MINUTES OF THE Local Planning Panel HELD VIA AUDIO-VISUAL MEANS ON Tuesday, 20 September 2022 AT 3:30pm
PRESENT
Stephen O’Connor (Chairperson), David Johnson, Tony Reed and Robert Warry.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF LAND
The Chairperson, acknowledged the Burramattagal people of The Darug Nation as the traditional land owners of land in Parramatta and paid respect to their ancient culture and to their elders past, present and emerging.
WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT
The Chairperson advised that this public meeting is being recorded. The recording will be archived and made available on Council’s website.
APOLOGIES
There were no apologies made to this Local Planning Panel.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest made to this Local Planning Panel.
Reports - Development Applications
5.1 |
SUBJECT OUTSIDE
PUBLIC MEETING:
DESCRIPTION Demolition, tree removal and construction of a two storey shop top housing development including 1 level of basement car parking with 22 parking spaces, 4 commercial tenancies on the ground floor, 6 residential units on the first floor and associated landscaping works.
REFERENCE DA/324/2022 - D08628699
APPLICANT/S Pradip Dhakal
OWNERS Pradip Dhakal
REPORT OF Group Manager Development and Traffic Services
|
|
The Panel considered the matter listed at Item 5.1 and attachments to Item 5.1.
PUBLIC FORUM
1. Michael Trinh from IDA Design Group answered questions from the Panel in relation to the development application.
2. Sohail Faridy from IDA Design Group answered questions from the Panel in relation to the development application.
|
|
(a) That the Parramatta Local Planning Panel, exercising the functions of Council, pursuant to Section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, refuse development consent to DA/324/2022 for the demolition of the existing building and the construction of a two (2) storey shop top housing development consisting of four (4) commercial tenancies at ground floor, six (6) residential units at the first floor plus basement car paring with twenty-two (22) car parking spaces and associated landscaping.
(b) Further, that the submitters be advised of the decision.
REASONS FOR REFUSAL
1. State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021
a) Chapter 2: Insufficient information has been provided to determine the impact, if any, the proposed tree removal will have on the ecological, heritage, aesthetic and cultural significance of the area. As such, the aims of Chapter 2 of SEPP (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 are unable to be satisfied.
2. State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021
a) Chapter 4: Insufficient information has been submitted demonstrating that the subject site is suitable or can be made suitable for its proposed use. As such, the object and aims of Chapter 4 of SEPP (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 are unable to be satisfied.
3. Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011
a) Clause 1.2(f) ‘Aims of Plan’: The proposal fails to satisfy Aim (f) of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2012 (PLEP 2012). Insufficient and inaccurate information has been provided to enable an assessment to be undertaken determining the proposed development will protect and enhance the natural environment.
b) Clause 4.3 ‘Height of Buildings’: The proposal does not comply with the maximum 6m building height development standard detailed in Clause 4.3 of the PLEP. The proposed building height is 10.90m, which is an 81% variation to the development standard. The objectives of this standard are not met.
c) Clause 4.6 ‘Exceptions to Development Standards’: Compliance with the Height of Buildings Development Standard is reasonable and necessary and sufficient environmental planning grounds do not exist to justify contravening the Development Standard.
d) Clause 5.10 ‘Heritage Conservation’: The proposed development is not sympathetic to the Experiment Farm Heritage Conservation area, or surrounding heritage items.
e) Clause 6.2 ‘Earthworks’: As a result of the insufficient documentation submitted the effect of the proposed earthworks on the amenity of adjoining properties was unable to be determined. This Development Application fails to satisfy the Objectives of this Clause
4. Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011
a) Section 2.4.3: Land Contamination. Insufficient information has been submitted demonstrating that the subject site is suitable, or can be made suitable for its proposed use.
b) Section 2.4.6: Development on Sloping Land. The proposed development does not respond to the topography of the site.
c) Section 2.4.7: Biodiversity. Insufficient information has been provided to determine the impact, if any, the proposed tree removal will have on the biodiversity of the City of Parramatta.
d) Section 2.4.8: Public Domain. The proposal as submitted does not enhance the quality of the public domain. The Objectives of this Clause are not met.
e) Section 3.1.3: Preliminary Building Envelope Tables. The proposal does not comply with the Preliminary Building Envelope Table for Shop top Housing.
f) Section 3.2.1: Building Form and Massing. The building form and mass is not compatible with the character and spatial characteristics of the locality and surrounding Experiment Farm Heritage Conservation Area.
g) Section 3.2.2: Building Façade and Articulation. The proposed building does not complement or enhance neighbourhood or streetscape character.
h) Section 3.2.5: Streetscape. The proposed development is not compatible with the existing and future character of the locality.
i) Section 3.3.5: Solar Access and Cross Ventilation. Solar access to adjoining and surrounding properties will be negatively affected by the proposal.
j) Section 3.3.7: Waste Management. The proposed waste storage facilities are not appropriately located. The Objectives of this Clause are not met.
k) Section 3.4.4: Safety and Security. Natural surveillance and compliance with CPTED principles is not achieved from the ground floor communal open space.
l) Section 3.5: Heritage. The proposal does not reinforce the attributes that contribute to the heritage significance of the surround heritage item or Experiment Farm Conservation area.
5. Insufficient information
a) The public domain details provided by the applicant does not provide adequate street tree planting and footpath details as required under Section 2.12.8 of the PDCP 2011.
6. The Public Interest
a) Based on the assessment contained in this report, approval of the development is contrary to the public interest.
The Panel decision was UNANIMOUS. |
5.2 |
SUBJECT OUTSIDE PUBLIC MEETING:
DESCRIPTION Temporary open markets between mixed use residential towers within the pedestrian and vehicle shared area to provide mini markets up to 50 stalls, live music, community organisation stalls to operate on Sundays fortnightly from 9.00am to 1.00pm.
REFERENCE DA/430/2022 - D08642076
APPLICANT/S REACTIVATE CONSULTING PTY LTD
OWNERS Owners of SP 103041 and City of Parramatta Council
REPORT OF Group Manager Development and Traffic Services
|
|
The Panel considered the matter listed at Item 5.2 and attachments to Item 5.2.
PUBLIC FORUM
There were no public forum submissions for Item 5.2.
|
|
(a) That the Parramatta Local Planning Panel, exercising the functions of Council, pursuant to section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant development consent to DA/430/2022 for a period of five (5) years within which physical commencement is to occur from the date on the Notice of Determination, subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 1.
(b) Further, that submitters be advised of the decision.
REASONS FOR APPROVAL
The DA should be approved for the following reasons:
1. The development is permissible in the B2 Local Centre Use Zone and generally satisfies the requirements of the applicable planning provisions.
2. To ensure that the local amenity is maintained and is not adversely affected and that adequate safeguards are incorporated into the development.
3. The development will be compatible with the emerging and planned future character of the area.
4. For the reasons given above, approval of the application is in the public interest.
The Panel decision was UNANIMOUS. |
5.3 |
SUBJECT OUTSIDE
PUBLIC MEETING:
DESCRIPTION Section 8.3 Review of the decision to refuse DA 802/2021 which seeks consent for the demolition of existing buildings across the site down to slab level (heritage facades of the former Murray Brothers department store retained) and archaeological test excavations at 197 Church Street Parramatta and 89 Marsden Street Parramatta, and 207 Church Street Parramatta.
REFERENCE DA/802/2021 - D08658901
APPLICANT/S Think Planners
OWNERS Holdmark Properties Pty Ltd
REPORT OF Group Manager Development and Traffic Services
|
|
The Panel considered the matter listed at Item 5.3 and attachments to Item 5.3.
PUBLIC FORUM
1. Adam Byrnes from Think Planners spoke in favour of the report recommendation to approve the development application.
2. Joshua Madden from Biosis (Aboriginal and archaeological) was available to answer questions from the Panel in relation to the development application.
3. Ankita Powale from Think Planners (Heritage) was available to answer questions from the Panel in relation to the development application.
|
|
(a) That the Parramatta Local Planning Panel (PLPP), exercising the functions of Council, pursuant to Section 8.4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant development consent to DA/802/2021 for the demolition of existing buildings down to ground floor slab, except for the heritage facades of the former Murray Brothers building to Church and Macquarie Streets which must be retained, and for archaeological testing at Lot 1 DP 710335 and Lot 1 DP 233150 being Nos. 197 and 207 Church Street and No. 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta, subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 1.
(b) Further, that submitters be notified of the decision.
REASONS FOR APPROVAL
1. To facilitate the orderly implementation of the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the aims and objectives of the relevant Council Planning instrument.
2. The proposal is permissible in the B4 Mixed Use zone and is satisfactory when considered against Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
3. The proposal allows for the heritage values the site to be retained with an expectation that the primary façade will be incorporated into a future redevelopment of this site.
4. Approval of the application is in the public interest.
The Panel decision was UNANIMOUS. |
Reports – planning proposals
6.1 |
SUBJECT Refusal of the Planning Proposal for land at 169 Pennant Hills Road, Carlingford
REFERENCE RZ/3/2022 – D08861653
APPLICANT/S Urbanism Pty Ltd
OWNERS Mr Lorenzo Biordi
REPORT OF Team Leader Land Use and Planning
|
|
The Panel considered the matter listed at Item 6.1 and attachments to Item 6.1.
PUBLIC FORUM
There were no public forum submissions for Item 6.1.
|
|
(a) That the Panel recommend that Council refuse the Planning Proposal at 169 Pennant Hills Road, Carlingford for the following reasons:
i. The Planning Proposal is inconsistent with the Local Strategic Planning Statement as the site is not within the identified Carlingford Growth Precinct and the form of development proposed is incompatible with the low density character of the area.
ii. The Planning Proposal is inconsistent with the Local Housing Strategy as intensification of development along the Parramatta CBD to Epping Corridor is not required to meet existing housing targets.
iii. The Planning Proposal is premature given that the investigation into the potential Epping to Parramatta Mass Transit/Train Link has not yet commenced and the likely timeframe for new housing delivery associated with this infrastructure is post 2036.
iv. The proposed density and heights would result in an overdevelopment of the site, are inconsistent with the density and heights of nearby development, and are overbearing of nearby lower scale development.
(b) Further, that the applicant be advised of Council’s decision.
The Panel decision was UNANIMOUS. |
The meeting terminated at 3:55 pm.
Chairperson