Decision details

The Panel:

(A)       upheld the variation requested to Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings in accordance with Clause 4.6 'Exceptions to development standards' of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012;

(B)       upheld the variation requested to Clause 68 (2)(d) communal open space, of the SEPP (Housing) 2021, in accordance with Clause 4.6 'Exceptions to development standards' of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012; and

(C)       granted consent to Development Application No. D/2022/285 subject to the conditions set out in Attachment A to the subject report, subject to the following amendments (additions shown in bold italics, deletions shown in strikethrough):

(2)        DESIGN MODIFICATIONS

The design of the building must be modified as follows:

(a)        Details of the screening around the ground level mechanical plant area are to be provided at a scale of 1:50 and must demonstrate that the plant and associated screen do not sit higher than the sill of the adjacent windows or the adjacent fence. Details of the screen design, along with materials, colours and finishes are required.

(b)        Window W2.18 on the eastern elevation to the side of the level 2 dormer window is to be deleted redesigned to achieve a single vertically proportioned form.

(c)        All external glazing is to be clear (not tinted), with a minimum VLT of 70% to ensure all glazing is consistent with the character of the contributory building

(d)        The ground floor southern communal outdoor area is to include two fixed seating benches with piered footings. These seats are to be sufficiently distanced from the mechanical plant and drying area.

(e)        All new windows and doors to the first floor as well as any windows / doors in the existing original walls on level 2 are to be timber framed

(f)         The building identification sign on the east elevation is to be externally illuminated from a concealed or discrete source.

(g)        The required bike spaces for the child care centre under D/2006/1792/B are to be re-located.

(h)        A workspace for the manager is to be provided either within the communal living area or in a separate space.

(i)          The new access to the front porch is to be redesigned to retain as much as possible of the original porch including the tiled roof, the ceiling (soffit) and rafters, brick columns and the stepped balustrade (which references to the stepped balustrade of St James Church).

The modifications are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Area Planning Manager prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason

To require amendments to the approved plans and supporting documentation following assessment of the development.

Reasons for Decision

The application was approved for the following reasons:

(A)       The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the R1 General Residential zone.

(B)       The proposed development satisfies the relevant objectives and provisions of the Sydney Development Control Plan 2012

(C)       Based upon the material available to the Panel at the time of determining this application, the Panel is satisfied that:

(i)         the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6(3) of the Sydney LEP 2012, that compliance with the building height development standard and communal open space development standard are unreasonable or unnecessary and that there are sufficient planning grounds to justify contravening clause 4.3 of the Sydney LEP 2012 and clause 68(2)(d) of the SEPP (Housing) 2021; and

(ii)        the proposal is in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the R1 General Residential zone, the building height development standard and the SEPP (Housing) 2021 standards.

(D)       Having considered the matters in Clause 6.21 of the Sydney LEP 2012, the building displays design excellence because:

(i)         The alterations and additions to the existing building are sympathetic and respond to the heritage fabric and features of the existing building.

(ii)        The proposed roof additions are appropriately designed to limit the perceived additional bulk and massing.

(iii)       The proposal does not result in unreasonable amenity impacts to neighbouring properties.

(E)       The proposal provides for uses that are compatible with the surrounding area. The proposal is in keeping with the future desired character of the area and is considered to be in the public interest.

(F)       Condition 2(b) was amended to improve amenity to the communal area.

(G)      Condition 2(i) was added to retain as much of the existing front porch as possible.

Carried unanimously.

D/2022/285