Lane Cove Local Planning Panel Meeting 25 March
2025
Planning Proposal 40 - 2
Marshall Avenue, St Leonards
Item No: LPP4/25
Subject: Planning
Proposal 40 - 2 Marshall Avenue, St Leonards
Record No: SU10206 - 15171/25
Division: Planning
and Sustainability Division
Author(s): Christopher
Pelcz
|
Property:
|
2 Marshall Avenue, St Leonard’s
|
|
PP No:
|
Planning Proposal No. 40
|
|
Legal Description:
|
Lot 4, Section 3, DP 7259
|
|
Date Lodged:
|
3/02/2025
|
|
Owner (Proponent):
|
Owner of property
|
|
Applicant:
|
Planning Ingenuity Pty Ltd
|
|
Site Area:
|
680 m2
|
|
Description of Proposal:
|
· Maintain the
existing R4 High Density Residential zone,
· Increase the
height of buildings from 2.5 metres to 53 metres,
· Retain the
Incentive floor space ratio of 3.85:1 and
· Provide a small
open space.
|
|
Planning Proposal documents
|
Links to all the proponent’s
documents are provided in Attachments at the end of this report (AT-1
to AT-4).
|
|
Relevant Strategic Planning documents
|
A Metropolis of Three Cities –
dated March 2018
North District Plan – dated
March 2018
Crows Nest TOD plans – dated (AT-6
to AT-8)
Section 9.1 Ministerial Directions
Local Strategic Planning Statement
2020 – dated 30 March 2020 (AT-9)
Local Housing Strategy (AT-10)
Local Environmental Plan 2009
|
|
Recommendation
|
That Planning Proposal No. 40 not be
supported.
|
PURPOSE
The Lane Cove
Local Planning Panel is required to review the proposal in conjunction with
Councils assessment report and provide advice in relation to the proposed LEP
amendments.
REASON FOR REFERRAL
The Planning Proposal is referred to Council’s Local
Planning Panel under Section 9.1 of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979. This Section requires referral of any Planning
Proposal to the Local Planning Panel for advice with an assessment report which
sets out recommendations in relation to the Proposal.
The Planning Proposal does not meet any of the criteria for
an exemption from referral to the Local Planning Panel. This criterion is as
follows;
a) the correction of an obvious error in a
local environmental plan.
b) matters that are of a consequential,
transitional, machinery or other minor nature; or
c) matters that Council’s General Manager
considers will not have any significant adverse impact on the environment or
adjoining land.
Therefore, the Planning Proposal is referred to the Local
Planning Panel for advice prior to Council making any determination on the
matter.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to consider the planning
merits and seek the Panel’s advice on the proposal to redevelop land at 2
Marshall Avenue, St Leonard into a co-living / residential tower.
The Proposal (AT-1) seeks the following
changes to the planning controls;
· Maintain
the existing R4 High Density Residential zone,
· Increase
the Incentive height of buildings from 2.5 metres to 53 metres,
· Retain the
Incentive floor space ratio of 3.85:1 and
· Provide
a small open space.
Planning Proposal 40 is also accompanied by:
· Concept Building Envelope (AT-2);
· Solar Access Analysis (AT-3);
· Flood Assessment (AT-4);
· Advice from the NSROC Design Review Panel (AT-5);
· Crows Nest TOD – Precinct Design Guide (AT-6);
· Crows Nest TOD – Final Urban Design Report (AT-7);
· Crows Nest TOD – Final Urban Design Report –
Appendix A (AT-8);
· Lane Cove Local Strategic Planning Statement (AT-9): and
· Lane Cove Local Housing Strategy (AT-10).
The Panel is requested to review the
proposal in line with the assessment report.
SITE
HISTORY
The site known as 2 Marshall Avenue, St Leonards is part of
the St Leonards South Precinct.
Under Council’s Local Environmental Plan (Part 7) it
was to form part of Area 1 (see figures below) which provided height and floor
space incentives only if certain items were delivered on site.
It was intended that all sites within Area 1 were to be
acquired and developed in accordance with Part 7 of the LEP as part of the
Development Application (DA) process.
The property was not acquired by the subject developer and
the development for Area 1 was determined without this property. The SNPP
determined that the applicant met the criteria in attempting to acquire the
site as outlined by the NSWLEC.
SITE
The subject site is located on the southern side
of Marshall Avenue and sits at the corner of Marshall Avenue and Canberra
Avenue (see Figure 1). The site is relatively rectangular in shape
and contains an area approximately 688 m2.
The site has a primary northern frontage to
Marshall Avenue measured at 15.6m, with a corner splay of approximately 4.4m,
and a secondary eastern frontage to Canberra Avenue of 33.5m.
Figure 1: Location of site
Existing on the site is
a single storey dwelling house with vehicle access provided from Canberra
Avenue to a detached garage.
The
immediate context of the site is dominated by high density residential
buildings, either newly built or under construction, with building heights
starting at 5 storeys and reaching more than 20 storeys in height.
To
the north of the site is the Embassy Tower at No. 1-13 Marshall Avenue which
sits on the opposite side of Marshall Avenue and reaches a height of 29
storeys.
The
land directly adjoining the subject site to the east and south is currently
under construction in accordance with the approval under DA79/2022. This DA was
approved by Sydney North Planning Panel on 6 April 2023 for demolition of
existing structures and constructions of three (3) residential flat buildings
(ranging from 12 to 19 storeys) comprising a total of 232 apartments and
basement parking for 348 vehicles.
Current LEP Planning Controls
Figure 2 shows the current LEP
controls for maximum incentive height and incentive floor space ratio on the
site.
Figure 2: Current Incentive building height (left side)
and Incentive floor space ratio (right side)
Based on the
existing controls and intended plans shown in Council’s Development
Control Plan (and other documents), the subject site was to form part of a
public open space mainly connecting Areas 1 to 2 and beyond (see Figures 3 &
4).
Figure 3: Development Control Plan - Structure Plan
(taken from Part C – Residential Localities)
Figure 4: Landscape Master Plan – intentions
for the site (taken from DCP & Landscape Master Plan)
Crows Nest
TOD Controls
Figure 5 indicates the proposed controls under the Crows
Nest TOD Plan for maximum height on the site.
Figure 5: Approved Crows Nest height in storeys (taken from
Precinct Design Guide and Urban Design Report)
During exhibition of the Crows Nest TOD plans,
the owners made a submission requesting greater height and density. Based on Figure 6, this change was refused and no changes to the
current controls were recommended.
Figure 6: Response to submissions (taken from Crows Nest TOD
Urban Design Reports)
Based on the
Crows Nest TOD controls (in the Design Guide) the site is also intended for
public open space in accordance with Council’s plans for the site. This
is discussed further in the later sections of this report.
BACKGROUND
While this
Planning Proposal in principle validates Council’s approach, there are
also other strategic planning documents to consider. These documents and their relationship
to this site are briefly outlined below.
Australian Housing Accord
In August 2023, the Australian Federal Government signed
the National Housing Accord. The Accord committed to building 1.2 million new
homes across Australia in a five year period from 2024 to 2029.
It set housing targets for each State and Territory, with
NSW required to complete 377,000 new homes within the same five-year period.
The current target for Lane Cove is 3,400 new dwellings by
2029. Based on analysis, Council is well on track to exceed its Housing Accord
Target by 2029.
Transport
Oriented Development Program
A key NSW Government response to the Accord is the
Transport Oriented Development Program. This program has identified the new
Crows Nest Metro Station as one of the new “Accelerated Precincts”.
It is important to note that the Planning Proposal is directly across the road
from the new Crows Nest Metro Station.
Areas within 1,200 metres of the new Station will be
rezoned by the NSW Government towards the end of 2024. Lane Cove Council has
been advised that the rezonings will largely be consistent with the existing
SLCN 2036 Plan.
Greater Sydney Region Plan
Objective 31 of the Greater Sydney Region Plan is relevant
to the proposal. It states that “public open space is accessible,
protected and enhanced”. The subsequent Strategy 31.1 states that
planning is to maximise the use of existing open space and protect, enhance and
expand public open space by:
· “investigating opportunities to provide new open
space so that all residential areas are within 400 metres of open space and all
high density residential areas (over 60 dwellings per hectare) are within 200
metres of open space
· requiring large urban renewal initiatives to demonstrate
how the quantity of, or access to high quality and diverse local open space is
maintained or improved
· planning new neighbourhoods with a sufficient quantity and
quality of new open space
· delivering or complementing the Greater Sydney Green Grid” (page 167 of Greater Sydney Region
Plan).
Crows Nest TOD Plans
The Crows Nest TOD plans recently replaced the St
Leonards/Crows Nest 2036 Plan. The St Leonards/Crow’s Nest Planned
Precinct is identified by the North District Plan (NDP) as “a
mixed-use centre with high-rise offices, and high-density residential
development”.
The Crows Nest TOD plan delivers Action 31 of the NDP which
is to deliver and implement a Place Strategy and Infrastructure Plan for the St
Leonards health precinct. While Action 34 focuses on growth subject to
“growing jobs in the centre” and to “deliver new high
open space, upgrade public areas, and establish collaborative place-making
initiatives”. Additional capacity for housing supply is a secondary
but important function of the precinct along with public open spaces. It is
from these two purposes of the North District Plan that the previous
2036 Plan & current Crows Nest TOD plan has emerged.
Previously, a Special Infrastructure Contributions rate was
introduced which now applies to all new residential and mixed-use residential
development in the area.
Special Infrastructure Contributions
As part of the final 2036 Plan, the Special Infrastructure
Contribution (SIC) applies to this area of St Leonards and Crow’s Nest
for the residential development component.
Section 9.1 Ministerial Directions
All Planning Proposals are required to address Section 9.1
Ministerial Directions, where they are applicable to the site. However, in this
instance Ministerial Direction 1.13 is relevant because it specifically deals
with the implementation of St Leonards and Crow’s Nest 2036 Plan and now
the Crows Nest TOD plan.
It states that Planning Proposals may be inconsistent
with the Plan if it can be demonstrated that the inconsistency is of
minor significance while still achieving the vision, objectives and actions
identified in the Plan.
Local Strategic Planning Statement
Council's adopted Local Strategic Planning Statement (AT-9)
outlines a 20-year vision, planning priorities and actions for land use in Lane
Cove. The LSPS came into force on 30 March 2020 and was published to the NSW
Planning Portal website.
This Statement
and other relevant documents must now be used to inform future amendments to
Council's Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan.
Local Housing Strategy
Council’s adopted Local Housing Strategy (LHS)
provides an evidence-based framework that informs how and where residential
development is planned to be delivered in the LGA for the next 20 years.
Because the
Planning Proposal involves mixed use development with a residential component,
this Strategy (AT-10) is relevant.
NSROC Design
Review Panel
The proposal was
submitted to Council’s Design Review Panel on 26 March 2024. The final
minutes are attached to this report in AT-5.
PROPOSAL
The proponent-led Planning Proposal seeks the
following amendments to Lane Cove LEP 2009 for the subject site:-
· Maintain
the existing R4 High Density Residential zone,
· Amendment
of the St Leonards South LEP clauses (Part 7) to permit the development with
consent while excluding itself from the requirements for bedroom mixes,
affordable housing, and minimum public open space;
· Increase
the Incentive height of buildings from 2.5 metres to 53 metres,
· Retain
the Incentive floor space ratio of 3.85:1 and
· Provide a small open space.
Overall, the proposed controls would result in a co-living
development of 19 storeys on a 680 m2 site. The only image of the
built form is contained in AT-2.
DISCUSSION
This section of
the report will discuss the strategic and site-specific merit requirements.
Crows Nest TOD Plans
The findings of the Crows Nest TOD plans are relevant
because they give effect to the objectives and actions of both the Regional and
North District Plan. The final controls are contained and have been implemented
into the Crows Nest TOD Precinct Design Guide (AT-6). The built form
controls are shown below in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Built form controls in Design Guide (page 19 of AT-6)
Based on this figure (and others shown in this report) the
site is clearly intended to be a public open space in all State Government
plans for the area. In addition, Figure 8 also shows that the site is to
be a public open space but also to be protected from overshadowing.
Figure 8: Solar Access Map in Design Guide (page 23 of AT-6)
Section 2.4 of the guide contains a series of objectives
for both residential development and public open spaces.
Based on the endorsed State Government plans and figures
attached to this report, it is clear that the proposal is not consistent
with the State Government’s endorsed plans for the area, nor is it
appropriate to be rezoned for high density residential use.
Local Strategic Planning Statement
Council’s Local Strategic
Planning Statement (LSPS) contains a series of Planning Principles for the
future location of additional housing and supporting actions.
Three key actions from this
Statement are relevant:
· “Implement
Council’s planning responses in St Leonards South to facilitate delivery
of the 6 - 10 year (2021 - 2026) housing supply” (page 30 of AT-9);
· “Improve
connections to the Green Grid, where possible, to enhance liveability; and
· Identify
opportunities for the provision of more open space in the planning proposal and
development assessment phases” (page 37 of AT-9).
Figure 9 (shown below)
contains Council’s planning responses in St Leonards South.
Figure 9: Extract from Local Strategic Planning
Statement (page 30 of AT-9).
The figure clearly shows the site and its surrounds as
‘proposed parks and public space’. It is also worth noting that
since the LSPS was made, Council has delivered new open spaces at Friedlander
Place, Wadanggari Park (Plaza), and open spaces associated with developments in
St Leonards South.
Based on the above, the proposal
is not consistent with Council’s Local Strategic Planning
Statement.
Local Housing
Strategy
One action is related to this proposal, as
follows:
“Only pursue planning proposals or
other planning framework changes in the Lane Cove LGA if they include a
principal affordable housing purpose and are consistent with Council’s
‘Principles for the location of additional housing’ in its Local
Strategic Planning Statement” (page 95 of AT-10).
There is no
affordable housing being proposed and the owner is specifically seeking
exemption from this requirement as part of the amendments. Not withstanding
that, co-living development is not defined as Affordable Housing under the State
Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) – it is defined as diverse
housing. There are already a number of diverse housing development in the area
including two separate (approved) developments for Build-to-Rent housing to
meet this need.
As a result, the
proposal is not consistent with this action, it is also not consistent with
Council’s Local Housing Strategy – which has been previously
endorsed by the Department of Planning.
In terms of a
change in circumstance, this has already been considered by the recent Crows
Nest TOD plans. As shown in Figure 6, no change to any planning controls
was recommended and adopted.
Regarding site-specific
merit, the issues are as follows:
· The Crows Nest TOD plans showed the site as potentially flood
affected, however this has been addressed through a flood study (in AT-4). No other hazards are known.
· As shown in previous figures, both State Government and Council
plans show this site as public open space (along with their surrounds) with no
residential development. This is confirmed across a range of endorsed plans. It
is correct that the area around the site was to be developed as residential
with attached open space however Council’s plans were for the developer
to acquire this site and use it as public open space.
· Based on the building envelope, Council is not satisfied that such a
building could be built on site to satisfy controls (particularly setbacks,
basements and waste).
· Council’s Design Review Panel found that the entire proposal
lacked merit and “the design proposal does not demonstrate
design excellence in terms of master planning, built form, sustainability or
connection with Country. In addition, the proposal does not demonstrate
adequate design quality in respect to the Apartment Design Guide” (AT-5).
· If the proposal is approved, it will reduce the amount of public
open space infrastructure in the St Leonards South precinct. The amount
provided in the proposal is not an improvement or an offset.
RESPONSE TO NOTIFICATION
While the
Gateway process does not provide for public exhibition prior to the submission
to the Department, Lane Cove Councils policy requires exhibition upon
lodgement.
The proposal was
exhibited for 14 days from February to March 2025. Council received 52
submissions:
|
Concern
|
Comment
|
|
Site was open space under Council’s
plans. It should remain as such.
|
Noted. The
proposal does not comply with State Government and/or Council’s plans
for the site (to be a public open space in addition to the adjoining lots).
Further, in
the Crows Nest TOD plans a submission was received from the site and no
change to zoning or planning controls were recommended (see Figure 6).
|
|
Impacts on views
|
Noted. Under
State Government and Council’s plans this site is a public open space
and has no impact on views. The approved building behind the site has been
designed to achieve appropriate view sharing. To date, no analysis has been
provided from the applicant.
|
|
Concerns about overshadowing
|
Noted.
Council’s Design Review Panel raised considerable concern with this
aspect as follows:
“The proposed building
envelope may result in considerable overshadowing of the proposed
neighbouring park and adjacent buildings currently under construction
within Areas 1 and 2 of the South St Leonards Precinct. The description
provided by the Applicant of the levels of over-shadowing of the subject site
by existing buildings to the north, appears to be at odds with the sun view
diagrams provided.”
It also fails to address the
Crows Nest TOD Design Guide requirement for no additional overshadowing of
existing and proposed open spaces for the Precinct.
|
|
Does not comply with SEPP requirements
for Co-living developments
|
Noted. Due to
the site’s size, the proposal is unable to comply with the SEPP’s
minimum lot size standards for Co-living (Section 69). It is important to
note that these standards are not non-discretionary standards and the lot
size requirement in particular does not appear to be flexible. Amalgamation
is not possible as the adjoining sites are being developed for open space by
a separate developer.
Council is
also concerned that due to the site’s constraints and inability to
comply with requirements (i.e. setbacks, basement & waste) any building
may never be able to be built.
|
|
Worsening traffic/parking
|
At this stage,
the applicant has not provided any traffic/parking analysis to support their
proposal or address concerns.
|
|
Co-living development has no affordable
housing requirement
|
Under the State
Environmental Planning Policy (Housing), Co-living is not considered as
affordable housing – it is considered diverse housing.
However, under
Council’s Local Environmental Plan, in order to achieve the
incentive height and floor space ratio an applicant must provide affordable
housing on-site (in perpetuity). The proposal does not comply with this.
|
|
Concerns about the nature of co-living
and its impact on the area
|
These types of
concerns could be addressed at a future Development Application stage.
|
|
Questions about property values
|
Under the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, property values are not a relevant
consideration in planning decisions.
|
|
Some submissions supported the proposal
|
One supporting
submission was received from the owner of the site. The others focused on the
housing crisis and short-term rental accommodation (STRA) and the need for a
cafe.
Lane Cove
Council is well on track to exceed its Housing Accord Target of 3,400 new
dwellings by 2029 and other forms of STRA are going to be available in the
precinct. Council has also recently opened Wadanggari Park containing a
supermarket, library, cafes, restaurants which this precinct has direct
access to.
|
CONCLUSION
Planning Proposal No. 40 has been reviewed
by Council’s Design Review Panel and staff.
Based on the
above, the Planning Proposal is not consistent with either State Government or
Council’s plans for the site – which have consistently identified
it as being for public open space only.
The owner
previously made a submission to the State Government’s Crows Nest TOD
plans and no change was recommended (see Figure 6). The endorsed State
Government plans continued to identify the site for public open space.
Council’s
Design Review Panel also found that it lacked merit and if approved would
significantly overshadow buildings, open spaces and would not adequately
consider the Apartment Design Guide.
Based on the
building footprint provided, there are also doubts as to whether such a
building could be built on site that complies with any required controls.
On balance as
the proposed development does not achieve either strategic or site-specific
merit, it is therefore recommended for refusal.
|
RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to Section 9.1 of the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Lane Cove Local Planning
Panel at its meeting of 25 March 2025 is recommended to not support Planning
Proposal No. 40, for the following reasons:-
A. Does
not Pass the Strategic Merit Test
Reasons:
1) Is inconsistent with the Greater Sydney Region
Plan Objective 31 that “public open space is accessible,
protected and enhanced”.
2) Is inconsistent with the North District Plan
Actions 31 & 34 which is to deliver and implement a
Place Strategy and Infrastructure Plan for the St Leonards health precinct
and to “deliver new high open space, upgrade public areas, and
establish collaborative place-making initiatives” – in St
Leonards.
3) Is inconsistent with the State Government’s
Crows Nest TOD plans (including the Design Guide) which show this site
specifically as public open space.
4) Is inconsistent with Section 9.1 Ministerial
Direction 1.13 because it does not achieve (and undermines) the intended
outcomes of the Crows Nest TOD plans and is not of minor significance.
5) Is inconsistent with the following actions of
Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement:
a. Implement Council’s planning responses in St
Leonards South to facilitate delivery of the 6 - 10 year (2021 - 2026)
housing supply.
b. Improve connections to the Green Grid, where
possible, to enhance liveability.
c. Identify opportunities for the provision of more open
space in the planning proposal and development assessment phases.
6) Is inconsistent with Council’s adopted Local
Housing Strategy which states that Council should only
pursue planning proposals or other planning framework changes in the Lane
Cove LGA if they include a principal affordable housing purpose. The proposal
actively seeks to remove itself from this requirement
B. Does not comply with Section 3.33 of the NSW
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
Reason:
This section of the
Act deals with the preparation, explanation
and justification of Planning Proposals – which requires Proposals to
state whether they will give effect to both a Local Strategic Planning
Statement and comply with the relevant directions under section 9.1.
Having considered the above, the Planning
Proposal is inconsistent with Section 3.33 (2)(c) of the EP&A Act because
the Planning Proposal will not “give effect to” Council’s
Local Strategic Planning Statement and does not comply with the relevant
Section 9.1 Ministerial Direction (i.e. Direction 1.13).
C. Does not pass the Site-specific Merit Test
Reasons:
1) Both State Government and Council
plans show this site as public open space (along with their surrounds) with
no residential development. This is confirmed across a range of endorsed
plans. It is correct that the area around the site was to be developed as
residential with attached open space however Council’s plans were for
the developer to acquire this site and use it as public open space.
2) Based on the building envelope,
Council is not satisfied that such a building could be built on site to
satisfy controls (particularly setbacks, basements and waste).
3) Council’s Design Review Panel
found that the entire proposal lacked merit and “the design
proposal does not demonstrate design excellence in terms of master planning,
built form, sustainability or connection with Country. In addition, the
proposal does not demonstrate adequate design quality in respect to the
Apartment Design Guide”.
4) If the proposal is approved, it will
reduce the amount of public open space infrastructure in the St Leonards
South precinct. The amount provided in the proposal is not an improvement or
an offset.
D. Does not comply with Council’s intended plans
for the site
As shown
above, all State and Local Government planning have consistently designated
this site (and the surrounding ones) as public open space.
Based on
recent Development Application (DA) approvals in the area, Council should
give consideration to a future rezoning of this site and others in the area
as RE1 Public Recreation.
|
Mark Brisby
Director - Planning and Sustainability
Planning and Sustainability Division
ATTACHMENTS:
|
AT‑1 View
|
Planning Proposal No. 40
|
65 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑2 View
|
Concept Building Envelope
|
1 Page
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑3 View
|
Solar Access Analysis
|
1 Page
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑4 View
|
Flood Assessment
|
15 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑5 View
|
Final minutes of the NSROC Design Review Panel
|
5 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑6 View
|
Crows Nest TOD - Precinct Design Guide
|
67 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑7 View
|
Crows Nest TOD - Final Urban Design Report
|
99 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑8 View
|
Crows Nest TOD - Final Urban Design Report - Appendix A
|
63 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑9 View
|
Local Strategic Planning Statement - March 2020
|
83 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
|
AT‑10 View
|
Adopted Local Housing Strategy
|
98 Pages
|
Available Electronically
|
