Administrative Centre

30 Frances St

Randwick 2031

Tel: 02 9399 0999

Fax 02 9319 1510

DX 4121 Maroubra Junction

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

INCORPORATED

AS A MUNICIPALITY

22 FEBRUARY 1859

PROCLAIMED AS

A CITY JULY 1990

 

4 June 2002

 

HEALTH, BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A HEALTH BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANDWICK WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, TOWN HALL, 90 AVOCA STREET, RANDWICK, ON TUESDAY, 11TH JUNE, 2002 AT 6.30 P.M.

 

Committee Members:                  His Worship, the Mayor, Cr D. Sullivan, Crs Andrews (Deputy Chairperson), Backes, Bastic, Daley (Chairperson), Greenwood, Matson, Matthews, Notley-Smith, Procopiadis, Schick, Seng, Tracey, White, Whitehead.

 

Quorum:                                      Eight (8) members.

 

NOTE: AT THE ORDINARY MEETING HELD ON 5TH SEPTEMBER, 2000, THE COUNCIL RESOLVED THAT THE HEALTH, BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE BE CONSTITUTED AS A COMMITTEE WHOSE MEMBERSHIP CONSISTS OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND WITH FULL DELEGATION TO DETERMINE MATTERS ON THE AGENDA.

 

 

1           Apologies

 

2           Minutes

 

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE HEALTH, BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 14 TH MAY, 2002.

 

3           Addresses to Committee by the Public

 

4           Mayoral Minutes

 

5           Development Applications

 

5.1                        

UNIT 10/ 14 ALBI PLACE, RANDWICK.

2

5.2                        

51-61 MILITARY ROAD, MATRAVILLE (BOTANY CEMETERY).

 

10

 

5.3                        

450-458 ANZAC PARADE, KINGSFORD.

31

 

5.4                        

11 CAIRO STREET, COOGEE.

79

5.5

16 DWYER AVENUE, LITTLE BAY

 

84

 

 

6           Miscellaneous

 

6.1                        

DIRECTOR PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT'S REPORT 34/2002 - MASTER PLAN AND REZONING FOR 68-76 WENTWORTH STREET, RANDWICK.

118

 

 

7.         General Business

 

8.         Notice Of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

 

…………………………….

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

24 May, 2002

FILE NO:

D/0098/2002

 

PROPOSAL:

 Construct an attic storage addition to an existing multi unit building

PROPERTY:

 UNIT 10/ 14 ALBI PLACE, RANDWICK

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Kevin Thomas Design & Construction

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Freda Backes, Murray Matson, Bruce Notley-Smith.

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions and the conversion of the existing roof space for use as attic style storage rooms to provide for additional floor space to unit 10.

The proposal was notified to adjoining and nearby property owners and three submissions were received.

 

The main issues regarding the proposal are bulk, scale, height and its impact upon the aesthetic appearance of the existing multi unit building.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions and the conversion of the existing roof space for use as attic style storage rooms to provide for additional floor space to unit 10. It is also proposed to carry out internal alterations to the third floor unit to accommodate a new stairway to the attic rooms.

 

The proposal will result in an additional 27.42m² of floor space.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is an irregular shaped allotment with frontages to Albi Place (main frontage), Dolphin Street at the rear and Judge Street on the Western side. Vehicular access is via Albi Place, which is a cul-de-sac. Existing on the site is a three/four-storey flat building with car parking at ground level. The building accommodates a total of 12 residential units consisting of 2 x 1 bedroom, 9 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom with one car parking space allocated to each unit. There is no visitor parking space provided on site.

 

The locality is residential in nature and is characterised by a preponderance of residential flat buildings of a variety of styles with dwelling houses interspersed. At the end of Albi Place is a reserve with access to Dolphin Street.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

DA 365/1998 was approved on 1 July 1998 for strata subdivision and refurbishment of the existing residential flat building.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan 1998. The following submissions were received:

 

5.1  Objections

 

1.     D & V Fleck (20 Judge Street, Randwick)

 

              Concerns:

              -the proposal will result in an increase in the height of the building.

              -the proposal will affect the view and privacy from their residence.

 

2.     Kamal Bracks (1/ 12 Albi Place, Randwick)

 

Concerns:

- the proposal will set a precedent for future development.

- the proposal will result in a loss of visual privacy.

- the proposal will result in additional overshadowing.

 

3.     Stefan Flegman (2/12 Albi Place, Randwick)

 

Concerns:

-the proposal will impact on the solar access into their unit.

-the proposed addition is not in keeping with the aesthetics or character of the    original building design.

-the attic area could be use for other purposes such as a bedroom.

-the application will set a precedent, which will encourage other applications.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

6.1       Building and Construction Issues

 

-BCA Classification

 

Under the Building Code of Australia, the classification of the building is Class 2.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The Development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

(a)   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned residential 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal: -

 

Clause 32 (1) of the Randwick LEP details maximum floor space ratios for buildings other than dwellings in Zone 2B as 0.65:1. The proposed additions within the roof space of the existing building will provide an extra 27.42m² of floor space resulting in a total floor space ratio, which further exceeds the allowable maximum for this particular site as detailed in the LEP. The applicant has not provided Council with full floor plan layout of the building and therefore the FSR for the building cannot be verified. It is to be noted however, that the applicant does indicate in the submitted plans that the development will result in a total FSR of 1.6:1.

 

Clause 33 (1) of the LEP states that for buildings in 2B zones, other than dwellings, a maximum height of a building is 9.5m measured vertically from any point on ground level. The proposal does not maintain the existing overall ridge height of the building and will increase the overall height at the rear of the building from 11.20m to 11.60m, which does not comply with maximum height limit.

 

Clause 33 (3) of the LEP states that for buildings in 2B zones, other than dwellings, a maximum height for any external wall is 7.0m measured vertically from any point on ground level. The proposed works protrude outside the existing roof space of the building and will increase the overall external wall height at the rear of the building from 8.00m to 10.15m

 

In order that Council may consider the variation of these standards, the applicant has submitted a SEPP 1 Objection.  The purpose of the SEPP 1 is to provide flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards, where in the particular case they are considered to be unreasonable or unnecessary.  The applicant has presented the following argument to vary the standards (Clause 32 &33 of the LEP): -

 

“        *the proposal complies with clause 11 (d) of the LEP

*the proposal if built will not be visible from the street

*the increase in FSR from the existing building is minimal. The total increase is   0.03:1

*There will be minimal or no overshadowing onto adjoining properties

*There will be no loss of views by occupants within the immediate area

*There will be no loss of privacy as there are no windows in walls.

*This addition will be used specifically for storage purposes as there are no wall   windows & fixed staircase        “

 

The purpose of the LEP is to set upper limits for the development in residential zones that are consistent with the redevelopment potential of land through limit on the amount of floor space and height that can be provided, given other development restrictions. Such standard requirements will help to reduce the potential for adverse impact on nearby and adjoining development while still providing for reasonable levels of development. The proposed development will result in the building having an unbalanced appearance from the street and adjoining developments. The application proposes an attic addition consisting of two storage rooms and exceeds the overall height and wall height controls for the zone. Due to the adjacent street trees, the addition will be considerably screened when viewed from the rear, there will however be an oblique view of the addition between the trees. 

 

It is considered that such ad hoc additions to individual units within residential flat buildings detract from the architectural integrity and design of the building in the same way as the piecemeal enclosure of individual balconies, which are discouraged by the DCP.  The approval of an addition to one of the units in the building would be inequitable for other units as any further addition would be more difficult to design.  The approval of the proposal would set a precedent for further piecemeal attic additions to other residential flat buildings in the surrounding area.  The proposal will also result in adverse impacts in terms of building bulk on the visual amenity of adjoining premises.

 

In the circumstances of this case, it is considered that the SEPP 1 Objection to the FSR, overall building height and external wall height standards is not well founded as the purpose of Clause 32 & 33 have not been satisfied and a further variation of the development standards will set a poor precedent for attic additions to multi unit housing buildings.

 

8.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

8.1   Bulk of the building

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing with regard to density are that bulk and scale of development is to reflect the desired future character of the area, building bulk is to be compatible with the surrounding built forms and minimises impact on nearby buildings, open space and the streetscape.

 

The proposed works are not confined substantially within the existing roof form and will protrude from the existing roof space of the building. The additional storage room will create an increase in the available usable floor area and increase the overall bulk of the existing building. Although the proposed addition is at the rear of the property and will only be partially visible from Albi Place (front), it can be viewed from Dolphin and Judge Street to varying degree. The proposed storage rooms are considered large in size and extend significantly to the southern roof planes. The proposed roof pitch of the additional area will be higher than the existing ridge height of the building and therefore will be visible from surrounding streets.

 

The overall bulk of the building is incompatible with the surrounding built forms and will result in adverse impacts upon the visual amenity of the adjoining residents and the character of the area.

 

8.2   Appearance of the building in relation to the adjoining residential development and the streetscape

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing include that height limits should assist in responding to the desired future character of the local context and variations in massing and height create visual interest, distribute the bulk of the building and minimise amenity impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

The proposed development will compromise the existing architectural character of the building. The multi unit development as originally built has an architectural integrity as a whole, which can be easily destroyed by unsympathetic roof additions. The design and siting of the proposed work will adversely impact the integrity and the appearance of the building and it’s relationship to adjoining residential development and the streetscape. The massing and height of the proposed addition is inappropriately distributed and will present as an incongruous element in the streetscape.

 

The site inspection revealed that there is a number of large trees along Dolphin and Judge Street, which will screen the proposed addition, however these trees are deciduous and as such, the additions will be visible for a significant portion of the year.

 

8.3   Privacy

 

In relation to impact upon the privacy of the adjoining properties, the intended use of the proposed room, the location and dimensions of the skylight, and the distance of the addition to the adjoining premises are such that it is not considered that there will be any significant impact upon the privacy of the adjoining dwellings.

 

8.4 Overshadowing / Solar Access

 

In relation to increased overshadowing, the submitted shadow diagrams do not indicate that the proposed works will result in any additional shadows during the winter months to the adjoining properties. The proposal is therefore considered satisfactory in this regard.

 

8.5 Loss of view

 

In relation to the proposal resulting in view loss from Judge Street, an inspection of the objector’s property at Judge Street was made in order to determine the full extent of the visual impact.  The objector’s property enjoys a significant view corridor that comprises the subject property building in the foreground and the surrounding building outline in the middle and far distant ocean views. Two large coral trees exist between the site and the objector’s property and are currently in full bloom. The foliage of these trees currently reduces the distant view of the subject site from the objector’s property.  Whilst these trees are deciduous it is not envisaged that any significant view loss will result from this proposal.

 

9.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposed development will result in ad-hoc additions that will detract from the architectural integrity of the building. 

 

The SEPP 1 Objection is not supported, as the applicant has not adequately demonstrated that compliance with Clause 32 and 33 (Floor Space Ratio & Building Heights) in Randwick Local Environment Plan 1998 is unnecessary and unreasonable. The development will set a poor precedent for attic additions to multi unit buildings and result in adverse impacts on the visual amenity of adjoining premises and the locality.

 

It is considered that the proposal does not satisfy the relevant assessment criteria and it is recommended that the application be refused. 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.        THAT Council as the responsible authority refuse development consent under Section 80 and 80 A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. D/0098/2002 for Construct an attic storage addition to an existing multi unit building at Unit 10/ 14 Albi Place, Randwick for the following reasons: -

 

1.         The proposed development does not comply with Clause 32- Floor Space Ratio and Clause 33 - Building Heights of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

 

The objection lodged under SEPP 1 is not supported in this instance, as it does not demonstrate that strict compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances. 

 

2.         The proposed development does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of Council’s Development Control Plan- Multi Unit Housing in relation to height and density. 

 

3.         The proposed addition does not effectively integrate with the existing building and will compromise the architectural integrity of the building.

 

4.         The proposed development represents an ad-hoc addition to the multi unit housing building and will detrimentally impact on the visual amenity of the locality.

 

5.         Inadequate information has been submitted to allow a proper assessment of the application.

 

6.         The development would set an undesirable precedent for further piecemeal attic additions to multi unit housing development and is not in the public interest.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A4 Configuration

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

IDALY YAP

ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 



 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

9 May, 2002

FILE NO:

D/0034/2002

 

PROPOSAL:

 Construction of 704 new vaults and crypts and 1128 ash niches, including landscaping, paving and roadworks.

PROPERTY:

 51-61 Military Road, Matraville (Botany Cemetery)

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 N&F Arciuli pty. Limited

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Committee as it is valued at $3,700,000.

 

The proposal is for construction of new vaults and crypts within the Botany Cemetery comprising 704 burial spaces (vaults and crypts) and 1128 ash niches arranged in a garden setting. The subject site adjoins the existing Pioneers Park memorial garden, which is a heritage item under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

 

Following discussions with the applicant in relation to heritage issues, the applicant has submitted a heritage impact report to address these issues. The heritage impact report was referred to the Royal Australian Historical Society pursuant to the Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act 1972.

 

The report was also referred to NSW Heritage Office for comments. Following endorsement of the findings and recommendations of the heritage report by the NSW Heritage Office, amended plans were submitted by the applicant. The amended plans, which are the subject of this report, are considered to be satisfactory.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

It is proposed to construct a vault and crypt development containing 704 burial spaces (vaults and crypts) and 1128 ash niches arranged in a garden setting in a site adjacent to the existing Pioneers Park memorial garden within the Botany Cemetery. The proposed vaults, crypts and niche walls will be arranged along two intersecting paths running east-west and north-south to form two axes. The proposal will have a geometrical pattern that reflects the geometry of the existing Pioneers Park.

 

The two axes will be linked to pedestrian entry points which will be available from Reid Avenue in the east, Frost Avenue in the north, and Greg Taylor Avenue in the west. Two spaces will be provided within the site for hearse parking and removal of coffin with access off Reid Avenue. Car parking for visitors will be available on all internal streets within the cemetery.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is located on the western side of Bunnerong Road, and is bounded by internal cemetery roads comprising Reid Avenue on the eastern side, Frost Avenue on the northern side, and Greg Taylor Avenue on the western side. The southern side is bounded by the existing Pioneer Park Memorial Garden site. The site is relatively flat and has a total site area of 2740 sqm.

 

The surrounding development comprises predominantly the Botany Cemetery grounds immediately to the west and south of the subject site. Further to the west is the Port Botany industrial complex. To the east, on the other side of Bunnerong Road, is open space comprising the Womens Athletic Field.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

The site forms part of the Botany Cemetery and is located adjacent to the Pioneers Park site. In 1901, early headstones and grave monuments in the Old Devonshire Street Cemetery were relocated to Botany Cemetery to create the site for Central Station. These headstones and monuments included those commemorating pioneers of the colony including John Cadman and Mary Reiby. In 1972, the State Government passed the Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act which, among other provisions, allowed the Botany Cemetery Trust to remove prescribed monuments and graves to preserve them in a memorial area within the cemetery. Accordingly, in 1972, preparations were undertaken to relocate the early headstones and grave monuments from the earlier location within the Botany Cemetery into the existing Pioneer Park. In this context, the Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act 1972, required the Cemetery Trust to consult the Royal Australian Historical Society for any redevelopment affecting the Botany Cemetery. In 1976, Pioneer Park was designed formally into a garden memorial setting.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified, advertised and referred to Precinct Committee in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan 1998. One submission was received in response to the notification/advertisement:

 

Martyn Killion, Society of Australian Genealogists, 120 Kent Street, Sydney

 

§ Inadequate curtilage and screen planting to the development from Pioneer Park

§ Need to consider the national historical significance of memorials within the Pioneer Park

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers, including where necessary external bodies and the following comments have been provided:-

 

6.1  Landscape Issues

 

There are several trees, covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order, that will be affected by the proposed works, including:

 

a)   Two (2) Melaleuca quinquenervia (Paperbarks) located towards the eastern end of the development site. These trees are approximately 7 metres tall and in reasonable health, however they are not significant specimens and as such permission should be granted for their removal.

 

b)   Three (3) Casuarina glauca (She-oaks) located towards the south eastern corner of the site. These trees are approximately 6-7 metres tall and in good health. Given that they are in direct conflict with the proposed works and have not yet reached maturity, permission should be granted for their removal, subject to the planting of three replacement trees within the site.

 

c)   One (1) Eucalyptus species (Gum Tree) located within the south eastern corner of the site. This tree is approximately 6 metres tall and in average to good health with some deadwood throughout the canopy. Given that this tree is in direct conflict with the proposed works, permission should be granted for its removal, subject to the planting of one replacement tree within the site.

 

6.2  Drainage Issues

 

On site detention is not required for this site.

 

The DEPCD is advised that the following drainage condition has been included within this report:

 

The proposed paving within the development site shall be constructed with a permeable brick paving or other similar material that will allow stormwater to infiltrate to ground (eg Rocla permeable paving).

 

The DEPCD is requested to consider this condition and to advise the DAIS if it is conflict with any design requirements the DEPCD is seeking to impose.(Comment: The condition requiring the use of permeable brick paving is considered acceptable subject to a further  condition requiring the submission of a paving plan to show the proposed  paving layout and material( including samples of paving materials)  for Council’s approval prior to issue of a construction certificate.

 

6.3       Traffic/Parking Issues

 

The proposed development does not seek to alter any of the internal road network and it utilises the existing vehicular entry/exit points. The applicant does not indicate additional vehicular movements associated with the development proposal however it is anticipated that the new development will not significantly increase the traffic flow in Bunnerong Road or other streets surrounding the development site.

 

Parking associated with the new development is to be provided onstreet within the existing internal road network, the applicant has stated that sufficient capacity exists within the cemetery road network to accommodate the parking demand generated by the development. Council’s development engineer has inspected the site and is of the opinion that demand for parking can be accommodated within the internal roads surrounding the development site, (the majority of areas adjacent to the proposed development have been fully developed and therefore these areas are unlikely to have funeral services that are in competition with funeral services for the proposed development). The extent/intensity of existing development within the areas surrounding the site is such that no dedicated offstreet carpark could be constructed to serve the proposed development.

 

The applicant has indicated that the existing entry/exit point located on the Bunnerong Road site frontage and adjacent to the development site is to be relocated. The applicant has not submitted any documentation with this application in support of the relocation and therefore it is recommended that the proposed relocation be deleted from this application. The DEPCD is requested to advise the applicant that Council could support relocation of the vehicular entry/exit point subject to a traffic management plan being submitted with/in support of the application for relocation.

 

The section of Frost Avenue fronting the development site has a scaled off width of approximately 4.4metres. The applicant should consider the following options for ensuring that vehicles parked in Frost Avenue whilst attending a service do not impede through vehicular movements:

 

(i)         widen the subject section of Frost Avenue to be an absolute minimum clear width of 4.9 metres. The proposed plans will need amendments to accommodate this road widening. All costs associated with the road widening to be met by the applicant.

(ii)        Submit vehicle movement diagrams that show the existing road layout can accommodate one lane of parking and one through traffic lane in the section of Frost Avenue fronting the development site.

(iii)       Restrict parking in the subject section of Frost Avenue.

 

6.4  Heritage Issues

 

The Heritage Planner advises as follows:

 

“The subject site is in the vicinity of Pioneers Park site within Botany Cemetery, listed as a heritage item under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The Pioneers Park site comprises an arrangement of early headstones and grave monuments commemorating pioneers of the colony including John Cadman and Mary Reiby.

 

The original proposal was for a vault/crypt development immediately to the north of Pioneer Memorial Park.  The proposal includes provision for 704 burials (vaults and crypts) and 1128 niches in a garden arrangement.

 

Clause 46 of Randwick LEP 1998 requires Council to take into consideration the likely effect of any proposal on the heritage significance of the heritage item, heritage conservation area or potential archaeological site and on its setting.  The original development application was accompanied by a Statement of Environmental Effects which included a brief section on heritage issues.  Following Council’s request for a more detailed assessment of the impact of the proposal on the heritage significance, historian Meredith Walker was subsequently engaged by Turpin Brown Architects to advise on the proposal.

 

One of the preliminary recommendations from Meredith Walker was for consultation with likely interested organisations, including the Royal Australian Historical Society, the NSW Heritage Office and the National Trust.  It is noted that the 1972 Act of Parliament which allowed for the relocation of the memorials from an earlier location within the Cemetery required the creation of a park to contain the memorials and consultation with the RAHS.  On 4 March 2002 Council forwarded letters to the RAHS, the Heritage Office and the National Trust of Australia (NSW), advising them of the proposal and requesting any comments by the end of March.

 

A report on the heritage impact of the proposal on Pioneer Park, prepared by Meredith Walker, Heritage Futures and Michael Lehany, Landscape Architect, has now been received.  The report includes a brief history of Pioneer Memorial Park, a summary statement of significance, obligations arising from significance, and an assessment of the impact of the proposal on Pioneer Park.

 

In terms of the background to Pioneers Park, the report notes that the monuments were moved in 1901 from Devonshire Street in order to create a site for Central Railway Station.  Some of the stones had previously been moved from the old Town Hall Cemetery.  The summary statement of significance notes that the site is significant as it includes remnants of two early Sydney cemeteries which were moved to facilitate major Sydney developments, as a collection of evidence of memorials which are associated with important figures in the early history of Sydney, for its value in demonstrating the skill of monumental masons of the period, and as an important part of the history of the Cemetery and one of the reasons for its creation.  The site is also likely to have scientific value as a basis for further research and social value to significant groups in the community who have a special interest in the early history of Sydney.  The report considers that Pioneers Park has significance at a local and a state level and would be likely to meet thresholds for listing on the State Heritage Register.  The obligations arising from significance are to maintain the headstones and monuments and minimise adverse environmental affects; for the headstones to continue to be seen and appreciated in an appropriate setting; to retain the garden and landscape setting; and to maintain the prominence of Pioneer Park within the Cemetery and ease of access to it.

 

The assessment of the impact of the proposal lists a number of impacts and measures to ameliorate these impacts, as follows:

 

§ Irregular juxtaposition of layout of the development and Pioneer Park- the juxtaposition of two different alignments will read as irregular and incongruous, and will negate the benefit of following the same geometric pattern,  The proposal should be redesigned to align with the monuments and Greg Taylor Avenue, rather than with Frost Avenue.

 

§ Small gap between the proposal and the monuments- the distance will vary between 0.6m and 1.58m, for new buildings with an approximate height of 4m.  To respect Pioneer Park and provide space for viewing the monuments in attractive circumstances, any new development should be sited a sufficient distance from the edge monuments to allow for a designed walkway between them with a minimum width of 4m.

 

§ Landscape treatment- the grassed walkway indicated in the proposal is unlikely to eventuate, given that the grass will be on the south side of the 4m high monuments.  The landscaped edge is likely to be replaced by paving.

 

§ Risk of damage to monuments- the proximity of the proposed buildings to monuments is likely to lead to damage during construction and maintenance.  Padding should be provided to protect monuments during site works.

 

§ Value of older trees in the north east corner- these trees probably predate the Park provide shade and contribute to the character of the Cemetery,  They should be retained as part of the Garden design of the development.

 

Comments on the proposal have been received from the NSW Heritage Office, the Society of Australian Genealogists, and the National Trust.  The NSW Heritage Office have requested that Council consider the recommendations made in the Walker and Lehany report and either include consent conditions in relation to these recommendations, or preferably seek amended plans prior to a consent being issued.  Consent conditions should cover appropriate spacings between monuments, landscaping treatments (including an indication of appropriate hard surface materials), retention of trees and appropriate maintenance programs.  The Heritage Office have also recommended that Council ensures that the archaeological potential of the site is investigated, given its location on a site of archaeological potential (cemetery).

 

The Society of Australian Genealogists have noted that the monuments have historical and genealogical significance for people in Australia and consider that this significance has not been acknowledged in the design and scale of the development.  They have raised concerns that the inadequate curtilage and screen plantings does little to encourage visitation and interpretation of this historic collection of monuments.  The National Trust considers the vault complex will overwhelm the Memorial Park if it is closer than the height of the structure, and that the recommended 4 metre separation is a bare minimum.  The National Trust also considers that the “ragged” south wall of the development is inappropriate and a clear separation, in the form of a linear boundary is favoured.

 

A meeting was organised to discuss these issues with the applicant and their architects.  At this meeting, an amended drawing was presented which was generally in accordance with the recommendations of the report, in relation to realigning the proposal and increasing the distance between the proposal and the monuments.  It is considered that the amended drawings adequately address the major design concerns raised by the Walker Lehany report.

 

In relation to retaining older trees, the architects have advised that consultation with an arborist has revealed that the trees in the north east corner do not predate the Park.  These trees contribute to the character and amenity of the Park and it is suggested that a consent condition be included requiring the submission of an amended landscape plan which addresses the issue of the feasibility of retaining as many of these older trees as possible, within the soft landscaping proposed for this part of the site.

 

In relation to landscaping treatments, the amended drawings indicate a planting adjacent to the vaults, a central pathway, and a grassed area adjacent to the monuments.  It is suggested that a consent condition be included requiring the submission of an amended landscape plan indicating species which will be tolerant of the shade adjacent to the vaults, and addressing the issue of the feasibility of providing a grassed area adjacent to the monuments.

 

In relation to maintenance, it is noted that a copy of the Cemetery and Crematorium Trust’s guidelines for maintenance staff carrying out upkeep of the grounds in the vicinity of the monuments has been submitted.  These guidelines are considered to be generally satisfactory.  It is also suggested that a condition be included requiring protection of the monuments during construction.

 

In relation to archaeological potential, the architects have advised that consultation with the Cemetery Trust has confirmed that there are no burials in the area of the Memorial Park, which contains monuments only, nor in the area of the proposed vault/crypt development, due to the presence of rock very close to the surface.  It is suggested however, that a consent condition be included requiring the submission of an archaeological assessment with the construction certificate application.

 

The following conditions should be included in any consent:

 

§ An amended landscape plan is to be prepared which addresses the issue of the feasibility of retaining as many of these older trees as possible, within the soft landscaping proposed for this part of the site.  The amended landscape plan is to address the issue of the feasibility of providing a grassed area adjacent to the monuments, and is to indicate species which will be tolerant of the shade adjacent to the vaults.  The amended landscape plan is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

§ The existing monuments are to be protected from damage during construction.  Details of protection, such as fencing, padding etc, are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

§ A concise maintenance plan is to be prepared to provide guidelines for gardeners/maintenance workers carrying out upkeep of the grounds in the vicinity of the monuments, to ensure that they are protected from damage.

 

§ An archaeological assessment of the site is to be prepared in accordance with the Archaeological Assessment Guidelines produced by the NSW Heritage Office.  The assessment should advise on the likelihood and potential significance of relics on the site and recommend appropriate action in the context of the proposed development.  The archaeological assessment is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

§ A copy of any excavation permit required under Section 140 of the Heritage Act, 1977, shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

6.5  Issues Raised by External Bodies

 

6.5.1    NSW Heritage Office

 

The NSW Heritage Office provided comments to the proposal in a letter to Council dated 20 May 2002. The Heritage Office is generally in agreement with the findings and recommendations contained in the heritage impact report prepared by Meredith Walker and Michael Lehany, heritage consultants for the applicant. The Office has requested that Council consider the recommendations made in the Walker and Lehany report and either include consent conditions in relation to these recommendations, or preferably seek amended plans prior to a consent being issued.  Consent conditions should cover appropriate spacings between monuments, landscaping treatments (including an indication of appropriate hard surface materials), retention of trees and appropriate maintenance programs.  The Heritage Office have also recommended that Council ensures that the archaeological potential of the site is investigated, given its location on a site of archaeological potential (cemetery).

 

6.5.2    Department of Land and Water Conservation

 

The Department has provided comments as the land owner of the subject site. The Department advises that its consent is given to the lodgement of the development application. In addition, the Department recommends the use of native species for plantings in the proposed landscaped areas.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The Development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

7.1       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned Special Uses 5 under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal.

 

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

 

29 – Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

 

30 – Min Lot Size

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

31 – Landscape Area

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

32 – FSR

 

 

N.A.

 

N.A

 

N.A

 

33 – Building Height

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

43 – Heritage Item or Conservation Area

 

N.A

 

Not a heritage item and not located in a heritage conservation area.

 

N.A.

 

49– Development in the vicinity of heritage item, conservation area or archeological sites

 

Preparation and submission of a Heritage Impact Report.

 

Heritage Impact Report prepared and submitted

 

Yes

 

7.2       Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act 1972

 

This Act requires the Cemetery Trust to consult the Royal Australian Historical Society for any redevelopment affecting the Botany Cemetery.

 

8.    POLICYCONTROLS

No policy controls apply to the site.

 

9.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

9.1       Statutory Controls

 

The proposed development is permissible in the Special Uses 5 zoning subject to Council’s consent.

 

The proposal was referred to the Royal Australian Historical Society for comments on 4 March 2002 in accordance with the Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act 1972 which essentially requires that the Society be consulted in relation to any changes in the layout of Pioneer Park. The Society has provided no response to Council’s referral notwithstanding Council’s follow-up on the matter on two occasions in May 2002.  In view of the fact that adequate time has been given for the Society to respond to the matter, it is considered reasonable to assume the Society’s concurrence in this matter. In referring the application and heritage report to the Society, it is considered that the provision of the Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act 1972 has been met.

 

9.2       Policy Controls

 

There are no policy controls applicable to the site. 

 

9.3     Urban Design

 

The applicant’s heritage consultant has recommended the following amendments to the layout and design of the proposal, which have been endorsed by the Heritage Office:

 

§ Realign the crypt and vault development parallel with the northern boundary of the Pioneer Park site so as to ensure a regular juxtaposition of buildings and monuments in the proposed development and Pioneer Park.

 

§ Provide a 4m setback between the proposed development and Pioneer Park measured from the edge of the existing northern most monuments in Pioneer Park and the walls of the proposed buildings in the proposed development. This will ensure Pioneer Park’s heritage significance is respected and provide space for viewing the existing monuments from the southern edge of the subject site.

 

The applicant has submitted amended plans incorporating the above recommendations of the heritage consultant. The amended plans indicate that the vaults and crypts will be built into 8 separate building units each design in a classical style to suite the existing context.  Each unit will have reinforced concrete slabs and roofs and the facades to be treated with a combination of imported stone, granite, brick and sandstone material to complement the weathered sandstone and heritage headstones and memorials in the existing Pioneer Park memorial garden.

 

The units will be arranged along two intersecting axes made up of pathways that have been orientated to allow for pedestrian access from all internal street frontages as well as to Pioneer Park so that it would be possible for visitors to walk from the centre of the proposed development to the centre of the Park.

 

The proposal will have a garden arrangement with a central layout similar in geometry to the existing layout of headstones and monuments in Pioneer Park . The garden areas will incorporate statues and seating areas for the public when visiting or attending funerals.

 

Overall, the amended design and layout of the proposal is considered sympathetic to the heritage elements in the existing cemetery and will integrate suitably with the existing Pioneer Park.

 

9.4     Impact on adjoining development

 

The subject site is located well away from any residential area and involves a cemetery use within the larger Botany Cemetery area so that it will not give rise to any overshadowing, overlooking and loss of views.

 

9.5       Traffic and car parking

 

The proposal will provide two parking bays for hearse parking and removal of coffin on Reid Avenue.

 

The proposal will utilise existing internal streets within the cemetery for circulation and carparking. As no significant increase in traffic is anticipated from the new development, Council’s development engineer considers the use of existing internal street for circulation and parking acceptable.

 

The applicant has proposed the relocation of the existing entrance at the corner of Bunnerong Road and Frost Avenue. However, no details have been provided of the traffic impacts of an alternate entrance. As such, the proposed relocation of the entrance will be required to be deleted from the proposal. Should the applicant wish to pursue this matter further, Council’s traffic engineer would be prepared to consider the matter subject to a traffic management plan being submitted in support of an application for relocation of the entrance.

 

10        CONCLUSION

 

The proposal for a new vault/crypt and ash niche development has been assessed in relation to its impact on the heritage significance of the adjoining Pioneer Park memorial garden, which is a heritage item under the Randwick LEP 1998. As such, the applicant has submitted a heritage impact report prepared by its heritage consultants, Meredith Walker and Michael Lehany. The application and heritage report was forwarded to the Royal Australian Historical Society in accordance with the Botany Cemetery and Crematorium Act 1972.

 

The application and heritage report was also referred to the NSW Heritage Office for comments. The Heritage Office has subsequently advised that it endorses the findings and recommendations of the heritage report. Accordingly, the applicant has submitted amended plans to reflect the recommendation of the heritage report. The amended plans have been assessed by Council’s Heritage Planner and are found to be satisfactory.

 

As such, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.        THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. 0034/2002 for construction of 704 new vaults and crypts and 1128 ash niches including landscaping, paving and roadworks at 51-61 Military Road, Matraville, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the amended plans numbered 2001.5.1A, 2001.5.5A, 2001.5.7A and 2001.5.8A dated 22 May 2002 and received by Council on 27 May 2002, the application form, and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.         The external colours, materials and finishes of the proposed development and the landscaping shall be in accordance with the details and plans submitted to Council on 14 January 2002.

 

3.         The words “Existing entry to be relocated”, referring to the proposed relocation of the Bunnerong Road entrance, shall be deleted from the proposed development.

 

4.         An amended landscape plan is to be prepared which addresses the issue of the feasibility of retaining as many older trees as possible, within the soft landscaping proposed for the site.  The amended landscape plan is to address the issue of the feasibility of providing a grassed area adjacent to the monuments, and is to indicate species, which will be tolerant of the shade adjacent to the vaults.  The amended landscape plan is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

5.         The existing monuments are to be protected from damage during construction.  Details of protection, such as fencing, padding etc, are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

6.         A concise maintenance plan is to be prepared to provide guidelines for gardeners/maintenance workers carrying out upkeep of the grounds in the vicinity of the monuments, to ensure that they are protected from damage.

 

7.         An archaeological assessment of the site is to be prepared in accordance with the Archaeological Assessment Guidelines produced by the NSW Heritage Office.  The assessment should advise on the likelihood and potential significance of relics on the site and recommend appropriate action in the context of the proposed development.  The archaeological assessment is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

8.         A copy of any excavation permit required under Section 140 of the Heritage Act, 1977, shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

 

9.         The following damage deposit requirement is to be complied with prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, as security for making good any damage caused to the roadway, footway, verge or any public place; or as security for completing any public work; and for remedying any defect on such public works, in accordance with section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

a)   $2000.00   -           Security damage deposit

 

The damage deposit may be provided by way of a cash or cheque with the Council and is refundable upon the applicant advising Council, in writing, of the completion of all building works and/or obtaining an occupation certificate, if required.

 

The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

Traffic conditions/Civil Works Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for access, transport and infrastructure:

 

10.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's road, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's roadway.

 

11.       Prior to the commencement of any site construction works the applicant shall undertake one or a combination of the following:

 

·    Submit to the certifying authority for approval, and have approved, amended details for the development that provide for an absolute minimum clear pavement width of 4.9 metres in the section of Frost Avenue that fronts the development site.

 

·    Submit to the certifying authority for approval, and have approved, vehicle movement diagrams that demonstrate that through vehicle movements will not be impeded by cars parking in the section of Frost Avenue fronting the development site.

 

·    Submit to the certifying authority for approval, and have approved, a traffic management plan that restricts parking in the section of Frost Avenue fronting the development site.

 

This condition is required because the width of road pavement available for parking and through movements in the section of Frost Avenue fronting the development site is shown as being only 4.4 metres on the plans submitted with the application.

 

Service Authority Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate consideration for service authority assets:

 

12.       A public utility impact assessment must be carried out on all public utility services on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the development/building works and include relevant information from public utility authorities and exploratory trenching or pot-holing, if necessary, to determine the position and level of service.

 

13.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Telstra, Energy Australia, Sydney Water or Natural Gas Company to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

Drainage Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for drainage and associated infrastructure:

 

14.       All site stormwater including the impervious areas (eg roof/hard paved areas) shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrester pit prior to the stormwater discharging from the site.

 

The location and details of the proposed internal stormwater pipelines, silt arrestor pit shall be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. A copy of the plans are to be forwarded to Council, prior to a construction certificate being issued, if the Council is not the certifying authority.

 

Notes:

 

a.         The sediment/silt arrestor pit shall be constructed:-

 

i.          within the site at an appropriate location downstream of the development.

ii.          with a child proof and corrosion resistant fastening system (e.g. spring loaded jay-bolt).

iii.         with a minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes (preferably located in the walls of the pit at the floor level) and with a suitable geotextile material with a high filtration rating located around the weep holes.

iv.         with the pit floor being a minimum 300mm below the invert level of the outlet pipeline.

v.         with a galvanised heavy duty screen (Lysaght RH3030 Maximesh or similar) located over the outlet pipe. (pit similar to a Mascot GRC stormwater discharge control pit, product code DS3SDC).

 

          All works shall be to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

15.       The proposed paving within the development site shall be constructed with a permeable brick paving or other similar material that will allow stormwater to infiltrate to ground  (eg Rocla permeable paving). A plan indicating the paving arrangement and materials including samples of paving materials is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for landscaping and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

16.       The landscaped areas shown on the landscape plans LO1 & 2, issue A dated 29.11.01 shall be the subject of detailed landscape drawings and specifications, which are to be submitted to, and approved by, a certifying authority, prior to the issue of a construction certificate. The landscape drawings and specifications are to be prepared by a suitably qualified landscape designer with relevant qualifications in landscape architecture or horticulture. The documentation is to include:

 

a.         A site plan at an appropriate scale showing existing site boundaries, existing trees within the property (clearly identified as being retained or removed), existing street trees (clearly identified as being retained or removed), features on adjoining sites (buildings, trees, other structures etc), council’s footway, existing and proposed ground levels shown as spot heights and/or contours over the site, at site boundaries, and at the base of the tree/s to be retained, proposed building envelope, proposed areas of pavement, and proposed landscaped areas.

 

The plan shall clearly show the position, canopy spread (location of dripline), trunk diameter, height and names of all existing trees upon the site and adjoining sites which are likely to be affected by the development.

 

b.         A planting plan at a scale of 1:100 or 1:200 indicating the location of all proposed planting and existing trees to be retained. All plants are to be drawn at their mature size with a dense planting of shrubs, accent plants and ground covers within all garden beds so that a continuous planted cover is achieved. Plant spacings are to be clearly indicated for all accent and groundcovers.

 

c.         A planting schedule listing all plants by botanic & common names, plant numbers, plant spacings for groundcovers and accent planting, pot sizes, the estimated size of the plant at maturity (height & spread) and proposed staking methods when applicable.

 

d.         Additional notation showing soil and mulch details, irrigation details, edging, paving, fencing details, surface finishes, retaining wall details, and any other landscape elements in sufficient detail to fully describe the proposed landscape works.

 

e.         Position of existing and proposed site services including water, gas, electricity, sewer, stormwater, etc.

 

f.          Sectional elevations through the site showing the existing and proposed groundlines, building elevations, and mature height of proposed planting.

 

g.         All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape elevations through the site showing the existing and proposed groundlines, building elevations and mature height of proposed planting.

 

h.         Species selection shall be considered carefully and shall avoid species known to be toxic, poisonous or to cause skin irritations or breathing difficulties.

 

i.          The landscape plan shall include suitable shade trees to be incorporated into the landscape areas.

 

j.          Location of easements within the site and upon adjacent sites (if any).

 

The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved documentation prior to the issue of an occupation certificate and shall be maintained in accordance with those plans.

 

17.       In order to prevent the encroachment of motor vehicles into the landscaped areas a 150mm high concrete edge shall be constructed between the landscaped areas and roadway. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

18.       To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaped areas, an automatic irrigation system shall be installed throughout all the landscaped areas. Such system shall provide full coverage to all the landscaped areas with no overspray onto driveways and pathways.

 

Details of the automatic irrigation system shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans and specifications. The system shall comply with all Sydney Water requirements, and relevant Australian Standards.

 

19.       The naturestrip upon Council's footway shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

20.       The naturestrip upon Council's footway shall be maintained by the applicant in accordance with Council guidelines. Such maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, watering, mowing, fertilising, and the removal of weeds.

 

21.       Approval is granted for the removal of the following trees subject to the planting of 3 x 100litre and 1 x 75 litre broad canopied replacement trees (not palms) within the site. The species selected shall be those that will attain a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity.

 

22.       Two (2) Melaleuca quinquenervia (Paperbarks) located towards the eastern end of the site.

 

23.       Three (3) Casuarina glauca (She-oaks) located towards the south eastern corner of the site.

 

24.       One Eucalyptus species (Gum Tree) located towards the south eastern corner of the site.

 

25.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque, or bank guarantee for the amount of $5,000.00 shall be lodged with Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development to ensure the implementation and maintenance of the landscape works in accordance with the approved landscape documentation.

 

a.   The refundable deposit will be released twelve (12) months after the issue of a final occupation certificate by the principle certifying authority providing the landscape works have been successfully implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved landscape documentation. Throughout the maintenance/bond period, the applicant shall be responsible for all routine maintenance such as grass cutting, weeding, watering, fertilising, spraying, staking and replacement of all failed plant stock.  There must be no alteration to the original design, including substitution of trees and shrubs, without the prior approval of Council.

 

b.   Any contravention of Council's landscape conditions at any time during the construction period or prior to the expiration of a period of twelve (12) months from the date a final occupation certificate is issued will result in the Council claiming all or part of the lodged security.

 

c.   In order to organise for a final inspection for the Occupation Certificate or for the release of the security deposit, the applicant shall contact the Town Planning Department to advise that the site is ready to be inspected. Town Planning will then organise for a final inspection to be carried out. Should the landscaping be found to be unsatisfactory, thus necessitating further inspections, the applicant is advised that each additional inspection will be charged at $55.00 (incl.GST) and that this amount  shall be paid into Account Number 41901939, Code RGJ at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to any further inspection being carried out.

 

The applicant shall present the receipt at the Asset and Infrastructure Services counter on the First Floor to organise for a further inspection to be undertaken.

 

Advisory Conditions

 

A1.      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A4 Attachments

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID ONGKILI

ACTING DIRECTOR PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER

 

 

 

 

 





 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

30 April, 2002

FILE NO:

D/1206/2001

 

PROPOSAL:

 Demolish existing building and erect an 8 storey mixed commercial and residential building

PROPERTY:

 450-458 Anzac Parade, Kingsford

WARD:

 West Ward

APPLICANT:

 Apex Developments Pty. Limited

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Committee as it is valued at $3,500,000.

 

The proposal is for demolition of the existing building and erection of an 8 storey mixed commercial/residential development comprising 2 shops, 11 commercial suites, 20 dwellings, and basement and above-ground car parking for 47 vehicles. The proposal comprises a building block with primary frontage to Anzac Parade and a secondary frontage to Middle Lane. A podium containing four storeys is proposed with a four storey tower component above and setback from Anzac Parade and Middle Lane.

 

Following discussions with the applicant in relation to concerns about the height, floor space ratio, commercial layout, and façade design of the proposal, amended plans were submitted on 28 March 2002, to address these issues. The amended plans which are the subject of this report, are considered to be satisfactory subject to further variations to lower the height of the building and improve its streetscape presentation.

 

The proposal complies with all the statutory controls applicable to the site with the exception of the 24m maximum building height control to which the applicant has submitted an objection under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP No.1). An assessment of the objection indicates that the compliance with the control in this instance would be unreasonable and unnecessary.

 

The proposal would be suitable for the site and would have acceptable impacts on the amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

It is proposed to demolish the existing building and erect an 8 storey mixed commercial/residential development comprising 2 shops, 11 commercial suites, 20 dwellings, and basement and above-ground car parking for 47 vehicles

 

The design of the proposed buildings is contemporary in style, with the external finishes of the front elevations being rendered and painted.

 

The residential component of the development comprises 2 x 1 bedroom dwellings, 9 x 2 bedroom dwellings, and 9 x 3 bedroom dwellings.

 

Pedestrian access to the residential component of the building would be provided from Anzac Parade, whilst vehicular access is provided from Middle Lane.

 

Car parking for the development would be accommodated within 1 basement and 2 above ground levels of carparking containing a total of 47 car spaces.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is located on the eastern side of Anzac Parade, and western side of Middle Lane, between Middle Street and Meeks Street. The site is regularly shaped with a frontage of 17.095m to Anzac Parade, 17.07 to Middle Lane, and a side boundary of approximately 53.34m. The site is relatively flat and has a total site area of 910.6 sqm.

 

The surrounding development comprises a shopping strip along Anzac Parade with predominantly two storey retail shops, restaurants and services, and multi-storey mixed commercial/residential developments. Adjoining the site to the north is the two-storey Castellorizian Club, to the east on the opposite side of Middle Lane are rear garages of dwelling houses fronting Harbourne Road, to the south is a two storey brick shop, and to the west on the opposite side of Anzac Parade  is a multi-storey mixed commercial and residential building.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

Development Application No. 192/89 was approved on 26 July 1989 for alterations and additions to the existing building and convert the residential portion and existing commercial area on the first floor for use as a reception hall. As part of the approval, the applicant was charged a Section 94 contribution for 5 carparking spaces, payment of which was made in August 1989.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified, advertised and referred to Precinct Committee  in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan 1998. The following submissions were received:

 

5.1  Objections

 

A & L Calafatis, 56 Pasadena Street, Monterey (owners of 460 Anzac Parade) (two letters submitted)

 

§ Excessive height and bulk sets an undesirable precedent

§ Lack of front setback due to narrow frontage

§ Does not comply with minimum frontage requirements of DCP

§ Does not comply with carparking and access requirements of DCP

§ Internal rooms defined as suites will become defacto substandard residential units

§ Loss of sunlight and ventilation

 

R. Andre, 39 Middlemiss Street, Rosebery (owner of 34-36 Harbourne Road)

 

§ Loss of sunlight

§ Shadow diagrams lack detail

§ Excessive height and out of scale with streetscape

§ Traffic impact on Middle Lane

 

J.M. Barbouttis, 251 Elizabeth Street, Sydney (on behalf of Castellorizian Club)

 

§ Increased traffic on Middle Lane which is in poor condition

§ Does not comply with car parking and access requirements of DCP and will detrimentally affect the Club’s carparking

§ Exacerbate lack of on-street carparking

 

5.2  Support

 

No letter in support of the application was received.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers, including where necessary external bodies and the following comments have been provided:-

 

6.1  Waste Management

 

The amended application did not clearly identify that the proposed development would have sufficient area for the storage of garbage bins, (minimum of 20 bins required for the residential component and 13 bins for the commercial component). The applicant faxed through a detail on 22/5/2002 showing that the development site could accommodate the required number of bins. The DAIS is of the opinion that the applicant has satisfied Council’s concerns about the ability to provide space for bin storage within the site however it is considered that further improvements could be made to the garbage storage areas with the Construction Certificate submission. Conditions relating to waste management have been included in this report.

 

6.2  Landscape Issues

 

There are no existing trees, (covered by Council's Tree Preservation Order), that will be affected by this proposal.

 

The footpath area in Anzac Parade fronting the development site has recently been reconstructed in accordance with Urban Design Guidelines for Kingsford and therefore no conditions relating to additional footpath works in Anzac Parade have been included.

 

6.3  Drainage Issues

 

The applicant was advised of the following Engineering comments/requirements at a prelodgement meeting:

 

The development site is located to the north of a localised low point in Anzac parade, (at the intersection with Borrodale Road). To minimise the potential for stormwater ingress of the site from Anzac Parade the Department of Asset and Infrastructure Services recommends that the floor level for the retail/commercial component of the site, (i.e the floor level adjacent to Anzac Parade), be established based on consideration of one or more of the following parameters:

 

(a)  A minimum of 200 mm above the back of the footpath in Anzac Parade opposite the northern site boundary; or

 

(b)  A minimum of 400mm above the high point of any stormwater escape route from the localised low point at the corner of Anzac Parade and Borrodale Road; or

 

(c)  A minimum of 300mm above the calculated 1 in 100 year flood level for the area. The applicant would have to undertake a suitable flood study to determine the 1 in 100 year flood level.

 

The Kensington Flooding Drainage Works Investigation compiled in 1985, reported:-

 

a.         a flood level at the north eastern corner of Anzac Parade and Borrodale Road at RL 25.40 AHD.

b.         7 properties adjacent to this location on the eastern side of Anzac Parade as having the floor levels inundated.

 

The original application proposed to construct the ground floor level at RL 25.77. The footpath level adjacent to the northern boundary is RL25.92. The amended application has proposed a ground floor level for the commercial component of RL 26.12 and therefore complies with option (a) above. The Director of Environmental Planning and City Development is requested to determine whether the proposed method of providing disabled access to the ground floor commercial units is satisfactory. (Comments: A condition has been applied requiring the provision of access for people with disabilities in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1428.1, AS4299 and AS2890.1).

 

At the prelodgement, the applicant was also advised to carry out sufficient geotechnical investigation to determine if the proposed development would have any affect on, or be affected by, the existing groundwater conditions.

 

No geotechnical report or details have been submitted with the application, however based on information submitted by the applicant for a development site at 398 – 402 Anzac Parade, (this application had 2 levels of basement carparking below ground level), the subject application is unlikely to require dewatering to facilitate construction. 

 

6.4  Traffic/Parking Issues

 

The average traffic generation for the proposed residential development consisting of 20 residential units, 2 ground floor commercial units and 10 upper floor office suites will be in the range of 140 to 170 vehicle movements per day.

 

The expected peak flow volume of approximately 18 vehicles per hour is considered low to moderate and no delays should be experienced in Middle Lane or the streets surrounding the development site as a result of this development.

 

6.5   Environmental Health Issues   

 

The subject site has a panel beating/smash repair shop currently operating on-site. Due to potential site contamination from this operation, a deferred commencement condition has been applied requiring the preparation of a site audit report and statement by an EPA Accredited Site Auditor to confirm that the site is or will be suitable for the intended use.

 

6.6   Federal Airports Corporation

 

Under the provisions of the Air Navigation (Building Control) Regulations the concurrence of the Federal Airports Corporation is required for any building to be constructed on the subject site, which lies within the Conical Surface of the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces for Sydney Airport. At the time of finalising this report the Corporation has yet to give its approval for the proposed development. It is recommended that the application, should it be approved, be subject to a deferred commencement consent requiring the FAC’s approval of the proposed building height.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The Development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

7.1       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned local Business 3A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal.

 

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

 

29 – Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

 

30 – Min Lot Size

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

31 – Landscape Area

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

N.A.

 

32 – FSR

 

 

 

 

Max. Overall = 3:1

 

Max. Residential = 2:1

 

Max. Commercial= 1:1

 

2.99:1

 

 

1.99:1

 

 

0.99:1

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

33 – Building Height

 

24m

 

28.2m (to the top of the plant/service enclosure) Main building height will be 25.8m

 

No (SEPP No.1 Objection submitted)

 

43 – Heritage Item or Conservation Area

 

N.A.

 

Not a heritage item and not located in a heritage conservation area.

 

N.A.

 

8.    POLICY CONTROLS

8.1 Development Control Plan No. 16 – Kingsford Commercial Centre.

 

Table 1:  Compliance with DCP No. 16

 

Required

Provided / Proposed

Y / N

1.  Site Consolidation – Min. 800 sqm and frontage of 18m to permit development to FSR of 3:1.

1.  The site has an area of 910.6 sqm and frontage of 17.095.

No (see assessment below)

2.  On front boundary a vertical plane of 12m, then setback building by min. 5m to a maximum height of 24m.  Building Height Plan of 45 degrees above 8m at rear.

Front vertical plane of 12m then building will be setback 5m to a maximum height of 28.2 (inclusive of lift and stairwell).

Building Height Plane of 45 degrees above 11m along rear.

 

No (maximum height and rear building height plane (see assessment below)

3.  Retail / Commercial floor space along the length of Anzac Parade frontage to a depth of 10m to maintain / enhance retail continuity.

3.  Retail floor space on the ground level Anzac Parade frontage to a depth of 13.3m.

Yes

4.  6m side setback (for that part of the building exceeding 12m) unless demonstrated to be impractical due to site conditions.

4.  Side setback on southern side (min. 2.4 m and max. 3.4 m) and northern side (min.) have been provided for that part of the wall exceeding 7.6 m in height.

Yes, in principle – see assessment below.

5.  Build up to street alignment for at least the lower floors up to a maximum 12 m.

5.  Proposal will be built up to street alignment for the lower floors up to a maximum height of 12m.

Yes

6.  Provision of architectural detailing to add visual interest to façade and streetscape reflecting contributing façades along Anzac Parade.

6.  The architectural design of the podium level will add visual interest and draw from contributory façades in Anzac Parade (see assessment below).

Yes

7.  Continuous cantilevered for suspended awning to street frontage 3 m deep and 3.5 m to 4.5 m above street.

8.  Continuous awning proposed along the Anzac Parade frontage 4m deep and 4m above street level.

Yes

8.  Loading and unloading facilities not on the main street.

11.  Loading and unloading will be from rear lane.

Yes

 

8.2 Development Control Plan – Parking

 

Table 3: Compliance with DCP – Parking

Number of car parking spaces:

 

 

 

 

 

USE

REQUIREMENT (DCP – Parking)

PROPOSED NUMBER AND/OR FLOOR AREA

REQUIRED PROVISION

PROPOSED PROVISION

Residential

1 space per one bedroom dwelling

2 x one bedroom dwellings

2 spaces

 

 

22 residential carspaces

 

1.2 spaces per two bedroom dwelling

9 x two bedroom dwellings

10.8 spaces

 

1.5 spaces per three bedroom dwellings

9 x three bedroom dwellings proposed

13.5 spaces

 

Visitor:

1 space per 4 units

Total dwellings = 20

5 spaces

5 spaces (will be required as condition of consent)

Business

1 space per 40 sqm GFA

801.29 sqm GFA

20.03 spaces

20 spaces (will be required as a condition of consent)

TOTAL

 

 

51.3 spaces

47 spaces plus existing credit of 5 carparking spaces from a previous section 94 contribution

 

 

The applicant advises that there is an existing credit of 5 car parking spaces for the site arising from a previous Section 94 monetary contribution for car parking.

 

9.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

 

9.1       Statutory Controls

 

9.1.1    Floor Space

 

Floor area calculations of the original proposal indicated that it did not comply with Clause 32 of the Randwick LEP which requires that the maximum floor space ratio for any part of a building to be used for residential purposes in the General Business Zone 3A zone be limited to FSR 2:1.  The original proposal had an FSR of 2:2:1 for the residential component.  The applicant has now amended the proposal such that the residential FSR has been reduced to 1.99:1 which has been verified from the applicant’s floor plans.  The proposal will also have a commercial / retail FSR of 0.99:1.  The overall FSR for the proposed development will be 2.99:1, which complies with the FSR control in the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

9.1.2    Building Height

 

The proposed development does not comply with Clause 33 of the Randwick LEP 1998, which requires a maximum building height of 24m within zone 3A. The proposal will have a main building height of 25.8m which will extend to 28.2m inclusive of the roof over the lift and stairwell.

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP 1) for Council to consider a variation from the height standard. The underlying objectives of the external wall height control are to set upper limits for the height of buildings in business zones that are consistent with the redevelopment potential of land in the zone given other development restrictions, and have regard for the amenity of surrounding areas. The applicant argues that strict compliance with the external wall height control is unreasonable and unnecessary for the following reason:

 

1.       The proposed height of the building will not dominate the precinct in the context of the desired future character of the surrounding area.

 

2.       The non-compliance is a technical one that arises by virtue of the slight increase in floor to ceiling height on various floor levels as a result of design considerations based on Draft SEPP 65. In this regard, strict compliance with the standard would affect the verticality present in the fenestration of the building and therefore detract from the urban design merits of the proposal.

 

3.       The additional height would be difficult to read by the casual observer as the proposed development will still be in keeping with the desired streetscape character.

 

The desired future character of the area is reflected in the objectives of the Business 3A zoning and relevant statutory controls contained in the Randwick LEP as well as the policy controls in DCP No. 16. These controls generally envisage redevelopment of the area such that its business character and overall commercial viability is maintained through higher densities and scales of development. A major objective of the 3A zone is to maintain the viability of existing business centres, by encouraging economically viable retail cores which are centrally located and in close proximity to public transport, and by enhancing employment opportunities and servicing the needs of the local and regional communities. In this context, the proposed development is considered to have a height, bulk and scale that is consistent with the desired future character of the area especially considering that the proposal also generally complies with all other statutory and policy controls applicable to the site.

 

The non-compliance in the building height will largely be confined to a 2.4m high enclosure over the lift and stairwell. As the proposed lift and stair well will cover a small area measuring approximately 2.8m by 8.4 m (approximately 24 sqm), the increase in height will largely be localised so that its visual impact will be negligible and does not represent a distortion the redevelopment potential of the land. In addition, the proposal will not give rise to any detrimental amenity impacts on adjoining and surrounding properties as a consequence of the proposed building height (see Section 9.4 below). It should be noted that the Randwick LEP 1998 allows for service installations to exceed the height limit where Council is satisfied that it will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding area.

 

In view of the above, it is considered that SEPP 1 objection is well founded and should be supported. In addition a deferred commencement condition will be applied should approval be given requiring a reduction in the floor to floor height on each relevant floor in the proposal to achieve the following design outcomes:

 

·        A reduction in the overall height of the main building to a maximum RL 51.47 at the top of the balustrade to the common terrace on the roof area so as to be consistent with the building height of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian Club site at 440-448 Anzac Parade.

 

·        A reduction height of the podium level to maximum RL of 36.27 at the top of the balustrade on level 3 so as to be consistent with the height of the podium level of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian Club site at 440-448 Anzac Parade.

 

The above amendments to the height of the building would allow greater continuity in the streetscape at podium level and minimise the overall height of the building.

 

9.2       Policy Controls

 

9.2.1    Development Control Plan No. 16 – Kingsford Commercial Centre

 

The proposal complies with all the requirements of DCP No. 16 – Kingsford Commercial Centres with the exception of the 18m minimum frontage requirement, rear building height plane, maximum building height, and side boundary setbacks.

 

9.2.1.1 Minimum frontage

 

The subject site has a frontage of 17.095 to Anzac Parade. An objection has been raised by the owner of the adjoining southern property at No. 460 Anzac Parade to the shortfall in the site frontage. This shortfall is minor and will not affect the redevelopment potential of the subject site and its compliance with relevant planning standards. In fact, the site area of 910.6 sqm more than adequately meets the minimum 800 sqm necessary for site consolidation under the DCP. 

 

9.2.1.2 Rear building height plane

 

DCP No. 16 requires a building height plane of 45 degrees above 8m at rear. The proposal has a building height plane of 45 degrees above 11m at the rear. A further objection has been raised by the owner of the adjoining southern property at No. 460 Anzac Parade to the impact of the rear section of the building on the existing rear yard of No. 460 Anzac Parade. An assessment of the objection indicates that the proposed building height plane at the rear of the proposed development is considered acceptable for the following reason:

 

§ The proposed podium wall at the rear will have a height and scale that will not be visually bulky nor overbearing on surrounding properties but will be appropriate in scale to the approved and proposed mixed development on the adjoining Castellorizian Club site at No. 440-448 Anzac Parade (DA No. 141/1998), and having regard also to the transitory nature of the development in the adjoining and surrounding commercial zoned land (including the objector’s property).

 

§ The rear section of the proposed podium will minimise the impact of overshadowing on adjoining and surrounding developments as discussed in Section 9.4.1 below. It should be noted that DCP No. 16 recognises that the building height plane may not adequately control the effect of overshadowing of a new building in some circumstances, and that in these cases Council can consider the individual circumstances or merits (page 6).

 

§ The rear section of the proposed podium will minimise the potential for overlooking into rear properties (see Section 9.4.2 below) by providing for a 1m high by 1m wide planter box along the whole eastern length of the terrace on the upper level of the podium. In addition, the proposal will restrict the size of the rear balconies on the second floor to 2m wide by 5m long to limit opportunities for overlooking into adjoining properties.

 

§ The rear elevation of the proposal will present as a well proportioned and vertically orientated podium that will visually improve the streetscape along Middle Lane. 

 

§ The rear yard of the objector’s property is used for carparking and is not landscaped or used for any recreational purpose.

 

 

 

9.2.1.3 Maximum building height

 

The maximum building height control in DCP No. 16 is 24 m, which is also a statutory control in the Randwick LEP. The proposal has a maximum height of 28.2m. As discussed in Section 9.1.2 above, the proposal’s breach of the height control is supported by a SEPP No. 1 Objection, which has been assessed and found to be well-founded.

 

9.2.1.4 Side boundary Setback

 

DCP No. 16 requires a side boundary setback of 6m for that part of the building exceeding 12m in height to provide adequate distance between buildings to ensure privacy and avoid visual bulk along Anzac Parade. The proposal will have varying side boundary walls with the following configurations:

 

§ A northern wall built to the side boundary varying in height from 11m towards Middle Lane, to 7m in the middle section, and 26m towards Anzac Parade. In the middle section, the proposal will be setback by a minimum 4m and maximum 6m above the 7m high side boundary wall. 

 

§ A southern wall built to the boundary varying in height from 11m in towards Middle Lane, to 8m in the middle section and 14m in towards Anzac Parade . In the middle section the proposal will be setback by a minimum 2.5m and maximum 3.5m above the 8m high side boundary wall.

 

The variation from the side boundary requirements of the DCP is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

 

§ The middle sections of the building on the northern and southern sides will be built to a maximum 7m and 8m height respectively instead of the maximum 12m permitted under the DCP. As such, the lower heights of these side boundary walls will adequately off-set the reduced setback of the walls above thus minimising the potential impact of bulk and scale on adjoining properties.

 

§ The height of the side boundary walls below that required in the DCP in the northern and southern middle sections of the proposed development (7m and 8m respectively) would allow greater natural light penetration than if a 12m high wall were proposed. 

 

§ The adjoining approved mixed development on the Castellorizian Club site at No. 448 Anzac Parade will have a variable setback of a maximum 6m from the northern boundary of the subject site. As such, the proposed setback of the northern wall of the proposed development, will effectively provide a maximum 12m separation between the proposed building and the future approved building on the Castellorizian site. This distance will mitigate any overlooking impacts from the proposed development and vice-versa.

 

§ The proposal will provide an obscure glass fence/balustrade along the whole length of the north-facing balcony on the second floor to act as a privacy screen between the proposed development and the adjoining approved development in the Castellorizian Club site at 448 Anzac Parade.

 

9.2.2    Development Control Plan - Parking

 

The total carparking requirement for the proposal under the DCP – Parking is 51 carspaces. The proposal will provide 47 car parking spaces resulting in a shortfall of 4 spaces.  The applicant advises that this shortfall will be eliminated by an existing credit of 5 car parking spaces in the site arising from a previous Section 94 monetary contribution for car parking, details of which have been verified. As such, the proposal complies with the numerical requirements of the DCP – Parking.

 

Four of the proposed car parking spaces would be 5m long instead of the 5.5m required in the DCP – Parking. These carspaces would only be suitable for small cars. No objection is raised to this arrangement subject to a condition requiring signage indicating the subject carspaces be allocated to small cars.

 

The proposal will have 6m wide aisles, which do not comply with the 6.2m wide aisles width requirement of the DCP. This variation from the DCP is minor and is therefore acceptable. Furthermore, the application of turning templates to the carparking plan indicates that there will be adequate turning area for cars to access parking spaces from the proposed aisles.

 

9.3     Urban Design

 

The proposal will have a design and visual character that will enhance the streetscape through the introduction of a building with a modern design, and a strong urban edge to Anzac Parade. The applicant advises that reference has been made to the design guidelines in the draft SEPP 65 and this is reflected in the clearly defined base, middle and top in the facade treatment adding to the visual interest of the building which will comprise the following:

 

§ A podium level built to the front boundary containing well proportioned vertically orientated bays with recessed balconies and separated by vertical groove.

 

§ An intervening middle level between the podium and tower component setback by 2m from the front boundary. This middle section comprises an elongated  terrace area with a solid masonry balustrade and  metal railing to Anzac Parade.

 

§ A tower component setback 5m from the front boundary comprising two distinct vertical bays containing balconies, well-proportioned and spaced vertical fenestrations and planter beds framing a proposed roof-top common area.

 

The façade of the proposal will be rendered and painted and the applicant has submitted a colour scheme for the external walls to Anzac Parade which will essentially comprise a predominantly soft cream colour to external walls accentuated by deeper tones to the bay frames and balconies. It considered that some degree of face brickwork should be introduced into the front façade treatment for emphasis as well as variation so that the building will have a vertical presentation and consistency with the façade treatment of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian site at No. 440-448 Anzac Parade. 

 

The proposal will have a common area on the roof that will have planter boxes to the edge. To enhance the outdoor environment of this common area, it is considered appropriate that a condition be applied requiring the submission of an amended plan providing for enhanced landscaping, pergola and shade structures, benches, and the like to the roof area, and the relocation of the proposed 12m long north-facing planter box within the common area and not cantilevered outside of this common area, prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

The northern elevation of the proposal contains windows that potentially will be exposed to direct sunlight all day. A condition will be applied requiring the installation of  environmentally acceptable and aesthetically pleasing shading devices to these north-facing windows.

 

The overall effect of the design treatment is not considered to be out of character with the established urban streetscape along Anzac Parade. Whilst the design of the proposal is consistent with that of the approved development in the adjoining Castellorizian Club site (DA No. 141/1998) in its use of distinct bays and vertical recesses, further amendments will be required as a condition of deferred commencement for the following :

 

·      a reduction in the width of the bay frames on the front façade to emphasise verticality

 

·      modification to the size of the front windows on level 1 and 2 to emphasise verticality

 

·      inclusion of face brickwork into the front façade treatment for emphasis as well as variation so that the building will have a vertical presentation, and visual consistency with the façade treatment of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian site at No. 440-448 Anzac Parade. 

 

9.4     Impact on adjoining development

 

9.4.1    Overshadowing

 

Following a request from Council, the applicant has submitted amended shadow diagrams indicating the footprint of all buildings falling within the reach of the mid-winter shadows of the proposed building. The submitted shadow diagrams indicate that at 9.00 am in the winter solstice, overshadowing will occur predominantly upon Anzac Parade, the commercial properties on the opposite side of Anzac Parade, and the western section of the commercial properties to the south of the subject site. By 12 noon the proposal will overshadow the southern adjoining and surrounding properties from No. 460 to No. 468 Anzac Parade. By 3.00 pm, the proposal will overshadow the eastern section of the commercial properties to the south and the western section of the properties on the opposite side of Middle Lane.

 

An objection has been raised by the owner of a dwelling unit in No. 34-36 Harbourne Road to lack of an elevation showing the vertical shadow impacts on adjoining properties, and the loss of sunlight from the west to the objector’s property. The submitted shadow diagram showing the overshadowing impact in plan form is considered adequate and an elevation showing vertical impacts is not considered necessary in the circumstances given the transitional nature of development in the adjoining and surrounding commercial properties. The overshadowing impact on No.34-36 Harbourne Road, in the winter afternoon is considered acceptable as this property will be free from overshadowing from the proposed development in the winter morning and noon. The objector’s reference to the lack of morning sunlight to the west-facing units on Harbourne Road arises from a natural consequence of these dwelling units being in the shadow of their building and not as a consequence of overshadowing from the proposed development.

 

An objection has been raised by the owner of the adjoining property at No. 460 Anzac Parade to the loss of natural light to two balconies within the objectors property located approximately 15m and 25m from the front boundary. The objector has requested that the proposed southern wall abutting the common boundary be setback from the southern boundary and reduced in height to facilitate natural light onto the two balconies. Following an assessment of the objector’s concerns, the objector’s request is considered unreasonable for the following reasons:

 

§ DCP No. 16 does not require side boundary setbacks for a building wall up to 12m high. In comparison, the southern side boundary wall of the proposal will only be 8m high so as to maintain the amenity of the adjoining property (as discussed in Section 9.2.1.4 above). Above the 8m southern wall, the proposed building is then set back by between 2.4m and 3.4m. Whilst these setbacks fall short of the 6m required under DCP No.16, the proposal is considered adequate to allow for natural light onto the two balconies in the objector’s property. It should be noted that the DCP requirement for a 6m side boundary setback for the part of the wall exceeding l2m in height is primarily a visual and privacy control, that seeks to avoid the creation of large tall sections of unbroken walls along Anzac Parade and minimise overlooking between properties.

 

§ A setback of the proposed southern wall, as requested by the objector, is not supported as it would create a layout and design that results in a irregular building line along the southern boundary. It would potentially produce a wind-tunnel or light-well effect along commercial boundaries which are undesirable in the context of high-rise mixed developments and therefore not in keeping with the urban design principles of DCP No. 16.

 

Overall the proposal’s shadow impact on adjoining properties is considered to be reasonable and acceptable in context of the surrounding area and given the height, bulk and scale of the development proposed.

 

 

9.4.2    Overlooking

 

The proposed building will have balconies linked to living rooms and, in some cases bedrooms, for each unit on the west, north and east elevations. The potential for overlooking from the east and north elevations will be minimal as the former faces Anzac Parade and the latter faces the roof areas of the existing shops on Anzac Parade. Whilst there is potential for overlooking into the backyards of residential properties on the eastern side of Middle Lane, this overlooking will be mitigated by the small widths of the balconies and the gradual setback of these balconies from Middle Lane. It should also be noted that the commercially zoned area along Anzac Parade is in transition with the potential for redevelopment to higher densities in the future so that a degree of privacy invasion must be expected.

 

9.4.3    Loss of views

 

The subject site and surrounding land are relatively flat. There is no apparent loss of views enjoyed by adjoining and surrounding properties that would be affected by the proposed development.

 

9.5       Traffic and access

 

Concern has been raised by adjoining property owners regarding the impact of traffic on Middle Lane. The proposed residential component is expected to generate in the range of 140 to 170 vehicle movements per day, which is considered moderate.  The expected peak flow volume of approximately 18 vehicles per hour is considered low and is therefore not expected to overburden the environmental traffic capacity of the locality. As such, the rear access from Middle Lane is considered appropriate and is not expected to detrimentally affect the access and parking arrangements of existing adjoining uses.

 

The proposal has provided for inadequate ramp gradients for disabled/wheel-chair access to the shops from the front footpath. As such, a condition has been applied for amended plans to be submitted indicating appropriate gradients for disabled/wheelchair ramp access to the shops should approval be granted.

 

9.6       Social impacts

 

It is considered that the proposal will increase the availability of housing and promote the objectives of the zone. The effect of the proposal would be to bring more people to the site and the demographic characteristics of this population are likely to include, single persons or share households; young couples such as first home buyers; “empty nester” household; and young families. It is likely that there will be a mix of incomes amongst residents with some units being owner occupied and others being rented. The added population will generate additional needs for businesses, employees and patrons which will in turn encourage the location of services and facilities into the area. The increase in density is not considered to generate an unreasonable demand on the availability of services.

 

 

9.7       Ecologically Sustainable Development

 

In line with the Local Government Amendment (Ecologically Sustainable Development) Act 1997, Council requires appropriate consideration to be given to the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development in the assessment of development applications.

 

The proposed development will be well served by public buses along Anzac Parade, linking the subject site to the CBD, Railway Square, Bondi Junction, and Randwick Junction. The introduction of residential uses close to commercial areas served by good public transport linkages is not only desirable but also in keeping with an increasing trend towards the promotion of public transport usage as a primary means of enhancing ecological sustainability and the reduction of greenhouse gases in the Sydney Region.  The proposal would assist in encouraging the use of public transport in line with ESD principles.

 

The applicant has submitted NatHERS reports of the dwellings in the proposed development, which show the NatHERS ratings for these dwellings.

 

The proposal is considered acceptable in relation to Ecologically Sustainable Development issues.

 

9.8       Issues raised in submissions

 

The majority of issues raised in resident submissions have been addressed in the relevant sections above. Some remaining concerns requiring comments are addressed below.

 

9.8.1       Lack of front setback due to narrow width of the site

 

DCP No. 16 requires that the continuity of building facades along Anzac Parade should be maintained and as such setbacks for new developments front the street frontages are to be avoided. This requirement is in line with the need to provide for strong building edge along Anzac Parade to ensure a legible and defined streetscape. The provision of a setback from the established building line along Anzac Parade will be visually out of character with the streetscape.

 

9.8.2    Suites will become defacto substandard residential units

 

The applicant’s amended plans and its accompanying documentation indicates clearly the area and location of commercial suites in the podium level of the proposal. A condition will be applied requiring that the areas indicated as suites on the submission plans be used for commercial purposes only and not for residential purposes.

 

9.8.3    Excessive height and bulk sets an undesirable precedent

 

The proposal has a height, bulk and scale that will not be out of character with the existing streetscape and is consistent with the zoning objectives contained in the Randwick LEP 1998, and the urban design objectives contained in the DCP No. 16 Kingsford Commercial Centre. In addition, the proposal is consistent in bulk and scale with the approved developments in the adjoining Castellorizian Club site (DA No. 141/98).

 

10   CONCLUSION

 

The SEPP 1 objection lodged with respect to the non compliance with the maximum building height of 24 m is considered to be well founded in the circumstances.

 

The proposal complies with all policy controls applicable to the site with the exception of the front width, rear height plane, maximum building height and side setbacks requirements of DCP No. 16 - Kingsford Commercial Centre, and the car space dimension requirements of the DCP - Carparking. The variations from these requirements have been assessed and are considered justified in the circumstances.

 

The proposed development is not considered to give rise to detrimental impacts on surrounding developments. Visually, the proposal will have a design that contributes to the existing streetscape whilst being consistent with the desired future character of the area having regard to the transitional nature of development in the area.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.        THAT the Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No. 1) in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 33 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (relating to building height) on the grounds that the proposed use complies with the objectives of the clauses and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.         THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent as a Deferred Commencement under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No D/1206/2001 for Demolish existing building and erect an 8 storey mixed commercial and residential building at 450-458 Anzac Parade, Kingsford subject to the following conditions:-

 

Deferred Commencement Conditions

 

The consent is not to operate until the following material has been submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning and Environment:

 

1.         Advice from the Federal Airports Corporation, and/or any other relevant body,  that no objection is raised, and approval is given, to the building height of the proposed development.

 

2.         The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be compatible with the adjacent development to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

            Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (ie. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning & Environment, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

3.         Amended plans indicating appropriate reduction in the floor to floor height on each relevant floor in the proposal to achieve the following design outcomes:

 

·    A reduction in the overall height of the main building to a maximum RL 51.47 at the top of the balustrade to the common terrace on the roof area so as to be consistent with the building height of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian Club site at 440-448 Anzac Parade.

 

·    A reduction height of the podium level to maximum RL of 36.27 at the top of the balustrade on level 3 so as to be consistent with the height of the podium level of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian Club site at 440-448 Anzac Parade.

 

4.         Amended plans indicating the following changes to the façade of the podium level fronting Anzac Parade:

 

·    a reduction in the width of the bay frames on the front façade to emphasise verticality

 

·    reduce the proportion of the front windows on level 1 and 2 to emphasise verticality

 

·    inclusion of face brickwork into the front façade treatment for emphasis as well as variation so that the building will have a vertical presentation, and visual consistency with the façade treatment of the approved development on the adjoining Castellorizian site at No. 440-448 Anzac Parade. 

 

5.         Amended plan indicating enhanced landscaping, pergola and shade structures, benches, and the like to the roof-top common area, and the relocation of the 12m long north-facing planter box within the common area and not cantilevered outside of this common area, are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

6.         The applicant is to engage an EPA Accredited Site Auditor. The Site Auditor is to assess the suitability of the site for its intended use and the potential for groundwater contamination and migration. A satisfactory site audit report and site audit statement is to be submitted to and accepted by Council, which confirms that the site is or will be suitable for its intended use after implementation of a remedial action plan.

 

The owner of the site must comply with all additional conditions, which may be imposed or recommended by the EPA accredited auditor, as may be listed in the site audit statement, as a result of the assessment of contamination, and written confirmation is to be obtained from the owner of the site accordingly.

 

Evidence required to satisfy the above conditions must be submitted to Council within 3 months of the date of this consent in accordance with Clause 95(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Regulation 1998, or the consent will lapse.

 

10                Development Consent Conditions

 

Subject to compliance with the deferred commencement conditions, to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Environment, development consent is granted under Section 80 & 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 subject to the following conditions:

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA 00 to DA 07 dated December 2001 and received by Council on 18 December 2001, and amended plans numbered DA 01 to DA 06 and DA 09, Revision B, received by Council on 28 March 2002, the application form, and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.         The external colours, materials and finishes of the proposed development and the landscaping shall be in accordance with the details and plans submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning and Environment pursuant to the deferred commencement condition.

           

3.         Five car spaces shall be allocated for residential visitor carparking and twenty carspaces shall be allocated for commercial carparking.

 

4.         Car parking spaces marked Nos. 10, 14, 15 and 16 shall be designated for small cars only with appropriate signage to indicate this.

 

5.         Amended plans indicating the installation of environmentally acceptable and aesthetically pleasing sun shading devices to the north-facing windows on the north elevation of the proposed development are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development

 

6.         A new development application shall be submitted for the strata sub-division of the proposed development

 

7.         The consumption of water within the proposed building shall be minimised by the use of triple A-rated water efficient plumbing features (taps and shower roses) and water-efficient dual flush toilets. Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate.

 

8.         The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent.  The details and samples of the glass to be used are to be submitted with the colour and material schedule for the approval of Council’s Director of Planning and Environment, prior to the issuing of the construction certificate.

 

9.         The development must be designed and constructed to achieve a minimum energy efficiency NatHERS rating of 3.5 stars or equivalent and a NatHERS certificate or equivalent, prepared by a suitably qualified person, is to be submitted to the certifying authority with the construction certificate application.

 

The design of the building must be consistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the energy efficiency rating may necessitate a new or amendment to the development consent prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

10.       All plumbing and drainage pipes, other than rainwater heads, gutters and downpipes, must be concealed within the building.

 

11.       A single common television aerial, and/or satellite dish (having a maximum diameter of 700mm and not located on the front or street elevation of the building) is to be installed to serve the development.

 

12.       Street numbering must be provided to the premises in a prominent position, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

13.       The enclosure of balconies is prohibited by this consent.

 

14.       Internal or external clothes drying facilities are to be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Should external clothes drying facilities be provided, the facilities must be adequately screened by vegetation and details are to be incorporated into the landscaping plans, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

15.       Vehicular access to the residential and commercial car parking within the development shall be readily accessible to visitors at all times. Where a security gate is provided restricting access to the basement carparking area, a suitable intercom system shall be installed adjacent to the vehicular entrance together with appropriate instructions signage to provide for access to visitor spaces at all times.

 

16.       The proposed commercial suites shall only be used for commercial purposes.

 

The following conditions are applied to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity and public health safety.

 

17.       All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997, environmental planning instruments applying to the site, guidelines made by the NSW Environment Protection Authority and DUAP, Randwick City Council’s Contaminated Land Policy 1999 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

 

18.       A copy of the Validation Report shall be submitted to Council upon completion of the remedial works and prior to commencing building work.  This report shall be prepared with reference to the NSW Environment Protection Authority guidelines, Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites, and shall include:

 

·          Description and documentation of all works performed.

·          Results of validation testing and monitoring.

·          Validation results of any imported fill onto the site.

·          Demonstrate how all agreed clean-up criteria and relevant regulations have been satisfied.

·          Clear justification as to the suitability of the site for the proposed use and the potential for off-site migration of any residual contaminants.

 

19.       The proponent shall engage the services of a site auditor holding current accreditation in accordance with sections 49 and 50 of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997.  Within one (1) month from the completion of remediation works a Site Audit Statement (SAS) together with a Summary Site Audit Report (SSAR) in the format defined by the Contaminated Land Management Regulation 1998 shall be furnished to Council.

 

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

The following conditions are applied to ensure adequate environmental protection.

 

20.       All hazardous or intractable wastes (including asbestos) shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover and the Environmental Protection Authority, and with the provisions of:

 

·          Occupational health and Safety Act 1983 (NSW)

·          Construction Safety Act 1912; Regulation 84A-J Construction Work Involving Asbestos or Asbestos Cement 1983 (NSW)

·          Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 1996 (NSW).

·          Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 1996 (NSW); and

                        ·          Waste Minimisation and Management Act 1995 and Regulations (NSW).

 

SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTION

The following group of conditions have been applied to ensure that adequate provisions are made for Section 94 Contributions:

 

21.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan adopted on September 1999 a monetary contribution is to be paid to Council for the provision or improvement of public open space in lieu of on site provision for an amount of $43,114.42 This amount shall be paid by cash or bank cheque prior to the issuing of the construction certificate.  Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick.

 

22.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan adopted on September 1999 a monetary contribution is to be paid to Council for the provision of community facilities in lieu of on site provision for an amount of $19,063.48.  This amount shall be paid by cash or bank cheque prior to the issuing of the construction certificate.  Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick.

 

23.       In accordance with Council's Section 94 Contributions  Plan adopted on September 1999 a monetary contribution is to be paid to Council for administration charges for an amount of $425.00.  This amount shall be paid by cash or bank cheque prior to the issuing of the construction certificate.  Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick.

 

The following conditions have been applied to ensure that noise emissions from the development satisfy legislative requirements and maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

 

24.       The proposed use of the premises and the operation of all plant and equipment shall not give rise to an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

In this regard, the use of the premises and the operation of any plant or equipment on the site shall not give rise to an L10 sound pressure level which is 5dB(A) greater than the A-weighted L90 background sound pressure level, measured at any point on a residential boundary or within any residential dwelling.

 

25.       A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted with the construction certificate application, which demonstrates that the development will comply with AS/NZS 2107:2000 Acoustics-Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors, in relation to the door and window openings to the residential units.

 

A report is also to be provided to the principal certifying authority (and the Council, if it is not the PCA) upon completion, which confirms compliance with AS/NZS2107:2000 and the relevant requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 & conditions of development consent.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

26.       All new building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), in accordance with Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

27.       In accordance with clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation      2000, it is a prescribed condition, that in the case of residential building work, a contract of insurance must be obtained and in force, in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

Where the work is to be done by a licensed contractor, excavation or building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA):

 

·          has been informed in writing of the licensee’s name and contractor number; and

·          is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the insurance requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989, or

 

Where the work to be done by any other person (i.e. an owner builder), excavation or building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

·          has been informed of the person’s name and owner-builder permit number, or

·          has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land that states that the market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work does not exceed $3,000.

 

Details of the builder and compliance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989 are to be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of works, on the notice of appointment of the PCA / Intention to commence building work.

 

The following group of conditions have been applied to ensure the structural adequacy and integrity of the proposed building and adjacent premises:

 

28.       A report shall be prepared by a professional engineer and submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, detailing the proposed methods of excavation, shoring or pile construction, including details of vibration emissions and detailing any possible damage which may occur to adjoining or nearby premises that may be caused by the proposed building, excavation and shoring works.

 

Any practices or procedures specified in the engineer’s report in relation to the avoidance or minimisation of structural damage to nearby premises, are to be fully complied with and incorporated into the plans and specifications for the construction certificate.

 

29.       A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer or suitably qualified and experienced building surveyor shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works detailing the current condition and status of all buildings, including ancillary structures located upon all of the premises adjoining the subject site

 

The report is to be supported with photographic evidence of the status of the buildings and a copy of the report must also be forwarded to the Council and to the owners of each of the above stated premises, prior to the commencement of any works.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies the terms of Council's approval and relevant standards of construction, and to maintain adequate levels of health, safety and amenity during construction:

 

30.       A sign must be erected on the site in a prominent, visible position, prior to commencing any demolition, excavation or building works, stating that 'unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited' and showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number at which the person may be contacted outside working hours, in accordance with clause 78H of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 1994.

 

            In the case of residential building work, the sign is also required to detail the licence number of the building contractor or the permit number of the owner-builder, in accordance with the Home Building Act, 1989 and Regulations.

 

31.       All demolition work is to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of AS2601-1991.  The Demolition of Structures, as in Force at 1 July, 1993 and details of compliance are to be prepared by a suitably qualified person and be submitted to the principal certifying authority, prior to the commencement of any demolition works.

 

32.       Prior to the commencement of any building works, a construction certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

33.       Prior to the commencement of any building work, a principal certifying authority must be appointed and Council is to be notified accordingly and, at least 2 days notice of the intention to commence building work must be given to Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

34.       A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans & specifications and development consent conditions must be kept on the site at all times and be available to the Council officers upon request.

 

35.       The building works are to be inspected by the principal certifying authority (or other suitably qualified person on behalf of the applicant) to monitor compliance with Council’s approval and the relevant standards of construction.

 

Documentary evidence of compliance with Council’s approval and relevant building inspections, is to be maintained by the principal certifying authority.

 

Upon inspection of each stage of construction, the principal certifying authority (or other suitably qualified person on behalf of the applicant) is also required to ensure that adequate provisions are made for the following measures (as applicable), to ensure compliance with the terms of Council’s approval:

 

·          Sediment control measures.

·          Provision of perimeter fences or hoardings for public safety and restricted access to building sites.

·          Maintenance of the public place free from unauthorised materials, waste containers or other obstructions.

 

36.       All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely in accordance with appropriate professional standards and excavations are to be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property. 

 

37.       Retaining walls or shoring must be provided to support land which is excavated in association with the erection or demolition of a building, to prevent the movement of soil and to support the adjacent land, if the soil conditions require it, and adequate provisions are to be made for drainage.

 

Retaining walls and shoring are to be designed and installed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standards and details of any proposed retaining walls are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for consideration prior to installation.

 

38.       An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the principal certifying authority prior to any occupation of the building work encompassed in this development consent in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

39.       In addition to the matters contained in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the following matters are to be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this development consent, prior to the occupation of the building:

 

a)         car parking and vehicular access

b)         landscaping

c)         stormwater drainage

d)         external finishes and materials

 

40.       A coloured works-as-executed fire services plan is to be submitted to the Council prior to occupation of the development, detailing the location of the essential fire safety measures installed within the building premises.

 

41.       A Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate or compliance certificate is to be forwarded to the principal certifying authority (and a copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not the principal certifying authority), detailing compliance with Council’s approval at the following stage/s of construction:

 

 (a)       Prior to construction of the first completed floor/floor slab (prior to pouring of concrete), showing the area of land, building and boundary setbacks and verifying that the building is being construction at the approved levels.

 

 (b)       On completion of the erection of the building showing the area of the land, the position of the building and boundary setbacks and verifying the building has been constructed at the approved levels.

 

42.       Building and demolition works must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive, between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays and all building activities are strictly prohibited on Sundays and public holidays, except with the specific written authorisation of Council’s Manager of Environmental Health and Building Services.

 

43.       Temporary toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site throughout the course of demolition and construction, at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site and the toilet facilities must be connected to a public sewer or other sewage management facility approved by Council.

 

44.       Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials or construction equipment must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time and the footpath, nature strip and road must be maintained in a clean condition and free from any obstructions at all times.

 

45.       Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written consent of the Council, unless the waste container is located upon the road in accordance with the Roads & Traffic Authority Guidelines and Requirements, and the container is exempt from an approval under Council’s Local Approvals Policy.

 

46.       Any building/demolition works involving asbestos cement are to be carried out in accordance with the Work Cover New South Wales “Guidelines for Practices Involving Asbestos Cement in Buildings”.

 

47.       A Construction Site Management Plan is to be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works. The site management plan must include the following measures, as applicable to the type of development:

 

·          location and construction of protective fencing / hoardings to the perimeter of the site;

·          location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·          location of building materials for construction;

·          provisions for public safety;

·          dust control measures;

·          site access location and construction

·          details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·          protective measures for tree preservation;

·          provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·          location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·          details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·          construction noise and vibration management.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain adequate levels of public health and safety.  A copy of the approved Construction Site Management Plan must be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

48.       During construction stages, sediment laden stormwater run-off shall be controlled using the sediment control measures outlined in the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

A soil and water management plan (SWMP) must be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority and implemented prior to the commencement of any site works or activities.

 

The soil and water management plan must contain a site plan, detailing:

 

·          the slope of the land

·          site access points and access control measures

·          location and type of all sediment control measures

·          location of existing vegetation, to be retained

·          material stockpile or storage areas and methods of sediment control

·          location of existing and proposed drainage systems

·          proposed disposal of site water

·          location of building operations and equipment

·          proposed re-vegetation details

 

All soil and water management measures must be maintained at all times throughout demolition, excavation, building and site works and a copy of the soil and water management plan is to be kept on-site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

49.       Stockpiles of soil, sand, aggregate or other materials must not be located on any drainage line, natural watercourse, footpath, roadway or any public place and the stockpiles must be protected with adequate sediment control measures.

 

Building operations such as brick cutting, washing tools or equipment and mixing mortar are not permitted on public footpaths, roadways, in any public place or any location which may lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater drainage system.

 

50.       A warning sign for soil and water management must be displayed in a prominent position on the building site, visible to both the public and site workers.  The sign must be displayed throughout the construction period.  Copies of a suitable warning sign are available at Council’s Customer Service Centre for a nominal fee.

 

51.       If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient or the building involves the enclosure of a public place, a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.

 

If necessary, an awning is to be erected sufficiently to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work from falling into the public place or adjoining premises.

 

The public place adjacent to the work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place and any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed upon completion of the work.

 

The public safety provisions and temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any hoardings, site fencing or amenities upon a footpath or public place, the written consent from Council’s Building Services section must be obtained beforehand and detailed plans are to be submitted to Council for consideration, together with payment of the weekly charge in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges.

 

52.       A temporary timber crossing is to be provided to the site entrance across the kerb and footway area, with splayed edges, unless access is via an existing concrete crossover.

 

53.       The applicant/builder is required to hold Public Liability Insurance, with a minimum liability of $5 million and a copy of the Insurance cover is to be provided to Council.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide access and facilities for people with disabilities:

 

54.       Access, facilities and car parking for people with disabilities must be provided in accordance with Council’s development control plan for multi-unit housing and in accordance with the relevant provisions of Part D3 of the Building Code of Australia and AS1428.1, AS4299 and 2890.1. Details of the proposed access, facilities and carparking for people with disabilities are to be included in the plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that reasonable levels of fire safety are provided in the building:

 

55.       The building is required to be provided with a smoke alarm system complying with Clause 3 of Specification E2.2a of the B.C.A. or a smoke detection system complying with Clause 4 of Specification E2.2a of the B.C.A. or a combination of a smoke alarm system within the sole-occupancy units and a smoke detection system in areas not within the sole-occupancy units.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

 

56.       The following security deposits requirements are to be complied with prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, as security for making good any damage caused to the roadway, footway, verge or any public place; or as security for completing any public work; and for remedying any defect on such public works, in accordance with section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

a)         $2000.00         -           Security damage deposit

b)         $2000.00         -           Vehicular crossing deposit

 

The damage deposit may be provided by way of a cash or cheque with the Council and is refundable upon the applicant advising Council, in writing, of the completion of all building works and/or obtaining an occupation certificate, if required.

 

The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

Traffic conditions/Civil Works Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for access, transport and infrastructure:

 

57.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

58.       Construct full width heavy duty vehicular crossings in Middle Lane opposite the vehicular entry/exit points for the site and the proposed Loading Dock.

 

59.       Construct kerb and gutter for the full site frontage except opposite the vehicular entry and exit points.

 

60.       Carry out a full depth, minimum 3.0 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full site frontage.

 

61.       Construct a footpath along the full Middle Lane site frontage, except opposite the vehicular entry and exit points.  Any footpath construction works shall use materials that are in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for Kingsford.

 

62.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway.

 

63.       All external work, carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council's Policy for "Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works". An application for the cost of the Council civil works is to be submitted to Council at the completion of the internal building works. An application fee shall be payable to Council for the quotation of the required works. The applicant may elect to use his contractor for the required works, subject to Council approval, however a design and supervision fee based on the lowest quotation from Council's nominated contractor will be required to be paid prior to the commencement of any works.

 

64.       All walls adjacent to the vehicular exit should be splayed 1.5 metres by 1.5 metres, and/or lowered to a maximum height of 600mm above the internal driveway and/or suitably setback from the street alignment such that the driver of an exiting vehicle stopped two metres behind the boundary line could observe pedestrians up to two metres away from the exit crossing. Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition. As an alternative to the above the applicant would be required to submit for approval, and have approved by the Certifying Authority, a traffic management plan aimed at minimising the potential for vehicle/pedestrian conflict at the exit driveway. The traffic management plan would need to be approved prior to release of the construction certificate and the applicant would be required to meet all costs associated with implementation of the plan including installation of any traffic/pedestrian control devices.

 

65.       A work zone is to be provided, (at full cost to the applicant), at a suitable location along the site frontage. The applicant shall contact Council’s Traffic Engineer to determine the preferred location for the work zone prior to lodgement of a construction certificate application. The work zone shall have a minimum length of 12 metres, and all fees must be paid to Council at least four (4) weeks prior to the commencement of building works.

 

66.       The applicant shall install a traffic control system to be used for vehicles entering/exiting the circular access ramp. Prior to release of the construction certificate the applicant shall submit for approval, and have approved by the Certifying Authority, full design and location details for the traffic control system. This condition is required because the width of the circular access ramps does not comply with the requirements of AS 2890.1 – 1993 for two-way traffic on curved circulation roadways and ramps.

 

67.       Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate the applicant shall submit to the Certifying Authority for approval, and have approved, longitudinal sections along the extremities and the centreline of each internal driveway/access ramp at a scale of 1:20. Each section shall indicate compliance with Council’s issued alignment levels. Vehicular access driveways are to be designed in general accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan – Parking and the relevant sections of AS 2890.1-1993.

 

68.       Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate the applicant shall dedicate a strip of land 1.2 metres wide along the Middle Lane site frontage for road widening of Middle Lane.

 

69.       The applicant shall meet the full cost for “No Standing” restrictions to be installed in Middle Lane along the full Middle Lane site frontage.

 

70.       All security roller shutters are to be suitably located such that operation of the shutters, or any keypads associated with the shutters, will not impact on the through movement of traffic within Middle Lane, (i.e vehicles queuing whilst waiting for shutters to open should not impede through vehicle movements).

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for future civil works in the road reserve:

 

71.       The Council’s Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services has inspected the above site and have determined that the design alignment level at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, are as follows:

 

Anzac Parade: match the back of the existing footpath along the full Anzac Parade site frontage.

 

Middle Lane: 75mm above the centreline of Middle Lane at all points opposite.

 

72.       The above alignment levels have been issued by the Council's Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services at a prescribed fee of $564.00 calculated at $16.50 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

73.       The design alignment levels issued by Council and their relationship to the roadway/kerb/footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

Service Authority Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate consideration for service authority assets:

 

74.       A public utility impact assessment must be carried out on all public utility services on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the development/building works and include relevant information from public utility authorities and exploratory trenching or pot-holing, if necessary, to determine the position and level of service.

 

75.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Telstra, Energy Australia, Sydney Water or Natural Gas Company to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

76.       Documentary evidence from the relevant public utility authorities confirming that their requirements have been satisfied, must be submitted to the certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Any electricity substation required for the site is to be located within the site and is to be screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on all detailed landscape drawings and specifications. The applicant is to liaise with Sydney Electricity prior to lodging the construction certificate to see if an electricity substation will be required for the development.

 

Drainage Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for drainage and associated infrastructure:

 

77.       The minimum ground floor level shall be constructed at RL 26.12. This condition has been imposed o help reduce the possibility of stormwater inundating the proposed ground floor level during a major storm event.

 

78.       Engineering calculations and plans with levels reduced to Australian Height Datum in relation to site drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. A copy of the engineering calculations and plans are to be forwarded to Council, prior to a construction certificate being issue, if the Council is not the certifying authority. The drawings and details shall include the following information:

 

a)         A detailed drainage design supported by a catchment area plan, at a scale of 1:100 or as considered acceptable to the Council or an accredited certifier, and drainage calculations prepared in accordance with the Institution of Engineers publication, Australian Rainfall and Run-off, 1987 edition.

 

b)         A layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of all drainage pipes and the connection into Council's stormwater system.  This may involve either connection to the Council's street gutter, or into a Council stormwater pit.  Note:  All proposals should indicate the location of the closest Council stormwater pit and line regardless of the point of discharge.  This information can be obtained by a visual inspection of the area and perusing Council's drainage plans.

 

c)         Generally all internal pipelines must be capable of discharging a 1 in 20 year storm flow.  However the minimum pipe size for pipes that accept stormwater from a surface inlet pit must be 150mm diameter.  The site must be graded to direct any surplus run-off (ie. above the 1 in 20 year storm) to the proposed drainage system.

 

d)         The separate catchment areas within the site, draining to each collection point or surface pit are to be classified into the following categories:

 

i.          Roof areas

ii.          Paved areas

iii.         Grassed areas

iv.         Garden areas

 

e)         Where buildings abut higher buildings and their roofs are "flashed in" to the higher wall, the area contributing must be taken as:  the projected roof area of the lower building, plus one half of the area of the vertical wall abutting, for the purpose of determining the discharge from the lower roof.

 

f)          Proposed finished surface levels and grades of car parks, internal driveways and access aisles which are to be related to Council's design alignment levels.

 

g)         The details of any special features that will affect the drainage design eg. the nature of the soil in the site and/or the presence of rock etc.

 

h)         All stormwater run-off naturally draining to the site must be collected and discharged through this property's stormwater system.  Such drainage must, if necessary, be constructed prior to the commencement of building work.

 

79.       On-site detention must be provided to ensure that the maximum discharge from the above site is not to exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 5 year storm of 1 hour duration for the existing site conditions.  All other stormwater run-off from the above site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 year storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the kerb and gutter or drainage system as required by the Director of Assets and Infrastructure Services.  Provision is to be made for satisfactory overland flow should a storm in excess of the above parameters occur.

 

For small areas up to 0.5 hectares, determination of the required cumulative storage must be calculated by the mass curve technique as detailed in Technical Note 1, Chapter 14 of the Australian Rainfall and Run-off Volume 1, 1987 Edition.

 

Where possible the detention tank must have an open base to infiltrate stormwater to the groundwater. Note that the ground water and any rock stratum have to be a minimum of 2.0 metres below the base of the tank.

 

80.       All site stormwater leaving the site must be discharged by gravity to the kerb and gutter or drainage system at the front of the property.

 

81.       The applicant must provide for a detention volume of up to the 1 in 100 year, plus an additional 50% of storage volume should no overland escape route be provided for storms greater than the design storm.

 

82.       A “restriction as to user and positive covenant” must be placed on the title of the subject property in conjunction with the registration of any future plan of subdivision or strata subdivision for this property.  Such restriction and positive covenant shall relate to the onsite stormwater detention system and shall not be released, varied or modified without the consent of the Council.

 

Notes:

a.   The "restriction as to user and positive covenant" are to be to the satisfaction of Council. A copy of Council’s standard wording/layout for the restriction and positive covenant may be obtained from Council’s Asset and Infrastructure Services Department.

b.   The linen plans shall indicate the location and dimensions of the detention/infiltration areas. 

 

This condition is to ensure that no works which could affect the design function of the detention system are undertaken without the prior consent (in writing) from Council.

 

83.       The detention area must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure it functions as required by the design.

 

84.       The stormwater detention area must be suitably signposted where required, warning people of the maximum flood level.

 

85.       The floor level of all habitable and storage areas adjacent to the detention area must be a minimum of 300mm above the maximum water level for the design storm or alternately a permanent 300mm high water proof barrier is to be constructed.

 

(In this regard, it must be noted that this condition must not result in any increase in the heights or levels of the building.  Any variations to the heights or levels of the building will require a new or amended development consent from the Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development).

 

86.       Should a pump system be required to drain any portion of the site the system must be designed with a minimum of two pumps being installed, connected in parallel (with each pump capable of discharging at the permissible discharge rate) and connected to a control board so that each pump will operate alternatively. The pump system must also be designed and installed strictly in accordance with "Section 8.4 PUMP SYSTEMS" as stipulated in Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

87.       A work-as-executed plan prepared and signed by the hydraulic engineer or a registered surveyor, and approved by an accredited certifier, must be submitted to Council's Director of Asset and Infrastructure Services prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, detailing the location of the detention basin with finished surface levels, contours at 0.2 metre intervals and volume of storage available.  The outlet pipe from the detention basin to its connection with Council's drainage system, must be indicated on this plan in conjunction with the following information:

 

a)         location

b)         pipe diameter

c)         gradient

d)         pipe material ie PVC or EW etc

e)         orifice size (if applicable)

 

88.       A sediment/silt arrester pit must be provided within the site at or near the street boundary prior to the site stormwater discharging by gravity to the kerb/street drainage system/absorption system. The sediment/silt arrestor pit shall be constructed with:-

 

·    The base of the pit located a minimum 300mm under the invert level of the outlet pipe.

 

·    The pit must be constructed from cast in-situ concrete, precast concrete or double brick.

 

·    The grate is to be a galvanised heavy-duty grate that has a provision for a child proof fastening system.

 

·    A minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes located in the walls of the pit at the floor level with a suitable geotextile material with a high filtration rating located over the weep holes.

 

·    A galvanised heavy-duty screen (Lysaght RH3030 Maximesh or similar) located over the outlet pipe. (Similar to a Mascot GRC stormwater discharge control pit, product code DS3SDC).

 

·    A child proof and corrosion resistant fastening system for the access grate (e.g. similar to a Weldlock spring loaded jay-bolt).

 

·    The inlet pipeline located on the side of the pit so that the stormwater will discharge across the face of the screen.

 

·    A sign adjacent to this pit stating that:

 

“This sediment/silt arrester pit shall be regularly inspected and cleaned.”

 

Note:    Sketch details of a standard sediment/silt arrester pit can be obtained from Council’s Drainage Engineer.

 

89.       Any Absorption Trenches/Pits must be designed in accordance with "Section 8.5 ABSORPTION TRENCHES" as stipulated in Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

90.       The garbage storage area is to be provided with a tap and hose and the floor is to be graded and drained to an approved floor waste to the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

91.       A covered car-washing bay shall be provided for this development.

 

a)         The car-washing bay must be drained to sewer to the requirements of Sydney Water and proof of compliance is to be submitted to the certifying authority, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development.

 

b)         The car-washing bay must be located outside any required/approved stormwater detention system and must be suitably signposted.

 

c)         The car-washing bay must be constructed with a minimum 20mm bund around the perimeter of the car washing bay/s (or equivalent)

 

d)         A water tap shall be located adjacent to the car-washing bay.

 

92.       All drainage details for the site shall be prepared by a suitably qualified hydraulic consultant who shall, at the completion of the works, certify that the drainage works have been constructed in accordance with the approved drainage plans.

 

93.       As the above site may be present within a fluctuating water table the basement carpark or similar structures are to be suitably tanked and waterproofed. A Structural Engineer and/or Geotechnical Engineer shall certify that the tanking & waterproofing has been carried out to an acceptable standard and a copy of the certification is to be forwarded to Council.

 

Notes:-

 

a)   Any subsoil drainage is to be disposed of within the site and is not to be charged to Council’s kerb & gutter and/or underground drainage system.

 

b)   Adequate provision is to be made for the ground water to drain around the basement carpark (to ensure that the basement will not dam or slow the movement of the ground water through the development site).

 

Landscape Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for landscaping and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

94.       Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate the applicant shall submit for approval, and have approved by the Certifying Authority, detailed landscape plans, drawings and specifications for the development. The landscape plans, drawings and specifications are to be prepared by a suitably qualified landscape designer with relevant qualifications in landscape architecture or horticulture. The documentation is to include:

 

a.         A site plan at an appropriate scale showing existing site boundaries, existing trees within the property (clearly identified as being retained or removed), existing street trees (clearly identified as being retained or removed), features on adjoining sites (buildings, trees, other structures etc), council’s footway, existing and proposed ground levels shown as spot heights and/or contours over the site, at site boundaries, and at the base of the tree/s to be retained, proposed building envelope, proposed areas of pavement, and proposed landscaped areas.

 

The plan shall clearly show the position, canopy spread (location of dripline), trunk diameter, height and names of all existing trees upon the site and adjoining sites which are likely to be affected by the development.

 

b.         A planting plan at a scale of 1:100 or 1:200 indicating the location of all proposed planting and existing trees to be retained. All plants are to be drawn at their mature size with a dense planting of shrubs, accent plants and ground covers within all garden beds so that a continuous planted cover is achieved. Plant spacings are to be clearly indicated for all accent and groundcovers.

 

c.         A planting schedule listing all plants by botanic & common names, plant numbers, plant spacings for groundcovers and accent planting, pot sizes, the estimated size of the plant at maturity (height & spread) and proposed staking methods when applicable.

 

d.         Additional notation showing soil and mulch details, irrigation details, edging, paving, fencing details, surface finishes, retaining wall details, and any other landscape elements in sufficient detail to fully describe the proposed landscape works.

 

e.         Position of existing and proposed site services including water, gas, electricity, sewer, stormwater, etc.

 

f.          Sectional elevations through the site showing the existing and proposed groundlines, building elevations, and mature height of proposed planting.

 

g.         All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape elevations through the site showing the existing and proposed groundlines, building elevations and mature height of proposed planting.

 

95.       To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaped areas, an automatic irrigation system shall be installed throughout all the landscaped areas. Such system shall provide full coverage to all the landscaped areas with no overspray onto driveways and pathways.

 

Details of the automatic irrigation system shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans and specifications. The system shall comply with all Sydney Water requirements, and relevant Australian Standards.

 

96.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque, or bank guarantee for the amount of $10,000.00 shall be lodged with Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development to ensure the implementation and maintenance of the landscape works in accordance with the approved landscape documentation.

 

a.         the refundable deposit will be released twelve (12)  months after the issue of a final occupation certificate by the principle certifying authority  providing the landscape works have been successfully implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved landscape documentation. Throughout the maintenance/bond period, the applicant shall be responsible for all routine maintenance such as grass cutting, weeding, watering, fertilising, spraying, staking and replacement of all failed plant stock.  There must be no alteration to the original design, including substitution of trees and shrubs, without the prior approval of Council.

 

b.         any contravention of Council's landscape conditions at any time during the construction period or prior to the expiration of a period of twelve (12) months from the date a final occupation certificate is issued will result in the Council claiming all or part of the lodged security.

 

Waste Management Conditions

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for waste management:

 

97.       Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to submit to Council and have approved by Council’s Manager of Waste a Waste Management Plan detailing waste and recycling storage and disposal for both the residential and commercial components of the development site, post construction. The number of bins to be provided for the commercial component of the development can be calculated based on 1 x 240 litre garbage bin per 2 units and 1 x 240 litre recycle garbage bin per 2 units. Waste collection for the commercial component of the development would need to be separate to the residential component.

 

A         ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

1.         The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specification must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

            In this regard, the development consent plans do not show compliance with the deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the BCA, including:

 

            a)         Part B1                        -           Structural provisions

            b)         Part C1                        -           Fire resistance and stability

            c)         Clause D1.4                 -           Exit travel distances

            d)         Part D3                        -           Access for people with disabilities

            e)         Part E1                         -           Fire fighting equipment

            f)          Part E2                         -           Smoke Hazard Management

            g)         Part E3                         -           Lift Installations

            h)         Part E4                         -           Emergency lighting, exit signs and warning systems

            i)          Part F5                         -           Sound Transmission and Insulation

 

            Details of compliance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and conditions of development consent are to be provided in the plans and specifications for the construction certificate.

 

2.         The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

3.         The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council’s footpath, kerb and gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council’s footpath and roadway.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.  A4 Plans

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

 

DAVID ONGKILI

DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER

 

 

 

 

 










 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

31 May, 2002

FILE NO:

D/2/02 'B'

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 96 Modification to demolish and reinstate three internal walls

PROPERTY:

 11 Cairo Street, COOGEE

WARD:

 Central Ward

APPLICANT:

 P & L SWEENEY

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting for determination at the request of Councillors Matson, Greenwood and Whitehead.

 

The current approval details the demolition of the existing walls in conjunction with the development consent for alterations and additions to the dwelling, DA 360/98. The applicant had sought consent for the reinstatement of the western wall, south eastern wall, eastern wall, removal of the retaining wall and planter box at the south west corner and lower garage floor level. Essentially the building is being rebuilt in part because the existing walls are structurally unsound and are not capable of supporting the loads of the new works. Consent was originally granted for this application on the 26th February 2002.

 

The current approval has been the subject of a Section 96 application to modify the consent, which added an additional wall to those which were to be demolished and rebuilt, consent being granted for the modification on the 28th May 2002.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposed modification adds additional walls to those that require reinstatement. The existing walls within the centre of the building are cracked and structurally unsound and it is proposed to demolish these walls and reinstate in exactly the same position and height. The proposed works are in part below the existing ground level and are setback behind and underneath the cantilevered upper floor levels.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The premises is within the Foreshore Scenic Protection area which contains a mixture of older style and large contemporary dwellings. The subject premises is on the southern side of Cairo Street and has overall dimensions of 10.973m x 40.54m, with an area of 445m5. The site at present is vacant, most to the existing dwelling having been demolished to accommodate alterations and additions to the dwelling as detailed under Development Application 360/98, and the subject development application 2/02.

 

4.    SECTION 96

 

4.1       Substantially the same development

 

The proposed modifications are minor in that the works do not increase the overall bulk and scale of the building or add any additional elements to the building and merely propose the reinstatement of three structurally unsound walls, and will not result in any additional impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape and therefore the proposed modifications to the original development proposal are considered to represent substantially the same development.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified on the 6th May 2002 and on the 16th May 2002 in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan 1998. The following submissions were received:

 

5.1  Objections

 

P & A Spencer of 9 Cairo Street South Coogee

 

-   objects to the demolition and reconstruction of this wall for the same reasons given previously.

 

            M & B Phillips of 13 CAIRO STREET SOUTH COOGEE

 

-   the plans do not represent an accurate indication of the subfloor and the proposed works detail the enlargement of the subfloor area.

-   their home has suffered damage allegedly caused by the excavation of the swimming pool and any further excavation may cause further damage.

 

Comment:

 

The salient point of the application is that the proposal details only the demolition of  existing walls because they are structurally unsound and not capable of supporting the additional loads imposed by the works as approved under Development Consent 960/98. The walls will be demolished and reconstructed in exactly the same location and height as the existing wall and the works will not alter the layout or area of the subfloor area.

 

Further, the proposed modifications do not alter the extent of the subfloor area approved under Development Consent No.2/02, and will not increase the potential for damage to the adjoining properties.

 

6.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The Development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

(a)   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed development is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

 

7.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

The proposed modifications to the consent do not increase or alter the overall envelope and bulk and scale of the dwelling and will not result in any additional impact to either the adjoining development or to the streetscape.

 

8.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposed modification to the original consent satisfies Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and in addition the proposed modifications will not result in any significant additional adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modifications to the original Development Consent are reasonable.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Modify Development Consent No. 2/02 for permission to reinstate existing walls including modifications to the existing walls and window locations for 11 Cairo Street Coogee in the following manner:

 

        Condition No.1 is altered to read as follows

 

“1.   The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered A.01- A.07, drawn by GA Design, dated December 2001, received by Council on the 2nd January 2002, as amended by the plan received by Council on the 30th April 2002 and the 2nd May 2002, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans.”

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A4 Configuration Plans

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

PERRY HEAD

ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 



  

Director Planning & Environment's Report 34/2002

 

 

SUBJECT:

MASTER PLAN AND REZONING FOR 68-76 WENTWORTH STREET, RANDWICK

 

DATE:

31 May, 2002

FILE NO:

98/S/4475

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT     

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

On 24 January 2002, JBA Planning Consultants submitted a Master Plan accompanied by a rezoning application on behalf of the University of New South Wales (UNSW) for the site at 68-76 Wentworth Street, Randwick.  The applicant was seeking approval to construct a multi-unit development comprising of 66 units in three blocks (Buildings A, B and C) ranging from two (2) to four (4) storeys in height and two (2) separate basement car parks with 116 car spaces in total.

 

A preliminary assessment of the Master Plan was undertaken which included discussions with Council Officers, public submissions and a community information night. In response to these further amendments were made,  with regard to the following:

 

§ A reduction in the building height.

§ A reduction in the number of units.

§ A reduction in number of car parking spaces.

§ Increased set backs for Building A.

§ Repositioning of the pedestrian entry into Block B.

§ Redesign of the unit frontage in Block A.

 

As a result, amended plans were lodged on 29 April 2002 and readvertised. The Master Plan now comprises of 60 dwellings in three buildings that range between 2 and 3 storeys in height, 112 basement car parking spaces, landscaping and possible subdivision of the site. These plans are the subject of this assessment.

 

The Master Plan has been prepared in conjunction with the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (1998), the Development Control Plan - Multi-Unit Housing and the Development Control Plan – Parking.

 

This report recommends that Council adopt the 68-76 Wentworth Street, Randwick Master Plan subject to variations relating primarily to the building height, provision of setbacks, the location of basement car parking and the provision of car parking.

 

1.         THE MASTERPLAN:

 

The Master Plan is for a multi-unit housing development and includes the following:

 

§ 60 dwellings (comprising three buildings of 2 and 3 storeys in height)

§ 26 x 2 bedroom units

§ 34 x 3 bedroom units

§ 6,332m² of gross floor area (FSR of 0.8:1)

§ 5,090m² of landscaped area equivalent to 63% of the site area

§ Private open space equivalent to balconies of 17m² for units above ground and 25m² for ground floor units.

§ The retention of 26 of the 45 trees that were identified in the tree survey as being in good or fair condition.

§ 2 x basement car parks containing 112 parking spaces.

 

The proposal will have a layout comprising three Buildings A, B and C. Building A fronts Dangar Street and comprises 14 x two bedroom units and 15 x three bedroom units. It is two storeys in height, increasing to three storeys on the northern side of Building A. Building B fronts Wentworth Street and comprises 8 x two bedroom units and 6 x three bedroom units. It is three storeys in height at the south eastern section decreasing to two at the northern and western sides. Building C fronts Wentworth Street and comprises 4 x two bedroom units and 13 x 3 bedroom units. It is three storeys in height.

 

Pedestrian access is also proposed via Wentworth, Dangar and King Streets. Vehicular access to the basement car parks is also proposed via Wentworth, Dangar and King Streets, which serve as the access/egress points for the various basement car parks.

 

2.         THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is L-shaped and is bounded by Tramway Lane to the north, Wentworth Road to the east, Dangar Street to the west and King Street to the south. The subject site comprises Lot 2 in DP 218688 and is owned by the UNSW.

 

The subject site has an area of 8,041m² and has a fall of 14 metres from east to west. It is currently divided into eastern and western sections. The eastern section comprises the former residence of the UNSW Vice Chancellor, a garden and a bitumen car parking area. The western section accommodates three tennis courts, a small clubhouse and a bitumen car parking area.

 

Development in the locality is characterised by a mix of residential uses. To the north are low-density detached dwelling houses fronting Wentworth and Danger Streets. To the south is medium-density housing characterised by apartment buildings and townhouses, which front King Street.

 

Wentworth Street, which is to the east of the site, contains a number of 3 and 4 storey residential apartment buildings. A new 2-storey townhouse development (86 King Street) adjoins the site to the south and west, completing the street block on which the site is located. Opposite the subject site, to the west, is the former STA Bus Depot site, which has received Council approval for a SEPP 5 development.

 

3.         MASTER PLAN REQUIREMENTS:

 

Under the provisions of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan Amendment No.17 Clause 40A, a Master Plan is required for development of sites over 4,000sqm in area.  The Council cannot approve a development application on a site over 4,000sqm unless the Council has adopted a Master Plan for the site and it is satisfied that the proposed development is consistent with the Master Plan.  Council may grant a waiver to the requirement for a Master Plan, but only if the proposal is minor or ancillary or if adequate controls/guidelines already exist. 

 

Master Plans are required to outline long-term proposals for development of sites and explain how proposals address a range of matters including:

 

§ design principles drawn from an analysis of the site and its context;

§ phasing of development;

§ distribution of land uses, including open space;

§ building envelopes and built form controls;

§ infrastructure provision;

§ pedestrian, cycle and road access and circulation, parking and public transport;

§ provision of public facilities; and

§ impact on and improvements to the public domain.

 

The requirements for a Master Plan application include public advertising and notification of the proposal. The assessment is to have regard to any submissions received.

 

4.         STATUTORY CONTROLS:

 

The subject site is zoned Special Uses Zone (Zone No. 5) under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. This zone allows a FSR of 0.5:1 and therefore the proposed FSR of 0.8:1 will not comply under this zone. The application requests that Council consider a residential zone for the site, initial suggestions being a 2(b) zoning across the entire property. This is despite the current zoning allowing a limited density of residential development.  In assessing the rezoning request, and the suitability of the development proposed in the Master Plan, the existing character of the area needs to be considered. 

 

Tramway Lane to the north separates the site from development that is predominantly single and two storey dwellings.  The dwellings are located in a conservation area, which has a 2(a) zoning.  The height of these dwelling is also consistent with the 9.5 metre height limit allowed in the 2(b) zone.

 

Along part of the southern and western edges of the site is the townhouse development fronting Dangar and King Streets.  This building has the outward appearance of two storeys, similar to that of the townhouse scheme.   Building A contains have a section that is three storeys but the impact and suitability of this component will be considered later in the report.   The section of building that fronts Dangar Street and the section that adjoins the townhouse scheme are both two storeys in height.  On the basis of the character of development in Dangar Street, it is appropriate to use the controls for a 2(b) zone as a guide for assessing the impact of Building A.

 

Buildings B and C are located with frontages to Wentworth Street.  A study of the character of this street reveals a strong presence of large residential flat buildings, not necessarily all reflecting the design objectives that are desirable, but nevertheless have a scale that is commensurate with Council’s 2(c) zoning.  The generous setbacks and the proposed heights of Building B and C are also consistent with the 2(c) zoning and this will serve as a guide to assist in the assessment of the Master Plan.

 

The proposal seeks to average the FSR across the whole site in order to allow the movement of some of the potential floor space from the upper section of the site to the lower section. If this is considered appropriate, any approvals should ensure that the open space areas of the upper section are accessible to the occupants of Buildings A, B and C.   The future rezoning should link the development of the site to the approved Master Plan so that any future subdivision does not facilitate future increased density on the upper section of the site.

 

In order to achieve this, a more appropriate zoning would be one that applies across the whole site and limits the potential development to be consistent with the Master Plan.  Some consideration has been given to “development zone” which would enable site-specific controls to be put in place.

 

 

5.   PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSION:

 

The Master Plan was exhibited from 5th February to 19th February 2002, following advertisements in the local newspaper, notification of local residents and erection of site notices. During this period 103 submissions were received from the immediate vicinity, neighbouring areas as well as a number of other parties interested in the tennis court use well as local politicians, all of which outlined objections to the proposed development.

 

The Master Plan was readvertised and exhibited until the 21st May 2002 after amendments to the development were undertaken. During this period 37 submissions were received mostly by residents in neighbouring areas. The majority of these residents had already written submissions during the first period of advertising. Similar concerns were outlined in the recent submissions that were outlined in the previous submissions.

 

5.1       Objections

 

The objectors concerns from both the first and second amendments are as follows:

·    Over development of the site.

·    The floor space ratios in 2 of the proposed buildings exceed limits set by Council.

·    The height of the proposed buildings exceeds zoning regulations and does not maintain existing character of the area.

·   The development is more consistent with Residential C Zoning.

·   Site should be retained for recreational purposes and not multiple dwellings.

·    Increase in noise levels from traffic and additional residents.

·    Size, bulk and scale are excessive.

·   Master Plan breaches LEP for the requested Residential B Zoning.

·    The design is of poor quality.

·    The average FSR proposed for the three buildings substantially exceed the allowable FSR for Zone 2(b).

·    Federation style quality of the area should be maintained.

·   Population increase of 200 or more in area of single-family dwellings is inappropriate.

·   Over development will affect the value of surrounding properties

·    Development would look directly over adjoining properties and threaten privacy.

·    Increased traffic from development will consequently increase traffic accidents.

·   Additional 112 cars would exacerbate air pollution.

·    Concerns over fumes associated with development.

·    Heavy impact on parking availability.

·    Existing infrastructure such as roads are at breaking point.

·    Threat to leafy view for properties on Wentworth Street.

·    The planting of new trees will further shade the neighbouring terraces when mature.

·    Bird life may be affected if trees come down.

·    Flora under threat by new development.

·    Tree replacement would mean a 20-year (plus) timeframe for trees to reach their current size.

·    Randwick Primary School children disadvantaged by loss of sporting facility.

·    The report fails to take into account the consequences of the new development on King Street for aged care facilities.

·    Once rezoned, developers will push Council to maximize the number of dwellings to maximize their profit.

·   Lack of respect for the heritage significance of the adjoining conservation area.

·   It will obstruct current views of the city skyline from properties on Wentworth Street.

·    Loss of tennis court facility would be an enormous loss to the community.

·   Concern over losing last sporting facility in the area.

·   Current site property and gardens are of architectural & landscape merit and should be preserved.

·    Insist on working hours to be kept and care taken for the impact and dirt on the roads during the period of development.

·    Community needs should be placed first.

 

The issues raised by the objectors have been considered at length and are discussed throughout this report.  The major potential for impact is on the townhouses in Dangar Street and the immediately adjacent dwellings across Dangar Lane.  Particular consideration has been given to these buildings and some constraints on the future development of the site regarding height and overshadowing would be appropriate.

 

6.         TECHNICAL OFFICER’S COMMENTS:

 

6.1       Landscape Comments

 

Council’s Landscape Technician considered the original Master Plan submission and advised of the following:

 

·     The original Master Plan submitted for the above site was considered satisfactory. Although a number of significant trees were to be removed, it appeared that every effort had been made to retain the majority of the existing trees on site as well as incorporating additional planting to compensate.

 

The amended Master Plan has now been considered by Council’s Landscape Technician and the following comments should be noted:

 

·     The amended Master Plan is similar to the original and therefore the majority of the proposal is supported with respect to landscape issues. One element of variance between the amended Master Plan and the one originally considered is that the vehicular entry/exit point for Block C has been relocated from Wentworth Street in the original submission to King Street in the current submission. The location of the vehicular crossing as now proposed is practical from a purely engineering and planning perspective, (allowing the building to be kept as low as possible and minimising ramp lengths), however the vehicular crossing requires the removal of an additional two trees from the development site over and above the original Master Plan submission. Both of these trees are significant specimens that are noted in the Arborist’s report as being worthy of retention. The DEPCD is requested to consider the relative merits of the Block C design in the amended application against those of the original Block C design and determine if the benefits derived from the current Block C design warrants the need for removal of at least two additional trees.

 

6.2       Drainage Engineers Comments

 

The applicant should be advised of the following general requirements for site stormwater discharge:

 

·    Onsite detention of stormwater is required for the redeveloped portion of the site. The maximum discharge from the above site is not to exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 5 year storm of 1 hour duration for the existing site conditions. All other stormwater run-off from the above site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the kerb and gutter or drainage system as required by the Director of Asset and Infrastructure Services. Provision is to be made for satisfactory overland flow should a storm in excess of the above parameters occur.

 

·    Engineering calculations and plans with levels reduced to Australian Height Datum in relation to site drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed development.

 

·    The applicant should undertake sufficient geotechnical investigation to determine if the proposed development would have any affect on, or be affected by, the existing groundwater conditions.

 

·   As the above site may be present within a fluctuating water table and/or affected by the movement of seepage water any basement carpark or similar structure may need to be suitably tanked and waterproofed.

 

·   Any proposed drainage easement should be of sufficient width to accommodate a pipeline capable of draining stormwater flows for up to the 1 in 20 year storm event and conveying overland flows for storms up to the 1 in 100 year event.

 

These issues will need to be considered in the preparation and lodgment of future development applications for the site.

 

6.3       Traffic Engineers Comments

 

Council’s traffic engineer advises as follows:

 

Parking

 

The proposal provides for 60 residential dwellings comprising of:

 

26 * 2 bedroom units

34 * 3 bedroom units

 

The parking requirement as per Council’s DCP-Parking is:

 

26*1.2 = 31.2

34*1.5 = 51

 

Visitor spaces = 60/4 = 15

Hence a total of 97 spaces are required.

 

The master plan provides for 112 car spaces which complies with Council’s DCP-Parking, however a large amount of these spaces (14) are tandem which is not permitted under Council’s DCP-Parking and is not supported.

 

The traffic report indicates that a minimum of 2.4 metres width will be provided for the tenant parking. This is not acceptable. A minimum width of 2.5 metres for all parking spaces is required. The traffic report also states that a minimum headroom of 2.2m will be provided. This should be increased to 2.3 metres.

 

Traffic Generation

 

Applying Medium density residential flat building traffic generation rates from RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments.

 

Daily vehicle trips:

 

26*4.5 = 117

34*6 = 204

 

A total of 321 trips/day will be generated by the residential development, with a peak hour traffic generation 32 trips/hour.

 

Peak hour traffic volumes indicate that approximately 200 vehicles/hour travel along Dangar Street and 270 vehicles/hour in King Street. The development will add 12 trips/am peak on Dangar Street and 22 trips/hour on Wentworth Street. These roads can accommodate the increase in traffic.  

 

In order to manage the increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic it is considered appropriate that the development provide for the installation of traffic calming measures in Dangar Street and King Street.

 

Traffic Calming

 

Traffic calming measures are to be installed in vicinity of the site with details to be submitted with the Development Application. Local residents have expressed concerns regarding speeding vehicles in the roads fronting the development. A reduction in vehicular speeds will reduce noise levels and promote driver behaviour consistent with the surrounding residential environment.

 

The following measures should be considered:

 

·    The installation of a roundabout at the King Street/Dangar Street intersection.

 

·    Definition of parking lanes on Dangar Street by line marking. This must cater for cyclists, as Dangar Street is a designated cycle path.

 

Access & Circulation

 

The recommended access driveway width is 3.0m to 6.0m (driveway type 1 AS2980.1). The master plan provides driveway entry widths of 6.0metres, which complies with Council’s DCP-Parking.

 

It is proposed to provide all parking in the basement areas. The maximum grade adjacent to the property boundary must be less than 1 in 20 for the first 5m from the property boundary.

 

Three access points are indicated on the plan. Block A access is off Dangar Street and services 51 car spaces. Block B access is off Wentworth Street and services 30 car spaces and Block C access is off King Street and services 31 car spaces.

 

The access points are located in satisfactory positions Block A, 30 metres from Tramway Lane, Block B, 27 metres from Tramway Lane and Block C, 20 metres from Wentworth Street, (note: the applicant has indicated that the vehicular entry/exit point for Block C will be designed as a left in/left out driveway and this is supported by Council).

 

The straight roadway ramp must be a minimum of 5.5 metres for two way traffic. The proposal provides for widths in excess of 5.5 metres, which is considered satisfactory.

 

The circulation aisles must be 6.0 metres wide for two way traffic and for blind aisles must be increased to 7.0 metres.        

 

An INTANAL intersection analysis indicates that the surrounding intersections operate at a Level of Service A in both the AM and PM peaks with the proposed development. 

 

The issues raised by Council’s traffic engineer will need to be considered in future development applications for the site.

 

7.         DISCUSSION AND ISSUES:

 

Council is required to consider a number of issues in determining the Master Plan (section 3 of this report outlines the assessment criteria for Master Plans). These issues are discussed below.

 

7.1       General

 

The Master Plan addresses all relevant matters covered in Clause 40 of the RLEP. The application considers the appropriateness of the site for residential development and its suitability as an urban infill site. The overall form and design has had regard to a wide range of issues and generally responds to these in a favourable manner.

 

7.2       Height

 

The Master Plan indicates that the height of the proposed buildings range from 2-3 storeys.  Building A and B are both a mixture of 2 and 3 storeys and Building C, only contains 3 storeys. As discussed, the character around the site is varied and requires careful consideration regarding the impact it may have on the streetscape and amenity of adjoining development.

 

Clause 33 of the RLEP (1998) sets height limits for 2(b) zones at 9.5m and for 2(c) zones at 12m.  The height is determined after consideration of existing ground levels and not the future excavated levels.  On this basis, many areas of the proposed buildings are within the height controls envisaged by the current controls for buildings of this nature.

 

Prior to the Master Plan amendments the proposed height was 15 metres.  This exceeded the height control for both 2(b) and 2(c) zones.  Submissions were received from residents in the adjoining streets stating that excessive heights would be out of character for that particular site, especially being so closely located to a conservation zone and to the single attached dwellings on Dangar Street and Wentworth Street.  These concerns were addressed by the applicant through a reduction in the height of the buildings in several locations.

 

The height of the southern side of Building A is 2 storeys, keeping with the height of the adjoining townhouses. The southern side originally contained 3 storeys were considered excessive due to the potential impacts on the adjacent townhouses. The plans have now been amended to allow 2 storeys along this section of the building.

 

Building B, proposed 2 storeys fronting Tramway Lane and Wentworth Street, which is considered appropriate due to the adjoining 2 storey dwellings.  The third storey is located on the southern side of the building.  This is positioned to the centre of the site and is surrounded by significant mature trees. The retention of these trees has resulted in a building footprint that is well setback from the property boundaries. The provision of the third storey towards the centre of the site is unobtrusive and consistent with the built form for this part of the street.

 

The provision of 3 storeys for building C is also considered acceptable within the context of the site and its surrounds. Again, the retention of significant vegetation on the site has evoked a greater than usual provision of landscaping and generous setbacks. These aspects combined with the surrounding residential flat buildings in Wentworth and King Street result in the scheme being consistent with the streetscape.

 

The main areas of concern relate to impacts from overshadowing created by the height of Building A.  The existing townhouse development to the south currently enjoys winter sun to the lower living areas and courtyards.  The material submitted with the application indicates that the height of Block A will result in loss of sunlight during winter, and no sunlight reaching some of the downstairs areas during this period.

 

It is considered that the building should be lowered in height or setback further to ensure that the solar access provisions of Council’s policies are met.  This can be controlled by a condition on the Master Plan if approved.

 

The height of Building B is also of concern.  The current ground level will result in the external wall height exceeding Council’s requirement significantly.  The current Master Plan proposes an external wall height in this location of approximately 15 metres above the existing ground level and an overall height of 17 metres.

 

The residential floors of Building B also cantilever out over the basement parking at this point.  This creates and undesirable façade and is an unsatisfactory treatment of this elevation.  The building should be reduced in length by at least 3 metres at this point and lowered in height to meet the requirement for wall heights and overall building height so that they are consistent with the requirements of a 2(c) zone.  This should also remove the undesirable building overhang that currently exists.

 

This reduced building length will also allow for a greater separation between Buildings A and B, which is currently only 4 metres.  Despite the difference in levels, this minimal distance is considered undesirable.  A lowering of the height of Building B and the increased setback will improve this relationship and improve the solar access to the courtyard of Building A.

 

In a similar way, the building and wall height in Building C should meet the wall and overall height requirements consistent with a 2(c) development.  The relocation of the vehicle entrance to King Street has assisted this situation but every effort should be made in the development application design to minimise the impacts of basement sitting out of ground.

 

The change in ground levels between the gradual gradient of Tramway lane and the flatter level area of the tennis courts reduces impact that may result from the 3 storey section of the building in this location.  The outward appearance of the scheme from Dangar Street and most of Tramway lane will still be of a two-storey development although there is one prominent exception.  There will be a short section of the northern elevation where the 3 storeys are apparent both from the lane and Dangar Street. 

 

The rationale behind allowing townhouses in this section of the site is the 2-storey appearance that will result in the streetscape.  It is considered that the first module of 3 storeys will be quite visible from Dangar Street and Tramway Lane and the height here should be reduced to 2 storeys.  The removal of the upper level of this module will also allow greater articulation in the roofline of the 3-storey section, creating a 2 step roof structure when viewed from Dangar Street.

 

This scheme will necessitate the construction of an internal retaining wall of some height and accordingly future applications should detail the treatment of this area and take into account the useability of the space in the resultant courtyards and landscaped area.

 

The additional height in this section will not result in significant loss of privacy.  The nearest residential property is the two storey dwelling on the corner of Tramway Land and Dangar Streets.  The nature and orientation of the structures on this site preserve the privacy of the yard and dwelling very well.  In addition, the row of pencil pines along the southern edge of the property (in Tramway Lane) are quickly reaching a height that will provide significant screening of views.

 

Subject to the changes outlined above, the overall height of the development is consistent with the character of the area.

 

7.3       Density

 

Under Clause 32 of RLEP 1998, the maximum FSR applicable to the Residential 2(b) zone is 0.65:1, while the F.S.R for the Residential 2(c) zone is 0.9:1. The proposed FSR for the overall development is 0.8:1.

 

If the site were zoned 2(b) on the lower section and 2(c) on the upper section, the overall allowable floor space based on the above ratios would be approximately 6,400m2.  This is in excess of the overall floor space for the development, which is approximately 6330m2.  This indicates that the overall density for the site is consistent with the density that would be achieved under the split zonings if they were considered appropriate.

 

The proposed FSR for Block A is considered reasonable given the bulk and scale of surrounding developments, especially 89-91 Dangar Street and the approved SEPP5 development at 88-120 King Street.  The Buildings B and C are also considered reasonable, as they are commensurate with other development fronting Wentworth and King Street.

 

The development on the upper section of the site achieves a density slightly below the 2(c) zoning which assists in the transition between the higher buildings in Wentworth Street and the townhouse style development in King and Dangar Streets.  Some of this density is transferred to the lower section of the site and steps should be taken to ensure that the open space areas of the upper section are linked to the lower development.

 

In view of the variation in the proposed FSR from Council’s standard, the proposal will require the submission, together with a development application, of an objection under the provisions of SEPP1 for Council to consider the variations to the development standard.

 

7.4       Design

 

Building A represents a townhouse style development.  This has been designed in a similar manner to the adjoining townhouse development on King Street.  It is two storeys and from the street it has separate entrances to each dwelling. Buildings B and C are residential flat buildings varying between 2 and 3 storeys.  This height is similar to the adjoining flat buildings in King and Dangar Street.

 

The articulation of the rooflines of all buildings is in response to the slope of the site, which helps break down the scale and mass of the development. The provision of 3 buildings, moderately generous setbacks and landscaped communal open space and private open space also breaks up the density, bulk and scale.

 

Objections have been received raising concerns that the design of proposal does not blend in with the existing character of the area. The Master Plan application only considers the overall shape and form of the scheme, making allowance for the style of construction that might be required to ensure that the scheme is compatible with the surrounding area.  A more detailed design would form part of any future development application and would be considered at that time.

 

The proposal will contain townhouses fronting Dangar Street in a similar style to the adjoining development.  The buildings fronting Wentworth Street will also replicate residential units that are in close proximity to the development.  The design of the scheme attempts to break down the developments bulk and scale through setbacks, elevated rooflines, articulated heights, the provision of public and private open space and generous amounts of landscaping.

 

There are some design issues relating to the basement car parks and building overhangs but these can be controlled by conditions on the Master Plan if approved.  In general, the buildings are generally consistent with the character of the area and will make a design contribution.

 

7.5       Heritage

 

The subject site does not contain any heritage items.  The proximity of the Conservation Area to the north of the site has been considered in the assessment.  The design has paid due regard to the height and form of development, particularly in Dangar Street.  The current retaining wall fronting Dangar Street adds little to the streetscape and the new townhouse style development will contribute significantly to the street.  The design has also taken into account the nature of the dwellings in Dangar Street in terms of width and proportion as well as the access and fencing style.  The proposal is therefore not considered to detract from the heritage conservation area.

 

7.6       Landscaping and Pedestrian Access

 

The development provides 63% of landscaped area in total.  A pre-development tree assessment was undertaken by the applicant stating 69% of the trees on site that were in good or fair condition were to be retained.  Most of the trees are located on the central part of the site between buildings B and C, as well as on Tramway Lane.

 

The Master Plan provides for additional planting within and on the boundaries of the site.  A communal landscaped courtyard will be provided in Building A, located around the private courtyards of the terrace houses.

 

The Master Plan provides an adequate amount of landscaping for private and public use.  The retention of mature trees and additional landscaping is consistent with the character of the area. The generous setbacks of the development have resulted from the intent to keep the existing vegetation around buildings A, B and C.  This allows for the retention of mature trees as well supplementary planting to improve amenity and overcome any privacy issues.  Consideration should be given to some evergreen planting to increase the screening between the development and the adjoining dwelling which fronts Wentworth Street and is located across Tramway Lane.

 

Pedestrian access to the site includes access from Dangar Street to each of the townhouses in building A.  The pedestrian access is provided to buildings B and C from Wentworth Street, a landscaped path will provide entry to Building B.  Pedestrian access between each block has not been provided nor is encouraged.  Overall the Master Plan has provided an adequate amount of pedestrian access within the site.

 

The amended proposal provides for an access for vehicles from King Street.  This will require removal of approximately two trees but this must be considered against the impacts of creating a driveway access through the prime open space area on the site.  The future development application should carefully consider the location of the driveway from King Street to minimise vegetation loss of significant trees whilst also allowing the building height to be lowered.

 

7.7       Phasing

 

The Master Plan does not propose how the development will be phased; however it suggests that buildings A, B and C might be separate developments.  A future application for development and/or subdivision should carefully consider the relationship of the various sites to each other and the floor space that has been allowed in each component.

 

In order to ensure that the development preserves the appropriate amount of open space for all occupants of the development, a community title subdivision may be required.  The land should not be subdivided in a manner, which segregates the large area of high quality open space from any of the individual buildings of resultant land parcels.  This approach also takes into account the allocation of density to different parts of the development site.

 

7.8       Social Impact and Support Services

 

The Master Plan provides limited information on the social impact of the development.  Many objections received, raised concern regarding the impact on the community over the loss of tennis courts.  The proposal states that these courts will be relocated at the University of New South Wales, Kensington Campus. 

 

The Master Plan provides a mix of two and three bedrooms units and townhouses. It is considered that this will increase the availability of housing, bringing more people to the site. The demographic characteristics of this population are likely to include, share households; young couples such as first home buyers; “empty nester” households; and young families.

 

It is likely that there will be a mix of incomes amongst residents with some units being owner occupied and others being rented. The added population will generate additional needs for businesses, employees and patrons, which will in turn encourage the location of services and facilities into the area. The increase in density is not considered to generate an unreasonable demand on the availability of existing services.

 

The applicant provided a community information night and a number of amendments were undertaken as a result of this.  There are no adverse social impacts produced by this development.

 

7.9       Flora and fauna

 

A tree assessment undertaking by the applicant determined that there were no trees of local significance.  Most of the existing trees to be retained are located between Building B and Tramway Lane, Building C and King Street between Buildings B and C as well as on the Wentworth Street frontage.

 

There were 65 trees identified in the survey of which only 45 were identified as being of good or fair condition.  In total 39 trees are to be removed, 19 of which were considered to be in average or very poor condition.

 

The trees that are to remain on the site are substantial and will retain the character created by the current levels of vegetation.  Careful consideration should be given at the development application stage as to the type and location of any introduced species to the site.  A detailed landscape plan would be required for further consideration.

 

An amended Landscape Concept Plan was submitted with the amended Master Plan. This includes the reorganisation of planting in Building A and on the boundary setbacks. Additional planting on all boundaries as well as between Buildings B and C is proposed and will provide adequate privacy for the development and adjoining neighbours.

 

There were a number of submissions received that addressed the loss of privacy during the winter months for properties to the north of the site as a result of the deciduas trees on the Tramway Lane boundary.  This loss of privacy is not considered excessive, given the pencil pines and limited number of windows of the immediate adjoining property that overlooks the subject site.

 

The flora and fauna issues would need to be brought to the attention of Council’s Seed Collector and Bush Care Officer.  These issues will be addressed at the development applicant stage to assess compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

 

7.10     Ecological Sustainable Development

 

Some concern over solar access has been discussed and these problems should be overcome to ensure as much access to passive energy on the site as possible.  Any future development application should meet Council controls for solar access and should provide detailed plans to indicate this compliance.

 

The future design of the development should be undertaken to achieve a NatHERS rating of 3.5 stars or energy efficient mechanical systems for ventilation and heating.  It is recommended that the opportunities to introduce measures and options to promote ESD principles be identified in the development applicant stage.

 

7.11   Impact on adjoining properties

 

Sunlight

 

Building A will create a large amount of overshadowing on the northern section of the first and second storeys on 86-91 King Street in 9am and 12noon within the winter months. The DCP multi-unit housing requires a minimum 3 hours direct sunlight penetration throughout the year.  The Master Plan should be conditioned to ensure solar access is maintained.

 

Building B fronting Wentworth Street is not considered to adversely overshadow any adjoining properties but some overshadowing of the future buildings on the site will occur.  Steps should be taken to reduce this impact although the existing vegetation does have a significant impact on sunlight availability at present.

 

A number of objections received raised concerns regarding overshadowing on adjoining properties, especially from residents at 89-91 Dangar Street. The loss of sunlight that will be experienced is considered excessive and the development should meet the performance the criteria set out in Councils Multi unit DCP to minimise impacts from overshadowing.

 

Overshadowing from Building C will have a small impact on the townhouse development at 89-91 King Street, but this will only be during AM periods and is not considered to be an adverse impact. The existing vegetation and the change in levels between the sites result in significant overshadowing at present.  It is not expected that the future development will dramatically change this situation but detailed shadow diagrams should be provided with any future development application.

 

Privacy and Noise

 

The provisions of generous landscaped setbacks along the street frontages, as well as the location of Tramway Lane between Building A and B and adjoining residential dwellings provides adequate distance from the surrounding residential properties to minimise any potential overlooking into these properties.  The potential for noises to increase on the site in terms of increased traffic noise needs to be addressed in the development application.

 

Additional supplementary planting will further reduce the opportunity for overlooking.  As mentioned earlier, the reduced heights and physical separation of the properties will not result in amenity impacts from privacy.  The dwelling fronting Wentworth Street (across Dangar Lane) has a physical wall-to-wall distance from the new building of approximately 15 metres.  This distance, combined with existing and future planting, is considered acceptable.

 

7.12     Traffic, Transport and Parking

 

A traffic and transport study was submitted with the Master Plan.  The study concludes there will be minor increases in traffic generated by the development amounting to 30 vehicles during both week day AM and PM commuter peak hour periods and would remain within the maximum environmental capacity of the surrounding roads. Council’s traffic engineer states a total of 360 trips/day will be generated by the residential development, with a peak hour traffic generation of 36 trips/hour.

 

The parking numbers comply with the requirements of the DCP Parking and the DCP for multi-unit housing.  However, 17 tandem spaces are included as part of the 112 spaces which is not permissible under Councils DCP Parking.  The width of the parking spaces also does not comply with the DCP Parking. As indicated in the traffic engineers comments, parking should comply with the DCP – Parking and tandem spaces is not considered appropriate.

 

A number of submissions received address the problems surrounding increased traffic in the area.  Although there will be a slight increase in traffic this increase does not exceed the maximum environmental capacity of the surrounding roads. The surrounding roads can accommodate this increase and the traffic impact is not considered excessive.

 

7.13   Matters to be addressed in future Development Application

 

The assessment of the Master Plan has provided the opportunity to identify standards, revisions and supplementary information required for a comprehensive assessment of the development application.  The following matters will require consideration in addition to those comments on drainage, landscaping and traffic which were made in Section 6 by Council’s technical officers:

 

§ Demonstrated consistency with all the requirements and variations of the approved Master Plan.

§ Demonstrated consistency with the principles of ecologically sustainable development in the design and location of the buildings and private and communal open space, infrastructure and natural and cultural heritage.

§ The applicant shall be conditioned to dedicate splay corners for road widening purposes at all intersections. Typically the splay corners required will be 3metre by 3 metre at the King Street-Wentworth Street intersection; 3metre by 1.5 metre at both the Wentworth Street-Tram Lane and Dangar Street-Tram Lane intersections. Minor variations to the splay corner dimensions could be approved if the outcome was a better design solution.

§ Identification and application of measures and options to promote ESD principles.

 

 

8.       CONCLUSION:

 

It is considered that the proposed Master Plan is appropriate on the site given the relationship with surrounding development in terms of height, set backs, façade treatment and landscaping. The proposal will not have a significant impact on surrounding properties and the non-compliances with statutory and policy controls will not exacerbate impacts.

 

The assessment has carefully considered the surrounding character of the area and the potential for development on this significant site.  A number of changes are suggested to improve the outcomes for the development.  After consideration of these issues, the Master Plan is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

The UNSW surplus land, 68-76 Wentworth Street Master Plan for multi-unit housing has merit and should be adopted subject to the following variations as outlined below.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A         That Council adopt the Master Plan for Lot 2 in DP 218688 68-76 Wentworth Street, Randwick subject to the following variations and/or requirements:

 

1.         The upper level of the first three storey module at the western end of the section of buidling A which fronts Tramway Lane shall be deleted.

 

2.         Building A complying with the requirements for external wall heights and overall building heights along the western and southern sections of the building as outlined in Randwick LEP 1998 for a residential 2(b) zone.

 

3.         Building B being reduced in length by at least 3 metres to increase the setback between Buildings A and B and to reduce the overall wall and building height of the western elevation.

 

4.         The 2 storey sections of Building B complying with the requirements for external wall heights and overall building heights as outlined in Randwick LEP 1998  for a residential 2(b) zone.

 

5.         The 3 storey sections of Buildings B and C complying with the requirements for external wall heights and overall building heights as outlined in Randwick LEP 1998 for a residential 2(c) zone.

 

6.         The front fences on Dangar Street being limited in height to 1.2 metres so as to be consistent in height with the existing character of the street. All other front fences to be limited to a maximum height of 1.8m and designed so that the upper two-thirds are at least 75 per cent open so as to avoid the effect of a ‘walled estate’ and ‘gated community’.

 

7.         The driveway to Building C being located in manner, which reduces the need for removal of mature trees on the King Street frontage.

 

8.         The site shall be the subject of a community title subdivision, so that the principal open space area between buildings B and C is accessible to all residents.

 

9.         Evergreen planting shall be included in the landscaping along the tramway lane frontage.

 

10.       The compliance with the objectives and performance requirements of Council’s Multi-unit Housing DCP.

 

11.       Three (3) hours solar access to the ground level areas of the adjoining townhouse development on the corner of King and Dangar Streets shall be maintained throughout the year.

 

12.       At least 80% of dwelling units are to be cross ventilated and are to receive at least 3 hrs of directly solar access on 21 June.

 

13.       The design of the buildings is to incorporate articulation, modulation, fenestration and external detailing in the facades addressing street frontages and the common open space areas within the site, so as to reduce the apparent bulk of the buildings, provide visual interest, and encourage casual surveillance of public areas.

 

14.       Car parking is to be provided on site in accordance with Council’s DCP - Parking.  (Advisory note - tandem parking and layouts with parallel parking on the opposite side of an aisle from angled parking are not supported).

 

15.       A detailed flora and fauna survey and management plan including all vegetation and fauna to be removed or disturbed directly/indirectly. The plan should include methods of protecting and regenerating any significant vegetation and fauna during construction and ongoing management and maintenance. Methods for protecting primary and critical root zones during works, and proposed landscape treatments should be specified.

 

B.         The applicant is to provide an amended Master Plan document, incorporating the variations listed above, prior to lodgement of any development application.  The required changes to the Master Plans shall include new and reworded principles, revised diagrams, and reworked development concepts to the appropriate sections in the Master Plan.

 

C.        That Council resolve to prepare a draft local environmental plan to give effect to the master plan provisions and remove any zoning anomaly arising from the adoption of the draft master plan.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.       A4 configuration Plans

2.       UNSW Surplus Land - Wentworth Street, Randwick - April 2002.01260 (under

separate cover)  

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

STUART HARDING

ACTING DIRECTOR PLANNING & .ENVIRONMENT

WILLANA ASSOCIATES