under 15m frontage duplex Bankstown?

Hi juxt1n, how is the progress so far? Does council allow you to build duplexes?

For other team members, I am asking for your advices because same as juxt1n, my land also has funny features (small at front, but getting wider at the back). Is there any maximum setbacks? Because on setbacks of 8.5m, I have achieved 15m frontage. Will this be approved? Thanks

 

I haven't gone forward with my application on the ground of an advice from a house designer. He said the setback is where the council will end up looking at should there be a dispute.

 

I can see minimum setbacks required, but there are no mention on maximum setbacks. Has anyone encountered similar case when you meet 15m FBL by moving the building behind? Any thoughts?

 

Ask the council, but normally you have to follow what others in the street have done.

 

Some councils look at average setbacks a few houses either side and talk about being within a range. Streetscape and aesthetics is often looked at, blend in.

 

Thanks Anthony416. The surroundings also have average setbacks of 8-9.5m FBL

 

Hi Guys. an important and common topic, questions and thread. The answer to the question, in 2020, is that most NSW metropolitan (Sydney) councils have strict frontage/site width requirements for dual occupancy/ duplex development, as they do for townhouses, residential flat buildings. We have been in this market for many years on countless duplexes, working in (among many) Bankstown, Auburn (Cumberland), Parramatta, Blacktown, Fairfield, Liverpool, Hills Shire and as a development consultant, professional registered Architect I can clearly advise the following regards frontage non-compliances;

1. Council set the development standards for a reason (ie-to be followed-not broken!). and it is now extremely rare for any council accept a non-compliance of frontage-even if its 10cm. Policy impact (ie-setting a precedent) for other people to follow, under common law, is a key reason why. If the frontage is listed as an LEP (Local Environmental Plan) requirement, a variation request may be submitted with any such DA which is called a 'Clause 4.6 variation), referring to clause 4.6 of the LEP standard template. However, you will need extremely strong justifications & a unique situation to support this, and only suitably qualified professional such as a Professional Town Planner, can draft these statements. Clause 4.6 requests rarely refer to site width as these are typically requirements under the local Development Control Plan (DCP)-not LEP. Clause 4.6 requests are typically for height protrusions, floor space non compliance and there is strong grounds typically for such.

2. There is only a small chance council will accept ANY variations to site width/frontage for duplex/dual occupancy applications.

3. A quick chat with the duty planner at your local council (usually you can just go there and speak to duty town planner) and have a discussion regards this will clarify you more. If council planner says that they may accept this variation-then I would suggest a Pre DA-to minimise risk (Pre Lodgement application). You would need some sketch plans including site plan, basic survey plan, basic planning report and particular discussion on the site width question. Note-some councils don’t allow pre lodgement applications on small development such as duplex/dual occupancy applications so you need to check with local council regards this.

4. Over the past 17 years-I have only ever got one(1) minor variation approved for site width, but that was circa 2005 when things were easier regards this matter. These days it’s a clear NO.

5. The public may see such a minor non compliance of site width as a small issue-but in council terms/policy impact terms, tis a big issue. We have laws, regulations, standards for a reason-and that is to be obeyed & followed-not broken

6. My conclusion is that if the standard (usually) requires 15m frontage-then even 14.99 will not be typically accepted due to policy impact (setting a precedent). Unless directly next door had it accepted, and was approved under the current LEP & DCP- and you are in a growth area-you got very small chance.

Ibrahim Conlon. Architect www.iscdesign.com.au

 

I was hopeful to pick up an adjoining site to achieve about 34 m frontage and pushing for 5 t/h but I require 35m to achieve that.

 

Ok well surprisingly enough-council are a typically little more relaxed on frontage for multi-dwellings and residential flat building (RFB/ Apartment) building developments, than they are for smaller duplex developments. This could most likely be due to the fact hat such larger developments are more rare and have larger lots that can accommodate minor non compliances. For a multi dwelling site 1metre non compliance-that is significant yet NOT impossible. There is plenty of established precedent both through councils and the court (Land & Environment Court -appeals court) as such, for this. If you already own the site-it would be an easy matter to research and advise including looking at design options and the major planning objectives of (a) Floor area, (2) Setbacks, (3) site cover (4) landscaping/deep soil planting, (5) height, (6) carparking (7) stormwater drainage These are the major objectives. If overall-general compliance can be achieved, yet there is a single non compliance 1m for site width/site frontage- then this is something council may well consider & accept. If not-then it could be likewise taken to court and overturned on appeal as the court will tend to look at the bigger planning objectives 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 as above-rather than policy impact of the local council.

The complexity comes when a developer wishes to purchase a site for such development. There is always risk with such applications. Hence a Pre DA/ pre lodgment application is the best strategy. As advised, first step is a quick chat with local council duty planner. Our first step is individual research on the site considering all the planning & site issues (drainage), sewer pipe location, slope, LEP, DCP & EPI requirements. We then generally advise a developer the chances. But 1m is significant non compliance so you have a very small chance.


Ibrahim Conlon. Architect www.iscdesign.com.au