with strata subdivision Property: Lot 4 DP 29773, 24

DAReportDelegated.dotx Page 1 of 14

Proposal: Partial demolition of existing structures, construction of a dual occupancy

with strata subdivision

Property: Lot 4 DP 29773, 24 Morrison Avenue, Engadine

Applicant: Champion Homes Sales Pty Ltd

File Number: DA19/0041

To be determined by: Delegated authority

Report from: (Thomas Stanton)

PROPOSALThe application is for partial demolition of existing structures, construction of a dual occupancy with strata

subdivision.

ASSESSMENT OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION

1.0 THAT:1.1 That Development Application No. DA19/0041 for Partial demolition of existing structures,

construction of a dual occupancy with strata subdivision at Lot 4 DP 29773 24 Morrison

Avenue, Engadine be approved, subject to the conditions.

ASSESSMENT OFFICER’S COMMENTARY

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSALThe proposal is for a two storey side by side dual occupancy which will have a single central driveway to

the north west of the site. The ground floor of both dwellings consists of a single garage, front living area,

bathroom, study, laundry, kitchen, family and a dining room. To the rear of site exists an outdoor living

area which steps down into the rear yard private open space. For the dwelling to the east of the site

known as unit 1 the existing garage is being maintained for the purposes of a storage space. The first floor

for both dwellings consists of three bedrooms, a sitting area and a bathroom. The master bedroom has an

attached ensuite and walk in robe.


A site plan is provided below.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND LOCALITYThe site is located on the south eastern side of Morrison Avenue

within the suburb of Engadine. The site is rectangular in shape with a

frontage width of 15.24m, side length of 45.72m and a rear boundary width of 15.24m. The total site area

is 696.8m2 with an approximate 7.7m fall to the rear of the site. Currently existing on the site is a single

storey brick dwelling. The adjoining dwelling to the east of the site is fibro single store dwelling and to the

west exists a rendered single storey dwelling. As the site is located within a R2 Low Density Residential

Zone the majority of the surrounding character consists of 1-2 storey dwellings.

A locality plan and an aerial photo are provided below.

4.0 BACKGROUNDA history of the development proposal is as follows:

The current application was submitted on 23 January 2019.

The application was placed on exhibition, with the last date for public submissions being 04 March

2019.

A site visit was conducted on 20 March 2020.

Council requested that the following additional information be provided in relation to:

- Building Height

- Bulk and Scale

- Private open space

- Solar access

- Drainage

- Landscape plan


- Existing Garage

Amended plans were lodged on 30 August, 21 November 2019 and the 8 January 2020.

5.0 ADEQUACY OF APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONIn relation to the Statement of Environmental Effects, plans and other documentation submitted with the

application or after a request from Council, the applicant has provided adequate information to Council to

enable an assessment of this application.

6.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATIONThe application was advertised in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 42 of Sutherland Shire

Development Control Plan 2015 (SSDCP 2015).

Council notified 9 adjoining or affected owners of the proposal and 3 submissions were received.

Address Date of Letter/s Issues

26 Morrison ave Engadine 2 March 2019 1,2,3,4,5,6,7

13 Tobruk Avenue Engadine 2 March 2019 4,8

15 Morrison Ave Engadine 3 March 2019 9

Additional concerns raised

over amended plans by 26

Morrison ave Engadine

29 September 2019 3,8,10

7.0 MAJOR ISSUES ARISING FROM SUBMISSIONSThe main issues identified in the submissions are as follows:

Issue 1: Existing garage does not comply with current regulationsComment : The garage was approved under an older application HB941/24. Whilst the criteria for which

the garage was supported back in 2000 would not likely be supported today it is a lawful structure based

on the prior assessment conducted by Council. As the structure does not contribute to any other non-

compliances its retention can be supported with the relevant conditions of consent discussed in the

assessment section of this report.

Issue 2: Rear balcony attached the existing garageComment : An objection has been raised in relation to the unapproved rear balcony attached to the

existing detached garage in relation to its privacy impact and structural integrity. To ensure visual privacy

is not hindered a privacy screen has been conditioned to obscure views to objectors property. To ensure

the balcony is structurally suitable conditions of consent have been provided requiring the applicant to

lodge certification from a suitably qualified engineer or licensed builder certifying the deck/balcony is

structurally sound and is fit for purpose.

Issue 3: Privacy


Comment : Concerns of privacy from the rear balcony and from the backyard where raised. To ensure

visual privacy is not hindered a privacy screen has been conditioned to obscure views to neighbouring

property from the rear facing balcony. The proposed landscape plan has been proposed in a manner that

will not allow for adverse onlooking. Further conditions have been placed on the development to modify

the rear yard to ensure visual privacy is maintained.

Issue 4: Drainage Comment : The downstream property owners were contacted by Council officers on few occasions to

discuss the application and explain the easement process. It was also explained that an alternate solution

would be designed if an easement was formally rejected. Easement rejection letters were provided from

the neighbouring properties in 2017 and again in 2019. As a result the applicant has designed an alternate

drainage plan which has been assessed by Councils engineers and has been conditioned to comply with

the DCP.

Issue 5: Boundary fence between 22 and 24 Morrison is in the wrong location. Comment : If the existing boundary fence is inadequate or incorrect, changes are to be agreed upon by

the neighbouring properties considering the Dividing Fences Act 1991 as diving fences are not subject to

a Council approval unless proposed over 1.8m. A fence up to this height is permissible under exempt

development. This application does not consider nor grant approval for any boundary fences.

Issue 6: Tree removal Comment : The application proposes to remove the Howea forsteriana (Kentia palm) located at the centre

of the property. Council tree management officer has inspected the tree and has supported the applicant’s

proposal to removal the tree to incorporate the retaining walls and drainage tanks. Replacement tree

planting has been recommended as a result of the removal.

Issue 7: What is the use of the existing garage to be as it is being maintained? Comment : The garage has been conditioned to be used solely for the purposes of storage and that all

elements of the unlawful kitchen are removed.

Issue 8: Structural suitability of retaining walls Comment : The structural specifications of all the proposed retaining walls is a matter to be specified at a

later stage prior to occupation certificate. To ensure the walls structural suitability, it is has been

conditioned that certification will need to be provided ensuring that they are fit for purpose.

Issue 9: Parking Comment : Concerns were raised in relation to the effect of the development on street parking as well as

the parking provided by the development not being suitable for the locality due to the narrow street. The

development has proposed a single central driveway which will assist in maintaining the majority of the on

street parking. As the site has a slightly wider than normal frontage the development has demonstrated

that it will not be a greater impact on street parking than the controls anticipate. Furthermore, the

development is fully compliant with the amount of onsite parking that has been provided and can be

supported.


Issue 10: Landscape Plan Comment : Concerns were raised in relation to the detail shown on the landscape plan and the proposals

compliance with the minimum landscaping provisions. The landscape plans demonstrate adequate detail

for DA stage. Further details for elements such as retaining wall will be provided for CC stage and beyond.

Council tree protection officer has assessed the landscaped plan and deemed it an acceptable response

to the site. In addition the site has demonstrated compliance with the minimum landscaped areas control.

Revised PlansThe applicant lodged revised plans on the 30 August, 21 November 2019 and the 8 January 2020.

In accordance with the requirements of SSDCP2015 these plans were not publicly exhibited as, in the

opinion of Council, the changes being sought did not intensify or change the external impact of the

development to the extent that neighbours ought to be given the opportunity to comment.

Submission Review Panel (SRP)The submissions received were discussed with the Team Leader and given the nature of the issues raised

it was decided that referral to Council's SRP was not required.

8.0 STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONSThe subject land is located within Zone R2 Low Density Residential Zone pursuant to the provisions of

Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015. The proposed development, being a dual occupancy

and strata subdivision, is a permissible land use within the zone with development consent from Council.

The following Environmental Planning Instruments (EPIs), Draft EPIs, Development Control Plan (DCP),

Codes or Policies are relevant to this application:

Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 (SSLEP 2015).

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2 – Georges River Catchment.

Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015 (SSDCP 2015).

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

Section 7.11 / 7.12 Development Contribution Plan 2016

Section 7.12 Development Contribution Plan 2016 - Sutherland Shire.

9.0 COMPLIANCE9.1. State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 (Remediation of Land) (SEPP 55)State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) requires Council to

consider whether the land subject to the development proposal is contaminated; and if the site is

contaminated, Council must be satisfied that the site is suitable or can be made suitable (i.e. following

remediation) for the proposed land use.

A search of Council’s contaminated land register specifies that the site is not potentially contaminated. In

conclusion, the site is suitable for the proposed residential in accordance with requirements of SEPP 55.


9.2. State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index) 2004 (BASIX) aims to establish a

scheme to encourage sustainable residential development across New South Wales. BASIX certificates

accompany the development application addressing the requirements for the proposed building. The

proposal achieves the minimum performance levels / targets associated with water, energy and thermal

efficiency.

9.3. Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2- Georges River CatchmentGreater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2 (GMREP2) includes a number of aims and

objectives for the environment and water quality within the catchment. Appropriate stormwater

management and water quality measures are proposed and there is likely to be minimal adverse impacts

on water quality. Council is of the view that with the implementation of the recommended conditions of

consent the proposal would be consistent with the aims and objectives of GMREP2.

9.4. Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016The Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017 outlines the

framework for assessment and approval of biodiversity impacts for development that requires consent

under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The assessment of the development has revealed that the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS) threshold is

not triggered and biodiversity matters have been appropriately assessed via Council’s LEP and DCP

objectives and controls.

9.5. Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015The proposal has been assessed for compliance against Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan

2015. A compliance table with a summary of the applicable development standards is contained below:

CHAPTER 4: A. Dual Occupancies in the R2 Low Density Residential ZoneB. Site area = 696.8m2

Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015CLAUSE REQUIRED PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE NOTESCl.4.3Height of Building 8.5m 8.3 m YesCl.4.4Floor Space Ratio

0.55 : 1 (382.96 m2)

0.53: 1 (373.7m2)

Yes

Cl.6.14 Landscaped Area

35% (243.88m2) 35% (243.88m2) Yes

9.6. Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015The proposal has been assessed for compliance with SSDCP 2015. A compliance table with a summary

of the applicable development controls is contained below.


Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015REQUIRED PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE NOTES

Cl.1.2 – Streetscape & Building FormCl. 1Development must be designed and sited so that it addresses the street frontage ensuring that the path to all main entries are clearly identifiable form the street.

Clearly identifiable Yes

Cl.2Front entrance is to be the dominant element in each dwelling frontage. (landings/patios used to accomplish this)

Entrance is dominant Yes

Cl. 3Where dwellings are provided side by side, the building entries to each dwelling should not require entry through a space allocated for parking nor be recessed behind garaging.

Entrances are not through garages

Yes

Cl.4Design must seek to reduce the bulk and scale. Façade articulation should be employed.

Achieved satisfactorily Yes

Cl.5Dual occ development limited to one single garage door per dwelling fronting the same street.


Cl.7Maximum 2 storeys. Basements are not permitted.

No basement proposed

Yes

Cl.9Two or Three storey development is only permitted on the front 60% of the depth of the site measured from the property boundary.

<60% Complies Yes

Cl.10 (despite Cl.9)Where topography, orientation or context of the site would allow for a better outcome…a variation may be considered if it does not result in significant loss in privacy or amenity of adjoining properties.


Cl.12Development must be sensitively designed so that it is sympathetic to the amenities and view corridors of neighbouring public and private property and balances this with the amenity afforded to the new development.


Cl.2.2 – Building SetbacksCl.2Street Setback

Side Setback

Rear Setback

7.5m

900mm (ground floor)

1.5m (second storey)

6.0m

7.5m (with articulation)

0.9m

1.5m

16m

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Cl.3If setback of 7.5m or greater, building elements may encroach 1.5m into the articulation zone for a max of one third of the area of the façade.


Cl.4Garage and garage doors cannot be located in the articulation zone. Must be located no closer than



7.5mCl.12Where a second storey wall adjacent to a side boundary exceeds 15m in continuous length, the side setback shall be increased by a further 500mm or more for part of the wall.

Less that 15m continuous Achieved satisfactorily

Yes

Cl.3.2 – LandformCl.1The depth of cut and fill must not exceed 1m from existing ground level, except where the excavation is for a basement.

0.6m Yes

Cl.3Avoid any unnecessary earthworks by designing and siting buildings within the natural slope of the land. Building footprint must be designed to minimise cut and fill by allowing the building mass to step in accordance with the slope of the land.


Cl. 4Any excavation must not extend beyond the building footprint


Cl.5Natural ground level surround the development at the property boundaries must be retained.


Cl.4.2 – LandscapingCl.1Hard surface areas within the street frontage shall be limited to a max of 50% of the area of the front setback, with the remaining area occupied by landscaping.

51% Yes

Cl.2Development should be designed to retain existing canopy trees in the vicinity of side, rear and front setbacks including on adjoining land


Cl.3A minimum of 4 trees are to be provided per dual occupancy development.


Cl. 4Landscape design and plant species selection should reduce the potential for invasive plant species to escape into the surrounding bushland.


Cl.5Street trees are only required on the side of the road where there are no continuous overhead power lines.


Cl.5.2 – Building Layout, Private Open Space & Solar AccessCl. 1Orientate all new development and windows to take advantage of solar orientation to maximise natural light penetration to indoor areas and reduce the need for mechanical heating and cooling.


Cl.2Minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in midwinter should be provided to living areas.


Cl.3Each dwelling is to provide a POS with minimum area of 36m2 (min dimension of 5m and 9m2 paved)


Cl.5Primary living area to directly access private open space.


Cl.710m2 of private open space is to have 3 hours of solar access between 9am and 3pm at the winter



solstice (21 June).Cl.810m2 of private open spaces and windows of living areas of neighbouring dwellings are to have 3 hours of solar access between 9am and 3pm at the winter solstice (21 June) where reasonably expected.


Cl.9Secure space of 10m3 per dwelling exclusively for storage as part of the garage or dwelling. Must be adequately lit & secure


Cl. 10Each dwelling is to provide an external service area set aside for accommodating garbage bins, air conditioning units etc

Shown on landscape plan

Yes

Cl.6.2 – Visual & Acoustic PrivacyCl. 1Locate, orientate and design new development to ensure visual privacy between buildings and between buildings and adjacent private open space


Cl. 2Use building design to increase privacy without compromising access to light and air


Cl.3Living/dining/kitchen area windows that provide a direct outlook on to adjacent property which leads to a loss of amenity, needs to consider privacy treatment.a.


Cl. 5Arrange dwellings within a development to minimise noise transition between dwellings.


Cl. 6All noise generating equipment such as air conditioning units, swimming pool filters, fixed vacuum systems and driveway entry shutters must be designed to protect the acoustic privacy of residents and neighbours.

Conditioned Yes

Cl.7.2 – Vehicular Access, Parking & CirculationCl.1One parking space per dwelling required.

Provided satisfactorily Yes

Cl. 2Two may be permitted is such spaces do not excessively add to overall bulk and scale and diminish the streetscape quality. Should be behind the building line.

1 space provided Yes

Cl.3Min. garage dimension: Single – 5.5m long x 3.0m wide with opening of 2.75m (can be reduced to 2.4m if straight driveway access).Double - 5.5m long x 5.7m wide with opening of at least 5m.


Cl.4Only two single garage doors with a max width of 3m to face the street.


Cl.5 Parking spaces shall have a grade no greater than 1:20.


Cl.7Car parking layout and vehicular access requirements and design and public/private footpaths must be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004 and



requirements in Chapter 36. Cl. 8Driveways are to be designed and sited to accommodate street gully pits and street trees, and maximise the availability of on-street parking


Cl.9Single driveways should not exceed a max of 3.5m at the boundary.


Cl. 11Where a common driveway serves a side by side dual occ, (where adjacent parking is provided) and the required parking space is setback 7.5m or less, driveways should not exceed a max width of 4.5m at the boundary and 3.5m at the kerb.


Cl.12Hard surface areas within the street frontage shall be limited to a maximum of 50% of the area of the front setback, with the remaining 50% occupied by deep soil landscaping.

51% Yes

Cl.8.2 – Waste Management RequirementsCl.1Each dwelling must provide waste storage to accommodating 3 waste bins.


Cl.2 The waste storage area must not be located forward of the building line and must not detract from the streetscape.


Cl.3Developments must be designed so that bins do not need to be wheeled more than 75 metres.


10.0 SPECIALIST COMMENTS The application was referred to the following internal specialists for assessment and the following

comments were received:

Engineering (Assessment Team)Council’s Assessment Team Engineers have reviewed the stormwater drainage, vehicular driveway and

carparking provision and determined that the proposal is satisfactory, subject to the recommended

conditions of development consent, which have been incorporated into the conditions of consent.

Tree Management OfficerCouncil’s Tree Management officer has reviewed the landscape plan and determined that the proposal is

acceptable, subject to the recommended conditions of development consent, which have been

incorporated into the conditions of consent.

Compliance Officer (Building Regulation)Council Environmental Health and building team was consulted in regards to the garage and the attached

unlawful balcony from the rear of the garage. Through the submission of further certification to justify the

balcony. Council compliance officer has further recommended that conditions have been added to ensure

that the garage is used only for the use of storage.

11.0 ASSESSMENT


A detailed assessment of the application has been carried out having regard to the Heads of

Consideration under Section 4.15(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The

following matters are considered important to this application.

11.1 Minimum Subdivision Lot SizeThe subject application proposes the Strata title subdivision of one lot into 2 newly created strata lots.

Enabled by clause 4.1(3C) of SSLEP 2015, subdivision of a lot in zone R2 Low Density Residential is not

required to comply with the minimum subdivision lot size if there is a dual occupancy on the lot and one of

those dwellings will be situated on each lot resulting from the subdivision. Considering that the proposed

subdivision will not take place until the completion of the requirements detailed in the development

consent, and that the proposed development has ensured that each dwelling on each newly created lot

will comply with the FSR and landscaped area development standards, the application is considered

acceptable

11.2 Minimum Lot Width and DepthSimilar to above, clause 4.1A(3) enables subdivision of a lot without complying with the minimum lot width

and depth requirements if there is a dual occupancy on the lot and one of those dwellings will be situated

on each lot resulting from the subdivision.

11.3 General Compliance with SSLEP 2015 and SSDCP 2015The site is located within R2 – Low Density Residential zone and the proposed development is a

permissible form of development within the zone. The proposed land use intensification from an existing

single dwelling land use is consistent with Council’s current planning direction and the broader planning

agenda for Greater Sydney Region and the South District, and achieves the objectives of the R2 – Low

Density Residential zone.

11.4 Existing Garage The existing brick garage was approved as a part of application HB941/24 in 2000. The garage has since

been fitted out and is primarily used as a storage area for the current occupants. In the past the garage

has been used unlawfully as a secondary dwelling and at some point a previous owner has unlawfully

erected a balcony at the rear of the garage.

The applicant has proposed to retain the garage to be used as a storage space. To ensure that further

unlawful use does not occur as it has in the past, conditions of consent have been provided to ensure that

the garage is to be used only as a storage space and that any unlawful kitchen appliance/ structures must

be removed from the garage. As the structure itself was previously approved and does not contribute to

the development not complying with relevant development standards, it can be support with the proposed

conditions of consent.


Council’s compliance unit has been involved in the investigating of the rear balcony to the garage and has

recommended that the balcony can stay subject to privacy measures being added to the structure and that

further certification is provided to Council to justify the structural suitability of the balcony. To ensure this

takes place further conditions of consent have been applied to this aspect of the development.

11.5 EarthworksThe proposal includes earthworks and Clause 6.2 of SSLEP 2015 requires certain matters to be

considered in deciding whether to grant consent. These matters include impacts on drainage; future

development; quality and source of fill; effect on adjoining properties; destination of excavated material;

likely disturbance of relics; impacts on waterways; catchments and sensitive areas and measures to

mitigate impacts. The relevant matters have been considered and the application is acceptable.

11.6 Stormwater ManagementClause 6.4 requires Council to be satisfied of certain matters in relation to stormwater management prior

to development consent being granted. These matters include maximising permeable surfaces; on-site

stormwater retention minimising the impacts on stormwater runoff. The rear adjoining neighbours were

given adequate opportunities to provide an easement with compensation but have communicated in

writing that they are not willing to provide the easement. Therefore the applicant has provided an alternate

solution to the site stormwater management which has addressed the DCP to Council’s satisfaction.

11.7 Urban Design (Residential Buildings)Clause 6.16 and 6.17 of SSLEP2015 and Chapter 4 of SSDCP 2015 contain certain matters of

consideration relating to urban design and residential amenity. The proposed development is considered

to be appropriate in design and compatible with the desired future character of the area in terms of height,

bulk and scale, subject to conditions.

Council requested on the 9 May 2019 to ensure compliance with the maximum building height, modify

materials to reduce the apparent building bulk, increase solar access and amend the private open spaces.

The amended plans have adjusted the building height to comply, the bulk and scale of the building has

been reduced, skylights have been added to improve solar access and the private open spaces have

been amended to comply.

Due to the sloping nature of the site retaining walls have been proposed to allow the applicant to have a

useable private open space. These walls have been conditioned to ensure that there is minimal disruption

to neighbouring properties and the natural landform that exists within the rear of the site. Conditions have

also been issued to ensure the walls are structurally suitable.

Following the amendment, the site area and built form has been adequately distributed in accordance with

the assessment criteria specified within SSDCP 2015 so as to enable reasonable internal and external

amenity for future occupants of the proposed dual occupancy. Visual intrusion and bulk of the building is

considered minimised by the proposed development. The proposed development appropriately responds


to the established street pattern and spatial proportion of the streetscape. Garaging is integrated well with

the façade of the development and contrasting architectural treatment is provided to the elevation. The

proposed development is considered acceptable in terms of its streetscape appearance, architectural

design, articulation and landscape treatment so as to be compatible with the established and desired

streetscape character.

The proposed development, subject to conditions, will not have significant detrimental impacts on

adjoining properties, in terms of privacy, amenity and overshadowing.

11.8 Archaeological SensitivityCouncil records indicate that the subject site is rated medium in terms of Archaeological Sensitivity. A site

inspection did not reveal any evidence of shell material or significant sandstone features within the

development zone. The proposal does not warrant an Aboriginal Archaeological Study being undertaken.

12.0 DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONSThe proposed development has a value of greater than $100,000. In order to provide high quality and

diverse public facilities, the proposed development will attract Section 7.12 Contributions in accordance

with Council’s adopted Section 7.12 Development Contribution Plan 2016.

This contribution is based upon the proposed cost of the development and has been calculated at 1% of

$743,241 (the estimated cost of development identified on the development application form). Therefore,

the Section 7.12 levy for the proposed development is $7,432.

13.0 DECLARATIONS OF AFFILIATION, GIFTS AND POLITICAL DONATIONSSection 10.4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires the declaration of

donations/gifts in excess of $1000. In addition Council’s development application form requires a general

declaration of affiliation. In relation to this development application no declaration has been made.

14.0 CONCLUSIONThe subject land is located within Zone R2 Low Density Residential pursuant to the provisions of

Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015. The proposed development, being dual occupancy and

strata subdivision, is a permissible land use within the zone with development consent.

In response to public exhibition, 3 submissions were received. The matters raised in these submissions

have been dealt with by design changes or conditions of consent where appropriate.

The application has been assessed having regard to the Heads of Consideration under Section 4.15 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The application will not result in any significant impact

on the environment or the amenity of nearby residents. Following assessment, Development Application

No. DA19/0041 may be supported for the reasons outlined in this report.

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is:

Author: (Thomas Stanton) Date: 13 January 2019


Assessment Officer

Electronically Published by Administration Officer: mw

Documents

with strata subdivision Property: Lot 4 DP 29773, 24