Proposed dwelling at the rear of 32 St Johns Road (Source development application D/2024/631)

by Lyn Milton, July 2025 (Bulletin 5/2025)

In Bulletin 8/2024 (p. 3), Ian Stephenson referred to the Society’s submission to City of Sydney on a development application (DA) that sought approval to construct a secondary dwelling facing Denman Lane at the rear of 32 St Johns Road, Glebe (Figure 1). DA D/2024/631 was lodged on 30 July last year and was approved by Council on 26 February this year. This property adjoins my own.

Briefly, the proposal sought a secondary dwelling that includes:

  • A plan that, under a normal definition, would be considered two storeys.
  • Premises that occupy the full width of the block.
  • A band of windows at the rear (facing the rear of the existing residence on the same site), almost the width of the building and two large ‘dormers’ at the front facing Denman Lane.
  • Minimum land for the amenity of the residents of the main house.
  • A side wall replaces at least ¾ of my present fence.
  • The secondary dwelling would have no open space, either behind, in front or on either side. It’s ‘aspect’ is Denman Lane – garbage bins and dumped rubbish. Denman Lane is poorly drained and becomes a river even in light rain. Location, location, location.
  • Rear windows that peer into the rear yard of 37 Wentworth Street, although they are to be of translucent glass to ensure the privacy of those residents.
  • Bin storage within the house.
Figure 1. Location of site that is the subject of D/2024/631 (Source: City of Sydney ePlanning)

Recommendations for rear lane development for the St Phillips HCA

Such a dwelling is out of keeping with the rear lane development envisaged for the St Phillips heritage conservation area (HCA) in which the site is located. The St Phillips HCA is one of eight HCAs within Glebe–Forest Lodge. These HCAs are listed in Part 2 of Schedule 5 of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 (SLEP)[1], a NSW government environmental planning instrument with legislative force under section 3.20 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Detailed ‘provisions to guide development’ are in the Sydney Development Control Plan 2012 (DCP),[2] which ‘supplements’ the SLEP. Section 2.6 of the DCP has concise ‘locality statements’ for areas within Glebe and Forest Lodge. Section 2.6.9, for St Phillips locality, refers to the area’s ‘heritage character’, including that the area’s ‘intact townscape, including the building form, scale, architectural elements and relationship to the street is to be retained and enhanced. New development that is introduced is to be sympathetic to its surrounds.’

Figure 2. From the St Phillips locality statement in the Sydney Development Control Plan 2012

Section 4 of the DCP addresses development types, including ‘secondary and laneway dwellings’ (section 4.1.6).[3] Provisions for secondary and/or laneway dwellings in HCAs in particular, are outlined in Section 4.1.6.2:

  • Where a property is … located within a heritage conservation area, development to the rear lane is only possible where it is consistent with the heritage significance of the property, particularly: (a) the ability to appropriately accommodate additional development at the rear of the property; and (b) in terms of its scale and configuration.
  • Retain stables or significant structures that contribute to the history, character and significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area.
  • Where a rear lane is highly intact, the pattern of original outbuildings, fences and laneway widths must be retained.
  • Development is to retain the predominant scale of the lane, particularly where that scale is single-storey.
  • Development is to retain … any landscape features, including mature trees.

These are consistent with recommendations for the development of rear lanes in the State Heritage Inventory’s St Phillips HCA listing:[4]

  • Retain the predominant one storey scale.
  • Do not allow new second storey development to any lanes at the boundary fence.
  • Retain small structures, timber paling fences and greenery of rear gardens which contribute to the landscape character.

It seems that all this was disregarded (reinterpreted?) in this proposal.

The rear development at 30 St Johns

D/2003/1327 for 30 St Johns Road approved for the ‘erection of a garage with storage loft within the roof pitch at 30 St Johns Road’, a property which is next door to 32 St Johns Road. This was an amendment of a previous attempt to place a ‘granny flat’ on the site. The resulting structure is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Garage at 30 St Johns Road, viewed from Denman Lane (Source: D/2015/1602)

A cynic could say that the garage/storage loft has the appearance of a residence and does not provide particularly efficient storage. The general feeling in the neighbourhood was that this was a blight on the block, and none of the private owners would want to replicate it. Although it was claimed that the building was compatible with surrounding buildings, all local residences are late Victorian attic cottages and two-storey terraces. There is no similarity of proportion, fabric or style and no easily detected architectural merit. If this is compatible, it is not obvious!

It was therefore unsurprising that a DA was submitted to the City of Sydney (D/2015/1602) for number 30’s ‘garage and storage loft’ to be converted to a ‘secondary dwelling’ under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. (Yes, really!). The DA was approved in April 2016 (see Figure 4 for the result).

Figure 4. The secondary dwelling at 30 St Johns Road – compatible with neighbouring properties? (Photo taken by L. Milton on 11 May this year)

Like its predecessor, the building was the width of the block, paling fences demolished for its front and side walls. Essentially, the roof was redesigned, including being slightly lowered to accommodate the planned residence, but the footings remained unchanged. There is a solitary entrance from Denham Lane. A row of windows facing the rear of the main residence is almost the width of the building. It was claimed that the windows at the front face the side of a house and therefore do not affect the privacy of the residents at 37 Wentworth Street.

Secondary residence at 32 St Johns

Number 32, a former NSW Department of Housing property, was sold in August 2022 for $1,450,000. Unknown to local residents, number 32 was purchased by the owner of number 30 and has been leased since. In July 2024, DA D/2024/631 was submitted to erect a secondary dwelling at number 32, similar but not identical to that on the neighbouring property (Figure 5).

Submissions objecting to the proposal were submitted by the Glebe Society, one neighbour, and me. Some aspects fell outside the Council’s authority to accept, and a Local Planning Panel was convened for Wednesday, 26 February 2025. The Panel consisted of the Chairman (Rob Stokes), three experts and three community members. The speakers included Mark Shapiro (architect), Eli Gescheit of NAVON, whose role is described as ‘assisting our clients with navigating the red tape often found when dealing with Councils’, and me, the sole objector whose fate was sealed. Unfortunately, no representative of the Glebe Society was available.

Figure 5. Proposed dwelling at the rear of 32 St Johns Road (Source: development application D/2024/631)

The determination was that the proposal be approved. During the discussion, Mr Geschiet noted that, had the rear lane development at number 30 not occurred, ‘we would not be here today’.

Some of the reasoning for the approval was surprising and disappointing to me:

  • The removal of the nineteenth-century toilet building, which had already taken place, was endorsed. Although contrary to the St Phillips Heritage Conservation Area recommendations, as we were informed, there are ‘many examples’ of rows of outhouses. My understanding of terrace house living is the similarity of premises that is socially levelling!
  • What would appear to almost anyone but the Local Planning Panel as a second storey of the proposed building was, in fact, we were told, ‘a modern interpretation’ of an attic.
  • Similarly, the large pair of front windows facing Denman Lane was also ‘a modern interpretation’; this time, of a dormer.
  • The windows would not impact the privacy of my neighbour at 37 Wentworth Street, although they seem directed to her rear yard because they would be filled with translucent glass.
  • The overshadowing onto my property was ‘not significant’, although a lawyer who specialises in this issue advised me that I had a strong case. According to the Panel, overshadowing would not affect my garden and other normal backyard activities. My request for a shadow diagram for the equinox, as distinct from the one provided on the shortest day of the year, was ignored.
  • The resale value of my property would not be reduced, they said. We will see about this, but I doubt the wisdom of the Panel on that one and much else. The approved ‘secondary dwelling’ is the width of the block. My paling backyard side fence will be replaced by the side of this two-storey building, one story and the modern interpretation of an attic. This impacts every aspect of using and enjoying my rear yard – drying the washing, gardening, and entertaining.
  • Egress was not an issue, apparently: ‘There are many houses in this area with only one entrance’. This, even though there was a fire on the verandah of one of the houses in our block some years ago and exit through the front door would not have been possible if required without the assistance of numerous fire ‘appliances’ and their staff that attended.
  • While I pointed out that I had walked every lane in the St Phillips area and there was only one two-storey building at a lane – and that was number 30 St Johns. I was told that if I were to go ‘not far away’, I would see plenty of those – ‘those’ being two-storey lane-facing secondary dwellings (a momentary lapse, presumably – isn’t this proposal for one storey and a ‘modern interpretation’ of an attic? Gotcha!). This is hardly the point anyhow, as we were discussing a residence in the St Phillips area.
  • One of the community members was concerned that the bedrooms in the proposed building were too close, and snoring in the adjacent room could disturb the sleep of those in the next room. I would have appreciated it if he could have taken the community and heritage impacts just as seriously.

I can’t help thinking that there was something in the tone of these replies that they expected this poor, dumb, old woman would go away, happy that a huge, unnecessary building for the benefit of a non-resident owner would be erected next door, with significant impacts for current and future residents of our neighbourhood.

Snorers notwithstanding, the proposal was approved.

Postscript

The moral of this [true] story is that beware the applicant for a laneway dwelling – they form a precedent, they multiply, and residents appear to be powerless to stop the progression.

Perhaps the listing sheets for the various heritage conservation areas need to be rewritten with definitions, e.g. ‘attic’, ‘dormer’, so that applicants, Council staff, supporters, objectors and planning panels are ‘all on the same page’.

The fear of snoring cannot delay a good [?] DA.

And lastly – on the day of the Panel, the Chairman was appointed to head the Housing program at Anglicare! A post that he will combine with his role as Chairman of Faith Housing. Christians awake!

[1] The other heritage conservation areas in Glebe–Forest Lodge are Bishopthorpe, Glebe Point, Glebe Point Road, Hughes, Lyndhurst, Hereford and Forest Lodge, and Toxteth HCAs (Part 2 of the SLEP’s Schedule 5)

[2] Sections of the DCP can be downloaded individually from the City of Sydney’s Sydney DCP 2012 web page.

[3] A secondary dwelling ‘is a self-contained dwelling located on the same land title as the principal dwelling’.

[4] The City of Sydney commissioned a review of the Glebe Conservation Area in 2005. The resulting report ‘recommended division of the Area into separate conservation areas, identified threats and issues within the area and proposed policies to protect the identified heritage character.’ (City of Sydney Glebe Conservation Area: Study Report, 2008) The St Phillips HCA was established as a result.