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

 

6 August 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, 13TH AUGUST 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 9TH JULY, 2002.

 

3           Addresses to Committee by the Public

 

4           Mayoral Minutes

 

5           Development Applications

 

5.1                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT - 134 BROOK STREET, COOGEE.

2

 

5.2                        

 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT - 56 MILROY AVENUE, KENSINGTON.

51

 

 

 

 

 

5.3                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT - 54 CANBERRA

STREET, RANDWICK.

88

 

5.4                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT - 22 OXLEY

STREET, MATRAVILLE.

111

 

 

6           Miscellaneous

 

6.1                        

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 49/2002 - APPOINTMENT OF AUDITOR FOR THE RITZ CINEMA.

119

 

 

6.2                        

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 50/2002 - DRAFT MASTER PLAN FOR UNIVERSITY OF NSW, KENSINGTON CAMPUS, KENSINGTON.

123

 

 

7           General Business

 

8           Motions Pursuant to Notice

 

9           Notice of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

…………………………………….

ACTING GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

16 July, 2002

FILE NO:

DA247/2002

 

PROPOSAL:

 To demolish the existing buildings on the site and erect a three storey multi unit housing development containing 5 dwellings with basement parking for 8 vehicles

PROPERTY:

 134 Brook Street, Coogee

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Mr A J Winton

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 Judy Greenwood, Murray Matson, Marjery Whitehead.

 

The estimated cost of the development is $650,000.

 

A previous application DA567/2001 for the site, which proposed the construction of a five storey mult unit housing building with basement carparking (subsequently proposed to be reduced to 4 storeys by amended plans), was refused by Council at its Ordinary meeting held on 23 October 2002. The subject application and proposal involves, among other things, a reduction in the height of the building to three storeys and is considered to be a significant improvement on the previous scheme.

 

Three submissions by way of objection to the proposal have been received. The main concerns raised relate to floor area, building bulk and scale, side boundary setbacks, provision for landscaping, overshadowing and loss of privacy/overlooking.

 

The proposal does not meet the 0.65:1 floor space ratio standard applicable to the site, being less than 700sq.m in area, or the landscaping standard for a maximum 50 % of the required landscaped area to be provided over podiums or excavated basement areas, under Randwick LEP1998. Objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 have been submitted in this regard. The objections are considered to be well founded.

 

The side boundary setbacks of the proposal do not comply with the preferred solutions of the DCP-Multi Unit Housing but satisfies the performance requirements.

 

The recommendation is for approval.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

Approval is sought to demolish the existing dwelling house on the site and to erect a three storey multi unit housing development containing 2 x two bedroom dwellings and 3 x three bedroom dwellings over 3 levels, with basement parking for 8 vehicles. Pedestrian and vehicular access to the development is proposed along the northern side boundary of the site. 

 

A proposed lift provides access between the car park and the three residential levels of the building.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject property is located on the western side of Brook Street just north of its intersection with Carr Street, Coogee. The site is a regular shaped allotment with a frontage to Brook Street of 11.43m, a depth of 50.75m, and a site area of 580.1sq.m. The site is elevated about 1m above the adjacent footpath level in Brook Street and has a fall from rear to front of about 2.0m. The site contains a single-storey brick dwelling house.

 

Adjoining to the north at No. 130-132 Brook Street is a three storey residential flat building with under croft parking. Adjoining to the south, on the corner with Carr Street, is an elevated two-storey townhouse development at No.51 Carr Street, with basement car parking accessed from the Brook Street frontage. Further west adjoining the southern boundary of the site is a two storey residential flat building at No.49 Carr Street and a two-storey dwelling house at No.47 Carr Street.

 

Adjoining the rear of the site is the rear garden area of a three storey residential flat building that fronts Kidman Street (No.26).

 

To the east on the opposite side of Brook Street are a variety of building types including a three storey residential flat building with under croft parking directly opposite, and the St Nicholas Church and Rectory buildings extending to the corner with Carr Street, which are identified as heritage items under Randwick LEP1998.

     

Residential development in the locality comprises mainly three storey residential flat buildings with some single and two storey housing forms interspersed.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

73/00124/DZ       To erect a two storey residential flat building containing 6 units.

                            Refused 05/06/73.

 

01/00567/GE       To demolish the existing dwelling house and erect a multi-unit housing development containing nine dwellings and associated car parking for 12 vehicles. Refused 23/10/01.

 

Council refused the most recent application 01/00567/GE at its Ordinary meeting held on 23 October 2001 for the following reasons:

 

1.   The proposal does not comply with the intent and provision of Clause 32 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, as the proposed development will significantly exceed the 0.65:1 maximum permissible floor space ratio for sites with less than 700sqm within Zone. 2C.

 

2.   The proposal does not comply with the intent and provision of Clause 31(3) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, as the proposed building will significantly exceed the maximum landscaped area over a basement.

 

3.   The proposal does not comply with the intent or provision of Clause 33 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, as the proposed building will exceed the maximum overall and wall height requirements for sites within Zone. 2C.

 

4.   The proposal does not comply with the provisions of Clause 46 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, as the proposed building will have a detrimental impact on the heritage significance of the St. Nicholas precinct.

 

5.   The proposal does not satisfy the objectives, performance requirements and preferred solutions of the DCP – Multi Unit housing in relation to Building Setbacks as the proposed development is likely to have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties through loss of privacy, loss of sunlight and loss of views due to its excessive height, bulk, scale and inadequate setbacks.

 

6.   The siting, bulk, scale, design and external appearance of the proposed development is not appropriate to the site, unsympathetic to the character of the streetscape, and inconsistent with the principles and provisions of Draft SEPP 65.

 

7.   The application is deficient in that inadequate and insufficient information has been provided regarding the proposed impact of overshadowing on surrounding properties.

 

8.   The proposed development is likely to adversely affect the long term health and stability of the Gum tree on 130-132 Brook Street and the Norfolk Island Pine on No. 47 Carr Street.

 

9.   The proposal has not provided adequate details relating to proposed material, texture, colour, style and type of finish to be used in the exterior of the proposed building.

 

10. The proposal is not in the public interest, as it will detrimentally affect the existing and likely future amenity of the locality and immediately adjoining properties. 

 

11. The consent of the owners of the land to which the development application relates has not been provided as required by Clause 49(1) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act Regulations 2000, as amended.

 

Under this application a 5 storey (6 level) residential flat building was proposed. The application was reported on to the Health Building and Planning Committee meeting held on 9 October 2002 Council with a recommendation for refusal. At the meeting it was resolved that the application be deferred to the next Ordinary Council meeting in order for:

 

a)   the owner’s consent to be lodged with Council;

 

b)   the applicant to be given the opportunity to lodge a SEPP No. 1 objection; and

 

c)   amended plans lodged by the applicant to be considered by Council Officers   

 

Amended plans for four storeys were reported on to the Ordinary Council meeting

held on 23 October 2001 when it was resolved that the application be refused for the reasons cited above.

 

Both the original and amended plans sought significant departures from the building height, FSR and landscaping standards and the bulk, scale, design and external appearance of the development was considered to be inappropriate for the site and its surrounding streetscape context.

 

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

 

1.  K and W Nixon

47 Carr Street

COOGEE 2034

 

Concerns:

 

-    Proposal significantly exceeds 0.65:1 FSR standard applying to sites less than 700sq.m in area/overdevelopment of the site/ would set an undesirable precedent

-    Proposed side boundary setbacks below the recommended minimum standards causing problems in regard to solar access, overlooking and access to views.

-     Building bulk and scale.

-    Overlooking to the rear of Carr Street properties from windows and terrace/balconies on the upper two floors of the development.

-     Loss of view corridors from neighbouring properties.

-     Affect of proposed development on existing Norfolk Pine in rear yard of property and the existing street tree at the front of the subject site.

-     Inadequate provision for landscaping.

-     Aesthetics/articulation of the proposed building/large featureless walls should be avoided.

-     SEPP 1 objections in relation to FSR and landscaping and the reduced setbacks should not be supported.

 

2.  A Heath

12/26 Kidman Street

COOGEE 2034

 

Concerns:

 

-     side boundary setbacks

-     floor space ratio

-     inadequate provision for car parking    

 

3.  R Wade

11/26 Kidman Street

COOGEE 2034

           

-     Building height and setbacks

-     Loss of views to ocean and heritage buildings in Brook Street.

-     FSR/density

-     Air conditioning noise  

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers and the following comments have been provided: -

 

6.1  Landscape Issues

 

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

 

a)   One Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani) located adjacent to the front of the existing dwelling. This tree is approximately 4 metres tall with a 4 metre wide canopy and in good health, however, it is in direct conflict with the proposed works and as such permission should be granted for the removal of this tree.

 

b)   One Casuarina species (She-oak) located within Council’s nature strip. This tree is a significant specimen, approximately 20 metres tall with a broad canopy. Although this tree is quite a large, significant specimen in the streetscape, its root system has been previously damaged by the installation of kerb and guttering and it also has a sheer crack in one side of its trunk. The tree is still healthy but it is highly likely that any further proposed development will have a detrimental effect upon its health. As such permission should be granted for the removal of this tree, subject to the planting of one replacement street tree.

 

Both the Eucalyptus species (Gum Tree) and Araucaria heterophylla (Norfolk Island Pine) located within adjoining properties to the  north and south of the development site respectively,should not be affected by the proposed works.

 

Both trees were mentioned in the previous DA567/2001 refused by Council with conditions specifying a minimum clearance of 2 metres from the tree trunks to the proposed works. The plans submitted as part of DA 247/2002 show the proposed basement carpark and associated works to be a minimum of approximately 3 metres from the trunk of the Norfolk Island Pine and 5m from the trunk of the Gum Tree. As such these trees should not be affected.

 

6.2  Drainage Issues

 

Onsite detention of stormwater is required for this application.

 

6.3  Traffic/Parking Issues

 

The average traffic generation for the proposed residential development consisting of 5 residential units will be in the range of 20 to 25 vehicle movements per day.

 

The expected peak flow volume of approximately 3 vehicles per hour is considered low and no delays should be experienced in Brook Street as a result of this development.

 

6.4  Heritage Issues

 

       Council’s Heritage Planner has provided the following advice regarding the application:

 

The subject site is on the western side of Brook Street between Kidman and Carr Streets, and is currently occupied by a Federation style cottage, somewhat altered, including replacement of timber windows with steel windows.

 

To the north on the same side of Brook Street are several residential flat buildings of three levels over ground level car parking.  To the south on the same side of Brook Street is a multi-unit housing development of two storeys.  Due to the steep topography of the area, this development is considerably elevated above the level of the street and has retained the distinctive sandstone retaining wall to the street edge.  On the opposite side of Brook Street are several heritage items, St. Nicholas’ Anglican Church and Rectory, and no.113 Brook Street, a Federation style dwelling.

 

In relation to development in the vicinity of a heritage item, Clause 46 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 requires Council to consider the likely effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage item, heritage conservation area or potential archaeological site and on its setting.

 

A previous application for a residential flat building comprising four levels over basement car parking was refused.  My original memo on the application raised concerns relating the implications of the limited width of the site on the design of the building.

 

The current application proposes a residential flat building of three levels over basement car parking.  The top level of the building is generally set back from the front and rear boundaries of the site.  As compared to the previous application, the current proposal has reduced the height of the building by one level.

 

It is noted that the apparent height of the building will be accentuated by its narrowness, which is the product of the 11.5m width of the property.  The reduction in the height of the building by one level will considerably improve the proportions of the building.  It is considered that the scale and bulk of the proposal will be consistent with surrounding medium density development, allowing the Church and Rectory to maintain their dominance and landmark character in the urban context.  Consent conditions should be included to ensure that materials and finishes are consistent with adjacent development, in keeping with such an infill development.

 

Due to the limited width of the site, the proposed driveway providing access to the basement car park takes up around 30% of the frontage of the property.  My previous memo raised concerns that the driveway would dominate the streetscape presentation of the dwelling and leave a minimal area for landscaping.  It is noted that the driveway has been set back from the northern boundary of the site, so that it encroaches around 2.5m across the frontage of the proposed building.  The location of the driveway will considerably detract from the amenity of the ground floor unit at the front of the building and from the integrity of the verandah at the front of the building, so that a supporting column to the north eastern edge of the verandah will not be able to be provided.  The verandah element is an important feature of the building, helping to relate it to the setbacks of neighbouring buildings.  The lack of a supporting column is evident on the large-scale side elevation and will erode the verandah element and produce a top-heavy appearance.

 

The following conditions should be included in any consent:

 

       1.  The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be compatible with surrounding residential development.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e.- a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) 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.

 

The applicant submitted amended plans on 11 July 2002 incorporating amendments to the treatment of the street elevation to address concerns raised by the Heritage Planner. A Colour Sample Board has also been supplied. The Heritage Planner has provided the following additional comments in relation to the amended plans and the colour scheme:

 

My previous memo raised concerns that the driveway would dominate the streetscape presentation of the dwelling and detract from the integrity of the verandah at the front of the building.  The verandah element is an important feature of the building, helping to relate it to the setbacks of neighbouring buildings.  Amended drawings have now been received which generally address these concerns in relation to the front façade.

 

A sample board has been provided for the proposal.  It is considered that the proposed colours and finishes are generally compatible with those of adjacent multi-unit housing developments to the north and south, on the western side of Brook Street.

 

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

A master plan is not required as the site is less than 4000sq.m in area.

 

8.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

           

-    Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended

-    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

-    Building Code of Australia.

 

 

(a)   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned Residential 2C 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: -

 

Residential

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

30 – Min. Lot Size

N/A

N/A

N/A

31 - Landscape Area

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clause 31(2):

50% of site area (or 290.05sq.m)

 

Clause 31(3):

Not more than

50% (or 145sq.m) of the required landscaped area to be provided over podiums or excavated basement areas

56.6% or 329sq.m

 

 

 

174sq.m or 60%  

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

No.

(SEPP 1 objection submitted. See section 9.1.1) 

 

 

 

 

32 – FSR

0.9:1 (0.65:1 for sites less than 700sq.m in area)

0.967:1

No.

(SEPP 1 objection submitted. See section 9.1.2)

33 - Building Height

12m max. overall

 

 

10m max. wall height

Max. 11.4m to top of lift overrun

 

9.76m max. to top of roof parapet

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

Other Clauses

Effect

Applies

Comment

29

Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

No

N/A

43

Heritage Item of Conservation Area

No

N/A

46

Vicinity of Heritage Item

Yes

See Section 6.4

 

8.1  Policy Controls
a.  Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing

 

CONTROLS

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

PREFERRED SOLUTIONS

COMPLIANCE

 (how applicant has achieved performance requirements or preferred solutions)

site planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

P2  Development sites have appropriate areas/dimensions to allow for satisfactory siting of buildings.

 

 

 

 

 

S2 Sites are of regular shape with frontages of at least 20m.

 

Complies

 

 

 

Site is regular in shape; however, frontage to Brook Street is only 11.43m which does not comply with the preferred solution. However, the site is an infill development site with no opportunity for consolidation and redevelopment with adjoining sites. Further, the height of the proposed development has been scaled down to reduce amenity impacts on adjoining properties. Notwithstanding the reduced side boundary setbacks of the proposed building, the performance requirements will be satisfactorily met.

 

building height

P1 Heights of walls, their location and orientation do not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties.
 
P2 Variations in massing and height create visual interest, distribute the bulk of the building and minimise amenity impacts on the streetscape and adjoining properties.
 

 

Complies; the proposed building complies with the height limits under the LEP and DCP.The lift overrun which has a maximum height of 11.4m from ground level does not adversely affect the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of its bulk and scale and overshadowing impact.

 

The proposal responds to the topography, dimensions and orientation of the site and surrounding properties, and incorporates a number of features which help to reduce its apparent bulk, including:

 

·   the articulation of the external facades of the building through the provision of balconies/terraces, louvres and pergolas the stepping of wall surfaces etc.

·              a proposed combination of external colour finishes.

BUILDING SETBACKS

Front  boundary setbacks

P1 The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies; the setback from the street frontage is consistent with the front setbacks of the adjoining buildings.

 

Side boundary setbacks

P2 Side setbacks to ensure:

· Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

· Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

· Landscaping and private open space provided.

· Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

S2  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 4 metres.

No part closer than 2.5 metres. 

 

 

 

 

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

 

 

 

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

 

North side setback 2.0m-3.6m-does not comply.

 

South side setback 2.0-3.2m. Does not comply.

 

(See Section 9.2 of report).

 

 

Maximum length of unarticulated wall is 10.0m. Complies.

 

 

 

Minimum 2.28m. Does not comply; however, relevant performance requirements are satisfactorily met.

 

 

Rear Boundary Setbacks

P3 Ensure that:

· solar access and overshadowing are minimised.

· Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

· Landscaping, communal recreation facilities and outdoor clothes drying spaces provided.

· Building built across site.

 

S3  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 6 metres.

No part closer than 2.5 metres.

 

 

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

Complies-Minimum setback 8.425m at all levels.

 

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

General

P4 Eaves, window hoods and other sun-shading or weather protection pose no significant adverse impact on adjoining properties.

 

 

S4  No device may encroach  more than 25% of the Preferred Solution.

 

Complies.

DENSITY

P1 Building bulk compatible with surrounding built forms and minimises impact on nearby buildings, open spaces and the streetscape.

 

 

 

Complies; The proposed building is an infill development. The bulk and scale of the building is compatible with the predominant three-storey scale of existing development in the locality, and provides an acceptable streetscape fit.

FENCES

P1

· Front fences consistent  with  streetscape.

· Entrances highlighted.

· Planting used to soften and provide privacy.

S1

Solid front fences no higher than 1.2 metres. May increase to 1.8 metres when 50 % transparent.

 

 

Complies; A retaining wall is proposed to the street boundary only. No front fencing above the retaining wall is proposed. 

LANDSCAPEAND OPEN SPACE

Landscaped Areas

P1   Areas are sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

 

P2 Areas around multi-unit buildings are communal open space and not divided up for allocation to individual units.

 

S1  Minimum for landscaped area 2 metres.

Complies; Landscaped areas and terraces to the front, rear and sides of the proposed building have dimensions greater than 2.0metres.

 

 

 

Complies-No landscaped area is to be allocated to individual units within the development.

 

Private Open Space

P3    Provides privacy for its users, is readily accessible, and provides opportunities for outdoor recreation / living.

 

P4 Is located in front of the building only where setback and fence design sympathetic.

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

Flats and apartments

P6 Dwellings have direct access to courtyard, balcony,  deck or roof garden.

 

S6    Minimum area of 8m2 and a minimum dimension of 2 metres.

 

 

Complies.

 

PRIVACY

Visual Privacy

P1 Windows and balconies of main living areas are located to avoid overlooking windows in adjoining dwellings and private open space.

 

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

Acoustic Privacy

P3 Building layout and design minimises noise transmission. of noise. Quiet areas separate noise generating activities.

 

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

 

S1 Offset, angle or screen windows with less than 10m separation . Sill level of 1.6 metres above floor level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S4 Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

 

 

Complies-see Section 9.3.2 of report.

 

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

 

 

Complies-as per BCA requirements.

VIEW SHARING

 

P2 Development minimises effects on views and shows how view loss is minimised.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies- The ground floor level of the proposed building is partially excavated below ground and has a maximum height of approximately 9.1m excluding the lift overrun (11.4m). The height of the proposed building will not unreasonably impact on views currently obtained from the upper level s of buildings to the west and south west of the site. 

 

 

SOLAR ACCESS AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

P1 Design, orientation, siting and landscaping minimises loss of solar access.

 

P1.1 Solar access to existing solar collectors maintained between 9am and 3pm.

 

P1.2-3 Solar access to living areas and at least 50% of principal landscaped areas of neighbouring properties is not reduced to less than 3hrs/day.

 

 

 

 

Complies-See Section 9.3.1 of report.

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

Complies-refer to Section 9.3.1 of report

 

 

Building Layout, Design and Construction

P4 Protect from prevailing strong winds and adverse weather.

· Living areas are orientated to the north.

· Larger windows are located on the north.

 

 

 

S4 75% of dwellings achieve 3.5star Nat HERS rating or equivalent.

No dwelling achieves less than 3 stars. The Nat HERS rating for each dwelling (on a typical unit basis) is provided with the application.

 

 

 

Complies. Of the 7 units proposed 6 achieve a 4 star Nat HERS rating and 1 a 3.5 star rating.

 

SAFETY AND SECURITY

P1 Design allows surveillance.

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

 

 

Complies; windows and balconies overlook street and entry areas, and no front fencing is proposed allow surveillance. The provision of a security roller shutter with intercom system will ensure security to the basement car park. This can be required by condition of development consent.

CAR

PARKING

P1 Garages and parking structures do not dominate the street frontage.

 

P2 Parking spaces for people with a disability provided as required (refer to dwelling number requirements in P1 and P2 Barrier Free Access.

 

 

P3 Secure storage for bicycles are provided.

 

 

Required On-site Parking

 

1 bedroom dwelling

1 space per  dwelling

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

3 or more bedroom   

1.5 spaces per dwelling

 

Visitor parking is 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

 

Complies; all parking is provided at a basement level with a single entry point from the street frontage.

 

N/A as development contains less than 15 dwellings.  However, car space no.8 is proposed to provide parking for people with a disability and the residential levels above are accessible via a proposed lift.

 

Complies; A storeroom is proposed at basement level where bicycles may be secured.

 

Complies- see Section 8.1.b of report.

DRIVE-WAYS AND TURNING

AREAS

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

 

 

P3 Driveways and access roads avoid a ‘gun barrel’ effect.

 

P4 Space between boundaries and driveways, access ways and parking spaces enables landscaping and planting.

 

 

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

 

 

P6  Driveway gradients safe.

 

 

 

 

S2  Vehicles enter with a single turn and leave in no more than 2 turns.

 

S3  Long driveways provide passing bays

 

 

S4  Driveways have a minimum width of 3 metres and be at least 1 metre from any side or rear fence.

 

S5  Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

 

S6  Driveway gradients do not exceed 1 in 6 or 1 in 5 for ramps over 20m.

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Passing bay/s not required due to short length of proposed driveway.

 

 

Complies; proposed driveway is 3.5m wide and is set back 1.5m from northern side boundary.

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Complies.

STORAGE

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

S1 10sqm of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1m. At least 50% of storage space is within dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area. Storage facilities may be in basement areas, or attached to garages .

 

Complies-A storeroom is proposed at basement level. which could be divided into storage compartments for each unit of the development Robes are provided in at least two bedrooms of each proposed dwelling. Bedrooms other than the main bedroom 1 within each dwelling could also be utilised for storage if the occupants do not require additional bedroom accommodation.

BARRIER-FREE ACCESS

P1 Design must provide access for people with special access needs as required (foyer parking open space).

 

 

P2  Dwelling requirements:

  0 – 14 dwellings    0

15 – 29 dwellings    1

30 – 44 dwellings    2

45 – 60 dwellings    3 so on…

The requirements of AS1428.1 and AS 4299 are to be considered.

 

P3  Dwellings for people with a disability have corresponding parking space.

 

P4  Passenger lifts provide access for people with a disability to common and parking areas.

 

S1 Publicly accessible areas comply with the Building Code of Australia for access and mobility.

Not required; however, lift access and one readily accessible car space available within the basement car park.

 

 

N/A as the proposed building contains only 5 dwellings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

b.     Development Control Plan - Parking

 

 

Standard

 

Requirement

 

Provided

 

Compliance

 

 

Car Parking

a)    number

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

b) layout

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bicycle Storage

 

 

1.2 spaces required for each two bedroom dwelling (4 x 1.2 = 4.8 spaces)

 

1.5 spaces for each three bedroom dwellings (1 x 1.5 = 1.5 spaces)

 

1space/4 dwgs for visitors (1.25 spaces required for 5 units)

 

TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED = 7 SPACES

 

As per DCP.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1space per 3 units plus 1 visitor space per 10 units

 

6 PRIVATE AND 1 VISITOR SPACE.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unenclosed spaces 2.75m min.; end bay spaces 3.2m. All spaces 5.4m in length. Aisle width is 5.5m. Ramp grades 1:8 and 1:10-satisfactory.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Common storeroom provided for units within basement car park that may be used for bicycle storage.

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does not comply with DCP; however, turning/manoeuvre diagrams have been submitted demonstrating compliance with AS2890.1. Compliance with the less stringent Australian Standard is acceptable due to the limited number of car spaces within the basement car park.

 

Yes

 

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       Randwick LEP 1998

 

            9.1.1    Landscaped Area

     

Under Clause 31 of the LEP 50 % of the site area must be provided as landscaped area, of which not more than half is to be provided over podiums or excavated basement areas.

 

The proposal provides 56.6% of the site area as landscaped area; however, 60% of the required landscaped area is proposed over the excavated basement car park.

 

The applicant has lodged an objection under SEPP 1 in relation to the proposal’s departure from the standard. In the objection, the applicant submits the following:

 

-     The proposed landscaping of the site will incorporate the provision of predominantly soft landscaping with hard surfaced areas being restricted to the entrance pathway and four ground level balcony/terrace areas.

 

-     The soft landscaped areas will be landscaped with a large variety of plants including to the front and rear of the site, a number of trees that will reach a mature height of at least 15m. The implementation of such landscaping satisfies the objectives of the landscaped area provisions contained in LEP1998 in that it will benefit the occupiers of the development by way of providing a pleasant landscaped environment and open space recreation areas, it will assist in the reduction of urban run off and will visually soften the visual impact of the development from the street and adjoining properties. 

 

-     Clause 31(3) of Randwick LEP1998 is designed to restrict hard surface areas and to ensure that substantial areas remain unexcavated and are capable of providing significant soft landscaping.

 

-     The proposed development provides in excess of the minimum required landscaped area both in terms of the total landscaped area to be provided and the unexcavated landscaped area to be provided. The amount of landscaped area to be provided is 329sq.m, this being some 38.5sq.m or 13.25% in excess of the minimum requirement. The amount of unexcavated landscaped area to be provided is 155sq.m this being 9.75sq.m or 6.7% in excess of the minimum requirement. 

 

-     Of the 329sq.m of landscaped area provided over podium or excavated basement, approximately 80% of the area takes the form of soft landscaping.

 

-     As discussed in the Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with application, The proposal is satisfactory in terms of providing a high quality environment (internal and external) for the occupiers of the development, and will have no unreasonable adverse impacts on adjoining properties in respect of loss of privacy, overshadowing and visual impact. Neither will non-compliance result in any adverse impacts on the streetscape character of the locality.

 

The purpose of the landscaping standards as stated in the LEP is:

 

To establish minimum requirements for the provision of landscaping to soften the visual impact of development, assist in the reduction of urban runoff and provide adequate areas of open space for recreational purposes.

 

The proposed development provides approximately 329 sq m of landscaped area on the site, some 39sq. m in excess of the minimum requirement. Furthermore, the amount of deep soil landscaped area proposed is approximately 155sq.m, which corresponds to approximately 26.7% of the site area. The landscaped area to be provided over the excavated basement area will be predominantly soft landscaping comprising tree and shrub plantings within planters having a 1.0m soil depth. The only hard surfaced areas proposed are to the pedestrian pathway along the northern side of the building and the ground floor terraces to Units 1 and 2 at the front and rear of the building.      

 

The SEPP 1 objection is considered to be well founded.

 

9.1.2    Floor Area

 

Under Clause 32 of the LEP a 0.65:1 floor space ratio (FSR) applies to development on the site, the site being less than 700sq.m in area.

 

The proposed development has a calculated FSR of 0.967:1.

 

The applicant has lodged an objection under SEPP 1 in relation to the proposal’s departure from the FSR standard. In the objection, the applicant submits the following:

 

The purpose of the floor space standards as stated in the LEP is:

 

To establish reasonable upper limits for development in residential, business, industrial and special use zones through a limit on the amount of floor space that can be provided. This will help to reduce the potential for adverse amenity impact on nearby and adjoining development while still providing for reasonable levels of development and redevelopment.

 

Notwithstanding the proposed significant numerical departure from the maximum FSR of 0.65:1, the proposed building is an infill development which is compatible in bulk and scale with the existing adjoining and other nearby buildings in the immediate streetscape, and no unreasonable adverse amenity impacts by way of overshadowing, loss of privacy or views will be occasioned to adjoining or nearby properties (see Section 9.3 of the report). 

 

The calculated FSR of the development includes the basement store of the development, which does not contribute to building bulk above ground on the site. If the store was excluded from the floor space calculations, the FSR of the development would be 0.941:1.

 

The proposed building is part 2/part 3 storey in scale. Due to the significant differences in site levels between the subject site and the adjoining southern properties, the reduced southern side setbacks of the building do not unreasonably impact on the amenity of those properties in terms of overshadowing or loss of privacy.

 

The reduced northern side setbacks of the proposed building do not cause any adverse impacts on the adjoining three storey residential flat building by way of overshadowing, or loss of privacy due to the limited size, number and heights of openings in the northern elevation of the proposed building. Furthermore, the proposed planters to the front and rear terrace areas of the proposed Level 2 unit and the positioning of openings along the southern elevation of the building ensure that overlooking to the adjoining southern properties is restricted to an acceptable level.  

 

The SEPP 1 objection is considered to be well founded.

 

9.2       Building Setbacks

 

As indicated in the Table to Section 8.1.a) above, the proposed building does not meet the preferred minimum and average setbacks from the northern and southern side boundaries of the property. However, due to the significant differences in site levels between the subject site and the adjoining southern properties, no significant adverse impact that would warrant refusal of the application will be occasioned to those properties by way of overshadowing or loss of privacy (see Section 9.3 of report). No overshadowing will be occasioned to the adjoining residential flat development to the north at No.130-132 Brook Street and the positioning, limited number, size and heights of proposed openings in the northern façade of the building combined with existing and proposed screen planting along the boundary ensure that no significant adverse overlooking or loss of privacy will be occasioned to that property.

 

There is adequate separation distance between the proposed and existing adjoining buildings, opportunities for screen planting/ landscaping along the boundaries are provided, no significant overshadowing or loss of light will be occasioned to the adjoining southern properties by the proposed development, the preferred solutions for solar access to the adjoining southern properties will be met, and the proposal performs satisfactorily from a privacy and overlooking aspect. The performance requirements of DCP-Multi Unit Housing in relation to side and rear building setbacks will be satisfactorily met. 

 

9.3       Amenity Impacts

 

9.3.1    Overshadowing and Sunlight Access

 

The shadow diagrams submitted with the application demonstrate that the solar access requirements of DCP-Multi Unit Housing will be satisfactorily met.

 

The adjoining properties to the south are elevated some 2.5 to 3.0m above the level of the subject site such that shadows cast by the proposed building do not affect any north facing window openings or balconies of the buildings on those properties.

 

No sensitive private open space areas of adjoining southern properties will be affected by shadows cast by the proposed building other than the rear yard area of the two storey dwelling house at No.47 Carr Street, which adjoins the rear western part of the site.

Shadows cast by the proposed building will affect the rear yard area of this property in the morning to midday period in winter. After 12noon shadowing to this property would be negligible.

 

The shadow diagrams indicate that the performance requirement for a minimum 3 hours of sunlight to be received to at least 50% of the principal landscaped areas of adjoining properties throughout the year will be satisfactorily met.

 

9.3.2    Privacy and Overlooking

 

The main living areas to the proposed units on the Ground floor and Level 1 are orientated to the front and rear of the proposed building and on Level 2, to the front of the building. The limited size and number and the positioning and heights of openings in the northern and southern side elevations of the proposed building combined with the proposed planters to the Level 2 front and rear terraces, existing and proposed screen planting along the side and rear boundaries, and the differences in levels between the subject site and adjoining southern properties ensure that overlooking and loss of privacy to adjoining properties is restricted to an acceptable level.  

 

9.3.3    Views

 

The Ground floor level of the proposed building is partially excavated into the ground thus reducing the effective height of the building above ground. The proposed building may be described as a low part two/part three storey building and will present to the Brook Street frontage as a two storey building which is lesser in bulk and scale than the adjoining and other nearby buildings. The rear upper level units of flat buildings at No.14-24 and 26 Kidman Street currently have restricted easterly townscape and distant ocean views over and along the sides of the existing single storey dwelling house on the site. The view corridors along the sides of the proposed building will generally be increased in width due to the increased setbacks of the proposed building from the side boundaries relative to the existing dwelling, however, the increased height of the proposed building will obviously reduce those views presently obtained over the roof of the existing dwelling. Given the low part two /part three storey scale of the proposed building and the distant, secondary and generally restricted nature of the views currently available, the proposal’s impacts on views from residential units in Kidman Street is considered to be acceptable.

 

            9.4       Building Design, Materials and Appearance

 

Sufficient articulation and visual interest is achieved to the building facades of the proposed building by the proposed combination of colour finishes to the proposed external rendered wall surfaces, windows, balcony balustrading and pergolas of the building, the deeply recessed balconies to the front and rear elevations, the stepping of wall surfaces along the side elevations, and the proposed parapet detailing and balcony/terrace planters. The visual bulk and scale of the building will be further softened by the proposed landscaping and tree plantings to the front, sides and rear of the building and required replacement street planting.

 

The proposed external materials and colour finishes of the development are satisfactory.

 

SEPP65-Design Quality of Residential flat Development is a matter for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The SEPP aims to ensure that residential flat buildings are better designed to improve their appearance and the streetscape and are socially and environmentally sustainable. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the principles and provisions of SEPP 65.

 

9.5       Building Bulk and Scale

 

The bulk and scale of the proposed building is compatible with existing adjoining and nearby buildings in the street, and provides an acceptable streetscape fit. As a comparison, the main roof parapet of the building will be approximately 2.1m higher than the roof ridge of the existing single storey dwelling on the site.

 

9.6       Comparison with previous refused scheme (DA567/2001)

 

The proposal represents a significant improvement on the previous scheme refused by Council under DA567/2001 in that:

 

-     the height and scale of the development has been reduced by one full storey and the upper level roof terraces have been significantly reduced in size by the provision of substantial perimeter planters to restrict overlooking and soften the appearance of the development. It is considered that the height of the proposed building has now been satisfactorily reconciled against the proposed reduced side boundary setbacks of the building, and the bulk and scale of the proposed building is compatible with the existing adjoining and nearby buildings. Heritage related concerns have also been satisfactorily addressed.

 

-     the proposal now provides the required number of car parking spaces under DCP-Parking whereas the previous scheme was deficient in this regard.

 

-     the basement car park footprint has been significantly reduced, allowing provision for substantial deep soil landscaping to the rear of the building

     

-     amenity impacts, including overshadowing, privacy and overlooking of adjoining properties, have now been satisfactorily addressed.

 

The proposal is considered to satisfactorily address the reasons for refusal of the previous scheme.

 

9.7       Resident Submissions

 

Most of the issues/concerns raised in submissions have been previously addressed. Outstanding issues/concerns requiring further comment are identified and addressed below.

 

-     Affect of proposed development on existing Norfolk Pine in rear yard of property and the existing street tree at the front of the subject site.

 

Comment:

 

As mentioned under section 6.1 of the report, no works are proposed within approximately 3 metres of the Norfolk Island Pine located in the rear yard of the adjoining property at No.47 Carr Street. As such this tree should not be affected.

 

-     inadequate provision for car parking      

 

Comment:

 

The proposed development provides the required number of car parking spaces under Council’s DCP-Parking, and the proposal is satisfactory in this regard.

 

-     air conditioning noise                  

 

Comment:

 

No air conditioning system for the building is proposed; however, the operation of any plant or equipment associated with the development shall be required to comply with relevant noise emission criteria by condition of development consent.

 

9.8       Section 94 Contributions

 

The proposal attracts contributions of $9,049.76 for open space and $4,001.44 for community facilities, plus a $425 administrative charge.

 

10.       CONCLUSION

 

The proposed development satisfactorily addresses the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP-Multi Unit Housing, and the SEPP 1 objections to the floor area and landscaped area standards of the LEP are considered to be well founded.

 

Having regard to the reduced height, bulk and scale of the development as currently proposed, its improved design, massing and aesthetic appearance and consistency with the provisions of SEPP 65, the site’s isolated position between two residential flat developments, and the proposal’s acceptable amenity impacts on neighbouring properties, the application is recommended for approval by Council.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A        THAT the Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP No. 1) in respect to non-compliances with Clauses 31(3) and 32(2) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (relating to landscaping and floor area) on the grounds that the proposed use complies with the objective of the clause 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 under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No 247/2002 To demolish the existing buildings on the site and erect a three storey multi unit housing development containing 5 dwellings with basement parking for 8 vehicles  at 134 Brook Street, Coogee subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans    prepared by Adriaan Winton Architects with Drawing Nos. 1 to 11 and the Landscape Plan dated May 2001 and March 2002 and received by Council on 22 March 2002, as amended by Drawings 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 dated 8 July 2002 and dated as received by Council on 11 July 2002, and on the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

                 

2.         The external colours, materials and finishes of the proposed development shall be in accordance with the details provided in the Colour Board submitted with the application and dated as received 22 March 2002. Any variations to the colour scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning and Environment prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

3.         Separate storage compartments are to be provided for each dwelling within the  ‘storage’ room at basement level. Details are to be provided in the construction certificate plans for the development.

 

4.         There must be no encroachment of any part of the structure/s onto the adjoining                 premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place.

 

5.         Any gate openings shall be constructed so that the gates, when hung, will be fitted             in such a manner that they will not open over the footway or public place.

 

6.         All plumbing and drainage pipes, other than rain water heads, gutters and down pipes, must be concealed within the building.

 

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

 

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

 

9.         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.

 

10.       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.

 

11.       Where access is required to adjoining premises for construction purposes, the written consent of the owner/s of the subject adjoining premises must be provided to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to carrying out any construction works from or upon the adjoining premises.

 

12.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents or motorists and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

13.       The development must be designed and constructed to achieve a minimum energy efficiency Nat HERS rating of 3.5 stars or equivalent and a Nat HERS 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.

 

14.       The consumption of water within the building shall be minimised by the use of triple A rated water efficient plumbing fixtures (taps and shower roses) and water efficient dual flush toilets.  Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

15.       Upon completion of the development and prior to the issuing of any strata subdivision, documentary evidence is to be submitted to the Council by the Principal Certifying Authority (or other suitably qualified person on behalf of the owner of the premises, to the satisfaction of Council) which confirms that the development has been carried out in accordance with the relevant development consent conditions.

 

16.       A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water.  Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator, for details see the Sydney Water web site www.sydneywater.com.au\customer\urban\index or telephone 13 20 92.

 

            Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will be forwarded detailing water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid.  Please make early contact with the Water Servicing Co-ordinator, as building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development or release of the linen plan, as applicable.

 

The following condition/s are applied to satisfy the increased demand for public amenities and public services:

 

17.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan effective from 2 September 1999, the following monetary contribution is to be paid to Council.

 

a)         for the provision or improvement of open space                       $9,049.76

b)         for the provision or improvement of community facilities            $4001.44

c)         Administration fee                                                                      $425.00

 

The contribution must be paid in cash or by bank cheque prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development, together with payment of the required Section 94 Administration Fee of $425.00.  Council’s Section 94 Contribution Plans may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for parking to the development:

 

18.       Car space No.8 being identified as a visitor parking space.

 

19.       A sign legible from the street must be permanently displayed to indicate that visitor parking is available on the site and the visitor parking space must be clearly marked and accessible at all times.

 

20.       The car parking spaces and driveways must be kept clear of goods at all times and must not be used for storage purposes.

 

21.       Public access to the visitor’s carparking space is to be maintained at all times and an intercom system is to be provided adjacent to the vehicular entrance to the carpark, together with appropriate signage providing instructions for use.

 

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:

 

22.       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.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that adequate provisions are made for the management of waste from the development:

 

23.       Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage, collection and disposal of waste and recyclable materials.

 

A Waste Management Plan is to be submitted to Council and approved by Council’s Manager of Waste Services, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development.

 

The plan shall detail the type and quantity of waste to be generated by the development; demolition waste; construction waste; materials to be re-used or recycled; facilities/procedures for the storage, collection recycling & disposal of waste and the on-going management of waste.

 

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

 

24.       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.

 

25.       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:

 

26.       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.

 

27.       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 (i.e. including dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, veranda’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc.) 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 abovestated 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:

 

28.       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.

 

29.       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.

 

30.       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.

 

31.       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.

 

32.       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.

 

33.       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.

 

34.       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. 

 

35.       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.

 

36.       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.

 

37.       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

 

38.       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.

 

39.       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 constructed 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.

 

40.       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.

 

41.       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.

 

42.       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.

 

43.       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.

 

44.       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”.

 

45.       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.

 

46.       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.

 

47.       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.

 

48.       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.

 

49.       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.

 

50.       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.

 

51.       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 ensure that reasonable levels of fire safety are provided in the building:

 

52.       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.

 

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

 

53.       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)         $1000.00         -           Security damage deposit

b)         $1000.00         -           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 vehicular crossing deposit may be provided by way of cash or cheque with the Council and is refundable upon the completion of the Council vehicular crossing.

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

a.         Construct a full width heavy-duty vehicular crossing and layback at kerb in Brook Street opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

b.         Reline mark the parking bays affected by the proposed vehicular access to          the site.

 

55.       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.

 

56.       The applicant shall note that 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.

 

57.       A work zone is to be provided, (at full cost to the applicant), at a suitable location along the Brook Street 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.

 

58.       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.

 

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

 

59.       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, must be as follows:

 

Match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

60.       The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) issued by Council and their relationship to the 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.

 

61.       The above alignment levels have been issued by the Council's Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services at a prescribed fee of $ 189.00 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.

 

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

 

62.       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.

 

63.       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.

 

64.       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.

 

65.       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.

 

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

 

66.       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.

 

67.       Onsite stormwater 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 10 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 has to be a minimum of 2.0 metres below the base of the tank.

 

68.       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.

 

69.       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.

 

70.       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 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.

 

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

 

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

 

73.       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).

 

74.       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.

 

75.       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)

 

76.       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.

 

77.       A `V' drain is to be constructed along the perimeter of the property, where required, to direct all stormwater to the detention area.

 

78.       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.

 

79.       One 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 (or equivalent).

 

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

 

80.       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.

 

81.       Prior to release of the construction certificate the applicant shall submit for approval, and have approved by the certifying authority, a geotechnical report that identifies the ground water level for the development site and makes comment on the possibility of seepage water flows within the site. If the report identifies that any section of the basement carpark is below the water table, (making allowance for reasonable fluctuations in the water table), and/or impacted on by the flow of seepage water the basement carpark or similar structures are to be suitably tanked and waterproofed. A Structural Engineer/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).

 

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

 

82.       The garbage room areas are to be designed so as to be able to contain a total of 6 x 240 litre bins 3 garbage bins & 3 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins. Details showing compliance with this requirement are to be shown on the plans submitted to the certifying authority for the construction certificate.

 

83.       The internal floor area of any garbage area must be graded and drained to the sewer to the approval and requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation and a copy of the consent must be forwarded to the certifying authority and the Council.

 

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

 

84.       The landscaped areas shown on the Landscape Proposal Plan, dated March 2002 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 qualified Landscape Architect who is eligible for membership with the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA). 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 within 6 metres of the common property boundary (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 within 6 metres of the common property boundary 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.

 

h.         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.

 

85.       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.

 

86.       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.

 

87.       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.

 

88.       Any substation required shall be screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on all detailed landscape drawings and specifications.

 

89.       All detention tanks and stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm to ensure sufficient soil depth to permit the establishment of landscaping on top of these services as stipulated by these conditions of development consent.

 

All stormwater documentation submitted for the construction certificate application shall show the top of the detention tanks and stormwater infiltration devices being 600mm below the finished ground level of the landscaped areas.

 

Tree Management

 

90.       The applicant shall submit a total payment of $2,485.00 to Council,

 

a.         Being the cost for Council to remove the existing Casuarina species (She-oak) street tree ($1,100.00), and

 

b.         Being the cost for Council to supply and install 1 x 45 litre street tree at the completion of all works ($145.00), and

 

c.         To compensate Council for the loss of amenity caused by the removal of the street tree ($1,240.00).

 

The contribution shall be paid into Account Number 43450030 at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

91.       Approval is granted for the removal of the following trees.

 

92.       One Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani) located within the front yard of the property, adjacent to the existing dwelling.

 

93.       Permission is granted for the removal of only those trees falling within the area occupied by the approved works. Removal of the remaining trees on the site are subject to separate application under the Tree Preservation Order.

 

94.       The applicant shall be required to ensure the retention and long-term health of all trees located on adjoining properties adjacent to the proposed development. As a general guide there shall be minimal excavation or root pruning within the driplines of the subject trees.

 

95.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque, or bank guarantee for the amount of $6,000.00 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 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 R6J 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 MATTERS:

 

A1.      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)   Part C2                        -       Compartmentation and separation

d)   Clause C3.2&C3.4      -       Protection of openings in external walls

e)   Clause D1.4                 -       Exit travel distances, from the basement carpark

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.

 

A2.      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 configurations

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

STEVEN HUGHES

ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

ACTING TEAM LEADER-DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT

 











 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

29 July, 2002

FILE NO:

02/00342/GA

 

PROPOSAL:

 Ground floor alterations and additions including a new first floor addition and installation of an new swimming pool at the rear of the property

PROPERTY:

 56 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

WARD:

 West Ward

APPLICANT:

 Micheal Wright

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 John Procopiadis, Peter Schick, Dominic Sullivan, Marjery Whitehead.

 

The application is seeking approval for alterations and ground floor additions including a new first floor addition to the rear of the existing dwelling. The proposal also includes a single level addition to the eastern side of the existing dwelling including an attached carport. A new swimming pool is also proposed in the rear yard along the eastern boundary. The estimated cost of the development is $250,000

 

The subject property is located within the West Kensington Conservation Area and is occupied by a single storey Federation style dwelling which has been considerably altered including rendering and painting of face brickwork and replacement of original timber windows with aluminium.

 

A number of submissions were received in regard to the proposal with the main points of concern being building form and character and its relationship to the streetscape and amenity impacts on adjoining properties.

 

A mediation session was held on the 17th June 2002 too attempt to establish communication between the applicants and the objectors and clarify and/or resolve some of the issues surrounding the application. There was no resolutions that were agreed upon, however the applicant agreed to consider the objections submitted and submit amended plans and additional details to address some of the neighbours concerns. However, the applicant advised that a contemporary built form would be fundamental to the design scheme.

 

Amended plans and additional details were subsequently received by Council and renotified to the surrounding properties. The main issues raised in the submissions stated that the changes were minor and did not address the original streetscape character and building form concerns that were originally raised.

 

The proposed additions satisfy the relevant preferred solutions of the Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, with the exception of those relating to side setbacks from the proposed carport. The proposed additions together with the setbacks from the front of the building, minimises its visibility from the street and the flat roof form minimises its prominence from the street. 

 

It is considered that the proposal satisfies the relevant assessment criteria under Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and the Development Control Plan for the West Kensington

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The applicant is seeking approval to carry out alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including a new first floor addition. The proposal involves a new double storey addition at the rear of the existing dwelling with a single level playroom to the eastern side of the building including an attached carport. A new swimming pool is also proposed to be installed to the rear yard along the eastern boundary. The proposed addition at ground level will provide an open living, kitchen, pantry and WC and at first floor level a master bedroom with ensuite and walk-in-wardrobe and a study.

 

The application is supported by a Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by City Plan Heritage. The HIA includes a significance assessment and reference to the Burra Charter Principles and Processes. A landscape proposal has also been submitted The proposed landscaped areas include a traditional front garden, including a front lawn bisected by a path of paving and shrubs across the front of the premises with screen planting along the eastern and western side boundaries and the rear northern boundary.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject property is located on the northern side of Milroy Avenue within the West Kensington Conservation Area and is occupied by a single storey Federation style dwelling which has been considerably altered including rendering and painting of face brickwork and replacement of original timber windows with aluminium. The site is a regular shaped allotment having a frontage of 15.24m, depth of 45.265m and a total site area of 689.84m2.

 

Adjoining development includes the property to the west No. 54 Milroy Avenue which is an existing single storey Federation style dwelling which incorporates a newly constructed ground floor and rear upper level additions with a prominent gable roof to the western side of the building. To the east is property no 58 Milroy Avenue which is an existing single storey cottage. Dwellings immediately surrounding the subject property are existing single storey cottages which have been subject to less alterations and generally retain their original materials and details.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

A pre-lodgement meeting was held for the proposed development in March2002. The main issues raised at the meeting included:

 

·    The proposed nil set-back of the car-port, garage and playroom additions to the south eastern boundary. The height and extent of the south-eastern boundary masonry fence (which in part is made up of the south eastern walls of the additions) also presents a problem. The Heritage Planner’s comments below indicate that the proposed location of the additions and the height and nature of the fence are not in keeping with the original character of the Conservation Area and that the proposal will detract form the open nature of the subdivision pattern (see below).

 

·    The proposal to elevate the playroom area will also result the side boundary wall/fence increasing from the proposed 2.4m (which remains an issue) to a height of 3.5m for a length of 9.5m. It is considered that the fence/wall height at both 2.4 but especially at 3.5m for 9.5m may result in unacceptable sunlight and fresh air access losses and bulk, scale and proximity affects to No 58 Milroy. In combination with the heritage issues raised above, and because of the non-compliance with the building set-back requirements of the Randwick DCP for Dwelling Houses, it is considered that Council is unlikely to support the application in its current form.

 

·    Reconfiguration of the south eastern elevation ground floor extensions including the carport and garage are needed so that the proposal can comply with Clauses 10(1)(a)& (c) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan, and applicable preferred solutions and/or performance requirements the DCP for Dwelling Houses and the requirements of the Draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area DCP. Lowering the floor level of the playroom, increasing the setbacks and reducing the fence height are suggested although Council is prepared to consider design options that meet performance requirements where preferred solutions are not achievable.

 

·    The location and elevated position of the swimming pool could be an issue in submissions.

 

The following is the Heritage Planners comments which were discussed at the meeting:

 

·    Clause 43(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 requires any development application within a heritage conservation area to be accompanied by a report assessing the impact of the proposal on heritage significance.  It is suggested that a heritage/conservation architect be engaged to prepare this report.

 

·    In relation to alterations within the existing rooms it is noted that no plans of the existing dwelling have been provided and that the plans which have been submitted do not indicate the location of existing walls and other features such as fireplaces etc.  Comments on the heritage impact of these internal changes cannot be made at this stage therefore.

 

·    In relation to the proposed additions to the side of the dwelling, it is noted the proposed dwelling, garage and carport will have a zero setback from the south eastern boundary for a distance of 22m.  The original character of the conservation area is of modest single storey cottages on generous blocks of land and dwellings are typically sited to provide generous setbacks to their side boundaries on at least one side.  It is considered that when viewed from the street and the neighbouring dwelling, the proposed additions to the side of the dwelling will considerably detract from the open and spacious landscape character of the subdivision pattern.  It is noted that the drawings also appear to indicate a 2.4 high wall for the full length of the south eastern boundary.  Properties within the conservation area were traditionally enclosed by timber paling fences to side and rear boundaries to a height of around 1.5m.  It is considered that the proposed high brick wall will detract from the open character of the conservation area and create a fortress-like division between neighbouring properties.

 

·    In relation to the proposed additions to the rear of the dwelling, it is noted that the Draft Development Control Plan for the North Randwick Conservation Area recommends that second level additions will be permitted only in very limited circumstances, including where roof space is converted to provide accommodation without intruding on the street presentation of an otherwise reasonably intact building; or where the second level is confined to the rear, either out of site or set back far enough to appear as a separate structure.  It is noted that the existing dwelling has been considerably altered.  The proposed upper level addition is set towards the rear of the dwelling and has a ridge height around 0.5m above the existing ridge.  The modern forms and detailing of the proposed upper level addition will allow it to be differentiated from the original form of the dwelling, while the set back of the addition will minimise its prominence from the street.

 

The submitted plans have addressed the above issues by setting the playroom back 900mm from the boundary and having the carport structure open above the boundary fence. Landscaping used as screen planting along the eastern boundary and a 1.8m high fence at the end of the pool have been proposed to alleviate overlooking from the swimming pool deck.

 

A mediation session was held for the proposed development on the 17th June 2002. A number of objectors were present at the mediation as well as the applicants, their architect and their heritage advisor. The aim of the mediation was to attempt to establish communication between the applicants and the objectors and clarify and/or resolve some of the issues surrounding the application. There were no resolutions that were agreed upon.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

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

 

5.1  Objections

 

Catherine Shand                                              -     46 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Joe Giordimaina & Eileen O’Keefe                  -     58 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Tony & Juana Mulherin                                    -     4 McDougall Street, Kensington

David & Julir Jenkins                                       -     54 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Byron & Francine Pirola                                  -     38 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Michael & Sandra Smith                                  -     91 Todman Avenue, Kensington

C Kimber                                                        -     47 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Rodney Jensen & Associates Architects

on behalf of David & Julie Jenkins                    -    54 Milroy Avenue, Kensigton

Sugianto Alim                                                  -     53 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

JB Pender                                                       -     28 McDougall Street, Kensington

G Onus                                                           -     27 McDougall Street, Kensington

Jacquiline Milledge                                           -     5 Baker Street, Kensington

Jasmine Westerman Planning Consultsnt

on behalf of Davis & Julie Jenkins                    -    54 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

M Willis                                                          -     55 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Alma Whittingham                                           -     49 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Dennis Fenech                                                 -     18 Koorinda Avenue, Kensington

 

The issues raised in the submissions are summarised as follows:

 

-     The proposed cement rendered second storey is incompatible with the surroundings

-     The addition has a box-like appearance behind a single storey dwelling

-     The development will set an undesirable precedent for future developments in the area

-     The bulk and scale of the building will dominant and detract from the Milroy Avenue Streetscape

-     The proposed size and location of windows will intrude upon the privacy of adjoining properties

-     The swimming pool and surrounding deck area is elevated and will result in amenity impacts including noise and overlooking

-     The proposed roller door garage will look unsightly

-     The proposal fails to address many criteria in the Draft Development Control Plan for West Kensington

-     Proposed building, carport and garage too close to boundary will block sunlight and air

-     The upper storey will result in loss of sunlight to windows and rear yard

-     Loss of privacy from rear balcony

-     Object to trees planted along the boundary as it will create problems with roots

-     Proposal will destroy heritage/federation character of the area

-     The design does not incorporate existing consistent streetscape features such as roof shapes, forms and pitches

-     The rear elevation will be unsightly from adjoining property

-     The modernistic nature of the proposal is not in keeping with the heritage conservation area.

-     The Heritage Impact Statement contains factual errors and fails to adequately account for the proposals failure to comply with many principles of the DCP.

-     Discrepancies between numerical calculations

-     The addition makes no attempt to sympathise with the character of the existing house or surroundings

-     Respect for neighbouring development is of particular significance in a conservation area. This does not require that new buildings copy or replicate traditional stylistic features, however regard to prevailing bulk and scale to existing properties setbacks, roof forms and the like, none of these feature requires a compromise to a contemporary approach.

-     The proposal does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP  -Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

-     No chimneys are indicated on the existing part of the proposal as modified

-     The survey plan does not accurately depict the openings on the adjoining property

-     The flat roof design is particularly objectionable in an area of predominately pitched roof form.

-     The proposed alterations and additions are considered to be an unsympathetic addition to the relatively intact heritage streetscape

-     The proposal will spoil the look of Milroy Avenue

 

Amended plans were notified on the 11 July 2002. In response to this notification, the following submissions were received:

 

Anne Caldwell                                           -     3 Elsmere Street, Kensington

JB Pender                                                 -     28 McDougall Street, Kensington

Alma Whittingham                                     -     49 Milroy Avenue, Kensongton

Catherine Shand                                        -     47 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

Joe Giordimama & Eileen O’Keeffe           -     58 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

M Willis                                                    -     55 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

David and Julie Jenkins                              -     54 Milroy Avenue, Kensington

G Onus                                                     -     27 McDougall Street, Kensington

 

The issues raised in the submissions are summarised as follows:

 

-     The development is inconsistent with the Heritage character of the locality and the neighbouring property

-     The design approach is inappropriate to the existing streetscape and has an overbearing and unsightly effect on the existing house and the neighbouring property.

-     The development contravenes the design principles in the Heritage DCP and the Draft DCP for West Kensington. These include significant scale and bulk, inadequate setbacks, intrusion on the street frontage, excessive height, excessive floor space ratio and coverage.

-     The development would have serious impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of overshadowing, loss of daylight, loss of solar access, visual intrusion, and overbearing and overwhelming scale, increased overlooking and loss of privacy.

-     The proposal disregards the character of the street and adjoining development. The building extension may be appropriate to an industrial area or an area devoid of any heritage value but is not appropriate in this location.

-     The proposal would give rise to amenity problems for neighbouring dwellings.

-     Amended plans do virtually nothing to address matters raised by objectors concerning bulk, scale and shape of the proposal and its impact on the heritage streetscape, nor do they offer a satisfactory solution to the privacy issues.

-     The landscape proposal do not remove the major concerns raised by the height, privacy intrusion and design aspects of the proposed development

-     The amended plans fail to address in an acceptable way any issues raised in letters and expert reports

-     The amendments are minor and superficial

 

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   Engineering Issues

 

Landscape Comments

 

A site inspection was made on the 8/5/02 and there are no existing trees, (covered by Council's Tree Preservation Order), that will be affected by this proposal.

 

6.2   Heritage Issues

 

The subject site is located within the West Kensington Conservation Area and is occupied by a single storey Federation style dwelling which has been considerably altered including rendering and painting of face brickwork and replacement of original timber windows with aluminium.  Surrounding dwellings have been subject to less alteration and generally retain their original materials and details.  A number of surrounding dwellings to the north west towards Baker Street have been the subject of upper level additions generally set well to the rear and having forms which are compatible with the original dwelling.  Opposite the subject site is no.55 Milroy Avenue, listed as a heritage item under Randwick LEP 1998.

 

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the dwelling, including an upper level addition.  Plans of the existing layout of the dwelling have been provided, however, it appears that it is proposed to remove the existing walls towards the rear of the dwelling and to provide a new bathroom and laundry, and to reduce the size of an existing bedroom.  At the side of the dwelling, at ground floor level, it is proposed to provide a new playroom and carport.  At the rear of the dwelling, at ground floor level it is proposed to provide a new lounge, dining and kitchen area, as well as a rear deck.  At first floor level it is proposed to provide a void area, master bedroom, ensuite bathroom, walk-in robe and study.  The application proposes to replace the existing aluminium windows at the front of the dwelling with timber windows.  It is proposed to replace the existing terracotta tiled roof with a slate substitute.  Details of the proposed replacement roofing have not been provided however.  It is proposed to modify the existing fence to accord with the brick and iron fences typical of the period.  The streetscape perspective included in the submission does not indicate a typical brick and iron fence however.

 

The application has been accompanied by a Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by City Plan Heritage.  The HIA includes a significance assessment and reference to Burra Charter Principles and Processes.  The HIA addresses the section of the Draft DCP for the West Kensington Conservation Area Maintenance and Restoration, but does not address the section of the Draft DCP for the which covers Additions, including Second Level Additions.

 

An pre-lodgement meeting has been held in relation to the proposal, at which concerns were raised in relation to the lack of information to assess the heritage impact of proposed internal changes, and the zero boundary setback of the 22m long south eastern wall.

 

In relation to the proposed additions to the rear of the dwelling, it is noted that the Draft Development Control Plan for the West Kensington Conservation Area recommends that second level additions will be permitted only in very limited circumstances, including where roof space is converted to provide accommodation without intruding on the street presentation of an otherwise reasonably intact building; or where the second level is confined to the rear, either out of site or set back far enough to appear as a separate structure.  It is noted that the existing dwelling has been considerably altered.  The proposed upper level addition is set towards the rear of the dwelling and has a ridge height around 0.5m above the existing ridge.  The Draft DCP suggests that “Additions should be in keeping with the buildings they serve, otherwise they are more likely to draw attention to themselves.  At the same time it should be possible to possible to distinguish the new work from the old, on close inspection.  … Old and new should not be confused or the boundaries blurred.”  The forms of the proposed upper level addition will allow it to be differentiated from the original form of the dwelling, while the set back of the addition will minimise its prominence from the street.

 

The current plans have addressed concerns in relation to the setback of the south eastern wall, however, the following concerns remain:

 

·      RLs indicate that the height from the new first floor to the new roof will be 3.3m.  It is noted that no sections of the proposal have been provided to indicate the actual ceiling height of the addition.  If it were possible to further reduce the wall height of the proposed addition, then its visibility in the streetscape and dominance of the original dwelling would also be reduced.

 

·      In relation to the proposed additions to the side of the dwelling, it is noted the footprint of the dwelling, garage and carport have been modified from the pre-da proposal to provide a 900mm setback from the south eastern boundary.  The wall of the dwelling adjacent to this boundary has a height of over 4m and there are concerns that this height is excessive for a wall so close to the boundary.  This excessive height results from a design decision to raise the floor level of the proposed playroom 1m higher than the existing floor levels in the dwelling.  The proposed pergola linking the side an rear additions will have also have an excessive height of 3.5m.

 

·      The existing two front rooms will remain in their existing configuration, the existing two rooms behind them are to be reduced in size by relocating their rear walls and all fabric behind these rooms is to be demolished.  There are concerns that internally, these changes will somewhat detract from the integrity of original rooms and externally, will apparently require the rear edge of the existing roof to be removed in order to accommodate a box gutter adjacent to the proposed addition.

 

·      It is noted that a number of features of the proposal, including the large overhang to the south eastern elevation and vertically and horizontally proportioned slit windows are not traditional.  It is suggested that the addition should display a greater respect for the detail of the original dwelling in terms of the proportions of openings.  The purpose of the large overhang is not clear, as it is unlikely to fulfill any sunshading function to the single window on this elevation.

 

·      The proposal includes a diversity of material for the proposed addition including rendered masonry, and frameless glass balustrades.  A number of the materials have not yet been finalised, including the “sliding screen or aluminium louvres”, and the “glazed area: final form to be confirmed upon discussion with glazier”.  Such a range of materials competes with the uniform masonry surfaces of the original dwelling and the limited range of cladding materials traditionally used for additions and draws attention to the proposal.

 

·      It is noted that the drawings indicate a 1.8m high wall to the full length of the south eastern and north west boundaries of the site.  The wall to north west boundary appears to be over 2m high however.  Properties within the conservation area were traditionally enclosed by timber paling fences to side and rear boundaries to a height of around 1.5m.  It is considered that the proposed high brick wall will detract from the open character of the conservation area and create a fortress-like division between neighbouring properties.

 

Amended plans were received on 26 June 2002, the following comments have been provided in response to the amended plans and additional information submitted:

 

My previous memo raised concerns in relation to the wall height of the proposed upper level addition, the height of the proposed playroom and adjacent pergola, the impact of the proposed internal changes on the integrity of the existing fabric and spaces, and the proposed high brick boundary walls.  There were concerns that a number of features of the proposal, including the large overhang to the south eastern elevation and vertically and horizontally proportioned slit windows are not traditional.  It was suggested that the addition should display a greater respect for the detail of the original dwelling in terms of the proportions of openings.  There were also concerns in relation to the diversity of material for the proposed addition, a number of which had not yet been finalised.  Similarly details of front fencing had not yet been provided.  It was considered that such a range of materials competed with the uniform masonry surfaces of the original dwelling and the limited range of cladding materials traditionally used for additions and drew attention to the proposal.

 

The Heritage Office and Department of Planning publication on Conservation Areas includes guidelines for adaptation of buildings.  It notes that ‘sympathetic development’ acknowledges the heritage values of an existing area, and notes that the more emphatic the statement of the new work, the more likely it its that it will not be a ‘sympathetic development’.  The publication provides two basic principles which encourage good solutions- firstly, that alterations and extensions must have regard to the architectural character and style of the building and area concerned, and secondly that consideration be given to the characteristics of the development surrounding the building.  The guidelines note that the adoption of a plain character for new work is important so as not to challenge the existing fabric or directly mimic its from, but stresses that an alteration or extension should not be of a scale that overwhelms the existing building , dominating and challenging or destroying its identity.

 

In relation to front fencing, it is noted that the perspective which has been submitted indicates a style of fencing which is appropriate to the conservation area, in terms of compatibility with the style of the dwelling and the streetscape.  Further details would be required in relation to height and materials of the proposed fencing.

 

In relation to proportions of openings, it is noted that the proposal includes a larger squarish opening with a vertical division, a smaller squarish opening with no divisions (a 2m by 1.6m window to the ensuite bathroom), and two very narrow windows of differing height.  It is assumed that the large ensuite window would in any case be provided with obscure glass.  It is suggested that an improved consistency in the proportions of openings would better relate to the windows in the surrounding conservation area.  It is further suggested that any new openings in the existing dwelling be of traditional proportions.

 

The following are the Heritage Planner’s concluding comments in relation to the development:

 

My previous memo raised concerns in relation to the wall height of the proposed upper level addition, the height of the proposed playroom and adjacent pergola, the impact of the proposed internal changes on the integrity of the existing fabric and spaces, and the proposed high brick boundary walls.  There were concerns that a number of features of the proposal, including the large overhang to the south eastern elevation and vertically and horizontally proportioned slit windows are not traditional.  It was suggested that the addition should display a greater respect for the detail of the original dwelling in terms of the proportions of openings.  There were also concerns in relation to the diversity of material for the proposed addition, a number of which had not yet been finalised.  It was considered that such a range of materials competed with the uniform masonry surfaces of the original dwelling and the limited range of cladding materials traditionally used for additions and drew attention to the proposal.  Similarly details of front fencing had not yet been provided.

 

In relation to proposed internal changes, it is noted that much of the original interior detail has been subjected to previous damage.  In relation to height, it is noted that the height of a number of existing walls are to be reduced, minimising the visibility of the additions.  The size of the overhang to the south eastern elevation has also been reduced.  In relation to proportions of openings, it is noted that use of a timber boarded inset to the north western elevation will help to integrate the proportions of the narrow openings within it.

 

In relation to diversity of materials, it is noted that the detail of a number of building elements have now been clarified.  The most recent proposal has replaced the masonry front wall to the upper level addition with timber cladding.  This finish will increase the diversity of materials and will draw attention to the additions.  It is suggested that the timber cladding be replaced with masonry to match new side walls.  In relation to the sample board has been submitted, it is suggested that the paint finish for the existing dwelling be more consistent with the colours of surrounding face brick dwellings, and that the paint finish for the existing dwelling and the proposed addition provide less contrast.

 

In relation to front fencing, it is noted that the perspective which has been submitted indicates a style of fencing which is appropriate to the conservation area, in terms of compatibility with the style of the dwelling and the streetscape.  Further details would be required in relation to height and materials of the proposed fencing.

 

The following conditions should be included in any consent:

 

·          The original brick corners of the building are to be left intact and the brick extension and the new work is to be separated from the old by an expansion joint.

 

·          The timber cladding to the front wall of the upper level addition is to be replaced with masonry to match new side walls.

 

·          Full details of the design, height, materials and structure of the front fence and gates 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.  Fencing and gates are to be compatible with the architectural style of the building and streetscape.

 

·          The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building, including roofing and garage doors, are to be compatible with surrounding buildings in the heritage conservation area.  The paint finish for the existing dwelling be more consistent with the colours of surrounding face brick dwellings, and the paint finish for the existing dwelling and the proposed addition are to provide less contrast.  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 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.

 

·          Details of the proposed paint scheme 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.  Unpainted surfaces, eg- brickwork/stonework are to remain unpainted.

 

6.3       Building and Construction Issues

 

-     BCA Classification

 

Under the Building Code of Australia, the classification of the building is:

 

Dwelling – Class 1a

Garage – Class 10a

Swimming pool – Class 10b

 

-     General comments

 

No objections is raised with respect to compliance with the

 

·    Environmental health and building provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended

·    Provisions of the Building Code of Australia

 

-     Other Comments

 

The development consent plans do not show compliance with a number of the deemed-to satisfy provisions of the BCA, including:

                                             

a)   Part 3.7.1         -     Fire separation, with respect to the carport between the dwelling and side boundary.

b)  Part 3.8.5          -     Ventilation requirements

           

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

Not Applicable as the site is less than 4000m2.

 

8.    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 2A 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:-

 

Residential

Other Clauses

Effect

Applies

Comment

29

Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

No

N/A

43

Heritage Item of Conservation Area

Subject property located within West Kensington Heritage Conservation Area

See section 6.2 Heritage Planners Comments

46

Vicinity of Heritage Item

Within vicinity of Heritage Item 407, 85 Todman Avenue at the rear north of the site, and set two properties west of the subject site.

See also section 6.2 Heritage Planners Comments Development will not impact upon item

 

8.1  Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

CONTROLS

PERFORMANCE

REQUIREMENTS

PREFERRED

SOLUTIONS

COMPLIANCE

(how applicant has

achieved performance requirements of performance solutions).

SOLAR ACCESS

P1  New dwellings must achieve (Nathers) rating of 3.5 stars.

 

Design minimise  energy  for heating, cooling.

High thermal mass materials.

Solar hot water systems.

Insulated hot water pipes.

Hot water tanks and heaters close to rooms where hot water used.

Cooking tops located away from windows, fridges and freezers.

Task lights.

Maximised natural lighting.

Ceiling and wall insulation to AS2627.1-1993.

 

P2  Orientation and design maximises solar access to living areas and open space.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P3  Design minimises use of mechanical appliances.

 

P4  Roof area suitable for solar collectors and photovoltaic cells.

 

P5 Building materials, appliances minimise  energy requirements.

 

P6  External clothes drying area available.

 

P7  Landscape design assists microclimate management.

 

P8  Windows sized to reduce summer heat and permit winter sun.

 

P9  Design and siting of buildings, alterations minimises loss of solar access to neighbours.

 

 

P9  Neighbour’s north-facing living area windows receive at least 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less is already available the amount is not reduced.

 

P9  Neighbour’s principal outdoor area receives 3 hours of sunlight over part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less is already available the amount is not reduced. 

 

P10  Construction materials are energy efficient and recyclable.

S1  New dwellings provide certificate complying with a minimum (Nathers) rating of 3.5 stars or equivalent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S2.8  North-facing windows to living areas received at least 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

 

S2  Private open space

receives 3 hours of sunlight over part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S9  Solar access to solar collectors on adjacent buildings maintained between 9.00am and 3.00pm each day.

 

 

S9  North-facing windows to living areas of neighbours receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less available the amount is not reduced.

 

 

 

 

S9  Neighbour’s principal outdoor receives 3 hours of sunlight over part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less available the amount is not reduced.

 

 

N/A alterations and additions to existing dwelling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies; 3 hours sunlight received to north facing windows to living areas

 

 

Complies, 3 hours sunlight received to recreation areas of adjoining properties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

Complies, north facing windows to living areas of adjoining properties will receive 3 hours of sunlight.

 

 

 

 

Complies, principal recreation areas

 will receive 3 hours of sunlight.

 

 

 

WATER MANAGEMENT

P1  Stormwater disposal systems:

 

collect and drain to a suitable disposal system;

do not adversely affect existing downstream systems;

fit in with hydrology;

use on–site stormwater infiltration;

maximise opportunities for stormwater re-use stormwater;

retain existing trees.

 

P2  Water consumption minimised inside dwelling .

 

P3  Water consumption minimised to landscaping.

 

 

S1  Stormwater is graded and drained via a gravity system to Council’s street gutter; or to a suitable absorption system.

 

S1  Rainwater tanks or other storage systems collect roof run-off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S2  Triple A rated fixtures. Dual flush toilets installed.

 

 

 

 

S3  Landscaped area: contain low water demand plant species and design.

 

 

A suitable condition may be imposed, should approval be granted.

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A suitable condition may be imposed, should approval be granted

 

Complies

LANDSCAPING & OPEN SPACE

P1  Landscaped areas suit requirements of the dwelling occupants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2  Location and design of private open space:

 

allows year-round use

minimises impact on neighbours

addresses privacy and sun access

addresses surveillance, privacy and security.

 

P3  Local indigenous plant species used.

 

P4  Existing trees and shrubs retained.

 

P5  Planting will not obscure or obstruct dwelling entities or personal safety.

 

P6  Unpaved or unsealed landscaped areas are maximised.

 

S1  40% of the total site area is landscaped.

 

 

 

S1  252m of useable private open space per dwelling.

 

S1  Minimum dimensions are 3m x 4m.

 

 

 

S1  Private open space is located behind the building line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S6  20% of the site area is permeable.

 

 

Complies, approx 53% of site area is landscaped area.

 

Complies >208m2

 

 

Complies dimensions include 20.6 x 10.1

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies, approx 35%

FLOOR AREA

P1  Building bulk must be compatible with surrounding built forms, minimise effects on neighbours and streets.

FSR

<300m2            0.65:1

>30 to 450m2    0.6:1

451-600m 0.9-Site Area(m2)

                            1500

>600m2            0.5:1

Complies 0.49:1

HEIGHT, FORM & MATERIALS

P1  Height relates to surrounding streetscape.

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2  Designed to enhance built form and character of street.

 

P3  Design relates to the topography with minimal cut and fill.

 

 

 

 

 

 

P4  Design preserves privacy and natural light access to neighbours.

 

 

 

P5  Second storey of a semi detached dwelling integrates with streetscape and adjoining dwelling.

 

 

 

P6  Design allows view sharing.

S1  Maximum 7m external wall height for house or attached dual occupancy.

 

S1  Maximum 3.5m external wall height of buildings or additions to the rear.

 

 

 

 

 

S3  Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

 

S3  No excavation within 900mm of side boundary.

 

S3  No excavation within 3m of rear boundary.

 

S4  Length of second storey portion is not greater than 12m at less than 1.5m from a southern boundary.

 

 

S5  Second storey potion of a semi is confined within a existing roof space or setback from the front elevation and respects the symmetry of the adjoining semi.

 

Complies 6.1m

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

BUILDING SETBACKS

Front Setback

 

P1  Generally conforms with adjoining development or dominant setback along street.

 

Rear Setback

 

P2  Allow neighbours adequate access to natural light, view sharing and retains trees and vegetation.

 

Side Setback

 

P3  Allow occupants and neighbours adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air.

 

Side setbacks on corner allotments must integrate with established setbacks of both streets and maintain the streetscape.

Front Setback

 

S1  The average of adjoining dwelling or 6m setback where no adjoining dwelling.

 

 

 

Rear Setback

 

S2  No closer than 4.5m.

 

 

 

 

 

Side Setbacks

 

S3  900mm for any part over 1m above ground level up to one level in height.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.5m for any part of a building, two levels at that point.

 

 

 

 

3.0m for any part of a building more than two levels at that point.

 

 

 

No proposed changes to front setbacks of dwelling.

 

 

 

 

Complies Rear setback
> 20m

 

 

 

 

 

Building complies 900mm & 1.535m from eastern and western side boundaries respectively.

Carport does not comply setback Nil from eastern side boundary (see secion 8.2.1 Setbacks below)

 

 

Complies, 3.11m & 1.535m from eastern and western side boundaries respectively

 

N/A

 

VISUAL & ACOUSTIC PRIVACY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAFETY AND SECURITY

P1  Overlooking neighbouring internal living areas and private open spaces is minimised.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2  Balconies provide adequate privacy for occupants.

 

P3  Dwellings close to noise sources such as busy roads or industry designed to provide comfortable living and sleeping environment.

 P1  Buildings provide comfortable living and sleeping environment.

 

 

 

 

P2  Entries are readily identifiable.

 

P3  Front fences, landscape areas and driveways promote safety and security.

S1  Habitable room windows with direct outlook to others windows within 9m are offset by more than 45 degrees or have fixed obscure glazing or sill height to 1.5m.

 

S1  Direct view into the private open space of adjoining dwelling is obscured or screened within 9m.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S1  Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more above floor level or fixed obscure glazing to any part of the window less than 1.5m above floor level.

 

 

 

 

 

S3  Buildings comply with

•AS-2107: Acoustics – recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors.

 

S1,2,3  Front doors visible from street.

 

S1,.3  At least one habitable room window overlooks the street.

 

S2  Street number displayed.

 

 

S3  Fences comply with fencing requirements.

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies: window on first floor eastern elevation obscured. Some overlooking from western windows at first floor (see section 8.2.1 visual and acoustic privacy below)

 

 

Does not comply (see section 8.2.1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

GARAGES, DRIVEWAYS & CAR PARKING

Note:  Council’s car parking DCP requirements:

 

1-2 bedroom 1 space

3 bedroom    2 spaces

 

P1  Are located  and designed for convenience and safety.

enable the efficient use of car spaces.

safe, efficient, adequate manoeuvrability.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2  Do not breach the predominant building line.

 

 

 

P3  Do not detract from the streetscape and are compatible with the dwelling.

 

P4  Car parking areas and accessways facilitate stormwater infiltration on site.

 

P6  Uncovered parking areas suitably landscaped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S1  Car parking spaces have minimum dimensions of 5.5 metres x 2.5 metres.

 

Driveways have a minimum width of three metres and are set back at least one metre from the side boundary (max width 3m at boundary).

Driveway gradients have a maxium of 1 in 6. The gradient for the first 5m from street not more than 1 in 8.

 

Garages and carport to a rear leane are 1m setback.

 

 

S2  Carports and garages located behind the building where rear access available, or behind building line where front access available.

 

S3  Driveways, car parking facilities <35% of frontage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

Complies, carport located at eastern side of building

 

 

 

Complies

 

FENCES

P1  Front fences are integrated with streetscape.

S1  Sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

 

Solid front fences in front of the building line no higher than 1.2m.

 

Fences in front of the building line no higher than 1.8m with upper two thirds at least 50% open. (Not applicable in Heritage Conservation Areas).

N/A

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

Proposed fencing acceptable for heritage area (see heritage planners comments)

 

 

8.2       Council Policies

 

8.2.1 Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

Landscaping

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP with regard to landscaping are that existing significant trees and landscaping are retained and enhanced, dwellings are provided with usable outdoor recreation area, storm water management and the appearance, amenity and energy efficiency of the dwelling is improved through integrated landscape design and the native wildlife populations are preserved and enhanced through appropriate planting of indigenous vegetation.

 

The proposed landscaped areas include a traditional front garden keeping to the style of the dwelling, including a front lawn bisected by a path of paving and shrubs across the front of the premises.

 

As indicated in the table above, the proposal fully complies with the landscaping requirements of the DCP, which requires a minimum of 40% of the site area to be landscaped of which, 20% of the area has a permeable treatment.

 

It is considered that the proposal satisfactorily complies with Council’s objectives and performance requirements in regards to landscaping requirements.

 

It is proposed to install a semi-above ground swimming pool to the rear yard of the subject property. The swimming pool will extend approx 1m above ground level with a deck surrounding. The proposed swimming pool and deck will be setback 900mm from the eastern side boundary with an additional 1.8m high fence extending from the end of the deck. It is also proposed to install Kentia Palms along the eastern boundary at varying mature heights. The palms are proposed to be installed at varying heights of 2.5m, 5m, and 3.5m. The proposed fence together with the selected palms at the proposed varying heights will provide adequate screening from overlooking to the adjoining property. Given that the proposed swimming pool adjoins an existing greenhouse type structure on the adjoining property at No 58 Milroy Avenue along the eastern boundary, the proposal will not be visually dominant when viewed from the adjoining residence.

 

Floor Area

 

The objective and performance requirements of the DCP are that developments are not excessive in bulk or scale, compatible with the existing character of the locality and also minimise adverse effects of bulk on neighbours and the street.

 

The preferred solution for an allotment with an area of 689.84m2 is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 applies.

 

The proposal complies with the 0.5:1 FSR preferred solution of the Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and is not considered to be excessive in floor area. The locality contains examples of other dwellings that have carried out additions both at first floor and to the rear of dwellings of similar bulk and scale. Building bulk has been minimised through the setbacks of the first floor addition from the front of the building. The proposed addition will not dominate the original building which due to the large setback and the minimal protrusion of the addition above the existing roof ridge, the bulk and scale of the original building will remain the dominant visual element on the site. The addition is sited to the rear and is set back a distance in excess of 8m, and as such there will not be minimal visual impact upon the Milroy Avenue streetscape.

 

The proposal satisfactorily complies with the preferred solutions of the DCP and in this regard meets the corresponding performance requirements with regard to floor area. 

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

The objectives of the DCP are that developments should not be excessive in height and scale and be compatible with the existing character of the locality, and with respect to additions that they not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling.

 

The relevant performance requirements are that the height of buildings should relate to those in the existing streetscape and buildings be designed to enhance the existing desirable built form character of the street by adopting where relevant characteristics of mass and proportion, materials and finishes, roof form and pitch, facade articulation, window and door location and proportions, and verandahs, eaves and parapets.

 

Preferred solutions include that the external wall height of the building not exceed 7m, the length of a second storey portion is no greater than 12m at less than 1.5m from a side boundary, and that the second storey portion of a semi-detached dwelling be confined to within the existing roof space or be set back from the front elevation behind a substantial portion of the existing roof form and further, the design respect the symmetry of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling.

 

The proposal is well below the maximum external wall height preferred solution of the DCP. The proposed first floor addition will protrude approximately 860mm above the existing roof ridge.  It is considered that given the setback of the addition from the front of the building and the omission of a traditional pitched roof form, the proposed addition will not be highly visible when viewed from the front of the street and will not overwhelm the existing single storey scale of the existing building.  The proposal has replaced the masonry front wall to the upper level addition with timber cladding.  This proposed finish will draw attention to the additions and increase the diversity of materials.  As suggested in the Heritage Planners comments, should approval be granted, the timber cladding is to be replaced with masonry to match new side walls.

 

Building Setbacks

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP seek to ensure that there is adequate access to sunlight, daylight and fresh air to building occupants and neighbours, and with respect to front boundary setbacks that the proposal generally conform with the adjoining or dominant streetscape.

 

Preferred solutions include that side setbacks be 900mm for any part of the building at ground level and 1.5m at first floor level, and that no part of the building is closer than 4.5m from the rear boundary.

 

The proposed alterations and addition to the dwelling satisfies the relevant preferred solution for building setbacks. The addition maintains the existing side boundary setback of 1535mm and 3110mm from the western and eastern side boundaries respectively which is consistent with other dwellings in the street and it is considered that there will be adequate access to sunlight and ventilation to the subject and adjoining premises.

 

The proposed carport does not comply with the side setback preferred solution preferred solution. The DCP states that Preferred Solutions are not compulsory standards but illustrate how the Performance requirements may be achieved in the design of the development. The Performance Requirements for side boundary setbacks under the DCP are criteria for ensuring neighbours adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air. Given that the proposed carport is open above the existing dividing fence, access to natural light and fresh air will not be compromised.   

 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

The objective of the DCP is to ensure that new buildings and additions meet the occupant and neighbours requirements for visual and acoustic privacy.

 

The performance requirements include that overlooking of internal private living areas is minimised through appropriate building layout, location and design of windows and balconies and where necessary, separation, screening devices and landscaping.

 

The position and location of windows relative to the adjoining properties will not result in the direct overlooking into another dwellings habitable room windows. The proposed window along the south eastern elevation, is attached to a ensuite and will be obscured glazing. Along the south eastern elevation, a window attached to the proposed study will extend from floor to ceiling. The proposed window does not satisfy the preferred solutions of the DCP and will result in overlooking of private open spaces of the adjoining property. It is recommended that should approval be granted, the window is to have obscured glazing below 1.5m above floor level. The proposed balcony at the rear of the building is setback over 20m from the rear with a sliding timber privacy screen at the edge of the balcony, further the rear of the property will be suitably landscaped minimising overlooking to adjoining properties. 

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant performance requirements and objectives of the DCP with regard to visual and acoustic privacy.

 

Garages & Driveways

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP include that car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive and do not detract from the appearance of the dwelling and the street scape, and structures are compatible in scale, form, materials and finishes with the associated dwelling.

 

Preferred solutions include that car parking spaces have a minimum dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m, driveways have minimum width of 3m and are set back at least 1m from the side boundary, parking is located behind the building line and driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment. Driveway gradients should not exceed a maximum of 1 in 8 for the first 5m from street alignment and 1 in 6 there after.

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant preferred solutions of the DCP for garages and driveways. The proposed carport is located at the side of the building and does not occupy more than 35% of the width of the site. The proposed carport satisfies the minimum dimensions required for a car space under Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and under Development Control Plan – Parking.

 

Fences

 

Generally the objectives and performance requirements for fences in the DCP are to ensure that front fencing is integrated with the street scape and is compatible with the appearance of the dwelling and any established local fence form and material.

 

Preferred solutions include that solid fences front fences are no higher than 1200mm and other types of fences be 1800mm maximum in height and they be designed so that the upper two thirds is at least 50% open.

 

A new front fence is proposed to be erected, having a maximum height of 1.2m with a 600mm solid base and timber paling infill. It is considered that the style of fencing is appropriate to the conservation area.

 

8.2.2    Development Control Plan West Kensington Heritage Conservation Area

 

Building Form - Additions

 

The DCP details controls in relation to the building form within the Heritage Conservation Area, these include that generally additions should only be at ground level, the prevailing front and side setbacks should be maintained, a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 applies and that additions do not dominate or detract from the character of the existing building.

 

Specifically the additions should not dominate the original building, be out of character with the character of the existing building, unreasonably intrude upon the neighbours privacy or intrude upon the street scape.

 

The modern detailing of the addition allows the addition to be differentiated from the original fabric, and the setback of 8.9m of the addition minimises its prominence from the street. The use of a flat roof in lieu of a traditional pitched roof form for the proposed additions also minimises its bulk and streetscape impact.

 

It is therefore considered that the proposal satisfies the objectives of the DCP for the West Kensington Heritage Conservation Area.

 

Accommodating the car

 

The DCP details controls in relation to car parking within the Heritage Conservation Area, these include that generally parking structures do not dominate or compete with original character buildings and minimise the impact of car parking on the street.

 

The proposed carport structure with roller door is located to the side of the building and setback approximately 4.5m from the front building alignment. The location of the proposed parking structure meets the preferred solutions of the DCP and does not dominate or detract from the original dwelling.

 

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       Physical relationship to and impact upon adjoining development

 

Shadows cast by the proposed development affects the subject property and the adjoining road to the west in the morning period and no 58 Milroy Avenue to the east in the afternoon.

 

The DCP requires, as a preferred solution, that at least 3 hours of sunlight is received the principle outdoor recreation spaces and north facing windows of adjoining properties between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less than 3 hours are available under the current conditions, access to sunlight is not reduced.

 

The shadow diagrams submitted by the applicant have been checked and indicate that the majority of shadows cast by the proposed development would fall onto the subject property and the road to the west in the morning period up until 12 noon. The shadows cast by the proposed development would fall onto the roof, side wall, and part of the rear yard area of No 58 Milroy Avenue to the east in the afternoon period from about 12 noon onwards.

 

The requirement for a minimum 3 hours of sunlight being substantially received to rear yards and living spaces of adjoining properties would be reasonably met, by the proposed development.

 

9.2       Matters raised by objectors

 

A majority of the issues raised in the objections relate to building form and design and its integration to the streetscape and the conservation area. Other issues relate to the proposal compliance with the development control plans and amenity issues on adjoining properties. A majority of the issues raised in the submission have been addressed in the report above and in the Heritage Planners comments. The following relates to issue raised in the submissions not previously discussed:

 

-     No chimneys are indicated on the existing part of the proposal as modified

 

Comment:

The existing chimneys will be retained as part of the proposal. They have been indicated on the amended plans.

 

-     The survey plan does not accurately depict the openings on the adjoining property.

 

Comment:

The site has been inspected and it is considered that the position of the proposed windows are positioned so they do not have direct outlook into the window of the adjoining property.

 

-     Object to trees planted along the boundary as it will create problems with roots

 

Comment:

The proposed planting along the eastern boundary consist of palms, which generally do not have a strong enough root system which would affect the paving of the adjoining property. As discussed with Council’s Landscape Technician, the roots of a palm generally grow down and do not spread out. The position of the trees in relation to the setbacks from the boundary are acceptable.

 

10        CONCLUSION

 

The proposed additions satisfy the relevant performance standards applicable to the subject site under the Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, and the Development Control Plan – West Kensington Heritage Conservation Area. The proposal would not adversely impact on the heritage significance of the conservation area.

 

The contemporary form of the proposed addition together with its setback from the front of the building, minimises its visibility from the street and its prominence in the streetscape.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

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 342/2002 for Ground floor alterations and additions including a new first floor addition and installation of a new swimming pool at the rear of the property at 56 Milroy Avenue, Kensington subject to the following conditions:-

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the amended plans numbered 001-010 drawn by Tobias Theodore Buildings & Interiors Pty Ltd, dated April 2002 with landscape proposal sketch plan, updated and received by Council on 26 June 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:

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AMENITY:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

2.         The original brick corners of the building are to be left intact and the brick extension and the new work is to be separated from the old by an expansion joint.

 

3.         The front timber cladding to the wall of the upper level addition is to be replaced with masonry to match new side walls.

 

4.         Full details of the design, height, materials and structure of the front fence and gates 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.  Fencing and gates are to be compatible with the architectural style of the building and streetscape.

 

5.         The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building, including roofing and garage doors, are to be compatible with surrounding buildings in the heritage conservation area.  The paint finish for the existing dwelling be more consistent with the colours of surrounding face brick dwellings, and the paint finish for the existing dwelling and the proposed addition are to provide less contrast.  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 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.         Details of the proposed paint scheme 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.  Unpainted surfaces, eg- brickwork/stonework are to remain unpainted.

 

7.         The north western first floor window of the study is to be fixed and provided with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing below1.5m above floor level. Details are to be provided on the construction certificate plans.

 

8.         The consumption of water within the building shall be minimised by the use of triple A rated water efficient plumbing fixtures (taps and shower roses) and water efficient dual flush toilets.  Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

9.         Any gate openings shall be constructed so that the gates, when hung, will be fitted in such a manner that they will not open over the footway or public place.

 

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

 

The following group of conditions have been applied to ensure that adequate drainage is provided from the premises and to maintain adequate levels of health and amenity in the locality:

 

11.       Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit and details are to be included in the construction certificate details for the development.

 

Absorption pits or soaker wells must be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed to any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance.

 

Details of any works proposed to be carried out in or on a public road/footway are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment prior to commencement of works.

 

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS & FIRE SAFETY:

 

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

 

12.       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.

 

13.       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 $5,000.

 

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:

 

14.       A Certificate of Adequacy prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to occupation of the building, certifying the structural adequacy of the building and that the building works satisfy the relevant structural design requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

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

 

15.       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.

 

16.       The building works are to be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or other suitably qualified person, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority), to monitor compliance with the relevant standards of construction and Council’s development consent.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority shall specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected and a satisfactory inspection must be carried out, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction or finalisation of the works (as applicable).

 

Documentary evidence of the building inspections carried out and compliance with Council’s approval is to be maintained by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

17.       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.

18.       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.

 

19.       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.

 

20.       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.

 

21.       Noise emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must comply with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 & the Noise Control Manual published by the Environment Protection Authority, except as may be amended by the conditions of this approval.

 

22.       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 and debris at all times.

 

23.       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.

 

24.       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.

 

25.       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.

 

26.       Public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted, when work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied.

 

A temporary safety fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the perimeter of the site (unless the site is separated from the adjoining land by an existing structurally adequate fence, having a minimum height of 1.5 metres).  Temporary fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed of cyclone wire fencing with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control, or other material approved by Council.

 

Hoarding or fences are to be structurally adequate and be constructed in a good and workmanlike manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

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.

 

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

 

27.       Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or dwelling in accordance with the relevant provisions of Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. – Housing Provisions.

 

Smoke alarms must comply with AS3786 – Smoke alarms and be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.

 

The smoke alarms are to be installed in suitable locations on or near the ceiling, in any storey containing bedrooms; located between each part of the dwelling containing the bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling, or where bedrooms are served by a hallway, the smoke alarms are to be located in that hallway; and smoke alarms are to be installed in any other storey not containing bedrooms, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

Smoke alarms are not to be located in ‘dead-air-spaces’, in the corner junction of walls and ceilings between exposed rafters/joists or at the apex of raked ceilings, as detailed in Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. – Housing Provisions.

 

Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be included in the plans / specification for the construction certificate.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure compliance with the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and to maintain public safety and amenity:

 

28.       Swimming pools are to be provided with childproof fences and self-locking gates, in accordance with the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and regulations.

 

The swimming pool is to be surrounded by a fence having a minimum height of 1.2m, that separates the pool from any residential building situated on the premises and from any place (whether public or private) adjoining the premises; and that is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with AS 1926-1986.

 

Gates to pool area shall be a maximum width of 1 metre, and be self-closing and latching; the gate is required to open outwards from the pool area and prevent a small child opening the gate or door when the gate or door is closed.

 

Temporary pool safety fencing is to be provided pending the completion of all building work and the pool must not be filled until a fencing inspection has been carried out and approved by the principal certifying authority.

 

A sign shall be erected in a prominent position in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool, in accordance with the document entitled “Policy Statement No.9.4.1: Guidelines for the Preparation of Posters on Resuscitation”, published in 1985 by the Australian Resuscitation Council and the sign must bear a notice that contains the words “YOUNG CHILDREN SHOULD BE SUPERVISED WHEN USING THIS SWIMMING POOL”, together with details of resuscitation techniques (for adults, children and infants) set out in accordance with the document entitled “Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation” published by the Australian Resuscitation Council.

 

29.       Swimming pools are to be designed and installed in accordance with the following general requirements:-

 

·    Backwash of the pool filter and other discharge of water is to be drained to the sewer in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

·    All pool overflow water is to be drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in a nuisance or damage to premises.

 

·    Pool plant and equipment is to be enclosed in a sound absorbing enclosure or installed within a building, to minimise noise emissions and possible nuisance to nearby residents.

 

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

 

30.       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.

 

31.       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.

 

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

 

32.       The following vehicular crossing deposit requirement is to be complied with prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, as security for Council or a Council approved subcontractor to construct the vehicular crossing.

 

a)         $700.00           -           Vehicular crossing deposit

 

The vehicular crossing deposit may be provided by way of cash or cheque with the Council and is refundable upon the completion of the Council vehicular crossing by Council or a Council approved subcontractor.

 

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

 

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

 

a)         Construct a new concrete vehicular crossing slab between the existing layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

34.       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.

 

35.       The applicant shall note that 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.

 

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

 

36.       That part of the naturestrip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'ANL Organic Garden Mix', and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf. Such works shall be completed at the applicants expense prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

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.

 

A         ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1       The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specifications must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) – Housing Provisions.

 

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

 

a)   Part 3.7.1         -     Fire separation, with respect to the carport between the dwelling and side boundary.

b)   Part 3.8.5           -   Ventilation requirements

 

            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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A4 Configuration Plans

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

 

NADIA ELBOTATY

ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PLANNER

 

 

 

 





 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

16 July, 2002

FILE NO:

D/0515/2002

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations to ground floor and first floor additions to existing semi-detached dwelling house

PROPERTY:

 54 Canberra St, Randwick

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Shari Jackson

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 Bastic, Backes and Andrews.

 

The estimated cost of development is $120,000.

 

The proposal was notified to adjoining and nearby property owners and five (5) submissions were received. The main concerns relate to privacy, architectural character, height and overshadowing.

 

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

It is proposed to carry out alterations and additions to ground floor and first floor extension the existing semidetached dwelling on the subject site. The extension and additions comprises of a family room and storage at lower ground floor level and a mezzanine (rumpus) area at the upper floor level. The submitted plans indicates that the proposed addition will be erected over an existing Water Board sewer line, which is located at the rear section of the site.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is a long narrow allotment with a frontage to Canberra Street of 6.70m and a depth of 48.16m. The site is rectangular in shape and fall from the front to the rear at approximately 1.40m. It contains a single storey semi detached dwelling, which is of brick construction with tile roof.

 

The locality is predominantly characterised by a mixture of one and two storey attached semi or freestanding houses of mixed architectural styles. The existing dwelling on the subject site forms one side of a pair of semi detached dwellings. To the south are a number of semi detached houses (at no 56 & 58 Canberra Street) and to the east directly across the Street is the Randwick Energy Australia substation located at no 61 Canberra Street (Heritage Item).

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

There is no development application history pertaining to the site.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with Clause 23 of the Local Environmental Plan 1998 for a period of fourteen days. The following submissions were received:

 

5.1  Objections

 

Anthony Ryan- 60 Canberra Street, Randwick.

 

Concerns:

- loss of sunlight on house and rear yard

- loss of privacy from the proposed windows

- the proposal is out of character with all the surrounding houses

 

Sean Connolly- 52 Canberra Street, Randwick.

 

Concerns:

-     loss of privacy

-     the proposal is out of character with all the surrounding houses.

 

George Melas- 56 Canberra Street, Randwick.

 

Concerns:

-     loss of sunshine to the house and rear yard

-     loss of privacy

-     the proposal is out of character with all the surrounding houses

 

Michael Menelaou- 17 Anderson Rd, Concord (submission is on behalf of owner at no 56 Canberra St)

 

Concerns:

-     loss of privacy

-     the aesthetic appearance of the extension / character

-     loss of natural sunlight

-     loss of potential district views

-     devaluation of adjoining properties

 

C.Signa- 195A Rainbow St, Randwick

 

Concerns:

-     loss of fresh air

 

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       Building and Construction issues

 

-BCA classification

 

Under the Building Code of Australia, the classification of the building is Class 1a- dwelling.

 

6.2       Landscape issues

 

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

 

6.3       Service Authority issues

 

The applicant is to liaise with Sydney Water regarding their requirements in relation to building over an existing sewer line. Documentary evidence is to be submitted to Council confirming that the Sydney Water requirements have been satisfied prior to release of construction certificate.

 

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

A master plan is not required as the site is less than 4000 square metres.

 

8.    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 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

8.1       Policy Controls

a.         Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

CONTROLS

PERFORMANCE

REQUIREMENTS

PREFERRED

SOLUTIONS

COMPLIANCE

(How applicant has

Achieved performance requirements of performance solutions).

SOLAR ACCESS

P1 New dwellings must achieve (Nathers) rating of 3.5 stars.

 

·      Design minimise energy for heating, cooling.

·      High thermal mass materials.

·      Solar hot water systems.

·      Insulated hot water pipes.

·      Hot water tanks and heaters close to rooms where hot water used.

·      Cooking tops located away from windows, fridges and freezers.

·      Task lights.

·      Maximised natural lighting.

·      Ceiling and wall insulation to AS2627.1-1993.

 

P2 Orientation and design maximises solar access to living areas and open space.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P3 Design minimises use of mechanical appliances.

 

 

P4 Roof area suitable for solar collectors and photovoltaic cells.

 

P5 Building materials, appliances minimise energy requirements.

 

P6 External clothes drying area available.

 

P7 Landscape design assists microclimate management.

 

P8 Windows sized to reduce summer heat and permit winter sun.

 

P9 Design and siting of buildings, alterations minimises loss of solar access to neighbours.

 

P9 Neighbour’s north-facing living area windows receive at least 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less is already available the amount is not reduced.

 

P9 Neighbour’s principal outdoor area receives 3 hours of sunlight over part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less is already available the amount is not reduced. 

 

 

 

 

 

P10 Construction materials are energy efficient and recyclable.

S1 New dwellings provide certificate complying with a minimum (Nathers) rating of 3.5 stars or equivalent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S2, 8 North-facing windows to living areas received at least 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

 

S2 Private open space

receives 3 hours of sunlight over part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S9 Solar access to solar collectors on adjacent buildings maintained between 9.00am and 3.00pm each day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S9 North-facing windows to living areas of neighbours receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less available the amount is not reduced.

 

S9 Neighbour’s principal outdoor receives 3 hours of sunlight over part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less available the amount is not reduced.

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

N/A

None proposed

 

 

The applicant proposes to clad the outer skin of ground floor in brickwork.

 

To be provided in rear yard.

 

N/A

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Existing living room windows do not receive 3 hours on June 21.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

 

Complies

WATER MANAGEMENT

P1 Stormwater disposal systems:

·    collect and drain to a suitable disposal system;

·    do not adversely affect existing downstream systems;

·    fit in with hydrology;

·    use on–site stormwater infiltration;

·    maximise opportunities for stormwater re-use stormwater;

·    retain existing trees.

 

P2 Water consumption minimised inside dwelling.

 

P3 Water consumption minimised to landscaping.

S1 Stormwater is graded and drained via a gravity system to Council’s street gutter; or to a suitable absorption system.

 

S1 Rainwater tanks or other storage systems collect roof run-off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S2 Triple A rated fixtures. Dual flush toilets installed.

 

 

S3 Landscaped area: contain low water demand plant species and design.

 

Stormwater to be drained to Council’s street system.

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Condition to be attached.

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

LANDSCAPING & OPEN SPACE

P1 Landscaped areas suit requirements of the dwelling occupants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2 Location and design of private open space:

 

·    Allows year-round use

·    minimises impact on neighbours

·    addresses privacy and sun access

·    addresses surveillance, privacy and security.

 

P3  Local indigenous plant species used.

 

P4 Existing trees and shrubs retained.

 

P5 Planting will not obscure or obstruct dwelling entities or personal safety.

 

P6 Unpaved or unsealed landscaped areas are maximised.

S1 40% of the total site area is landscaped.

 

 

S1  252m of useable private open space per dwelling.

 

S1 Minimum dimensions are 3m x 4m.

 

S1 Private open space is located behind the building line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S6 20% of the site area is permeable.

 

 

Complies -

43% landscaping provided

 

Complies

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

Complies

 

Complies

 

Complies

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

Complies

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

Complies

FLOOR AREA

P1 Building bulk must be compatible with surrounding built forms, minimise effects on neighbours and streets.

FSR

<300m2            0.65:1

>300 to 450m2    0.6:1

451-600m 0.9-Site Area (m2)

                                1500

>600m2            0.5:1

Complies

Site area=

322.90 sq m

Preferred FSR is 0.6:1

Proposed FSR is 0.574:1

 

HEIGHT, FORM & MATERIALS

P1 Height relates to surrounding streetscape.

 

 

 

 

P2 Designed to enhance built form and character of street.

 

P3 Design relates to the topography with minimal cut and fill.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P4 Design preserves privacy and natural light access to neighbours.

 

P5 Second storey of a semi-detached dwelling integrates with streetscape and adjoining dwelling.

 

P6 Design allows view sharing.

S1 Maximum 7m external wall height for house or attached dual occupancy.

 

S1 Maximum 3.5m external wall height of buildings or additions to the rear.

 

 

 

 

S3 Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

 

 

S3 No excavation within 900mm of side boundary.

 

S3 No excavation within 3m of rear boundary.

 

S4 Length of second storey portion is not greater than 12m at less than 1.5m from a southern boundary.

 

S5 Second storey potion of a semi is confined within an existing roof space or setback from the front elevation and respects the symmetry of the adjoining semi.

 

Complies

Maximum 6.5m.

 

 

N/A

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

N/A

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

BUILDING SETBACKS

Front Setback

 

P1 Generally conforms with adjoining development or dominant setback along street.

 

Rear Setback

 

P2 Allow neighbours adequate access to natural light, view sharing and retains trees and vegetation.

 

Side Setback

 

P3 Allow occupants and neighbours adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air.

 

Side setbacks on corner allotments must integrate with established setbacks of both streets and maintain the streetscape.

Front Setback

 

S1 The average of adjoining dwelling or 6m setback where no adjoining dwelling.

 

 

 

 

Rear Setback

 

S2 No closer than 4.5m.

 

 

 

 

 

Side Setbacks

 

S3  900mm for any part over 1m above ground level

 

1.5m for any part of a building, two levels at that point.

 

3.0m for any part of a building more than two levels at that point.

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern wall at nil (0) setback.  Southern wall at 0.9 to 1.5m setback.

 

 

 

Complies with performance requirement

 

 

VISUAL & ACOUSTIC PRIVACY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAFETY AND SECURITY

P1 Overlooking neighbouring internal living areas and private open spaces is minimised.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2 Balconies provide adequate privacy for occupants.

 

P3 Dwellings close to noise sources such as busy roads or industry designed to provide comfortable living and sleeping environment.

 

 P1 Buildings provide comfortable living and sleeping environment.

 

P2 Entries are readily identifiable.

 

S1 Habitable room windows with direct outlook to others windows within 9m are offset by more than 45 degrees or have fixed obscure glazing or sill height to 1.5m.

 

S1 Direct view into the private open space of adjoining dwelling is obscured or screened within 9m.

 

S1 Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more above floor level or fixed obscure glazing to any part of the window less than 1.5m above floor level.

 

 

 

 

 

S3 Buildings comply with

•AS-2107: Acoustics – recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors.

 

 

S1, 2,3 Front doors visible from street.

 

 

S1,.3  At least one habitable room window overlooks the street.

First floor  southern windows will overlook adjoining rear yard (condition to be attached).

 

 

(to be conditioned)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

GARAGES, DRIVEWAYS & CAR PARKING

Note:  Council’s car parking DCP requirements:

 

1-2 bedroom 1 space

3 bedroom    2 spaces

 

P1  Are located  and designed for convenience and safety.

·    enable the efficient use of car spaces.

·    safe, efficient, adequate manoeuvrability.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P2  Do not breach the predominant building line.

 

 

 

P3  Do not detract from the streetscape and are compatible with the dwelling.

 

P4  Car parking areas and access ways facilitate stormwater infiltration on site.

 

P6  Uncovered parking areas suitably landscaped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S1  Car parking spaces have minimum dimensions of 5.5 metres x 2.5 metres.

 

·    Driveways have a minimum width of three metres and are set back at least one metre from the side boundary (max width 3m at boundary).

·    Driveway gradients have a maximum of 1 in 6. The gradient for the first 5m from street not more than 1 in 8.

 

·    Garages and carport to a rear lane are 1m setback.

 

S2  Carports and garages located behind the building where rear access available, or behind building line where front access available.

 

S3  Driveways, car parking facilities <35% of frontage.

 

 

 

 

 

 Existing (no changes).

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Existing

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

Existing

 

 

 

 

 

Existing

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

N/A

FENCES

P1  Front fences are integrated with streetscape.

S1  Sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

 

Solid front fences in front of the building line no higher than 1.2m.

 

Fences in front of the building line no higher than 1.8m with upper two thirds at least 50% open. (Not applicable in Heritage Conservation Areas).

N/A

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

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       Development Control Plan- Dwelling House and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

9.1.1    Overshadowing

 

The objectives and performance requirements of DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies include the protection of solar access to adjoining properties through appropriate design and siting of new buildings. The preferred solutions requires that the principal outdoor recreation space and north facing windows to living areas of neighbouring dwellings receives at least 3 hours of sunlight over at least part of their area/ surface between 9.00 am and 3.00 pm on 21 June.

 

The submitted shadow diagrams indicate that at 9.00 am, the adjoining property at no 56 Canberra Street will be fully in shadow due to the height of the existing side fence and retaining wall. From 12.00 midafternoon, the majority of the rear yard of the adjoining property at 56 Canberra Street, which receives solar access under current conditions will not be affected by the proposed development. At 3.00 pm, the shadow impact on No. 56 Canberra Street from the proposed development,

will be significantly less.

 

The proposal will cause some additional overshadowing to the northern side windows of the dwelling at 56 Canberra Street. However, it is to be noted that a side setback of 1.5m is proposed for the first floor addition from the southern boundary, and that under current conditions, access to sunlight for the northern windows of the adjoining building is limited to the laundry window only. No solar access is available to all of the other northern windows of the adjoining building on 21 June.

 

It should be noted that Council has adopted amendments to the DCP, relating to solar access, which reads:

 

“P9 The design and siting of new buildings, alterations and additions to existing buildings and landscaping minimises loss of solar access to neighbouring properties.  Solar access is to be maximized to the north facing windows of living areas and the principal outdoor recreation space of neighbouring dwellings

 

 In order to minimise the overshadowing impact of the adjoining properties, it is recommended that the overall height of the building is reduced by 0.3m, by reducing the internal ceiling height and lowering the height of the external walls of the building, so that the maximum height of the building does not exceed RL15.34. The proposed height of the southern side elevation will be therefore reduced from 5.5m to 5.2m from the natural ground level, and the length of shadow during the winter solstice will also be reduce by approximately 1.0m. 

 

Having regard to the orientation of the site, the recent adopted amendments to the solar access performance requirements of the DCP, the possibility of lowering the height of the proposed addition and the compliance with the southern side setback requirement, the overshadowing is considered reasonable and complies with the performance requirement.

 

9.1.2    Side setback

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP seek to ensure that there is adequate access to sunlight, daylight and fresh air to building occupants and neighbours, and with respect to front boundary setbacks that the proposal generally conform with the adjoining or dominant streetscape.

 

Preferred solutions include that side setbacks be 900mm for any part of the building at ground level and 1.5m at first floor level, and that no part of the building is closer than 4.5m from the rear boundary.

 

The proposed setback for the ground floor addition and first floor addition is nil (0) to the northern boundary and 0.9m – 1.5m to the southern boundary. The setbacks do not comply with the preferred solution at the northern boundary however they match the existing building setbacks and wall positions of the original dwelling. The proposed side setback at the southern boundary will comply with the preferred solution of the DCP & will allow occupants and neighbours adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air.

 

9.1.3  Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

Concerns are raised that the placement of windows in the first floor addition (rumpus room) will cause some overlooking of adjoining properties. In order to resolve this privacy/overlooking issue, it is recommended that a condition of consent is to be attached, which requires the sill height of the southern elevation of the mezzanine level windows be increased to a minimum height of 1.6m above floor level, or alternatively, the window is to be provided with fixed translucent, obscured or sandblasted glazing.

 

9.1.4  Height & Character of the building

 

The objectives of the DCP are that developments should not be excessive in height and scale and be compatible with the existing character of the locality, and with respect to additions that they not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling.

 

The relevant performance requirements are that the height of buildings should relate to those in the existing streetscape and buildings be designed to enhance the existing desirable built form character of the street by adopting where relevant characteristics of mass and proportion, materials and finishes, roof form and pitch, facade articulation, window and door location and proportions, and verandahs, eaves and parapets.

 

Preferred solutions include that the external wall height of the building not exceed 7m, the length of a second storey portion is no greater than 12m at less than 1.5m from a side boundary, and that the second storey portion of a semi-detached dwelling be confined to within the existing roof space or be set back from the front elevation behind a substantial portion of the existing roof form and further, the design respect the symmetry of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling.

 

It is to be noted that the applicant has attempt to utilise the natural slope of the site in order to lower the height and bulk of the proposed development. The proposed external wall height of the development is approximately 5.5m to 6.5m and will therefore comply with the preferred solution of the DCP. The proposal will also comply with the DCP height requirement in that, the second storey portion of the semidetached dwelling is setback from the front elevation behind a substantial portion of the existing roof form. Should the proposed second storey extension be above the existing foot-print of the building, the height of the first floor addition would be higher than the existing main ridge height (RL 15.64) and may be visible from Canberra Street.

 

The proposed height and siting of the second storey addition will maintain the character of the area and will not compromise the amenity of the surrounding residential areas. Should the sitting of the first floor addition be relocated further to the front above the existing foot print of the building, the proposed wall height of the development would increase and the forward position of the addition would not integrate with the adjoining semi-detached dwelling or the streetscape. The position of the first floor addition would be prominent from the street and be incompatible with the style, form and proportion of the existing dwelling and neighbouring dwelling. It would further exacerbates the asymmetry of a proposed first floor to only one half of a semi detached building. The bulk of the building would relate poorly to the adjoining semi-attached building and would be detrimental to the architectural integrity of the semi pair.

 

9.1.6  Loss of views

 

There will be no loss of any ocean, foreshore or significant district views. It is considered that the adjoining properties do not presently enjoy any significant views.

 

9.1.7  Streetscape/Appearance

 

The original dwelling will remain intact, and the visibility of the addition will be minimal from Canberra Street due to the proposed location of the addition, the setback from the front elevation and the slope of the land. Although the proposed rear addition is not within the existing footprint of the building, and is different to the majority of buildings on this side of Canberra Street (which are mainly single storey), the proposal would not be seen and would be in a form, which is generally in keeping with that envisaged for the area. The proposal will therefore be compatible with the existing character of the area and will not compromise the current appearance of the building.

 

 In term of streetscape, the first floor addition to the building observes a minimum setback of 25m to the front boundary.  The addition is adjoined on the northern and western side by a number of two storey brick buildings, which have frontages to Rainbow Street. In term of streetscape fit, the proposal may only be marginally visible from Canberra Street as the maximum proposed height of the development is to be no higher than the existing main ridge of the building. No objection is seen to this proposal provided that any approval requires a reduction in height.

 

9.1.8  Devaluation of adjoining properties

 

No evidence has been submitted in order to substantiate this claim. The proposed development will not result in any significant adverse impact to the quality of the surrounding environment and it is therefore not anticipated that a loss of property value will occur.

 

9.1.9  Development in the vicinity of heritage items

 

The proposed development is on land within the vicinity of a heritage item, which is an electricity substation building built in 1930 at no 61 Canberra Street. Under Clause 46 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan, Council must consider the likely effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage item. Given that the subject site is across the street and that the proposal will not be visible from the streetscape, it is considered that no adverse impact is likely to occur onto the heritage significance of the electricity substation building.

 

10.     CONCLUSION

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant assessment criteria contained in DCP- Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, and may be approved subject to appropriate conditions.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval.

 

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 D/0515/2002 for Alterations to ground floor and first floor additions to existing semi-detached dwelling house at 54 Canberra St, Randwick subject to the following conditions: -

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered AR/310/01 to 07 dated 07/03/02 and received by Council on 31/05/2002, 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:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

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

 

Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. 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 prior to commencement of any building works.

 

3.         The consumption of water within the building shall be minimised by the use of triple A rated water efficient plumbing fixtures (taps and shower roses) and water efficient dual flush toilets.  Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

4.         The height of the proposed addition at the rear (consisting of family room, storage and mezzanine) is to be reduced by 0.3m by:

 

i.      Reducing the internal ceiling height

ii.      Lowering the height of the external walls of the building

 

            so that the maximum height of the building does not exceed RL 15.340 and details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans.

 

5.         The sill height of the mezzanine room southern windows are to be increased to a minimum height of 1.6m above floor level, or alternatively, the windows are to be provided with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing below the specified level. Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans.

 

The following group of conditions have been applied to ensure that adequate drainage is provided from the premises and to maintain adequate levels of health and amenity in the locality:

 

6          Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter and details are to be included in the construction certificate details for the development.

 

Details of any works proposed to be carried out in or on a public road/footway are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment prior to commencement of works.

 

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

 

7          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.

 

8          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:

 

9          A Certificate of Adequacy supplied by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, certifying the structural adequacy of the proposed building work.

 

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

 

10        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.

 

11        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.

 

12        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.

 

13        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.

 

14        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.

 

15        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.

 

16        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 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

 

17        Noise emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must comply with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 & the Noise Control Manual published by the Environment Protection Authority, except as may be amended by the conditions of this approval.

 

18        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.

 

19        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.

 

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

 

20        Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or dwelling in accordance with the relevant provisions of Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. – Housing Provisions.

 

Smoke alarms must comply with AS3786 – Smoke alarms and be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back up.

 

The smoke alarms are to be installed in suitable locations on or near the ceiling, in any storey containing bedrooms; located between each part of the dwelling containing the bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling, or where bedrooms are served by a hallway, the smoke alarms are to be located in that hallway; and smoke alarms are to be installed in any other storey not containing bedrooms, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

Smoke alarms are not to be located in ‘dead-air-spaces’, in the corner junction of walls and ceilings between exposed rafters/joists or at the apex of raked ceilings, as detailed in Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. – Housing Provisions.

 

Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be included in the plans / specification for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

21        The applicant shall liaise with Sydney Water regarding their requirements for construction over the sewer line. Documentary evidence from Sydney Water confirming that their requirements have been satisfied, must be submitted to the certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

22        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.

 

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

 

23        That part of the nature strip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'ANL Organic Garden Mix', and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf. Such works shall be completed at the applicants expense prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

The nature strip 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.

 

Advisory Conditions

 

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.

 

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.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A4 Configuration

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

 

IDALY YAP

DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLANNER

 

 

 

 






 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR of PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

 

DATE:

12 July, 2002

FILE NO:

D/0557/2002

 

PROPOSAL:

 New front carport

PROPERTY:

 22 Oxley St, Matraville

WARD:

 South Ward

APPLICANT:

 E. Brown

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 Michael Daley, Charles Matthews, Alan White.

 

The estimated cost of the development is $5,000.

 

The proposal was notified to adjoining and nearby property owners and no submissions have been received. 

 

The main issue with the application relates to the setback of the carport from the north eastern side boundary.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The applicant is seeking approval to erect a new carport over the existing driveway. The proposed dimensions of the carport are approximately 3.5m – 5.0 m x  6.5m. A flat roof is proposed and the undercover section of the carport will be setback at 0.5m from the north eastern side boundary.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is located on the western side Oxley Street between Landy and Lawson Street, Chifley. Oxley Street contains a number of detached single storey houses and  is characterised by open front yard areas with low fencing.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

No relevant history exists.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The owners of adjoining properties were notified of the proposed development on 24 June, 2002. As a result of this notification, no submissions were received.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

No referrals required.

 

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

There is no master plan requirement for this site.

 

 

 

8.    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 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

The proposal has been assessed in relation to compliance with the following controls:-

 

-       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

-       Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

-       Building Code of Australia.

-       Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual       Occupancies.

 

8.1  Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

Setbacks

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP seek to ensure that there is adequate access to sunlight, daylight and fresh air to building occupants and neighbours, and with respect to front boundary setbacks that the proposal generally conform with the adjoining or dominant streetscape.

 

Preferred solutions include that side setbacks be 900mm for any part of the building at ground level and 1.5m at first floor level, and that no part of the building is closer than 4.5m from the rear boundary.

 

The proposed carport has nil (0) setback from the side boundary and will not comply with the preferred solution minimum side setback requirement of 900mm under the DCP. Given the significant height difference between the existing side fence and proposed top of the carport, it is considered appropriate that a condition be imposed for the carport to be setback from the side boundary fence in line with the exiting ‘garage’ structure at the rear, which is approximately 500mm from the side boundary.  This setback will assist in reducing the height of the structure when viewed from the adjoining property.  It is considered that with the imposition of a 500mm setback, impacts from the development will not be adverse and the location of the carport will be acceptable in relation to the DCP requirements for setbacks. 

 

Garages & Driveways

 

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP include that car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive and do not detract from the appearance of the dwelling and the street scape, and structures are compatible in scale, form, materials and finishes with the associated dwelling.

 

Preferred solutions include that car parking spaces have a minimum dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m, driveways have minimum width of 3m and are set back at least 1m from the side boundary, parking is located behind the building line and driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment. Driveway gradients should not exceed a maximum of 1 in 8 for the first 5m from street alignment and 1 in 6 there after.

 

The applicant proposes to erect a carport adjoining the existing garage with the dimensions of 3.5m-5.0m x 6.5m, a height of 3.0m and is to be located on the side boundary. 

 

The application details the location of the proposed carport behind the building line and will generally comply with all the preferred solutions of the DCP.  The proposed development conforms to the dominant setback of the street. The erection of a structure in this position will not compromise or have a significant adverse impact upon the streetscape or the adjoining premises subject to a 0.5m setback from the side boundary. 

 

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.

 

The proposal generally satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. The proposed works will not be out of character with the existing streetscape and will not impact upon the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

10.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant assessment criteria and may be approved subject to appropriate 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 D/0557/2002 for New front carport at 22 Oxley St, Matraville subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered Development Application No 557/2002 and received by Council on 13 June 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:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

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

3.         The proposed carport is to be setback at a minimum of 0.5m from the north western side boundary so that it is in line with the existing side setback of the garage. Details are to be shown with the Construction Certificate.

 

4.         There must be no encroachment of any part of the structure/s onto the adjoining premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place.

 

5.         Where access is required to adjoining premises for construction purposes, the written consent of the owner/s of the subject adjoining premises must be provided to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to carrying out any construction works from or upon the adjoining premises.

 

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

 

6.         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 conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies relevant standards of construction, and to maintain adequate levels of health, safety and amenity during construction:

 

7.         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.

 

8.         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.

 

9.         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.

 

10.       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.

 

11.       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.

 

12.       Noise emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must comply with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 & the Noise Control Manual published by the Environment Protection Authority, except as may be amended by the conditions of this approval.

 

13.       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.

 

14.       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.

 

15.       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.

 

16.       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.

 

17.       Public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted, when work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied.

 

A temporary safety fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the perimeter of the site (unless the site is separated from the adjoining land by an existing structurally adequate fence, having a minimum height of 1.5 metres).  Temporary fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed of cyclone wire fencing with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control, or other material approved by Council.

 

Hoarding or fences are to be structurally adequate and be constructed in a good and workmanlike manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

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.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A4 Configuration

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

IDALY YAP

ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLANNER

 

 

 

 

 



 

Director Planning & Community Development's Report 49/2002

 

 

SUBJECT:

Appointment of auditor for the Ritz Cinema.

 

 

DATE:

1 August, 2002

FILE NO:

DA 1076/98

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT     

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Development Consent No. 1076/98 for alterations and additions to the Ritz Cinema was issued by the Land & Environment Court on 29 November 1999.

 

Condition 8 of the Development Consent required Council to engage an independent auditor at the applicant’s expense, to carry out monthly audits of the site to confirm compliance with the terms of Condition 4, which limited the maximum number of seats to be occupied at any time to 1253.

 

On 7 December 1999, Council resolved to appoint Mr Adrian Hack of Hill PDA Land Economists as auditor to carry out the monthly audits of the Ritz Cinema.  Mr Hack was selected to be auditor due to his involvement in the appeal on Council’s behalf.

 

On 10 August 2001, Mr Ziade wrote to Council enquiring as to the likely costs of the audits and provided Council with two quotes, one from a consultant planner and the other from a financial controller.  The highest quote provided by Mr Ziade was $900 a year.  In response to Mr Ziade’s enquiry Council contacted Mr Hack and sought advice as to the likely costs of the audit.

 

Mr Hack advised Council that the charge rate was $1200.00 per day including GST, and that he envisaged that the task would take 4 days a quarter- one day per month in data entry and a further day and a quarter to prepare a report for Council (total cost of $19,200 per annum).

 

It was considered that the fee proposed was reasonable given the complex format of the computer printouts of ticket sales for the Ritz and the extent of data entry required to organise the data into a manner that would establish compliance with Condition 4.  The quotations submitted by Mr Ziade at the time did not appear to have taken this factor into consideration. However, in the interests of procedural fairness, it was recommended that further quotes be sought from relevantly qualified and experienced people.

 

The Health Building & Planning Committee at its meeting on 11 September 2001 resolved that:

 

a)   Council write to the proprietor of the Ritz Cinema outlining Council’s envisaged method of assessment and seeking his comments on this method of assessment;

 

b)   If Council’s method of assessment is acceptable to the proprietor, Council proceed with an advertisement in the Sydney Morning Herald to obtain at least 3 written quotes from suitably qualified, experienced and totally independent people to carry out the monthly audits of the Ritz Cinema to confirm compliance with Condition 4 of Development Consent No. 1076/98.  Upon receipt of the quotations a report shall be presented to Council outlining the relative merits of each prospective auditor; and

 

c)   If the proprietor does not agree with the envisaged method of assessment the matter be reported back to a future Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting.

 

ISSUES:

 

In accordance with the above resolution, Council wrote to Mr. Ziade, the Director of the Ritz Cinema on 18 September 2001 to outline the method of assessment to confirm compliance with the maximum seating numbers. A series of discussions were held with Mr. Ziade and a method of assessment has been agreed on. 

 

The data from computer printouts which detail the ticket sales and therefore seating numbers will be entered into an electronic spreadsheet by the management of the cinema which will allow for an automatic calculation of the total number of seats sold at any one time, thus relieving the auditor of the data entry task. The auditor will check these figures against the distributor reports provided by the operator of the cinema.  A monthly report summarising the maximum attendance figures on any day and compliance with condition 4 will be provided by the auditor.

 

The auditor will also be required to inspect the premises biannually to observe the operation of the cinema in accordance with the approved plan of management.

 

An advertisement seeking the services of a suitably qualified consultant was placed in the Sydney Morning Herald on 1 & 8 June 2002.  Thirteen applications were received in response to the advertisement.  A number of applicants applied for the role of auditor under the misapprehension that it entailed a permanent full time position with Council and as such are unsuitable for the position. The relative merits of each the 4 remaining prospective auditors is discussed below. The applications including resumes and hourly rates are provided under separate cover.   

 

(a)        Ian Harris RL Consulting

 

·    20 years experience as an internal auditor for clients such as Centennial & Moore Park Trust, NSW Office of the Children, Teachers Housing Authority and Motor Vehicle Repair Industry

·    Experience in compliance based audits and data analysis

·    Qualifications in Accounting and accredited as Quality Assurance Auditor

 

(b)        Andrew R Christian Devlema Pty Ltd

 

·    Operates a bookkeeping service in the eastern suburbs

·    Qualifications in computerised accounting from Metropolitan Business College

 

(c)        Aurora F.Villafuerte Triumphant Consultancy

 

·    Business consultant

·    Performed audits and investigations with the Australian Taxation office

·    Qualifications in Business Administration

 

(d)        Gam. Y. Yapapandara Chartered Management & Certified Accountant

 

·    20 years experience in auditing and financial management in national and international including 8 years in Australian federal and NSW audit services and 10 years experience in international universities and World Bank projects

 

·    Bachelor of Commerce degree from the Queensland University of Technology

 

The information which is currently being provided by the owner of the Ritz (relating to the operation of the cinema and seating numbers) is ‘commercial in confidence’ and as such should not be made available to the auditor until such time as they are appointed by Council and have entered into a contract for the services to be provided.

 

In order to ensure that the exact nature of the work required and responsibilities of the auditor is clearly understood, a requirements brief and external consultants agreement should be prepared which will contain a detailed scope of work, reporting requirements, remuneration, due diligence, confidentiality and conflict of interest provisions.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

It is considered that Mr Ian Harris of RL Consulting possesses the skills, attributes, qualifications, and relevant experience to undertake the role of auditor and is the preferred applicant for the position. Mr Harris’s extensive experience in compliance audits and data analysis will ensure that the data provided by the owner of the Ritz is scrutinised in professional and ethical manner.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Mr Ian Harris of RL Consulting be appointed as auditor for the Ritz Cinema subject to entering into an external consultants agreement containing a detailed scope of work, reporting requirements, remuneration, due diligence, confidentiality and conflict of interest provisions.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.         Applicant’s CV’s provided under separate cover

2.         Applicant’s pricing details under separate cover (CONFIDENTIAL)

  

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

KERRY KYRIACOU

ACTING DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

ACTING MANAGER DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director Planning & Community Development's Report 50/2002

 

 

SUBJECT:

Draft Master Plan for University of NSW, Kensington Campus, Kensington

 

 

DATE:

2 August, 2002

FILE NO:

98/S/4475

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT   

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

On 24 June 2002, the University of New South Wales (UNSW) submitted a “Draft” Master Plan for its Kensington Campus. The Draft Master Plan has been lodged in accordance with clause 40(A) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP), 1998 and clause 276 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations, 2000, which requires submission of a Master Plan for sites in the Randwick LGA that have an area of 4,000m2 and over.

 

Subclause 40A(8)(b) of the RLEP also limits the time for consideration of a Draft Master Plan to sixty (60) days, after which time a development application may be lodged without an approved Master Plan in place. The legislation appears to put no limits on the matters or conditions that Council may wish to place on a master plan approval and consequently the amount of revisions that may be required of the “Draft” master plan.

 

As a result, Council is on a position where if they refuse or delay the determination of the Draft Master Plan, the future development applications will no longer require assessment against the contents of a Master Plan.  In some situations, it is clearly more beneficial to adopt some form of Master Plan despite the fact that the plan may have deficiencies.

 

This report recommends that Council adopt the UNSW Kensington Campus Master Plan, subject to the incorporation of further detail relating primarily to building envelope and built form and that the conditions require the lodgement of a revised Master Plan document that reflects these changes.

 

1.         THE MASTERPLAN:

 

The Draft Master Plan provides an analysis of opportunities outcomes and actions and an academic and statutory background to support proposed development of the Kensington Campus within five (5) and ten (10) year time frames.  The document has been prepared after careful consideration of a number of issues affecting the future growth of the campus.

 

The Draft Master Plan separately addresses activities that occur on the Campus (including educational administrative and ancillary) and proposes outcomes and actions relating to each activity. The document refers to these activities under the following headings:

 

§ Building Works and Changes to Floor Space

§ Student Housing

§ Regional and Local Access

§ Parking

§ Access and Circulation on Campus

§ Heritage

§ Open Spaces and Landscaping

§ Engineering Services

§ The Public Domain

 

The Draft Master Plan has been prepared with regard to the EP&A Act, the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (1998), the Draft State Environmental Planning Policy 66 – Integration of Land Use and Transport, and the University’s internal strategic planning documents.

 

2.         THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is the Kensington Campus of the University of New South Wales.

 

Main Campus

 

The main portion of the site is 35.6ha in area and is bounded by Anzac Parade, High Street, Botany Street and Barker Street. This ‘Main Campus’ is divided into three smaller ‘campuses’:

 

§ Upper Campus (the easternmost campus) fronting Botany Street

§ Middle Campus

§ Lower Campus fronting Anzac Parade

 

Across Anzac Parade there are two additional portions or campuses that are also included in the subject site. These are:

 

§ Western Campus, which fronts Anzac Parade, incorporates the National Institute for Dramatic Art (NIDA) and has an area of 2.7ha;

§ The L5 site, (Unisearch House) which fronts Anzac Parade approximately halfway between Day Avenue and Barker Street and has an area of 2,475m2.

 

The campus extends from east to west, a distance of 1.063 km. The land slopes from east to west and results in a change in level of approximately 30 metres between the Upper Campus and the Western Campus.

 

To the north of the Main Campus, across High Street, is Randwick Racecourse. To the northeast are various buildings including medium density housing and previously residential buildings that have been converted to house medical uses and ancillary functions to the University.

 

To the east of the Main Campus, across Botany Street, is a strip of residential development, behind which is the Prince of Wales Hospital (public and private), the Royal Women’s Hospital and the Sydney Children’s Hospital. The eastern boundary of Main Campus does not follow Botany Street for its entire length, but cuts along Willis Street. The Main Campus shares this south-eastern boundary with a 2(a) zone, that encourages small scale residential development.

 

To the south of the Main Campus, across Barker Street, is small to medium scale residential development.  To the west of the Main Campus is Anzac Parade, a six lane divided roadway. Across Anzac Parade to the northwest is the Western Campus, to the southwest is the L5 site and various commercial, retail and residential developments.

 

The north-eastern portion of the Main Campus is generally comprised of educational and administrative uses. The north-western corner of the Main Campus is occupied by educational uses, incorporating community and sports uses such as Unigym. To the southeast are educational buildings and car parking. The south-western corner of the Main Campus is largely comprised of student housing and open space areas, such as ovals.

 

The Old Tote Courtyard on the Middle Campus is a Heritage Conservation Area (HCA). The HCA includes built elements (Fig Tree Theatre, Old Tote Building) and landscape elements (Moreton Bay Fig Trees). These elements are considered to be of historic, social and aesthetic value.

 

Western Campus

 

The Western Campus has a frontage to Day Avenue and Anzac Parade. Across Day Avenue are medium scale residential developments. To the western boundary of this campus are small-scale residential developments. To the north of this campus is a petrol station (which also fronts Anzac Parade). The northern portion of the site is comprised of the recently completed National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA) building. The southern portion of this site is comprised of buildings, surface parking and open space and is currently used for academic and support services.

 

To the east of the L5 campus is Anzac Parade and the Main Campus. To the south of this site is commercial development.  To the west, across Houston Lane, are small to medium scale residential uses. The L5 site is currently used for support and other services.

 

 

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 the following matters (but is not limited to them):

 

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

§ phasing of development;

§ distribution of land uses, including open space;

§ subdivision pattern;

§ building envelopes and built form controls;

§ heritage conservation, including both Aboriginal and European heritage;

§ infrastructure provision;

§ remediation of the site;

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

§ parking provision;

§ provision of public facilities;

§ impact on and improvements to the public domain;

§ provision of open space, its function and landscaping;

§   identification and conservation of native flora and fauna habitat on the site; and

§ the principles of ecologically sustainable development.

 

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.

 

Despite its comprehensive nature, the document does not fulfil the content and purpose intended by the planning legislation for master plans.  It covers the subject matter required but stops short of providing physical and spatial controls that would guide the form and location of future development.  This is a critical ingredient for the Master Plan document as intended by the planning legislation.  This aspect of the assessment is covered in great detail by the Urban Design Advisory Service (UDAS) in their consideration of the Draft Master Plan application in section 6 of this report.

 

 

4.         STATUTORY CONTROLS:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)

 

SEPP 65 aims to achieve better design quality for residential flat buildings over three storeys in height and containing four or more self-contained dwellings. Buildings not commonly understood to be “residential flat buildings”, such as serviced apartments, are considered to be residential flat buildings for the purposes of this policy. Any additional student housing in the form of self-contained dwellings, must have regard to this policy.

 

As a result, the principles of design espoused by SEPP 65 should be embodied in the Master Plan to ensure their consideration.  This is an appropriate piece of state legislation to have the University consider in designing accommodation and to guide future residential development on the site.  It will assist the University in providing the high quality development referred to in the Draft Master Plan.

 

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy 66 – Integrating Land Use and Transport (Draft SEPP 66)

 

This Policy aims to ensure that urban structure, building forms, land use locations, development designs, subdivision and street layouts help achieve the following planning objectives:

(a)   improving accessibility to housing, employment and services by walking, cycling, and public transport,

(b)   improving the choice of transport and reducing dependence solely on cars for travel purposes,

(c)   moderating growth in the demand for travel and the distances travelled, especially by car,

(d)   supporting the efficient and viable operation of public transport services,

(e)   providing for the efficient movement of freight.

 

The policy generally applies to development having a gross floor space of more than 1,000 square metres. Clause 8 of the Policy also requires that Master Plans be consistent with the Policy and have regard to its objectives.

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (RLEP)

 

The subject site, being the Kensington Campus of UNSW including parcels to the west of Anzac Parade is zoned Special Uses Zone (Zone No. 5) under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (RLEP). There is no maximum FSR or height restriction over the site under the RLEP.

 

5.         PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSION:

 

The Draft Master Plan was exhibited during July 2002 for a period of 14 days, including advertisements in the local newspaper, notification of local residents and erection of site notices. During this period only three submissions were received.

 

5.1       Objections

 

The objectors concerns are as follows:

 

§ International House Residents Society (RESOC) have raised concerns regarding the possibility of multi storey car park being located within close proximity to their residential college and the impact this will have upon their quality of life.

 

§ Car parking availability in streets surrounding the UNSW site is already stretched to capacity. Council should encourage provision of adequate parking on the University Campus.

 

Cr Whitehead also raised concerns regarding the Draft Master Plan.  The detailed letter included the following issues:

 

§ The process of exhibition for the Master Plan was limited and was during school holiday time when people are away.

 

§ Raised concern over the lack of information regarding what is proposed for the western side of the University.

 

§ Noted the benefits for students and property owners of low-rental accommodation, but not for the wider community. Increased student accommodation will change the face of Kensington completely.

 

§ Raised issues over the buses along Anzac Parade.

 

§ Considered that the University should provide its own parking requirements, including parking under proposed buildings.

 

§ The fig trees are valuable and should be retained.

 

§ The local community should have been included in the discussion for the Master Plan much earlier.

 

§ Wants the University to be a good neighbour and should value the local community.

 

The issues raised by the objectors have been considered and are discussed throughout this report.  The major potential for impact is on the residential zones to the west of the Western and L5 campuses. Particular consideration has been given to these areas.  The report discusses how future development of the site regarding height and overshadowing and privacy must be included in the revised document.  Issues such as traffic and car parking are also requiring further investigation in a revised Master Plan.

 

6.         TECHNICAL OFFICER’S COMMENTS:

 

6.1       Landscape Comments

 

Council’s Landscape Technician considered the original Master Plan submission and advised that the Master Plan should be revised to include the need for a landscape plan of management with future development applications.  A condition requiring this information has been included in the recommendation.

 

6.2       Drainage Engineers Comments

 

The applicant should be advised of the following general requirements:

 

Borewater

 

Extraction of borewater will be subject to the approval of the Department of Land and Water Conservation.

 

Drainage and Stormwater

 

§ New gross pollutant traps will be required on all stormwater pipelines that drain the site to the Council stormwater system.

§ For future redeveloped areas of the campus:-

b.   On site detention will:-

i. be required for the areas that will drain to High and Botany Streets.

ii. not be required for the areas that will drain to corner of Anzac Parade and Barker Street except where the impervious area is increased.

c.   To help replenish the ground water, infiltrating stormwater to ground will also be encouraged by:-

i. landscaping areas and permeable paving be used where appropriate.

ii. a minimum 10 M2 of infiltration provided where appropriate.

§ The stormwater from parts of the eastern side of the campus (adjacent to Botany Street) drain to Botany Street.

§ New gross pollutant traps should be located on the pipelines adjacent to Warrene College M7 and the Australian Graduate School of Management G27.

§ Install new gross pollutant traps at Village Green, Anzac Parade and Botany Street to further reduce pollution to the RCC stormwater system.

 

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

 

 

6.3       Traffic Engineers Comments

 

Council’s traffic engineer advises that any future development applications will be required to provide a traffic analysis that indicates how the proposed development complies with the strategic transport solution for the campus and the wider cumulative impacts of the proposal on the traffic and parking issues.

 

This issue has been covered by the suggested conditions forming part of the recommendation of this report.

 

6.4       Heritage Officers Comments

 

Council’s Local Environmental Plan 1998 Amendment No.17 requires the adoption of a satisfactory master plan for sites having an area of more than 4,000 square metres.  A Master Plan has been received for the ongoing development of the UNSW Kensington Campus.  LEP No.17 requires that a master plan address, illustrate and explain a range of matters, where appropriate, including Design Principles drawn from an analysis of the site and its context; Subdivision Pattern; Building Envelopes and Built Form Controls; Heritage Conservation; Impact on, and Improvements to the Public Domain; and Open Space.

 

My previous memo on the preliminary Master Plan provided comments and suggested amendments to the sections of the Master Plan relating to the Old Tote/Fig Tree Theatre Conservation Area, and to the sections of the Master Plan relating to Open Space and Landscaping, Public Domain and Built Form Considerations.

 

The boundaries of the Old Tote/Fig Tree Theatre Conservation Area shown in the LEP map encompass the White House, Old Tote, Fig Tree Theatre, and a group of mature Moreton Bay fig trees, and is consistent with the Statement of Significance prepared by Perumal Murphy Wu.  It is noted that Perumal Murphy Wu have suggested that the University be invited to prepare a conservation management plan for the precinct, as part of its Master Plan for the larger campus.

 

Design and Development Principles

 

The Master Plan should include the specific aim that future development of the Old Tote/Fig Tree Theatre Conservation Area is in keeping with the heritage values of the Heritage Conservation Area.  It is recommended that such a reference to heritage significance be included as a broad principle, in addition to being covered in the Heritage section.

 

Heritage

 

My original memo suggested that the Master Plan should provide a summary Statement of Significance for the Old Tote/Fig Tree Theatre Conservation Area and for the buildings and landscape elements within it.  The current Master Plan has provided a summary Statement of Significance which attributes levels of significance to individual elements within the Conservation Area.

 

A number of concerns remain in relation to the Heritage component of the Master Plan.  The summary Statement of Significance considers that the Fig Tree Theatre has a medium level of historic and social significance, and the Future considerations section of the Master Plan notes that “it is the University’s intention to ensure that any future development within or adjoining the Courtyard does not impact on its heritage significance” and that “the redevelopment potential of the Courtyard  will need to be evaluated in detail prior to the commencement of any works.”  Figure 10- Existing building condition however, indicates possible demolition for the building, and Opportunities and Action sections of the Master Plan notes that four of the buildings within the Courtyard, including the Fig Tree Theatre “may easily be demolished and their occupants relocated elsewhere on campus.”

 

There are concerns that options for demolition and redevelopment within the Conservation Area are being put forward prior to proper consideration of heritage impact.  Amendments to the Future considerations, Constraints, Opportunities and Actions sections of the Master Plan which relate to Heritage are required, and the following requirements should be clarified:

 

§ Prepare a Heritage Impact Assessment report for any proposal within the Conservation Area, including any demolition or construction of new buildings.  (Required under LEP Clause 43(3)  Any new buildings within the Conservation Area should minimise impact on the existing heritage significance of the buildings and landscape features.

 

§ Prepare a Conservation Plan is to guide necessary conservation works to heritage buildings, and in particular the Old Tote Building.  (Required under LEP Clause 48).

 

§ Prepare a Landscape Plan of Management to ensure the ongoing health of the fig trees.

 

It is suggested that the Master Plan also include a requirement for interpretative material on the heritage significance of the Conservation Area, including its history as a Racecourse, Migrant Hostel and part of the National Institute for Dramatic Art.

 

Open Space and Landscaping

 

My original memo suggested that the Master Plan should provide a summary Statement of Significance for the landscape elements within the Old Tote/Fig Tree Theatre Conservation Area.  The current Master Plan has provided a summary Statement of Significance which attributes a high/medium level of historic significance, a high level of aesthetic significance and a medium level of social significance to the Moreton Bay Fig Trees.

 

Public Domain

 

My original memo suggested that the Master Plan should acknowledge the linear character of Anzac Parade as a spine stretching the entire length of Randwick City from Kensington to La Perouse and should seek to maintain the continuity of Anzac Parade, and not treat the roadway as part of the campus.  The current Master Plan has noted that Anzac Parade is a major traffic route that links the campus with the Sydney CBD and the region and that its boulevard character is to be retained and enhanced.

 

6.5       Urban Design Comments

 

Executive Summary

 

The Kensington Campus Master Plan document satisfactorily addresses the general strategic objectives for the UNSW Kensington Campus and sets some broad requirements for uses and required capacities.

 

However, it is essentially a framework for facilities management within the Kensington Campus and, as such, is not a comprehensive Master Plan.  It does not provide a clear set of planning principles sufficient to guide the physical development of the Campus and deliver the overall vision for the place.  Valuable work has gone into this document which should be used as the basis for subsequent and appropriately detailed site specific master planning.

 

It is recommended that such planning be realised in two more ‘sets’ of documents at different scales: an overall Campus Master Plan and Precinct Master Plans.  Together, these documents would enable development to take account of:

 

§ Vision and objectives;

§ Regional, local and site specific context;

§ Opportunities and constraints;

§ Site design principles;

and would result in detailed planning which resolves the principles into a future urban form for the site.

 

It is recommended that the current Master Plan be considered a Strategy, the overarching planning document within which sit the Campus Master Plan and the Precinct Master Plans.

 

Issues and Recommendations

 

1.0       A Master Plan versus a Strategy

 

The Master Plan document generally outlines some written standards and strategic outcomes. It provides a brief analysis of the site in terms of issues such as building works and floor space, student housing, regional and local access, parking, access and circulation on Campus, heritage, open spaces and landscaping, engineering services and public domain. It then generally outlines proposed development actions to be completed within five and ten year's time.

 

The proposed development actions are very general. The main outcome appears to be the identification of preferred redevelopment sites.

 

The rationale behind these redevelopment sites is unclear in terms of whether or not they will actually achieve quality development suitable to the campus as a whole and the surrounding areas. This occurs due to the development actions not necessarily being an outcome of an understanding of the important aspects and urban structure of the site and its surrounds. In addition there is little basis upon which to judge what is quality design or development for the particular sites mentioned within the context of the campus and the surrounding local area.

 

This is not to say that the proposed redevelopment opportunities will not achieve a quality outcome. Rather, the level of analysis, synthesis and documentation of the site and its contextual issues and site design principles arising from this is insufficient in depth or detail to be assured of achieving the desired outcomes or to be able to judge the appropriateness of any redevelopment opportunities.

 

It is recommended that a more appropriate approach may be to consider the document as a Strategy rather than a Master Plan.

This would allow the opportunity for appropriately detailed master planning to take place subsequent to the Strategy where resolution of the general strategic principles within the context of site specific and contextual planning can be adequately addressed and documented through an urban designed based, master planning process.

 

Suggested tiers of planning documents include:

- A Strategy: sets the general objectives for future development;

- A Campus Master Plan: an overall Master Plan for the site analyses and synthesises planning issues and addresses the main urban structuring elements across the site whilst also achieving the general strategic objectives;

- Precinct Master Plans: Master Plans for specific sites, areas or precincts that sit within the Campus Master Plan and in detail realise the objectives of the Strategy.

 

These three tiers of planning would provide all the necessary background and rationale with which to ascertain the appropriateness of development proposals. They would from an important tool for understanding current issues and future directions for the Campus to develop high quality and appropriate public domain and built form both now and in 5 and 10 years time.

 

2.0       The Campus Master Plan included with the Strategy

 

If the recommendation to consider the current document a Strategy is adopted, it is also suggested that it would be greatly strengthened with the development of the Campus Master Plan in concurrence with the Strategy.

 

This would provide the necessary level of site specific information to be able to ascertain the appropriateness of any new development sites on the campus.

 

3.0       The components of a Master Plan

 

A Master Plan is a drawn and annotated document that represents the resolution of a sites regional, local and site specific physical, social and economic opportunities and constraints into a future urban form for the site.

 

Master Plans should be developed by experienced urban designers.

In summary a Master Plan contains:

•           Objectives;

•           Regional, local and site specific analysis;

•           Opportunities and constraints;

•           Site design principles;

•           A plan of the principles resolved into a future urban form for the site.

 

A Campus Master Plan would detail an understanding of the important urban structuring elements of the site and its surrounding context. The site itself would necessitate specific responses but as a start this may include:

 

- Views from, to, around and into the site and from it's surrounding context;

- The visual character and improvements to important surrounding and internal streets, parks, open spaces;

- A hierarchy of pedestrian access and movement;

- A hierarchy of uses;

- A hierarchy of traffic circulation and parking;

- A hierarchy of built form, character and scale;

- Maintaining neighbouring residential amenity;

- Landscape character;

- A hierarchy of social and cultural spaces;

- Precincts;

- Public domain plan.

 

The Master Plan would provide the necessary framework with which to develop more detailed Precinct Master Plans or to assess the appropriateness of larger development proposals.

 

4.0       General comments on the structure of the document

 

The document outlines the history of the site.  The document then runs through an analysis of various components of the site. The following topics are covered; existing conditions, opportunities and constraints, outcomes and actions.

 

For each site component accompanying plan diagrams visually describe the existing condition of the site. The diagrams, although being labelled 'existing' start to indicate potential development opportunities within the campus and step beyond just describing the current condition of the campus.

 

This makes the diagrams and information confusing and disparate throughout the document.

 

The definition between analysis, opportunities/constraints, design principles and design proposals could be more clearly delineated. This could be achieved by following a master planning process where thorough analysis underpins design and decision making a holistic for the future of the site.

 

Additionally, although the analysis undertaken is thorough, the topics covered could be much more in-depth and be extended to include the following topics:

 

- Views and visual character;

- Activities and uses;

- Street hierarchy and character;

- Built form character and scale;

- Precinct character.

 

Under these headings it is recommended that analysis, opportunities/constraints, site-specific design principles and site specific design resolutions are all clearly separated.

 

6.6       Social Planners Comments

 

Safety of Students and Public on Campus

 

This issue is not addressed separately in the Master Plan and mentioned only briefly in relation to an identified lack of safety on Anzac Parade. Safety issues have been identified by Student Associations as a significant issue on campus, particularly for female students on campus at night. What strategies has the University in place to address this issue and how will the demand for safety related services (such as UNSW buses) that will result from an increasing resident student population on campus be addressed?

 

Equity in Education

 

Under the heading of Academic Context, University Funding, the Master Plan notes that the university is considering a range of options to address the funding difficulties faced by Australian universities, including UNSW. Two of the options identified are the ‘Greater ability to charge student fees’ and the ‘Commercialisation of educational services and intellectual property’.

 

Private expenditure on education in Australia, that is, the costs borne by students and their families, are already significantly greater than in other OECD countries, for example. Increasing the burden of private educational costs is likely to further disadvantage students and families of low socio-economic status (SES).  This may result in reducing the accessibility of university education to persons of low SES and a concomitant range of adverse social consequences. In a similar way the increasing commercialisation of education services may result in higher costs to students, with adverse consequences from an equity perspective.

 

 

Support Services for students and staff

 

It is positive that there appears to be adequate recognition in the Master Plan of the need for support and other services on campus for students and staff. It is important that these services be located in an accessible fashion across the entire Kensington campus. High student demand for facilities such as ATMS should be accounted for, and also the need for access to reasonably priced food outlets that cater to the needs of students from a range of cultures, particularly the high proportion of Asian students on campus.

 

Student Accommodation

 

The Master Plan notes that ‘students have expressed a desire for broader types of accommodation being made available to them in buildings that have larger bedroom sizes and a range of associated amenities’. It is important that expressed student needs such as this be taken account of in the design of new student accommodation and refurbishment of existing student accommodation on campus.

 

The issue of affordability of accommodation to students is important. Many are on limited incomes as their study commitment permits only part-time work. It is positive that UNSW has undertaken to charge rents that are below market rates for on –campus accommodation.

 

The Public Domain

 

It is positive that UNSW has considered the needs of local residents and the general public, in addition to those of students and staff. RCC supports consideration of community outreach through public use of campus facilities and community orientated services, programs and activities of the University. RCC supports the University’s intention to expand community outreach facilities in the future. It is anticipated that additional details in this regard will be provided at the DA stage.

 

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 Draft Master Plan generally discusses the relevant matters provided by Clause 40 of the RLEP. The application identifies areas where improvements are required to meet functional, statutory and best practice outcomes and considers appropriate responses to these requirements. The document has had regard to a wide range of issues and responds to these in a favourable manner but only with broad statement of intent rather than specific development criteria. The document lacks detail in its discussion of key master planning issues such as building envelope and built form controls. These issues will need to be addressed in a revised document to Council.

 

7.2       Design Principles

 

The Draft Master Plan sets Design and Development criteria relating to Spatial Form, Built Form, Infrastructure, Location Criteria and Ecologically Sustainable Development. These statements are intended to guide future development of the Campus and ensure it meets the expectations of the both the University and the wider community.

 

The draft document addresses spatial form by providing guidance in relation to access and circulation, such as reducing the number of car journeys generated by the University and that pedestrian routes and shared zones at least comply with Australian Standards for accessibility. This initiative needs to be supported in the document by plans and diagrams which indicate how they might be achieved as described in the UDS comments.

 

Built form principles include the retention of the predominant east-west, north-south orientation of buildings, buildings must have setbacks, design, height and scale that is sensitive to adjacent buildings and minimise overshadowing and impacts on residential properties. Buildings are also to be designed in accordance with relevant Australian Standards for accessibility and buildings are thermally efficient as possible and air conditioning is minimised. These principles are considered to be appropriate but again they need to be supported by built form controls that ensure the attainment of these desired outcomes.

 

The following principle is but one example of the content of the Draft Master Plan.

 

“Where possible, new buildings complete or create courtyards and are linked with existing buildings”. 

 

This statement is generic in terms of design and may not represent the best outcome for some sites on Campus. The courtyard building form can present security issues depending on the size of courtyard and the number of rooms which overlook the area. Linkages to existing buildings can be beneficial, however in some cases they can lead to a confusion of circulation. The Draft Master Plan identifies redevelopment sites but stops short of applying the statement and determining whether it is appropriate in each particular circumstance. The form of new buildings based on this statement should be annotated on these sites so that a full assessment of their appropriateness in the context and of the security, design and environmental implications of this form in the particular locations can be made. These forms need to be indicated in the revised Master Plan document.

 

Desirable outcomes for Infrastructure include the provision of underground service tunnels for the accommodation of engineering services, the monitoring of energy usage to identify requirements for infrastructure changes and that new and refurbished buildings are designed to minimise environmental impacts. The undergrounding of infrastructure is appropriate to achieving the beautification of the campus and the extension of the existing service tunnel will increase access to these services for ongoing maintenance.

 

Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) principles are considered within ten categories. In terms of planning, design and construction the principles promise the incorporation of environmental factors in all project briefs for design, construction and infrastructure works, flexibility in the design of buildings, the prevention of soil erosion and that off-site impacts of construction and material wastage and spillage are minimised. Energy efficiency principles include the use of renewable energy wherever possible. Access and circulation can contribute to ESD principles through encouragement of pedestrian movement and the management of travel demand to encourage use of sustainable modes of transport such as public transport, cycling and walking.

 

Water conservation outcomes include an undertaking to minimise stormwater pollution and the reuse of ‘greywater’. Air quality principles aim to minimise greenhouse gas emissions and improvement of indoor air quality through design of buildings. Waste management is based on maximising the collection, processing and reuse of recycled organics.

 

Landscaping principles to further ESD outcomes include increasing the amount of landscaping to provide amenity and improve microclimate conditions, and reducing the amount of energy and waste required for the landscaping of the Campus. Environmental criteria are also to be incorporated into the purchasing and procurement policies and practices of the University. The ESD design principles, and subsequent sections of the Draft Master Plan do not address targets, standards and controls adequately to support the achievement of the objectives in this section of the document. Standards need to be developed and included in a revised document.

 

The document also provides principles in relation to landscaping and site works. These principles include forming a clear hierarchy throughout the campus of formal and informal spaces and reinforcing the green edge of the campus. No detailed landscaping plans or reservations for improved access into the Campus is provided by the Draft Master Plan.  The document relies on these being resolved at a later design stage. Included in the Master Plan should be a Landscape Plan that addresses each of the design principles by way of sketches and design controls and which encompasses on overall urban design strategy for the campus.  This strategy should be clearly articulated showing details in the plan.

 

The intended design outcomes are generally appropriate, however the Draft Master Plan lacks adequate details and controls to guide future development but has made no assessment as to the size and location of the most appropriate land uses.

 

7.3       Phasing of Development

 

The Master Plan does not addresses phasing of campus redevelopment in detail, but does provide a list of proposed actions over five (5) and ten (10) year timeframes. The Master Plan is intended to have a five year lifespan, being reviewed, updated and resubmitted to Randwick City Council every five years to ensure ongoing consistency with current best practice, funding and statutory requirements.

 

7.4       Distribution of Land Uses

 

The Draft Master Plan has addressed the distribution of land uses, proposing indicative locations for community uses, open space, student housing, car parking and new educational facilities. The Draft Master Plan estimates the amount of floor space that will be required to meet future needs of students and indicates potential areas where expansion/ redevelopment can occur. These areas have been designated on the basis of building condition and age, underutilised sites and functional efficiencies.

 

The Draft Master Plan proposes new educational and research buildings on the lower campus, the L5 site and the western campus and refurbishment of existing buildings on the upper and middle campuses. These locations are consistent with the existing land uses on the site and will provide the additional floor space required without significantly reducing existing open space. The concentration of these uses on the Campus also has benefits for access, security and surveillance objectives.

 

The Draft Master Plan indicates that expansion of existing student housing is required to meet demand. This includes the refurbishment of existing accommodation and the provision of new housing within the Old Tote Courtyard, lower campus and western campus. The Old Tote Courtyard and lower campus are adjacent to existing student housing provision and is consistent with the development of a residential precinct with appropriate amenity whilst being ‘on campus’. New development in the Old Tote Courtyard must have regard to its status as a Heritage Conservation Area and associated heritage items. It is likely that sensitively designed buildings of a residential scale, rather than large educational buildings, will be able to complement and enhance the heritage value of this area. The western campus adjoins residential areas to the west. The provision of student housing in this location will be compatible with surrounding land uses.

 

Retail and commercial land uses are proposed in the redevelopment of the Western Campus. The western campus has a large frontage to Anzac Parade and the incorporation of commercial uses in this location will increase the variety of development along Anzac Parade, improve amenity for students and staff and provide a revenue stream for the University.  Any future development of commercial activity along Anzac Parade needs to consider the viability of existing centres and the important urban design elements of Anzac Parade.  The master plan does not adequately address the possible location and size of such development including building envelopes and controls.  The revised master plan should provide much greater detail on any development that proposes an interface with the public domain such as road frontage and where the University Campus adjoins privately owned land.

 

The Draft Master Plan indicates the location of new and expanded car parking uses to the perimeter of the site. This location will allow for vehicular traffic to be minimised within the Campus. The location of parking stations on the perimeter of the Campus will require detailed consideration of streetscape and design in their construction and materials, particularly on the proposed High Street site. Options for providing underground parking in this location should also be explored. Additional safety measures at High Street may also be required as high levels of pedestrian and vehicular traffic occur in the vicinity of the proposed car park site. In order to turn right into the new car park, traffic approaching the car park from Anzac Parade will require queuing space and possibly a reduction in on street parking to ensure through traffic, particularly buses, can flow around queuing vehicles.

 

A revised master plan should include greater consideration of the size and location of future buildings in this precinct.  It should consider appropriate streetscape controls to ensure the delivery of a high quality urban design outcome in High Street.

 

Community uses are proposed within the redevelopment of the lower campus. This is consistent with the existing publicly accessible facilities such as the UniGym. Community facilities increase the public visibility and accessibility of the University. Collocation of these facilities can improve the security of University buildings and the Campus. Concentrating out of hours use to a limited area reduces the locations requiring security patrols and increases the numbers of passers-by, providing casual surveillance.

 

The location of open spaces on the Campus has not been addressed in detail by the Draft Master Plan. New major open spaces are not specifically proposed, although the draft document requires the inclusion of a variety of open spaces in the redevelopment of the Old Tote Courtyard, Lower Campus and L5 site. The location of open spaces and the connections between them are important to the overall design of the Campus. Detail on the shape, orientation and linkages of the open spaces to these sites is to be included in the revised document.

 

Although the Draft Master Plan does include proposed locations for various uses the document does not provide proposed densities or details of the proposed composition of increased educational uses and student housing on campus. Whilst there is no FSR requirement for this site these densities may be useful in determining facilities and infrastructure planning and requirements and conditions should require these details in the revised Master Plan document.

 

7.5       Building Envelopes and Built Form Controls

 

The Draft Master Plan indicates demolition and redevelopment of the lower, western campuses and L5 site in the next five years. Specific building envelopes and built form controls based on the analysis of the site and context were not included in the Draft Master Plan document. There are no existing statutory height or floor space ratio (FSR) controls for sites within the Special Uses zone except for the provision of housing.

 

Built form controls should indicate passive solar design and natural ventilation principles in block layout, orientation and planned intended form. Built form must be considered in terms of orientation, alignment and separation at a precinct and a campus level and should also consider future open spaces and developments. The detailing of building forms should reflect the type and use of buildings in the context of the campus hierarchy. The Master Plan also needs to indicate the intended appearance of buildings - elements textures, materials and colours.

 

The appearance of buildings should be derived from the buildings context, use and the desired character of the precinct. The Master Plan should establish the desired character of precincts and distinguish between those areas that are to undergo transition (promoting a new character), and those which are to have the existing character retained and enhanced.

 

Controls that are often used to establish the scale and shape of proposed buildings, and should be considered by the Master Plan for open spaces and proposed redevelopment sites are:

§ Building Height

§ Building Footprint

§ Building Depth

§ Façade Length

§ Setbacks

§ Building Expression

§ Security

§ ESD principles

§ Streetscape controls in terms of scale, activation of ground level, articulation of entry to campus/ campus identity and to individual buildings, pedestrian and vehicular separation

 

The current document does not set some clear criteria for development of the Campus where it adjoins private land or has a frontage to a public road.  This is considered a fundamental role of a master Plan and should be addressed by including some built form controls in the revised plan.

 

In particular, the campus shares a boundary with a number of properties along the western edge of the campus.  The privately owned properties have frontages to Doncaster Avenue with yards abutting the campus.

 

This area is particularly sensitive to the size of the buildings that result from the redevelopment of the western campus.  At present there are a number of mature trees along this boundary, which would need retention, not only for their environmental and aesthetic value, but also because of the screening that they provide.  Any development along this interface should be setback sufficiently to protect the root base of the trees and to ensure adequate solar access and privacy for the dwellings.

 

Heights of buildings will also need to be constrained to ensure the same outcomes.  The tree canopy forms a well-defined screen and any new development should not exceed the height of these trees to any significant extent, and certainly not at the expense of the amenity of the adjoining properties.

 

Consistent with the urban design comments provided by UDAS it is considered that the Master Plan document should be supplemented with these details.  Conditions relating to the revised document should include details of urban design considerations, built form and building envelope controls based on the information presented in the Draft Master Plan and the desired character of the precincts and campus. These requirements are detailed in section 8.

 

7.6       Heritage Conservation

 

The subject site contains heritage items of aesthetic, historic and social value. A Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) also exists on the site. The Old Tote HCA and the heritage items contained within it is the subject of future redevelopment proposals under the Master Plan. Council’s heritage officer has provided comment in relation to the Draft Master Plan, and proposes inclusions to ensure that Heritage is adequately addressed in the Master Plan and in future development applications. These include the preparation of a Conservation Plan and a Landscape Plan of Management. A full list of the proposed heritage amendments is provided in the recommendations section of this report.

 

7.7       Infrastructure Provision

 

The infrastructure provisions of the Draft Master Plan largely relate to the ongoing upgrading and maintenance of existing services to ensure all areas of the campus can be adequately serviced. The draft document raises health and amenity, environmental and future capacity issues that require upgrading of existing sewer and stormwater systems within the next five (5) years. Existing service tunnels will also be extended in the five (5) year plan to support the redevelopment of the lower campus. These works are considered to be consistent with ESD principles, as described by the draft document, and the undergrounding of services will minimise surface disruption as a result of the works and improve the appearance of the campus.

 

The Draft Master Plan indicates locations for future infrastructure provisions such as substations and cogeneration sites. Cogeneration uses natural gas to generate electricity, resulting in the emission of less greenhouse gasses than traditional electricity production. Campus infrastructure needs to be upgraded and maintained to ensure that it is environmentally sustainable and can meet functional requirements across the whole campus. The Draft Master Plan includes these objectives. The draft document provides that Annual Greenhouse gas emission abatement targets under the Greenhouse Challenge Agreement are to be achieved.

 

The Master Plan does not include objectives nor controls related to the design and siting of large-scale surface infrastructure such as substations or cogeneration plants. These elements should be sited and designed so as not to detract from the air quality, visual and acoustic amenity of the Campus. Opportunities for education, especially with regard to the cogeneration technology, through thoughtful design of these structures should be explored. They must be constructed to minimise impacts on surrounding areas, buildings and uses.

 

7.8       Pedestrian, cycle and road access and circulation and public transport

 

The Draft Master Plan incorporates general objectives which aim to improve pedestrian and bicycle access whilst reducing reliance on cars. The Draft Master Plan indicates that the UNSW will negotiate with other agencies to achieve new bus routes etc. While there is a need for cooperation between agencies, the UNSW is in a position to take a proactive approach. The Draft Master Plan supports the provision of a heavy and/or light rail connection to the campus but does not reserve land for the provision of an on-site station. The station needs to be located appropriately and linked to higher densities and concentrations of uses to ensure its effectiveness. The reduction of car parking supply is noted as contributing to public transport use, however this is a more negative strategy than more encouraging solutions such as the proposed introduction of “smartcard” technology for student cards and consideration of public transport concessions being included in staff remuneration, both of which are proposed outcomes of the draft document. These types of positive inducements to use public transport should be considered further. Other areas where UNSW could contribute to improving public transport without capital outlay such as timetabling to avoid peak periods may also alleviate congestion and improve the regularity of service, and should be further explored.

 

The draft document does not provide detailed plans of proposed roads/ pedestrian paths or the character of these roads and their detailing in order to ensure that they are safe and attractive places to walk. The access plan does not provide details of buildings that may terminate vistas, axis and other devices which promote ‘way finding’. Streets and paths should be connected, particularly through the design of building footprints to eliminate dead ends and create a clear perception of connectivity. The Master Plan needs to consider how paths of travel and desire lines can be best linked to outside paths and streets and how entry points on these paths of travel can be emphasised and designed to increase the identity of the UNSW.

 

The Master Plan should identify areas that will require special attention to overcome issues of accessibility. The Master Plan should also clearly identify areas where improvements in safety, convenience, lighting, signage and weather protection are required.

 

With regard to cycling the Draft Master Plan provides that negotiations with the Randwick City Council to implement the Randwick Bicycle Plan will continue. The Draft Master Plan provides details of current bike paths and parking on the Main Campus but does not detail how these may be further improved or encouraged.

 

The Draft Master Plan does not indicate specific traffic management measures that could improve safety, nor the implications of the proposed redevelopments on the lower campus. The Western and L5 sites will require detailed consideration to ensure safety and access is maintained in such close proximity to Anzac Parade. Details of access improvements and controls are to be addressed in conditions relating to the revised Master Plan document.

 

7.9       Parking Provision

 

The Draft Master Plan aims to reduce reliance on cars and consequently reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the demand for car parking. The Draft Master Plan also notes the impact parking has on surrounding residential streets and the cumulative impact of the University and nearby Hospital uses. The draft document also aims to increase “greening” of the campus via the removal of surface parking in favour of multi-storey car parking in designated locations. Whilst removal of surface parking is desirable, options for undergrounding of this provision is preferable to above ground parking structures. Underground parking is proposed in the redevelopment of the Western and L5 campuses. The impact of the proposed multi storey car park at High Street and the additions to existing parking at Barker Street have not been addressed in terms of potential streetscape, traffic management and safety issues. These issues are to be addressed in conditions relating to the revised Master Plan.

 

The Draft Master Plan recognises that discouragement of car use through reduced parking provision shouldn’t be relied upon to increase public transport use and more proactive measures must be implemented. Details of parking numbers versus floor space may be useful in determining requirements, the impact of public transport use and so measures can be made against the Randwick Parking DCP and RTA guidelines. The composition of existing parking and detailed investigations into how students currently use parking, to establish the turnover of spaces and how this might impact the required number of spaces, requires further study. Timetabling and other non-physical strategies may then be used to moderate parking provision/ requirements and ensure parking needs is accommodated without over-provision.

 

7.10     Provision of Public Facilities

 

The provision of community facilities has been considered. The University currently allows public access to child care, sports, entertainment, library, retail facilities and open spaces on the campus. The University also provides programs and services to the wider community and contributes to local businesses through the influx of students into the area. Future provision of these facilities is indicated in the redevelopment of the lower campus, but community access could also activate, enhance and increase public awareness of the Old Tote Courtyard HCA. The Draft Master Plan maintains and enhances the existing commitment to public facilities by aiming to expand the opportunities for use of facilities and attendance at programs by the community.

 

7.11     The Public Domain

 

The Draft Master Plan focuses on the provision of community facilities in relation to the public domain. Whilst these areas do contribute to the public perception of the University, they are not typically considered to encompass all aspects of the “public domain”. The Master Plan document must consider the broader context of the public domain such as, the relationship of the Campus to surrounding uses and urban design principles. The internal ‘public domain’ of the open spaces and buildings of the university campus should also be considered.

 

The Draft Master Plan makes reference to Anzac Parade and the enhancement of its boulevard character, but does not refer to the character of the Campus in relation to other areas directly outside the site, such as the Hospital, racecourse and residential areas. The perimeter of the campus and the desired future character of this edge – being a transitional zone or intentional contrast at certain points has not been discussed or outlined. Improvements to the presentation of the Campus from the street, High Street and Botany street in particular have not been considered adequately in terms of improving through site linkages and determining desire lines and where entries to the campus should be placed and emphasised through design.

 

The Draft Master Plan does not detail future scale of development in terms of the number of storeys for buildings or the scale relationships between existing and proposed buildings. The issue of scale needs to be addressed to ensure the public domain is a visually attractive and comfortable place to be, from both outside and within the Campus perimeter. The scale of buildings assists in improving the legibility of the public domain by providing forms for visual prominence and improving identification and way finding. Building scale is also crucial in providing solar access. The revised Master Plan should set the desired scale of building across the campus. Desired characters for different precincts are to be set to enable the continued promotion and enhancement of these characters in future development of the Campus and its public domain.

 

The development of a revised Master Plan document must address the public domain and how the Kensington Campus is to contribute to its enhancement through design.

 

7.12     Open Space and Landscaping

 

As discussed previously in this report, open space and landscaping have been covered in the DCP in terms of objectives such as the provision of greater areas of planting and the development of a greater variety of open spaces on campus. The Draft Master Plan lacks detail on how these objectives are to be achieved. With the redevelopment of several areas proposed, open space reservations should be stipulated now to ensure that building footprints allow adequate areas of open space. The reservation of future open space areas would also represent a strategic approach to the provision of such spaces ensuring that they meet objectives for access, cross linkages on the site, security, solar access and the protection and enhancement of vistas.

 

The Draft Master Plan describes these elements in principle but does not demonstrate how they will be achieved. Vistas are mentioned as important elements however the Draft Master Plan does not identify buildings, or elements which are important terminations of existing vistas to be preserved, nor where redevelopment opportunities may reveal new vistas or enhance them. Landscape design can incorporate vistas to enhance “way finding” on the campus and emphasise the dramatic topography of site and provide a unique character for the campus. The connectivity of existing and proposed open spaces and opportunities for greater connectivity across the campus has not been identified in detail.

 

The Moreton Bay Fig trees on the site are classified as heritage items and must be retained. Open spaces and landscaping schemes must reinforce security and have regard to pedestrian and vehicular safety.

 

A landscaping plan indicating the location of open space areas and incorporating desired vistas and planting schemes is to be required in conditions relating to the revised Master Plan document as described in section of this report.

 

7.13     Native Flora and Fauna

 

The Kensington Campus was previously used for various purposes including Kensington Racecourse, a golf course and oval. These previous uses removed native flora from the site. The continued and increased use of the site for educational and ancillary purposes will not have a significant impact on any existing native flora or fauna communities in the area. The Draft Master Plan addresses landscaping, however does not provide any details of proposed species, which (if native) may contribute to re-establishing urban communities of some native animals.

 

Landscaping plans should be required in the revised Master Plan and should at least incorporate details of appropriate native species that are to be included in landscaping schemes for the site. This requirement has been included in the recommendations of section 8 of this report.

 

7.14     Ecologically sustainable development

 

The University has shown a commitment to the principles of ESD in teaching and research (through the establishment of Solarch and the Recycled Organics Unit) and in its operation. UNSW is a signatory to the Talloires Declaration and to a Greenhouse Challenge Agreement with the Commonwealth Government. The Draft Master Plan identifies key areas where sustainability can be improved and provides objectives for these.

 

The University’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet targets set by external parties (such as the Greenhouse Challenge Agreement) is positive, however in addition to these strategic agreements, controls should also be established at a basic level, such as stipulating building form and depth controls to ensure solar access and natural ventilation and the use of a benchmark such as a NatHERs rating for new and refurbished buildings to monitor sustainability at more frequent intervals, than provided by the agreements and ensure targets are being achieved. These benchmarks are to be included in the revised Master Plan document.

 

7.15     Impact on adjoining properties

 

The redevelopment of the Main Campus will be unlikely to have a significant impact on surrounding residential areas due to the separation provided by roads and the types of uses proposed nearby residential areas, such as student housing. Notwithstanding the current separation, building envelopes are to have regard to solar access, privacy and visual impact on adjoining residential zones. Buildings are to be designed to meet the requirements of AMCORD, the Model Code and other residential best practice documents with regard to the amenity of surrounding residential properties. The provision of additional on campus car parking areas will assist in reducing the impact of the University on resident access to on-street parking.

 

The Western Campus and L5 sites are adjacent to small and medium scale residential zones. Building envelopes in these areas must have regard to the issue of residential amenity and must not cause significant impacts. The redevelopment of these sites will require careful consideration of the change in scale between Anzac Parade and residential zones behind. Development on these sites is to act as a buffer between the heavily trafficked Anzac Parade and the small scale residential uses to the west, whilst maintaining a streetscape presence and identity to Anzac Parade. Redevelopment of these sites must also be of a scale which is compatible with residential development behind.

 

In order to ensure residential amenity, development of these sites must meet the Randwick residential DCP requirements for solar access and overlooking to residential properties to the rear and must be of a scale that is appropriate to the existing buildings adjacent to the western boundary of the western and L5 sites. The design and redevelopment of these sites must also limit the visual impacts of redevelopment on properties to the west.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

It is considered that the proposed Master Plan is more a strategy document that forms a sound basis for the development of character and built form studies and controls for the site and its relationship with surrounding development in terms of height, set backs, façade treatment and landscaping.  Despite this, Council is in a position where it must consider whether to adopt the Draft Master Plan, with or without conditions or take the more definitive step and simply refuse the application.  Refusal will allow the UNSW to subsequently lodge development applications and remove the ability of Council to consider those elements of the Master Plan that have merit.

 

The assessment has carefully considered the master plan requirements and the document prepared by the University of NSW. A number of changes are required to meet the requirements of clause 40(A) of the Randwick LEP 1998. After consideration of these issues, the Master Plan is recommended for revision to include more detailed provisions in line with the urban design comments provided to Council.  This option at least will give Council the ability to consider both the broad environmental goals in the plan as well as inclusion of the following recommended changes.

 

The Kensington Campus Master Plan has merit and should be revised and resubmitted in accordance will the following variations as outlined below.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council approve the submitted Master Plan for the Kensington Campus of the University of NSW, subject to the following revisions:

 

1.       Any future development applications in the lower or western campus’ must be accompanied by an urban design study prepared by a qualified urban design professional which outlines the proposal’s compatibility with the surrounding built environment and the overall strategic growth of the campus as outlined in the Master Plan.  The urban design studies must include:

·          Building envelopes and performance criteria which address, at minimum, building heights, footprints, building depth, façade length, setbacks, building expression, security, ESD principles, open space, landscaping and street scape.

·          Details of improvements and controls relating to transport including pedestrian and bicycle movement and how the proposal impacts on the matters both in the immediate environs of the proposed new development but also with the strategic direction outlined by the University Master Plan.

·          The design considerations given to the public domain including the connectivity and design of any areas and the relationship these areas have with the broader campus.

·          A site analysis plan, which indicated how the proposal has considered and resolved issues relating to open space and landscaping including important vistas and surveillance issues.

2.       The performance criteria for the transition zone on the western campus boundary will limit development along the residential interface to the height of the existing tree line and ensure setbacks that preserve the root zone of the existing vegetation whilst maintaining solar access and privacy for the adjoining residential properties.

3.        The Draft Master Plan be revised to acknowledge the need for future development applications to be accompanied by the landscape plan of management which identifies landscape solutions for the proposal and the consistency of these solutions with strategic directions for landscaping identified in this report and the Master Plan.

4.       The Master Plan revision must ensure that development on this campus embodies the principles of SEPP 65, which control the design of certain buildings, and the performance criteria in AMCORD that protect privacy and solar access to adjoining residential properties.

5.       The Master to be revised to include a requirements for a requirement for a transport analysis to accompany future development applications for new development.  The analysis should identify the proposal’s compliance with the strategic transport solutions for the Campus and the cumulative impacts of the proposal on parking and traffic issues in the vicinity of the University.

6.       The Master Plan be revised to note that any future development applications will be required to indicate the impact of the proposal on the surrounding areas and the connectivity with the surrounding vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian networks.

7.       The Master Plan to be revised to include the following engineering requirements covering drainage and stormwater:

 

Drainage and Stormwater

 

o New gross pollutant traps will be required on all stormwater pipelines that drain the site to the Council stormwater system.

o For future re-developed areas of the campus:-

o Be required for the areas that will drain to High and Botany Streets.

o Not be required for the areas that will drain to corner of Anzac Parade and Barker Street except where the impervious area is increased.

o To help replenish the ground water, infiltrating stormwater to ground will also be encouraged by:-

o Landscaping areas and permeable paving be used where appropriate.

o A minimum of 10m2  of infiltration provided where appropriate.

o New gross pollutant traps should be located on the pipelines adjacent to Warrene College M7 and the Australian Graduate School of Management G27.

o Install new gross pollutant traps at Village Green, Anzac Parade and Botany Street to further reduce pollution to the RCC stormwater system.

 

8.         The Master Plan be revised to note that any  future development applications are to include a stormwater management plan, which highlights the proposal’s consistency with stormwater actions and outcomes outlined in the Master Plan.

9.         The Master Plan is to acknowledge the role of the Department of Land and Water Conservation in approving extraction of Borewater and all appropriate approvals for extraction are to be obtained.

10.       The Master Plan is to include the specific aim that future development of the Old Tote / Fig Tree Theatre Conservation Area is in keeping with the heritage values of the Heritage Conservation Area.  This reference to heritage significance is to be included as a broad principle, in addition to being covered in the Heritage section.

11.       A Heritage Impact Assessment report must be prepared for any proposal within the Conservation Area, including any demolition or construction of new buildings in accordance with LEP clause 43(3).  Any new buildings within the Conservation Area must minimise impact on the existing heritage significance of the buildings and landscape features.

12.       A Conservation Plan is to be prepared to guide necessary conservation works to heritage buildings, and in particular the Old Tote Building, as required under LEP clause 48.

13.       A Landscape Plan of Management is to be prepared to ensure the ongoing health of the fig trees.

14.       The Master Plan is to include a requirement for interpretative material on the heritage significance of the Conservation Area, including its history as a Racecourse, Migrant Hostel and part of the National Institute for Dramatic Art to be prepared and displayed.

15.       The Draft Master Plan be revised to show the location of major infrastructure project and the size, location and setbacks required to ensure the infrastructure does not impact on surrounding land uses.

 

The application is to provide an amended Master Plan document, incorporating the variations listed above, prior to determination of any development application.  The required changes to the Master Plan shall include new and reworded principles, revised diagrams, and reworked development concept to the appropriate sections in the Master Plan as outlined in this report including the comments made by the Urban Design Advisory Service.  This approval extends for a 5 year period from the date of Council’s determination.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

STUART HARDING

ACTING DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

WILLANA ASSOCIATES