Item - REPORTS · Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer Page 2 Re: 2 Warung Street, McMahons Point EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This development application seeks Council’s approval

Item ____IPP02_______ - REPORTS -______07/12/2016_________

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 07/12/2016

Attachments:

1. Site Plan

2. Drawings

3. Shadow diagrams

ADDRESS/WARD: 2 Warung Street, McMahons Point (V)

APPLICATION No: DA 223/16

PROPOSAL: Substantial alterations and additions to a dwelling, including

new upper level and deck, and garage to Blues Point Road

PLANS REF: Drawings by Gerard Page Consulting numbered A004 (Rev.A),

A100 (Rev.C), A101 (Rev.C), A102 (Rev.C), A103 (Rev.C),

A201 (Rev.B), dated 24/5/16 and received by Council on

23/6/16; and A050 (Rev.D) & A051 (Rev.D), dated 26/7/16 and

received by Council on 26/7/16; and A150 (Rev.D), A151

(Rev.D), A152 (Rev.D), A200 (Rev.E), , dated 7/11/16, and

received by Council on 9/11/16

OWNER: Phillip & Jennifer Lawrence

APPLICANT: Gerard Page

AUTHOR: Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer

DATE OF REPORT: 25 November 2016

DATE LODGED: 23 June 2016

AMENDED: 26 July & 9 September 2013

SUBMISSIONS: One

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal

Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer Page 2

Re: 2 Warung Street, McMahons Point

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This development application seeks Council’s approval for substantial alterations and additions to a

dwelling, including new upper level and deck, and garage to Blues Point Road.

The application is reported to NSIPP for determination upon request of the applicant and

following enquiries from the Mayor, Gilly Gibson.

Council’s notification of the proposal did not attract any submissions.

The building is located within the McMahons Point South Conservation Area which contains a mix of

building typologies, including detached dwellings with characteristic pitched roof form and masonry

construction. The existing dwelling has a neutral contribution to the Conservation Area.

The proposal has been assessed and found to be unsatisfactory with regard to the objectives in the Local

Environmental Plan relating to heritage conservation areas, and inconsistent with numerous provisions

in the Development Control Plan in relation to form and massing, roof form, and built form character.

The proposal involves removal of the existing pitched roof and construction of a new flat-roofed “box-

like” addition with a large roof deck, and substantial demolition of an existing front verandah infill

which will be reconstructed as a contemporary open verandah. These works will result in loss of

characteristic built elements and their replacement with new uncharacteristic built form. The form,

massing and character of the existing dwelling will be transformed to one that does not reflect and

reinforce the characteristic built form of detached dwellings in the locality.

The only flat-roofed addition to a detached dwelling in the immediate vicinity of the site is at No.58

Blues Point Road; this addition is, however, located at ground level, set back from Blues Point Road

and more visible from the side street. In contrast, the proposed flat-roofed addition is elevated above

and presents a contemporary building façade to Blues Point Road. The subject property is located on a

prominent location at the corner of Blues Point Road and Warung Street, and is highly visible from both

streets.

The proposed contemporary front balcony does not complement the dwelling adjoining to the east at

No.4 Warung Street, which has a traditionally detailed front verandah infill similar to the existing front

verandah infill of the subject dwelling. The proportion of glazing to masonry on the Warung Street

elevation is considered excessive and not characteristic or complementary to the adjoining dwelling.

The proposal in its current form breaches the Building Height development standard; however, a formal

request for variation of the control pursuant to clause 4.6 of the LEP has not been lodged. Council has

no power to grant consent to the development in its current form where the application is not

accompanied by a request for variation in accordance with clause 4.6. It is noted that the variation is

minimal and could be eliminated by amending the design; however, a height-compliant scheme has not

been received.

The proposal does not satisfy the objectives of the zone and heritage controls, and would be

inappropriate in its context and would have significant adverse impacts on the cultural heritage of North

Sydney. The works, if approved, will undermine the neutrality of the property and result in an

uncharacteristic building in the Conservation Area. The application is recommended for refusal.

In considering whether the existing house is suitable for redevelopment, it is considered that an

alternative scheme incorporating a pitched roof addition could reasonably be achieved on the site,

substantially within the envelope controls for the site, while achieving a complementary built form with

comparable and reasonable levels of internal amenity. However, in the absence of such a scheme, the

subject proposal is not considered to be an appropriate response and refusal is recommended.

LOCATION MAP

McMahons Point

HENRY LAWSON RESERVE AVENUEMcMahon's Point

WharfLAWSON

HENRY EAS T

CR

ESC

ENT

S TR

EET

L OO

KOU

T

WARUNG STREET

LLO

YD R

EES

LOO

KOU

T EASTBLU

ES

MID

DLEDOWLING STREET ROAD RESERVE

STREETDOWLING STREET

STREET

PARKER

STREET

CR

ESC

ENT

WEST CR ES C

EN T

McM

ANU S

STR

EET

FRENCH LANE

F RENC

H ST RE E

T

RE SER

VE

STR

EETWEST CRESCENT

STREET ROAD

RESERVE

FRENCH2

18-22

1614

17A17

1215 A

151 3

11 A1 1

89A

97

56 1

2

15- 17( 2 )

30- 4

04 2

4650

5254

-56

5 860

626 4

6668

70

14 -2 8

7476

7880

82-8

433

3 537

394 3

4 586

47

2

9094

9698

100

4910

410

610

811

011

211

4

4

51

1

5759

6163

-65

6769

2

2A

8

6

19

(25 )

3 1(2

3 )33 35

292 5

37

211 7

1 51 1

( 9)

75

32 6

12 4

2 2

28

1 6- 2

0

30

141 2

10

32

6

1

2-4

97

1

3

5

(41 )

7 4( 6

8 )58

3A

5650

48

3028

3

4

1

8987

85

6

8179

7775

7371

1

909051

705730

705730

7352

3

1157191

2 SP 21762

(Lease - fo

r Valuation purposes only)

SP 62225

8Sec C

(Lease

- for Valu

ation p

urposes only)

2

752067Sec C

100048224

58

7

209345

1

8

1132752067

9

12

34

6

752067752067

7

(Lease - f

or Va lua

tion

purposes

only)

8

SP 6123

9

1133

16

SP 6454

SP 36729

802222

1

1

1146537

544018

PATHWAY

8022226

1098250

Sec D

814

1 14 6

5 37

2

Part CrownLand Reserve

944-690 1077

149

7048

5819

9222027

661

SP 125 11598981 1581992

902933 2305941

2

206643613575SP 1927

SP 4308 12 211

SP 16010CA

SP 2760 338032

2748831

D 3380321

SP 10140 60025

SP 50787359959 B

60027

SP 44569

5

419012

Y442802 A

344 7

00C109056 X

Y

1 438679

X

Sec B

781

127151659448 SP 11500

8Sec A 86

Sec G21

5066875685

75

22

1101 904522

731853 1 102

SP 17160 880994

101731853

100 1 50

923025

6 1

8 661

732

21

223657

20 80729311

223657

9A Sec G8

3365

4

1C1

659415

2343

57

12

Unidentif ied Passageway

1

Pt D

333654

SP 6123 21 217474

3

1

31120215 13

5478

9511

2926

1

1

5043242

SP 9

676

SP 7

5987

SP 18058

SP 1

3 38 9

6002

222746

303346

SP 5

70

1

SP 2

156 1

915829

A

5156751

SP 83485

SP 1322

1524518

330192

SP 13674

12

B

212

861201Pt 50

861201

Pt 50

A

SP 10832

SP 10831SP 64741

SP 12278

SP 31057

SP 15708

21

1

322230

86120151

257

2828

85 3 33 811

( Lease - for Valuat ion

pu rpose s only)

SP 5315

2

1572828

SP 53222

(Split for Valuationpurposes only)

SP 10316

325054BSP 7223

CT 19

(Lease - for Valuationpurposes only)

SP 1976SP 2268

SP 12654SP 19504

9837

71

CT

20

SP 10011

(Lea

s e -

f or V

alua

ti on

p ur p

oses

onl

y)SP 21014

420696

618 0

2 32

323406938490 3

1

SP 16307

1670

89

Re: Page 3

Property/Applicant Submittors - Properties Notified

2 Warung Street, McMahons Point - DA 233/16



DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The application seeks approval for substantial alterations and additions to a dwelling, including

the following:

Excavation to extend sub-floor level to accommodate a new garage accessed via a

proposed new driveway crossing to Blues Point Road;

Demolition of internal and external walls;

Demolition of roof; and

Construction of an additional floor and roof top deck (Figure 1).

Figure 1 – Photomontage of proposed development



STATUTORY CONTROLS

NSLEP 2013

Zoning – R3 Medium Density Residential

Item of Heritage – No

In Vicinity of Item of Heritage – Yes (No.58 Blues Point Road, No.3 Warung Street,

No’s.14-28 Blues Point Road (Blues Point Tower))

Conservation Area – Yes (McMahons Point South (CA14))

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 northern side of Warung Street on the north eastern corner of Blues

Point Road. It is located within R3 Medium Density Residential zone and the McMahons Point

South Conservation Area (Figure 2). The property is a neutral item within the Conservation

Area, however, is located in the immediate vicinity of several heritage items on Warung Street,

and many contributory items on both sides of Blues Point Road.

Figure 2 – Site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential and within the McMahons Point South

Conservation Area (CA14)

The site is rectangular in shape with primary frontage of 8.5m to Warung Street, and a 28m

side boundary to Blues Point Road. The site falls approximately 3m from the northern rear

boundary to the south, and has an area of 238m2. The site is occupied by a single storey

detached dwelling with a basement undercroft area (Figure 3).



Figure 3 – Primary frontage to Warung Street & side elevation to Blues Point Road

Surrounding development is residential, including multi-level flat buildings to the south and

west. Immediately adjoining the site to the east and north are a 3- to 4-level detached dwellings

at No.6 Warung Street and No.33 Blues Point Road, respectively (Figure 4).



Figure 4 – Surrounding development

RELEVANT HISTORY

The subject DA223/16 was lodged on 23/6/16. Council requested additional and amended

information, including compliance diagrams and preliminary engineering/structural report in

letters dated 29/6/16 and 5/7/16. A site inspection was conducted on 13/7/16.

A preliminary assessment of the development was undertaken in which numerous issues were

identified, including extent of demolition and characterisation of the proposal; heritage, site

coverage, setback, form and massing. Council sent a letter to the applicant on 15/9/16 advising

of the significant non-compliances, requesting withdrawal of the application.

The applicant sought additional time to submit the necessary information and an amended

design to address the concerns raised. Additional information was received on 11, 15 & 25

July and 3 August 2016. On 27/9/16, the owner contacted the Mayor’s office and raised a

number of issues, including the seeming disparity between the proposed development and the

flat roofed addition at No.58 Blues Point Road. Following enquiries from the Mayor, it was

determined to be appropriate to refer the matter to NSIPP.

An amended DA was received by Council on 9/11/16 which is materially the same as the

original proposal, however, with some changes to materials and finishes (Figure 5).



Figure 5 – Original & amended DA

REFERRALS

Ausgrid

The proposal was referred to Ausgrid in relation to an electric light pole adjacent the proposed

new driveway on Blues Point Road. Ausgrid raises no objection to the proposed development,

subject to conditions, including separation requirements and clearance distances from existing

power infrastructure on Blues Point Road.



Sydney Buses

The proposal was referred to State Transit in relation to a bus stop and bus zone adjacent the

site on Blues Point Road. State Transit has advised in correspondence dated 11/7/16 that it has

no objections to the proposed driveway at the rear end of the bus zone on the corner of Blues

Point Road and Warung Street.

Traffic operations

The proposal was referred to Council’s Traffic & Transport Engineer who did not raise any

objection to the development on traffic grounds, subject to the following:

If State Transit raises no objection to the location of driveway access within the Bus

Zone, then the works shall be subject to appropriate engineering plans be submitted to

Council for approval by Development Engineer.

The existing “Disabled Parking” space shall remain unaffected.

The applicant is required to submit a Construction Traffic Management plan to

Council for approval prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. This is due to the

site frontage being bounded by Bus Zone in Blues Point Rd and No Stopping

restriction in Warung Street.

Building

The proposal would have to comply with the Building Code of Australia. Conditions can be

imposed to ensure compliance.

Engineer

The proposal was referred to Council’s Development Engineer who has raised no objection, in

principle, to the proposed development, subject to conditions, however, with the exception of

the new garage and driveway. The Development Engineer has advised that the internal levels

of the garage as currently proposed are unsatisfactory in relation to the existing footpath levels

on Blues Point Road, which are be maintained. To date, Council has not received engineering

drawings that demonstrate the proposed garage is capable of meeting the existing footpath

levels.

Heritage

The original DA was referred to Council’s Conservation Planner who conducted a preliminary

assessment and advised that the proposal could not be supported due to adverse impacts on the

Conservation Area. The applicant was advised of the non-compliances with Council’s controls

and lodged an amended DA on 9/11/16. The Conservation Planner has assessed the amended

application and advised as follows:

1. Heritage Significance

The subject property is located within the McMahons Point South Conservation Area.

It is identified as having a neutral contribution to the significance of the Conservation Area.

It is located in the immediate vicinity of several heritage items along Warung Street, and

many contributory items along both sides of Blues Point Road.



The McMahons Point Conservation Area is significant:

(a) For its connection to the early grant to William Blue and the Harbour crossing point at

Blues Point, the early waterfront industry of Sydney Harbour, both of which can be

interpreted by physical remnants.

(b) As a mid 19th to early 20th century residential area with a mix of Victorian,

Federation, 1920’s and 1930’s housing mixed with some Inter-war residential flat

buildings.

2. The property

The subject property is located on a prominent location at the corner of Blues Point Road and

Warung Street, and is highly visible from both streets.

The existing building on the site is a late Federation Style dwelling, built circa 1924. Although

the face original brickwork has been rendered and the original front verandah enclosed, the

dwelling has retained its original form and many features that are characteristic to the

Conservation Area, including an ashlar sandstone base, traditional fenestration, simple

terracotta roof form, exposed eaves and garden setting. It is clearly able to be identified as

originating from the significant era of development of the McMahons Point Conservation Area,

and is one of a pair with the adjacent dwelling (No.4). It is considered that, with the reversal of

the front verandah enclosure, the subject building would have a strong contribution to the

significance of the conservation area. Internally, the house has retained much of its original

fabric and many original features including patterned ceilings.

3. The proposal

The proposal is for major alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, including the

creation of a garage and residential accommodation within in the existing sub floor, removal of

all existing internal walls, removal of the entire roof, and the addition of an additional storey

with extensive balcony. The only elements of the existing dwelling that are proposed to be

retained are the external walls and possibly the floor structure, although these will also be

substantially altered. The proposed addition has been designed in a distinctly contemporary

style with a box-like form and flat roof, clad in louvred timber panels in front of floor to ceiling

glazing and a roof terrace with prominent balustrades.

3. Preliminary Heritage Impact Assessment

A preliminary assessment of the heritage impact of the application, as originally submitted, was

undertaken on 11 August 2016 concluding that:

‘The subject property contains a dwelling, built c1924, which originates from the significant era

of development of the McMahons Point South Conservation Area. The building, in its existing

form, represents the significant era of development and displays the predominant architectural

style.

The proposal is not supported in its current form. Significant concerns are raised about the

extensive removal and alterations of original fabric, which is considered to be excessive and

could be considered to be 'demolition'. Demolition of neutral items is not supported by Council's

controls, and the amount of demolition would need to be significantly reduced in order for an

application on this property to be supported.

The proposal, in its current form, is considered to have a detrimental impact on the character

and significance of the area, due to the excessive demolition and uncharacteristic form and

details of the alterations and additions. The proposal is inconsistent with multiple objectives and

provisions of NSDCP 2013 in relation to development in conservation areas.



In order for an application to be supported, it should be amended to retain a considerably

greater proportion of the existing building, and the alterations and additions designed to better

reflect the character of, and have minimal impact on the McMahons Point Conservation Area.

The application should have regard to the relevant controls within NSDCP Section 13’.

4. Amendments and further information (9/11/16)

The applicant submitted amended plans and a revised Heritage Impact Statement on 9 November

2016. The amendments are limited to the replacement of the glazed balustrade with a flat metal

balustrade. No other aspects of the proposal appear to have been amended, and the amended

application fails to address any of the concerns previously raised in relation to the heritage

impact of the proposal.

Further, the new Heritage Statement of Heritage Impact has failed to address the concerns

raised in relation to the heritage impact of the proposal. This report fails to adequately justify

the major non-compliances of this proposal in relation to Council’s heritage controls, relying

heavily on uncharacteristic developments that were not approved under current controls in

order to justify the uncharacteristic nature of this development.

5. Heritage Impact Assessment – Amended proposal

The proposal, in its original form, was considered to have a detrimental impact on the character

and significance of the area, due to the excessive demolition and uncharacteristic form and

details of the alterations and additions, and inconsistency with multiple objectives and provisions

of NSDCP 2013 in relation to development in conservation areas. The applicant was asked to

amend the proposal to retain a considerably greater proportion of the existing building, and the

alterations and additions amended to better reflect the character of, and have minimal impact on

the McMahons Point Conservation Area, with greater regard to the relevant controls within

NSDCP Section 13.

The application has not been amended with the exception of changing the balustrade material

from glass to flat steel. This minor amendment has not addressed the concerns raised in relation

to the detrimental impact of the proposal upon the McMahons Point South Conservation Area.

The proposal is not able to be supported on heritage grounds. The proposal has an

unsatisfactory and significant adverse impact on the character of the Conservation Area due to

the following non-compliances:

Uncharacteristic built form & character

The form and character of the existing building is considered characteristic of the conservation

area. This form and character will be substantially altered by the proposed works, with the form,

character, details and materials of the proposed building being fundamentally inconsistent with

the established character and significance of the McMahons Point South conservation area.

The additional storey will alter the scale and form of the existing dwelling. The box like, flat

roof form and timber louvred cladding of additional storey, excessively large balcony with

large areas of uncharacteristic flat metal balustrade, large areas of glazing, metal framed

windows are all uncharacteristic elements that will be highly visible from the street and, if

approved, will erode the character of the area.

The amended proposal is inconsistent with the following parts of NSDCP 2013 Section 13

(Heritage and Conservation):

NSDCP 2013 Section B13.6 Heritage Conservation Areas the intention for neutral items 'is to

achieve a neutral or improved built outcome by removing previous unsympathetic features that

are characteristic of an area.'



B13.6.1 General Objectives O1, O3 and O4.

B13.6.2 Form, massing and scale – Objectives O1 & O2, and Provisions P1, P2, P5 & P9.

B13.6.3 Roofs – Objective O1, and Provision P1.

B13.6.4 Additional storeys and levels – Objective O1, and Provisions P1, P2 & P3.

B13.9.3 Verandas and Balconies – Objectives O1 & O2, and Provisions P2, P3 & P5.

B13.9.4 Materials, colours and finishes – Objective O1, and Provisions P3, P5 & P8.

B9.8 McMahons Point South Character Statement

The Character Statement for the conservation area states that:

Characteristic built elements include – pitched roofs between 30 and 45 degrees with some use of

parapets to the street, high proportion of masonry or solid surfaces to glazed surfaces, timber

framed windows and doors have traditional styles and proportions according to architectural

style of the building, face brick, terracotta tiles, corrugated metal, slate, timber joinery,

sandstone base courses.

Uncharacteristic elements include – post-war residential flat buildings and modern infill

development; garages to front setback, roof lights and dormers in front and side roof pitches,

removal of original detail, garden paving, verandah infills.

5. Conclusion and Recommendations

An assessment of the proposed works at 2 Warung Street Kirribilli, has been undertaken 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.

The proposal is for major alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, including the

creation of a garage and residential accommodation within in the existing sub floor, removal of

all existing internal walls, removal of the entire roof, and the addition of an additional storey.

The only elements of the existing dwelling that are proposed to be retained are the external walls

and some of the floor structure, although these will also be altered. The proposed addition has

been designed in a distinctly contemporary style with a box-like form and flat roof, clad in

louvred timber panels and with large areas of balustrades.

The proposal is not supported due to its detrimental impact on the McMahons Point

Conservation Area. The proposed development is considered to be highly uncharacteristic to the

conservation area and given its prominent corner location, will be highly visible from Blues

Point Road, where its impact will be significant. In addition, the proposal fails to comply with the

multiple objectives and provisions of the relevant controls of NSDCP Section 13. Significant

concerns are raised about the extensive removal and alterations of original fabric, which is

considered to be excessive, and could be considered to be 'demolition'.

The proposed development includes the removal of the characteristic pitched terracotta tiled

roof and its replacement with an additional level, with box like form, flat roof and timber

louvred cladding. The proposal also involves an excessively large balcony with large areas of

uncharacteristic flat metal balustrade, large areas of glazing and metal framed windows.

These changes are all identifies as ‘uncharacteristic elements’ with the McMahons Point

South Character Statement, and will substantially alter the scale, form and character of the

building.



The proposal, if approved, would result in a building that would be considered to be an

‘uncharacteristic’ item that will be highly visible from the street and, if approved, will erode

the character of the area. Furthermore, approval of this development could set a precedent for

the approval of further highly uncharacteristic built forms with significant non–compliances, in

very prominent locations within the conservation area. This would result in the further erosion

of the character and significance of the McMahons Point Conservation Area.

Whilst the subject building is identified as having a neutral impact on the conservation area, the

building clearly originates from its significant era of development and with the reversal of the

front verandah infill, and a sensitively designed upper level addition, would be considered to

make a positive contribution of the areas significance. It is recommended that a determination

of this applicant be deferred so that the applicant can pursue an alternate scheme that is

guided by the Controls in NSDCP Section 13 and the McMahons Point South Character

Statement.

Planner’s comment: The following advice has been provided by the Conservation Planner in

relation to an alternative approach:

Suggested amendments/alternative approach

An additional storey could be supported in this location, if it was contained within a

characteristic pitched roof form with a greater amount of original fabric retained, and

traditional details and materials utilised in areas of the building that are highly visible from the

public domain.

The existing pitched roof could be lifted (with the masonry walls extended) by approximately

1.6 metres, possibly with gable ends added. This would minimise the impact on the

significance and character of the conservation area without any compromise to the amenity of

the accommodation provided. Contemporary elements may be included where they are not

highly visible from Warung Street or Blues Point Road. Further, the retention of the front

verandah (as a winter garden) would assist in retaining the unity and character of the

streetscape, particularly in relation to No.4 Warung Street.

Such an approach, guided by the North Sydney heritage controls, that minimises the heritage

impact of the proposal, would be able to be supported on heritage grounds.

The suggested amendments are considered to be workable and feasible within the constraints

of the site; the alternative approach is illustrated conceptually in Figure 6 below. It is

considered that a pitched roof addition would provide for a characteristic form whilst still

achieving a high residential amenity. The suggested alternative approach is also capable of

being accommodated substantially within the envelope controls for the site.



Figure 6 – Indicative pitched roof alternative approach



Landscaping

The proposal was referred to Council’s Landscape Development Officer who advised that there

are no objections to the removal of the Bottlebrush on the Warung Street frontage of the

property, subject to the planting of 2 x (45 litre) Skyrocket Juniper (dwarf pine trees), 2m to

the south of the approved driveway and the second tree be planted approximately 3m to the

south of the first tree, and the Bottlebrush within the western planter further to the south within

the property being retained. Any approval should be subject to a bond of up to $10,000 on

both kerb frontages, and a $4,000 bond for the grass verge outside both frontages of the

property and the Queensland Firewheel Tree growing in the verge area of Blues Point Road.

SUBMISSIONS

The owners of adjoining properties and the Lavender Bay Precinct were notified of the

proposed development for a 14-day period, between 8 & 22 July 2016, in accordance with

section A4 of NSDCP 2013. The notification resulted in one submission in support,

summarised as follows:

Basis of Submissions

Support:

Reduced volume of the house towards the front facing Warung Street will allow more sunlight & also

increase our views towards the west of the harbour;

2nd storey to the rear will protect us from harsh summer western sun but not prevent winter western sun

on our back deck

The amended DA received by Council on 9/11/16 was not required to be notified, in

accordance with section A4 of the DCP, as it incorporated minor changes only with no

increase in the building envelope as compared to the original proposal.

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 zoned R3 Medium Density Residential under the provisions of the North Sydney

Local Environmental Plan 2013 (NSLEP 2013). Development for the purposes of alterations

and additions to an existing dwelling is permissible with the consent of Council. Demolition

is permissible with consent pursuant to clause 2.7 of the LEP.



2. Residential Zone Objectives

Clauses 2.3 and the Land Use Table contained in NSLEP 2013 provide for the particular

objectives of the R3 Medium Density Residential zone. It is considered that the proposed

development would maintain existing residential accommodation and provide for a high level

of residential amenity, as discussed in this report. However, the proposal would not achieve

the objectives of the zone relating to impacts to heritage. The proposal is therefore

unsatisfactory with respect to the zone objectives.

3. LEP Compliance table

The application has been assessed against the relevant principal development standards

contained in Part 4 of NSLEP 2013 as indicated in the following compliance table. More

detailed comments with regard to non-compliances are provided later in this report.

STATUTORY CONTROL – North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013

Site Area – 238m² Existing Proposed Control Complies

B3 Medium Density Residential

Minimum Lot Size (cl.4.1) 238m² No change 230m² Yes

Building Height (cl.4.3(2)) (max) 7.6m 8.575m 8.5m No *

* Clause 4.6 request for variation required

4. Building Heights

The maximum building height for the site is 8.5m pursuant to clause 4.3 of NSLEP 2013. The

proposed building height of 8.575m (Figure 7) does not comply with the development

standard.

Figure 7 – Breach of Building Height development standard



As the development application involve a non-compliance with a development standard

pursuant to clause 4.3 in NSLEP 2013 in relation to Building Height, written justification for

the non-compliance is required pursuant to clause 4.6 of the LEP; however, none has been

submitted. While the numeric breach of 0.9% is minor (and could be rectified by reducing the

eave projection), Council does not have any discretion to legally consider the non-compliance,

as currently proposed, in the absence of a formal request for variation under clause 4.6 of the

LEP.

The issue of breach of Building Height was brought to the attention of the applicant during the

course of assessment; however, the necessary documentation to demonstrate that the proposal

achieves the objectives of the Building Height control despite the proposed variation, has not

been received. The applicant has failed to provide adequate reasons as to why it would be

unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case to adhere to the control, and failed

to provide sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development

standard.

It is noted that any breach of the Building Height control arising from the height of the new

roof ridge under the amended pitched roof alternative approach, as discussed in the Heritage

Referral section (refer to Figure 6 further above), could be considered on merit pursuant to

clause 4.6 of the LEP.

5. Preservation of trees or vegetation

Clause 5.9 of NSLEP 2013 seeks to preserve the amenity of the area through the preservation

of trees and other vegetation. The development will maintain landscape amenity, subject to

additional plantings on the western periphery of the site, as discussed in the Landscape

Referral section in this report.

6. Heritage conservation

The development has been assessed in relation to the relevant heritage conservation provisions

in clause 5.10 of NSLEP 2013 and found to be inconsistent with the relevant objectives. As

discussed earlier in the Heritage Referrals section of this report, Council’s Conservation

Planner does not support the development as it will have detrimental impacts on the character

of the conservation area.

7. 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 effects on:

(i) drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality of the development

(ii) natural features of, and vegetation on, the site and adjoining land Comment: The proposed excavations will be an extension to an existing excavated

basement within the building footprint and will not disrupt natural vegetation or

drainage patterns or the stability of the subject and adjoining properties, subject to the

recommendations of Council’s Development Engineer.



(b) The effect of the development on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land Comment: The earthworks will not detrimentally impact on the likely future and

continued use of the land for residential purpose.

(c) The quality of the fill or the soil to be excavated, or both Comment: The excavated soil will not likely be contaminated due to the residential

history of the site.

(d) The effect of the development on the existing and likely amenity of adjoining

properties Comment: The excavations will be beneath the existing building footprint and set back

1.3m & 4.3m from the east- & north-adjoining properties, respectively, so that the

amenity of the adjoining dwellings will not be impacted.

(e) The source of any fill material and the destination of any excavated material Comment: The excavated soil will be disposed of in accordance with relevant

legislation and regulations.

(f) The likelihood of disturbing Aboriginal objects or relics Comment: 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 Comment: Conditions can be imposed in relation to stormwater disposal and sediment

control so that the works will not adversely impact on Sydney Harbour.

(h) Any appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the

development -

Comment: The impacts of the earthworks can be minimised by requiring geotechnical

certification and the preparation of dilapidation reports for potentially affected

properties.

8. Vehicle access

Development for the purposes of a driveway and vehicular crossing within a road reserve

associated with a permissible use in an adjoining zone may be carried out with consent,

pursuant to clause 6.13 of the LEP. Conditions have been recommended by Ausgrid and

Council’s Development Engineer to ensure that any new driveway complies with relevant

standards while protecting public infrastructure assets in the vicinity of the works.

SEPP (BASIX) 2004

SEPP (BASIX) requires that the subject proposal in relation to a dwelling house involving

building works which exceed $50,000 be accompanied by a BASIX certificate detailing energy

efficiency commitments to be undertaken with the proposed works. It is noted that a BASIX

certificate has been submitted for “alterations and additions” and commitments where relevant

have been reflected on the amended plans as submitted. The development is acceptable in this

regard.



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 generally maintained as the development would

be set back from the foreshore and be of significantly lesser scale compared to numerous

surrounding development including multi-storey flat buildings. As such, the development will

not have any detrimental impact on the character or scenic quality of foreshores and waterways.

NORTH SYDNEY DCP 2013

DCP 2013 Compliance Table – Heritage & Conservation

The proposal is contrary to the relevant provisions and does not satisfy the objectives in section

B13, in particular, section B13.6 in relation to conservation areas, as assessed in the Heritage

Referral section in this report.

DCP 2013 Compliance Table – Residential Development

The proposal is generally consistent with section B1 of the DCP relating to residential

developments and section C9 & C9.8 being the character statement for the McMahons Point

South Conservation Area within the Lavender Bay Planning Area.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2013

Residential Development Complies Comments

B1.2 Social Amenity

Maintaining residential

accommodation

Yes The existing dwelling will be retained.

B1.3 Environmental Criteria

Topography Yes The proposed excavations will be set back at least 1m from

boundaries except for the western boundary to Blues Point Road.

Conditions are recommended by Council’s Development Engineer to

ensure the structural integrity of adjoining land is maintained.

The earthworks will be located beneath the existing building footprint

and the local topography, falling towards Blues Point, will be

maintained.

Views Yes The development will not affect the views of Lavender Bay &

Sydney Harbour from Lloyd Rees Reserve which is located some

30m directly to the east of the subject site with intervening buildings.

The development will not result in any view impacts on surrounding

development as the works are generally below the primary living and

open spaces of adjoining dwellings.





Solar access Yes The submitted shadow diagrams (refer to Attachment 3) indicate

that the proposed development will not result in any material shadow

impacts on the adjoining dwelling to the east at No.4 Warung Street

for which a primary living room and deck are elevated on Level 2

and oriented to the north. The lower level lounge on Level 1 will

receive adequate solar amenity via a western side window during

midwinter afternoon and through the rear patio doors via an open

plan family room (with reference to approved drawings under

BA642/97 & DA525/06/2).

Acoustic privacy Yes The proposed bedrooms will be located away from the street corner.

Visual privacy No The application proposes a roof deck on Level 2, contrary to section

B1.3.10 P7; however, provision P8 allows for consideration of such a

deck under the following criteria:

(a) the space is designed such that there is no potential for existing

or future overlooking of the space and subsequent noise and

privacy issues: The existing roof proposed to be converted to a roof

deck is currently overlooked by surrounding development, including

an existing front balcony at No.4 Warung Street and nearby

residential units. The balcony is proposed to be used in association

with a bedroom with an outlook to the harbour and public streets and

adequately separated from nearby residences.

(b) the space is set back at least 1m from the extent of the external

enclosing walls to the floor level below: The trafficable area and

balustrade of the roof deck are not set back; however, any consent for

a deck at this level could be conditional upon a setback of at least 1m

from the external walls below.

(c) the space does not exceed 18m2 or 50% of the storey below

whichever is the lesser: The proposed roof deck has an area of 51m2

(8.8m x 5.8m) and does not comply. Nonetheless, a roof deck could

be supported, in reduced form, up to a maximum area of 18m2.

(d) there is no other appropriate ground level space for outdoor

recreation off a primary living room: The proposed internal

reconfiguration to provide primary living areas oriented south to the

harbour, instead of facing rear to retaining walls, is reasonable. This,

however, will result in a living room elevated above and with no

direct access to the stepped and densely planted front garden below.

The existing rear courtyard will be accessible from the new living

room via an internal hallway and side door. The roof deck will

complement existing ground level open spaces that are limited by the

building footprint and topography.

On balance, an elevated deck could be supported, as reasonable

privacy can be maintained subject to a minimum 1m setback from the

building line, and a reduction in size.

B1.4 Quality Built Form

Context No The proposal does not adequately respond to the character of the

subject neutral item and its prominent position elevated on a street

corner and within a Conservation Area, contrary to section B1.4.1 O1

& P1.

Subdivision pattern Yes Characteristic lot size and primary building orientation to Warung

Street and the harbour will be maintained.

Streetscape Yes Any approval of the development would require retention of existing

sandstone kerbing except in the location of the driveway and

additional plantings within the site adjacent Blues Point Road, to

maintain streetscape amenity.





Siting Yes The existing siting of the building, with primary address to Warung

Street, secondary façade to Blues Point Road, and small front and

rear gardens, will be maintained.

Setbacks (front & rear) Yes The primary front and rear building lines will generally be

maintained and generally in alignment with the adjoining multi-level

dwelling at No.4 Warung Street.

Setbacks (side) No The proposed side setbacks do not comply with the minimum

setbacks required in section B1.4.6 P2, being 900mm, 1.5m and 2m

at building heights of up to 4m, 7m, and greater than 7m,

respectively, as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8 – Non-compliant side setbacks at Levels 1 & 2

Setbacks (side)

(continued)

The proposed side setbacks are not supported in their current form as

they do not satisfy the objectives of the provision, discussed as

follows:

O1. To reinforce the characteristic pattern of setbacks and building

orientation with the street. The proposed side setbacks on the upper

levels are comparable to detached dwellings in the vicinity of the site,

including No.4 Warung Street which has a uniform setback of

900mm to its western boundary in common with the subject site from

ground to upper levels, similar to that which is proposed.





No O2. To control the bulk and scale of buildings. The side setbacks

to the uppermost Level 2 will result in excessive bulk, by virtue of

the 9m long addition with inadequate side setback occupying half of

the area of the existing roof. The upper Level 2 fails to recede behind

the primary building line of Level 1 as is envisaged by the provisions

for setbacks and pitched roofs in the Conservation Area, giving rise

to an orthogonal massing that will have an overbearing impact on the

existing building and visually dominate the property as viewed from

Blues Point Road.

It is noted that an alternative approach incorporating an upper level

with a pitched roof plane receding from Blues Point Road (refer to

Figure 6 in this report) could reasonably minimise the extent of non-

compliance with the side setback provisions, with localised variations

arising from any dormer(s) potentially supportable on merit.

O3. To provide separation between buildings. The provision of

1.5m side setback from the eastern boundary substantially complies

with the minimum setback provision. The partial non-compliance at

the upper eastern portion of Level 2 will nonetheless provide for

2.4m building separation from No.4 Warung Street, which is

adequate in terms privacy and light amenity.

O4. To preserve the amenity of existing dwellings and provide

amenity to new dwellings in terms of shadowing, privacy, views,

ventilation and solar access. The development will not give rise to

any material shadow, privacy or ventilation impacts by reason of the

proposed side setbacks, as assessed in this report.

Form, massing & scale Yes The proposed development is generally consistent with the Building

Height control in the LEP, and comparable and not significantly

larger than the scale of surrounding multi-level detached dwellings in

the vicinity of the site.

Built form character No The proposed development fails to satisfy Built Form Character

objective in section B1.4.8 O1 which seeks to “ensure the design of

buildings reflects and reinforces, or is complementary to, the

existing character of the locality”.

The proposal is contrary to section B1.4.8 P2 which seeks to repeat

the size, location and proportions of distinctive features of buildings

such as facades and roof form. The proposed development will

remove characteristic building fabric and replace them with elements

that do not reflect and reinforce, or complement, the existing

character of the subject dwelling and locality. The neutrality of the

property will be significantly eroded by the works, resulting in a

more uncharacteristic property that will erode the built form character

of the Conservation Area; in particular:

No Flat-roofed addition

The proposed removal of a characteristic pitched roof, and

replacement with a flat roofed addition does not reflect, reinforce or

complement the existing and desirable built form character of the

Conservation Area.

The relevant and characteristic roof form for the subject detached

dwelling typology is a pitched roof as currently exists on the subject

and adjoining properties at No.4 Warung Street and No’s. 33, 35 &

39 Blues Point Road (Figure 9). The proposed flat roof is

inconsistent with surrounding characteristic properties and does not

comply with the DCP provisions for roofs in section B1.4.10 (further

discussed below).





Figure 9 – All detached dwellings adjoining the site have pitched roofs

Built form character

(continued)

The flat roof form for detached dwellings (as well as numerous

nearby flat buildings) is prevalent, and there is an absence of flat-

roofed detached dwellings in the vicinity of the site and within the

Conservation Area, with one exception at No.58 Blues Point Road,

which has a history and context entirely distinguishable from the

subject site, as discussed below.

The flat-roofed contemporary addition located at No.58 Blues Point

Road is located approximately 35m northwest of the site. The

addition was approved by North Sydney Council at its meeting on

8/4/13 (DA417/12) as part of a proposal for significant alterations

and additions to an existing detached dwelling, including a new upper

floor addition, reconfiguration of the existing floor levels, and

upgrade of an existing carport. A section 96 modification, including

a change to roofs, was approved by North Sydney Independent

Planning Panel at its meeting on 4/6/14.

The approved development at No.58 Blues Point Road is

distinguished from, and not considered to be a relevant or

desirable precedent for, the subject development proposal in the

following key respects:






No.58 Blues Point Road Subject site No.2 Warung Street

Figure 10 – No.58 Blues Point Road, set back on

side (West Crescent) street

Figure 11 – Montage of proposed additions, elevated

above Blues Point Road

The proposed flat-roofed addition was supported by

the Conservation Planner on heritage grounds,

having regard to the particular circumstances of the

site and its context:

“The removal of the existing roof and proposed

roof addition is considered acceptable on

heritage grounds, given the context of the site.

The house and its roof are not characteristic to

the conservation area and do not originate from

the significant era of development.

The majority of the house is located below

street level and setback from the street such

that its impact on Blues Point Road is limited.

The scale of the dwelling will be smaller than

surrounding development along Blues Point

Road. It will be more visible from West

Crescent Street, which is characterised by

larger buildings in a variety of building styles

including a very contemporary building

immediately adjacent. Within this context, the

contemporary form of the addition is

considered to have limited impact on the

conservation area.

The works to the rear of the property will not be

visible from the street but will be visible from

the properties at the rear and the water. The

proposed development is consistent with

surrounding development at the rear and along

the waterfront at McMahons Point.”

The proposed built form is not supported on heritage

grounds, having regard to the existing building and

different site context; in particular:

“The form and character of the existing building is

considered characteristic of the conservation area.

This form and character will be substantially altered

by the proposed works, with the form, character,

details and materials of the proposed building being

fundamentally inconsistent with the established

character and significance of the McMahons Point

South conservation area.

The additional storey will alter the scale and form of

the existing dwelling.

The box like, flat roof form and timber louvred

cladding of additional storey, excessively large balcony

with large areas of uncharacteristic flat metal

balustrade, large areas of glazing, metal framed

windows are all uncharacteristic elements that will be

highly visible from the street and, if approved, will

erode the character of the area.”

A previous approval (DA573/03) for demolition of

a dwelling and construction of new multi level

contemporary style dwelling, was active at the time

of assessment and determination of DA417/12. The

more recent development proposal was considered

to have lesser impacts compared to the earlier

consent.

The proposed development does not serve to rectify or

mitigate the impacts of any previous consent for the

property.

The flat-roofed rear are at ground level on Blues

Point Road and set back some 7.5m (Figure 12).

The primary length of the proposed flat-roofed addition

at No.2 Warung Street is set back 900mm and

elevated up to 5.7m above Blues Point Road.





Figure 12 – Flat roofed contemporary addition at No.58 Blues Point Rd, set back from Blues Point Rd

The orientation of No.58 is east-west so that the

side boundary is along a side street (West Crescent

Street) such that the rear additions are more visible

from the side street rather than Blues Point Road.

The length of the side boundary of the subject site is

highly prominent to Blues Point Road and the proposed

rear addition will be highly visible from the Blues

Point Road.

The flat-roofed addition at No.58 was approved to

be behind and partially obscured by a front

landscaped garden and perimeter stone wall (currently being re-constructed) (Figure 13).

The proposed rear addition will be set back 900mm

with minimal screening to Blues Point Road (Figure

14).





Figure 13 – Rear additions at No.58 screened by

heritage wall and front garden landscaping

Figure 14 – Elevated addition with minimal screening

No.58 is adjoined by a mix of larger buildings

including a highly contemporary building adjoining

to the west.

The subject site is adjoined by contributory and

neutral detached dwellings all with pitched roofs,

and is one of a pair with the adjacent dwelling No.4

Warung Street. Flat-roofed buildings in the immediate

vicinity of the site are associated with strata buildings,

namely, a multi-storey parapet building at No.6

Warung Street and a walk-up flat building at No.1

Warung Street, both identified as Uncharacteristic

Items within the Conservation Area.

A low pitched roof plane on West Crescent Street

was considered appropriate at No.58 as a traditional

pitched roof form would have added additional bulk

to the building with adverse view and shadow

amenity impacts on adjoining residences.

The subject north-south orientation of the subject site,

below the adjoining dwellings on Blues Point Road

does not warrant a flat-roofed design by reason of any

view or shadow impacts, particularly where it would

erode the built form character of the Conservation

Area.




(continued)

No

Contemporary reconstruction of traditional front verandah

Verandah infills are identified as uncharacteristic elements in the

Conservation Area. The existing front verandah infill is reversible;

however, it is noted that the verandah enclosure in its current form

matches that at No.4 Warung Street which, as a pair, contribute to the

streetscape (Figure 15).





Figure 15 – Front balcony matches No.4 Warung Street

The proposal to substantially demolish the original detailing and

conversion to a contemporary balcony fails to reflect and reinforce

existing built form character, nor does the contemporary detailing of

the proposed front verandah complement the verandah infill

adjoining at No.4 Warung Street. Given the context, it is considered

that the front porch could be partially re-opened as a wintergarden,

with the original detailing, including articulated masonry piers,

retained.


(continued)

Oversized roof deck

Large decks are common in the neighbourhood, including at

adjoining detached dwellings on Warung Street and Blues Point Road

(Figure 16). However, with the exception of decks on top of

garages, upper level decks are generally integrated into the

architecture of the building and below pitched roof forms.

The proposed roof deck, measuring some 50m2 in area, built to the

building line, fails to reflect and reinforce the existing character, or

complement surrounding development. However, a roof deck that is

reduced in size to a maximum of 18m2 in accordance with section

B1.3.10 P8, and integrated with the building design, could be

supported.





Figure 16 – Upper level roof decks in the locality generally below pitched roof forms

Excessive glazing

The proposed development, in particular, the alterations to the south

elevation on Level 1 and new Level 2 addition, will result in an

excessively high proportion of glazing to masonry at the primary

street address of the property and compared to a characteristically

high proportion of masonry construction in the Conservation Area

(Figure 17). The proposed materiality does not reflect and reinforce

the characteristic high proportion of masonry or solid surfaces to

glazed surfaces typical of detached dwellings in the Conservation

Area, as identified in section C9.8.6 P5, and as discussed in the

Colours & materials section below.

Figure 17 – Proposed glazing on south elevation compared to surrounding street facades which are

characterised by a high proportion of masonry





Dwelling entry Yes The existing front gate at Warung Street and entry path along the side

boundary to the front door within the eastern side setback will be

maintained.

Roofs No The proposed flat roof does not achieve the objective of section

B1.4.10 O1 which seeks to ensure the provision of a characteristic

roof typology through the use of similar forms, shapes and materials;

in particular:

The proposed flat roof does not incorporate a pitched roof

between 30 & 45 degrees as identified as characteristic in the

character statement section C9.8.6 P4, contrary to section

B1.4.10 P1 & P3; and

The flat roof is visually prominent on Blues Point Road, contrary

to section B1.4.10 P5.

Colours & materials No The contemporary additions do not achieve the objective of section

B1.4.12 which seeks to ensure new works reflect and reinforce the

existing and desired character of a locality; in particular:

The front façade fails to provide for a high proportion of masonry

to glass, as provided for under section B1.4.12 P4 and character

statement section C9.8.6 P5; if a vertical line is drawn down the

centreline of the South Elevation, more than 50% of glass or 75%

of clear opening and glass occupies the façade; and

The proposed aluminium framed windows and doors are contrary

to character statement section C9.8.6 P6 which provides for

timber framed windows and doors and traditional styles and

proportions according to architectural style of the building.

Front fences Yes No change is proposed to the existing low planters and picket fence

to the front garden.

B1.5 Quality Urban Environment

High quality residential

accommodation

Yes

All habitable rooms will have access to daylight and natural

ventilation via operable windows. Lightwells &

ventilation

Yes

Safety and security Yes The property will have a secure perimeter and direct sightlines to the

street.

Vehicular access & car

parking

Yes The proposed single garage is appropriately located toward the rear

of the site where it will have the least visual impact. As discussed in

the Referrals section in this report, the garage and new driveway to

Blues Point Road can be supported, subject to meeting any

requirements of Ausgrid in relation to a power pole, Sydney Buses in

relation to a Bus Zone, and Council’s Traffic & Transport and

Development Engineers in relation to driveway design and level

transitions.

Site coverage No The proposed development does not comply with the maximum 50%

site coverage provision applicable to the site.

Site area = 238m2 Existing Proposed Control Complies

Site Coverage (lot size

230-499m2) (cl.B1.5.5)

(max)

50.4%

(120m2) 52.5% (125m2) 50% (119m2) No





The development is nevertheless supported as it satisfies the

objectives of the site coverage provision, despite the variation,

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 development will generally be accommodated within the

existing footprint of the site. The proposed increase of 5m2 (2%)

in site coverage is considered to be marginal and within the

capacity of the site with no overdevelopment. Site coverage

(continued)

O2. To ensure that development promotes the existing or desired

future character of the neighbourhood. The proposed site coverage

is comparable to the existing site coverage and consistent with the

densely built character of the neighbourhood.

O3. To control site density. The existing density of development

on 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

existing landscaped front garden and useable rear courtyard will be

maintained.

Landscape area No The existing and proposed development do not comply with the

minimum landscape and maximum un-built upon area provisions:

Site area = 238 m2 Existing Proposed Control Complies

Landscape Area (min)

(cl.B1.5.6)

22.2%

(52.9m2) 23.2% (55.2m2) 30% (71.4m2) No

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

27.4%

(65.1m2) 24.3% (57.8m2) 20% (47.6m2) No

The proposal is nevertheless considered satisfactory as the extent of

existing non-compliances will be reduced by the provision of

additional landscaping within the eastern breezeway of the dwelling.

The objectives of the landscape area provisions are satisfied despite

the non-compliance; in particular, the rear courtyard will be retained,

and the characteristic landscaped front garden and perimeter planters

adjacent to Blues Point Road will be substantially retained to provide

for streetscape amenity.

Excavation Yes The proposed basement parking to a dwelling is satisfactory, in

accordance with the criteria in section B1.5.7 P3, as follows:

(a) The development satisfies the objectives of this sub-section:

The proposed garage excavation satisfies the objectives of section

B1.5.7; in particular:

O1. To retain existing vegetation and allow for new substantial

vegetation and trees. The removal of vegetation to accommodate

the garage opening will be limited to a section of a side, and the

removal of a Bottlebrush Tree is supported provided replacement

plantings are provided in accordance with the recommendations

of Council’s Landscape Development Officer.

O2. To minimise adverse effects of excavation on the amenity

of neighbouring properties. The garage excavations will be set

back 1.3m and 4.3m from the eastern and northern boundaries.

The structural integrity and amenity of adjoining land can be

protected by requiring dilapidation reports and geotechnical

certification.





Excavation

(continued)

O3. To minimise excavation and site disturbance so as to retain

natural landforms, natural rock faces, sandstone retaining

walls and the like and to retain natural water runoff patterns

and underground water table and flow patterns. The proposed

excavations are localised and be an extension of an existing part-

basement level, with no significant impacts on underground

water flows.

O4. To ensure the structural integrity of adjoining properties.

Conditions can be imposed to provide for the protection of

adjoining properties.

O5. To minimise adverse effects of adjoining transport

infrastructure. The proposed excavations will allow for

accommodation of a new garage at the rear end of a Bus Zone on

the corner of Blues Point Road and Warung Street, and Sydney

Buses has advised that no objections are raised to the location of

the driveway.

(b) That the entire basement is located entirely within the

footprint of the building above: The basement garage will be located

within the existing building footprint.

(c) There is no alternative location on the site to accommodate

the required level of car parking: The proposed garage excavation

satisfies the objectives of section B1.5.7; in particular:

Landscaping Yes Existing soft landscaping will be substantially retained. The removal

of a Bottlebrush Tree to accommodate a new driveway is satisfactory,

subject to replacement plantings as recommended by Council’s

Landscape Development Officer.

Front gardens Yes The existing front garden will be retained.

Private open space Yes The dwelling will maintain at least 40m2 of ground level private open

space, comprising landscaped front yard, and rear garden and patio.

Garbage storage

Site facilities

Yes The dwelling will maintain natural clothes drying and bins storage

areas.

B1.6 Efficient Use of Resources

Energy efficiency Yes The development meets BASIX requirements.

B10 Car Parking & Transport

Quantity requirements Yes The provision of a single car space for a 3-bedroom dwelling in a

location well serviced by public bus and ferry services is adequate.

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 N/A

7. Physical relationship to and impact upon adjoining Yes

development (Views, privacy, overshadowing, etc.)

8. Site Management Issues N/A

9. All relevant S79C considerations of Yes

Environmental Planning and Assessment (Amendment) Act 1979

SUBMITTERS CONCERNS

The matters raised by a submitter in support of the development proposal are addressed below.

(a) Reduced volume of the house towards the front facing Warung Street will allow

more sunlight and also increase our views towards the west of the harbour

Comment: The enhancement of any private view and daylight access by means of an

uncharacteristic and oversized roof deck which requires removal of characteristic built

form that results in adverse impacts on the streetscape and the McMahons Point South

Conservation Area is contrary to the public interest.

(b) 2nd storey to the rear will protect us from harsh summer western sun but not prevent

winter western sun on our back deck

Comment: The improvement of amenity during summer afternoons to a private property

is not a compelling reason for a flat roofed addition. A modified pitched roof addition

and/or a suitable shade device at the submitter’s property, could potentially provide

sunshading without detracting from characteristic built form in the Conservation Area.

CONCLUSION

The proposed development in its current form would result in the loss of characteristic elements

within the McMahons Point South Conservation Area and replacement with uncharacteristic

built form, massing and character, contrary to the heritage and built form character provisions

in North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 and North Sydney DCP 2013, and the

proposal is recommended for refusal.

It is also noted that the proposed development breaches the maximum Building Height control

of 8.5m pursuant to clause 4.3 of North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013. A request for

variation of the development standard in accordance with clause 4.6 of the LEP has not been

submitted with the application; accordingly, Council is not empowered to approve the

application as currently submitted.

If the Panel is minded to support a proposal, amendments would be required to provide for a

pitched roof form to any upper level addition, with a smaller roof top deck, and a reversal of

the front verandah infill or conversion to a wintergarden with retention of expressed masonry

columns/piers. It is Council’s view that such an application should be submitted as a new

development application.



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, resolve to refuse development consent to

Development Application No. 223/16 for substantial alterations and additions to a

dwelling, including new upper level and deck, and garage to Blues Point Road, on land

at 2 Warung Street, McMahons Point, as shown on plans, for the following reasons:

1. The development will have detrimental impact on the McMahons Point

South Conservation Area.

The proposed development removes original and characteristic building fabric

and replaces these with “uncharacteristic elements” in the Area Character

Statement, and will substantially alter the scale, form and character of the

building.

The proposal, if approved, would result in a building that is currently a neutral

item being considered an “uncharacteristic” item that will be highly visible from

the street, resulting in detrimental impact on the Conservation Area.

(a) The development is contrary to section B13.6 of North Sydney

Development Control Plan 2013 “to achieve a neutral or improved built

outcome by removing previous unsympathetic features that are

characteristic of an area”. The application fails to satisfy general objectives

of heritage conservation areas in section B13.6.1.

O1. The proposed design fails to retain and complement the character and

significance of the conservation area.

O3. The proposed development does not ensure that the subject neutral

item is improved such that it contributes to the character of the Conservation

Area through the removal of unsympathetic and inappropriate elements,

and reinstating missing details where appropriate.

O4. The proposed alterations to the front verandah exacerbates and does

not reduce the extent of intrusion the infill.

(b) The proposal would not result in a compatible and complementary building

form and scale to that which characterises the Conservation Area,

inconsistent with the objectives in section B13.6.2 relating to form,

massing and scale within conservation areas.

P1. The proposed development does not reflect the bulk, mass, scale,

orientation, curtilage and setbacks of surrounding heritage and

contributory items.

P2. The proposed development does not recognise and complement the

predominant architectural scale and form of the area.



P9. The new contemporary additions give rise to a detrimental impact on

the characteristic built form of the area, particularly in terms of bulk,

scale, height, form or materials.

(c) The proposed development fails to achieve a neutral or improved

outcome to neutral items, contrary to provision P5; in particular, the

proposed development:

(a) does not respect original or characteristic building patterns in terms

of bulk, form, scale and height;

(b) does not minimise changes to original and characteristic features;

(c) adds to rather than removes unsympathetic and uncharacteristic

changes; and

(d) does not reinstate characteristic details where there is physical or

documentary evidence.

(d) The development will result in the removal of an existing pitched roof

identified as characteristic in the character statement in section C9.8, and

thus fails to maintain the characteristic roof profiles within a heritage

conservation area, contrary to section B13.6.3 O1 & P1 relating to roofs

within conservation areas.

(e) The proposal does not respect the streetscape and context of the heritage

Conservation Area, contrary to section B13.6.4 O1 relating to additional

storeys and levels within conservation areas.

The proposed development does not satisfy the criteria in provision P2 in

that the design does not respect the heritage characteristics of the subject

building and area, and the upper addition is not located substantially

within the existing roof.

(f) The oversized roof deck and contemporary balcony conversion will

detrimentally impact upon the significance of the Conservation Area,

contrary to the objectives of section B13.9.3 relating to verandas and

balconies.

O2. The proposal fails to retain or reinstate the original front verandah,

which is complementary to the front verandah at No.4 Warung Street.

(g) The proposal does not reverse the balcony infill to reinstate the original

front verandah and detailing, and the new front balcony does not relate to

the proportions, style, detail and period of the building, and characteristic

elements of the Conservation Area as identified in the relevant character

statement, contrary to provisions P2, P3 & P5.

(h) The proposed materials and finishes are inconsistent with the characteristic

elements of the Conservation Area, contrary to section objective O1 in

section B13.9.4 in relation to materials, colours and finishes.



(i) The extensive glazing to the south (Warung Street) elevation, removal of

original detailing including roof and front verandah, aluminium framed

windows and metal balustrades, are not compatible with the characteristic

built elements of the Conservation Area as described in the Character

Statement in section C9.8, contrary to provision P8.

2. The removal of original roof and front verandah detailing, and

uncharacteristic and visually prominent contemporary additions, would not

reflect, reinforce, or complement the character of detached dwellings in the

McMahons Point South Conservation Area, contrary to the built form

character provisions and objectives in the DCP.

(a) The roof deck is not set back at least 1m from the extent of the external

enclosing walls of the floor below and exceeds 18m2 in area, contrary to

section B1.3.10 P8 (b) & (c).

(b) The proposal does not respond appropriately to context, in particular, the

character of the subject neutral item and its prominent position elevated on

a street corner and within a Conservation Area, contrary to section B1.4.1

O1 & P1.

(c) The proposed side setbacks on the upper (Level 2) addition do not provide

for the minimum side setback required in section B1.4.6 P2, resulting in

excessive building bulk contrary to section B1.4.6 O2. The extent of the

non-compliance can be reduced by providing a pitched roof form in

accordance with the provisions of the DCP.

(d) The proposed development fails to reflect and reinforce the built form

character of the subject site and nearby detached dwellings within the

McMahons Point South Conservation Area. The proposed removal of

distinctive and characteristic pitched roof and traditional front verandah

structure, and oversized roof deck, is contrary to section B1.4.8 P2.

(e) The proposed box-like addition and minimalist contemporary front porch

do not complement adjoining detached pitched roof and traditionally

detailed detached dwellings.

(f) The proposed form and massing fail to satisfy the objective in section

B1.4.8 O1.

(g) The development will substantially alter the form, massing and character of

the building and would undermine the neutrality of the neutral item as

identified in the DCP, result in detrimental and cumulative impacts on the

Conservation Area.

(h) The proposed flat roof on a visually prominent street frontage is contrary to

the characteristic pitched roof typology as identified in the character

statement section C9.8.6 P4, contrary to section B1.4.10 P1, P3 & P5, and

fails to satisfy section B1.4.10 O1.



(i) The development fails to achieve objective O1 in section B1.4.12 in relation

to materials. The extent of glazing to on the southern (Warung Street)

elevation is excessive and does not provide for a high proportion of masonry

to glazing in accordance with section B1.4.12 P4 and character statement

section C9.8.6 P5. The proposed aluminium framed windows and doors are

contrary to character statement section C9.8.6 P6 which provides for timber

framed windows and doors and traditional styles and proportions according

to architectural style of the building.

3. The proposal is contrary to the aims of the North Sydney Local

Environmental Plan 2013 and the zone objectives.

(a) The proposal fails to satisfy the aims of the plan in clause 1.2(2) of the North

Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 as the development is inappropriate

in its context, significantly erode the character of a Conservation Area, and

will adversely affect the built heritage of North Sydney.

(b) The proposal is inconsistent with the objective for the R3 Medium Density

Residential zone in clause 2.3 and Land Use Table of the North Sydney

Local Environmental Plan 2013 as the development will have significant

and adverse impacts on the cultural heritage of the area.

4. The development fails to satisfy objectives in clause 5.10(1) in North Sydney

Local Environmental Plan 2013 in relation to heritage conservation. The

development will have detrimental impact on the McMahons Point South

Conservation Area.

(a) The excessive removal of original and characteristic building fabric fails to

conserve the environmental heritage of North Sydney; and

(b) The proposal fails to conserve the heritage significance of the McMahons

Point South Conservation Area by removing original and characteristic

fabric and provision of uncharacteristic additions that erode the local

setting.

Public interest

5. Approval of this development could set an undesirable precedent for the

approval of further highly uncharacteristic built forms with significant non–

compliances, in very prominent locations within the Conservation Area. This

would result in the further erosion of the character and significance of the

McMahons Point Conservation Area. There are no particular circumstances that

are unique to the site to warrant departure from the heritage and built form

provisions in this instance; comparable residential amenity is capable of being

achieved on the site while conserving the character of the site and Conservation

Area.

6. Approval of the development in its current form would be contrary to the public

interest due to significant non-compliances with the relevant provisions in North

Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 and Development Control Plan 2013.

B. THAT in refusing Development Application No. 223/16, and in the event of the

applicant lodging an appeal to the Land & Environment Court, the Council pursuant to

Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 grants delegated authority to the

General Manager to resist such appeals having regard to the reasons for refusal

identified above.



Susanna Cheng David Hoy

SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ASSESSMENTS

Stephen Beattie

MANAGER ASSESSMENTS

Blues Point

BLUES POINT

RESERVE

McMahons Point

HENRY LAWSON RESERVE AVENUELAWSON

HENRY EAS

T C

RES

CEN

TST

REET

LO

OK O

UT

WARUNG STREET

LLO

YD R

EES

L OO

K OU

T EASTBL

UES

MID

DLEDOWLING STREET ROAD RESERVE

STREETDOWLING STREET

STREET

PARKER

STREET

CR

ESC

ENT

WES T C R

ES CE NT

McM

ANUS

STR

EET

FRENCH LANE

FREN

CH S

TREE

T

RES ER

VE

STR

EETWEST CRESCENT

STREET ROAD

RESERVE

FRENCH

NOTTINGHAM STREET

NOTTINGHAM STREET R

ESERVE

STREET

SAWMILLERS RESERVE

BAY

V

IEW

MIL MIL STREETROAD RESERVE

MARY FRENCH

RESERVE

2

18-22

1614

17 A17

1215A

151 3

1 1A11

89A

97

56

1

1

3

2

5

15 -1 7(2 )

16

79

18

11 13

30-4

042

4 65 0

20

525 4

-56

586 0

6264

6 668

70

1 4-2 8

7476

7880

82-8

43 3

3537

3943

4586

47

2

9094

9698

100

4910

410

610

811

011

211

411

6

4

5111

8

1

120

5759

6163

-65

6769

2

2A

8

6

19

( 25 )

3 1( 2

3)3 3 35

2 925

3 7

2 11 7

1 511

(9)

75

326

12 4

22

28

1 6-2

0

30

1 41 2

1 0

32

6

1

2-4

97

1

3

5

3

43 2

(41 )

34

74

5

(68)

45

47 8 7

58

10

3A

9

4951

53 12

5650

48

36

1112A

(12B

)

3028

3

4

1

101

8987

85

6

8179

7775

7371

206431

1

1

909051

1103512100

705730

705730

7352

3

1157191

2 SP 21762

(Lease - for Valuation purposes only)

SP 62225

8Sec C

222085

(Lease - f

or Valua

tion pu

rposes o

nl y)

1

2

752067Sec C

100048224

(Lease - for Valuat ion

p urp oses o nly)

58

7

3713

209345

1


8

1132752067

9

12

1163777

34

1

6

752067752067

7

(Lease

- for Va lua

tion

purpo

ses only)

8

SP 6123

9

1133

16

1

SP 6454

82938

SP 36729

802222

1

1

1146537

544018

PATHWAY

802222(L eas e - for Valu atio n

p urpo ses only)

1

767146

1098250

1007


1134

1135

Sec D 1008

8Pt 15

Sec D

814

1 14 6

5 37

2

Part CrownLand Reserve

944-690 1077

149

7048

5819

9222027

661

SP 125 11598981 1581992

902933 2305941

2

206643613575SP 1927

SP 4308 12 211

SP 16010CA

SP 2760 338032

2748831

D 3380321

SP 10140 60025

SP 50787359959 B

60027

SP 44569

5

419012

Y442802 A

3 44 7

0 0C109056 X

Y

1 438679

X

Sec B

781

127151659448 SP 11500

8Sec A 86

Sec G21

5066875685

75

22

1101 904522

731853 1 1 02

SP 17160 880994

101

731853100 1 50

923025

1018682

1828

91

1

SP 10886

15

2

6 1

866 1

73

1 60702

2

1

21

223657

20

83597

80729311

223657

9

SP 11501

A Sec G8

3365

4

2216475546261

7758

84

1

1

1

SP 1

5058

SP 1

57791

C1

1

659415

2343

57

5 67 6

86

12

Unidentified Passageway

74786

1

1

Pt D

1709759333654

745924

SP 6123

21 217474

3

2

1

31120215 13

5478

9511

2926

1

1

5043242

SP 9

6 76

SP 7

5987

SP 18058

1SP

133

89

6002

1222533

4329

99

222746

100

303346

SP 5

70

1

SP 2

1561

915829

A

5156751

SP 83485

SP 1322

1524518

330192

SP 13674

12

B

A

212

B383325

861201Pt 50

17

1

229675

861201

976193

Pt 50

980306

A

SP 10832

SP 10831SP 64741

Sec 5

SP 12278

SP 31057

2

SP 15708

21

131

2181

322230

86120151

257

2828

8 5 33 381 1

(Le ase - f or Val uation

purpo ses o nly)

SP 5315

2

1572828

SP 53222

(Split for Valuationpurposes only)

SP 10316

325054BSP 7223

CT 19


SP 1976SP 2268

SP 12654SP 19504

9837

7 1

CT

2 0

SP 10011

( Le a

se -

for V

a lu a

t ion

purp

o se s

onl

y )SP 21014

420696

6 18 0

2 32

323406938490

31

SP 16307

1670

89 ( Le a

se -

f or V

alua

t ion

p urp

oses

only

)

1


2

SP 54824

5

166929

1

2

2 1097

479

3

10

11196777 2

North Sydney CouncilCopyright:

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].

ATTACHMENT TO IPP02 - 07/12/2016 Page 38

>AUL3 16 - 2 WAKUÑG

Checked By

Checker

24105116DâÎeSæþ

100

IVED

l6

cts -DATE RE

23. b

t-1

DP (t,Nro

?l

7

I

\ 1a+

oÕ

SKYLIGHT

J

I

s'tr0

14568

t

14824

14000

\

7À

\.Q*

gÞ.Ñ

SIIÊ BOUHDARY

l-UJ¡Uú.l--Øoz=É.

=

\ 'vNOrSÊ

"'.>BLUES POI

NOISE

\ \3?\¡t

mSc. 1:100 0 1 2 3 5m

No. Date

24t05t16Description

ISSUED FOR DA

Cli6nt Dratrr By

Author Drawing Tile

SITE PLANPhillip & Jenny Lawrence gerard page consultingPrqþct

2 Warung StMcMahons Point, NSW, 2060

1E WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMlEL:0425 308 850E: GÊ[email protected]

Approved Bylssue

ADrawíng Numbs

Sels

A

1 :100 4004


€0 rv00r. : I9Llgyrz001: I

3âlecst4oc'cNodÐte@:ev¿o¡g :¡098 809 9¿Þ0:1=L

ti{vt{sulrSd 'ovou llfcuv¡ 8t

oìeoolecs

onsslJêgunN ôu!flerc0g0z'MsN'Ìulod suoqeyuoy\¡

¡g 6un:e¡¡ ¿lcslord

-z,{g poô¡ddv

d9vo uol o3nssrNOU_VNIúUOOC UOI Of nSSt

sj-N3l/\l!\to3 uor f nsst ûvNrt!n3ud uondr.rcso6

9Lt90tþ¿

I tiç0l9 II t/90/t0

aleo

cIV

'oNNV'Id JOOU

oùlf 6urMeJO

f€ palcsqC1

6uq¡nsuoo a6ed preJoo Xf Ág ûercacuerrviel ,{uuo¡3rld

lusrlc

urg t, z L 0 001:L'3sr

ri0ç rv j'Y'ovou rNtod sfnrs

L

I

I

dnûv0Nn0g

llts

:

t

III

L("ù

00¿v

IL

¿ioN.a

iinrrl ,

ãÐCz6)CN-{Fmm-l

:do

ûvoNno€ 3Js

l.

7l'1t7V

( li\l ir) ìì

, ;','',,,Ìli

.,.j:

I

l,S


CIS - NSCDATË RECFIVED

q.44-46

8.5m HEIGHT LlMllÉoz:o24300

Éozf,*oó

W1 BEHIND

ROOF rz-t/,/

,//

/./

LINE OF ORIGINAL RO a 24300LARGE HEDGE

a

33 BLUES POINT RD6¡--O)C.t

21325

NEWWAL)a

LANDCAPE SCREEN

OoOó

WARUNG ST

GAlE

18020

-

\ LEVEL 1 rz1 8325

o(oC\¡

--+ ROUND tz15725

TIMBER CLAD PANEL STONE

TC: TIMBER CLADDING LV: TII\,,IBER OPERAELE LOWREST: EXISTING SANDSTONE WALL PF:

5ð:

TEXTURED RENDER+ PAINT

PAINTED STEEL FLAT BAR BALUSTRADE

COLOURS SHO\AN AREAS PER NORTH SYDNEYCOUNCIL'S DA REQUIREMEN- f,

I lL i t It I x I li

PF

t

s

- ]/VINDOWS-EXISTING_WNDOWS-EXISTING

Sc.1:100 0 1 2 3 5mDrawn By

EXClient

Phiil & Jen LawrenceChecked By

GP

Draw¡ng Title

WEST ELEVATION

Approved By

GP

Project

2 Warung St

McMahons Point, NSW, 2060

'100Scale

I

Drawing Number

DA15007 t11116Dalê

gerard page consulting

18 WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMTEL: 0425 308 850E: [email protected]

100Scale

1

No

A

B

D

Date

03/05/1 6

1 6/05/1 6

24t05t1607t11t16

Description

PRELIMINARY ISSUE FOR COMMENTS

ISSUED FOR COORDINATIONISSUED FOR DA

ISSUED FOR DA


CIS. N$CDATE RECEIVED

1 tltb

243008.5mm HEIGHT LlMlï

úozfo6

- --\

ÉÕzfôú nOOf _.:LINE OF ORIGINAL ROOF

2430023125 I 33 BLUES POINT RD

TC

6f.rO)N

LEvE!? v,/ 21325

NEWWALL

WARUNG STREEToOooCOURTYARD

1 8325

oo(oc!

-lG

TC: IIMEER CLADDING LV: TIMBER OPERABLE LOWREST: EXISTING SANDSTONE WALL

..:.i+'

PF:

SB:

TEXTURED RENDER+ PAINT

PAINTED STEEL FLAT BAR BALUSÍRADE

COLOURS SHO\AN AREAS PER NORTH SYDNEYCOUNCIL'S DA REQUIREMENT

-

Sc. 1:100 0 1 2 3 5m

w2ST

Drawn By

EX& Jen LawrenceCl¡ent

PhilChecked By

GP

Drawino Title

EAST ELEVATIONS

Approved By

GP

Project


100Scale

1

Drawing Number

D4151


1B WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMTEL: 0425 308 850E: [email protected]

'100Scale

1 07 t11t16Date

No

A

B

D

Date

03/05/1 6

1 6/05/1 6

24t05t1607 t11t16

Description


ISSUED FOR COORDINATION

ISSUED FOR DA

ISSUED FOR DA

L


CIS. N$CDATE FECEiVËD

1 t4.46

4200

7W6

\n

a- II

I

# SETBACKLINE

Éozlo@UtsØ

Éozlo@Utsõ

úozloóUFõ

ãozloóUÞ

7M ABOVEGROUND _l r

7M ABOVEGROUND ATENTRY

TC 7M ABOVE GROUND7[4 ABOVE GROUND

LVLINE OF EXISTNG ROOFLINE OF EXISTING ROOF

ROOF

7M AEOVEGROUND

4M ABOVEGROUND

4M ABOVEGROUND ATENTRY

6NO)C.l

4M ABOVE GROUND

LEVEL 2

L4M ABOVEGROUND

BLUES pOtNT ROAD BLUES POINT ROAD oOOo1 8397

PF

'18380 4M ABOVE GROUND

LEVEL ,1 Z

a ooc!

NDv15725

NEW AI^NING WINDOWS

NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION1 :100 1 :100

EXISTING SANDSTONE WALL lc: TIMBER CLADDING LV: TIMBER OPERABLE LOWRE

¡rlt

PF:

S8:

TEXTURED RENDER+ PAINI

PAINTED STEEL FLAT BAR EALUSTRADE

COLOURS SHOWN ARE AS PER NORTH SYDNEYCOUNCIL'S DA REQUIREMENT f,

Sc.1.100 0 1 2 3 5mOrawn By

EXClient

Phillip & Jennv LawrenceChecked By

GP

Drawing Title

NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATIONS

Approved By

GP

Prcject

2 Warung St

McMahons Point, NSW, 2060Scale

1 100

Draw¡ng Number

4152 DScale

1 100Date

07 t11t16


I8 WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMrEL:0425 308 850E: [email protected]

No.

A

B

U

Date

03/05/1 6

1 6/05/1 6

24t05t16

07111116

Description


ISSUED FOR COORDINATIONISSUED FOR DA

ISSUED FOR DA

L


I

I

- ^'.^lI

I l

I

SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST MAR gAM SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST MAR 12PM

-ä7i

l¡ t

il

t:..:-

Phillio & Jennv LawrenceCl¡ent Drawn By

EXChecked By

GP

Draw¡ng Title

SHADOW DIAGRAMS. MARCHPrcject


Approved By

GP

No

ADate

24105116

DescriptionISSUED FOR DA

¿-

Scale

24105116Date


18 WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMlEL:0425 308 850E: [email protected] Sæle

Drawing Number

A4005

SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST MAR 3PM


SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST JUN gAM SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST JUN 12PM

-

r

/

c f

Phillip & Jennv LawrenceClient Drawn By

EXChecked By

GP

Drawing T¡lle

SHADOW DIAGRAM - JUNEPrcject


Approved By

GP

No. Date

24t05t16Description

ISSUED FOR DA

L

Scale

24t05t16Date


18 WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMïEL:0425 308 850E: [email protected] Scale

Drawing Number lssue

A4006

SHADOW DIAGRAM. 21ST JUN 3PM


SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST SEP gAM SHADOW DIAGRAM.2lST SEP 12PM

l

-I

t

Phillip & Jennv LawrenceClient Drawn By

EXChecked By

GP

Drawing T¡tle

SHADOW DIAGRAM- SEPTEMBERProject


Approved By

GP

No.A

Date24105116

DescriptionISSUED FOR DA

zScale

24t05t16Date


18 WARDELL ROAD, PETERSHAMlEL: 0425 308 850E: [email protected] Scale

Drawjng Number

A4007

\

ì

\

-.-

SHADOW DIAGRAM- 21ST SEP 3PM


Documents

Item - REPORTS · Report of Susanna Cheng, Senior Assessment Officer Page 2 Re: 2 Warung Street, McMahons Point EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This development application seeks Council’s approval