STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS · 2021. 1. 21. · STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS S4.55(2)...

STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

S4.55(2) modifications to a part-five, part-eleven storey residential flat building development with two

levels of basement car parking (approved under 2016/170)

3-5 Bridge Road

Homebush

Prepared for: Urban Link Architects

REF: M200323

DATE: 6 October 2020

Statement of Environmental Effects

Planning Ingenuity Pty Ltd REF: M200323 1

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 4

2. SITE ANALYSIS AND CONTEXT ..................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 The Site .............................................................................................................................................................. 5

2.2 Surrounding Development .................................................................................................................................. 7

2.3 Site Connectivity ............................................................................................................................................... 13

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL ............................................................................................................. 14

3.1 Planning History ................................................................................................................................................ 14

3.2 Modifications ..................................................................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Conditions of Consent to be Modified ............................................................................................................... 17

4. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 19

4.1 Section 4.55(2).................................................................................................................................................. 19

4.1.1 SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME DEVELOPMENT [Section 4.55(2)(a)] .................................................. 19

4.2 Statutory and policy compliance ....................................................................................................................... 23

4.2.1 SEPP No.55 – Remediation of Land..................................................................................................... 23

4.2.2 BASIX ................................................................................................................................................... 23

4.2.3 Strathfield Local Environmental Plan 2012 ........................................................................................... 23

4.2.4 Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan 2005 .................................................................... 24

4.2.5 Draft Strathfield Development Control Plan – Parramatta Road Precinct ............................................. 24

4.2.6 Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy ................................................................................ 24

4.2.7 SEPP65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Buildings and the Apartment Design Guide (ADG).............................................................................................................................................................. 25

4.3 Impacts on Natural & Built Environment ........................................................................................................... 27

4.3.1 Natural Environment ............................................................................................................................. 27

4.3.2 Water & Air Quality Impacts .................................................................................................................. 28

4.3.3 Flora & Fauna Impacts ......................................................................................................................... 28

4.3.4 External Appearance & Design ............................................................................................................. 29

4.3.5 Solar Access ......................................................................................................................................... 29

4.3.6 Views .................................................................................................................................................... 30

4.3.7 Aural & Visual Privacy .......................................................................................................................... 30

4.1 Economic & Social Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 30

4.2 The Suitability of the Site .................................................................................................................................. 31

4.3.8 Access to Services ............................................................................................................................... 31

4.3.9 Parking and Access .............................................................................................................................. 31



4.3.10 Hazards ................................................................................................................................................ 31

4.3 The Public Interest ............................................................................................................................................ 31

5. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 33

FIGURES

Figure 1 Aerial image of subject site (Source: Sixmaps) .............................................................................................. 5

Figure 2 Key Sites Map (SLEP 2012) ........................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 3 No.3 Bridge Road ........................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 4 No.5 Bridge Road ........................................................................................................................................... 7

Figure 5 Adjoining used car dealership to the north at No.200-206 Parramatta Road ................................................. 8

Figure 6 Adjoining 3 storey flat building to the south at No.7-11 Bridge Road ............................................................. 8

Figure 7 Access to Crane Street public car park and No.4 Bridge Road, opposite the subject site .............................. 9

Figure 8 Properties at the southern end of Bridge Road and large new RFB at No.50 Loftus Crescent ...................... 9

Figure 9 Properties at the southern end of Bridge Road (opposite side to the subject site) ....................................... 10

Figure 10 Looking north along Bridge Road from the railway bridge .......................................................................... 10

Figure 11 Large new developments fronting Parramatta Road (adjacent to used car dealership at No.200-206

Parramatta Road) ...................................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 12 Large new developments fronting Parramatta Road .................................................................................. 11

Figure 13 Large new developments fronting Parramatta Road (as viewed from the subject site, looking north east) 12

Figure 14 Construction site at No.16 Bridge Road ..................................................................................................... 12

Figure 15 New developments fronting Loftus Crescent to the south of the subject site (within the same block) ........ 13

Figure 16 Large new developments fronting Smallwood Ave (to the rear of the subject site, within the same block) 13

Figure 17 Approved Ground Floor Plan ...................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 18 Modified Ground Floor Plan ....................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 19 Approved Level 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 20 Modified typical Level 1-2 ........................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 21 Approved typical Level 6-10 ....................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 22 Modified typical Level 5-10 ......................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 23 Approved roof plan ..................................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 24 Modified roof plan ....................................................................................................................................... 16



Figure 25 Approved Eastern (Bridge Road) Elevation ................................................................................................ 16

Figure 26 Modified Eastern (Bridge Road) Elevation ................................................................................................. 16

Figure 27 Approved Southern Elevation ..................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 28 Modified Southern Elevation ...................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 29 Approved Northern Elevation ..................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 30 Modified Northern Elevation ....................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 31 Approved Western Elevation ...................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 32 Modified Western Elevation ........................................................................................................................ 17

©This document and the research reported in it remains the property of Planning Ingenuity Pty Ltd and are protected by copyright. Apart from fair

dealings for the purposes of private study, research or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of the document may be reproduced,

by any process, without the written permission of the author. All inquiries in this regard are to be directed to the Managing Director, Planning Ingenuity

Pty Ltd.



1. Introduction

We act on behalf of the Applicant for the proposed modification to an approved shop top housing development at Nos.3-

5 Bridge Road, Homebush.

Development consent under 2016/170 was granted by Council on 27 November 2019 for Demolition of existing

structures and construct a part three (3), part (11) storey residential flat building containing (77) units over three (3)

levels of basement parking.

Specifically the modified proposal seeks 80 residential units comprising a mix of 8 x Studios, 11 x one bedroom units

(14%), 51 x two bedroom units (64%) and 10 x three bedroom units (13%). A centralised pedestrian access from

Bridge Road is provided to a ground floor lobby which provides lift access to the basement levels and apartments

above. Vehicular access to the basement car parking is provided from a proposed laneway extension to the side

boundary (north). The two basement levels contain a total of 94 car parking spaces, including visitor parking and

accessible spaces.

Generous areas of communal open space are provided one at ground level and roof level. The ground level communal

open space is located in the south west corner of the site and is highly accessible to all residents. The roof terrace will

provide a secondary communal area for the use of occupants and will be embellished with plants, a BBQ and seating

areas. The proposal is illustrated within the submitted architectural plans, elevations and sections prepared by Urban

Link which are supported by specialist reports including Traffic and parking, stormwater, landscaping, arboricultural

assessment, Basix and an access compliance report.

This Statement of Environmental Effects accompanies a modification application pursuant to Section 4.55(2) of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) for a modification involving more than minimal

environmental impact.

The purpose of this Statement is to address the planning issues associated with the development proposal and

specifically to assess the likely impact of the development on the environment in accordance with the requirements of

Section 4.55(1A) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment (EP&A) Act, 1979



2. Site Analysis and Context

2.1 THE SITE

The subject site is located on the north-west side of Bridge Road. The site is known as Nos.3-5 Bridge Road and is

legally identified as Lot 30, Section 16 in DP477 and Lot 23 in DP9481

The site has a south eastern frontage to Bridge Road of and rear north western boundary of 42.67m. The site has north

eastern and south western side boundaries of 59.97m. The site has a total area of 2,558.9m2.

The site is relatively flat with a fall of approximately 1m from front to rear. An aerial image of the site is shown below at

Figure 1.

Figure 1 Aerial image of subject site (Source: Sixmaps)

The site contains a single storey detached dwelling at No.3 and a two storey detached dwelling at No.5 Bridge Road.

Both sites have heavy tree coverage and vegetation.

The site is located in the Parramatta Road Corridor Area and identified on the Key Sites Map as Key Site No. 51

(identified by the red arrow in Figure 2).



Figure 2 Key Sites Map (SLEP 2012)

Photos of the site are shown below at figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3 No.3 Bridge Road



Figure 4 No.5 Bridge Road

2.2 SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT

The area is characterised by a mixture of development types including detached dwellings, older small scale residential

flat buildings and newer large scale residential flat buildings and mixed use development. Older industrial and

commercial development is also present in the immediate vicinity and wider Parramatta Road Corridor. This is

representative of the mixed use zone (B4).

To the north of the site is a car dealership and associated parking lot. To the south of the site is a three storey smaller

scale residential flat building. Also present on Bridge Road are a mix of single and two storey detached dwellings and

newer three and seven storey residential flat buildings.

Photos of the surrounds are shown below at Figures 5 to 16.



Figure 5 Adjoining used car dealership to the north at No.200-206 Parramatta Road

Figure 6 Adjoining 3 storey flat building to the south at No.7-11 Bridge Road



Figure 7 Access to Crane Street public car park and No.4 Bridge Road, opposite the subject site

Figure 8 Properties at the southern end of Bridge Road and large new RFB at No.50 Loftus Crescent



Figure 9 Properties at the southern end of Bridge Road (opposite side to the subject site)

Figure 10 Looking north along Bridge Road from the railway bridge



Figure 11 Large new developments fronting Parramatta Road (adjacent to used car dealership at No.200-206 Parramatta Road)

Figure 12 Large new developments fronting Parramatta Road



Figure 13 Large new developments fronting Parramatta Road (as viewed from the subject site, looking north east)

Figure 14 Construction site at No.16 Bridge Road



Figure 15 New developments fronting Loftus Crescent to the south of the subject site (within the same block)

Figure 16 Large new developments fronting Smallwood Ave (to the rear of the subject site, within the same block)

2.3 SITE CONNECTIVITY

The site is located within 900m walking distance of both Homebush and Flemington Railway Stations and is 1.4km

walk from North Strathfield Railway Station.

Within 600m east of the site local bus services operate from Parramatta Road to Hurstville and Burwood and south of

the site along The Crescent bus services run towards Sydney and Burwood.

The site has access to all essential services and is ideally located to accommodate high density residential

development.



3. Description of the proposal

3.1 PLANNING HISTORY

2016/170 - Demolition of existing structures and construct a part three (3), part (11) storey residential flat building

containing (77) units over three (3) levels of basement parking. Approved 27 November 2019

3.2 MODIFICATIONS

The proposed modifications include the following:

Approved development Modified Development

Description A part three (3), part eleven (11) storey

residential flat building containing

seventy-seven (77) units over three (3)

levels of basement parking.

A part-five (5), part-eleven (11) storey

residential flat building containing eighty

(80) units over two levels (2) of

basement car parking

Height Lift overrun = RL52.30 (36.1m) Lift overrun = 53.90 (37.9m)

FSR 2.41:1 (6,179.13m2) 2.5:1 (6,390m2)

Unit Mix 1 x Studio

20 x 1 bedroom units



Total = 77

8 x Studio




Total = 80

Parking Residential = 69 spaces

Visitor = 16 spaces

Residential = 78 spaces

Visitor = 16 spaces

Communal Open Space 777.79m2 (30.4%) 1,166m2 (45.56%)

Deep Soil 189m2 (7.3%) 360m2 (14%)

Other proposed modifications include:

- Relocating the vehicular entrance ramp from Bridge Street to proposed new laneway at the northern boundary

- Creation of rooftop communal open space (COS) to complement the ground level COS

- Reduction of basement depth from 3 levels to 2 levels

- General design changes to the façade and material treatment

A summary of the proposed modifications, compared to the approved development, are shown below at Figures 17 to

30.



Figure 17 Approved Ground Floor Plan Figure 18 Modified Ground Floor Plan

Figure 19 Approved Level 2 Figure 20 Modified typical Level 1-2

Figure 21 Approved typical Level 6-10 Figure 22 Modified typical Level 5-10



Figure 23 Approved roof plan Figure 24 Modified roof plan

Figure 25 Approved Eastern (Bridge Road) Elevation Figure 26 Modified Eastern (Bridge Road) Elevation

Figure 27 Approved Southern Elevation Figure 28 Modified Southern Elevation



Figure 29 Approved Northern Elevation Figure 30 Modified Northern Elevation

Figure 31 Approved Western Elevation Figure 32 Modified Western Elevation

3.3 CONDITIONS OF CONSENT TO BE MODIFIED

The subject modification application will necessitate changes to the following conditions:

Condition 5 – Vehicular Access

This condition is to be deleted or amended as Council sees fit as the vehicular access is to be relocated from Bridge

Road to the proposed northern laneway.

Condition 7 – Atrium Structure

This condition is to be deleted or amended as Council sees fit upon review of the revised material schedule and

assessment of the overall design modifications.

Condition 15 – Approved Plans and Reference Documentation

This condition is to be updated to refer to the revised plans and documentation subject to this modification application.

Condition 18 – Building Height

This condition is to be updated to refer to the modified lift overrun height of RL53.900.



Condition 50 – Privacy (Measures to be complied with)

Condition 50(i) is to be deleted or amended as Council sees fit given the balcony design and unit numbering have been

modified.

Condition 77 – Car Parking

This condition 77(i) is to be updated to refer to 94 parking spaces, allocated as 72 residential spaces and 16 visitor

spaces.

Condition 84 – Noise (compliance with acoustic assessment report)

This condition is to be updated to refer to the updated acoustic report prepared by AcousticWorks, dated September

2020.



4. Environmental Planning Assessment

4.1 SECTION 4.55(2)

Section 4.55 of the EP&A Act contains provisions relating to the modification of a development consent. Sub-clause

(2) relates to ‘other modifications’ and states the following:

(2) Other Modifications

A consent authority may, on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent

granted by the consent authority and subject to and in accordance with the regulations, modify the consent if:

(a) it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as

the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified

(if at all), and

(b) it has consulted with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body (within the meaning of Division 4.8) in

respect of a condition imposed as a requirement of a concurrence to the consent or in accordance with the general

terms of an approval proposed to be granted by the approval body and that Minister, authority or body has not, within

21 days after being consulted, objected to the modification of that consent, and

(c) it has notified the application in accordance with:

(i) the regulations, if the regulations so require, or

(ii) a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan that

requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and

(d) it has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within the period prescribed by the

regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.

Assessment of the proposed modification against the relevant provisions of Section 4.55(2) is provided in section 4.1.1

of this Statement, and against the relevant provisions of Section 4.15(1) in section 4.2 of this Statement.

4.1.1 SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME DEVELOPMENT [Section 4.55(2)(a)]

When assessing a modification application, the consent authority has a threshold decision to make, and must be

satisfied that what is proposed is “substantially the same” development as the original development, as set out in

Section 4.55(2)(a) of the EP&A Act. Whether the development will be “substantially the same” as the original consent

is a mixed question of fact and law. This decision can be guided by principles and tests established in the Courts.

Decisions of the Land and Environment Court support the proposition that the main elements of the proposal are

matters substantially the same as the existing development consent, as outlined below.

Modification Principles Established by the Courts

The traditional ‘test’ as to whether or not a development as modified will be “substantially the same” development as

that originally approved was applied by J Stein and the Court of Appeal in Vacik Pty Limited v Penrith City Council

[1992] NSWLEC 8 and endorsed by J Bignold in Moto Projects (No 2) Pty Ltd V North Sydney C [1999] NSWLEC 280.

J Stein stated in the Vacik case: “In my opinion ‘substantially’ when used in the section [s102, the predecessor of s96]

means essentially or materially having the same essence”.



J Bignold expressed in the Moto case: “The requisite factual finding obviously requires a comparison between the

development, as currently approved, and the development as proposed to be modified … not merely a comparison of

the physical features or components of the development … rather … involves an appreciation, qualitative as well as

quantitative, of the developments being compared in their proper contexts (including the circumstances in which the

development consent was granted).”

J Bignold came to deal with the matter of “substantially the same” again in Tipalea Watson Pty Limited v Kurringai

Council [2003] NSWLEC 253. From this Judgement, one can distil a list of matters or ‘tests’ to consider, being whether

the modification involves the following:

(a) significant change to the nature or the intensity of the use;

(b) significant change to the relationship to adjoining properties;

(c) adverse amenity impacts on neighbours from the changes;

(d) significant change to the streetscape; and

(e) change to the scale or character of the development, or the character of the locality

In 2015, the principles regarding Section 96(2)(a) (now Section 4.55(2)(a)) were summarised in Agricultural Equity

Investments Pty Ltd v Westlime Pty Ltd (No 3) [2015] NSWLEC 75 where Pepper J set out the legal principles that

apply as follows:

The applicable legal principles governing the exercise of the power contained in s 96(2)(a) of the EPAA may

be stated as follows:

1. first, the power contained in the provision is to “modify the consent”. Originally the power was restricted to

modifying the details of the consent but the power was enlarged in 1985 (North Sydney Council v Michael

Standley & Associates Pty Ltd (1998) 43 NSWLR 468 at 475 and Scrap Realty Pty Ltd v Botany Bay City

Council [2008] NSWLEC 333; (2008) 166 LGERA 342 at [13]). Parliament has therefore “chosen to facilitate

the modification of consents, conscious that such modifications may involve beneficial cost savings and/or

improvements to amenity” (Michael Standley at 440);

2. the modification power is beneficial and facultative (Michael Standley at 440);

3. the condition precedent to the exercise of the power to modify consents is directed to “the development”,

making the comparison between the development as modified and the development as originally consented

to (Scrap Reality at [16]);

4. the applicant for the modification bears the onus of showing that the modified development is substantially

the same as the original development (Vacik Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [1992] NSWLEC 8);

5. the term “substantially” means “essentially or materially having the same essence” (Vac ik endorsed in

Michael Standley at 440 and Moto Projects (No 2) Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council [1999] NSWLEC 280;

(1999) 106 LGERA 298 at [30]);

6. the formation of the requisite mental state by the consent authority will involve questions of fact and degree

which will reasonably admit of different conclusions (Scrap Realty at [19]);

7. the term “modify” means “to alter without radical transformation” (Sydney City Council v Ilenace Pty Ltd

[1984] 3 NSWLR 414 at 42, Michael Standley at 474, Scrap Realty at [13] and Moto Projects at [27]);



8. in approaching the comparison exercise “one should not fall into the trap” of stating that because the

development was for a certain use and that as amended it will be for precisely the same use, it is substantially

the same development. But the use of land will be relevant to the assessment made under s 96(2)(a) (Vacik);

9. the comparative task involves more than a comparison of the physical features or components of the

development as currently approved and modified. The comparison should involve a qualitative and

quantitative appreciation of the developments in their “proper contexts (including the circumstances in which

the development consent was granted)” (Moto Projects at [56]); and

10. a numeric or quantitative evaluation of the modification when compared to the original consent absent any

qualitative assessment will be “legally flawed” (Moto Projects at [52]).

In the recent case of Arrage v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 85, Preston J found that there was no legal obligation

to consider the circumstances in which the development consent was granted when comparing the approved

development and the proposed modified development, or to consider the material or essential elements of the original

development consent, neither of which are mandatory relevant matters. Rather it is the statutory provision of Section

4.55 which provides the relevant test.

Whether or not there will be increased environmental or neighbourhood amenity impacts under a proposed modified

development is not a consideration as to whether or not a modification proposal is substantially the same under Section

4.55 of the EP&A Act. Authority for this position is set out in a decision of Talbot J in Wolgan Action Group Incorporated

v Lithgow City Council [2001] NSWLEC 199 [43] in which he provides:

“Even if the present applicant is correct in that there will be a significant increase in the environmental impact

… that, nevertheless, does not necessarily preclude a conclusion that the development, to which the consent

as modified relates, is substantially the same development as that already permitted. The extension … alone

does not change the inherent character of the development itself. There may be some additional

environmental impact but that is a matter to be considered as part of the deliberations on the merits.”

Modification Principles Applied to the Proposal

When considered against these principles, the proposed modification described at Section 4 of this Statement will result

in a development that is substantially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted and the

consent authority can therefore consider the application pursuant to Section 4.55(2) of the EP&A Act.

A comparison between the development as modified and the development as approved concludes that there is no

significant material change, with the final form being similar to that which has been granted approval. The development

remains an 11 storey tower with a lower height element. The approved development comprises a lower height element

which was 5 storeys fronting bridge road and 3 storeys at the rear, fronting the proposed laneway. The modified

development seeks to rebalance this to 4 storeys at both Bridge Road and the future laneway. Whilst this results in a

better proportioned building when viewed from both Bridge Road and the future laneway, it remains substantially the

same built form.

The proposed modification does not alter the approved use of the land. Whilst this fact in itself is not sufficient to

conclude the development is substantially the same, it is a relevant consideration which adds to the above analysis.

With consideration to the tests identified in Tipalea Watson Pty Limited v Kurringai Council, the proposal as modified

will not change the nature or the intensity of the use or relationship to adjoining properties, will not result in any material

change to the streetscape or material change in scale or character of the development or character of the locality, and

will not result in adverse amenity impacts on neighbours.



A quantitative assessment indicates that the development will remain substantially the same development as approved.

In terms of height, whilst the lift overrun is increased by 1.6m, it is set well away from the site boundaries, within the

centre of the site and therefore does not cast any additional shadow over neighbouring properties. Due to the height of

the building, the lift overrun will not be overly visible apart from in long views where it will be read in the context of a

number of large scale, multi-storey developments in the immediate area. The height variation was accompanied by a

well-founded Clause 4.6 variation statement which was considered acceptable to Council. The justifications contained

within that statement remain applicable to the as modified height variation.

The modification increases the FSR to 2.5:1 which remains compliant with the LEP standard. The ADG building

separation requirements and other numerical controls remain unchanged or any modifications are fully compliant. The

DCP front setback requirements are complied with (and are unchanged by the modified development).

The proposed increase in the number of units from 77 to 80 and associated parking increase do not lead to an

intensification of the site such that the development is significantly different to that which has been approved, as they

take place within the generally approved building envelope and a compliant FSR.

A qualitative assessment also indicates that the development will remain substantially the same development as

approved. In terms of design, whilst the façade and materials are proposed to be modified they relate to a similar built

form as that approved and do not materially change the assessment outcomes. The building’s appearance on the

streetscape will remain positive and, in our opinion, the modified scheme is an improvement upon the approved design.

A SEPP 65 design verification statement is submitted to support this.

The modified development will not introduce any amenity impacts which are substantially different to those which have

already been assessed and considered acceptable in the approved scheme. In fact, as the recently constructed building

at No.4-8 Smallwood Avenue (to the rear) casts shadow over the approved ground level Communal Open Space (COS)

the introduction of additional rooftop COS will ensure full compliance with the solar access ADG requirements in this

regard. The overshadowing impact remains as per the approved development given that, other than the lift overrun,

the building envelope is fully compliant and of a very similar built form.

ADG building separation distances, unit and balcony sizes, solar access and cross ventilation requirements and other

such numerical requirements which relate to amenity are all complied with or improved upon by the modified

development.

Whilst we believe that the modification does not result in any additional material impacts beyond those approved, it is

noted in Wolgan Action Group Incorporated v Lithgow City Council an increase in environmental impacts is not a

consideration as to whether or not a modification proposal is substantially the same.

In conclusion, the modifications proposed by this application are considered to result in a development that is

substantially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted.



4.2 STATUTORY AND POLICY COMPLIANCE

4.2.1 SEPP No.55 – Remediation of Land

This State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) was gazetted on 28 August 1989 and applies to the whole State. It

introduces planning controls for the remediation of contaminated land and requires an investigation to be made if land

contamination is suspected.

A Preliminary Site Investigation Report has been prepared by Martens Consulting Engineers and is submitted under

separate cover. The report has investigated potential contaminants within the soil and the suitability of the site for a

high density residential development.

The existing dwellings and shed have been classified as potential areas of environmental concern due to their potential

use of pesticides, asbestos and heavy metals for construction and maintenance. Additionally, rubbish stockpiles on site

could have introduced heavy metals, hydrocarbons or pesticides to the site soil.

However, the site is unlikely to be significantly contaminated and therefore capable of accommodating the proposed

residential development. All potential contaminates have been classified as low risk and are not deemed to generate

any adverse impacts to human health.

This level of information was considered appropriate for the approved development which is of a very similar scale and

nature. The requirements of SEPP No. 55 are therefore satisfied and no further investigation in relation to land

contamination is considered necessary.

4.2.2 BASIX

An updated BASIX Certificate has been prepared and is submitted separately with this application. The certificate

demonstrates compliance with the thermal comfort, energy efficiency and water efficiency requirements of the SEPP

BASIX.

4.2.3 Strathfield Local Environmental Plan 2012

The Strathfield Local Environmental Plan 2012 (SLEP 2012) applies to the subject site. Under the LEP indicates the

subject site is within Zone B4 – Mixed Use zone. The proposed development is best characterised as a residential flat

building which is permissible with consent in Zone B4.

The objectives of Zone B4 are as follows:

• To provide a mixture of compatible land uses.

• To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to

maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

• To facilitate mixed use urban growth around railway stations and transport nodes and corridors, commercial centres

and open space.

• To provide local and regional employment and live and work opportunities.

The proposal involves the construction of a residential flat building and will provide for the housing needs of the

community within an area providing a variety of compatible land uses. The residential building will integrate with other

development in an accessible location so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and

cycling. While the proposal will not generate employment opportunities it will provide an increase in the number of

residents in the locality to support local business and regional live and work opportunities.

The site is located within the Parramatta Road Corridor and therefore the provisions of Clause 6.9 of the SLEP 2012

apply. In accordance with Clause 6.9(3) development consent must not be granted for development on land to which



this Clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development will contribute to the general mix of

residential and non-residential land uses in the area and the vertical and horizontal integration of land uses in the area.

The subject site is zoned B4 Mixed Use and the development results in a high quality residential flat building that

achieves the objectives of this zone in providing residential occupants to support the wide range of local businesses

and is therefore considered to satisfy Clause 6.9 (3) of the SLEP 2012.

The site is within 900m of Homebush and Flemington railway stations. There is a bus interchange within 500m north

east of the site along Parramatta Road. The site is well located to existing shops and services and the proposal provides

high density housing which aligns with the zone objective.

4.2.4 Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan 2005

Strathfield Development Control Plan No. 20 (Parramatta Road Corridor Area) applies to the subject site. The modified

development does not result in any DCP variations which differ from those which have been assessed as part of the

approved development.

Therefore, the proposed modification does not result in any changes to compliance with the relevant DCP provisions

and no further assessment is required.

4.2.5 Draft Strathfield Development Control Plan – Parramatta Road Precinct

The Draft DCP proposes to amend DCP No. 20 (Parramatta Road Corridor Area) and applies to the subject site. At

Council’s meeting on 4 August 2020 Council resolved:

That the draft amendments proposed to Strathfield Development Control Plan 2005 (SDCP) and the site specific

Development Control Plans (DCPs) to remove the reference to Part L – Public Notifications and to update the DCP

parts applicable to the relevant site specific DCPs be endorsed by Council.

The amendments are on public exhibition until 9 September. None of the amendments will have any relevance to the

proposed development.

4.2.6 Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy

The Strategy is the NSW Government’s 30-year plan setting out how the Parramatta Road Corridor will grow and bring

new life to local communities living and working along the Corridor. The Strategy prepared by UrbanGrowth NSW has

been adopted by the NSW Government and is given statutory force by a Ministerial Direction under section 117 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (known as a Section 117 Ministerial Direction).

For the purposes of the Strategy, the Corridor is separated into two distinct sections – Corridor West and Corridor East.

Within each section, eight ‘Precincts’ have been identified and the subject site is within the Homebush, Eastern Precinct,

which is the largest of the eight extending from the Western Rail Line northwards along the Northern Rail Line into

Concord West. These Precincts have been earmarked for renewal because of their unique access to jobs, transport,

infrastructure and services, and their ability to accommodate new development in a balanced way.

The strategy seeks to deliver an additional 27,000 homes within the corridor and a minimum of five per cent of new

housing to be Affordable Housing.

In relation to the site, the Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy permits a split FSR of 2.2:1 and 3.6:1

(source: Figure 7.14 of Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Planning and Design Guidelines) and a

building height of 30m (source: Figure 7.13 of Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Planning and Design

Guidelines) on the site.



The proposed development seeks to achieve these requirements, without significantly overriding the current controls

for the site, proposing an FSR of 2.5:1 and a building height of 37.7m.

4.2.7 SEPP65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Buildings and the Apartment Design Guide

(ADG)

In accordance with the provisions of SEPP No.65 and Section 115(3A) of the EP&A Regulation, a statement prepared

by Urban Link Architects is submitted with the subject modification application which outlines how the development, as

modified, addresses the design quality principles of SEPP No. 65 and the objectives of the Apartment Design Guide

(ADG), and verifies that the proposed modifications do not diminish or detract from the design quality of the

development for which consent was originally granted.

An assessment of the modified development against the numerical objectives within the ADG is provided below:

ADG Objective Approved S.4.55 Proposed Modification Complies?

3D-1 Communal and Public

Open Space

1. Communal open space has a

minimum area equal to 25% of the

site (377.86m2).

2. Development to achieve minimum

50% direct sunlight to the principal

useable part of the COS for minimum

2hrs between 9am and 3pm in

midwnter

777.79m2 (30.4%)

Complied when

approved. However,

construction of No.4-8

Smallwood results in a

non-compliance

1,166m2 (45.56%)

Complies (due to roof

level COS)

Yes

Yes

3E-1 Deep Soil Zones

7%, minimum dimension 6m

189m2 (7.3%) 360m2 (14%)

Additional 3m deep soil

provided along side of

future laneway.

Yes

3F-1 Visual Privacy

Separation between windows and

balconies is provided to ensure visual

privacy is achieved. Minimum required

separation distances from buildings to

the side and rear boundaries are as

follows:

Building

Height

Habitable

Rooms

and

Balconies

Non-

habitable

rooms

Up to

12m (4

storeys)

Up to

25m (5-

8

storeys)

6m

9m

12m

3m

4.5m

6m

Up to 4 storeys –

complied.

Up to 8 storeys –

Up to 4 storeys –

Western boundary = nil

setback (blank wall)

Southern boundary = 6m

Northern boundary =

minimum 10m setback

from opposite side of

proposed laneway.

Up to 8 storeys

Western boundary =

Complies (as per

approved development)

On merit – acceptable




Over

25m

(9+

storeys)

Apartment buildings should have an

increased separation distance of 3m

(in addition to the requirements set out

in design criteria 1) when adjacent to

a different zone that permits lower

density residential development to

provide for a transition in scale and

increased landscaping (figure 3F.5)

No separation is required between

blank walls

Minor variations

accepted but broadly

compliant.

Above 9 storeys –

complied.

- Level 5 = 1.5m (to

balcony) – adjacent

to non-trafficable

room of existing

building fronting

Smallwood Ave.

- Level 6-8 = 21.7m

Southern boundary =

12m

Northern boundary =

10m setback from

opposite side of

proposed laneway (as

per the approved

development)

Above 9 storeys

Western boundary =

21.7m

Southern boundary =

12m

Northern boundary =

10m setback from

opposite side of

proposed laneway (as

per approved

development)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

On merit – acceptable

3J-1 Parking

1. For development in the following

locations:

• on sites that are within 800 metres of

a railway

station or light rail stop in the Sydney

Metropolitan

Area;

the minimum car parking requirement

for residents and

visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic

Generating

Developments, or the car parking

requirement

prescribed by the relevant council,

whichever is less

85 Spaces

- 69 residential

- 16 visitor

94 Spaces

Yes




The car parking needs for a

development must be

provided off street

4A-1 Solar Access and

Daylight

Living rooms and private open

spaces of at least 70% of apartments

in a building receive a minimum of 2

hours direct sunlight between 9 am

and 3 pm at mid-winter in the Sydney

Metropolitan Area and in the

Newcastle and Wollongong local

government areas.

A maximum of 15% of apartments in a

building receive no direct sunlight

between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter

59 (76%) of units receive

greater than 2hrs of solar

access.

4 (5%) of units receive no

direct sunlight.

58 (73%) of units receive

greater than 2hrs of solar

access.

2 (3%) of units receive no

direct sunlight.

Yes

Improvement on


4D-1 Size and layout

Studio – 35m2 1 bedroom – 50m2

2 bedroom – 70m2

3 bedroom – 90m2

Complied

Complies

Yes

4B -3 Natural Ventilation

At least 60% of apartments are

naturally cross ventilated in the first

nine storeys of the building.

Apartments at ten storeys or greater

are deemed to be cross ventilated

only if any enclosure of the balconies

at these levels allows adequate

natural ventilation and cannot be fully

enclosed.

80% (62 units) 60% (42 units) within the

first 9 storeys.

Yes

4E- Private open space and

balconies

Primary balcony size:

Studio – 4m2

1 bedroom – 8m2

2 bedroom - 10m2

3 bedroom – 12m2

Complied

Complies

Yes

4.3 IMPACTS ON NATURAL & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

4.3.1 Natural Environment

The proposal requires excavation to accommodate the basement car parking. However, the basement is contained

entirely below ground level and consequently the building has direct access from the street without any basement levels



protruding above ground level or changes in ground level to the building’s entrances As such, the proposal will not

generate any adverse visual impacts as a result of the modification to the site topography.

A Preliminary Geotechnical and Groundwater Assessment has been prepared by Martens Consulting Engineers and

is submitted under separate cover. The assessment outlines the geotechnical factors and groundwater conditions

associated with the proposed development and determines the potential impact on excavation works and basement

design.

No groundwater is expected to be encountered during excavation and basement construction. Nonetheless, ephemeral

perched groundwater within the soil and rock interface and or within rock defects during intensive rain fall may cause

minor inflows during excavation.

In the event minor water flows are encountered, either a sump and pump methodology or sub-surface drainage system

can be used for short and long-term inflow management respectively. The study recommends further geotechnical

investigation and design input is required during the detailed design phase prior to and during construction. The study

also recommends subsurface profiling via inspection and monitoring during construction. It is anticipated that measures

recommended in the geotechnical assessment may be conditioned by Council as per the approved development on

this site.

The proposal will therefore have no adverse impact on local topography. Excavation will not result in any adverse

impact to the amenity of neighbouring sites or the structural integrity of nearby buildings. The proposal results in a form

of development that is consistent with the desired future character of development in the area and as such, the proposal

will not generate any adverse topographical or scenic impacts.

4.3.2 Water & Air Quality Impacts

The proposed development will have no significant impact on air or water quality in the locality. Standard conditions of

consent relating to construction management will ensure that no silt laden water enters the stormwater system. The

completed project will be connected to Council’s stormwater drainage system on Smallwood Ave, via an easement at

No.2 Smallwood Ave. The development will incorporate on-site stormwater detention in accordance with the submitted

stormwater drainage plans.

The proposed development will be connected to the sewer and is not likely to generate any unusual liquid waste, odour

or fumes. Fumes from the basement car park will be appropriately discharged to the atmosphere via mechanical

exhaust in a manner that will not compromise air quality or impact on the amenity of residents. Accordingly, the proposal

is unlikely to have any notable impact on air quality.

4.3.3 Flora & Fauna Impacts

An Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Specification has been prepared by Horticultural

Management Services and is submitted under separate cover and remains as per the approved development. The

assessment has determined these trees have very little or no ecological significance and would experience long-term

decline due to the subterranean works proposed.

A landscape plan is provided under separate cover which details the high quality landscape proposal. Significant areas

of deep soil are proposed at the Bridge Street frontage, the frontage of the future laneway and the south eastern

residential boundary. A range of canopy trees, shrubs, grasses and appropriate native and exotic vegetation is

proposed in the deep soil areas and within the COS as ground and rooftop level.

The introduction of additional deep soil at the boundary with the future laneway provides additional articulation and

enhances the ground level interaction with the public realm by enabling high quality planting along the laneway. This is

an improvement to the fire exists and general servicing of the approved development.



The proposal exceeds the minimum deep soil zone required under the ADG and provides generous areas of common

open space. Overall the trees lost as a result of the development will be replaced through a comprehensive landscape

design for the site which includes appropriate compensatory planting tree species which will contribute to the site and

locality in the future.

4.3.4 External Appearance & Design

The modified development provides clearly defined pedestrian and vehicular access points and has been sighted in

line with the development controls and the emerging pattern of development in the street. At ground level, the modified

development will incorporate hard and soft landscaping elements that are appropriate to the scale of development and

encourage a range of private and communal open space areas.

The modified development seeks to relocate the vehicular access from Bridge Road to the proposed future laneway.

This is encouraged by the DCP and is the general preference from an urban design perspective as it is the function of

laneways to provide for such servicing. This maximises the pedestrian footpath on Bridge Road creating a more

attractive and safer environment.

The modified design of the building ensures functional internal layouts for each dwelling with building orientation and

window openings being determined by sensitivity of the adjoining properties. The proposal will promote passive

surveillance of both the established street frontage, the proposed laneway and the ground level communal open space

area at the site.

The modified building adopts a contemporary eleven storey presentation to Bridge Road and five storeys to the

proposed laneway, the design of which is consistent with recent approvals nearby and that approved on the site itself.

The scale of the modified development proposed is consistent with the future context of development in the immediate

area.

Physical articulation is incorporated into building facades to ameliorate perceived bulk and scale of the development.

The balconies and varying materials and finishes provide some relief and articulate the building when viewed from the

street frontages.

The combination of materials proposed are detailed on the elevations contained within the architectural plan set and

submitted with the development application. The modified proposal represents a high standard of building design and

will contribute to the existing and future development in the locality.

4.3.5 Solar Access

In terms of solar access, the modified proposal complies with the solar access requirements of the Apartment Design

Guide as it achieves more than 2 hours of sunlight to living room windows and private open space areas of 56 of 80

apartments (70%) between 9.00am and 3.00pm during mid-winter. The roof top communal open space above receives

excellent solar access throughout the day and also is readily accessible. The roof top space is sufficient to meet the

solar access requirements under the ADG and is therefore deemed acceptable.

In terms of the impacts of overshadowing, shadow diagrams of the proposed development have been prepared and

are submitted with the development application indicating the shadows cast by the modified building. They demonstrate

that the modified development generally has a reduced shadow when compared to the approved built form.

The DCP requires:

“ (ii) solar access to the windows of habitable rooms and to the majority of private open space of adjoining

properties must be substantially maintained or achieved for a minimum period of 3 hours between 9.00am

and 3.00pm at the winter solstice (June 22).”



The shadow diagrams indicate that due to the orientation of the subject site, the majority of the overshadowing falls to

the south over the adjoining apartment development at No.11 Bridge Road at 9am. From 12pm onwards the shadow

predominantly falls over Bridge Road itself and the properties opposite the subject site at Nos.6-10 Bridge Road

The development is consistent with the ADG building separation distance and the LEP building height variation relates

only to the lift overrun which does not introduce any additional shadow beyond the mainly compliant built form.

Considering the general compliance with the applicable solar access controls in relation to the subject development,

the reduction in overshadowing when compared to the approved built form and that the shadows cast on the adjoining

property is unavoidable due to the site orientation, the modified development is acceptable.

4.3.6 Views

There are no significant views of waterways or iconic buildings afforded from the site or from buildings in the immediate

vicinity. In light of the surrounding properties and applicable planning controls, the proposed development will not result

in any unreasonable level of view loss.

4.3.7 Aural & Visual Privacy

A detailed Acoustic Report has been prepared by Acoustic Works and is submitted under separate cover. The report

assesses the environmental and road traffic noise in the area and makes a series of recommendations to mitigate any

potential adverse noise impacts. It is anticipated that condition 84 of the approved consent will be updated to ensure

compliance with these suggested commendations.

Visual privacy is achieved by orienting balconies and habitable room windows to the street frontages where possible.

The proposal is generally consistent with ADG building separation distances, where there is any variation it has been

approved previous and does not result in any adverse loss of privacy to either the future occupants or adjoining

neighbours. The modified building has been designed to minimise views to the southern and western boundaries as

far as reasonably practical. The built form and orientation of units is similar to the approved development, as such, the

impact on privacy is not considered to be substantially different to the approved development.

The proposal includes generally compliant built form having regard to the relevant DCP controls and suitable boundary

landscaping within deep soil zones that will further offset any overlooking between neighbouring properties.

The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of aural and visual privacy impacts.

4.1 ECONOMIC & SOCIAL IMPACTS

The proposed development will result in an increase in the available housing stock in the locality by the provision of a

high quality residential development. The subject site enjoys good access to commercial services, community facilities

and public transport routes. Bus and rail services are located nearby from Parramatta Road, Flemington and Homebush

Railway Station which provide access to the regional centre of Parramatta as well as connections to the Sydney CBD.

Undertaking the demolition and construction works will have some short-term positive economic impacts through

employment generation, both direct employment and multiplier effects. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed

development is likely to have only positive social and economic impacts in the locality.



4.2 THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE

4.3.8 Access to Services

The site is located within an established area with good access to services and public transport. Homebush and

Flemington Railway Stations are located less than 900m walk from the subject site. Strathfield North station is located

approximately 1.4km walk from the subject site. There are also frequent bus services provided along Parramatta Road,

approximately 500m north-east of the site and from other surrounding streets.

As the site is within an established urban area, electricity, sewer, telephone, and water services are readily available

to the subject site.

4.3.9 Parking and Access

As the site is within 800m of a railway station the minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out

in the Guide to Traffic Generating Development, or the car parking requirement prescribed by Council, whichever is

less. In this case, the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Development is the lesser of the two calculations and requires

87 parking spaces. The modified development provides 94 spaces and is therefore compliant.

The design and layout of the on-site parking and vehicular access/egress is compliant with relevant Australian

Standards and will not give rise to any traffic or parking issues in the locality. The modified proposal is therefore

considered to satisfy the requirements of the ADG and proposes an increase in traffic generation anticipated by the

planning controls as addressed in the submitted Traffic and Parking Assessment Report prepared by Varga Traffic

Planning.

4.3.10 Hazards

The site is not in an area recognised by Council as being subject to landslip, flooding, bushfire or any other particular

hazards. The proposed development is not likely to increase the likelihood of such hazards occurring and is considered

appropriate in this instance.

4.3 THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The modified proposed development has been designed to relate to the configuration, constraints and context of the

site and has been designed to achieve compatibility with the desired future character of development in the area, as

anticipated by prescribed height and floor space ratio controls. The modified proposal will contribute to the high quality

housing stock available in the locality and has been designed to minimise or mitigate any adverse impacts on existing

and future development on adjoining allotments. Generously sized dwellings with access to private open space, car

parking and well-designed communal open space areas offers a high standard of resident amenity.

The modified proposal is generally consistent with the applicable LEP provisions, except with respect to height, this is

as per the approved development which was supported by a well-founded clause 4.6 statement. The justifications

contained within the 4.6 statement are applicable to the modified height variation and the development is therefore

acceptable in this regard. The modified proposal is also consistent with DCP controls and is considered to have positive

social and economic impacts, and manageable impacts on the environment.

The modified development improves upon both the approved design and the streetscape presentation to both Bridge

Road and the future laneway at the northern boundary by introducing additional deep soil and relocating the vehicular

access to the laneway.

Ultimately, the modified proposal represents a positive redevelopment of the site and is considered to be in the public

interest.



5. Conclusion

This Statement of Environmental Effects accompanies an application pursuant to Section 4.55(1A) of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) which seeks various modifications to the approved development

(2016/170) at Nos.3-5 Bridge Road, Homebush, approved by Strathfield Council on 27 November 2019.

The proposed modifications are the result of design development following the granting of consent. The proposed

modifications are considered to be substantially the same as the approved development, and the changes either

facilitate or improve the development as approved.

The modifications are consistent with the relevant provisions of the Apartment Design Guide, Strathfield LEP 2012 and

Strathfield DCP 2005 and will not introduce any adverse built or natural environmental impacts over and above the


Accordingly, for the reasons outlined in this Statement, we respectfully request that Council modify the development

consent to incorporate the proposed changes detailed in this report and accompanying plans

STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS · 2021. 1. 21. · STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS S4.55(2)...

Documents

Transcript of STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS · 2021. 1. 21. · STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS S4.55(2)...