Development Application: 184-200 Broadway, Chippendale - D/2024/1165

20/08/2025 - Development Application: 184-200 Broadway, Chippendale - D/2024/1165

The Panel:

(A)      upheld the request to vary the height of buildings development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 'Exceptions to development standards' of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012;

(B)      upheld the request to vary the floor space ratio development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 'Exceptions to development standards' of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012;

(C)      is satisfied that the requirement under Clause 6.21D of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 that the development be subject to a competitive design process is considered unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the site and the proposed development;

(D)      is satisfied that the requirement under Clause 7.20 of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 that a development control plan be prepared is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the site and the proposed development; and

(E)      granted consent to Development Application Number D/2024/1165 subject to the conditions set out in Attachment A to the subject report.

Reasons for Decision

The application was approved for the following reasons:

(A)      The proposal satisfies the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in that, subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it achieves the objectives of the planning controls for the site for the reasons outlined in the report to the Local Planning Panel.

(B)      Based upon the material available to the Panel at the time of determining this application, the Panel is satisfied that the applicant’s written requests have adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6(3) of the Sydney LEP 2012, that compliance with the height of buildings and the floor space ratio development standards is unreasonable or unnecessary and that there are sufficient planning grounds to justify contravening the development standards.

(C)      The development is permissible with consent in the MU1 - Mixed-Use zone and is consistent with the objectives of the zone.

(D)      The proposal has been assessed against the aims and objectives of the relevant planning controls including the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012, the Sydney Development Control Plan 2012, and the applicable Environmental Planning Instruments. Where non-compliances are proposed, they have been assessed in this report as being acceptable in the circumstances of the case or can be resolved by the recommended conditions of consent.

(E)      The development will not detrimentally impact the heritage significance of nearby heritage items or the Chippendale Heritage Conservation Area. The development is consistent with the character of the Chippendale locality.

(F)       The proposed development demonstrates design excellence in accordance with the relevant provisions and matters for consideration in clause 6.21C of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012.

(G)      The development, subject to conditions, will not unreasonably compromise the amenity of the surrounding area.

Community Objections

A number of objectors provided oral and further written submissions at the Panel meeting. Representatives from the applicant also provided oral submissions. The objectors raised the following matters:

·                Change to the character of the area

·                Lack of sustainability

·                Proposed contributions should be spent in the local area after consultation with local residents

·                Non compliance with LEP and DCP requirements

·                No benefits for the local community

·                Insufficient parking

·                Potential for storage of e-bikes on footpaths

·                Location at a busy intersection

·                Overpopulation of the area

·                Amenity impacts to surrounding properties

·                Proposed use unsuitable and a better use is the provision of much needed housing

·                Fire safety concerns

The Panel was satisfied that the issues raised during the Panel meeting have been satisfactorily addressed in the Council Officer’s report, advice from the applicant’s representatives, advice from Council staff and conditions of consent.

Overall, by majority, the Panel concluded that the proposed development is suitable for approval.

Carried on the following show of hands –

Ayes (3)          Graham Brown (Chair), Elisabeth Peet and Judy MacGraw

Noes (1)          Marcus Trimble

Carried.

D/2024/1165