STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS BOUNDARY …

STATEMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT AND

ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO

EXISTING STORAGE FACILITY

KENNARDS SELF STORAGE

2-4 PARRAMATTA ROAD

HOMEBUSH

DECEMBER 2020

Turnbull Planning International Pty Limited – Town Planners

Statement of Environmental Effects – 2-4 Parramatta Road Homebush

statement of

environmental effects Submission to

STRATHFIELD MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT AND ALTERATIONS

AND ADDITIONS TO EXISTING STORAGE FACILITY

2-4 PARRAMATTA ROAD HOMEBUSH

Prepared on behalf of

KENNARDS SELF STORAGE

Nic Najar BA (ICMS)

Town Planner

Pierre Le Bas BA (Geog)(UNE), LLB(Hons1), Grad Cert Leg P (UTS), MTCP (Syd)

Director & Legal Counsel

Town Planners

Suite 2301

Quattro Building 2

Level 3

4 Daydream Street

WARRIEWOOD NSW 2102

Phone: 02 9979 4922

Fax: 02 9979 4811 December 2020

www.turnbullplanning.com.au

[email protected]

Copyright © Turnbull Planning International Pty Limited and Peter A Le Bas 2020. All rights reserved.

This document is copyright. Apart from any fair dealings for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted

under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part may be reproduced in whole or in part, without the written permission of Turnbull Planning

International Pty Limited, Suite 2301, 4 Daydream Street, Warriewood NSW 2102.

This statement has been prepared in consideration of the Expert Witness Code of Conduct in the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

and the provisions relating to expert evidence. The opinions in the statement represent the professional opinions of the authors, based

on an assessment of the facts and circumstances as have been cited in the document



TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................6

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ....................................7

2.1 Location ..................................................................... 7

2.2 The Site ..................................................................... 8

2.3 Site History ................................................................. 9

2.4 Current Use ................................................................ 9

2.5 Self-Storage Units ...................................................... 11

3.0 RELEVANT DEVELOPMENT HISTORY ................................. 12

4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................ 13

5.0 COLUMBIA LANE PRECINCT CONCEPT PLAN ...................... 15

6.0 EXISTING USE RIGHTS ..................................................... 18

7.0 STATUTORY PLANNING FRAMEWORK ............................... 22

7.1 SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007 .......................................... 22

7.2 SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 ....................... 22

7.3 SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 ................... 22

7.4 SEPP No 19—Bushland in Urban Areas ........................... 22

7.5 Strathfield Local Environmental Plan 2012 ...................... 23

7.5.1 Permissibility .................................................. 23

7.5.2 Zone Objectives .............................................. 23

7.5.3 Height of Buildings ........................................... 26

7.5.4 Floor Space Ratio ............................................ 28

7.5.5 Development Near Zone Boundaries ................... 31

7.5.6 Heritage Conservation ...................................... 32

7.5.7 Acid Sulfate Soils ............................................. 33

7.5.8 Earthworks ..................................................... 33

7.5.9 Essential Services ............................................ 34

7.5.10 Erection or Display of Signage ........................... 34

7.5.11 Parramatta Road Corridor ................................. 35

7.6 Strathfield Consolidated DCP 2005 ................................ 36

7.7 Strathfield DCP No 20 (SDCP 20) .................................. 36

7.7.1 General .......................................................... 36

7.7.2 Status Purpose and Objectives ........................... 38

7.7.3 Design Principles and Considerations .................. 39



7.7.4 Roof Form ...................................................... 40

7.7.5 Visual and Acoustic Privacy ............................... 41

7.7.6 Vehicular Access and Car Parking ....................... 41

7.7.7 Stormwater Sewerage and Drainage ................... 43

7.7.8 Site Contamination .......................................... 44

7.7.9 Protection of Trees and Vegetation ..................... 44

8.0 STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK ................................ 44

8.1 The Greater Sydney Region Plan ................................... 44

8.2 Eastern City District Plan ............................................. 45

8.3 Future Transport Strategy 2056 ................................... 47

8.4 State Infrastructure Strategy 2018–2038 ....................... 47

8.5 A Plan for Growing Sydney 2036 .................................. 48

8.6 Parramatta Road Corridor Strategy ............................... 49

8.7 Parramatta Road Corridor Guidelines ............................. 50

8.8 Strathfield Local Strategic Planning Statement ................ 51

9.0 KEY ISSUES ...................................................................... 52

9.1 Existing Use Rights ..................................................... 52

9.2 Consistency with Zone Objectives ................................. 52

9.3 Height of Buildings ..................................................... 52

9.4 Floor Space Ratio ....................................................... 53

9.5 Streetscape and Character of the Area .......................... 53

9.6 Environmental Impacts and Amenity ............................. 53

9.7 Site Contamination ..................................................... 54

9.8 Protection of Trees and Vegetation ................................ 54

9.9 Economic Effect ......................................................... 54

10.0 CONCLUSION .................................................................... 54



TABLE OF ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE 1 – LOCALITY MAP

ANNEXURE 2 – AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH

ANNEXURE 3 – CADASTRAL PLAN

ANNEXURE 4 – PHOTOGRAPHIC PALETTE

ANNEXURE 5 – ZONING MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)

ANNEXURE 6 – HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)

ANNEXURE 7 – KEY SITES MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)

ANNEXURE 8 – FLOOR SPACE RATIO MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)

ANNEXURE 9 – HERITAGE MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP

ANNEXURE 10 – COPY OF SUBMISSION MADE TO STRATHFIELD

COUNCIL ON DRAFT LOCAL STRATEGIC

PLANNING STATEMENT

Although every effort has been made to ensure that the information in this document is accurate, up-to-date

and correct, the information is provided in good faith and without any express or implied warranty. Turnbull

Planning International Pty Limited, its directors, employees, contractors and consultants do not accept any

responsibility for any loss or damage occasioned by reliance upon the whole or any part of this document.



1.0 INTRODUCTION

This document has been prepared in order to provide information

and an assessment in respect of a development application (the

‘development application’ or ‘application’) for consent to the

following development (jointly and severally, the ‘proposed

development’ or ‘proposal’):

• a boundary re-adjustment of the land known as Nos 2-4 Parramatta Road, Homebush (the ‘site’ or ‘property’), so as

to amalgamate 3 lots into 2 lots, with a view to the future

southern adjoining allotment being made the subject of a separate application for development consent to the erection

of a residential flat building; and

• the carrying out of certain alterations and additions to the buildings to provide additional office and storage space, so as

to expand the capacity of the existing self-storage business.

Consideration has been given to the environmental merit of the

proposal, as well as in relation to the following principal legislation

and relevantly applicable statutory planning instruments and

subordinate policy documents:

▪ Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (‘EPAA’);

▪ Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000

(‘EPAR’);

▪ State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (‘Infrastructure SEPP’);

▪ Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour

Catchment) 2005 (‘SREP SHC’);

▪ State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 (‘SEPP Vegetation’);

▪ State Environmental Planning Policy No 19—Bushland in

Urban Areas (‘SEPP Bushland’);

▪ Strathfield Local Environmental Plan 2012 (‘SLEP’);

▪ Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan 2005

(‘SCDCP’);



▪ Strathfield Development Control Plan No 20—Guidelines for

the Siting, Design and Erection of Developments Within the Parramatta Road Corridor Area (‘SDCP 20’);

▪ A Metropolis of Three Cities: The Greater Sydney Region Plan

[also known as the Greater Sydney Region Plan] (March 2018);

▪ Eastern City District Plan (Greater Sydney Commission, March 2018 [updated]);

▪ Future Transport Strategy 2056 (NSW Government,

Transport for NSW);

▪ Building Momentum: State Infrastructure Strategy 2018–

2038 (Infrastructure NSW, 2018);

▪ A Plan for Growing Sydney (NSW Government, Planning &

Government, December 2014);

▪ Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Strategy: Precinct Transport Report (UrbanGrowth NSW, November

2016);

▪ Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Planning

and Design Guidelines: Implementation Tool Kit (UrbanGrowth NSW, November 2016);

▪ Columbia Lane Precinct Regeneration Plan (approved in 2013

as a concept plan under Part 3A of the EPAA);

▪ Strathfield 2040: Draft Local Strategic Planning Statement (Strathfield Council, March 2020); and

▪ Direction 7.3 (‘Parramatta Road Corridor Urban

Transformation Strategy’) issued by the NSW Minister for Planning to Relevant Planning Authorities under section

117(2) [sic] of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2.1 Location

The site is located on the southern side of Parramatta Road,

Homebush within a ‘brownfields’ area that is now



progressively being redeveloped into a new commercial and

residential centre.

The site is located in close proximity to the Western Motorway

and, as such, is well-connected to Greater Western Sydney.

The site’s key location on Parramatta Road enables great

access to local facilities and services. Furthermore, the

nearby Homebush train station and multiple CBD and Greater

Sydney servicing bus stops, mean the site is very well

connected to public transport links.

The site is also within close proximity of high-rise mixed use

developments, the Sydney Markets, Strathfield Plaza, other

retail centres, and Sydney Olympic Park.

The site’s key location on Parramatta Road makes it a key

contributor to the continued growth expected to occur along

the Parramatta Road Corridor. The site is located within a

short walk of Powell’s Creek Reserve and is also in close

proximity to the heritage item known as ‘Arnott’s Bridge’.

The site is situated approximately 13 kilometres from

Sydney’s CBD.

A location plan is provided at Annexure 1.

An aerial photograph is provided at Annexure 2.

A cadastral plan is provided at Annexure 3

2.2 The Site

The site, which comprises 3 separate lots, is known as Nos 2-

4 Parramatta Road, Homebush, being legally and severally

described as follows: Lot A in Deposited Plan 171468; Lot B

in Deposited Plan 171468; and Lot 1 in Deposited Plan

124584.

The total area of all 3 lots is 9084 sqm.

Columbia Lane provides access to the site from Parramatta

Road.

The site is semi-rectangular in shape, with a primary frontage

to Parramatta Road and a driveway entrance off Columbia

Lane.

The majority of the site is used, and has been so used for

over 30 years now, by KSS for the purpose of self-storage



units (refer section 2.3 [‘Self-Storage Units’] of this

document), being known as Kennards Self Storage

Homebush (‘KSS’).

2.3 Site History

The present use of the site for the purposes of self-storage is

an adaptive re-use of the former EMI Records manufacturing

facility and recording studio formerly located on the site. The

former EMI record factory and recording studio was first

established in 1926 as the Columbia Graphophone Company,

an Australian venture of the British based record company.

The building, which still stands on the corner of Parramatta

Road and Columbia Lane, was originally erected in 1921 by

Gold’s Hosiery Mills Ltd. In 1922 a private lane was built

adjacent to the factory called Golds Lane. This was later

transferred into public ownership and renamed Columbia

Lane in 1926. The recording studio and record pressing plant

were opened in that year.

The recording studio operated at Homebush until 1954 when

it was transferred to EMI’s studios in Castlereagh Street,

Sydney. In 1958 the Homebush factory was renamed EMI

Records, with the name Columbia continuing as a record

label. In 1992 the factory closed with the cessation of

production of vinyl records.

Many famous recordings were made at the Homebush studio

including ‘Our Don Bradman’ in 1930 and Sir Charles

Kingsford-Smith’s recollections of the first direct flight to

Australia in 1928.The former recording studio was used by

many Australian musicians and singers of yesteryear

including Slim Dusty who named his 100th record ‘Columbia

Lane’ as a tribute to the property.

The conversion of the former facilities and their adaptive re-

use for the purpose of self-storage units has given the

obsolete and unused building a new life. Stage 1 of the KSS

conversion was completed in 1996.

2.4 Current Use

As mentioned above, the majority of the site is used by KSS

for the purpose of self-storage units (refer section 2.3 [‘Self-

Storage Units’] of this document), being known as Kennards



Self Storage Homebush. In that regard, the existing industrial

buildings located on the front half of the site are currently

used for self-storage purposes. The rear lot namely lot B,

DP171468 is used for storage purposes and contains old

structures and buildings, which are proposed to be

demolished to create a vacant site for residential purposes in

accord with strategic planning objectives.

The KSS facility at Homebush has provision for onsite

carparking for both customers and employees. In that regard,

the proposal seeks, among other things, to improve the

existing carparking facilities by providing 28 car spaces as

well as providing larger loading and unloading facilities.

KSS facilities are designed and constructed with a high

priority being given to both building quality and landscaping.

In that regard, buildings are designed and constructed to a

high standard and are maintained similarly.

KSS facilities are professionally managed and offer a variety

of self-storage facilities. These may include commercial and

residential self-storage, document storage and retrieval, and

wine storage. In addition, KSS is now introducing larger self-

storage units at some of their facilities which are frequently

utilised by small as well as emerging businesses.

Individual self-storage units average about 9 sqm in area and

range from 1 sqm to around 27 sqm (or greater) in area.

Most customers access their respective storage spaces via

private vehicles (eg small vans, utilities and cars), delivery

vans, trucks which are generally no larger than furniture

delivery vehicles, or very occasionally smaller articulated

trucks.

KSS Homebush serves a wide range of customers including

residents of Strathfield, Homebush, Concord, Burwood,

Concord West, North Strathfield, Ashfield, Five Dock,

Newington, Croydon Park and Sydney.

The self-storage facility provides storage units of various

sizes, designed to suit virtually any storage requirement. The

facility offers 24-hour access to clientele and is secured by all

of the following:

• perimeter fencing;

• individually alarmed spaces with back-to-base

monitoring;



• CCTV surveillance throughout the facility with 18

cameras;

• computer-controlled PIN access in and out of the

facility; and

• security lighting throughout the facility.

The trading hours for the retail sale of boxes are as follows:

On days other than Public Holidays

• 8:30am to 6:00pm, Monday to Friday;

• 9:00am to 5:00pm, Saturday;

• 10:00am to 4:00pm, Sunday.

On Public Holidays the times are 10am to 4pm, excluding

Anzac Day, Good Friday, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, and

New Year’s Day (on which days the facility is closed).

Photographs of the site and the surrounding streetscape are

provided at Annexure 4.

2.5 Self-Storage Units

Self-service storage facilities (‘self-storage units’) have been

extant in Australia for over 50 years.

The expression ‘self-storage unit’ is defined in the Dictionary

to SLEP as follows:

self-storage units means premises that consist of individual

enclosed compartments for storing goods or materials (other than hazardous or offensive goods or materials).

Note. Self-storage units are a type of storage premises—see the definition of that term in this Dictionary.

The expression ‘storage premises’ is defined in the Dictionary

to SLEP as follows:

storage premises means a building or place used for the

storage of goods, materials, plant or machinery for commercial

purposes and where the storage is not ancillary to any industry,

business premises or retail premises on the same parcel of land,

and includes self-storage units, but does not include a heavy

industrial storage establishment or a warehouse or distribution

centre.

Thus, the use ‘self-storage units’ is properly described as a

species of the genus ‘storage premises’.



Self-storage units provide storage facilities for individuals and

small businesses, with there being a variety of storage unit

types to which there is easy access.

The demand for self-storage appears to be ever-increasing

as our population grows. More and more people are living in

apartment style living arrangements. As such, their storage

requirements cannot always be met in individual apartments.

Self-storage units ‘fill the gap’, so to speak. This is quite

important in light of the ever-increasing costs of residential

floor space as well as the demands for smaller dwellings.

Self-storage units also assist those temporarily working

overseas as well as those who have recently sold their

residential property but are yet to move into their new abode.

Self-storage units also provide flexible, convenient and

affordable storage facilities for those who work from home as

well as other small and medium size businesses.

In addition, self-storage units provide for the needs of

business owners and employees who can store goods without

the inconvenience and expense of having to travel distances

to large stock centres or having to purchase goods regularly

due to a lack of storage space on business premises. Self-

storage units also provide businesses with the flexibility of

extra floor space in a practical and inexpensive way, whether

in the short term or otherwise.

In short, self-storage units provide a most valuable facility to

the local community and the wider public, offering quasi-

permanent, temporary or transitional storage for local

residents and others.

3.0 RELEVANT DEVELOPMENT HISTORY

On 14 February 1997 Council granted building approval in respect

of Building Application BA97/29 ‘to construct the second floor (Level

3-W3) of the western building into a ‘self-storage facility’ at the

site.

In addition, pursuant to an application having been made under the

Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW), Council

has provided copies of the following notices of determination for

development applications (all such applications having been

determined by way of the granting of development consent) in

relation to the site:



Approval

or Consent

Description of Development or Activity

Consented to or Approved

BA 266/95

Demolition works and creation of a manoeuvring area

BA 343/95

Internal alterations and installation of roller doors

(southern elevation of existing western building)

BA 366/95

Internal alterations to existing building [deferred commencement approval]

DA 95/103

Conversion of existing factory buildings into self-storage facilities

BA 96/40

Conversion of existing factory building into self-storage facilities: east building (ground floor); west

building (ground and first floors)

Demolition Approval 96/179

Demolition of existing single storey brick and fibre cement storage buildings at front of site [deferred commencement approval]

DA 96/63

Refurbishment of existing building located at rear of site to provide an office on first floor area to be used

in conjunction with the approved use of self-storage units

BA 97/29

Construction of second floor (Level 3-W3) of the western building into a self-storage facility [deferred

commencement approval]

BA 6/99

Internal alterations to the commercial building

Table 1 - Relevant Development History

The abovementioned consents and approvals (in particular, DA

95/103, BA 96/40 and DA 96/63) are directly relevant to the matter

of ‘existing use rights’. (See, in that regard, section 6.0 [‘Existing

Use Rights’] of this document.)

4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

As mentioned in section 1.0 (‘Introduction’) of this document, the

proposed development involves:

• a boundary re-adjustment of the land comprising the

site, so as to amalgamate 3 lots into 2 lots, with a view

to the future southern adjoining allotment being in due

course the subject of a separate application for



development consent to the erection of a proposed

future residential flat building; and

• the carrying out of certain alterations and additions to

the buildings on the site, so as to expand the self-

storage business conducted on the site by providing

additional storage space and office space.

As respects the boundary re-adjustment, there is a proposal

(which, as mentioned, does not form part of the present

development application and proposal) for the future southern

adjoining allotment to be the site of a proposed future residential

flat building.

The proposed alterations and additions include the following

building and other works:

• the demolition of the buildings situated at the rear of

the site whilst retaining the existing front half of the

site (including maintaining the ‘saw’ façade along

Columbia Lane);

• the construction of a new KSS storage facility toward

the middle of the site, the height of which will be a

maximum of 30m;

• the construction of associated lifts;

• the construction of a new showroom;

• the construction of a new meeting area and toilet

facilities;

• the provision of car parking spaces for 28 cars as well

as new loading and unloading facilities;

• the construction of a new storage area;

• the carrying out of necessary safety and security

upgrades as required;

• associated landscaping works and provision for open

space; and

• the carrying out of fire upgrades and associated

construction upgrades.

The demolition of the buildings situated at the rear of the site and

the proposed boundary adjustment will result in the creation of a

new vacant allotment.

For additional detail please refer to the architectural drawings, the

schedule of colours and materials and other consultant reports

which accompany the development application.



5.0 COLUMBIA LANE PRECINCT CONCEPT PLAN

In 2012 KSS and surrounding businesses/developers collectively

submitted the Columbia Lane Precinct Concept Plan (the ‘Concept

Plan’) under Part 3A of the EPAA.

The Concept Plan (later to be approved in the form of the Concept

Approval [MP10_0143]), which applied to Nos 2-20 Parramatta

Road and Nos 11-13 Columbia Lane, Homebush, involved six key

sites within the area and postulated a variety of mixed use

developments consisting of residential, retail, commercial and

community uses, public open space, basement car parking for 809

car spaces and, most significantly and relevantly, the retention of

the existing KSS building and continued use of the facility. (For

further information please refer to the PAC report.)

The proposal related to six building blocks across the Columbia

Precinct area, one being the existing KSS facility. Due to objections

from Council as well as from surrounding councils, the matter was

referred to the ‘PAC’ for its review and determination. The Director

General’s Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) considered the

scheme in relation the subject of the Concept Plan in relation to the

relevantly applicable statutory controls and the various submissions

made in relation to the scheme. The overall recommendation was

to approve the Concept Plan subject to conditions. The key issues

raised were as follows:

• strategic context;

• built form and urban design, including Height and FSR; • staging of development;

• residential amenity, including future noise impacts on residence;

• transport, access and parking;

• open space; and • other issues including street activation, landowners’

consent (multiple authorities), section 94 [now s. 7.11] EPAA contributions, ecologically sustainable

development (ESD), flooding and stormwater management, heritage, contamination and adaptable

housing.

On 7 May 2013 the PAC approved the Concept Plan, and granted a

Concept Approval in relation thereto, under the now repealed Part

3A of the EPAA. Insofar as the Concept Plan is concerned, and the

way the proposal relates to our client, the Minister identified that



the land use of a ‘storage facility’ by Kennards Self Storage had the

benefit of existing use rights under the EPAA and SLEP,

notwithstanding that the property was zoned part B4 and part R4

in which zones ‘storage facilities’ are prohibited.

The Preferred Project, which was ultimately granted approval by

the PAC, included seven residential and one commercial tower with

a maximum height of 21 storeys, providing a total of 650 residential

and serviced apartments, retail/commercial tenancies equating to

4,540 sqm, a KSS facility, community facilities, extension to George

Street, a waiting lane to Parramatta Road and public domain works.

The approved concept had an FSR of 3.66:1.

Prior to the repeal of Part 3A of the EPAA by the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Amendment (Part 3A Repeal) Act 2011

(the ‘Part 3A Repeal Act’), all major projects, including a

subcategory of critical infrastructure projects, were assessed and

approved under the Part 3A EPAA provisions rather than under Part

4 or Part 5 of the EPAA. The Planning Minister was the consent

authority for all major projects and critical infrastructure.

When the Part 3A Repeal Act commenced, Part 3A of the EPAA was

replaced with two separate regimes for what the Government then

described as ‘genuinely’ State significant projects:

• the State significant development (SSD) regime,

applicable to private sector development and some classes of public sector development; and

• the State significant infrastructure (SSI) regime,

applicable to other classes of public sector development, being an approval regime in a new Part

5.1 of the Planning Act and is very similar to the Part 3A regime.

Schedule 6A to the Part 3A Repeal Act contained transitional

arrangements consequent upon the repeal of Part 3A of the EPAA.

By virtue of Schedule 6A(3)(1) to the Part 3A Repeal Act, Part 3A

of the EPAA, as in force immediately before the repeal of that Part

and as modified under Schedule 6A after that repeal, continues to

apply to and in respect of a ‘transitional Part 3A project’. In our

firm’s letter to Council of 27 September 2019 we explained why, in

our opinion, the Concept Approval is a ‘transitional Part 3A project’

which may be continued.



We also explained in our letter of 27 September 2019 how it is the

case that the Concept Approval has not lapsed.

Now, in 2017 the applicant in respect of the land known as Nos 11-

17 Columbia Lane, Homebush lodged a planning proposal

consistent with the Concept Approval. More significantly, however,

the following developments took place:

1. Development Consents DA2014/021 and DA2014/022 (in respect of Nos 6-8 and 10-18 Parramatta Road,

Homebush), respectively, were granted for the demolition of existing structures down to the concrete

hardstand slab and parking area on 12 March 2014,

which consents were acted upon.

2. Development Consent DA No 2014/066 (in respect of Nos 6-18 Parramatta Road, Homebush), granted by

the Sydney East Joint Regional Planning Panel (and recommended by Council) for the carrying out of site

remediation works, construction of an extension to George Street and dedication of the road to Council,

boundary re-alignment and road widening works to Parramatta Road and the construction of a mixed use

development comprising basement parking for 568 vehicles, ground level commercial floor space fronting

Parramatta Road with 430 residential apartments above comprising 132 x 1 bedroom, 272 x 2 bedroom

and 26 x 3 bedroom apartments across six buildings

with heights ranging between 8 and 14 storeys and consolidation and stratum subdivision of the site,

which consents were acted upon.

In its instrument of decision as respects DA No 2014/066, the

Sydney East Joint Regional Planning Panel noted, in its reasons for

its decision, that the Panel had received legal advice confirming that

the panel was able to deal with the development application,

notwithstanding its variance from Concept Approval MP 10-0143,

‘which was for a much larger development, the site of which

[nevertheless] included the subject land’.

The legal effect of the granting of development consent to the

abovementioned development applications should be obvious to all

concerned, namely, that the PAC’s approval of the Concept Plan has

not lapsed (refer Condition A4 of the Concept Approval of 7 May

2013).



The bottom line, as we see it, is that the Concept Approval, together

with the Concept Plan and scheme embodied therein, is alive and

extant under the otherwise repealed (but still taken to be in force

in certain circumstances) Part 3A of the EPAA. That means that the

provisions contained in the repealed Part 3A of the EPAA are still

applicable to the Concept Approval and the approved Concept Plan,

and Schedule 6A to the Part 3A Repeal Act plays a major role in

establishing the permissibility of the KSS proposal under the

repealed (but in key respects still operational) Part 3A of the EPAA.

The project, the subject of the Concept Approval also ties in with

Strathfield Council’s concern as respects the issue of ‘staged

development’, as the Concept Plan directly outlines that a

development of the scale in question will need to be undertaken in

stages, specifically, in the approved five stages. In that regard, the

staged development is identified in the stamped Concept Approval

plans from 2013, which relevantly provide for the front half of the

KSS property to be developed first, followed by the second half as

a residential tower.

We respectfully submit to Council that there is no legal or planning

impediment to the staged development of the site as provided for

in the Concept Approval granted by the then PAC in 2013.

Now, we are aware that Council, having apparently sought legal

advice on the matter, is of the view that the Concept Plan for mixed

use development of the Columbia Precinct ‘was never activated’ and

that, as a result, the ‘consent’ [sic] for the development is

considered to have lapsed: refer email dated 10 February 2020

from Louise Gibson, Senior Planner, to Nic Najar, Town Planner, of

our firm.

In the email, Council’s Senior Planner then stated that the future

development of the site would therefore need to rely upon existing

use rights. In that regard, please refer to Section 6.0 (‘Existing Use

Rights’) of this document.

6.0 EXISTING USE RIGHTS

Even if we be wrong in our conclusion that that the Concept

Approval, together with the Concept Plan and scheme embodied

therein, is alive and extant under the otherwise repealed (but still

taken to be in force in certain circumstances) Part 3A of the EPAA,



there is a fallback position, namely, that the continued use of the

site for the purpose of self-storage units has the benefit of existing

use rights.

Now, as Council is aware, an existing use is defined in section 4.65

of the EPAA as follows:

(a) the use of a building, work or land for a lawful purpose

immediately before the coming into force of an

environmental planning instrument which would, but for this Division, have the effect of prohibiting that use, and

(b) the use of a building, work or land—

(i) for which development consent was granted before the commencement of a provision of an environmental planning instrument having the

effect of prohibiting the use, and

(ii) that has been carried out, within one year after the date on which that provision commenced, in accordance with the terms of the consent

and to such an extent as to ensure (apart from that provision) that the development consent would not lapse.

A use will be lawful when:

either

the use commenced at a time when there was no relevantly

applicable requirement to obtain development consent in

respect of the use,

or

there was such a requirement and development consent was

duly obtained in respect of the use.

Now, what follows is, we respectfully submit, most important. In

light of the preponderance of judicial authority on the subject of

existing uses, and the information available to us, we are of the

view that the whole of the property has the benefit of existing use

rights for the purpose of self-storage units. In that regard, the task

involved in ascertaining the land the subject of existing use rights

has been held to require an analysis whether the proposed use can

be properly regarded as part of the same ‘unit’ applicable to the

existing use. In Steedman v Baulkham Hills Shire Council [No 1]

(1991) 87 LGERA 26 Meagher JA said at p 27:



It is also clear enough, on the authority of these cases, that the

land subject to the determination should be capable of

identification as far as possible in a way which avoids detailed

investigation and complicated disputes of fact; that land can be

used for a lawful purpose without there being an actual physical

use of it; that if the land is rightly regarded as a unit and it is

found that part of its area was physically used for the purpose in

question it follows that the land was used for that purpose; and

that if some part of the land was used for mining or extractive

purposes, the fact that the balance of the land was held in reserve

and intended for future use does not derogate from the fact that

in law the whole of the land was used for mining or extractive

purposes.

Similarly, in Doueihi v Randwick City Council [2005] NSWLEC 527

Lloyd J held at [33]:

In determining whether or not the whole of [the subject property]

enjoys existing use rights, the Court must adopt a broad and liberal

approach: Boyts Radio [North Sydney Municipal Council v Boyts

Radio and Electrical Pty Ltd (1998) 67 LGRA 344], Kirby P (with

whom Samuels and Priestley JJA agreed). …

See also Parramatta City Council v Bolton [1974] 2 NSWLR 241;

(1974) 33 LGRA 303.

The ‘bottom line’ is that the judicial authorities make it clear that

the area of land the subject of the existing use should be identified

in a way which avoids detailed investigations and complicated

disputes of facts.

In our view, there is sufficient probative material for Council to be

satisfied as to the existence of extant existing use rights in respect

of the site for the purpose of, relevantly, storage premises. The

current development proposal is consistent with the previously

consented to purposes. We also wish to point out that there has

been no abandonment of the use of the site for the purpose of self-

storage units.

As Council is very much aware, an existing use may that has not

been abandoned may be continued and, except as otherwise

provided by the EPAR, be enlarged, expanded or intensified, altered

or extended, rebuilt, or changed to another use, but only if that

other use is a use that may be carried out with or without

development consent under the EPA Act.

Even the most cursory perusal of the Table in section 3.0 (‘Relevant

Development History’) leads to the conclusion that the various

consents and approvals granted for the purpose of a self-storage



facility on the site, or for purposes associated with that use, would

not have been granted by Council unless Council was satisfied that

it was lawful for it, as the relevant consent authority, to grant

consent or approval, as the case may be, to the development or

activity in question. Particular reliance is placed on the following

consents and approvals:

1. DA 95/103 - Conversion of existing factory buildings into self-storage facilities

2. BA 96/40 - Conversion of existing factory building into

self-storage facilities: east building (ground floor);

west building (ground and first floors)

3. DA 96/63 - Refurbishment of existing building located at rear of site to provide an office on first floor area to

be used in conjunction with the approved [sic] use of self-storage units.

In the absence of evidence (that is, probative material) to the

contrary—and we are not aware of any such evidence— the several development consents and building and other approvals granted in

respect of the site for or in connection with the purpose/use of a self-storage facility (self-storage units) are valid and must be

presumed to be valid unless and until declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction (relevantly, the Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales). Accordingly, the consents and approvals

continue to operate according to their tenor and in accordance with their combined terms: see Swadling v Sutherland Shire Council

(1994) 82 LGERA 431 at 436; Omaya Investments Pty Limited v Dean Street Holdings Pty Limited (No 5) [2020] NSWLEC 9 at [81]

per Duggan J.

The bottom line is this: the applicant has existing use rights in respect of the entire site to use and otherwise carry out

development on the site for the purpose of, relevantly, self-storage units, being a species of the genus ‘storage premises’, subject to

and in accordance with the existing use provisions of the EPAA and EPAR.



7.0 STATUTORY PLANNING FRAMEWORK

7.1 SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007

The Infrastructure SEPP applies to all infrastructural

developments across the state of NSW and is therefore

relevant in respect of the subject proposal.

The proposed development will deliver a positive

infrastructural benefit to the Homebush area through the

provision of storage space for adjacent residential

developments and will be of high design quality. In our

opinion, the proposed development is therefore wholly

consistent with the aims of the Policy.

7.2 SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The subject site has been identified to lie within the

jurisdiction of the Sydney Harbour Catchment Regional

Environmental Plan.

The proposed development will meet the aims of the Plan in

ensuring that the catchments and waterways of Sydney

Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained

as healthy and sustainable public and natural assets. We

therefore submit that the proposed development is consistent

with the Plan and deserving of support from the consent

authority for this reason.

7.3 SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

Previously an industrial area, the subject site is largely

unvegetated. Therefore, although the Vegetation SEPP is

applicable to the subject site, it is not relevant to the proposal

as no native vegetation will be affected. Please refer to the

architectural plans and arborist report for greater detail.

7.4 SEPP No 19—Bushland in Urban Areas

The subject site has been identified to lie within the

jurisdiction of SEPP No 19. The proposed development will

not disturb any bushland and no remnant communities of

native flora or fauna have been observed on the site. Should

the development uncover any such communities, the

appropriate actions for their preservation will be undertaken.



Further, the proposed development will be carried out in

accordance with the recommendations contained with the

arborist report that has been prepared and accompanies the

development application.

7.5 Strathfield Local Environmental Plan 2012

7.5.1 Permissibility

Under SLEP, the site is zoned part R4 ‘High Density

Residential’ and part B4 ‘Mixed Use’.

The proposed development (other than the boundary

re-adjustment) involves the carrying out of certain

works on the front half of the site which, for the most

part, is zoned B4 ‘Mixed Use’.

Be that as it may, ‘storage premises’ is a purpose that

is nominately prohibited in both the R4 High Density

Residential zone and the B4 Mixed Use Zone.

Despite the prohibited nature of the proposed

development, an existing use (which, we respectfully

submit, is the case here) that has not been abandoned

may be continued and, except as otherwise provided

by the EPAR, be enlarged, expanded or intensified,

altered or extended, rebuilt, or changed to another

use, (refer clause 41(1) EPAR) but only if that other

use is a use that may be carried out with or without

development consent under the EPA Act.

An extract from the SLEP Zoning Map is provided at

Annexure 5.

7.5.2 Zone Objectives

As mentioned above, the proposed development

(other than the boundary re-adjustment) involves the

carrying out of certain works in the front half of the

site which for the most part is zoned B4 Mixed Use.

Accordingly, that Zone will be considered first.

The objectives of the B4 Mixed Use zone are as follows

(refer land use table, B4 Zone, item 1):

1 Objectives of zone

• 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.

In our opinion, the proposed development is a

compatible land use to the uses that are ordinarily

conducted in the B4 Mixed Use Zone, despite the

prohibited nature of the subject use. In addition, the

proposed development will be carried out in an

accessible location such as will maximise public

transport patronage.

The site has strategic locational importance. In that

regard, an important locational benefit of the

Parramatta Road Corridor Area is access to public

transport. The area adjoins the main western railway

line and Parramatta Road has been identified as a

route for a bus transitway between Strathfield and

Parramatta.

The use will facilitate future growth planned for the

Parramatta Corridor. This is achieved in this case by

provision of increased storage space, to meet the

storage requirements of future residential and

commercial users in the area. Providing local storage

in strategic locations will benefit future growth within

the LGA, and will assist Council in meeting its future

growth targets.

Finally, additional employment opportunities will arise

for locals and surrounding businesses, should the

proposal be granted consent.

In our opinion, the development proposal is consistent

with the B4 Mixed Use Zone objectives.

The R4 High Density Residential Zone is relevant to

the proposed boundary adjustment (that is, the

subdivision aspect of the proposed development).



As previously mentioned, the intention of the

boundary adjustment is to amalgamate 3 lots into 2

lots, with a view to the future southern adjoining

allotment being in due course, made the subject of a

separate application for development consent to the

erection of a residential flat building. However, insofar

as the present development application is concerned,

subdivision simpliciter is the relevant component of

the proposed development in addition to the proposed

alterations and additions.

With that in mind, the objectives of the R4 High

Density Residential Zone are as follows (refer land use

table, R4 Zone, item 1):

1 Objectives of zone

• To provide for the housing needs of the

community within a high density residential

environment.

• To provide a variety of housing types within a

high density residential environment.

• To enable other land uses that provide facilities

or services to meet the day to day needs of

residents.

Now, before considering these zone objectives, it

should be kept in mind that, in planning law, although

a use must be for a purpose (see Chamwell v

Strathfield Council [2007] NSWLEC 114; (2007) 151

LGERA 400), it has been recently held that subdivision

does not involve any use of land, that a use must

provide the foundation for which the purpose of a

development is proposed to be effected, and that in

the absence of a use there can be no purpose: see

Williams v Shellharbour City Council [2020] NSWLEC

3 per Moore J. Thus, subdivision simpliciter has been

held to be not for a purpose. That needs to be kept in

mind when considering the applicability of the R4 Zone

objectives.

The subdivision, legally speaking, is not for a purpose

per se. However, what is proposed in due course with

the future southern adjoining allotment will help to



provide for the housing needs of the community within

a high density residential environment.

In addition, the future planned development would be

compatible with high density residential and mixed use

developments in the area as regards potential amenity

impacts. Further, the ability to secure additional

storage space is especially significant to occupants of

residential flat buildings as adequate storage space is

often not available within apartment developments.

What is proposed in due course with the future

southern adjoining allotment would provide a most

appropriate housing type within what is increasingly a

high density residential environment.

The third dot point objective (which seeks to enable

other land uses that provide facilities or services to

meet the day to day needs of residents) is not directly

relevant to the subdivision aspect of the proposed

development.

In our opinion, the relevant aspects of the

development proposal is consistent with such of the

R4 High Density Residential Zone objectives as are of

relevance to the subject-matter of the proposal.

In short, we respectfully submit that the proposed

development is compatible with high density

residential and mixed use developments in the area.

We also note that the development will generate

minimal waste, noise emission will be minimal, and

there will be little or no pollution of land and air arising

from the carrying out of the proposed development.

The existing development and proposed alterations

and additions are in our view compatible with uses that

are ordinarily conducted in the B4 Mixed Use Zone,

despite the prohibited nature of the subject use under

the land use table.

7.5.3 Height of Buildings

Clause 4.3 (‘Height of buildings’) is a principal

development standard of SLEP, controlling the height

of buildings.



The objectives of clause 4.3 are as follows (refer

clause 4.3(1), SLEP):

• to ensure that any development is of a height that

is generally compatible with or which improves the

appearance of the existing area,

• to encourage a consolidation pattern that leads to

the optimum sustainable capacity height for the

area,

• to achieve a diversity of small and large

development options.

By virtue of clause 4.3(2) of SLEP, the height of a

building on any land is not to exceed the maximum

height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings

Map.

The site is within Area R2 as shown on, relevantly,

SLEP Height of Buildings Map—Sheet HOB tile 004.

Area R2 provides for what is, subject to the operation

of clause 4.6 of SLEP, a maximum building height of

22m pursuant to clause 4.3(2) of SLEP.

Despite this, as the site lies within ‘Area 1’ and is

identified as ‘part of’ Key Site 93 as shown on,

relevantly, SLEP Key Sites Map–Sheet KYS tile 004, a

maximum building height of 32 m applies to the site

pursuant to clause 4.3A of SLEP for the Parramatta

Road Corridor.

The proposed alterations and additions will not exceed

the relevantly applicable maximum height level of

32m. Specifically, the proposed height of the building

will be approximately 30.02m, as depicted on sheet

16 of the submitted drawings.

In respect of the proposed height, the built form

achieves compatibility with the surrounding

developments, as is demonstrated in the submitted

photo montage prepared by MCHP Architects,

accompanying this statement.

The alterations and additions are located in the south-

eastern corner of the proposed ‘self-storage’ lot. This

seeks to ensure that the new building does not create

unnecessary overshadowing and amenity impact

upon the rear residential lot.



Furthermore, focussing the building mass in this

corner minimises amenity impacts to the surrounding

developments as it will only overlook a rail line and

other industrial land-uses, as opposed to residential

development. By virtue of its height and mass, the

building also acts to provide screening and a noise

barrier from the rail line.

An extract from the SLEP Height of Buildings Map is


7.5.4 Floor Space Ratio

The maximum floor space ratio for a building on any

land is not to exceed the floor space ratio shown for

the land on the SLEP Floor Space Ratio Map (refer

clause 4.4(2), SLEP).

The site is identified as being within Area S2 on the

SLEP Floor Space Ratio Map [Sheet FSR_004]. Area SA

dictates a maximum floor space ratio of 1.65:1.

However, the site is also identified as being within

Area 1 on the SLEP Floor Space Ratio Map and part of

Key Site 93 as shown on, relevantly, the SLEP Key

Sites Map [Sheet KYS tile 004].

An extract from the SLEP Key Sites Map is provided at

Annexure 7.

Clause 4.4A (‘Exceptions to floor space ratio

(Parramatta Road Corridor)) of SLEP relevantly

provides that, despite clause 4.4, the floor space ratio

of a building on land in ‘Area 1’ identified on the

SLEP Floor Space Ratio Map that comprises a key site

shown in Column 1 of the Table to the clause and is

identified as a key site on the SLEP Key Sites Map is

not to exceed the floor space ratio shown opposite in

Column 2.

What this means is that a maximum floor space ratio

of 2.7:1 applies to the site by virtue of clause 4.4A of

SLEP.

The proposed development will have a floor space

ratio of 3.11:1. A written request under clause 4.6 of

SLEP has therefore been prepared and accompanies

the development application.



The objectives of clause 4.4 are as follows (refer

clause 4.4(1)):

(a) to ensure that dwellings are in keeping with the

built form character of the local area,

(b) to provide consistency in the bulk and scale of

new dwellings in residential areas,

(c) to minimise the impact of new development on

the amenity of adjoining properties,

(d) to minimise the development on heritage

conservation areas and heritage items,

(e) in relation to Strathfield Town Centre,

(i) to encourage consolidation and a

sustainable integrated land use and

transport development around key public

transport infrastructure, and

(ii) to provide space for the strategic

implementation of economic, social and

cultural goals that create an active, lively

and people-orientated development,

(f) in relation to Parramatta Road Corridor – to

encourage a sustainable consolidation pattern

that optimises floor space capacity in the

corridor.

The proposed development is consistent with such of

the objectives of clause 4.4 of SLEP as are of

relevance to the development. Specifically, the

proposal is aligned with the objectives relating to the

sustainable consolidation of the Parramatta Road

Corridor (refer clause 4.4(1)(f)).

The proposal involves the construction of additional

storage and office space in the south-eastern corner

of the ‘storage lot’. The additional space results in an

increased FSR for the site. Although the site benefits

from additional permitted FSR, the proposal exceeds

the maximum allowable of 2.7:1 and proposes

3:11:1. This results in a numerical exceedance of

15.2%.

In respect of the exceedance of the relevant FSR

control, we submit that it is acceptable for the

following reasons:



• The proposal provides a compatible building

bulk and scale with that of surrounding

developments.

• The building bulk is centralised to the south-

eastern corner of the ‘self-storage lot’ away

from residential developments and which

mitigates potential amenity issues.

• The design of the proposed development also

minimises amenity impacts through appropriate

massing.

• Impacts such as overshadowing, a ‘feeling of

oppression’, privacy and other amenity issues

are satisfactorily mitigated (and are further

addressed in the clause 4.6 written

submission).

• Impacts on the surrounding heritage items;

‘railway bridge with Arnott’s sign over road’ and

‘railway viaduct over Powell’s Creek’ are,

according to the HIA prepared by GBA Heritage,

negligible in nature;

• A compatible FSR, as recommended from the

PRCUTS Homebush Section 7.9 ‘recommended

planning controls’ in which the site is identified

to be ‘X’ (as shown below), allows for an FSR of

4:1, and 5:1 for surrounding sites.

Figure 1 – PRCUTS Extract



• The works will assist in the renewal of the area,

rejuvenating a site greatly in need of upgrading.

The proposed boundary adjustment will serve

to recognise strategic planning goals for

residential development.

• The works will contribute positively to the area,

enhancing the visual quality of the site.

• There will be no appreciable environmental or

amenity related impact from the extra massing

which, for the most part, will be indiscernible

from Parramatta Road.

For more detail, please refer to the clause 4.6 written

request.

An extract from the SLEP Floor Space Ratio Map is


7.5.5 Development Near Zone Boundaries

As the site is located within 10m of two different zone

boundaries, in fact spanning across two different

zones, Clause 5.3 ‘Development near zone boundaries’

of SLEP applies to the site. The objective of this

clauses reads as follows (refer clause 5.3(1), SLEP):

The objective of this clause is to provide flexibility where

the investigation of a site and its surroundings reveals

that a use allowed on the other side of a zone boundary

would enable a more logical and appropriate

development of the site and be compatible with the

planning objectives and land uses for the adjoining zone.

The site is zoned part B4 and part R4 and is

surrounded by SP2 zoned land. The site benefits from

existing use rights, allowing for the continued ‘use’ of

the facility, with consent. The proposal facilitates a

continued appropriate landuse and largely aligns with

the zone boundary, for the future purpose of erection

of a high density residential flat building.

In our view, the application is consistent with the

above control.

An extract from the SLEP Zoning Map is provided at

Annexure 5.



7.5.6 Heritage Conservation

As the site is located within close proximity of two

heritage items, clause 5.10 ‘Heritage conservation’ of

SLEP applies to the site. The objectives of the clause

are as follows (refer clause 5.10, SLEP):

(a) to conserve the environmental heritage of Strathfield,

(b) to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items

and heritage conservation areas, including associated

fabric, settings and views,

(c) to conserve archaeological sites,

(d) to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places

of heritage significance.

A Heritage Impact Assessment has been prepared by

GBA Heritage to accompany this application. The HIA

determines that the proposed development is within

close proximity of two heritage listed sites, under

schedule 5 of the SLEP. The HIA determines;

Although the subject site is not heritage listed nor

located in a HCA, it is adjacent to and in the vicinity of

two heritage items (l29 & I34) listed on Schedule 5 of

the Strathfield LEP 2012 as ‘Railway bridge with Arnott’s

sign over road’ and ‘Railway Viaduct over Powell’s Creek’

respectively.

As such, the HIA assesses the impact on the

surrounding heritage items, and concludes that the

proposal has minimal impact for the following reasons:

• As there is no significant and historic views to the

Railway Viaduct over Powell’s Creek from the subject

site, the proposed development is considered to be

acceptable, having no adverse impact on this heritage

listed item (I34) which is located at the southern end

of the allotment.

• Views to Railway bridge Arnott’s sign over road are

currently extensively impacted by high rise residential

buildings in the area.

• The proposed development is set well back from

Parramatta Road, thus would not obscure views to

Railway bridge Arnott’s sign over road on both sides of

the bridge.



• The proposed development will have no physical

intervention into any site features contained within the

heritage items in the vicinity of the site.

In our view, the proposal is consistent with the

surrounding urban heritage, and creates minimal

impact on these items, and does not detract from their

significance. In our view also, the application is worthy

of support from a heritage perspective. For additional

information please refer to the HIA that accompanies

this application.

An extract from the SLEP heritage Map is provided at

Annexure 9.

7.5.7 Acid Sulfate Soils

As the site is identified to be within a Class 5 Acid

Sulfate Soil’s area under the SLEP, clause 6.1 Acid

Sulfate Soils applies to the proposal. The objectives of

the clause read as follows:

The objective of this clause is to ensure that

development does not disturb, expose or drain acid

sulfate soils and cause environmental damage.

The proposal does involve some excavation associated

with the demolition and for construction of the

structural slab and support peers. The proposed

excavation works are expected to create a minimal

environmental impact.

In our opinion, the proposal is consistent with the

objectives of the clause. Furthermore, relevant control

measures will be undertaken during construction to

minimise any runoff associated with the works,

specifically to minimise impacts on the surrounding

Powell’s Creek. The applicant would of course submit

to conditions in this regard.

7.5.8 Earthworks

As the proposal involves earth works and demolition,

clause 6.2 of SLEP is relevantly applicable to the

proposal. The objective of the clause reads as follows;

The objective of this clause is to ensure that earthworks

for which development consent is required will not have



a detrimental impact on environmental functions and

processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items

or features of the surrounding land.

The works are expected to have a minimal impact on

the surrounding environment and land uses during the

construction process, however, relevant measures, as

detailed in the sediment control plan, waste

management plan and construction management

plan, will be undertaken to ensure the surrounding

environment is protected.

Subject to compliance with these plans, the

construction process will comply with the objectives of

the control. For additional information, please refer to

the accompanying documentation.

7.5.9 Essential Services

The proposed development will ensure that

appropriate essential services of water supply,

electricity supply and sewage disposal, appropriate

facilities for waste disposal and recycling and

stormwater management, and vehicular access are

maintained on the site in accordance with clause 6.4

of SLEP.

7.5.10 Erection or Display of Signage

The proposal involves the erection and display of

business identification signage for the proposed KSS

extension. The proposal involves the illuminated KSS

‘corporate logo’ displayed on the north, south, east

and west elevations plus display of the KSS ‘Padlock’

logo in an illuminated sign on the east and west

elevations of the proposed extension.

Due to the above, clause 6.6 ‘Erection or display of

signage’ of SLEP applies to the proposal. The clause

states:

Before granting development consent for development

that involves the erection or display of signage, the

consent authority must be satisfied that the signage—

(a) is compatible with the desired amenity and visual

character of the area, and



(b) provides effective communication in suitable

locations, and

(c) is of a high quality design and finish.

The proposal incorporates compatible signage in

suitable locations that will create minimal visual

impact. The proposed signage will be consistent with

the form and appearance of existing building signage.

The site has been used by KSS for over 25 years with

similar signage, using the same colour scheme. In

proposing similar signage the proposal maintains

consistency with the existing character of the locality,

including adjacent heritage items.

The signage creates a synergy with the proposed built

form, consistent with the KSS brand, and which has

been a ‘flag-ship’ building at the entrance of the

Parramatta Corridor in Homebush for many years.

The signage will not use reflective materials or

substances that might be perceived as nuisances to

road users and the surrounding community.

For additional information, please refer to the

architectural drawings, colour scheme documents and

HIA.

7.5.11 Parramatta Road Corridor

Clause 6.9 of SLEP relates to additional provisions for

development in the Parramatta Road Corridor. The

objectives of clause 6.8 are as follows (refer clause 6.9

(1), SLEP):

(a) to encourage a mix of commercial and residential

land uses,

(b) to encourage the integration of developments that

require large floor areas with other land uses.

The proposed development is aligned with the visions

and objectives for development along the Parramatta

Road Corridor and will enhance the level of amenity

provided to residential and other commercial land uses

in the surrounding area. Additionally, the proposal

facilitates a new allotment, that is intended for future

use high rise residential development. As such the



proposal is consistent with the objectives referred to

above.

7.6 Strathfield Consolidated DCP 2005

Strathfield Consolidated Development Control Plan 2005

(SCDCP) applies to all land to which SLEP applies, excluding

land that is covered by site-specific development control

plans.

SCDCP was adopted by Council on 4 April 2006 and came into

force on 3 May 2006. The development control plan is a

comprehensive document that contains multiple parts to

address different land uses and development matters.

Strathfield Development Control Plan No 20, ‘Guidelines for

the Siting, Design and Erection of Developments Within the

Parramatta Road Corridor Area’ (SDCP 20), is one of four site

specific development control plans and this also applies to the

site. Accordingly, the provisions of SDCP 20, to the extent to

which they are relevant to the proposed development, are

addressed below.

7.7 Strathfield DCP No 20 (SDCP 20)

7.7.1 General

Strathfield Development Control Plan No 20—

Guidelines for the Siting, Design and Erection of

Developments Within the Parramatta Road Corridor

Area (SDCP 20) is a site-specific development control

plan.

A Redevelopment Strategy Masterplan for the

Parramatta Road Corridor Area has been formulated.

The plan encompasses objectives, standards and

controls for both public and private land. The

Masterplan objectives, strategies and controls

relating to private land form the basis of SDCP 20.

This section of this document will address such of the

provisions of SDCP 20 as are of relevance to the

proposed development.

However, it must be stressed at the outset that a

development control plan contains guideline controls



at best: see Zhang v Canterbury City Council (1999)

105 LGERA 18. This is enshrined in sections 3.42 and

4.15(3A) of the EPAA. Those statutory provisions are

as follows:

3.42 Purpose and status of development control plans

(cf previous s 74BA)

(1) The principal purpose of a development control plan

is to provide guidance on the following matters to the

persons proposing to carry out development to which this

Part applies and to the consent authority for any such

development:

(a) giving effect to the aims of any environmental

planning instrument that applies to the

development,

(b) facilitating development that is permissible under

any such instrument,

(c) achieving the objectives of land zones under any

such instrument.

The provisions of a development control plan made for

that purpose are not statutory requirements.

(2) The other purpose of a development control plan is

to make provisions of the kind referred to in section 3.43

(1) (b)–(e).

(3) Subsection (1) does not affect any requirement

under Division 4.5 in relation to complying development.

[Our emphasis]

4.15 Evaluation

(cf previous s 79C)

… … …

(3A) Development control plans If a development control

plan contains provisions that relate to the development

that is the subject of a development application, the

consent authority:

(a) if those provisions set standards with respect to an

aspect of the development and the development

application complies with those standards—is not to

require more onerous standards with respect to that

aspect of the development, and



(b) if those provisions set standards with respect to an

aspect of the development and the development

application does not comply with those standards—

is to be flexible in applying those provisions and

allow reasonable alternative solutions that achieve

the objects of those standards for dealing with that

aspect of the development, and

(c) may consider those provisions only in connection

with the assessment of that development

application.

In this subsection, standards include performance

criteria.

Thus, any and all purported ‘requirements’ in SDCP 20

are only guidelines. They are not statutory

requirements. It is relevant that SDCP also does not

formally apply given that the site enjoys existing use

rights.

Now, having said that, the controls contained in SDCP

20, to the extent to which they are relevantly

applicable to the proposed development (and, in

particular, the proposed alterations and additions), will

now be considered and discussed.

7.7.2 Status Purpose and Objectives

SDCP 20 was adopted by Council on 4 April 2006 and

came into force on 3 May 2006.

The purpose of SDCP 20 is to encourage developers

and property owners to submit residential and mixed

use development proposals which are attractive,

appropriate for the surrounding built and natural

environment, affordable and enjoyable in which to live

and work: refer Section 1.0 (‘Introduction’) of SDCP

20.

The stated aim of SDCP 20 is to achieve development

within the Parramatta Road Corridor Area which is

sympathetic and appropriate for the natural and built

environment, optimises opportunities for utilising

public transport, acceptable to the community and

economically feasible: refer Section 1.3 (’Aims and

Objectives of this Plan’) of SDCP 20.



There are a number of specific objectives of SDCP 20

which are set out in Section 1.3 of SDCP 20. Those

objectives relate to location, accessibility, public

domain, streetscape, landscaped open space, and

building form. In our opinion, the proposed

development, by reason of its nature and having

regard to the strategic location of the site, is

consistent with such of the objectives as are of

relevance (in particular, location, accessibility,

streetscape and building form).

An important locational benefit of the Parramatta

Road Corridor Area is access to public transport. The

area adjoins the main western railway line and

Parramatta Road has been identified as a route for a

bus transitway between Strathfield and Parramatta.

As already mentioned, the site has strategic locational

importance.

In our opinion, the proposed development is

compatible with the purpose and major objectives of

SDCP 20. In that regard, the proposed development

provides facilities that meet the day to day needs of

residents as well as nearby businesses through the

provision of affordable storage opportunities.

In addition, the proposed development is highly

compatible with high density residential and mixed

use developments in the area. The ability to secure

additional storage space is especially significant to

occupants of residential flat buildings as adequate

storage space is often not available to them in their

own units.

7.7.3 Design Principles and Considerations

In preparing the proposed alterations and additions,

regard has been had to, among other things, section

2.0 (‘Development Guidelines’) of SDCP 20.

We respectfully submit that:

• the proposed development is consistent with the

height limits illustrated in figures 8 to 10 of SDCP

20;



• the development is compatible with the

predominant height, bulk, scale and future

character of the locality;

• the development is generally consistent with the

Masterplan for the Parramatta Road Corridor

area;

• the height, scale, character and external detailing

of the development is compatible with any

adjoining heritage; and

• the development is unlikely to adversely affect

the amenity of any existing residential

development in terms of overshadowing, privacy,

excess noise, loss of views or otherwise.

In addition, the development:

• will not have any material impact on adjoining

allotments including but not limited to Nos 7-11

Columbia Lane (refer DA2019/143); and

• will not, in terms of impacts such as visual

amenity, solar access, site coverage, building

separation, quality of deep soil landscaping,

communal open space areas, vehicular and

pedestrian access or otherwise, impinge on the

development potential of the future southern

adjoining allotment (being the site of the

proposed future residential flat building).

• will not have an adverse impact on the

surrounding heritage items, particularly the

Arnott’s railway bridge.

• Will not create an adverse impact on the proposal

at 7-11 Columbia lane (DA2019/143).

In our view, the proposal is consistent with the control.

7.7.4 Roof Form

The proposal creates a unique juxtaposition in terms

of roofing elements to existing ‘saw tooth’ roofing

facade. As such, Section 2.5 of the SDCP is applicable.

The proposed extension incorporates architectural

roofing elements, which allow for interest in the



facade, and which provides a compatible form and is

thus consistent with the control.

For additional information, please refer to the

architectural plans and photo montage.

7.7.5 Visual and Acoustic Privacy

As the proposal is in close proximity to future

residential development, consideration for

surrounding amenity has been given.

Visual and acoustic privacy are important

environmental considerations in relation to the

existing and future residential development of the

Corridor Area.

The proposal has been designed to protect and

mitigate the amenity impacts associated with the

works. This can be seen through:

• Orientation and location of building mass.

• Protection and enhancement of ‘Saw tooth’

facade, creating an interesting streetscape.

• Provision of landscaping features.

• Nature of the ‘use’ being a low impact

development, and which is not expected to

generate significant traffic or noise related

issues.

• The building bulk acting as a passive screening

feature from the adjacent railway, which

positively improves amenity for future

residential uses.

• Security features incorporated into all KSS

facilities to ensure surveillance, reduce crime

and encourage ‘friendly’ spaces.

In our view, the proposal is consistent with the control.

7.7.6 Vehicular Access and Car Parking

In respect of parking and access, the proposal involves

improvement to the existing parking layout, and



maneuvering areas to better facilitate storage

requirements and the daily functioning of the facility.

As such, a traffic and parking assessment

accompanies this application. As Council will be

aware, Self-Storage facilities have different parking

impacts and generate different parking demands when

compared to ‘regular’ commercial development. The

SDCP does not account for this, and only provides a

rate of:

• Office Development – 1 space per 100 m2 GFA

• Warehouses and Bulk Stores – 1 space per 100

m2 or 1 space for each 2 employees whichever

provides the greater number of spaces (but note

only applies to be used for buildings to be used

for this purpose not for new buildings).

The DCP provides no definitive guide to parking at self-

storage facilities, which have a very low parking

demand when compared to warehouses and the like.

The above rates are, we argue, not appliable to self-

storage facilities and a superior set of guidelines has

been prepared by Aurecon Australia Pty Ltd

(commissioned by the Self-storage Association

Australia).

Kennards Self-Storage facilities has also prepared a

set of guidelines informed by surveys of Kennards

Self-Storage facilities in suburban areas in NSW and

these indicate the following parking requirements to

be sufficient for the purposes of a self-storage facility.

Figure 2 - Traffic Parking Dobinson & Associates Pty Ltd at P6

Survey data above for Kennard’s self-storage facilities

yields an average parking demand of:



• Storage patrons – 1.41 spaces per 1,000 m2

NLA

• Customers – 0.60 spaces per 1,000 m2 NLA

• Staff – 0.30 spaces per 1,000 m2 NLA (however,

Kennards self-storage facilities generally

operate with a maximum of 2 staff on duty at

any one time).

As such, the proposal incorporates the following rates:

• Storage patrons – 12,599 m2NLA x 1.41 spaces

per 1,000 m2 NLA = 17.8 spaces

• Customers 12,599 m2 NLA x 0.60 spaces per

1,000 m2 NLA = 7.6 spaces

• Staff – 12,599 m2 NLA x 0.30 per 1,000 m2 NLA

= 3.8 spaces. However Kennards sites generally

operate with a maximum of 2 staff at any one

time.

Total parking required = 17.8 + 7.6 + 2 = say 27.4,

round up to 28 spaces.

In our opinion, the proposed parking rates comply with

the relevant self-storage parking provisions and these

are sufficient to address the demand for the proposed

use. For additional information, please refer to the

submitted parking and traffic assessment.

7.7.7 Stormwater Sewerage and Drainage

The development has been designed consideration of

the relevant controls pertained within section 2.11 of

SDCP 20.

The building work the subject of the proposed

alterations and additions has been designed so as to

not detrimentally affect the existing drainage system

of the area, particularly any residential area or public

domain area.

All drainage works on site are will be in accordance

with Council’s Stormwater Management Code.

Stormwater runoff from roof and paved surfaces will

be collected and discharged by means of a gravity pipe



system to the Council’s drainage system. Additionally,

the proposal involves providing OSD on site.

For more information, please refer to the stormwater

management plan accompanying the development

application.

7.7.8 Site Contamination

A site contamination report has been prepared and

accompanies the development application.

The proposed development will be carried out in

accordance with the recommendations contained in

the report and relevantly applicable legislation

including but not limited to the Contaminated Land

Management Act 1997 (NSW).

7.7.9 Protection of Trees and Vegetation

The proposed development involves, among other

things, the demolition of the buildings situated at the

rear of the site.

To ensure that trees and significant vegetation are

protected and not damaged in the course of the

demolition work and associated development, an

arborist report has been prepared and accompanies

the development application.

Additionally, the proposal involves planting additional

trees and landscaped vegetation along south-eastern

boundary of the site.

The proposed development will be carried out in

accordance with the recommendations contained in

the arborist report and planting will occur in

accordance with the submitted landscape plan.

8.0 STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK

8.1 The Greater Sydney Region Plan

A Metropolis of Three Cities: The Greater Sydney Region Plan

(March 2018) has been prepared concurrently with the NSW

Government’s Future Transport Strategy 2056 and

Infrastructure NSW’s State Infrastructure Strategy 2018–



2038 to integrate land use, transport and infrastructure

across the region.

The Greater Sydney Region Plan is built on a vision of three

cities where most residents live within 30 minutes of their

jobs, education and health facilities, services and great

places—Western Parkland City, Central River City, and

Eastern Harbour City. This vision seeks to rebalance the

economic and social opportunities and deliver a more equal

and equitable Greater Sydney.

Greater Sydney’s three cities reach across five districts:

Western City District, Central City District, Eastern City

District, North District and South District.

The Greater Sydney Plan emphasises the alignment of local

environmental plans, transport programs and other agency

programs. This involves the interface of NSW Government

investment, such as transport interchanges, and local

infrastructure provided by councils, such as public domain

improvements.

Relevant objectives, strategies and actions from The Greater

Sydney Plan are embedded in each of the planning priorities,

to integrate the district’s challenges and opportunities with

the Greater Sydney vision of the metropolis of three cities.

8.2 Eastern City District Plan

The Eastern City District Plan (the ‘District Plan’) sets out

planning priorities and actions for improving the quality of life

for residents as the Eastern City District grows and changes.

The District Plan is a 20-year plan to manage growth in the

context of economic, social and environmental matters to

achieve the 40-year vision for Greater Sydney.

The District Plan contains the planning priorities and actions

for implementing The Greater Sydney Region Plan at a district

level and is a bridge between regional and local planning. The

District Plan informs local strategic planning statements and

local environmental plans, the assessment of planning

proposals as well as community strategic plans and policies.

The District Plan also assists councils to plan for and support

growth and change, and align their local planning strategies

to place-based outcomes.



In addition, the District Plan guides the decisions of State

agencies and informs the private sector and the wider

community of approaches to manage growth and change.

Community engagement on the District Plan has contributed

to a plan for growth that reflects local values and aspirations,

in a way that balances regional and local considerations.

The District Plan responds to major transport, health and

education investments in the Eastern District, either

committed or planned, such as Sydney Metro and the CBD

and South East Light Rail, which aligns with Future Transport

2056.

The Eastern City District comprises land within the local

government areas of Bayside, Burwood, City of Canada Bay,

City of Sydney, Inner West, Randwick, Strathfield, Waverley,

and Woollahra.

Burwood, Strathfield, and Homebush are referred to as a

‘Planned Precinct’, the others being Rhodes East, Turrella,

Bardwell Park, and Anzac Parade corridor. Planned Precincts

are intended to be consistent with the objectives and

strategies of The Greater Sydney Region Plan and the District

Plan, be delivered in collaboration with councils, and be

informed by the asset plans of relevant agencies.

Planned Precincts are to be supported by a Special

Infrastructure Contribution or similar satisfactory

arrangement to help fund the delivery of essential community

infrastructure such as health facilities, schools, open space

and roads. Targeted development is focused on housing

diversity around a centre and transit node/rail station, and

infrastructure schedules and funding options.

The vision for Greater Sydney as a metropolis of three cities—

the Western Parkland City, the Central River City and the

Eastern Harbour City—will see the Eastern City District

become more innovative and globally competitive, carving

out a greater portion of knowledge-intensive jobs from the

Asia Pacific Region. The vision will improve the District’s

lifestyle and environmental assets. This is to be achieved by

a number of specified ways including, relevantly, ‘retaining

industrial and urban services land’ (at p6).



8.3 Future Transport Strategy 2056

Future Transport Strategy 2056 is the first transport strategy

in Australia to harness technology to improve customer and

network outcomes, starting with a long-term vision for our

communities and places. For the first time in NSW, planning

for the future of the transport network and for places and

land use are aligned.

The Future Transport Strategy is an update of NSW’s Long

Term Transport Master Plan which responded to a period of

underinvestment and poor planning of transport

infrastructure in NSW and undertook a comprehensive

analysis of transport problems and generated an

unprecedented pipeline of investment.

The Future Transport Strategy sets the 40-year vision,

directions and outcomes framework for customer mobility in

NSW, which will guide transport investment over the longer

term. It will be delivered through a series of supporting plans

and sets out a new approach to planning involving close

engagement with customers, industry and communities

through ‘co-operative design’ or simply ‘co-design’.

The Services and Infrastructure Plans set the customer

outcomes for Greater Sydney and regional NSW for the

movement of people and freight to meet customer needs and

deliver responsive, innovative services. The plans will define

the network required to achieve the service outcomes.

The Supporting Plans are more detailed issues-based or

place-based planning documents that help to implement the

Strategy across NSW.

8.4 State Infrastructure Strategy 2018–2038

Building Momentum: State Infrastructure Strategy 2018–

2038 builds on the NSW Government’s major long-term

infrastructure plans over the last seven years.

The Strategy sets out the NSW Government’s priorities for

the next 20 years, and combined with the Future Transport

Strategy 2056, the Greater Sydney Region Plan and the

Regional Development Framework, brings together

infrastructure investment and land-use planning for our cities

and regions.



The State Infrastructure Strategy 2018–2038 sets out the

NSW Government’s infrastructure vision for the state over

the next 20 years, across all sectors. It is underpinned by the

Greater Sydney Region Plan, Regional Development

Framework, and Future Transport Strategy 2056.

8.5 A Plan for Growing Sydney 2036

The site is within the Central Subregion under A Plan for

Growing Sydney.

There are a number of goals within the Plan to direct the

development of Sydney and they are as follows:

• Goal 1: A competitive economy with world-class

services and transport;

• Goal 2: A city of housing choice, with homes that meet

our needs and lifestyles;

• Goal 3: A great place to live with communities that are

strong, healthy and well connected;

• Goal 4: A sustainable and resilient city that protects the

natural environment and has a balanced approach to

the use of land and resources.

The Plan sets out actions that will deliver these goals for

Sydney. Each goal has a number of priority areas (directions

which provide a focus for the actions).

There are a number of ‘Priority Precincts’, being areas

selected through the Priority Precincts program as suitable

for urban renewal including increased housing. In addition,

the Parramatta to Olympic Peninsula Priority Growth Area is

established.

In some parts of the Priority Growth Area, land legacy issues

from industrial activity, proximity to industrial uses and other

associated issues require detailed investigations. An

investigation of the Strathfield Triangle between Concord

West, Strathfield and Flemington railway stations will identify

the potential for growth and future infrastructure needs.

These investigations will identify areas for different future

land uses, plan for infrastructure delivery and establish the

most appropriate staging and sequencing of development

(refer p34).



8.6 Parramatta Road Corridor Strategy

The Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation

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. There are more than 26,000 people who work in the

Corridor, across a variety of industry and service sectors.

The Strategy has been adopted by the NSW Government and

is given statutory force by a Ministerial Direction under then

section 117 [now s. 9.1] of the EPAA. It includes a prioritised

set of actions to facilitate transformation of the Corridor in

the short term (2016-2023) and beyond.

The Parramatta Road Corridor is the continuous length of

Parramatta Road, and includes land with direct frontage to

Parramatta Road, as well as eight Precincts. Change and

growth along the Corridor is focused in eight Precincts—

namely, Granville, Auburn, Homebush, Burwood-Concord,

Kings Bay, Taverners Hill, Leichhardt, and Camperdown. The

Precincts have been identified based on their access to jobs,

transport, infrastructure, and services and ability to

accommodate new development in a balanced way. In some

cases, the Precincts straddle local government area

boundaries.

For the purposes of the Strategy, the Parramatta Road

Corridor is separated into two distinct sections, namely,

Corridor West and Corridor East.

The site is situated in the Strathfield local government area

and, as such, is within Corridor East. Eight ‘Precincts’ have

been identified along the Corridor in consultation with local

councils. Homebush is one of the Eastern Precincts.

The site is identified in the Strategy as being within a

Transformation Area.

Key deliverables for the Strategy include:

• up to 56,000 additional residents in 27,000 new homes

and 50,000 new jobs over the next 30 years;

• up to $31.4 billion investment over 20 years with

significant economic benefits;



• a productive commercial and business environment

providing up to 50,000 new jobs;

• eight precincts (one of which is Homebush in which, as

mentioned, the site is located) that accommodate a

diversity of land uses and densities; and

• an integrated and legible network of infrastructure,

open space, and pathways to encourage pedestrian and

cycle activity.

The Strategy is supported by a range of stakeholders,

including State and local government, to drive and inform

land use planning and development decisions and long-term

infrastructure delivery programs. Landowners, developers

and business owners use the document to understand what

the future holds for the Parramatta Road Corridor and to

inform planning and investment decisions.

8.7 Parramatta Road Corridor Guidelines

The purpose of the Parramatta Road Corridor Urban

Transformation Planning and Design Guidelines is to:

• describe the priorities and principles that will ensure

future development achieves high design quality and

design excellence,

• guide the rapidly changing character of the Corridor

whilst ensuring future development responds to the

distinct character and identity along different parts of

the Corridor,

• ensure high levels of amenity are achieved across the

Corridor,

• protect heritage items, heritage conservation areas and

other highly valued characteristics across the Corridor,

• encourage public transport use, walking and cycling,

and

• integrate best practice sustainable urban

transformation.

The following is extracted from page 33 of the Design

Guidelines:



Homebush Precinct will become a new, mixed use precinct for

the Corridor, housing a new community of residents attracted to

the area for its high amenity and access to employment at

Parramatta CBD and Sydney Olympic Park. The precinct will

provide a long term supply of housing stock to meet increasing

demand as Sydney Olympic Park grows into a new city.

8.8 Strathfield Local Strategic Planning Statement

In response to the exhibition of Strathfield 2040: Draft Local

Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS), Council received a

number of submissions from government agencies, key

stakeholder and landowners and members of the community.

Where appropriate the planning priorities and actions have

been amended to address the matters raised in the

submissions.

The Greater Sydney Commission has reviewed the final draft,

which incorporated these changes, in January 2020 and

requested further modifications and details.

The LSPS has now been finalised, incorporating these

changes and was presented to Council at its meeting held on

Tuesday 3 March 2020 for endorsement and forwarding to

the Greater Sydney Commission for assurance that the

document is consistent with the Eastern City District Plan and

Greater Sydney Region Plan and has legislative status.

Once assurance has been given, the LSPS will be forwarded

to the Department of Planning, Infrastructure and

Environment to be made and uploaded to the planning portal.

It is now understood that the GSC, has since sent Strathfield

Council a letter of Support on the 27 March 2020, confirming

the LSPS is aligned with the future growth outlined within the

Eastern City District Plan.

The Strathfield local government area’s significant industrial

and commercial areas are key drivers for the growth in that

area. In 2018, the GDP was nearly $4billion and the largest

industries were transport, warehousing, construction and

education. The Draft Statement has identified that the local

government area has significant potential for additional

economic investment.

On 19 November 2019 Turnbull Planning International, on

behalf of the client, made a submission to Council on the

LSPS. A copy of the submission is provided at Annexure 10.



In the submission we discussed the various ways in which our

client’s proposal is entirely consistent with the initiatives and

objectives set out in the LSPS, in particular, Council’s

objective to promote and assist economic growth in the area.

KSS has been a key stakeholder in the community for several

years and we believe that Council is ‘on the right track’ to

improving the liveability of the Strathfield community. KSS

will endeavour to provide sustainable features in its new

proposal and provide for urban design and architectural

excellence.

9.0 KEY ISSUES

9.1 Existing Use Rights

The site enjoys existing use rights to operate as a self-

storage facility. For additional information, please refer to

Section 6.0 ‘Existing Use Rights’, of this document.

9.2 Consistency with Zone Objectives

The proposed development is consistent with such of the zone

objectives as are of relevance to the proposed development.

Relevantly, the proposed development is a land use that

provides facilities that meet the day to day needs of residents

as well as nearby businesses through the provision of

affordable storage opportunities. The development will

facilitate and support both commercial and residential

development.

In addition, the proposed development is compatible with

high density residential and mixed use developments in the

area. The ability to secure additional storage space is

especially significant to occupants of residential flat buildings

as adequate storage space is often not available in smaller

dwelling units.

9.3 Height of Buildings

The site lies within ‘Area 1’ and is identified as part of Key

Site 93 as shown on, relevantly, SLEP Key Sites Map–Sheet

KYS tile 004. A maximum building height of 32m applies to

the site pursuant to clause 4.3A of SLEP for the Parramatta

Road Corridor.



The proposed alterations and additions will not exceed the

relevantly applicable maximum height of 32m.

9.4 Floor Space Ratio

The site is identified as being within Area S2 on the SLEP

Floor Space Ratio Map. Area SA dictates a maximum floor

space ratio of 1.65:1. However, the site is also identified as

being within Area 1 on the SLEP Floor Space Ratio Map and

part of Key Site 93. A maximum FSR of 2.7:1 applies to the

site pursuant to clause 4.4A of SLEP for the Parramatta Road

Corridor.

The proposal involves a FSR exceedance of 3.11:1. As such,

a Clause 4.6 has been prepared. We submit that the written

request justifies the contravention of the FSR development

standard by demonstrating, firstly, that compliance with the

standard is, relevantly, unnecessary in the circumstances of

the case and, secondly, that there are sufficient

environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the

standard.

9.5 Streetscape and Character of the Area

The proposed alterations and additions will significantly

improve both the overall appearance and the functionality of

the existing industrial building.

The new building will be set well back from Parramatta Road

and landscaping will soften the impact of built form.

9.6 Environmental Impacts and Amenity

By reason of the nature and effect of the proposal, the

proposed development is most unlikely to interfere with the

amenity of the neighbourhood by reason of noise, vibration,

smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste

water, waste products, grit or oil, or otherwise.

The proposed development will not have any material impact

on adjoining allotments including but not limited to Nos 7-11

Columbia Lane (refer DA2019/143). In addition, the

development will not, in terms of impacts such as visual

amenity, solar access, site coverage, building separation,

quality of deep soil landscaping, communal open space areas,

vehicular and pedestrian access or otherwise, impinge on the



development potential of the future southern adjoining

allotment (being the site of the proposed future residential

flat building).

In short, we submit that the proposed development will have

little adverse environmental impact.

The overall appearance of the building, when viewed from the

street front, will be improved as a result of the carrying out

of the proposed alterations and additions.

9.7 Site Contamination

As the site contains asbestos, the proposed development will

be carried out in accordance with the recommendations

contained in the site contamination report accompanying the

development application, and all relevantly applicable

legislation including but not limited to the Contaminated Land

Management Act 1997 (NSW).

9.8 Protection of Trees and Vegetation

In order to ensure that trees and significant vegetation are

protected and not damaged in the course of the demolition

work and associated development, an arborist report has

been prepared and accompanies the development

application. The proposed development will be carried out in

accordance with the recommendations contained in the

report.

9.9 Economic Effect

The proposed development will contribute to the economic

growth of the area and is consistent with Council’s objective

of promoting and assisting economic growth in the area.

Additional employment opportunities will arise for locals and

surrounding businesses, should the proposal be granted

consent.

10.0 CONCLUSION

This statement of environmental effects addresses the statutory

planning regime relevantly applicable to the proposed development

and demonstrates that development consent for the change of use

and the carrying out of the proposed alterations and additions to



the existing industrial buildings, is both permissible and appropriate

in all relevant circumstances.

The proposed development is suitable in the location and is

generally consistent with the relevantly applicable regime of

planning controls including objectives and relevant development

standards notwithstanding the fact that it is an ‘existing use’.

The heads of consideration set out in section 4.15 of the EPAA have

been examined and, in our opinion, there is no matter which would

prevent Council from granting consent to the proposed

development in this instance.

In our opinion, the proposal merits support from the consent

authority and a grant of conditional development consent.



ANNEXURE 1

LOCATION PLAN



LOCATION PLAN EXTRACT FROM SIX MAPS

February 2020 Ref: ken.parh4

Annexure 1

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 2

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH



AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH EXTRACT FROM SIX MAPS


Annexure 2

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 3

CADASTRAL PLAN



CADASTRAL PLAN EXTRACT FROM SIX MAPS


Annexure 3

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 4

PHOTOGRAPHIC PALETTE



Photograph 1 Site looking east along Parramatta Road

Photograph 2 Looking in a south-easterly direction taken from

Parramatta Road



Photograph 3 View looking east along the southern side of Parramatta

Road

Photograph 4 View looking west along the southern side of Parramatta

Road



Photograph 5 View of western facade of existing building

Photograph 6 View of the site looking south along Columbia Lane



Photograph 7 View of the rear of the site looking north on Columbia Lane

Photograph 8 View of parking facilities at the rear of the site looking east



Photograph 9 View of Nos 11-17 Columbia Lane opposite and to west of site

Photograph 10 – View looking North-West towards existing Mixed-Use

development sites



ANNEXURE 5

ZONING MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)



ZONING MAP EXTRACT FROM SLEP 2012

February 2020 Ref: ken.par4h

Annexure 5

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 6

HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)



HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS MAP EXTRACT FROM SELP 2012


Annexure 6

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 7

KEY SITES MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)



KEY SITES MAP EXTRACT FROM SLEP 2012


Annexure 7

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 8

FLOOR SPACE RATIO MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)



FLOOR SPACE RATIO MAP EXTRACT FROM SLEP 2012


Annexure 8

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 9

HERITAGE MAP (EXTRACT FROM SLEP)



HERITAGE MAP EXTRACT FROM SELP 2012


Annexure 9

Drawn: CW

2-4 Parramatta Road

Homebush

The site



ANNEXURE 10

COPY OF SUBMISSION MADE TO STRATHFIELD COUNCIL ON DRAFT LOCAL STRATEGIC PLANNING

STATEMENT

STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS BOUNDARY …

Documents

Transcript of STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS BOUNDARY …