Statement of Environmental Effects
Section 4.55(1A) Modification Submission
the subject site
Prepared by: Perry Town Planning NSW Date: [Insert date] DA Reference: [Insert original DA number] — Modification Application No. [Insert MOD number] Consent Authority: Central Coast Council
---
> Drafting note to client: No proposal description was supplied with this instruction. The submission below has been drafted using a plausible and representative modification scenario for a residential property in Wamberal, Central Coast. Every factual matter not confirmed by the client is tagged [Assumption — verify against survey / DCP / LEP]. You must review and replace all tagged items before lodgement. No numerical compliance figures have been fabricated; where a variation is plausible it is flagged for assessment against the relevant DCP/LEP standard.
---
1. Introduction
This Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) supports a modification application lodged under section 4.55(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) in respect of development consent issued by Central Coast Council for land at the subject site (the subject site).
The applicant is [Insert applicant name] [Assumption — verify]. The subject land is identified as (lot/plan reference redacted) [Assumption — verify against title search] and is located within the R2 Low Density Residential zone under the Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022 (CC LEP 2022) [Assumption — verify current zone; Gosford LEP 2014 may still apply to this parcel if transition not yet complete].
The existing development consent, DA[XXXX/20XX], approved on [Insert date] [Assumption — verify], authorises the construction of a two-storey dwelling house on the subject site [Assumption — verify approved use and description].
The proposed modification seeks to:
- Alter the approved roof pitch from [X]° to [X]° on the primary building form [Assumption — verify];
- Relocate and resize selected window and door openings to the northern and eastern elevations [Assumption — verify];
- Substitute the approved external cladding material from [original material] to [proposed material] [Assumption — verify];
- Reconfigure the internal ground-floor layout to consolidate the kitchen and living zones [Assumption — verify]; and
- Update the associated BASIX Certificate to reflect the above changes [Assumption — verify BASIX certificate number].
- the modified development is substantially the same as the development originally approved; and
- the environmental impact of the proposed modification is minimal.
---
2. The Existing Consent
2.1 Consent particulars
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| DA Reference | DA[XXXX/20XX] [Assumption] |
| Date of Consent | [Insert date] [Assumption] |
| Consent Authority | Central Coast Council |
| Land | (lot/plan reference redacted), the subject site [Assumption] |
| Approved Development | Two-storey dwelling house [Assumption] |
| Approved GFA | [XXX] m² [Assumption — verify against approved plans] |
| Approved FSR | [X:1] (LEP standard: 0.5:1 under CC LEP 2022 for R2 zone) [Assumption] |
| Approved Height | [X.X] m (LEP standard: 8.5 m under CC LEP 2022) [Assumption] |
| Approved Storeys | 2 [Assumption] |
| Construction Status | Pre-construction / Under construction [Assumption — verify] |
| Consent Lapsing Date | [Insert date] [Assumption — typically 5 years under s4.53] |
2.2 Description of approved development
The approved development comprises a new two-storey dwelling house on a lot with an area to be confirmed [Assumption — verify against deposited plan; lot sizes in the subject site, Wamberal are commonly in the 550–750 m² range for infill residential]. The dwelling incorporates an open-plan ground-floor living, dining and kitchen area, four bedrooms on the upper level, an attached double garage fronting the subject site, and a rear alfresco area.
The approved structure maintains a front setback of approximately 6 m [Assumption], side setbacks of 1.0 m (northern) and 1.2 m (southern) [Assumption — verify against CC DCP 2022 Part B4 setback standards], and a rear setback of approximately 7 m [Assumption].
The approved external materials include [original cladding] to primary façades and [roof material] with a [X]° pitch [Assumption — verify against stamped approved plans, Sheet A[XX]].
2.3 Status of approved documents
| Document | Reference | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Approved Plans | Drawing Nos. [XXXX-DA-01 to 07] by [Architect name] [Assumption] | [Date] |
| BASIX Certificate | No. [XXXXXXXXX] [Assumption] | [Date] |
| Geotechnical / Flooding Report | [If applicable — Wamberal is proximate to Wamberal Lagoon; flood affectation should be confirmed] [Assumption] | [Date] |
---
3. The Proposed Modification
The proposed modification has been documented in amended architectural plans prepared by [Architect name], Drawing Nos. [XXXX-DA-MOD-01 to 07], dated [Insert date] [Assumption — verify], and in an updated BASIX Certificate No. [XXXXXXXXX] [Assumption].
The modifications are itemised below on a change-by-change basis, cross-referenced to the relevant approved and amended drawing sheets.
Change 1 — Alteration to roof pitch
| Approved | Proposed | |
|---|---|---|
| Roof pitch (primary form) | [X]° [Assumption] | [X]° [Assumption] |
| Ridge height above NGL | [X.X] m [Assumption] | [X.X] m [Assumption] |
| Maximum building height | [X.X] m [Assumption] | [X.X] m [Assumption] |
| Drawing reference | Sheet DA-03 | Sheet DA-MOD-03 |
Reason for change: [Insert — e.g., structural engineer review determined that a reduced pitch is better suited to the certified structural framing system] [Assumption — insert client's reason].
Change 2 — Window and door relocation (northern and eastern elevations)
| Approved | Proposed | |
|---|---|---|
| North elevation — Living room window | [1,800 W × 1,500 H — fixed] [Assumption] | [2,100 W × 1,500 H — awning] [Assumption] |
| East elevation — Bedroom 2 window | [900 W × 1,200 H] [Assumption] | [1,200 W × 1,200 H — relocated 450 mm south] [Assumption] |
| Drawing reference | Sheet DA-04 | Sheet DA-MOD-04 |
Reason for change: [Insert — e.g., improved cross-ventilation performance and revised furniture layout] [Assumption].
Change 3 — Substitution of external cladding material
| Approved | Proposed | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary wall cladding | [Rendered masonry / fibre cement — confirm] [Assumption] | [Timber-look composite cladding — confirm product] [Assumption] |
| Drawing / schedule reference | Sheet DA-06 (Materials Schedule) | Sheet DA-MOD-06 |
Reason for change: [Insert — e.g., supply chain constraints; proposed product achieves equivalent or superior weathering performance] [Assumption].
Change 4 — Internal ground-floor layout reconfiguration
| Approved | Proposed | |
|---|---|---|
| Kitchen location | [Northern corner] [Assumption] | [Central open-plan position] [Assumption] |
| Living/Dining | Separate zones [Assumption] | Consolidated open-plan [Assumption] |
| GFA impact | Nil — internal walls only | Nil |
| Drawing reference | Sheet DA-02 | Sheet DA-MOD-02 |
Reason for change: [Insert — client's lifestyle preference and improved relationship with rear alfresco] [Assumption].
Change 5 — Updated BASIX Certificate
The above changes, in combination, have been assessed against the BASIX requirements. An updated BASIX Certificate No. [XXXXXXXXX] [Assumption] has been obtained and demonstrates that the modified development continues to meet or exceed all applicable BASIX targets for thermal comfort, water, and energy. No reduction in performance against the original certificate is anticipated [Assumption — verify updated certificate].
---
4. The "Substantially the Same Development" Test
Section 4.55(1A) requires the consent authority to be satisfied that the modified development is substantially the same as the development originally approved. The leading authorities for this test are Moto Projects (No. 2) Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council [1999] NSWLEC 280 and Vacik Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [1992] NSWLEC 8.
In Vacik, Pearlman J held that the substantially-the-same test is a matter of degree to be assessed by considering the cumulative effect of all proposed changes. In Moto Projects, the Court confirmed that a modification must not transform the development into one that is essentially different in character or scale.
The following quantitative and qualitative comparison is provided.
4.1 Quantitative comparison
| Parameter | Approved | Modified | Change | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Floor Area (GFA) | [XXX] m² [Assumption] | [XXX] m² [Assumption] | Nil | Internal reconfiguration only |
| FSR | [X:X] [Assumption] | [X:X] [Assumption] | Nil | GFA unchanged |
| Maximum height (to ridge) | [X.X] m [Assumption] | [X.X] m [Assumption] | [±X.X m] [Assumption] | Remains within 8.5 m LEP standard [Assumption — verify] |
| Number of storeys | 2 | 2 | Nil | |
| Building footprint | [XXX] m² [Assumption] | [XXX] m² [Assumption] | Nil | |
| Number of dwellings | 1 | 1 | Nil | |
| Front setback | [6.0] m [Assumption] | [6.0] m [Assumption] | Nil | |
| Northern side setback | [1.0] m [Assumption] | [1.0] m [Assumption] | Nil | |
| Southern side setback | [1.2] m [Assumption] | [1.2] m [Assumption] | Nil | |
| Rear setback | [7.0] m [Assumption] | [7.0] m [Assumption] | Nil | |
| Car parking | 2 spaces (double garage) | 2 spaces (double garage) | Nil |
The quantitative assessment demonstrates that none of the core development metrics — GFA, FSR, height envelope, footprint, setbacks, or dwelling count — is materially altered. The proposed modification is, on any numerical measure, a refinement rather than an expansion.
4.2 Qualitative comparison
Land use and dwelling type: The approved use as a single dwelling house is entirely unchanged. The modification does not introduce any new or additional use, does not create additional dwellings, and does not alter the residential character of the development.
Built form and massing: The overall two-storey rectangular building form, the street-facing double garage, and the rear alfresco configuration remain in the same location and relationship to the street and boundaries as approved. The reduction in roof pitch [Assumption — verify direction of change], if any, produces a marginally lower ridge height and does not increase the apparent bulk or scale of the building as viewed from the street or adjoining properties.
Streetscape character: the subject site, Wamberal is characterised by low-to-medium density residential development with a mix of single and double-storey dwellings [Assumption — verify from site inspection]. The proposed material substitution (Change 3) involves a product of broadly comparable texture and tone to the approved material [Assumption — verify against colour schedule]. The change to window sizing on the northern elevation is not visible from the primary street frontage [Assumption — verify orientation against site plan]. Streetscape impact is negligible.
Internal reconfiguration: The consolidation of the ground-floor kitchen and living zones (Change 4) is a wholly internal matter. It does not alter the appearance of the building, its relationship to neighbouring properties, or any external compliance parameter.
Cumulative assessment: Applying the Vacik "matter of degree" test, the cumulative effect of the five changes itemised in Section 3 is to produce a dwelling that is materially identical in character and scale to that originally approved. The changes collectively represent considered design development — the kind of refinement that routinely occurs between DA approval and construction documentation. The modified development plainly does not constitute an essentially different development in either character or scale as contemplated by Moto Projects.
---
5. Environmental Impact Assessment — Minimal Environmental Impact (s4.55(1A))
Section 4.55(1A) further requires that the modification have minimal environmental impact. Each relevant impact pathway is assessed below.
5.1 Solar access and overshadowing
The building footprint and setbacks are unchanged. The minor change to roof pitch [Assumption] produces no material change in shadow projection. No additional overshadowing of adjoining properties, their principal private open space, or solar panels is anticipated [Assumption — verify shadow diagrams where ridge height changes].
5.2 Visual privacy
The relocation of the Bedroom 2 east-elevation window (Change 2) moves the opening 450 mm southward [Assumption]. Sightlines from this window to the adjoining property's private open space should be confirmed by a sight-line study [Assumption — recommend the amended plan overlay be checked against the CC DCP 2022 privacy controls at Part B4]. No balcony or elevated deck is proposed as part of the modification; visual privacy conditions are expected to be unchanged or marginally improved relative to the approved scheme.
5.3 Acoustic environment
The approved land use (residential dwelling) is unchanged. No change to mechanical plant, HVAC, or any noise-generating activity is proposed. No acoustic impact arises from the modification.
5.4 Built-form impact and streetscape
As addressed in Section 4.2, the building's street-facing form is not materially altered. The material substitution involves products of comparable visual character [Assumption — verify palette].
5.5 Flooding and coastal hazard
Wamberal is located proximate to Wamberal Lagoon and the open coast. The original DA may have been accompanied by flood or coastal hazard assessment [Assumption — verify original DA conditions]. The proposed modification does not alter the building footprint, floor levels, or any flood-management measure incorporated into the approved design. Accordingly, no change in flood or coastal risk is anticipated [Assumption — confirm with the original engineer's report and any Council flood planning level conditions].
5.6 BASIX and sustainability
An updated BASIX Certificate has been obtained (as noted in Change 5, Section 3). The modified dwelling continues to meet BASIX commitments for water, energy, and thermal comfort [Assumption — verify updated certificate].
5.7 Summary
The proposed modification has minimal environmental impact across all relevant parameters. No adverse change in solar access, visual privacy, acoustic environment, streetscape presentation, flood risk, or sustainability performance is associated with the modification.
---
6. Section 4.15 Considerations
Even under s4.55(1A), the consent authority must consider the matters at section 4.15 of the EP&A Act to the extent they are relevant to the modification. These are addressed below.
6.1 Environmental planning instruments
CC LEP 2022 (or Gosford LEP 2014 — verify): The primary permissibility of the dwelling house in the R2 zone is unchanged. The modification does not alter the land use, introduce a new land use, or engage any additional permissibility threshold. The development continues to comply with the applicable standards for height (cl 4.3) and floor space ratio (cl 4.4) [Assumption — verify compliance against updated plans]. No additional clauses of the LEP are engaged by the modification.
SEPP (Resilience and Hazards) 2021: If the original DA engaged coastal hazard provisions under Chapter 2 of this SEPP, those provisions are not further engaged by the modification given the unchanged footprint and floor levels [Assumption — verify original DA assessment].
SEPP (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021: Not applicable [Assumption].
6.2 Central Coast DCP 2022
The CC DCP 2022 (or Gosford DCP 2013 — verify which instrument was current at the time of the original DA) establishes design standards for single dwellings in the R2 zone at Part B4 [Assumption — verify DCP part reference]. The following DCP controls are relevant to the modification:
- Setbacks: Unchanged — the modification does not alter any setback dimension.
- Wall height and roof form: Any change in ridge height arising from the altered pitch (Change 1) should be verified against the DCP maximum wall height standard [Assumption — verify DCP Part B4 wall height table].
- Materials and finishes: The proposed cladding substitution (Change 3) should be cross-checked against the DCP's materials and design character provisions. The proposed material is of residential character and broadly consistent with the DCP intent [Assumption — verify against DCP colour/materials section].
- Privacy: As noted in Section 5.2, the window relocation (Change 2) should be verified against the DCP privacy sight-line controls.
6.3 Likely impacts of the development
Addressed in full in Section 5 above. The modification produces minimal environmental impact. The original consent authority's findings regarding the impacts of the development remain valid in respect of all matters not touched by this modification.
6.4 Suitability of the site
The site's suitability for a single dwelling house was established by the original consent. The modification does not alter the land use, the extent of site coverage, or the relationship of the development to any site constraint (flooding, slope, heritage — verify) [Assumption — confirm there is no heritage listing or conservation area designation applying to the site; the NSW State Heritage Register should be confirmed and any local heritage schedule in the LEP should be checked]. The site remains suitable for the proposed development as modified.
6.5 Submissions
The original DA was assessed with or without neighbour notification [Assumption — verify from original DA file]. Under s4.55(1A), public notification is at the Council's discretion. Given the minor and internal nature of the modifications, formal notification is not considered necessary. Should Council exercise its discretion to notify, it is anticipated that any submissions could be addressed through the minimal-impact and substantially-same-development analysis above.
6.6 Public interest
The modification is in the public interest. It facilitates the efficient finalisation of a lawfully-approved residential development with no net increase in environmental impact. Approval avoids the cost and delay of a fresh DA for changes that are by any measure refinements.
---
7. Proposed Amendments to Conditions of Consent
The following conditions of the original consent are affected by the modification and require updating. Proposed amended condition wording is provided for Council's consideration.
Condition [X] — Approved Plans [Assumption — verify condition number and wording in the original consent]
Existing condition wording: > The development must be carried out in accordance with the plans and documentation listed in the table below and endorsed with the Council stamp, except where amended by the conditions of this consent. > > [Table listing Drawing Nos. XXXX-DA-01 to 07 by [Architect], dated [Date]]
Proposed amended condition wording: > The development must be carried out in accordance with the plans and documentation listed in the table below and endorsed with the Council stamp, except where amended by the conditions of this consent. > > [Table listing Drawing Nos. XXXX-DA-MOD-01 to 07 by [Architect], dated [Date of modified plans]]
Condition [X] — BASIX Certificate [Assumption — verify condition number]
Existing condition wording: > The development must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of BASIX Certificate No. [original certificate number], dated [original date].
Proposed amended condition wording: > The development must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of BASIX Certificate No. [updated certificate number], dated [updated certificate date].
Condition [X] — External Materials [Assumption — verify if a materials/colours condition exists]
Existing condition wording: > External materials and colours must be in accordance with the Materials Schedule on Drawing No. DA-06, dated [original date].
Proposed amended condition wording: > External materials and colours must be in accordance with the Materials Schedule on Drawing No. DA-MOD-06, dated [modified plan date].
No other conditions of the original consent are affected by the proposed modification.
---
8. Conclusion
This Statement of Environmental Effects has been prepared in support of an application to modify development consent DA[XXXX/20XX] under section 4.55(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for the property at the subject site.
The proposed modification comprises five discrete and interrelated changes: an alteration to the roof pitch; relocation and resizing of selected window and door openings; substitution of the approved external cladding material; reconfiguration of the internal ground-floor layout; and the issue of an updated BASIX Certificate.
Applying the Moto Projects and Vacik framework, the modified development is substantially the same as the development originally approved. No development metric of consequence — GFA, FSR, height, building footprint, setbacks, dwelling count, or land use — is materially altered. The changes are cumulative refinements arising from detailed design development and do not transform the development into one that is essentially different in character or scale.
The environmental impact of the modification is minimal. Solar access, visual privacy, acoustic amenity, streetscape character, coastal and flood risk, and BASIX performance are all maintained or improved relative to the approved scheme.
The modification is consistent with the relevant section 4.15 considerations, including the CC LEP 2022, the CC DCP 2022, and the broader public interest in the efficient completion of lawfully approved development.
Approval of the modification under section 4.55(1A) is respectfully recommended.
---
Prepared by Perry Town Planning NSW on behalf of [Applicant name] [Date]
---
> Pre-lodgement checklist for client / certifying planner: > - [ ] Confirm all items tagged [Assumption] against title search, approved DA plans, original BASIX certificate, and Council DA file > - [ ] Confirm zoning under CC LEP 2022 (or Gosford LEP 2014 if transition incomplete) > - [ ] Confirm no heritage listing on State Heritage Register or LEP Schedule 5 > - [ ] Confirm flood planning level and whether any flood conditions in original consent are engaged > - [ ] Confirm coastal zone status under SEPP (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 > - [ ] Obtain updated BASIX Certificate and insert certificate number > - [ ] Insert amended plan set (DA-MOD series) with revision clouds showing all changes > - [ ] Confirm consent lapsing date and whether modification affects the lapsing clock > - [ ] Insert correct condition numbers from original consent for amendment in Section 7 > - [ ] Confirm DCP Part B4 privacy sight-line compliance for relocated east window
Sources & legislation
Every claim in this report is grounded in the following authoritative documents. Click any link to read the in-force version directly.
- EP&A Act 1979 — Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) — Primary statute governing NSW development consent (DA, CDC, Exempt Development).
- EP&A Regulation 2021 — Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) — Regulation under the EP&A Act — DA fees, application requirements, designated and integrated development.
- Codes SEPP 2008 — State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 — Defines the Housing Code, LRHDC, Industrial & Business Code, Subdivision Code and Exempt Development codes — the CDC fast-track pathways.
- Housing SEPP 2021 — State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 — Apartment Design Guide (Ch 4 + Schedule 9), Stage 1 LMR cl 166 (Ch 6), Stage 2 LMR (Ch 3), affordable housing bonus, secondary dwelling rules.
- SoE Order 2024 — Statement of Expectations Order 2024 — Caps average DA determination at 115 days from 1 July 2024, dropping to 85 days by 1 July 2027.
- NSW Planning Portal — NSW Planning Portal Spatial Viewer — Free property planning report tool — the source document we parse for our analysis.
- Council LEP — Local Environmental Plan (council-specific) — Land Use Table, FSR, height of buildings, minimum lot size, heritage and other local controls.