: To ensure the service requirements are met)

Susanna Cheng David Hoy SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ASSESSMENTS Geoff Mossemenear ACTING MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

September 2013 v1

NORTH SYDNEY COUNCIL CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL

6 EAST CRESCENT STREET, MCMAHONS POINT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. 367/13

A. Conditions that Identify Approved Plans Development in Accordance with Plans/documentation A1. The development must be carried out in accordance with the following drawings and

documentation and endorsed with Council’s approval stamp, except where amended by the following conditions of this consent.

Plan No. Issue Title Drawn by Received

DA001 C Site Plan & Site Analysis Mark Hurcum Design Practice

20/5/14

DA101 C Lower Ground Floor Plan Mark Hurcum Design Practice

20/5/14

DA102 C Ground Floor Plan Mark Hurcum Design Practice

20/5/14

DA103 C First Floor Plan Mark Hurcum Design Practice

23/5/14

DA104 C Second Floor Plan Mark Hurcum Design Practice

20/5/14

DA105 C Roof Plan Mark Hurcum Design Practice

20/5/14

DA106 AA Garage Plans Mark Hurcum Design Practice

24/2/14

DA201 C.2 North Elevation Mark Hurcum Design Practice

21/5/14

DA202 C.2 South Elevation Mark Hurcum Design Practice

21/5/14

DA203 C.3 East Elevation Mark Hurcum Design Practice

23/5/14

DA204 AA West Elevation Mark Hurcum Design Practice

24/2/14

DA205 B Garage Elevations & Section

Mark Hurcum Design Practice

23/5/14

DA301 A Section A-A Mark Hurcum Design Practice

21/5/14

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

accordance with the determination of Council, Public Information)

ATTACHMENT TO IPP03 - 04/06/2014

6 EAST CRESCENT STREET, MCMAHONS POINT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. 367/13 PAGE 2

September 2013 v1

Plans on Site A2. A copy of all stamped approved plans, specifications and documents (including the

plans, specifications and documents submitted and approved with the Construction Certificate) must be kept on site at all times so as to be readily available for perusal by any officer of Council or the Principal Certifying Authority. All documents kept on site in accordance with this condition must be provided to any officer of the Council or the certifying authority upon their request.


accordance with the determination of Council, Public Information and to ensure ongoing compliance)

No Demolition of Extra Fabric A3. Alterations to, and demolition of the existing building shall be limited to that

documented on the approved plans.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the approved development) External Finishes & Materials A4. External finishes and materials must be in accordance with the submitted drawing

SK41 Revision B dated 27/05/14, prepared by Mark Hurcum Design Practice and received by Council on 27/05/14, except where amended by the conditions of this consent or unless otherwise modified by Council in writing.


accordance with the determination of Council, Public Information) Design amendments

A5. The development is to comply with the following:

(a) The northern wall of the second floor kitchen/living/dining room is to

be set back 2.1m, as measured from the external wall to the northern side boundary, and with a commensurate increase in the setback of the northern parapet and roof.

(Reason: To achieve equitable view sharing) (b) The south eastern corner of the roof awning above the second floor

balcony is to be set back 1m to the west. (Reason: To minimise shadow impacts)



September 2013 v1

(c) The privacy screen on the southern side of the second floor balcony is to be reduced so that it does not extend east of the front (eastern) building alignment.

(Reason: To minimise shadow impacts) (d) The height of the parapet of the garage is not to exceed 3.5m from

finished footpath level on Middle Street. (Reason: To reduce bulk and scale for streetscape amenity) (e) The balcony balustrades are to be black in colour. (Reason: To minimise view impacts)

The Certifying Authority must ensure that the building plans and specifications submitted by the Applicant, referenced and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully satisfy the above.

Ausgrid requirements

A6. The developer must demonstrate compliance with Ausgrid’s Netword Standard

NS113 in relation to fire segregation requirements from the adjacent substation, in particular, with regard to clearance distances to glass windows and ventilation outlets/inlets. In this regard, written certification from Ausgrid must be obtained and a copy provided to the Certifying Authority, prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.

(Reason: To satisfy Ausgrid requirements and public safety)

C. Prior to the Issue of a Construction Certificate (and ongoing, where indicated). Dilapidation Report Damage to Public Infrastructure

C1. A dilapidation survey and report (including photographic record) must be prepared by

a suitably qualified consultant which details the pre-developed condition of the existing public infrastructure in the vicinity of the development site. Particular attention must be paid to accurately recording any pre-developed damaged areas so that Council is fully informed when assessing any damage to public infrastructure caused as a result of the development. A copy of the dilapidation survey and report is to be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The developer may be held liable for all damage to public infrastructure in the vicinity of the site, where such damage is not accurately recorded and demonstrated as pre-existing under the requirements of this condition.



September 2013 v1

The developer shall bear the cost of carrying out works to restore all public infrastructure damaged as a result of the carrying out of the development, and no occupation of the development shall occur until damage caused as a result of the carrying out of the development is rectified. A copy of the dilapidation survey and report must be lodged with North Sydney Council by the Certifying Authority with submission of the Construction Certificate documentation. (Reason: To record the condition of public infrastructure prior to the

commencement of construction) Dilapidation Report Private Property (Excavation) C2. A full dilapidation survey and report on the visible and structural condition of all

neighbouring structures within the ‘zone of influence’ of the required excavations must be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The zone of influence is to be defined as the horizontal distance from the edge of the excavation face to twice the excavation depth.

The dilapidation report and survey is to be prepared by a consulting structural/geotechnical engineer agreed to by both the applicant and the owner of any affected adjoining property.

All costs incurred in achieving compliance with this condition shall be borne by the person entitled to act on this Consent.

In the event that access for undertaking the dilapidation survey is denied by an adjoining owner, the applicant MUST DEMONSTRATE, in writing, to the satisfaction of Council that all reasonable steps have been taken to obtain access and advise the affected property owner of the reason for the survey and that these steps have failed. Written concurrence must be obtained from Council in such circumstances.

Note: This documentation is for record keeping purposes only, and may be used by

the developer or affected property owner to assist in any action required to resolve any dispute over damage to adjoining properties arising from the works. It is in the applicant’s and adjoining owner’s interest for it to be as full and detailed as possible.

(Reason: To record the condition of property/ies prior to the commencement of

construction)



September 2013 v1

Shoring for Adjoining Property C3. A photographic survey and dilapidation report of adjoining properties No’s. 2-4 East

Crescent Street and No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street, McMahons Point detailing the physical condition of those properties, both internally and externally, including, but not limited to, such items as walls, ceilings, roof, structural members and other similar items, SHALL BE submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. A copy of this documentation must be provided to the Council for record purposes.

Note: Approval of engineering drawings for shoring works to be located on adjoining property by the Certifying Authority does not authorise a trespass on private or public land. All relevant permissions/ legal rights must be obtained to undertake any works on adjoining land.

(Reason: To ensure the protection of existing public infrastructure and adjoining

properties) Structural Adequacy of Adjoining Properties – Excavation Works C4. A report prepared by an appropriately qualified and practising structural engineer

detailing the structural adequacy of adjoining properties No’s. 8 – 10 East Cresscent Street, McMahons Point, which certifies their ability to withstand the proposed excavation and outlines any measures required to be implemented to ensure that no damage will occur to adjoining properties during the course of the works, must be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The measures outlined in the certified report must be complied with at all times.

(Reason: To ensure the protection and structural integrity of adjoining properties

in close proximity during excavation works) Structural Adequacy of Existing Building C5. A report prepared by an appropriately qualified and practising structural engineer,

certifying the structural adequacy of the property and its ability to withstand the proposed additional, or altered structural loads during all stages of construction shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to issue of any Construction Certificate. The certified report must also include all details of the methodology to be employed in construction phases to achieve the above requirements. The methodology in the certified report must be complied with at all times.

(Reason: To ensure the structural integrity of the building is maintained)



September 2013 v1

Geotechnical Certificate C6. A certificate prepared by an appropriately qualified Geotechnical Engineer certifying

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. Recommendations made in the certified report must be complied with at all times.

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) Sediment Control C7. Where construction or excavation activity requires the disturbance of the soil surface

or existing vegetation, erosion and sediment control techniques, as a minimum, are to be in accordance with the publication Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils & Construction (4th edition, Landcom, 2004) commonly referred to as the “Blue Book” or a suitable and effective alternative method. A Sediment Control Plan must be prepared and submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate and prior to any works commencing. The Sediment Control Plan must be consistent with the Blue Book and disclose:

a) All details of drainage to protect and drain the site during the construction

processes; b) All sediment control devices, barriers and the like; c) Sedimentation tanks, ponds or the like;



September 2013 v1

d) Covering materials and methods; and e) A schedule and programme of the sequence of the sediment and erosion

control works or devices to be installed and maintained. f) Methods for the temporary and controlled disposal of stormwater during

construction.

All works must be undertaken in accordance with the approved Sediment Control plan. 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 protect the environment from the effects of sedimentation and

erosion from development sites) Waste Management Plan C8. A Waste Management Plan is to be submitted for approval by the Certifying Authority

prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The plan must include, but not be limited to:

a) The estimated volume of waste and method of disposal for the construction

and operation phases of the development; b) The design of the on-site waste storage and recycling area; and c) Administrative arrangements for waste and recycling management during the

construction process.

The approved Waste Management Plan must be complied with at all times in the carrying out of the development. (Reason: To encourage the minimisation of waste and recycling of building

waste) External Finishes and Materials C9. The external colours and finishes must be in accordance with the approved schedule

of finishes and materials. 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 quality built form of development)



September 2013 v1

Roofing Materials - Reflectivity C10. Roofing materials must be factory pre-finished with low glare and reflectivity

properties to be compatible with the colours of neighbouring buildings. The selected roofing material must not cause a glare nuisance or excessive reflectivity to adjoining or nearby properties. Plans and specifications which comply 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 that excessive glare or reflectivity nuisance from roofing

materials does not occur as a result of the development) No External Service Ducts C11. Service ducts must be provided within the building to keep external walls free of

plumbing, drainage or any other utility installations. Plans and specifications which comply 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 quality built form of the development)

Stormwater Management and Disposal Design Plan – Construction Issue Detail C12. Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the applicant shall have a site drainage

management plan prepared by a qualified drainage design engineer. The site drainage management plan must detail the following requirements of North Sydney Council:

a) Compliance with BCA drainage requirements, Councils Engineering

Performance guide and current Australian Standards and guidelines, such as AS/NZ3500.3.2 1998, National Plumbing and Drainage Code.

b) Stormwater runoff and subsoil drainage generated by the approved dwellings must be conveyed in a controlled manner by gravity to Council’s kerb in East Crescent Street via existing stormwater lines.

c) The stormwater drainage system shall be designed for an average recurrence interval (A.R.I.) of 1 in 20 years.

d) All redundant stormwater pipelines (if any) within the footpath area shall be removed and the footpath and kerb reinstated.

e) Pipelines within the footpath area shall be hot dipped galvanised steel rectangular hollow section with a minimum wall thickness of 4.0 millimetres and a section height of 100 millimetres.

f) Any footpath panel on East Crescent Street disturbed for the purpose of stormwater connection shall be reconstructed as whole panel.



September 2013 v1

g) Provision is to be made for the collection and disposal in an approved manner of any overland flow entering the subject property, or concentrated as a result of the proposed works.

h) All sub-soil seepage drainage shall be discharged via a suitable silt arrester pit, directly to Council’s nearest stormwater drainage line. Details of all plans certified as being adequate for their intended purpose and complaint with the provisions of AS3500.3.2 by an appropriately qualified and practising civil engineer, shall be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate.

i) The design and installation of the Rainwater Tanks shall comply with Basix and Sydney Water requirements. Overflow from tank shall be connected by gravity to the stormwater disposal system.

j) Prevent any stormwater egress into adjacent properties by creating physical barriers and surface drainage interception.

k) Provide subsoil drainage to all necessary areas with pump out facilities as required.

The Certifying Authority issuing the Construction Certificate must ensure that the approved drainage plan and specifications, satisfying the requirements of this condition, is referenced on and accompanies the Construction Certificate.

(Reason: To ensure controlled stormwater management and disposal without

nuisance) Bond for Damage and Completion of Infrastructure Works – Stormwater, Kerb and Gutter, Footpaths, Vehicular Crossing and Road Pavement C13. Prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate, security deposit or bank guarantee

must be provided to Council to the sum of $7,000.00 to be held by Council for the payment of cost for any/all of the following: a) making good any damage caused to any property of the Council as a

consequence of the doing of anything to which this consent relates, b) completing any public work (such as road work, kerbing and guttering,

footway construction, stormwater drainage and environmental controls) required in connection with this consent

c) remedying any defects in any such public work that arise within 6 months after

the work is completed. The security in accordance with the schedule contained later in these conditions and must be provided by way of a deposit with the Council; or a guarantee satisfactory to Council (such as a satisfactory bank guarantee).

The security will be refundable following the expiration of 6 months from the issue of any final Occupation Certificate or completion of public work required to be completed (whichever is the latest) but only upon inspection and release by Council’s Engineers.


http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/epaaa1979389/s4.html#environment�

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/epaaa1979389/s4.html#control�


September 2013 v1

Council shall have full authority to make use of the bond for such restoration works as deemed necessary by Council in circumstances including the following: - • where the damage constitutes a hazard in which case Council may make use of

the security immediately; • the applicant has not repaired or commenced repairing damage within 48 hours

of the issue by Council in writing of instructions to undertake such repairs or works;

• works in the public road associated with the development are to an unacceptable quality; and

• the Certifying Authority must ensure that security is provided to North Sydney Council prior to issue of any Construction Certificate.

(Reason: To ensure appropriate security for works on public land and an

appropriate quality for new public infrastructure)

Upgrade of existing building – Fire Spread and Safe Egress C14. Pursuant to clause 94 of the EP&A Regulation 2000, aspects of the existing building

must be brought into conformity with the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

Work must be carried out as part of the development so as to upgrade the building to bring it into compliance with Performance Requirements CP1 and CP2 of the BCA.

Plans and specifications showing the upgrading works which must be carried out

under this condition must be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate.

Notes: 1. The Certifying Authority must be satisfied that the plans and specifications

submitted prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate comply with the requirements of this condition.

2. The Certifying Authority issuing the Construction Certificate has no power to remove the requirements to upgrade the existing building as required by this condition.

3. Where this condition specifies compliance with the performance requirements of the BCA, the Certifying Authority, subject to their level of accreditation, may be satisfied as to such matters.

(Reason: Application of Regulations relating to Fire and Life Safety)



September 2013 v1

Tree Protection Measures to be shown on Construction Drawings C15. The recommendations contained within the tree reports prepared by Growing My Way

Tree Services, dated October 2013 & February 2014, and received by Council on 22/10/13 & 23/4/14, shall be implemented on site for the duration of the works. The Certifying Authority must ensure that the building plans and specifications submitted by the Applicant referenced on and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully satisfy the requirements of this condition.

(Reason: To ensure that appropriate tree protection measures are shown on

construction drawings) Protection of Trees C16. The following tree is required to be protected as part of the development consent:

• Wild Olive Tree growing on the adjoining property at No’s. 8-10 East Crescent

Street (Reason: Protection of existing environmental and community assets) Pruning of Trees C17. Any tree pruning necessary for construction shall be carried out in consultation with

the owner of the tree under the supervision of an appropriately qualified Arborist.

(Reason: To ensure the protection and longevity of existing significant trees) Asbestos Material Survey C18. A report must be prepared by a suitably qualified person in relation to the existing

building fabric to be demolished and/or disturbed identifying the presence or otherwise of asbestos contamination and, if asbestos contamination is present, making recommendations as to the work required to safely address the contamination. Any demolition works or other works identified in the report as having to be carried out must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the report and the following: a) the removal of asbestos must be undertaken by a WorkCover licensed

contractor; b) all removal must be in strict accordance with the requirements of the

WorkCover Authority in relation to the removal, handling and disposal of material containing asbestos and any Work Safe Australia requirements.

c) during the removal of any asbestos a sign stating “DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” must be erected in a visible position at the boundary of the site; and



September 2013 v1

d) Waste disposal receipts must be provided to the Certifying Authority as proof of correct disposal of asbestos laden waste.

The report must be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The Certifying Authority must ensure that the report, and other plans, referenced on and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully satisfy the requirements of this condition.

(Reason: To ensure the long term health of workers on site and occupants of the

building is not put at risk unnecessarily) Location of Plant C19. All plant and equipment (including but not limited to air conditioning equipment) is

not to be located on balconies or the roof. 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: Minimise impact on surrounding properties, improved visual

appearance and amenity for locality) Air Conditioners in Residential Premises C20. The use of any air conditioner installed on the premises must comply with the

requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Noise Control) Regulations 2008 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 and must not:

(b) emit a noise that is audible within a habitable room in any affected residence (regardless of whether any door or window to that room is open);

(i) before 8.00am and after 10.00pm on any Saturday, Sunday or Public Holiday; or

(ii) before 7.00am or after 10.00pm on any other day

(c) cause an LAeq(15min) which exceeds the RBL background noise level by more than 5dB when measured at the boundary of any affected residence. The modifying factor adjustments in Section 4 of the EPA Industrial Noise Policy will be applied.

“affected residence” includes residential premises (including any lot in the strata scheme or another strata scheme), premises for short-term accommodation and hospitals.

“boundary” includes any window or elevated window of an affected residence.



September 2013 v1

Terms in this condition have the same meaning as in the Noise Guide for Local Government and the Industrial Noise Policy published by the NSW Environment Protection Authority. (Reason: To maintain residential amenity)

Section 94 Contributions C21. 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 $367.45 Child Care Facilities $636.52 Community Centres $1,668.27 Library Acquisition $311.16 Library Premises & Equipment $962.66 Multi Purpose Indoor Sports Facility $262.83 Open Space Acquisition $10,492.24 Open Space Increased Capacity $20,797.49 Olympic Pool $856.15 Public Domain Improvements $822.12 Traffic Improvements $1,009.12 The total contribution is $38,186.01

The contribution MUST BE paid prior issue of any 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 C22. 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:



September 2013 v1

Security deposit/ guarantee Amount ($) Footpath Damage Bond $7,000.00 TOTAL BONDS $7,000.00

(Reason: Compliance with the development consent)

BASIX Certificate C23. 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. (487334M_02) 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) D. Prior to the Commencement of any Works (and continuing where indicated) Photographic Survey (Heritage Items) D1. Prior to any works commencing a photographic survey recording, in accordance with

the NSW Heritage Office Guidelines "Photographic recording of Heritage Items using file or digital capture", is to be prepared to the satisfaction of Council’s Historian and Conservation Planner. Two (2) copies of the photographic survey must be provided to Council.

(Reason: To provide a historical record of heritage significant fabric on site for

archival purposes) Protection of Trees D2. All trees that are specifically nominated to be retained by notation on plans or by

condition as a requirement of this consent must be maintained and protected during demolition, excavation and construction on the site in accordance with AS4970-2009 (Protection of trees on development sites). A report containing recommendations, and methods of tree protection prepared by an appropriately qualified person must be provided to the Certifying Authority for approval by an appropriately qualified person prior to commencement of any works on the site. Any recommendations must be undertaken for the duration of works on the site.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the requirement to retain significant

planting on the site)



September 2013 v1

Notice of Proposed Work (Remediation Work) D3. Notice of proposed work must be given to the Council in accordance with Clause 16

of State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land. The following additional information must be submitted with the notice to the Council:

a) Copies of any preliminary investigation, detailed investigation and remediation

action plan for the site; and b) Contact details for the remediation contractor and any other party responsible for

ensuring compliance of remediation work with regulatory requirements. Note: 30 days notice is required for any remediation work. In the case of work required to be carried out immediately under the terms of a remediation order a minimum of 2 days notice is required)

(Reason: Protection of the environment, SEPP 55 compliance)

Public Liability Insurance – Works on Public Land D4. Any person or contractor undertaking works on public land must take out Public Risk

Insurance with a minimum cover of $20 million in relation to the occupation of public land and the undertaking of approved works within Council’s road reserve or public land, as approved by this consent. The Policy is to note, and provide protection/full indemnification for North Sydney Council, as an interested party. A copy of the Policy must be submitted to Council prior to commencement of any works. The Policy must be valid for the entire period that the works are being undertaken.

(Note: Applications for hoarding permits, vehicular crossings etc will require

evidence of insurance upon lodgement of the application.)

(Reason: To ensure the community is protected from the cost of any claim for damages arising from works on public land)

Notification of New Addresses D5. Prior to the commencement of any building works, an application must be made and

written confirmation received from North Sydney Council of the allocated street address (house number) and/ or unit numbers of the completed project. To assist Council, a plan for unit numbering should be submitted for concurrence. These details will be recorded in Council records and must be displayed at the property in accordance with the provisions of the applicable Australian Standard relating to rural and urban addressing. A copy of the allocation confirmation must be submitted to the Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate.



September 2013 v1

(Reason: To ensure that Council records are accurate, and that house numbering complies with the requirements of Council’s House Numbering Policy. Proper house numbering also assists emergency services in readily locating properties)

Sydney Water Approvals D6. Prior to the commencement of any works, the approved plans must be submitted to a

Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Care Centre to determine whether the development application will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met. The approved plans will be appropriately stamped. The Certifying Authority must ensure that a Quick Check agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before the commencement of building works. Note: For Quick Check agent details please refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then see Building and Renovating under the heading Building and Developing, or telephone 13 20 92. (Reason: To ensure compliance with Sydney Water requirements)

Asbestos Material Survey

D7. Prior to the commencement of any works, a report must be prepared by a suitably

qualified person in relation to the existing building fabric to be demolished and/or disturbed identifying the presence or otherwise of asbestos contamination and, if asbestos contamination is present, making recommendations as to the work required to safely address the contamination. Any demolition works or other works identified in the report as having to be carried out must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the report and the following: a) the removal of asbestos must be undertaken by a WorkCover licensed

contractor; b) all removal must be in strict accordance with the requirements of the

WorkCover Authority in relation to the removal, handling and disposal of material containing asbestos and any Work Safe Australia requirements.

c) during the removal of any asbestos a sign stating “DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” must be erected in a visible position at the boundary of the site; and

d) Waste disposal receipts must be provided to the Certifying Authority as proof of correct disposal of asbestos laden waste.

The report must be submitted to the Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. The Certifying Authority must ensure that the report, and other plans, referenced on and accompanying the issued Construction Certificate, fully satisfy the requirements of this condition.



September 2013 v1

(Reason: To ensure the long term health of workers on site and occupants of the building is not put at risk unnecessarily)

Commencement of Works Notice

D8. Building work, demolition or excavation in accordance with this development consent

must not be commenced until the developer has given at least 2 days notice to North Sydney Council of the person’s intention to commence building work, demolition or excavation in accordance with this development consent.

(Reason: To ensure appropriate safeguarding measures are in place prior to the

commencement of any building work, demolition or excavation) E. During Demolition and Building Work Cigarette Butt Receptacle E1. A cigarette butt receptacle is to be provided on the site for the duration of

excavation/demolition/construction process, for convenient use of site workers.

(Reason: To ensure adequate provision is made for builders’ waste) Re-use of Sandstone E2. Sandstone blocks (if any) removed from the site are to be either stored for re-use on

site or offered to Council in the first instance.

Note: The provisions of the Heritage Act may also apply to altering any sandstone elements on any site)

(Reason: To allow for preservation of cultural resources within the North Sydney

Council area) Parking Restrictions

E3. Existing public parking provisions in the vicinity of the site must be maintained at all

times during works. The placement of any barriers, traffic cones, obstructions or other device in the road shoulder or kerbside lane is prohibited without the prior written consent of Council. Changes to existing public parking facilities/restrictions must be approved by the North Sydney Local Traffic Committee. The Developer will be held responsible for any breaches of this condition, and will incur any fines associated with enforcement by Council regulatory officers. (Reason: To ensure that existing kerbside parking provisions are not

compromised during works)



September 2013 v1

Road Reserve Safety E4. All public footways and roadways fronting and adjacent to the site must be maintained

in a safe condition at all times during the course of the development works, with no obstructions caused to the said footways and roadways. Construction materials and plant must not be stored in the road reserve without approval of Council.. A safe pedestrian circulation route and a pavement/route free of trip hazards must be maintained at all times on or adjacent to any public access ways fronting the construction site.

Where public infrastructure is damaged, repair works must be carried out in when and as directed by Council officers (at full Developer cost). Where pedestrian circulation is diverted on to the roadway or verge areas, clear directional signage and protective barricades must be installed in accordance with AS1742-3 (1996) “Traffic Control Devices for Work on Roads”. If pedestrian circulation is not satisfactorily maintained across the site frontage, and action is not taken promptly to rectify the defects, Council may undertake proceedings to stop work.

(Reason: Public Safety)

Temporary Disposal of Stormwater Runoff E5. During construction, stormwater runoff must be disposed in a controlled manner that

is compatible with the erosion and sediment controls on the site. Immediately upon completion of any impervious areas on the site (including roofs, driveways, paving) and where the final drainage system is incomplete, the necessary temporary drainage systems must be installed to reasonably manage and control runoff as far as the approved point of stormwater discharge. Such ongoing measures must be to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

(Reason: Stormwater control during construction)

Progress Survey E6. 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) at the completion of the first structural floor level indicating the level of that floor and the relationship of the building to the boundaries;

b) at the completed height of the building, prior to the placement of concrete

inform work, or the laying of roofing materials; and c) at completion, the relationship of the building, and any projections thereto, to

the boundaries.



September 2013 v1

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)

Removal of Extra Fabric E7. Should any portion of the existing building, trees, or curtilage of the site which is

indicated on the approved plans to be retained be damaged for whatever reason, all the works in the area of the damaged portion are to cease and written notification of the damage is to be given to Council forthwith. No work is to resume until the written approval of Council to do so is obtained. Failure to comply with the provisions of this condition may result in the Council taking further action including legal proceedings if necessary.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this development consent)

Dust Emission and Air Quality E8. The following must be complied with at all times:

(a) Materials must not be burnt on the site. (b) Vehicles entering and leaving the site with soil or fill material must be

covered. (c) Dust suppression measures must be carried out to minimise wind-borne

emissions in accordance with the NSW Department of Housing’s 1998 guidelines - Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction.

(d) Odour suppression measures must also be carried out where appropriate so as

to prevent nuisance occurring at adjoining properties. (Reason: To ensure residential amenity is maintained in the immediate vicinity)



September 2013 v1

Noise and Vibration E9. The works must be undertaken in accordance with the “Interim Construction Noise

Guideline” published by the NSW Environment Protection Authority, to ensure excessive levels of noise and vibration do not occur so as to minimise adverse effects experienced on any adjoining land.

(Reason: To ensure residential amenity is maintained in the immediate vicinity) No Work on Public Open Space E10. No work can be undertaken within adjoining public lands (ie. Parks, Reserves, Roads

etc) without the prior written consent of Council. In this regard the developer is to liaise with Council prior to the commencement of any design works or preparation of a Construction and Traffic Management Plan.

(Reason: Protection of existing public infrastructure and land and to ensure

public safety and proper management of public land) No Removal of Trees on Public Property E11. No trees on public property (footpaths, roads, reserves, etc.) unless specifically

approved by this consent shall be removed or damaged during construction including for the erection of any fences, hoardings or other temporary works.

(Reason: Protection of existing environmental infrastructure and community

assets) Protection of Trees E12. All trees required to be retained, as part of this consent must be protected from any

damage during construction works in accordance with AS4970-2009. All recommendations contained within the tree report prepared by Growing My Way Tree Services, dated October 2013 & February 2014, and received by Council on 22/10/13 & 23/4/14 must be implemented for the duration of the works.

In the event that any tree required to be retained is damaged during works on the site, notice of the damage must be given to Council forthwith. Notes: a. If the nominated tree is damaged to a significant degree or removed from the

site without prior written approval being obtained from Council, the issuing of fines or legal proceedings may be commenced for failure to comply with the conditions of this consent.



September 2013 v1

b. An application to modify this consent pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 will be required to address the non-compliance with any of the conditions of consent relating to the retention of nominated trees, and Council may require tree replenishment.

(Reason: Protection of existing environmental infrastructure and community

assets) Trees to be Removed E13. Permission is granted to remove all Trees and Shrubs from the property.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this development consent) Benchmarks E14. All permanent survey markers must be retained, undamaged, and not relocated.

(Reason: Protection of existing environmental infrastructure and community assets)

Special Permits E15. Unless otherwise specifically approved in writing by Council, all works, processes,

storage of materials, loading and unloading associated with the development must occur entirely on the property. The developer, owner or builder may apply for specific permits available from Council’s Customer Service Centre for the undermentioned activities on Council’s property. In the event that a permit is granted by Council for the carrying out of works, processes, storage of materials, loading and unloading associated with the development on Council's property, the development must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the permit. A minimum of forty-eight (48) hours notice is required for any permit: -

1) On-street mobile plant

Eg. cranes, concrete pumps, cherry-pickers, etc. - restrictions apply to the hours of operation, the area of operation, etc. Separate permits are required for each occasion and each piece of equipment. It is the developer's, owner’s and builder’s responsibilities to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that the use of any equipment does not violate adjoining property owner’s rights.

(Reason: Proper management of public land)



September 2013 v1

2) Hoardings

Permits are required to erect Class A and Class B hoardings. If an ‘A’ Class hoarding is to alienate a section of Council’s property, that section will require a permit for the occupation of Council’s property.


3) Storage of building materials and building waste containers (skips) on

Council’s property

Permits to utilise Council property for the storage of building materials and building waste containers (skips) are required for each location. Failure to obtain the relevant permits will result in the building materials or building waste containers (skips) being impounded by Council with no additional notice being given. Storage of building materials and waste containers on open space reserves and parks is prohibited.


4) Kerbside restrictions, construction zones

Attention is drawn to the existing kerbside restrictions adjacent to the development. Should alteration of existing kerbside restrictions be required, or the provision of a construction zone, the appropriate application must be made and the fee paid to Council. Alternatives to such restrictions may require referral to Council’s Traffic Committee and may take considerable time to be resolved. An earlier application is suggested to avoid delays in construction programs.


Noxious Plants E16. All lantana, privet, rubber trees, asthma weed, and other declared noxious plants on

the site, must be eradicated before the commencement of landscape works.

(Reason: To ensure that plants identified as weed species are not allowed to proliferate or interfere with a quality landscaping outcome)

Construction Hours E17. Building construction and works must be restricted to within the hours of 7.00 am to

5.00 pm Monday to Friday and on Saturday to within the hours of 8.00 am to 1.00 pm inclusive, with no work on Sundays and Public Holidays.



September 2013 v1

Demolition and excavation works must be restricted to within the hours of 8.00 am to 5.00 pm Monday to Friday only. For the purposes of this condition: a) “Building construction” means any physical activity on the site involved in the

erection of a structure, cladding, external finish, formwork, fixture, fitting of service installation and the unloading of plant, machinery, materials or the like.

b) “Demolition works” means any physical activity to tear down or break up a

structure (or part thereof) or surface, or the like, and includes the loading of demolition waste and the unloading of plant or machinery.

c) “Excavation work” means the use of any excavation machinery and the use of

jackhammers, rock breakers, excavators, loaders, or the like, regardless of whether the activities disturb or alter the natural state of the existing ground stratum or are breaking up/removing materials from the site and includes the unloading of plant or machinery associated with excavation work.

All builders, excavators must display, on-site, their twenty-four (24) hour contact telephone number, which is to be clearly visible and legible from any public place adjoining the site.

(Reason: To ensure that works do not interfere with reasonable amenity

expectations of residents and the community) Out of Hours Work Permits E18. Where it is necessary for works to occur outside those hours allowed by these

conditions, an application may be made to Council's Customer Services Centre for a permit to carry out works outside of the approved hours. If a permit is issued the works approved must be carried out in accordance with any requirements specified in the permit. Permits will only be approved if public safety is at risk. Applications which seek a variation to construction hours solely to benefit the developer will require the lodgement and favourable determination of a modification application pursuant to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Notes: 1) Failure to obtain a permit for work outside of the approved hours will result in

on the spot fines being issued, or Council pursuing any action required (including legal proceedings) to have the out of hours work cease, without prior warning.

2) Applications for out of hour’s works should be lodged with Council no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the date of the intended works.

3) Examples of activities for which permits may be granted include; • the erection of awnings, • footpath, road and other infrastructure works which can not be

carried out for public convenience reasons within normal hours,



September 2013 v1

• the erection and removal of hoardings and site cranes, and • craneage of materials which cannot be done for public convenience

reasons within normal working hours. 4) Examples of activities for which permits WILL NOT be granted include;

• extended concrete pours • works which are solely to convenience the developer or client, and • catch up works required to maintain or catch up with a construction

schedule. 5) Further information on permits can be obtained from the Council website at

www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au.

(Reason: To ensure that works do not interfere with reasonable amenity expectations of residents and the community)

Installation and Maintenance of Sediment Control E19. Erosion and sediment controls must be installed and maintained at all times in

accordance with the Sediment and erosion control plan submitted and approved with the Construction Certificate. Erosion and sediment measures must be maintained in accordance with the publication Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils & Construction (4th edition, Landcom, 2004), commonly referred to as the “Blue Book” and can only be removed when development activities have been completed and the site fully stabilised.


erosion from development sites) Sediment and Erosion Control Signage E20. A durable sign, must be erected during building works in a prominent location on site,

warning of penalties should appropriate erosion and sedimentation control devices not be maintained. A sign of the type referred to in this condition is available from Council.


erosion from development sites) Site Amenities and Facilities E21. Where work involved in the erection and demolition of a building is being carried out,

amenities which satisfy applicable occupational health and safety and construction safety regulations, including any WorkCover Authority requirements, must be provided and maintained at all times. The type of work place determines the type of amenities required. Further information and details can be obtained from the Internet at www.workcover.nsw.gov.au


http://www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au/�


September 2013 v1

(Reason: To ensure the health and safety of the community and workers on the site)

Health and Safety E22. All work undertaken must satisfy applicable occupational health and safety and

construction safety regulations, including any WorkCover Authority requirements to prepare a health and safety plan. Site fencing must be installed sufficient to exclude the public from the site. Safety signs must be erected that warn the public to keep out of the site, and provide a contact telephone number for enquiries.

Further information and details regarding occupational health and safety requirements for construction sites can be obtained from the internet at www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

(Reason: To ensure the health and safety of the community and workers on the

site) Prohibition on Use of Pavements E23. Building materials must not be placed on Council's footpaths, roadways, parks or

grass verges, (unless a permit is obtained from Council beforehand). A suitable sign to this effect must be erected adjacent to the street alignment.

(Reason: To ensure public safety and amenity on public land)

Plant & Equipment Kept Within Site E24. All plant and equipment used in the undertaking of the development/ works, including

concrete pumps, wagons, lifts, mobile cranes, hoardings etc, must be situated within the boundaries of the site (unless a permit is obtained from Council beforehand) and so placed that all concrete slurry, water, debris and the like must be discharged onto the building site, and is to be contained within the site boundaries.

Details of Council requirements for permits on public land for standing plant, hoardings, storage of materials and construction zones and the like are available on Council’s website at www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au. (Reason: To ensure public safety and amenity on public land)

Waste Disposal E25. All records demonstrating the lawful disposal of waste must be retained and kept

readily accessible for inspection by regulatory authorities such as North Sydney Council and the Environmental Protection Authority. (Reason: To ensure the lawful disposal of construction and demolition waste)


http://www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au/�


September 2013 v1

Asbestos Removal E26. All demolition works involving the removal and disposal of asbestos cement must

only be undertaken by contractors who hold a current WorkCover Asbestos or “Demolition Licence” and a current WorkCover “Class 2 (Restricted) Asbestos Licence and removal must be carried out in accordance with National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. (Reason: To ensure works are carried out in accordance with relevant

WorkCover requirements). Service adjustments

E27. Where required, the adjustment or inclusion of any new utility service facilities must

be carried out by the person acting on the consent and in accordance with the requirements of the relevant utility authority. These works shall be at no cost to Council. It is the Applicant’s full responsibility to make contact with the relevant utility authorities to ascertain the impacts of the proposal upon utility services at the appropriate stage of the development (including water, phone, gas and the like). Council accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any matter arising from its approval of this application involving any influence upon utility services provided by another authority.

(Reason: To ensure the service requirements are met)

F. Prescribed Conditions imposed under EP&A Act and Regulations and other

relevant Legislation Building Code of Australia F1. All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the

Building Code of Australia.

(Reason: Prescribed - Statutory) Home Building Act F2. 1) Building work that involves residential building work (within the meaning and

exemptions provided in the Home Building Act 1989) for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance under Part 6 of that Act must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to which the work relates has given North Sydney Council written notice of the contract of insurance being issued and of the following:

a) in the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be

appointed:



September 2013 v1

i) the name and licence number of the principal contractor, and ii) the name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part

6 of that Act, or

(b) in the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:

(i) the name of the owner-builder, and (ii) if the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder permit

under that Act, the number of the owner-builder permit.

2) If arrangements for doing residential building work are changed while the work is in progress such that the information submitted to Council in accordance with this conditions is out of date, work must cease and no further work may be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the Council), has given the Council written notice of the updated information.

Note: A certificate purporting to be issued by an approved insurer under Part 6 of the

Home Building Act 1989 that states that a person is the holder of an insurance policy issued for the purposes of that Part is, for the purposes of this clause, sufficient evidence that the person has complied with the requirements of that Part.

(Reason: Prescribed - Statutory)

Appointment of a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA)

F3. Building work, demolition or excavation in accordance with the development consent must not be commenced until the developer has appointed a Principal Certifying Authority for the building work in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act and its Regulations.

(Reason: Statutory; To ensure appropriate safeguarding measures are in place

prior to the commencement of any building work, demolition or excavation)

Construction Certificate

F4. Building work, demolition or excavation in accordance with the development consent must not be commenced until a Construction Certificate for the relevant part of the building work has been issued in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act and its Regulations.





September 2013 v1

Occupation Certificate

F5. A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building (new building

includes an altered portion of, or an extension to, an existing building) unless an Occupation Certificate has been issued in relation to the building or part. Only the Principal Certifying Authority appointed for the building work can issue an Occupation Certificate.

(Reason: Statutory) Critical Stage Inspections

F6. Building work must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority on the critical stage occasions prescribed by the EP&A Act and its Regulations, and as directed by the appointed Principal Certifying Authority.

(Reason: Statutory)

Commencement of Works

F7. Building work, demolition or excavation in accordance with this development consent must not be commenced until the developer has given at least 2 days notice to North Sydney Council of the person’s intention to commence the erection of the building.



Excavation/Demolition F8. 1) All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a

building must be executed safely and in accordance with appropriate professional standards.

2) All excavations associated with the erection or demolition of a building must

be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.

3) Demolition work must be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of

AS2601- Demolition of Structures.

(Reason: To ensure that work is undertaken in a professional and responsible manner and protect adjoining property and persons from potential damage)



September 2013 v1

Site Sign F9. 1) A sign must be erected in a prominent position on the site

a) stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited;

b) showing the name of the principal contractor (or person in charge of the work site), and a telephone number at which that person may be contacted at any time for business purposes and outside working hours; and

c) showing the name, address and telephone number of the Principal

Certifying Authority for the work. 2) Any such sign must be maintained while to building work or demolition work

is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

(Reason: Prescribed - Statutory) G. Prior to the Issue of an Occupation Certificate Infrastructure Repair and Completion of Works G1. Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate any and all works relating to the

development: a. in the road reserve must be fully completed; and b. to repair and make good any damaged public infrastructure caused as a result

of any works relating to the development (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub contractors, concrete vehicles) must be fully repaired;

to the satisfaction of Council Engineers at no cost to Council.

(Reason: Maintain quality of Public assets) Damage to Adjoining Properties G2. All precautions must be taken to prevent any damage likely to be sustained to

adjoining properties. Adjoining owner property rights and the need for owner’s permission must be observed at all times, including the entering onto land for the purpose of undertaking works.

(Reason: To ensure adjoining owner’s property rights are protected) Utility Services

G3. All utility services shall be adjusted, to the correct levels and/or location/s required by this consent, prior to issue of an occupation certificate. This shall be at no cost to Council.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this consent)



September 2013 v1

Notification of New Address Developments G4. Prior to any Occupation Certificate being issued, the person acting upon this consent

must comply with the following: -

(a) Notify Australia Post of the address(es) as issued by Council and the location in plan form of any secondary, internal addresses, in relation to built public roads. Check Australia Post Website (www.auspost.com.au) to find your nearest Australia Post Delivery Facility.

(Reason: To ensure that Council records are accurate, and that house numbering

complies with the requirements of Council’s House Numbering Policy. Proper house numbering also assists emergency services in readily locating properties)

Asbestos Clearance Certificate G5. For building works where asbestos based products have been removed or altered, an

asbestos clearance certificate signed by an appropriately qualified person (being an Occupational Hygienist or Environmental Consultant) must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority (and a copy forwarded to Council if it is not the Certifying Authority) for the building work prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, the asbestos clearance certificate must certify the following: -

a) the building/ land is free of asbestos; or b) the building/ land has asbestos that is presently deemed safe.

The certificate must also be accompanied by tipping receipts, which detail that all asbestos waste has been disposed of at an approved asbestos waste disposal depot. If asbestos is retained on site the certificate must identify the type, location, use, condition and amount of such material. Note: Further details of licensed asbestos waste disposal facilities can be obtained

from www.epa.nsw.gov.au (Reason: To ensure that building works involving asbestos based products are

safe for occupation and will pose no health risks to occupants) Certification of Tree and Shrub Condition G6. Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, a report prepared by an appropriately

qualified person (being an arborist or the like) must be submitted to the Certifying Authority, describing the health of the tree(s) and shrub(s) specifically nominated below:

• African Olive Tree • Camellias


http://www.auspost.com.au/�


September 2013 v1

growing in No’s. 8-10 East Crescent Street, McMahons Point and as identified in the tree report prepared by Growing My Way Tree Services, dated October 2013 & February 2014, and received by Council on 22/10/13 & 23/4/14.

The report must detail the condition and health of the nominated tree(s) and shrub(s) upon completion of the works, and shall certify that the tree(s) and shrub(s) have not been significantly damaged during the works on the site, and have reasonable prospects for survival. (Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this consent)

Height G7. Upon completion of the works and prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate the

RL of the development must be surveyed and certified by an appropriately qualified and practising surveyor as compliant with the maximum approved levels RL 41340 AHD at the lift overrun and RL 40750 AHD at the roof.This survey and certification must be submitted to the Certifying Authority with the application for an Occupation Certificate and a copy provided to Council (if it is not the Certifying Authority).

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this development consent)

Sydney Water G8. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be

obtained. .

The final Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to release of any linen plan for subdivision or prior to occupation of the development, whichever is the earlier. The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Strata Certificate. [Delete as appropriate]

Notes: Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator, for details see the Sydney Water web site www.sydneywater.com.au\customer\urban\index, or telephone 13 20 92. Following application, a ‘Notice of Requirements’ will be forwarded detailing water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design. (Reason: To ensure compliance with the statutory requirements of Sydney

Water)



September 2013 v1

BASIX Completion Certificate G9. In accordance with Clause 154C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Regulation 2000, prior to issuing a final occupation certificate the Certifying Authority must apply to the Director-General for a BASIX completion receipt.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the specified BASIX Certificate) House Numbering (Dwellings) G10. Prior to any Occupation Certificate being issued an application must be made to North

Sydney Council for written confirmation, or allocation, of the street address(es) or apartment number(s) for the completed project in accordance with Council's Property Addressing Policy. These are the numbers that will be recorded in Council records and must be displayed at the property in accordance with the provisions of AS/NZS 4819:2011.

Note: If apartments are to be sold off the plan, the applicant must have written confirmation from Council of the address and apartment numbering if the apartment number is to be identified on the contract.

(Reason: To ensure that Council records are accurate, and that house numbering complies with the requirements of Council’s House Numbering Policy. Proper house numbering also assists emergency services in readily locating properties.)

Landscaping G11. The landscaping shown in the approved landscape plan numbered SK24 (Rev.AA) &

SK25 (Rev.AA) prepared by Mark Hurcum Design Practice dated 24/2/14 and received by Council on 24/2/14 must be completed prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

(Reason: To ensure compliance) Damage to Adjoining Properties G12. On completion of the development the subject of this consent and prior to the issue of

the Occupation Certificate, a report is to be prepared by an appropriately qualified consultant and is to be provided to the Certifying Authority (and a copy to Council if it is not the Certifying Authority) certifying:

a) whether any damage to adjoining properties has occurred as a result of the

development; b) the nature and extent of any damage caused to the adjoining property as a

result of the development; c) the nature and extent of works required to rectify any damage caused to the

adjoining property as a result of the proposed development;



September 2013 v1

d) the nature and extent of works carried out to rectify any damage caused to the adjoining property as a result of the development; and

e) the nature and extent of any agreements entered into for rectification of any damage caused to the adjoining property as a result of the development.

The report and certification must reference the dilapidation survey and reports required to be provided to the Certifying Authority in accordance with this consent. Where works required to rectify any damage caused to adjoining property as a result of the development identified in the report and certification have not been carried out, a satisfactory agreement for rectification of the damage is to be made with the affected person/s as soon as possible prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate. All costs incurred in achieving compliance with this condition shall be borne by the developer.

(Reason: To ensure adjoining owner’s property rights are protected in so far as

possible) I. On-Going / Operational Conditions Single Occupancy I1. Nothing in this consent authorises the use of each dwelling unit other than for a single

occupancy.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of this consent) K. Prior to the Issue of any Strata Certificate Registered Plans (Strata) K1. The applicant must submit to Council’s documentary evidence that the Strata Plan has

been registered and the lot(s) exists. The use of the premise must not commence until the documentary evidence has been submitted to and approved by Council. (Reason: To ensure that the allotments of land are created prior to the

commencement of the approved use.) Strata Subdivision K2. A Strata Certificate pursuant to the Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Act 1973,

that authorises registration of the strata plan, strata plan of subdivision or notice of conversion at NSW Land and Property Information Office must be obtained. If the Strata Certificate is obtained from an Accredited Certifier, other than the Council, the certifier is to provide Council with a copy of the endorsed Strata Certificate within 7 days of issuing the same, pursuant to the Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Regulation 2002.



September 2013 v1

NOTES: For approval of the Strata Certificate by North Sydney Council, the following must be submitted to Council: - a) the original strata plans or strata plans of subdivision and administration sheets

plus two (2) copies of each, and any original Instrument (including but not limited to any section 88B or 88E instruments) to be endorsed, all enclosed in a protective cardboard tube (to prevent damage during transfer);

b) 2 additional copies of the strata plans or strata plans of subdivision and any relevant Instrument for submission to Council Customer Services and records department for electronic database scanning and copying;

c) a completed Subdivision or Strata Certificate Application form together with

payment of fee current at lodgement; d) written evidence that all applicable conditions of consent required to be

satisfied, prior to issue of the Strata Certificate, have been satisfied. Council will check the consent conditions on the relevant consent(s). Failure to submit the required information will delay endorsement of the Strata Certificate, and may require payment of rechecking fees;

e) plans of subdivision and copies must not be folded; and f) council will not accept bonds in lieu of completing subdivision works. (Reason: To ensure compliance with relevant legislative requirements and

maintenance of up to date Council records) Sydney Water K3. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be

obtained. .

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Certifying Authority or North Sydney Council with the documentation to enable the issue of the Strata Certificate.

Notes:

1. Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator, for details see the Sydney Water web site www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92.

2. Following application, a ‘Notice of Requirements’ will be forwarded detailing water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

(Reason: To ensure compliance with Sydney Water requirements)


http://www.sydneywater.com.au/�


September 2013 v1

Release of Strata Certificate K4. The Strata Certificate that authorises registration of the Strata Plan, Strata Plan of

Subdivision or Notice of Conversion at NSW Land and Property Information shall not be issued until bounding walls, floors and ceilings between proposed strata lots have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans identified in Condition A1 of this Consent.

(Reason: To ensure that the registered strata plan relates to approved

development) Allocation of Parking K5. Car-parking provided must only be used in conjunction with the units contained

within the development. Any carparking for strata lots for residential purposes must be individually allocated to its corresponding residential strata lot as part of each lot’s unit entitlement.

(Reason: To ensure that adequate parking facilities to service the development

are provided on site) Building and Unit Numbering (Strata Subdivisions) K6. Prior to issue of the Strata Certificate, the person acting upon this consent must apply

to North Sydney Council and receive written confirmation of the allocated street address and unit numbers for the building and the approved strata allotments within the completed project. These are the property addresses that will be recorded in Council records and must be displayed at the property in accordance with the provisions of the applicable Australian Standard (AS/NZS 4819:2011).

To assist Council, a draft proposal for numbering within the strata scheme or street should be submitted for concurrence to Council, as these numbers will be used to maintain Council’s property and mapping database.

(Reason: To ensure that Council records are accurate, and that building and unit

numbering complies with the requirements of Council’s Property Addressing Policy. Proper building and unit numbering also assists emergency services in readily locating properties)


Copyright © North Sydney Council - No part of this map may be reproducedwithout permission. Commercial decisions should not be made based on information contained in this map without first checking details held by the responsible Government authority.

Further details can be obtained by calling (02) 9936 8100 or e-mail [email protected].

North Sydney Council

1020

20

2010

10

30

30

30

30

1010

10

20

10

10

20

28.8

4.1

5.2

21.5

20.3

26.3

32.0

32.7

50.7

33.5

27.4

18.5

18.8

27.0

37.9

58.6

35.0

38.3

14.1

17.6

29.7

31.3

28.2

17.7

17.3

17.5

40.8

43.6

38.5

45.033.0

31.2

39.3

38.3

39.2

41.0

44.2

46.8

49.7

45.9

45.3

47.0

38.8

41.3

39.2

35.0

37.330.0

36.5

33.8

35.9

36.9

44.6

44.5

48.3

38.131.3

32.5

34.7

34.9

35.8

36.4

36.6

39.9

32.6

27.6

28.8

31.9

33.1

37.2

44.2

21.5

20.8

23.4

24.5

24.2

21.8

16.8

16.8

17.1

20.6

28.8

47.6

36.7

36.9 33.4

35.7

35.4

34.2

39.1

21.0

40.3

37.6

54.0

24.3

27.5

8.1

23.0

22.8

21.5

20.2

24.1

23.9

22.1

23.4

20.9

23.9

19.1

83.9

BLUES POINT

RESERVE

HENRY LAWSON RESERVE

McMahons Point

NOTTINGHAM STREET

STREET

FRENCH

STREET

WEST C

RESC

ENT

PARKER

STREET

BAY

V

IEW

STR

EET

MID

DLE

WARUNG STREET

STR

EET

CR

ESC

ENT

BLU

ES

EAST

HENRYLAWSON

AVENUE

DOWLING STREET

FREN

CH

LAN

E

McM

AN

US

STREET

LLO

YD R

EES

LOO

KOU

T

EA

ST

CR

ES

CE

NT

STR

EE

T LO

OK

OU

T

FREN

CH

STREET

RESER

VE

DOWLING STREET ROAD RESERVE

MIL MIL STREETROAD RESERVE

WEST CRESCENT

STREET ROAD

RESERVE

NOTTINGHAM STREET RESERVE

25

1

3A

5

3

1

35

5

3331

29(2

5)(2

3)

21

19

1715

11

3

(41)

(9)

75

1

7 9

34

3230

28

3

37

2

2A

(68)

5856

2

2624

2216

-20

14

45

128-

106

2-4

43

8

6

74

5048

8189

14-28

63

6

2

7167

812

1416

69

31

59

3335

3739

4345

47

4951

1

5761

7375

77

57

9 11 13

7985

87

114

5854

-56

5250

4642

30-4

0

99A

11A13

1515A

1717A

75

1

7876

74

7068

6664

6260

1618

104

106 1

0811

011

2

2830

116

4

11

82-8

486

9094

9698

100

80

20

15-17642

(Lease - for Valuationpurposes only)

(Lease - for Valuationpurposes only)

(Lea

se -

for V

alua

tion

purp

oses

onl

y)

CT 19

5

(Split for Valuationpurposes only)

(Lea

se -

for V

alua

tion

purp

oses

onl

y)

(Lease - for Valuation

purposes only)

11

2

853338

51

5728

28

B

6180

232

1

SP 21014

SP 54824

9837

7116

7089

572828

861201

325054

166929

CT

20

Sec H

861201

Pt 50

31

524518

9

Pt 50

1

2

2

1

A

12

2

1

1

2

1

B

1

21

A

SP 83485

SP 5

70

SP 1976SP 2268

SP 12654SP 19504

SP 13674

SP 10832

SP 7223

SP 15708

SP 53222

SP 12278

SP 31057

SP 16307

SP 5315

2

SP 10316

SP 2

1561

SP 10831SP 64741

SP 1322

SP 10011

980306

323406

861201

330192

938490

915829

222746

322230

8

303346420696

6002

1Sec G

Sec G

1828

91

217474

581992

2

9

504324

1

1

102

50

A

2

1

2

Y

13

1

2

21Y

11

X20

13

1

212

3

2

SP 18058

SP 9

676

SP 7

5987

SP 1

3389

SP 10886

613575

419012

5478

95

8661

73

206643

8

904522

127151

2343

57

1129

261

506687

880994

807293

8

230594

(Lease - for V

aluation

purposes only)


purposes only)


purposes only)

PATHWAY

SP 17160

Sec B

Sec D

Sec A

752067752067

Part CrownLand Reserve

944-690

544018

33654

1

5819

92

2

12

1

14

1

6

1

1

7048

13

2

Pt D

11323

2

C

8

100

1

101

5

D

7

X

7

1

9

101

6

1

81

7

12

1

5

5

2

1

15

21

4

B

6

7C

CA

9

1

1

1

A

2

6

611

1

2

SP 4308

SP 2760

SP 6123

SP 36729

SP 6454

SP 10140

SP 16010

SP 125

SP 11500

SP 1927

SP 44569

SP 50787

1146537

1018682

659415

1146

537

3447

00

802222802222 1120215

209345

2027

66

8

902933

338032

109056

923025

442802

223657

8

748831

359959

731853

438679

5685

75

659448

338032

6002

6002

223657

1077

149

731853

1098250

8

1159898

8

3365

4


For privacy reasons, the architectural plans have been removed

from this document prior to publishing on the web. The plans

attached to the hard copy report may be viewed at Stanton Library

during opening hours or at the Customer Service Centre in Council

Chambers between 9.00am and 4.00pm Monday to Friday.

Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment OfficerRe: 6 East Crescent Street, McMahons PointATTACIIMENT 3: SUBMISSIONS

Page I

a

a

a

a

a

a

NOTTFTCATTON (ORTGTNAL DA)

The owners of adjoining properties and the Lavender Bay Precinct were notified of the proposeddevelopment for al4-day period, between 1 & 15 November 2013, in accordance with Section 4of NSDCP 2002. The notification resulted in nineteen (19) submissions.

ORIGINAL DABasis of Submissions

Breaking existing setback alignment by 7m would severely affect the streetscape

Additional height and bulk would severely affect views and privacy of neighbours

Insuffrcient parking

Maintaining the existing low rise minimum boundary clearance for a much larger, bulkier and higherstructure is not in keeping with the nature of the area and would exacerbate the outlook for surroundingneighbours

Heritage statement is not consistent with the actual proposed development

Question why the heritage status was lifted or changed

Height poles to be independently erected

DA not to be approved in its present form

View impacts¡ The development would impact upon the expansive view towards the northem Bridee pylon from (rear)

Unit 13 (Level 4) because it would project forwards at its highest point where the sloping roof formwould be squared off

. The views from (rear) Unit 10 (Level3) appear likely to be affected by the proposed projection of thenew building and by the squaring off of the roof form; the view are limited to the southern portion of theBridge across a relatively narrow view corridor due to the existing building

. South-facing views to Walsh Bay from Units 3 (Level 1), 6 (Level2) & 9 (Level3), and overall harbourviews from Unit 12 (Level4) would be adversely affected

. Submitted view analysis is inaccurate and incomplete and unable to be relied upon:- Balcony levels are mislabelled- Area immediately north of the northern pylon is not visible from the balconies yet shown as

visible- Development is shown as being considerably lower than existing ridge contrary to elevation

drawings- Appears to show the proposed front building line being the same as existing- Does not include front balcony views

Accurate photomontages for Units l0 (Level 3) & 13 (Level 4) thal are confirmed accurate by anindependent person with credentials to provide that confirmation may be warranted

Development is not acceptable under the Tenøcìty view-sharing principles: Iconic and expansiveviews of the Harbour Bridge, CBD sþline, Walsh Bay and Sydney Harbour would be affected; viewsare obtained across the front boundary of 8-10 East Crescent Street and across the front setback ofthedevelopment site; extent of impacts are greater than is depicted in the submitted view analysis; theproposal is unreasonable as it breaches the height control, projects forward ofthe established frontsetback for the locality, siting has been limited to "alterations and additions" to the existing building.

The proposed development would impact on the views from the front apartments southwards towardsWalsh Bay which result in the overall vista of the Harbour Bridge, sþline and harbour due to theforwards protrusion from the building line of 8-10 East Crescent Street

The proposed development would not discernibly impact upon the quality of views from the [uppermost]balconies at Levels 5 & 6Views from Unit 7 (Level 2) appear to be blocked by existing vegetation and by a lift ovemrn or similarof a downslope buildingThere do not appear to be any views from the ground or fìrst floor rear apartment balconies facing

a

a

a

a

a

I:\DOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt DA3ó7_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx

ATTACHMENT TO IPP03 - 04/06/2014 Page 104

Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment OfficerRe: 6 East Crescent Street, McMahons PointATTACHMENT 3: SUBMISSIONS

Page2


towards the Bridge

Other amenity impacts. Visual and acoustic privacy impacts of front balconies due to non-compliant front setback, lack of

screening on the northem side, and size

Streetscape impactso Non-compliant street setback is visually incongruous with surrounding development; existing front

setback should be maintained on the grounds of consistencywith the established pattern of developmentin the locality- the proposed upper level setback of8.lm is 5.7m less than the average setback of 12.7m (site

and adjoining properties)- Site is only 8.5m wide and less capable of accommodating a reduced front setback compared to

neighbouring properties

Impacts on existing vegetation at 8-10 East Crescent Streeto An arborist report must be provided, including:

- Impact of demolition on root system of existing vegetation within the southem side setback of8-10 East Crescent Street

- Impact of removal of the vegetation within the southern side setback of 8-10 East CrescentStreet on the structural integrity of the building within 6 East Crescent Street, includingstructural report

- Address how the rare and ireplaceable camellia shrubs in close proximity to the subject siteare to be protected throughout of the

Construction-related impactso A structural engineer's report is required for Council to assess whether or not the development is

"alterations and additions":- Minimal extent of existing building fabric would be retained;- Not known whether existing flooring will be retained;

- Need evidence that nil setback wall to be retained will not collapse during course of construction. Minimum 900mm setback from northern boundary should be required if "new development". Owners corporation insists on a construction management plan prior to determination. Any move forward of the clear established building line between2-4,6, 8-10 & 12 East Crescent Street

would materially change the streetscapeo Any development forward of the building line will very likely restrict our southerþ views and the

amount of sþ and light we enjoy. The very large scale "alteration & addition" raises the question of whether or not the development

should have to comply with building off the boundary line as would be the case for new developments;there is poor access to the northern side during renovations and for ongoing maintenance

. When we were considering buying into the building there was little chance of it being "built out" due to

its heritage listing and it provides historic value and some contrast to the blocks of apartrnents

o The proposed balconies will directþ look into our (ground floor) lounge/living room, kitchen, balconyand outdoor living area; a large portion of our eastern wall is glass

. The development will significantly increase occupancy levels and with large balconies will encouragepeople to congregate; our privacy will be severely negatively impacted with both increased noise levelsand our visual privacy compromised

o Proposed setback is too far forward towards East Crescent Street; the building line should be drawnfrom the edge of no.4's portico and 8-10 East Crescent Street and the proposed construction conform tothis. By eye, the proposal seems to protrude to the east by some 5-6m

Setbackso 6 East Crescent Street is built very close to the boundary line and the distance at our closest points is

already 5m

. Historically, a forward building line has been observed from2 to 12 on this side of East Crescent Street

I:\DOCS\Susa¡na C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367 I3\NSIPP\D4367 l3_Report_Attach3_Submissions_REDACTED docx



Page 3

a

a


and it is proposed to go forward of this previously established line by 5 to 7m

View loss

o We will loose a substantial part of our Walsh Bay and city view, thus reducing our current enjoymentand lessening the future value of our properly

Privacyo Theproposedunenclosed, forward-extended, extra-largetop decklooks across ourbalconydirectþinto

our master bedroom which is set at an angel across our balcony and runs right to the front line of the

building

Setback line from the road is a standard that must be adhered to unless there is compelling reason; inthis instance there is no such compulsion

No adequate justification for breach of the 12m height maximum

We will have minor view loss from our apartment, which is a loss of financial value and amenity; an

independent review is required; we fully support the objections ofworse-affected oìvners in our building

The development cannot reasonably be regarded as "alterations" as the new building will bear

absolutely no resernblance to the old one, and if it is new construction, why are the rules governing such

not adhered to?

The development, lodged a few months of expiry of the heritage order, is an attempt to maximisefinancial return at the expense of local character and amenity

Unenclosed areas will have undesirable privacy and noise

. The DA is a new building and does not fall within the guidelines of alterations and additions

. The DA would place 2 high rise buildings within 5m of each other resulting in acoustic/noise privacyissues resulting from buildings being too close to each other

. Inadequate on-site parking

. The desigrr is unsuited to the character of the existing building

. The building alignment of 4 properties (2 to 12 East Crescent Street) that existed since 1979 would be

affected by the proposed DAPartial loss of my city view would affect the value of my unit

The extension of the building towards East Crescent Street is a violation of the established building line

We object to the new building work being constructed so close to the boundary

Loss of amenity and market value of our property

Too close to the boundary: The curent structure is extremely close to the boundary, much closer than

current regulations would permit. I object to the extension and decks to the front on the basis that it istoo close to the boundary and thus too close to us.

Forward of the building line: The buildings either side of the site were constrained by the building lineof the site. The proposed works break that line and put the front of the building significantly in front ofour building and our unit. This would remove our city view. A photo fuom 197 4 shows that the buildingline shows the current 4 and 6 East Crescent Street and that which existed on the site at 8- I 0 East

Crescent Street runs in line with the front of 6 East Crescent Street. There is no reason why 6 East

Crescent Street should be permitted to build in front of it.

Privacy: Should a deck be built on the front, it would be extremely close to our balcony. The northem

aspect should be constructed of solid material to visually and audibly shield users from each other.

Loss of view: Virtually all of our view of the city will be lost, which is not "minor".

Proposal is effectively a new building, not alterations and additions: Extensive nature ofthe proposal;

complete change of character; increase in the size and height of the building

Complete loss of Walsh Bay view: The building extension and balconies will eliminate half my views,including the entire view of Walsh Bay. The loss of iconic, distinctive and dramatic views of Sydney

Harbour area, Walsh Bay and the Sydney CBD skyline will be severe. Once balconies are outfitted withtables, chairs and barbecues, the view loss will be complete.

Incorrect assessment of view impact: The assessment should include loss of views from inside the

IIDOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367 13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report_Attach3-Submissions-REDACTED.docx

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

o

O

a



Page 4


affected apartments as well as from outdoor livíng areas. My apartment will lose views from every room

o Privacy: The building extension and balconies protrude well beyond my and other units in l0 East

Crescent Street, allowing residents of 6 East Crescent Street to look directly into our units on the southeastem side of our building. My verandah will be directþ overlooked, with considerable loss ofprivacy.No.6 East Crescent Street is building almost to the northern boundary and its new verandahs will be

unacceptably close to 10 East Crescent Street with privacy invasion more extreme. I will be forced tolive at all times with curtains drawn to prevent visual intrusion. The new occupants on all levels willhave direct views into the maste¡ bedroom of my apartrnent. I will lose all my privacy.

o Heritage value: The development would replace the existing style and character of the building whichis in harmony with the overall appearance of this block of East Crescent Street and in keeping with thestyle of other buildings in this part of East C¡escent Street, which has retained an ambience and

commonality of older buildings. The block preserves, in a pocket of East Crescent Street and

McMahons Point, a heritage style of appearance close to the water frontage. The preservation of these

buildings, and the fact that they have not been replaced by modern high rise units, contributes to theoverall appeal and historical and heritage value of McMahons Point. Approving this proposal woulddramatically alter the entire character of this last section of East Crescent Street.

. DesigF unsuited to character of block The design is too large, too far forward and too high for theoverall size of the block. The proposal is seeking to cram a building of four stories on an a¡ea that is toonalTow.

o Acoustic effects and noise: The proposed verandahs are only a few metres from the existing verandahsof No.l0. Due to the northern boundary of 6 East Crescent Street being built almost to the edge of itslot, any noise from the proposed verandahs would seriously affect the residents of l0 East CrescentStreet, many who have chosen to live and retire in McMahons Point because it is a quiet suburb. Thedevelopment is out of character with the peaceful character of this and adjoining suburbs.

o Substantial reduction in real estate value: I purchased my unit because of the view, and there is nodoubt that the dramatic reduction of the view would cause an equivalent dramatic reduction in the valueof my unit. The reduction would apply to many units in my block, as the size, scale and height of thebuilding would signifrcantly reduce the appeal of the units in our building.

o Alternative option for structural extension: There is substantial land at the rear of6 East CrescentStreet to expand the accommodation of the building, without diminishing views from the frontage.

¡ Unrelated heritage report: The heritage report refers to 32 Chuter Street, McMahons Point, and fails todiscuss the building's heritage nature, its origins, historical ownership, and its importance to the fabric ofNorth Sydney's built heritage. Council should request a complete heritage statement by a recogrrisedheritage consultant.

o Incorrect planning information: The controls for a residential flat buildingrequire a maximum of45%site coverage. This application indicates that the building will be 44% site coverage; however, it appears

that the calculations ignore the garage, carport and driveway areas.

o Parking: In this dense and built up area, it is unreasonable for the applicant to provide only two carspaces for such alarge development. The streets are already parked out and on-street parking is at apremium. Council should insist that the applicant provide more car-parking spaces including visitorparking or prohibit the new occupants from resident parking stickers.

The location and desigrr of the car-parking is unsafe for pedestrians crossing into the building. They willhave to cross over the driveway to access the pathway into the building. Further, the style of the garage

structure is not sympathetic to the area.

. Origrnal balconies fìlled in: The former owners of 6 East Crescent Street filled in the original full widthbalconies, and the new owners are now trying to creep further forward and take the views of theirneighbours. They can simply and easily reinstate the original balconies.

o The proposed building is to be placed forward of the current and consistently applied building line and

fails to match the alignment of the primary facades ofbuildings on adjoiningproperties. The buildingseither side of 6 East Crescent Street, both built after 6 East Crescent Street, were constrained so that the

nearest corners of those buildings did not project further forward than the front of 6 East Crescent Street.

I:\DOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx



Page 5


a

a

If placed forward of the current and consistently applied building line the proposed building creates

serious issues relating to:

- Maintenance of the characteristic pattern of setbacks and building orientation and siting in East

Crescent Street

- Acceptable preservation of the amenity of the existing multi-dwelling at 8-10 East Crescent Street

in terms of privacy, views and ventilation- Adequate consideration of the Land & Environment Court's planning principle for view sharing

established inlhe Tenqcity case

- Provision of adequate separation between the existing multi-dwelling at 8-10 East Crescent Streetand the proposed building

- UnnecessarilyobtrusiveoverlookingIf placed forward of the current and consistently applied building line and within approximately 6m ofthe south eastern comer of 8-10 East Crescent Street, the proposed building creates serious issues inrelation to:

- Provision of adequate separation between the existing multi-dwelling at 8-10 East Crescent Street

- Maintenance of the retaining wall between 6 East Crescent Street & 8-10 East Crescent Street onthe south eastern boundary of 8-10 East Crescent Street

- Preservation of amenity of the multi dwelling at 8-10 East Crescent Street in terms of privacy,views and ventilation, particularly with respect to the placement and desigrr of balconies

- Adequate consideration of the Land & Environment Court's planning principle for view sharingestablished inthe Tenacity case

- Construction and continuing maintenance of the northern wall of the proposed building, includingthe additional portions which sit on the southern boundary of 8-10 East Crescent Street and will notbe accessible from 6 East Crescent Street

lf 50% of the existing building is being retained, what steps will be or have been taken for geotechnicaland survey reports as to whether the retained building will not fail and what precautions will be takenduring construction; more than half of the proposal already sits on the border of 6 East Crescent Street

and 8-10 East Crescent Skeet

Landscaping:- A large banksia serrate with a 3-4m spread is planned within lm of the rear boundary

overshadowing the camellias at 8-10 East Crescent Street; the camellias cannot be replaced oracquired from a nursery.

- The regular arborist for 8-10 East Crescent Streethas said the African Olive (Witd Olive) growingin 8-10 East Crescent Street & penetrates the building at 6 East Crescent Street, is a declared pest

& can be removed; the arborist will however only trim it heavily because of the root system beingpartially under the existing & to be retained (?) structure & any unforeseen consequences ofremoval. Why is the applicant insisting on retention of the tree when it is a pest?

Finishes roof line: The proposed roof will be higher than the current peak & twice the length of thecurrent roof, much darker &. glary compared to the current unobtrusive tiles.

Finishes northern wall: While the white colour may be light reflecting, it is not a frnish which relatesto anything in the neighbourhood, is totally out of character & will destroy the character of the locality

Bedrooms/documentation: Privacy, overlooking & natural light. Bedroom windows are not clearlyshown; the plans show 6 bedrooms along the northem wall, but no reference to the number ofwindows.The persistent lack of clarity raises the bona hdes generally & actual location of these windows & what

they overlook, if they are light boxes, they overhang the boundary.

Additional concerns:

- The building appears to be new development rather than an alteration and addition- Balcony additions appear to be disproportionately large open and exposed spaces for the size of

the proposed units

a

o

a

a

I:\DOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx



Page 6

ORIGINAL DABasis of Submissionsa Existing building line: The proposed building breaches the existing alignment of the 4 buildings within

2 street corners from Warung Street to Parker Street (2-4, 8- I 0, I 2 East Crescent Street. These buildingswere built between the 1920s and 1978.

Streetscape: Should the proposed building be situated forward it will spoil the character, the pattern ofsetbacks and building orientation ofEast Crescent Street, and raises the question ofwhy the streetscapeis spoiled when there is spare land at the rear of 6 East Crescent Street. I purchased my unit owing tothe area's excellent village atmosphere of shops, cafes, tree-lined streets and being close to the city.

Building separation: The proposed building will be only 5m from the southeast building corner of 8East Crescent Street and will have 4 large east-facing balconies that will create acoustic noise issues,privacy issues and ventilation issues, and spoil the overall amenity for the people living at 8 EastCrescent Street.

Privacy: The proposed building has 4large east-facing balconies and the top floor L-shaped balconycan easily accommodate 20 people. Because there will be only 5m separation to 8 East Crescent Street,privacy will be an issue. People on the balcony will be able to look across and down into living roomsand bedrooms of 5 units at 8 East Crescent Street.

Loss of view: The proposed building extends towards East Crescent Street and severely compromiseviews from my unit and l0 other units at 8 East Crescent Street. The proposed building will not gainany additional views by extending towards the street.

Parking: The proposed building does not provide adequate on-site residents and visitors parking

Privacy shutters: Can the proposed privacy shutters facing north be opened to allow full view into theliving space at 8 East Crescent Street?

Alterations and additions: The DA is in effect a new building and does not fall within the guidelinesfor alterations and additions to an existing residence.

When our building was built in the 1970s it complied with building setback line that applies to ourbuilding, our neighbouring buildings at 2-4 and 12 East Crescent Street. The proposed developmentshows excessive encroachment and overstepping of this building line with its extension of the buildingsuch as balconies and porches excessively beyond the applied building line.

The north eastern corner of the proposed building will finish up even closer to the south eastern cornerof our building. The increased proximity will allow higher levels of noise to be transmitted from thenew building to ours. At the same time, we can imagine there will be loss of privacy and views to thesouth, in varying degrees, at different levels of our building, at the corner

That the DA is for alterations and additions seems impossible as the new structure will bear noresemblance to the original building.

The new construction is clearly in contradiction to the current setback of the building line of propertiesalong East Crescent Street, which can be observed from 2 to I 2 on this side ofEast Crescent Sfreet, andthat is proposed to go forward by 5-7m, which will change the character ofthe street and cause a loss ofamenity in terms of views, privacy and air flow.Prior to purchasingmyproperry, I checked with Council aboutneighbouringbuildings and was informedthat they were all heritage listed and therefore would not affect us in future. Why have the listing in thefirst place ifthey canjust expire, as has the order on 6 East Crescent Street, and the buildings can beknocked down at a later date. I was not informed about removal of the listing.

The extreme size of the balconies combined with the minimal separation (less than 6m) is intrusive liketo cause noise issues to our properfy and others in the block.

I am concemed about the impacts during the construction phase, given the proximity of the newconstruction and ask what geotechnical precautions are proposed to ensure no impact on thefoundations of our building.

The development will block views of approxim alely 20o/o for my unit and also decrease the value of myproperfy.

a

a

a

a

a

fIDOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D,\367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx



PageT

ORIGINAL DABasis of Submissionsa An increase in height will reduce and impeded northern light received to 2 East Crescent Street; light

received can only be accessed via northern windows. The height of the development increases fromEast Crescent Street to Middle Street due to the natural gradient of the land, causing higher shadow linein this direction along2 East Crescent Street.

Is the flag pole necessary as it has no real function and obstructs and intemrpts clean air space andvrewrng.

If the development proceeds, does Council desigrrate a finish date to the project, as many neighbourswill be affected?

a

a

a

a

An increase in height will reduce and impeded northern lightreceived to 2 East Crescent Street;lightreceived can only be accessed via northern windows. The height of the development increases fromEast Crescent Street to Middle Street due to the natural gradient of the land, causinghigher shadow linein this direction alongZ East Crescent Skeet.

If the development proceeds, does Council designate a finish date to the project, as many neighbourswill be affected?

o If the proposed structure is permitted to offend or not conform with the curve of the existing buildingalignment all otherbuildings on the westem side of East Crescent Street which follows the crescent ofEast Crescent Street, then it will set a dangerous precedent.

. The proposed large multi-storied structure projected forward of the building alignment is intrusive andunsightþ.

. The positioning of the building infringes the privacy of adjoining neighbours; it will overlook many ofthe units in both 2-4 &.8 East C¡escent Street, including seeing into bedrooms.

o The large and intrusive skucture will adversely affect the light and sunlight coming into theneighbouring buildings to the north and east.

o The building will shadow over neighbouring properties where no such shadow exists at present.

. The existing building has historic architectural merit and is one of the last remaining of its style in thearea.

. The new building will not fÌt aesthetically with the surrounding architecture.

. The existing building sits flush with the buildings on either side.

. The new building will encroach into the existing landscaped area facing East Crescent Street andproject beyond the existing line of buildings.

o The new building will be considerablyhigher and block afternoon sun and light, especially in winter, tothe buildings opposite.

[:\DOCS\Susanna C\East C¡escent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx



Page 8

RE.NOTIFICATION (AMENDED DA)

The owners of adjoining properties and the Lavender Bay Precinct were notified of the amendeddevelopment for a l4-dayperiod, between 14 &28 March 2Dl4inaccordance with SectionA4 ofNSDCP 2013. The notification resulted in nine (9) submissions.

AMEÌ\DED DABasis of Submissionsa

a

a

a

Amended plans still extend beyond the building linePrivacy & amenity of neighbours still compromised

Insuffrcient parking

Proposal exceeds building envelope allowed for the site

View impacts:- The setting back of the front balconies by one additional metre would result in an acceptable

level of view impact on units 3, ó & 9, without unreasonably preventing the proposeddevelopment from enjoying such views. The view impacts are extensive due to the loss of aniconic element from the existing view and the loss is unnecessary.

- The impacts from the kitchen areas of units 3, 6 & 9 should be included in the view analysisas the views are highly valuable, and consideration given to setting the building back further tomitigate impacts.

- Agree that view impacts on rear units 10 & 13 are minimal and acceptable.

Privacy impacts are no longer of concern as the balconies are suffrciently far back from 8-10 East

Crescent Street.

Streetscape: The proposal does not unreasonably protrude from the point of view of average setbackand consistency with the established streetscape.

Vegetation:- The amended arborist report does not regard the 8 x camellia shrubs are significant or worthy

of retention, however, does identifo protection measures which should be ensured.- The amended arborist report recognises that Tree 5 (Olive Tree) will need to be removed in a

manner consistent with the recommendations of a structural engineer; it is in any case notaccepted that the proposal will be able to successfully retain components of the existingbuilding.

"Alterations & additions" / construction-related impacts :

- The proposal is not alterations and additions; documentation has not been submitted todemonstrate the structure proposed to be retained would be structurally viable given additionalloads from new building level; percentage of retention is too low.

- As a new development, the proponent has the flexibility to locate the building optimally; in thiscase, a further lm setback to ensure that unnecessary view impacts on 8-10 East CrescentStreet are avoided.

Uppermost apartment / carparking: The unit occupying the uppermost two floors can be used for tworelatively large apartments, in which case the provision of 3 car spaces would be warranted (compared totwo proposed); in this regard, the proposed lift should be required to stop at level I & not service theuppermost level.

a

a

a

a

a

a

. Our main concerns are not sufficiently alleviated by the amendments.

¡ Privacy: The amended development is still forward enough that balconies can look directly into ourbalcony/patio, into our living/lounge room & outdoor garden areas. The setback of 5m will restrict how\rye use our space, especially given a large proportion of our south eastern wall is glass; we enjoy theprivacy afforded by the existing building line.

. Light & outlook Any development forward of the current building line will restrict our southerly

IIDOCS\Susanna C\East C¡escent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367 l3\NSIPP\D4367 13 Report_Attach3_Submissions_REDACTED.docx



Page 9

AMEI\DED DABasis of Submissions

a

a

views, including the iconic sþline, & the amount of sþ & light we enjoy. We are concerned the

building will feel overbearing. It seems rather unfair that the balconies are proposing to creep forwardafter having already been enclosed. As an alternative, the balconies could be reinstated.

Alterations or additions: The proposal seems to be an extensive redevelopmentraisingthe question ofwhether or not the proposal should comply with building off the boundary line. There is poor access to

the northern side of the building & extending the building surface area amplifies our concerns,particularly access during renovation & long-term ongoing maintenance.

Heritage: When we were considering buying, 6 East Crescent Street was heritage listed & hence ourrisk of having a development take place next door was negligible; it was our assessment that 6 East

Crescent Street had fully utilised the block. We did not foresee the risk due to the building's historicvalue & contrast in terms of residential tapestry (i.e., not block of apartments).

Changes do not go far enough.

The proposal is a new building and not redevelopment of an existing building, and should therefore be

subject to more stringent requirements.

There is no change to the over-close northern boundary line

The applicant has pulled back the forward building line by lm, which is still 4-6m beyond thepreviously established line.

Our view loss has been reduced but is still considerable, particularly of Walsh Bay & the city sþlinefrom our balcony and loss of harbour views from the kitchen & side bedrooms. The statement in the

view analysis that unit 9 is not affected is untrue.

We not still concerned about noise problems from the balconies.

The privacy screens are opened or closed to protect their own privacy, not to address OUR privacyneeds.

Changes are in right direction but do not go far enough.

View impacts - deliberate tactic of misleading computer simulations gtvittg false impression of the

negative impacts:

- "Existing City View: Sþline only'' is grossly misleading as their own photo illustrates.- Simulation shows no water views (which their own photo does), and doesn't show the westem

part of the city view at all, merely whiteness.

Privacy

Amendments do not alleviate the impacts in any substantial way and the amended DA should be refused;

amended proposal is still fundamentally incompatible with surrounding development and streetscape inMcMahons Point.

Proposal is effectively a new building, not alterations & additions: Extensive nature ofthe proposal;

complete change of character; balcony of my unit would still be less than 5.5m from the proposed

building resulting in unacceptable privacy, view & amenity impacts.

Loss of Walsh Bay & CBD view: Extending the building towards East Crescent Street & addingverandahs would still eliminate much of my view, including most of the view of Walsh Bay. My view ofthe land-water interchange will disappear, obstructed by the new balcony & additional building. The

loss is still severe, taking into account iconic, distinctive & dramatic nature of the view; the proposaladds no additional view to the existing structure while seriously impeding views from manyunits in 8-10

East Crescent Street. The Land & Environment Court has made clear in Tenacity when a more skilfuldesigrr can achieve no impact to neighbours' views.

Incorrect assessment of view impact: The view analysis responds that there is no water view from myunit towards the Harbour Bridge & Opera House, which is patentlyincorrect,anda lm setbackwouldbeadequate which is incorrect. The applicant has provided a very simplistic assessment & minimises the

true severity of view loss. Once the balconies are outfitted with chairs, tables & awnings, the view loss

will be severe.

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

tIDOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx



Page 10

a

AMENDED DABasis of Submissions¡ Privacy: The amendments make negligible difference to the serious intrusion on the privacy ofmyunit

which would still be severely & dramatically impacted. The extensions & verandahs protrude wellbeyond the frontage of 8-10 East Crescent Street, allowing residents of 6 East Crescent Street to lookdirectly into units on the south eastern side of l0 East Crescent Street, includingmyunit on the 2nd floot.My balcony would be positioned directly alongside the new structure, with extreme visual intrusion,allowing occupants to look directly into my home, including master bedroom & I will be forced to livewith my curtains drawn or lose all of my privacy.

o Heritage value: The proposal would replace the older style structure, which has heritage appeal, withan ultra-modern glass fronted set of units. The preservation of older buildings of heritage styleappearance in a pocket of East Crescent Street contributes to the appeal & historical value ofMcMahonsPoint. The modern high rise units would dramatically alter the entire character of this last section ofEast Crescent Street & McMahons Point.

. Design unsuited to character of block The desigrr is too large & too far forward for the overall size ofthe block, which is a narrow corridor between two larger blocks. The proposal is seeking to cram a 4-storey building into a land area which is too narrow.

o Acoustic effects & noise: The verandahs are only about 5.5m from the verandahs of 8-10 East Crescent

Street. Many residents have chosen to live & retire in McMahons Point because it is quiet; the

development is out of keeping with the peaceful character of this & adjoining buildings.

o Substantial reduction in real estate value: The dramatic reduction in view would cause an equivalent

dramatic reduction in the value of unit & many units in my block.

a Alternative option available for extension: There is substantial land at the rear for extensions, withoutdiminishing views.

Unrelated heritage report: The heritage report does not mention that until recentþthe site was a listed

heritage item or discussion of the building's age, origins, historical ownership or importance to the fabricofNorth Sydney.

Incorrect planning information: The SEE suggests the building is compliant with planning controls.The 44Yo site coverage calculation appears to ignore the garage, carport & driveway areas.

Parking: In this dense & built up area, it is unreasonable to provide only 2 car spaces for such alargedevelopment. The streets are already parked out. There should be more car spaces, including forvisitors and prohibition of resident parking stickers for new residents. Car parking design is unsafe; theywill have to cross over the driveway to access the building. Garage style is not sympathetic to the area.

Original balconies fÌlled in: Former owners chose to fill in the original full width front balconies & the

new owners are now trying to creep further forward. They can simply reinstate the original balconies.

a The revised building continues to be placed forward of the current & consistently applied building line& fails to match the alignment or design of the primary facades of buildings on adjoining properties.

This creates serious issues:

- Maintenance of characteristic pattern of setbacks & building orientation & siting in East

Crescent Street;- Unacceptable amenity impacts on views & privacy for lower floors on the northem side of the

proposal;- Increase of iconic views [for the subject site] at the expense of existing adjacent views, iconic

or otherwise;- Unnecessarilyobtrusiveoverlooking;- Maintenance of retaining wall between 6 & 8-10 East Crescent Street on the southeast

boundary of8-10 East Crescent Street;

View sharing: No site visit was made to 6 East Crescent Street to establish the current state of the

views from that building. It would assist the residents of 8-10 East Crescent Street to have new sitepoles erected to have assessment of views from 6 East Crescent Street made in addition to any other

assessment.

Renovations & additions: New strata development rather than an alteration & addition; no material to

a

a

a

I:\DOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Rçort Attach3 Submissions REDACTED.docx



Page I I

AMEI\DED DABasis of Submissions

show what portion of the building will be retained, what steps taken for geotechnical & surveyreports as

to whether or not the building will not fail & what precautions taken during construction. More thanhalf of the proposal already sits on the boundary with 8- 1 0 East Crescent Street. The intemal layout as

proposed & re-strata'ed does not seem to preserve any ofthe internal aspects ofthe building.

. Proposal for 4 units (not 3):

- There is no interconnecting stair between the upper levels of unit 2?

- The first or lowe¡ floor of unit 2 now has 2 bedrooms & a study (easily converted to a kitchen)& a rather large area devoted to a lobby; at the western end it is accessed by a lift & lobbywhich both appear to go to a lobby on the ground level;

- The second or upper floor of unit 2 now has 2 bedrooms, a kitchen, dining & living areas &again a rather large area devoted to a lobby;

- The lift & fire stairs are shown as shared with unit 3 at ground level;- Below ground level is unit I with I bedroom but no access to the lift or stairwell.

. Revised DA? Suitability of site for DA: There do not appear to be any revisions to the original DAdocuments. I have not found anything in the original or revised documents referring to the landscape &streetscape; amenity; traffic generation/problems in the vicinity; car access & availability of pubictransport.

. The development is certainly not visible from any foreshore; this is not to say that it in any way justifres

the ultra-modern proposal as a replacement.

's requirements are for 4 spaces & a minimum of 1 visitor space.a

. New building, not alteration: The new structure will bear no resemblance to the original building.

. Size of balconies: The extreme size of the overly large balconies with minimal separation & intrusivewhen our boundary is already very tight with a very small separation between buildings of less than 6m,will cause noise issues.

o Building at rear of block There is substantial land at the rear of 6 East Crescent Street to expandwithout diminishing views to 8-10 East Crescent Street.

. Carparking: It is unreasonable to provide only 2 car spaces for such a large 8-bedroom development.

. Building setback The new construction is clearly in contradiction to the cunent setback of the buildingline along the west side between 2 &. 12 East Crescent Street, going forward by S-7m,which will change

the character of the street & cause a loss of amenity in terms of views, privacy & air flow.o Heritage value: Prior to purchasing, I checked with & was informed by Council of the heritage listed

buildings nearby, which would therefore not affect us in future, so you can imagine my surprise to hearthe heritage order will expire shortly; I am concemed I was not informed about this removal at the timeof the enquiry.

Proposal is not alterations & additions but is a new building due to the complete change in character ofthe buildi¡g.We will lose almost all our view of the city sþline, Walsh Bay & land-water interchange. This amounts

to more than 50% of our view as our view of the Harbour Bridge is already obstructed. A lm setbackfrom the original plan is not sufficient.

There is substantial land at the rear while the proposed development sits right at the front very close tothe side boundaries.

We are concerned about the lack of parking, which is at a premium in the area.

We fail to understand such radical changes to the building which until recently was subject to a heritageorder.

We are not convinced that the proposal complies with site coverage controls.

The development will affect the ambience & amenity of the street & substantially reduce the realestate value ofour unit.

a

a

t:\DOCS\Susanna C\East Crescent St 6 McMahons Pt D4367_13\NSIPP\D4367_13_Report Attach3 Subrnissions REDACTED.docx


DESIGCI.AUSE 4.ó VAflANON - HEIOHI OF BUITDIING

¡UUOR, AIIERAÎIONS AND ADDITIONS fO EXISÎING iIUITI.DWET¡.IN(' RESIDENCEó EAST CRTSCEhIÎ STREET ¡TCiTAHONS ÞINT2t ocfoBER zll3

This stotement constítutes q requGst for voriotion lo o devetopmenl slondord, mode undcrClquse Á.6 ol Nodh Sydney locol Environmcntol Plon 2013 for North Sydncy Council.

The objecrivcs of Clouse 4.6 ore qs follows:(of to provide_on opPropriole dcaree of flexibility in opplying cerlqin developncnt stondordsto porticulor development,(bf to ochicve befier oulcomes for ond from developmcil by ollowing flcxibility in porticulorcírcumslonce¡.

For ttris lo occur, the Dcvelopment Applicotion is to be supporÞd by o wriüen opplicolionthot complionce with fiol dcvclopment stondord is unreosonobte or unnec"r.oq¡ in rhecircumstonces of the cose. This opplicotion should be reod in coniunction with theoccomponying Devclopment Applicolion drowings prepored by Mork Hurcum DesignPrqctice qnd Stotement of Environmcntol Effecls.

l.O Zoning of tl¡c lond

The subjecl site is zoned R4 "High Density Rcsidcntiol,,

2.O Obþtives of lhe Zonc

The obiectives of zone ore qs follows:

' To provide lor thc housing needs of the communily within o high density residenfiqlenvironment.

' To provide o voriety of housing types within o highdensity residentiol cnvironment.' To enqble other lqnd uses thot provide focilities or services to meet the doy{odoy

needs of residents.

elopment of sitcs for high density housing if such developmentfte omenity of the surrounding oreo or ilre noturol or culturol

To ensure thql o reosonobly high level of residentiql omenity is ochieved ondmoinloined.

a


DESI

CIAUSE 4.ó YARIANON - HEIG}IT OF BUIIDIING

'YI'UOR ATÍtRANONS AND ADDIT¡ONS 10 EXISÎING fiTULTI.DUYEIIING RESIDENCE

ó EAST CRESCENT STT¡EÍ 'UrC¡IAHONS

POINT2r ocÌoBER 20t3Pøgc2

3.0 Stqndord ro bc Voricd

The ¡tondord to be voried is Porl 4, Clouse 4.3 of LEF2Ol3, which ¡ets the moximum buildingheight for o building os shown on the Building Hcight Mop. Thc moximum building height foró Eost cresccnl street McMohons Point, locoted in Zonc R.4 Areo is 12 metrcs.

This stondqrd ossumcs building works odded to existing buildings must olso comply with rhcstondord.

4.0 Obicaivrs Perüoining to Stondord fo be Voried

The Obiectlves thol relole to the Building Height stondord con be found in tEP20l3:

'The ob¡'ecfiVes of this clouse qre qs fol|rcrws:

fo promole deveþment thot ænrorms fo ond reflecfs notu¡ol londlorms, bysfrepping developmenl on sloping lond to foilow the noturol grodient,lo promofe the refenlion and, il oppropriole, sfioríng of exisfíng views,]o moinlq,în solor occess to exisfing drrelfings, public reseryes qnd sheels, ond topromofe solor occess [or îuture developmen],fo noinforn privoey for residentu of existrhg dwellings ond ìo promole pñocy lorresidenb of new buildings,lo ensure compofibílify belween developmenl, porriculorly oì zone boundqn'es,lo encouroge on oppropriole scole ond densrþ of development ilrol is ln occordqncewilh, ond promofes ffie chorqcfe r of, on eÍeo.o

Erdcnr of Non Conformiry to lhe Stondold

(")

(b)

l")

(¿)

(")ff)

5.O

Existing moximum building height =Proposed moximum building height -

10.58m13.4m

The exisling residcntiol dwelling hos o moximum building height of 10.58m, conforming wÍthtlre devclopmen? stondord.

The proposed olterqtions qnd odditions to the building increoses the building height to13.4m. This is l.4m greoter thon the moximum of the devclopment stondorJ onJ is moinlylocoted olong the roof over the top floor bolcony, ond the new roof ridge is os por theexisîing roof ridge level of Rt40.75.


G1AUSE 4.ó VARIAIION - HE¡GHÍ Of BUIIDI¡NG

,lr,UOR AITERANONS AND ADDIIIONS fO EX|SNNG MULTI.DWEUJNG RIS¡DENCEó EA!5T CNESCENT STNEff fiICMAHONS POINÏ2r ocroBER 20t3Pogc 3

ó.O How i¡ stríct compliqncc wilh rhe dcvcþmcnt ¡tqndord unnrosonoblc orunnccGisqry in rhis porlicubr cor

The proposed works ore intcnded provide suitqble occommodotion for the chonging needs oftha currcnt occuponts, o fomily who wish to continue living in lhe some housc ond lãcofion.The proposed works hqve been dcsigned specificolþ lo suit the needs of ilre occuponts.

Additionol building height is required to suit the requirements of the occuponts. Theodditionol noncompliont oreo being the úin mctql roof overhonging qn unencloscd bolconywhich hos o low impoct lo the view corridor of the odiocent propcrlies.

The proposed works resuh in cn incrcose in building height thot ís l.4m greoter thqn thcmoxímum of thc devclopment stqndord. However lhis non-complionce is iustifioblc os itochieves oll obieaíves of the developmenl stondord limiting building height. This isdemonstrqted in Pqrt 7 bclow.

The dcvclopmenl stondord. being o numericol conhol ond not o pcrformonce conlrol, doesnol toke info occount oll foctors involved in developmenl such os thc specifics of the site ondoccuPonts' Flexibility should be gronted for the proposcd works os il provides suitqbleoccommodqfion for the occupcnls in o corcfully considercd design in which oll obiectivcs ofthe developmenf ¡tondord hovc becn met dcspite the 0.95m voriolion from thc numericolconFols.

7.o Gomplionce wirh rhe obiecives perroining no stondord ro be voricd

Thc primory dctermining foctor for vorying o development stondord under Clo¡rse 4.ó iswhether the Obieclives or intenl of the Development Stondord ore qchieved despite non-complíonce with ilre numericol requiremenls of the Stqndqrd.

The proposed development, whilst not complying wllh the numericol requirements of theBuilding Height Stqndord complies with the relevonl Obiectives, os demonstrotcd below:

7.1 Nqturql Site Context

The existing residence is locoted on o sloping site with existing rock formotions. Evident theproposed olterqtions qnd odditions relqin the mojorily of woll ond existing bosementfoundotion which minimise ony rock excovolion to site. The proposol conforms ond enhoncesthe noturol lqndform with stepping build form following the grodicnt.


clAUsE 4.ó VAHI\ÏON - HEtGlff oF ButlD¡tNG

ßlruoR AtrERAnoNs ANDADD,ffiONS To EXlsnNc ¡rutfl-DurEutNc R:stDENcEó EAST CRÊSCENT STR,EET mc'UrAHoNs UNI2r ocToBER 20t3Pcgc 4

7.o €-omplionce wilh rhc oblacivrc pcrtoinÍng !o glondsrd ro bG voricdlGonlinucl

7.2 Retention of Shored Views

Thc proposol endeovours,to rctoin existing shored views by keepìng the proposed roof ridgeto ths existing roof ridge levcl ond by keepin ¡ o lorge number of eiisting *àll. ¡n ord", ro'conslroin the building envelope. The oddilionol noncompliont oreo being rhe Colorbondmetol roof overhonging an un-cnclosed bolcony rctoin the Fonsporcncy t-hroughout the hontportion.of thc br.iilding wÍth gloss bolusFode to the decks. The oddirionol heigir olso ho.

-

minimol input on solor occess to the odioining propeÉies.

7.3 Solor Amenit)¡

Being posilioned bctween lwo residentiol high rise buildings. the odditionolworls to theexisting dwelling hos minimol impocf lo Ìhe existing solor omenity to surrounding properlies.The moiority of shodow by the subject dwelling is ovcrshodowed by I - I O Eost öre¡centsheet during winler ond is dcmonstrotcd on the shodow Elcvotion biogrom.

7.4 Retcntion of Privocy For Surrounding propcrtics

ol ond mogl new opcningss to openings ot livingpropcrlies.

7,5 Compotibility Between Devclopments ond Surrounding Areo

A mciority of existing exlarnol wolls to mqintoin the existinglondscope wiú the surrounding envi ion improves the cxisfinìguóqne pottem by providing o morc between 2 - 4 EoslCresccnl Street ond I - I 0 Eost Crescenl Slreel.

8.O CONCTUSTON

h is submitted úot o voriotion to North Sydney LEP2O'13 is oppropriote for rhis proiect os thenon<onformity does not odd ony impoct to odioining or neorby properties whilsr cåmpþingwith oll obiectives o[ ùe stqndord ond providing suiloble o""orroiofion for rh" o""rpånri.

As demonslroled obove, strict complionce with úis stondord is inoppropriole to thisDevelopment Applicotion.

Approvol should not therefore be withhetd due to the non-complionce of fie developmentstondord.


For privacy reasons, the architectural plans have been removed

from this document prior to publishing on the web. The plans

attached to the hard copy report may be viewed at Stanton Library

during opening hours or at the Customer Service Centre in Council

Chambers between 9.00am and 4.00pm Monday to Friday.

item - reports...report of susanna cheng, senior assessment officer page 6 re: 6 east crescent...

Documents