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

 

12th December, 2003

 

EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT AN EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANDWICK WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, TOWN HALL, 90 AVOCA STREET, RANDWICK, ON TUESDAY, 16TH DECEMBER, 2003 AT 6:00 P.M.

 

1          Council Prayer

 

2          Apologies

 

3          Addresses to the Council by the Public

 

4          Mayoral Minutes

 

5          General Manager’s Reports

 

5.1                        

GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT 35/2003 - TENDER 25/2003 MANAGEMENT & OPERATION OF SNAPE PARK TENNIS CENTRE.

2

 

5.2                        

GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT 36/2003 - MAROUBRA SWIMMING CLUB - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.

4

 

 

6           Director Assets & Infrastructure Services' Reports

 

6.1                      

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES' REPORT 78/2003 - SALE OF LAND ADJACENT 276 DONCASTER AVENUE, KINGSFORD.

10

 

6.2                      

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES' REPORT 79/2003 - TENDER T13/03 WEED CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE OF SELECTED PARKS.

13

 

6.3                      

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES' REPORT 80/2003 - DENISON STREET,  MATRAVILLE - TRANSFER OF ROAD TO COUNCIL OWNERSHIP.

18

 

6.4                        

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES' REPORT 81/2003 - UNDERGROUND CABLING MARINE PARADE BETWEEN UNDINE STREET AND WILSON STREET, MAROUBRA.

20

 

6.5                        

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES' REPORT 82/2003 - KENSINGTON / WEST KINGSFORD LOCAL AREA TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SCHEME.

23

 

6.6                        

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES' REPORT 83/2003 - LIFT SERVICE UPGRADE AND MAINTENANCE.

30

 

 

 

 

7           Director Governance Management & Information Services'  Report

 

7.1                        

DIRECTOR GOVERNANCE, MANAGEMENT & INFORMATION SERVICES’ REPORT 34/2003 - COUNCILS ONLINE - PROGRESS REPORT.

34

 

8                      Director Planning & Community Development's Reports

 

8.1                        

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 105/2003 - 39-47 ST PAUL'S STREET, RANDWICK.

37

 

8.2                        

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 106/2003 - 1599-1601 ANZAC PARADE, LA PEROUSE.

69

 

8.3                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 107/2003 - 14 - 16 DAINTREY CRESCENT AND 4 DUDLEY STREET, RANDWICK.

160

 

8.4                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 108/2003 - 63 GALE ROAD MAROUBRA.

264

 

8.5                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 109/2003 - 219 MAROUBRA ROAD MAROUBRA.

286

 

8.6                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 111/2003 - 801-899 BUNNERONG ROAD, CHIFLEY - WOMENS ATHLETIC FIELD.

370

 

8.7                        

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 112/2003 - 1-81 Little Bay Road LITTLE BAY.

419

 

8.8                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 113/2003 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 830/2003 FOR THE RELOCATION OF JARRAH HOUSE, PRINCE HENRY HOSPITAL SITE, 1430 ANZAC PARADE, LITTLE BAY.

492

 

8.9                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 114/2003 - 495-503 BUNNERONG ROAD, MATRAVILLE.

550

 

8.10                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 115/2003 - 1430 ANZAC PARADE LITTLE BAY - PRINCE HENRY HOSPITAL SITE.  (Report to be circularised prior to the Meeting.)

628

 


 

8.11                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 116/2003 - SEPP 65 - DESIGN REVIEW PANEL INTRODUCTION OF NEW FEE.

629

 

8.12                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 118/2003 - PRINCE HENRY SITE - DRAFT LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN (AMENDMENT NO. 28) AND DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN.

632

 

8.13                      

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 119/2003 - DCP NO. 11 - 3-21 WOLSELEY ROAD  AND DCP NO. 15 - MAROUBRA JUNCTION COMMERCIAL CENTRE.

644

 

 

9           Motions Pursuant to Notice

 

9.1                      

By Councillor Matson – Lack of Notification Prior to Removal of Street Trees in Athol Street, Coogee.  

646

9.2

By Councillor Matson – Malabar Headland Development Application.

646

 

 

10         Confidential Report

 

10.1                        

CONFIDENTIAL DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT 117/2003 - 35 KNOX STREET, CLOVELLY.

647

 

 

11         Committee-of-the-Whole

 

12         Report of the Committee-of-the-Whole

 

13         Notice of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

GENERAL MANAGER


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 35/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

TENDER 25/2003 MANAGEMENT & OPERATION OF SNAPE PARK TENNIS CENTRE

 

 

DATE:

11 December, 2003

FILE NO:

98/S/5088

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 October 2003, it was resolved to authorise the General Manager to negotiate with D&M Toomey for the operation of Snape Park Tennis centre and that “a report is brought to Council at the earliest possible meeting, regarding the outcomes of negotiations for the Snape Park lease, and proposed recommendations to finalise the Snape Park Tender”.

 

ISSUES:

 

Following a discussion with D&M Toomey, a proposal was submitted to Council. The proposal did not allow for any benefit to Council and it was decided to decline the offer.

 

There is still a requirement to undertake urgent and costly refurbishment of the Snape Park Tennis Centre before it can be successfully marketed as a viable tennis complex. It is intended that funding will be requested in the 2004/05 Budget to undertake a capital programme. The tender can be put out again in 2004.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Authority was given by Council (under s19(3)(e) of the Local Government (Tendering) Regulation 1999) to the General Manager to negotiate with D&M Toomey. As a result of those negotiations, it is not possible to enter into a contract that will be beneficial to Council.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

1.         That the Snape Park Tennis Centre Tender (T04/03) be finalised with no contract being entered into.

 

2.         That consideration be given to the allocation of funding in the 2004/05 Budget to undertake the capital programme.

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

..............................................

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 36/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

Maroubra Swimming Club - Memorandum of Understanding

 

 

DATE:

11 December, 2003

FILE NO:

98/S/0999 0999

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER  

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

The Maroubra Swimming Club, which was formed in 1961, has been located at the Des Renford Aquatic Centre (DRAC) at Heffron Park, Maroubra, since the facility was opened in 1962.

 

The Club has a long history in the Randwick area and has produced swimmers who have competed at State, National and International competitions, including Commonwealth and Olympic Games.

 

ISSUES:

 

The Maroubra Swimming Club is affiliated to the NSW Swimming Association and its members represent the clubs at swim meetings conducted in accordance with the rules of NSW Swimming.

 

In order to support the future development of the Maroubra Swimming Club and to recognise the long standing relationship between Council and the Club, Council would like to commit that the Maroubra Swimming Club will be the only Club affiliated with NSW Swimming that is located at and has use of the facilities at DRAC.

 

However, in doing so Randwick Council will continue to support and welcome the many other swimming and sporting clubs who are not affiliated with NSW Swimming, and who use the facilities of DRAC.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

A Memorandum of Understanding has been developed between Randwick City Council and the Maroubra Swimming Club that details this important relationship that promotes community spirit through the promotion of swimming activities and supports the development of Randwick’s young swimmers.

 

It is necessary for Councils Seal to be affixed to the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between Council and the Maroubra Swimming Club to facilitate the completion of the legal formalities

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the Council Seal be affixed to the Memorandum of Understanding with Maroubra Swimming Club.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Copy of Memorandum of Understanding

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..............................................

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

 

THIS MEMORANDUM  made  the                         day  of                                     2003

 

BETWEEN:   RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL of 30 Frances Street, Randwick in the State of New South Wales

 

AND               MAROUBRA SWIMMING CLUB Inc of Robey Street, Maroubra in the State of New South Wales

BACKGROUND

·          Maroubra Swimming Club Inc (‘Maroubra Swimming Club’) is an incorporated association within the meaning of the Associations  Incorporation  Act 1984.

·          The Maroubra Swimming Club was formed in 1961 and has been located at the now named Des Renford Aquatic Centre (‘DRAC’) at Heffron Park, Maroubra, since the swimming facility was opened in 1962.

·          Maroubra Swimming Club has a long history in the Randwick Local Government Area and has helped produce swimmers who have represented the local community and Maroubra Swimming Club at State, National and International competitions, including Commonwealth and Olympic games. 

·          Maroubra Swimming Club caters for those persons who like to swim socially and those persons who like to compete at numerous swim meets and carnivals held by various clubs and associations.  Ages of swimmers range from 5 years upwards.

·          Maroubra Swimming Club is affiliated to New South Wales Swimming Association Incorporated (‘NSW Swimming’), and such district associations as determined by the Boundaries Committee of NSW Swimming and any other organisations as the Management Committee of Maroubra Swimming Club may from time to time decide.

THE OBJECTS OF MAROUBRA SWIMMING CLUB

(a)        To promote the art of swimming and encourage its teaching.

 

(b)        To stimulate public opinion in favour of providing proper accommodation and facilities for acquiring the art of swimming.

(c)        To select members to represent Maroubra Swimming Club in swim meetings conducted in strict accordance with the rules of NSW Swimming.

(d)        To hold contests and championships from time to time as the Management Committee may determine.

(e)        To promote interest in the local Surf Life Saving Clubs.

OBJECTIVES OF THE MEMORANDUM

1.         Randwick City Council recognises the historical input of the Maroubra Swimming Club and the contribution that it has made to developing swimmers and supporting aquatic and Surf Life Saving activities in our local area.

2.         In order to support the future development of the Maroubra Swimming Club and to recognise the long standing relationship between Randwick City Council and the Maroubra Swimming Club, we commit that Maroubra Swimming Club will be the only club affiliated with NSW Swimming that is located at and will have use of the facilities at DRAC. 

3.         In promoting the spirit and the latter of this Memorandum of Understanding Randwick City Council will ensure that persons employed by the Council at DRAC will be informed of and will duly adhere to the terms of the relationship created by this Memorandum of Understanding. 

4.         Maroubra Swimming Club and its members recognise the support Randwick City Council has provided Maroubra Swimming Club to meet its objects.  Maroubra Swimming Club through this memorandum commits itself to form a close working relationship with Randwick City Council to meet our dual goals of community support and spirit through the promotion of swimming activities.

5.         In doing so, Randwick City Council and Maroubra Swimming Club will continue to support and welcome the many sporting and swimming clubs who are not affiliated with NSW Swimming to use the facilities at DRAC.

 


 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto subscribed their hands and affixed their seals the day and year first hereinbefore written.

 

THE COMMON SEAL of RANDWICK                         )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               )

CITY COUNCIL was hereunto affixed                            )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               )

this                   day of                        2003                          )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               )

in pursuance of a resolution of the Council                    )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               )

passed on the                  day of                                                                                                                                        )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

 

…………………………………………….            …………………………………….

Mayor                                                                                                       General Manager

 

  

 

THE COMMON SEAL of MAROUBRA                        )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               )

SWIMMING CLUB Inc was                                                                                                                                             )

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               )

hereunto affixed in the presence of:                                                                                                                                )

               )

 

 

…………………………………………….            …………………………………….

Secretary                                                                                                    President  

 


 

Director Asset & Infrastructure Services' Report 78/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

SALE OF LAND ADJACENT 276 DONCASTER AVENUE, KINGSFORD.

 

 

DATE:

9 December, 2003

FILE NO:

R/0240/00

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At its meeting held 26 August 2003, Council resolved that a report be prepared on the possible sale of a parcel of land adjacent to No. 276 Doncaster Avenue and Edward Avenue, Kingsford to the owner of the above address.

 

ISSUES:

 

A title search of the parcel of land known as Lot 7074 DP 1028719, has revealed that it is Crown Land dedicated as a reserve for Public Recreation under the care and management of Randwick City Council.

 

The land is located adjacent to 276 Doncaster Avenue, Kingsford at the corner of Edward Avenue, and has an approximate area of 200 square metres. It appears to be currently used by the owner of 276 Doncaster Avenue as a vegetable garden, with part of the land fenced with wooden stakes and chicken wire.  

 

Although the land is formally an unconnected part of Kensington Park, the land has the same 2A zoning as 276 Doncaster Avenue.  As the land is part of the Kensington Park reserve, it is designated as community land under the Local Government Act.

 

Prior to the sale of any portion of the park, it is necessary for the land to be reclassified as operational land.  The process for this is done by way of a Local Environmental Plan.

 

There is currently no public recreational use of the land and given its location, size and zoning, it is considered impractical for this purpose.

 

As the Trustee of the land, Randwick City Council may consider lease or sale of the land.

 

The Department of Lands has advised that any lease of the land would need to be consistent with the purpose of the land being reserved for Public Recreation. The current use of land by the owner of 276 Doncaster Avenue is not consistent with this purpose and consequently consideration of a lease is not appropriate.

 

In accordance with the Crown Lands Act 1989, Council as the Trustee of the land may consider its sale subject to advertisement of intent of sale and the subsequent consent of the Minister for the Department of Lands.

 

The land would be offered for sale with consideration of the market rate, and all legal, survey, valuation, application and other costs associated with the closure, sale and transfer of land, would be borne by the purchaser.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The land located adjacent to 276 Doncaster Avenue, Kingsford at the corner of Edward Avenue, known as Lot 7074 DP 1028719, with an approximate area of 200 square metres, is Crown Land dedicated as a reserve for Public Recreation under the care and management of Randwick City Council.

 

It is currently used by the owner of 276 Doncaster Avenue as a vegetable garden, with part of the land fenced with wooden stakes and chicken wire, and there is currently no public recreational use of the land.

 

Given its current usage, location, size and zoning, it is considered impractical for public recreation, and it is appropriate that the Council initiate sale of the land described as Lot 7074 DP 1028719, should the property owner of 276 Doncaster Avenue wish to proceed.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the owner of 276 Doncaster Avenue, Kensington be advised

 

1.         The estimated sale price of the land known as Lot 7074 DP 1028719 based on an indicative market rate, is $40,000, and a formal valuation at the owners expense can be arranged to confirm this estimate;

 

2.         Should the owner wish to proceed, Council will initiate the reclassification of portion of the land as operational, subject to the consent of the Minister for the Department of Lands, and the land would be offered for sale with consideration of the market rate based on a formal valuation;

 

3.         All legal, survey, valuation, application and other costs associated with the reclassification, closure, sale and transfer of land, would be borne by the purchaser.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MICK SAVAGE

MALCOLM HILL

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

ASSET ENGINEER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director Asset & Infrastructure Services' Report 79/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

TENDER T13/03

WEED CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE OF SELECTED PARKS   

 

 

DATE:

11 December, 2003

FILE NO:

98/S/5119

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES    

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

Tenders were called on 30 September 2003 for the weed control and maintenance of selected parks.  Following a 4-week tendering period the Tender closed on 28 October 2003.

The tender was issued for a two (2) year term with the option to extend for a further 12-month period.

Four tenders were received with all submitting bids conforming to the requirements of the Tender Specification to a varying degree. Discussion and evaluation of these Tenders are set out in this report.

 

BACKGROUND:

Council multi-skilled workers on an ongoing basis conduct Park maintenance. Levels of expertise in horticulture vary amongst staff.  Park maintenances peaks during the warmer months, with a substantial increase in workload for the maintenance of beaches and pools, barbeques, amenities and rubbish removal.  During the peak season little or no attention is placed on Council’s parks and reserves, in order to meet higher demand areas.

As a result of static staff numbers and the annual peak season, maintenance of these areas is seasonal and patchy, with most weed control activities undertaken in the ‘low’ or cooler season. Unfortunately most weeds are active during the warmer months, which coincides with the ‘peak’ season for visitation rates to our parks and reserves, severely undermining positive works undertaken previously.

In addition, new amendments to the Pesticide Act 1999 resulted in new legislation being put in place in July 2002. The new legislation requires those who administer herbicides must be trained on the use and application of herbicides and a record of herbicide use is now required.

 

ISSUES:

 

The coastal parks are mostly located in high profile locations with high use. The high use, in conjunction with the many other multi-skilled activities, identified the need for additional assistance to maintain the Coastal Parks to an acceptable level during this period.

In order to meet peak seasonal demands, a tender was issued with the intention to select a Contractor to assist in the respective areas, by continually maintaining weed growth within the garden beds within all contract areas.  It is expected this will result in a comparable level of weed treatment throughout all areas.

While Council staff, have been proactive in training and have undergone practical assessments, Council’s Training Officer has identified the need for further training to ensure all Council staff comply with the new Pesticides legislation.

 

Tender Assessment

The Tender Specification Part A ‘Conditions of Tendering’ advised that the evaluation, negotiation and selection of Tenders would be in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Local Government (Tendering) Regulation 1999 under the NSW Local Government Act 1993.  Tenderers’ were also given an indication of the selection criteria, (see below) to be referred to in the evaluation:

(a)        Price;

(b)        Experience and ability to complete the work;

(c)        Time period to complete the work;

(c)        Compliance with the Specification;

(d)        Quality Management System of the Tenderer;

(e)        Occupational Health and Safety;

The criteria were not listed in any particular order and it was emphasised that they would not be accorded equal weight in the assessment process. It was also pointed out that the criteria were intended to give Tenderers a general indication of the Council’s priorities and that Council reserved the right to disregard any of the above-listed criteria or to apply any other criteria.

Tender Opening

Tenders were opened at 10.00am on the closing date of the tender by a three (3) person panel comprising representatives from Randwick City Council.

Evaluation Team

A thorough and detailed evaluation of all tender submissions was conducted by a panel comprising, Council’s Manager Contracts and Purchasing, Kim Davis, Noxious Weeds Officer, Omar Seychell and Coast Area Coordinator, Brian Longbottom.

Evaluation Process

The process of Evaluation was conducted in accordance with the Evaluation Plan and approved by the Manager Contracts and Purchasing and included:

1.         The evaluation committee undertook an objective qualitative assessment of the completed schedules, (but not pricing information) submitted as part of each tender. 

2.         The schedule information and the specific questions were listed under the relevant criteria and weighted in order of importance to the overall evaluation.  Team members’ scored the criteria individually in accordance with the “Scoring Guideline” in the Evaluation Plan.  Individual scores were then calculated to forma Total Score as recorded on the “Evaluation Score” sheet. 

3.         The tendered prices in Schedule B2 “Tender Submission” were then calculated to form a “Cost Index” for each tenderer.

4.        

The corresponding Total Scores were divided by the Cost Indexes to form a

 

Summary of TendererS:

Bettersafe Pty Ltd

Bettersafe is located at Ingleburn, NSW. The Project Manager has been a fully licensed operator for 19 years and appeared to have extensive knowledge of Local Government operations, particularly in the field of aquatic noxious weed control. 

This tenderer failed to provide all the tender schedules, including any work place references.  The submission undervalued the required works, and it was seen by the evaluation committee that the submitted price of $28,566.20 could not fulfill the works identified in the requirements specification.  The tenderer offered poor responses with unsubstantiated claims, particularly in relation to the Occupational Health and Safety Questionnaire and supporting documents.  Bettersafe Pty Ltd failed to demonstrate an ability to complete the scope of works for the tendered price.

This tenderer achieved the lowest evaluation score.

Quality Lawn and Grounds Care

Quality Lawn and Grounds Care are grounds maintenance contractors for commercial, strata and industrial areas. The company commenced operations in 1997.

This tenderer has little experience with local government bodies, and work place references provided mixed reviews on previous work place performance. The tenderer offered an uncompetitive tender overall, areas including financial capacity, work place policies, such as quality assurance and environmental policies were not up to Council standards.

This tenderer achieved the second lowest evaluation score.

Marsupial Landscapes Pty Ltd

Marsupial Landscapes achieved the second highest evaluation score.

This submission displayed a distinct level of professionalism, efficiency and adaptability that is necessary when dealing with seasonal fluctuations that will affect plant growth rates. References were noted as being extremely happy with work place performance, and the evaluation committee noted its experience and ability in completing the required work specifications.

The submission by Marsupial Landscapes also provided adequate documentation for compliance to the relevant safety standards, reducing the risk of public liability posed to Council.

As Marsupial Landscapes submitted the highest purchase price of $158,070.00. The ‘Value for Money Score’ analysis subsequently rated Marsupial Landscapes as the second most cost efficient submission of the four tenders received. 

Green Horticultural Group Pty Ltd

Green Horticultural Group Pty Ltd, based in Baulkham Hills has been active for three years and achieved the highest evaluation score and provided the best ‘Value for Money Score’ for this tender.

This submission also displayed a distinct level of professionalism, efficiency and adaptability.  References were noted as being happy with work place performance, and the evaluation committee noted its extensive horticultural background amongst its staff, and previous work experience with local government and other statutory authorities.

This contractor did not present a risk to Council with regard to its financial capabilities and provided satisfactory documentation on Occupational Health and Safety, Quality Assurance and Environment Policies.

Based on its submitted price of $123,060.00, Green Horticultural Group presented the best ‘Value for Money’ score.

 

FUNDING:

Coastal Management Coordinator of Area B has allocated funding from the Coastal Garden Maintenance budget.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Of the 4 tenders considered by the evaluation team, Bettersafe Pty Ltd and Quality Lawn and Grounds Care did not offer value for money, both scoring well below 50%.

The tender submissions received from Marsupial Landscapes and Green Horticultural Group demonstrated the ability to complete the Scope of Works and fulfilled the necessary OH&S and Environmental requirements.

Green Horticultural Group achieved the highest evaluation score for its performance in the selection criteria, and the highest ‘Value for Money Score’ in comparison to the other tenderers’. The evaluation team concluded that this tender submission provided the greatest value for Council’s needs.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

Council accept the tender submitted by Green Horticultural Group Pty Ltd of Box Hill for weed control and maintenance of selected parks Tender No. T13/03 for a period of 2 years with the option to extend a further 12 month period for the annual tender amount of $123,060 (incl. GST).

1.         That the commencement date for the project be in January 2004.

2.         The unsuccessful tenderers are notified of the tender result.

3.         The General Manager in consultation with the Mayor be authorised to sign the contract and other documents pertaining to the scope of works and that Council’s Seal be affixed to the contract if required.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.  Evaluation Plan

2.  Evaluation Scores ALL UNDER SEPARATE COVER.

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………...

MICK SAVAGE

OMAR SEYCHELL

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

NOXIOUS WEEDS OFFICER-ASSETS & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director Asset & Infrastructure Services' Report 80/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

DENISON STREET,  MATRAVILLE - TRANSFER OF ROAD TO COUNCIL OWNERSHIP

 

 

DATE:

11 December, 2003

FILE NO:

DA 867/2003

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Council is in receipt of a development application for construction of a predominantly single storey industrial premise with mezzanine level at a property identified as 1 Denison Street. The industrial premise/factory will be utilised as a tyre service centre, where some fitting, warehousing and retail sales will occur, (no manufacturing).

 

The subject development site does not have direct frontage to a Council controlled public road, at present vehicular access to the site can be achieved via Perry Street and Denison Street, with Denison Street being classified as a crown public road, (as advised by the Department of Lands).

 

The development application makes provision for 6 parking spaces onsite and the total vehicle movements per day has been estimated at approximately 53, (see attachment)

 

ISSUES:

 

Included in the heads of consideration in the assessment of this Development Application Council must consider vehicular access, street drainage and civil infrastructure requirements in the vicinity of the development proposal.

 

The current condition of Denison Street, going from Perry Street to the development site, is that of an unsealed road with no formalised drainage system and no kerb and gutter on either side of the street.

 

The Department of Asset and Infrastructure Services, in assessing the development application, is of the opinion that the condition of the Denison Street pavement needs a major upgrade and that construction of drainage and other civil infrastructure is warranted.

 

In a facsimile to the applicant dated 27 August, 2003, (see attachment), the Department of Lands has indicated that should Council require upgrading or construction of Denison Street, Council would need to agree to accept the transfer of the road into its ownership.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

In its assessment of Development Application 867/2003 the Department of Asset and Infrastructure Services recommends that the applicant be conditioned to reconstruct that section of Denison Street between Perry Street and a suitable point to the north of the development site to Council’s standards and specification. The applicant can only comply with the DAIS recommendation if the subject section of Denison Street is transferred from being a crown public road under the care and control of the Department of Lands to a public road under the care, control and ownership of Council.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

1.         As part of any development consent for Development Application 867/2003 the applicant be conditioned to meet the full cost for reconstruction of that section of Denison Street between Perry Street and a suitable point to the north of the development site to Council’s standards and specification.

 

2.         Council agree in principle to the transfer of the affected section of Denison Street into Council ownership provided that this transfer occurs at no cost to Council.

 

3.         Subject to there being no cost to Council resulting from the subject transfer of ownership and, following agreement to the transfer from the applicant for DA 867/2003, the Department of Asset and Infrastructure Services initiate the transfer process.

 

4.         The applicant for DA 867/2003 meet any process costs associated with the transfer of ownership.

 

5.         The applicant to be granted conditional temporary site access over Denison Street, as it currently exists, pending completion of the transfer.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Facsimile from Department of Lands to applicant for DA 867/2003.

Site Plan taken from Development Application 867/2003.

Site Plan taken from Council's Base Map No. 50.

Access and Traffic summary taken from Development Application 867/2003.ALL UNDER SEPARATE COVER 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MICK SAVAGE

JOHN FLANIGAN

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER - COORDINATOR


 

Director Asset & Infrastructure Services' Report 81/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

UNDERGROUND CABLING MARINE PARADE BETWEEN UNDINE STREET AND WILSON STREET, MAROUBRA.

 

 

DATE:

8 December, 2003

FILE NO:

98/S/1719 xr R/0500/01

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the Works Committee meeting held 2nd December 2003, it was resolved that a supplementary report containing further information be prepared on the matter of the undergrounding of cables in Marine Parade, between Undine Street and Wilson Street, Maroubra. 

 

ISSUES:

 

In accordance with a resolution from the Finance, Works and Services Committee meeting held 19 November 1996, Council executed an Agreement with Optus regarding the deployment by Optus of an aerial broadband cable network throughout the local government of Randwick.

 

The Agreement provided for Optus to pay Council $8.00/pole/year for a period of five years. There is no provision in the Agreement for the extension of this arrangement. Clause 23 of the Agreement notes that the Agreement does not affect Council’s right to charge levies or annual rates under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

This refers to Section 611 of the Local Government Act 1993, which allows a Council to make an annual charge on persons occupying infrastructure on, under or over a public place.

 

The issue of Section 611 is an ongoing matter subject to legal proceedings between a number of Councils including Randwick Council and Optus and Telstra.

 

The High Court has reserved its decision in relation to the legality of Councils levying Section 611 charges, and a judgement is not expected for at least six months. Further legal proceedings relating to the process for levying of charges is dependent on the outcome of the High Court Decision.

 

Should all legal proceedings be decided in favour of the Councils, it is likely that Council would levy appropriate companies in accordance with Section 611 charges detailed in Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges.

 

As a result of the Optus agreement Council received a total income of $288,920.00 for the duration of the project.  In addition to this the residents of Marine Parade between Inman Street and Undine Street contribute 50% of the cost of works in that area totalling $23,113.50.  As such the total income for the project was $312,033.00.

 

Details of the expenditure of funds received under the Optus Agreement, are provided below:

 

Year

Project

Expenditure

1998-99

Marine Parade – Inman Street to Undine Street, Maroubra

$46,227

2000-01

Anzac Parade – La Perouse Loop

$32,019

2002-03

Marine Parade – McKeon Street - Fitzgerald Avenue, Maroubra

$234,515

TOTAL

$312,761

 

 

The proposed undergrounding works in Marine Parade between Undine Street and Wilson Street comprise the following works:

 

1.         Removal of two existing electric light poles, and replacement with suitable lamp poles;

2.         Undergrounding of electrical cables along Undine Street frontage of  No. 24 Marine Parade then continuing east along Marine Parade to existing electric light pole at corner of Wilson Street and Marine Parade;

3.         Private connections to underground mains;

4.         Reinstatement and restoration.

 

Energy Australia has provided a quotation detailing the estimated cost of the works at $85,812 including a $1,200 investigation fee should works proceed. The cost for private connections to the underground mains, would be covered by the affected property owner.

 

Energy Australia does not provide a unit rate for the type of work and costs each job individually, taking into account the age of the infrastructure and ground surface condition at each job.

 

The quotation does not include restoration costs for the work as per Council’s Fees & Charges, which are estimated at $5,000.

 

The total cost for the work is therefore estimated at $90,812. 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

There is no provision in the Aerial Broadband Network Agreement between Council and Optus, for the extension of the arrangement. Given Optus involvement in current legal proceedings opposing Council’s right to levy a charge for infrastructure in public land under Section 611 of the Local Government Act 1993, it is unlikely that Optus would be interested in extension of the existing, or initiation of a new agreement at this time.

 

Funds received under the Agreement, were fully expended on underground cabling  projects at Maroubra and La Perouse.

 

Legal proceedings relating to Section 611 charges are currently in process, however, if successful, income from charges levied under this section in the future, could be considered for  underground cabling projects in the City of Randwick.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

Director of Assets and Infrastructure Services Report , dated 8th December 2003, concerning underground cabling in Marine Parade between Undine Street and Wilson Street, Maroubra, be noted.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MICK SAVAGE

MALCOLM HILL

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

ASSET ENGINEER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director Asset & Infrastructure Services' Report 82/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

KENSINGTON / WEST KINGSFORD LOCAL AREA TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SCHEME

 

 

DATE:

8 December, 2003

FILE NO:

98/S/4405

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Council has been concerned for sometime about the traffic speed and traffic filtering through the residential streets of Kensington / West Kingsford.

 

In November 2001, Council engaged Christopher Stapleton Consulting Pty Ltd to complete a Local Area Traffic Management Plan for the area in consultation with representatives from the local residential community.

 

In March 2003, Mr Stapleton presented a draft report for discussion.  The report incorporated the following strategies:

 

1)         Management of intersections with Arterial Roads to reduce existing through traffic;

 

This strategy recommended changing the phasing and priorities of signals on Anzac Parade and Gardeners Road to discourage cross traffic movements taking short cuts.

 

2)         Management of local Collector Roads to increase residential amenity and pedestrian permeability;

 

            Introduction of road narrowing and speed management devices at 20 locations on seven residential streets that are Collector Roads on Council’s Road Hierarchy Plan was suggested; and

 

3)         Protection of Local Streets to stop intrusion by through traffic:

 

            This strategy requires:

 

·          Implementation of major semi road closures at five locations to discourage current through traffic routes; and

·          Introduction of minor semi road closures at seven locations to prevent new through traffic routes forming.

 

ISSUES:

 

The Stapleton report was initially considered by the Mayor and Ward Councillors at a briefing meeting held on 30 May 2003.

 

The Councillors unanimously agreed on the following, that:

 

1)         Council request the RTA to improve the traffic flow on the State Roads to encourage commuters to use the State Roads and not ‘rat run’ on the local roads;

 

2)         The various major semi road closures be not implemented;

 

The Ward Councillors found that the road closures would cause significant disruption to the local residential community and that speed was the significant issue on a number of streets.

 

3)         The partial road closure of Boronia Street at Anzac Parade, to prevent all traffic movements except the left turn from Anzac Parade into Boronia Street be implemented;

 

4)         The proposed traffic calming facilities (road narrowing and speed management devices) be referred to Council’s Traffic Committee for its consideration, and then by adoption by Council for implementation in a future Works Program.

 

The Traffic Committee considered the Stapleton report at its meeting held on 10 June 2003, and advised that:

 

1)         The changing of the signals phasing to give priority to the Main Roads be supported in principle;

 

2)         The RTA be requested to investigate the intersection of Boronia Street and Anzac Parade with regard to the safety of the intersection;

 

3)         The major semi road closures and secondary semi road closures, as suggested, would have a detrimental effect on the area in terms of:

 

·          Interference with local community travel patterns;

·          School Bus Routes; and

·          Loss of parking.

           

The Committee was also concerned that detailed design had not been undertaken on these roads to prove that adequate turning circles are available at the street closure locations.

 

4)         In regard to the traffic calming proposals suggested at various locations, the Traffic Committee stated that traffic volumes on these roads have remained generally stable since prior to the construction of the Eastern Distributor. The Committee reported that  the Stapleton Scheme did not appear to have reviewed accident statistics and black spots in the area.

 

The Committee therefore recommended that speed and traffic volume counts be carried out in the streets, where the introduction of certain traffic calming proposals has been suggested by Mr. Christopher Stapleton, to accurately determine:

 

·    exact locations where treatments are warranted; and

·    the type of treatment that is required.

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer has conducted a series of traffic volume counts and speed surveys.  A summary of these survey results indicated that:

 

·    traffic volumes on the streets of Kensington / West Kingsford have remained generally stable since prior to the construction of the Eastern Distributor; and

·    a number of streets within the study area experience relatively high-recorded 85th percentile speeds.

 

Accordingly, where high traffic speeds have been recorded, various traffic-calming measures have been identified for implementation.

 

In summary, the Randwick Traffic Committee has endorsed the implementation of the following traffic calming measures:

 

(i)         Tunstall Avenue, north of Gardeners Road – Provision of kerb blister and          central median island;

 

(ii)        Tunstall Avenue, Between Gardeners Road and the northern boundary of          the Australian Golf Course – Shifting the centreline and line marking the         parking lane on the eastern side of Tunstall Ave;

 

(iii)       Tunstall Avenue at Tresidder Avenue - Vehicle deflection/‘squeeze point’,

 

(iv)       Cottenham Avenue at Borrodale Road - Vehicle deflection/‘squeeze point’;       and

 

(v)        Day Avenue at Eastern Avenue – ‘Squeeze point’ incorporating pedestrian        refuge.

 

In addition, the Traffic Committee has agreed in principle to the design and implementation of the following minor traffic calming measures:

 

(i)         Tunstall Avenue at Goodrich Avenue - Vehicle deflection/‘squeeze point’;

 

(ii)        Eastern Avenue at Goodrich Avenue - Vehicle deflection/‘squeeze point’;

(iii)       Cottenham Avenue, between Day Ave and Roma Ave – Edge line treatment to visually narrow carriageway width;

 

(iv)       Cottenham Avenue, south of Roma Avenue – Pedestrian refuge island;

(v)        Mooramie Avenue, between Day Ave and Roma Ave - Edge line treatment       to visually narrow carriageway width; and

 

(vi)       Balfour Road at Addison Street - Central Median Island.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The primary objective of the Kensington / West Kingsford Local Area Traffic Management Study commissioned by Council was to protect and enhance the residential amenity of the study area.

 

In order to achieve this objective, it is considered appropriate to implement a system of traffic calming devices throughout the study area.

 

Council at its meeting held on 28 October 2003 resolved to implement speed control measures on the northern section of Tunstall Avenue and at the intersection with Addison Street, and the RTA has been requested to implement these measures as a matter of urgency.

 

Council’s Traffic Committee has now endorsed the following two major components of the Scheme:

 

a)         Partial closure of Boronia Street at Anzac Parade, subject to the concurrence of the RTA; and

 

b)         Traffic Calming Measures, at the other eleven locations within the study area, as shown on the attached plan.

 

However, prior to the construction of these facilities, it is proposed that the plans be placed on public exhibition seeking the residents’ comments.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

a)         The Kensington / West Kingsford Local Area Traffic Management Plan incorporating the partial closure of Boronia Street at Anzac Parade, and the introduction of traffic calming measures at various locations within the area, as shown on the plan attached to the Director Asset & Infrastructure Services’ report, be adopted as Council’s Concept Plan for public exhibition;

 

b)         Residents of Kensington / West Kingsford within the area bounded by South Dowling Street, Southern Cross Drive, Gardeners Road, Anzac Parade, Doncaster Avenue, Alison Road and Dacey Avenue be notified by letter box drop, to be carried out at the end of January 2004, seeking comments on the proposed measures within 28 days from the date of notice;

 

c)         An advertisement be placed in the Southern Courier outlining Council’s actions;

 

d)         The Director Asset & Infrastructure Services report back to Council’s meeting in April 2004 recommending a final plan of proposed measures for implementation as part of the 2004/2005 Capital Works Program.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.         Kensington / West Kingsford Local Area Traffic Management Plan.

 

2.         Summary of Traffic Speed and Volume Surveys.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MICK SAVAGE

KEN KANAGARAJAN

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

Senior TRAFFIC ENGINEER

 

 

 



 

 

 


 

Director Asset & Infrastructure Services' Report 83/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

LIFE SERVICE UPGRADE AND MAINTENANCE

 

 

DATE:

11 December, 2003

FILE NO:

PROJ/0047/03

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Open Tenders called for Lift Service Upgrade and Maintenance closed at 10am on Tuesday 9 December 2003 with 4 responses received.

 

Jim Campbell and Associates have conducted an investigation and report into the condition and compliance of the lifts in the Administration Centre in response to an increase in the frequency of breakdowns and changes to the standards for lift operations that had been introduced in recent years.

 

The report indicated that the lifts need modernisation to comply with the current standards and to alleviate the disruption to service caused by constant breakdowns. The advice received by Council indicated that the work to upgrade the lifts could be staged if required but it was advisable to conduct all works at the one time to minimise the disruption and cost.

 

Jim Campbell and Associates were commissioned to prepare a technical specification and to provide advice and assistance with tender evaluation. The specification called for refurbishment of both lifts with additional work being to provide new door mechanisms and to provide roller guides for the lift cars. The tender also called for comprehensive maintenance for a period of three years from date of the completion of the project.

 

Funding

 

An amount of $350,000 has been allocated in the 2003-04 budget for the capital works.

 

Evaluation Committee

 

The Evaluation Committee consisted of

 

·    Ms Kim Davis - Manager Contracts and Purchasing

·    Mr Terry Riley - Plant & Equipment Officer

·    Mr Bob Blanchard - Jim Campbell and Associates

 

The evaluation committee evaluated all tenders in accordance with the evaluation Plan submitted prior to the closing of tenders by the Manager Contracts and Purchasing

 

ISSUES:

 

Four tenders we received and evaluated in accordance with the evaluation Plan and in compliance with Councils Purchasing Policy and Procedures. The evaluation considered the quality of submissions, the overall cost of the capital works and the maintenance for three years.

 

Link Elevators

 

Link Elevators have been in operation for over ten years providing modernisation, installation and servicing. They have recently completed similar projects at Ryde Council and Macquarie University. The factory at Marrickville offers the full range of services required to upgrade and service the lifts. They are a relatively small company able to provide a more personalised service than that offered by the bigger operators.

 

Link Elevators have tendered at total price of $332,741.00 (including GST) to upgrade the lifts. The cost of comprehensive maintenance is $29,700.00.

 

The proposal offers mechanical and electrical hardware that is commonly used in the lift industry and is suitable for Councils requirements.

 

Liftronic

 

Liftronic is a medium sized company offering services including installation, modernisation and maintenance for all types of lift machinery.

 

Liftronic’s tendered price for the refurbishment project including options one and two is $328,020.00 but does not include the costs to remove pipe work and demolish and reconstruct a brick insert in the lift room. Their comprehensive maintenance agreement over three years is $44,173.80.

 

The tender submission indicated that Liftronic wanted to use their own conditions of contract, which is unacceptable to Council. Also they requested clear and uninterrupted access to lift equipment into the plant room. The tender called for these lifts to be conducted outside of normal operating hours to minimise disruption to services.

 

Liftronic are starting a project in March 2004 that may conflict with Council’s intended works program.

 

Thyssenkrupp

 

The tender submission from Thyssenkrupp failed to address the essential and desirable criteria. Due to the limited information provided and lack of substantiation, the submission rated poorly. Thyssenkrupp offered an uncompetitive tender as compared to the level required by Council  and are not considered as a potential supplier of lift services and or maintenance.

 

The overall price submitted for upgrade and maintenance was $368,148.00, the second highest cost.

 

Sanscord

 

Sanscord, Council’s current maintenance provider, took over the maintenance when they purchased Eastern Elevators approximately three years ago. Sanscord’s maintenance over the last couple of years has not been satisfactory with maintenance requests not dealt with and interruptions to lift service a constant issue. A constant source of irritation for members of the public has been the poor operations of the lifts especially call button response.

 

Sanscord’s tendered price of $318,972.00 includes maintenance costs of $33.330.00 over three years. Although offering the lowest price,  Sanscord submitted an uncompetitive tender, only scoring 34% in their value for money score.

 

Sanscord’s tender did not demonstrate an ability to provide the level of service required by Council, this coupled with their past record does not engender confidence in the works being carried out satisfactorily or maintenance standards being raised and should not be considered for the project.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Based on the responses it would be appropriate to proceed with the full scope of works to ensure that the lifts are bought up to standard and minimise disruptions.

 

Using the value for money methodology, considering the full project and maintenance costs over three years Link Elevators offered the best value for money

 

Summary of Value for Money Score

Tenderers Name

Quality Score

Cost Index

Value for Money Score

Link Elevators

69.100%

1.13627905

60.81%

Liftronic

53.800%

1.16685414

46.11%

Thysenkrupp

5.600%

1.15417027

4.85%

Sanscord Elevators

34.267%

1

34.27%

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That;-

 

1.         Council accept the tender submitted by Link Elevator Company Pty Ltd for the completion of the Lift Service Upgrade and Maintenance Tender No.T06/03  for the lump sum amount of $332,741.20 (lift upgrade) including GST and $29,700.00 (3 year maintenance agreement) including GST; and

 

2.         The commencement date for the project be January 2004;

 

3.         Unsuccessful tenderers be notified of the tender results;

 

4.         The General Manager in consultation with the Mayor be authorised to sign the contract and other documents pertaining to the scope of works and that Council’s seal be affixed to contract documentation, if required.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

1.  Evaluation Plan.

2.  Value for Money Assessment.(ALL UNDER SEPARATE COVER.) 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MICK SAVAGE

TERRY RILEY

DIRECTOR ASSET & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

PLANT AND EQUIPMENT OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director Governance, Management & Information Services' Report  34/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

COUNCILS ONLINE - PROGRESS REPORT

 

 

DATE:

12 December, 2003

FILE NO:

98/S/3323

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR GOVERNANCE, MANAGEMENT & INFORMATION SERVICES 

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

In December 2002, following the signing of contracts with Cap Gemini Ernst & Young (CGEY) by the five member Councils of the Syndicate – Randwick, Hornsby, Lake Macquarie, Parramatta and Wyong – work began on the development of corporate business systems to replace the TCS Stowe system.  This system was used by these  (and other) Councils for various activities, including rating (land information systems), accounting, payroll, purchasing, records management and works orders.

 

Councillors will recall that the TCS Stowe system has effectively become obsolete (the company having been brought out by GEAC), with that software product being replaced by other GEAC software.

 

In order to test the market for improved replacement systems, the five Councils formed a Syndicate to aggregate their buying power. As a single Council, Randwick represents approximately 125,000 residents with 300 users. (Users represent employees who regularly use a computer to undertake their duties with Council. Software is generally sold and licensed on a “per user” basis. The IT industry may offer discounts for “volume” – that is, high numbers of users.)

 

As a Syndicate, the five Councils represent more than 750,000 residents and 2,500 users.

 

ISSUES:

 

Following the signing of contracts last year, CGEY and the five Councils began work on the design and build of an integrated business system to replace TCS Stowe, and to provide new business applications that could expand the range of services the Councils can offer to residents, and improve the efficiency of existing services.

 

For example, the Councils Online solution will allow the payment of rates, dog registrations and other fees online (via the internet) – a new service. The new system will also allow residents to request services (rubbish pick-up, report a pothole, book a council facility, etc) online – an improved service over the current telephone/letter arrangements.

 

The design and build involves using “best of breed” applications – for example, Oracle Financials, GEAC Land Information Systems, TRIM Electronic Document Management Systems – with an integration layer. The integration layer allows the various applications to interconnect, utilising a single data base (Oracle), minimising the need for information to be duplicated or entered more than once in the system.

 

The project has been divided into 3 phases, with each phase containing a number of applications. Phase 1 includes Finance, Payroll, Purchasing, Human Resources, Document Management, Project Management, Land Information and Rates.  Phase 2 includes Libraries, Asset Management, Plant & Equipment, Works Estimating and Facilities Bookings. Phase 3 includes Customer Relationship Management and web-enabling of services.

 

The design and build work is undertaken in each phase by a team comprised of CGEY personnel, Council staff and representatives from the various software vendors. The design and build work involves mapping the key business processes undertaken by Councils, and then ensuring that those processes are incorporated in the functionality of the selected applications and the integration layer.

 

Following each design and build phase, CGEY undertake system testing. Upon the completion of system testing, the Councils, working collaboratively, conduct user acceptance testing – to ensure that the design and build work complies with the tender specifications in terms of delivering the services required.

 

As at December 2003, the design and build work for phase 1 has been completed. CGEY are completing system testing, and user acceptance testing by the five Councils is now underway. User acceptance testing will be completed February 2004.

 

In March 2004 Phase 1 will be piloted at Lake Macquarie Council. Once the system is operating satisfactorily, the solution will be progressively rolled out to each of the other Syndicate members. In the case of Randwick, we expect to “go live” with Phase 1 in late May 2004.

 

The work has progressed so satisfactorily to date that Phase 2 (design and build due to commence in February 2004) and Phase 3 (due to commence in June 2004) have both been brought forward, with design and build work commencing in December 2003. This will mean the delivery of the complete solution (that is, the “go live”) has been brought forward to August 2004, more than 2 months earlier than originally proposed.

 

This project has and continues to represent a major work effort for the five Councils, Randwick included. In the course of the design and build, testing, training and “go live”, more than 217 Randwick Council employees will have been actively involved on a full time or part time basis in this project.

 

This has and continues to be an enormous effort, and the employees involved have played a critical part in the success to date of the Councils Online project.

 

CONCLUSION: 

 

This is the single biggest project Randwick City Council has ever undertaken. Not only will we replace aged and obsolete business systems with “state of the art” applications, but also we will have gained the capacity to undertake our activities more effectively and efficiently. This will result in better value for money for Council’s residents and ratepayers, with a whole range of services available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week via the internet.

 

Being a ten-year contract, with CGEY funding a Centre of Excellence for future research and development, the Councils Online project will continue to deliver benefits to our residents for many years.

 

The contribution of Randwick employees has, in my view, been critical to the success of the Councils Online project.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the report of the Director Governance, Management and Information Services be received and noted.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK HUMMERSTON

 

DIRECTOR GOVERNANCE, MANAGEMENT & INFORMATION SERVICES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Director Planning & Community Development's Report 105/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

39-47 St Paul's Street, Randwick

 

 

DATE:

10 December, 2003

FILE NO:

D0615/2003

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Attached is the Development Assessment Report to increase the number of patrons in the Ritz Cinema from 1,253 to 1,815 and increase available parking for patrons and staff to a total of 18 spaces.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the development application in accordance with the recommendations contained in the attached report.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Development Assessment Report dated 4 December, 2003

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

 

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

 

DATE:

4 December, 2003

FILE NO:

D0615/2003

 

PROPOSAL:

 Increase the allowable number of patrons in the Ritz Cinema from 1,253 to 1,815 and increase available parking for patrons and staff to a total of 18 spaces

PROPERTY:

 39-47 St Paul's Street, Randwick

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Jack Ziade, Ritz Cinema

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Council for determination at the request of Councillors Judy Greenwood, Murray Matson, Margery Whitehead.

 

The proposal requests an increase in the number of seats allowed to be used within the Ritz Cinema at The Spot from 1,253 to 1,815. No building works are proposed as part of the application. The DA also includes details of additional parking spaces to be used by cinema patrons under a valet parking scheme. The Ritz Cinema is listed as a Heritage Item under Council’s LEP 1998 and is also listed on the State Heritage Register.

 

The main issues for consideration in the assessment of the proposal are whether the ongoing conservation of the Cinema relies on increased patronage, supporting an increase in the allowable number of seats. The assessment must also consider whether the increases in parking demand and traffic generation as a result of an increase in the Cinema’s capacity are acceptable.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The applicant seeks to increase the maximum number of patrons that can occupy the existing 6 cinemas on the site at any one time to 1,815 in order to ensure that the economic viability and the continued operation and viability of this significant heritage cinema is maintained. The development does not seek permission for any increases to floor area or other building works.

 

The proposal also aims to increase patron parking on site by utilising 8 basement spaces (currently used for staff parking). Three (3) spaces exist to the rear of the site and are used as valet parking currently. A valet service allowing the use of an additional 5 spaces at the rear of 50 St Paul’s Street, outside business hours is also proposed. Two spaces for the use of staff are to be provided in a new building at 25 Perouse Road. The maximum number of parking spaces proposed for cinema use is 18.

 

The properties at 25 Perouse Road and 50 St Paul’s Street are not wholly owned by the applicant. The property at 25 Perouse Road was approved for strata subdivision on 3/12/2003. The applicant has provided written consent from the owners of these properties to use their parking areas.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is located on the northern side of St Paul’s Street, between Perouse Road and Daintrey Crescent in ‘The Spot’. The site is occupied by the Ritz Cinema, an art deco building that is listed on the State Heritage Register and in Council’s RLEP98. The Ritz is one of only three cinemas listed on the State Heritage Register, and the only one within Sydney (the others being in Parramatta and Manildra). The site is located directly adjacent to The Spot Heritage Conservation Area.

Surrounding development to the south (across St Pauls Street) and west (towards Perouse Road) is largely two storey buildings with retail uses at ground floor level. To the north (rear) of the site is Brigidine College. To the north-east of the site is a vacant lot bounded by billboards and hoardings and a sports area used by Brigidine College. Adjacent to the site to the east is a bank of angled parking spaces that provide public on-street parking. Further to the east are 2-3 storey residential flat buildings and dwellings.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    HISTORY OF SITE USAGE

 

The Ritz cinema was established on the site in 1937 and has been operating continuously since that time. The building was originally constructed with one screen and seating for 1,000 patrons.

 

DA 410/75 for additions to the cinema were approved in 1975. Council’s records do not indicate the extent of these additions.

 

DA 324/95 for major additions to install 3 new screens at the cinema was approved by Council in 1995. This consent limited the number of patrons to be accommodated by the cinemas to 1,223. In 1996 the consent was modified to provide 3 valet parking spaces at the rear of the site and the number of patrons allowed on the site increased to 1,253.

 

DA 1076/98 proposed to add two more screens to the complex (345 seats) plus 8 on-site parking spaces. The applicant lodged an appeal with the Land and Environment Court on the basis of deemed refusal. The Court granted consent on 29/11/00 subject to conditions limiting the total number of occupied seats in the complex to 1,253 and requiring regular auditing of the seats to ensure that this condition was being met.

 

The proposed development is subject to section 60 of the Heritage Act, as such the applicant was requested to provide an approval (or alternatively exemption) from the Heritage Council. This is required for applications involving buildings listed on the State Heritage Register. In response, a signed exemption from the Heritage Office was received on 24 November 2003.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified and advertised in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A map indicating the location of objectors properties in relation to the subject site is included as an attachment to this report. The following submissions were received in response to the notification/advertising of the proposal:

 

5.1  Objections

 

1. M. Blackburn, 10 Stewart Street, Randwick

 

§ Parking impacts of proposal will exacerbate existing undersupply of parking in the area

§ Noise of patrons when leaving late sessions of the cinema

 

2. J. Williams, 5 Ivy Street, Randwick

 

§ Traffic and parking impacts of the proposal

§ Noise of patrons returning to their cars would be exacerbated

§ Land and Environment Court decision imposed the limit of 1,253 to ensure that parking and traffic impacts were not substantially increased

§ The proposed increase in capacity by 33% is too great and will result in pedestrian and vehicular congestion, noise, traffic and parking impacts

 

3. Ms W & Ms L Jabour, 208 Barker Street, Randwick

 

§ Proposal cannot be supported due to lack of adequate parking

§ As residents for 35 years we have watched the Spot grow, there has been a parking shortage for 20 years

§ Noise, traffic and air pollution will increase as a result of this proposal

 

4. W.Szal, 3 Dine Street, Randwick

 

§ Inadequate parking for proposal

§ Applicant has offered to build a much needed carpark but Council rejected the proposal in favour of a block of flats

§ Air pollution, noise and traffic congestion will result from any increase to The Ritz

§ Can Council please consider a 1 hour parking limit in the area?

 

5. S. Kutner, 10 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick

 

§ If approved an extra 58 cars will have to find parking in the area (250m parked end to end

§ Restrictions on patron numbers were only positive outcome of Land and Environment Court case

§ Has Council got jurisdiction to alter the ruling of the Court?

 

6. E & M Warder, 15 Ivy Street, Randwick

 

§ Insufficient parking

§ The lack of parking restrictions in Ivy Street results in business employees and owners parking all day, leaving no space for residents’ vehicles.

 

7. B&B Goodwin, 9 Dudley Street, Randwick

 

§ Parking is insufficient

§ Suggest that Lee Street is made rear to kerb parking to increase on-site provision, it is a wide street

 

8. Peter J Straton on behalf of Driat Pty Ltd, owners 67-69 St Pauls Street, Randwick

 

§ Existing parking and traffic situation is terrible, streets cannot handle traffic currently generated at the Spot

§ Residents and visitors cannot park close to their dwellings due to the pressures on parking, generated largely by the Ritz Cinema

§ Any increase in the number of approved patrons is unsustainable and contrary to the interests of surrounding residential owners unless there is a substantial increase in the parking facilities available, eg: a multi-storey carpark

§ Proposal includes 13 valet spaces and is tokenistic, inadequate and mocks the gravity of the situation

 

9.     A.Barila, 14C Dudley Street, Randwick

 

§ Demands on local street parking and traffic congestion as a result of the proposal

 

10.   H.Haslinger on behalf of Rowshell Pty Ltd, owners of properties at 67-69 St Pauls Street

 

§ Traffic and parking impacts of proposal

§ Residents will be forced to bear impact of any increase to the allowable number of patrons

 

11.   K.Alexander, by email, no address given

 

§ Additional parking proposed is inadequate, there are already major parking problems in the area, impacts of the proposal will exacerbate current problems.

 

12.   S. Francis, 11/117 Perouse Road, Randwick

 

§ Insufficient parking

§ Noise and rubbish on the street and increased graffiti

§ Removal of midnight closing will disrupt residents sleep and create additional noise impacts

Comment: The application does not propose any change to the existing operating hours of the cinema.

 

13.   L.Cable, 10/92 St Pauls Street, Randwick

 

§ Proposal will exacerbate current traffic congestion and put more pressure on existing parking

 

14.   D.J Mors, 25 Dine Street, Randwick

 

§ Proposal will cause further disruption to public transport and pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the Spot including:

-Illegal parking in bus zones, unsafe and difficult for bus passengers

-Congestion from picking up and dropping off outside cinema

-Illegal double parking

-Illegal parking within building alignments

 

15.   M.Scott, 3 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick

 

§ Excessive increase in patrons when compared to parking that will be provided

§ Staff will have to park on the street as basement parking will not be used for this purpose any more

Comment: 2 staff parking spaces are proposed at 25 Perouse Road

§ Three new shops including at least one new restaurant and the development on the corner of Perouse Rd and Aeolia Street will require additional parking not provided on site

Comment: This is the subject of a separate development assessment. The approved building at 25 Perouse Road has adequate parking to accommodate the development and staff parking for the Ritz.

§ Current parking restrictions in Daintrey Crescent have not deterred people from parking on footpaths and nature reserves or in ‘No Stopping’ zones

 

16.   B.O’Halloran, 91 Perouse Road, Randwick

 

§ Traffic and parking impacts

 

17.   J.Jones, 6/2 Dudley Street, Randwick

 

§ Parking impacts of proposal will exacerbate existing lack of parking in nearby residential areas

 

18.   O. Kautinchbury, 12/280 Carrington Road, Coogee

 

§ Impact of increased cinema partronage on residents parking

§ Hospital carpark is too far away to make a big difference to the current situation in the Spot

§ Pedestrian safety will be compromised by proposal

§ Approval will detract from heritage aspects of the area

 

19.   T & M Godhard, 23 St Pauls Street, Randwick

 

§ Traffic and parking impacts of proposal will exacerbate existing situation

§ Erosion of local roadways and traffic safety and manouvering concerns due to illegal parking as a result of parking shortages in The Spot.

§ Applicant was supposed to provide additional parking as a result of previous application and this has not been fully complied with.

§ Any increase of theatre seats is detrimental to local residents due to increased traffic, noise and critical lack of parking, application should be refused.

 

20.   C. Barraket, 91 Perouse Road, Randwick

 

§ On the basis of the previous Court judgement and reduced demand for the cinema due to nearby theatres, the current application is not supportable.

§ 8 extra spaces is not acceptable given that 56 extra would be required for the increased seating.

§ Traffic

§ Illegal parking

§ Increased noise

§ Increased rubbish

§ Lack on onstreet parking reduces residents amenity in terms of being able to have visitors to residences

§ No decrease in the above impacts, despite decreasing patronage of the Ritz.

 

21.   J.Murphy, 93 Perouse Road, Randwick

 

§ Object to proposal to increase patron numbers which is contrary to Court’s ruling that patron numbers should be reduced to minimise parking impacts in the locality

§ Insufficient parking provided

 

22.   A. Tosti, Chairperson The Spot Precinct Committee

 

§ Proposal will exacerbate existing parking and traffic situation at The Spot

§ Increased noise and loss of residential amenity, particularly on days when blockbuster films draw larger than usual audiences

§ Prince of Wales Hospital parking is irrelevant, this parking has not been widely marketed and is not viable due to the distance from the cinema and high cost of $2.20 per half hour.

§ The ARUP study supports the argument that there is traffic congestion at The Spot, although survey periods did not include night time and therefore is not a complete representation of the traffic conditions in The Spot

§ Proposal does not uphold objectives of DCP 22.

§ The spaces on other properties proposed for use by the applicant are not tied to the Cinema and may be reallocated at any time, Council has previously rejected applications proposing a similar scenario

§ No increase in allowable patronage can be supported until adequate off street parking is provided

§ No resident parking scheme has been put in place to assist in sharing on-street parking in The Spot

§ Original heritage aspects of the cinema have been removed and the applicant has not established a link to financial viability as an operating cinema.

§ Inadequate details of when the cinema was filled to capacity. This will need to be established to support the claim that the economic viability of the cinema relies on the increased patronage

 

23.   The Owners Corporation, 6-10 Dine Street aka 255 Avoca Street, Randwick

 

§ Parking

§ Although patron numbers have decreased, ticket prices have increased 25% over the last year

§ Prince of Wales Hospital parking is not adequately advertised

§ Level of patrolling to enforce 2 hour non-residents time limit is unclear

§ Council/ private business needs to provide a parking area of patrons

§ A reasonable outcome needs to be reached to ensure the amenity of surrounding residential areas.

 

24.   J & H Todd, 22 Stewart Street, Randwick

 

§ Lack of parking

§ Resident parking required

§ Traffic safety and congestion

§ Illegally parked vehicles

§ Noise

§ Rubbish

 

Two submissions marked ‘private and confidential’ were also received. These submissions objected to the proposal on the following grounds:

 

§ Traffic in the commercial zone infringes on residential amenity

§ Lack of residential parking – resident parking scheme urgently required

§ Vehicle noise, grafitti and vandalism have increased in The Spot

§ Street rubbish has increased

§ Driveways and naturestrips are regularly blocked by attendees of the cinemas and restaurants.

§ Parking, traffic safety and congestion

§ Car parking not owned by the owner of the Ritz should not be used to increase seat numbers at the Ritz.

§ Question argument for economic viability and the heritage value of the cinema given there are other examples on the Heritage Register. Independent heritage assessment required

§ Ritz may not be suited to screening mainstream films

§ Financial statements have not been properly prepared and cannot be relied upon

§ Statements in relation to market rent may be manipulated as the lessee of the premises is also the owner

§ Breakeven analysis does not appear to be correct and cost of maintaining building fabric and heritage aspects of building represent a small percentage of the overall revenue generated by the cinema.

§ The decline in patron numbers was known to the applicant prior to construction of the extensions

§ Amenity of residential areas in DCP 22 has not been considered in the SEE

§ Restaurants contribute more in terms of employment to the community than the Ritz, for the parking impact they generate.

 

Comments on submissions:

 

The overriding issue of concern for nearby residents is traffic and parking in The Spot precinct. Council is currently reviewing parking conditions in the area (see section 6.2). Deferred commencement condition 1 requires details of how the proposed spaces on the other sites will be tied to the use of the Cinema. This issue of parking is discussed in detail in Section 8.1 of this report.

 

Issues such as noise, graffiti and rubbish are considered to be due to the proximity of a vibrant commercial zone such as The Spot to residential areas and are not significantly contributed to by the cinema use, or any increase in the allowable number of patrons.

 

This is a new development application that does not directly relate to the previous Court ruling. Notwithstanding that this is a new DA, Section 96AA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act gives Council the power to modify consents issued by the Court. In any case, the applicant previously agreed to the condition limiting the number of patrons to 1,253. The applicant has now provided information that supports the removal of the cap in an effort to boost patron numbers and maintain the viability of the cinema. The screening of popular films is likely ensure that patronage remains at levels required to support the maintenance and conservation of the heritage building on the site.

 

The additional information provided relies on a previous detailed analysis of financial records that established a 14.9% decline in patronage would result in the cinema’breaking even’. Comparison of the last 2 years has shown decreases higher than this and supports the argument that an increase is required to ensure viability of the cinema operation on the site. Additional details indicating the extent to which current restrictions are limiting patronage have been provided (see discussion under section 8).

 

Restaurant uses rely in part on trade as a result of their proximity to the Ritz cinema and the contribution the cinema makes to the heritage streetscape of The Spot precinct.

 

The requirements of DCP 22 has been considered in section 8.1 of this report.

 

In relation to heritage issues raised by objectors, heritage advice from the applicant has not been relied upon in this assessment. Council’s Heritage Planner and the Heritage Office have both provided comments that support the proposal on heritage grounds.

 

5.2  Support

 

1.   The Spot Business Association Inc., PO Box 24, St Paul’s

 

§ The Ritz is the only Cinema complex in Randwick City and is a major attractor in the bustling precinct of The Spot.

§ The Spot has recently been re-vitalised and now supports 70 businesses with over 400 employees.

§ The Spot is a valued precinct for leisure time within Randwick City. The Ritz is the focal business in the precinct.

§ As the cinema operates in a competitive environment, it should be accorded every possible assistance by Council to ensure it ongoing viability.

 

2. J.W & H.D Deegan, 15 Mermaid Avenue, Maroubra (owners 42 Perouse Road, Randwick)

 

§ Without the cinema the precinct would quickly lose patronage to the point that many existing businesses would not survive.

§ We urge Council to extend all reasonable support to the Ritz Cinema to ensure its continuing viability.

 

3. S, H, D, A.Ohnesorge, 6/18 Daintrey Crescent (4 separate letters sent)

 

§ The Ritz contributes to the vitality of the neighbourhood and is a main attractor.

§ Enabling additional patrons would augment the positive effect the Ritz has on the area.

§ The additional parking will offset negative impacts on the parking situation in the area

 

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

 

The Manager, Environmental Health and Building has not raised any objection to the proposal and has noted that the building is Class 9(b) – place of public entertainment under the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Conditions recommended by Environmental Health and Building have been included (see Conditions 3-5).

 

6.2       Engineering Issues

 

The Director, Assets and Infrastructure Services has provided the following comments on the application:

 

An application has been received to increase the number of patrons permitted to be seated in the existing Ritz cinema at the above site.

 

The seating capacity of the cinema is understood to be 1815 patrons, however, the existing development approval limits the number of patrons at the site to 1253, and requires that regular audits be undertaken of the site to confirm that the patron limit is being adhered to.

 

Comments from Council’s Traffic Engineer for Parking

 

The subject development site is located within an area known as ‘The Spot’. Council has received numerous complaints from residents regarding the parking shortages in the area and is currently in the process of reviewing the parking conditions with the intent of providing a comprehensive residential parking scheme.

 

The application was referred to the Council Traffic Engineer who is currently reviewing the parking arrangements in ‘The Spot’ and the following report/comments were received:

 

This report deals specifically with the parking and traffic implications of the proposed development at the Ritz Cinema Complex (DA615/03). No comment is offered in respect of matters of heritage value or financial viability of the development.

 

The current application seeks to lift a previously imposed cap which limits seating capacity to 1253, to the physical seating capacity of the complex which is 1815 seats. The background to the setting of this seating cap is fully explained in the submission by URAP.

 

The Activity and Parking Assessment report prepared by Urban Research & Planning Pty Ltd on behalf of the applicant recommends that based on its findings (as detailed in the executive summary of that report) the current seating limitation of the Ritz Cinema Complex should be removed. An ancillary report prepared by SPD Town Planners on behalf of the applicant further supports URAP’s findings by concluding that the proposal will have no adverse parking impact.

 

Whilst both reports come to favorable conclusion on the proposal, both reports place major emphasis on the operation of the cinema complex, with only minor emphasis being given to the proposal’s impact on neighboring residential areas. In some respects, the conclusions reached by URAP and SPD are flawed.

 

1.   The URAP report provides detailed analysis of parking surveys conducted on behalf of the applicant. These surveys were conducted between 6.30pm-8.30pm on Friday (8/8/2003), Saturday(9/8/2003) and Monday(11/8/2003) and show variously that between 67.0% and 94.6% of on-street parking spaces in the vicinity of the Ritz were occupied. The summation therefore being that between 5% and 33% of on-street parking spaces were available, and that even at peak times of 5%, some 40 on-street parking spaces were vacant.

 

This survey however was performed over the entire area bounded by Avoca St, Coogee Bay Rd, Howard St and St. Pauls St and includes some on-street parking spaces which are up to 500 meters walking distance from the cinema complex, well beyond the 200 meter radius which is commonly accepted (See Section 6.3 ARAP Report).

 

Based on URAP’s own figures, for the 12 street sections within approximately 200 meters of the Ritz, only 3 of 443 on-street parking spaces were available at the peak cinema time of 8.30pm on Saturday 9 August 2003.

 

Whilst these parking counts include residents’ vehicles, the above highlights the serious existing deficiency in on-street parking in the vicinity of the Spot commercial center.

 

2.   The URAP report states that approximately 50% of cinema patrons use a car (ie. either drive or are passengers in a car). Using average figures, a further 10% are dropped off by car, 11% use public transport, 26% walk, and 3% use taxi or other.

 

URAP also states average vehicle occupancy rates of 2.3 persons per vehicle. On this basis, at peak cinema times when the current cap of 1253 is achieved approximately 270 vehicles are parked in the vicinity of the spot belonging to patrons of the cinema and a further 55 vehicles are in the area for drop-offs (according to the URAP report this occurred on 29 occasions during the last financial year). This equates to 650 vehicle movements in one peak cinema session or between 250-325 movements per hour.

 

If the capacity of the venue is increased to 1815 as requested, then it is possible that a further 145 vehicles will enter the area with up to 120 additional vehicles seeking to park in the area. The total vehicle movements as a result of a capacity crowd at the complex will be as high as 375-470 per hour.

 

3.   It is conceded that a considerable number of vehicles parked in residential streets in the vicinity of the Spot commercial center are residents’ vehicles. This of course is a function of an increase in vehicle usage by residents as well as an increase in residential units in the area. Residential parking will to some degree alleviate residents’ parking problems and Council is currently investigating this matter. Unfortunately residential parking will exacerbate the problem for patrons of the commercial center.

 

4.   It is further conceded that other commercial developments, other than the Ritz, as well as the POW hospital are also contributing to the parking problem in the area. The argument that numerous new restaurants have been developed in the area is a part of the problem, but then equally restaurant owners may argue that the Ritz only had one screen twenty-five years ago. Council however, has to balance the needs of all commercial enterprises and strike a balance in the imposition of on-street parking restrictions. Whereas quick turnover of parking would suit some business enterprises, others such as the cinema and restaurants would prefer to see long-term parking arrangements. The co-operative approach between the POW Hospital and the Ritz Cinema in respect of the hospital’s parking area are commendable and should be actively encouraged to other commercial enterprises in the Spot. Whilst the perfect solution would involve an increase in the number of public parking spaces available in the Spot, this arrangement with the hospital may form the basis of a short term strategy to overcome existing parking problems.

 

Summary

 

Significant parking problems are already evident in the Spot and the adjacent residential areas. Removal of the seating cap on the Ritz Cinema Complex will not by that action result in any improvement in this situation. It is however possible that by removing this cap parking problems will be exacerbated.

 

It is recommended that:

 

The existing cap of 1253 on the Ritz Cinema Complex be maintained.

 

Traffic/Parking Comments

 

In addition to the above comments the AIS Department also provides the following comments.

 

The applicant claims in their statement of environmental effects that the proposal will not adversely affect the parking situation in the vicinity of the site. The AIS Department does not agree with this statement and notes the following in relation to the proposal:

 

·    The applicant’s traffic consultant claims that ‘Reducing the capacity of the cinema complex to a number less than the total seating capacity has no effect on the parking situation in the area as the persons arriving for the cinema are not aware of the imposed limitation on number of patrons has been exceeded until they arrive at the cinema’.

 

In response to this statement, the AIS Department firstly notes that removing the seating restriction will enable the cinema to alter their screening arrangements (possibly run more concurrent blockbuster movies, offer movie marathons, alter pricing etc) to attract additional patronage.  The purpose of the proposal is to increase profits for the cinema, primarily by permitting additional patronage. Thus, it can only be assumed that the cinema will encourage additional patronage, which in turn will inevitably result in increased parking demands.

 

It is secondly noted that whilst a percentage of patrons currently turned away from the theatre (when the patronage limits are reached) may remain in the area, some will drive away effectively freeing up parking spaces.

 

·    The submitted transport survey indicates that the parking demands from the cinema complex are much higher than the assumed 1 per 10 seats, with a minimum of 23% percent of patrons being car drivers. This would suggest the parking demands generated from the cinema are closer to 1 carspace per 4 seats rather than the previously adopted figure of 1 space per 10 seats.

 

Based on these revised parking generation rates the proposed additional 562 patrons, would generate an additional parking demand of 140 plus the additional staff parking requirements.

 

The applicant proposes to provide an additional 7 parking spaces only (in addition to the 8 currently on site). This leaves a substantial parking deficit (for the proposal) of at least 133 spaces. Even if the parking generation rates were as low as 1 space per 10 seats, the parking deficit for the proposal would still be some 49 spaces.

 

·    The AIS Department raises concerns over the manner in which the additional 7 parking spaces are to be provided.

 

It is understood that the existing development provides a total of 8 staff parking spaces only. The applicant proposes that these 8 on-site parking spaces be converted to patron parking spaces together with 5 parking spaces located at the rear of 50 St Pauls Street. The staff parking provisions would be reduced to 2 spaces located at 25 Perouse Road. It is noted that the applicant proposes to manage the patron parking under a valet parking arrangement.

 

The AIS Department does not generally support the use of off-site parking facilities to meet on site parking demands unless it can be demonstrated that the parking spaces will always be available (even if the ownership of either development changes) and that the use of the spaces will not result in a parking deficit in the development from which they are taken. It is further noted that the AIS Department raises concerns over the appropriateness of a valet parking system.

 

Should the EPCD Department consider approving the development application with the parking arrangements as proposed by the applicant, the AIS Department has included two recommended deferred commencement conditions in this report which are aimed at resolving the issues raised in this point.

 

Comments on Compliance with Council DCP for ‘The Spot’ and surrounds

 

Council’s DCP for the Spot and surrounds incudes the following objective:

 

To increase the availability of carparking and improve the pedestrian environment by reducing pedestrian/vehicular conflicts within the commercial areas.

 

Given that the proposal is likely to increase the parking demands in the area, it is considered that the proposal is not in keeping with the objective of increasing the availability of carparking. Further, given that the proposal is likely to increase pedestrian movements by attracting additional patrons to the area, together with resulting in increased vehicular movements in the area (as noted by Council’s Traffic engineer), it is anticipated that pedestrian/vehicular conflicts will increase rather than decrease.

 

Based on the parking and traffic implication of the proposal the AIS Department does not support the proposal and recommends that the application be refused.

 

Should the EPCD Department determine that the application should be approved with reliance on the 8 on-site parking spaces and 7 off-site parking spaces, it is recommended S94 contributions for the parking deficit be obtained and that the following deferred commencement condition be included in the approval.

 

Issues raised by the AIS Department have been considered in detail in the relevant sections of this report. Conditions suggested by the AIS Department, including deferred commencement conditions have been included in the recommendation section of this report (see Deferred Commencement Conditions 1 and 2 and condition 6).

 

6.3       Randwick Development Committee

 

The Randwick Development Committee discussed the proposal at its meeting of 9 December 2003. The following comments are made:

 

Development Proposal:

The current application is to increase the number of patrons permitted to be seated in the existing Ritz Cinema complex to 1815, which is the maximum number that could be accommodated in the complex.

 

The applicant is seeking to use the basement for patron parking and provide two staff parking spaces at 25 Perouse Road and valet parking for the cinema patrons at 50 St Pauls Street (5 spaces).

 

Background:

The Ritz Cinema was established in 1937 with one cinema for approximately 1000 patrons.  No off-street parking was provided, except 8 spaces in the basement area, which was used for management and staff parking.

 

In 1996, Council approved a DA permitting an additional three cinemas and increased the maximum number of patrons to be accommodated to 1253.

 

As part of this consent, Council agreed to the provision of 3 car parking spaces at the rear of the cinema for valet parking.  In addition, approval was granted to the provision of 35 additional angle parking spaces on the northern side of St Pauls Street.  Previously there were 26 angle parking spaces at this location.

 

The applicant met the full cost for Council to undertake all roadworks including signposting and line marking, to create these additional 35 spaces.

 

On 29 November 1999, the applicant was granted consent by the Land and Environment Court to add 2 more cinemas (containing 345 seats), subject to a condition limiting the maximum number of patrons to 1253.

Committee’s Consideration:

 

The subject development site is located within an area known as ‘The Spot’.  Council has received numerous complaints from residents regarding the parking shortages in the area.

The major cinema complexes such as Fox Studios, Westfield, etc. have incorporated adequate off-street parking to cater for their patrons.  The Ritz Cinema should also be required to provide adequate off-street parking.

 

The Committee considers that the Ritz Cinema currently utilises 272 on-street parking spaces, with a capacity crowd of 1253 patrons.  This assumption is based on the report by Urban Research and Planning Pty Ltd:  50% of patrons use cars with an average car occupancy rate of 2.3 persons per car.

 

50% of 1253 = 626 divided by 2.3 = 272 spaces on-street which translates to one car parking space per 4.6 seats.

 

The applicant’s request for the use of 5 parking spaces located at the rear of premises No: 50 St Pauls Street and 2 spaces at No: 25 Perouse Road as valet parking could not be acceded as it is considered that it will create an unsatisfactory precedent for similar development proposals with inadequate on-site parking.

 

The Committee considers that in effect the patrons of the Ritz have previously been permitted to use 135 parking spaces on street in the vicinity.

 

This is based on the assumption that historically (between 1937 and 1996) approximately 100 parking spaces on-street served to cater for the needs of the patrons.  In addition, 35 on-street parking spaces were added in 1996.

 

If ratio of 1 parking space per 10 seats were adopted to calculate the parking requirement, the Committee would not object to permit a maximum of 1350 patrons.

 

However, based on the submitted survey results (which indicate a parking rate of one space per 4.6 patrons), a total of 272 spaces would be required.  This demonstrates that the existing development is already deficient in parking supply.  Therefore any additional increase in the number of patrons should not be supported without corresponding increase in parking supply.

 

The applicant has proposed the use of the Prince of Wales Hospital car park, operated by Metro Parking.

 

If such a proposal is to be supported, a signed agreement from the operator of Prince of Wales Car Park should be presented for the consideration of Council. Even if such an agreement is provided there is no guarantee that such a facility would be utilised.

 

In summary, the Committee considers that significant parking problems are already evident within The Spot Precinct and the adjacent residential areas.

 

Any increase in the permitted capacity of the complex without provision of additional parking, will exacerbate the traffic and parking problems currently being experienced in the area.

 

                IT IS RECOMMENDED:

 

Council be advised that the Randwick Traffic Committee does not support the application by the Ritz Cinema to increase the number of patrons permitted to be seated in the existing Ritz Cinema complex to 1815.

 

The impact of traffic and parking has been discussed in detail in section 8.1.

 

6.4       Heritage Issues

 

Council’s Heritage Planner has provided the following comment on the proposal:

 

The subject site is occupied by The Ritz Cinema, listed as a heritage item under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and listed on the State Heritage Register.  The Randwick Heritage Study Inventory Sheet describes the building as “the first modern style cinema in Randwick.  …  One of only a few Art Deco cinemas of the 1930s still operating in NSW.”

 

Generally, as the site is listed on the State Heritage Register, any proposal needs to be the subject of an Integrated Development Application or a prior application under Section 60 of the NSW Heritage Act.  As the NSW Heritage Office is the consent authority for the application, Council cannot issue development approval until the Heritage Office has provided conditions of consent. Amendments to the Heritage Act, gazetted in March 2003 however, allow for certain categories of minor works to be exempted from Heritage Office approval. Council have apparently forwarded to the applicant a copy of the Exemptions clauses and Notification Form.  Once Council has received a signed copy of the Exemptions Notification Form from the Heritage Office, Council can proceed with the determination for the development application.

 

The application proposes increasing the maximum number of patrons allowed in the premises, to reallocate staff parking on site for the use of patrons, and to remove the need for regular auditing of patrons.

 

The application has been accompanied by a Heritage Impact Report prepared by David Scobie Architects Pty Ltd.  The Conservation Management Plan (CMP) for the building prepared by Architectural Projects Pty Ltd recommended the programming of cyclic maintenance, and Peter Lonergan of Cracknell Lonergan has prepared more detailed Schedules of Conservation Works and budgets.  Accounting receipts have been provided for the works completed during the 2002-2003 financial year.  The Report notes that a review of the current and proposed expenditure on building maintenance confirms that the substantial expenditure is consistent with a building with the age, condition and frequency of use of the Ritz, and the requirement for specialist materials and finishes.  The Report notes that the building requires a combination of capital works and cyclical maintenance, including new carpet, repair of damaged plaster, repolishing and reupholstering of seating, much of it within the next five years.  The Report argues that considering the current decline in revenue through ticket sales, the Operator will be unable to sustain the appropriate expenditure, and the heritage significance of the building will be affected through damage and decay to the building fabric.  The Report therefore argues that income derived through increased ticket sales will therefore be vital in funding the Conservation Works. The Report notes that the key element of the significance of the site is the continued operation of the site as a cinema.  The Report includes a letter from the NSW Heritage Office expressing support for the continued viability of the Cinema, in the face of competition from existing and new cinema operators.

 

The proposal in relation to increase the number of patrons, reallocate staff parking, and to remove patron auditing requirements will not impact on the fabric of the building.  The proposal will improve the financial viability of the cinema and will provide increased funds for required ongoing maintenance of the building, which will ensure its continued conservation. The proposal is supported on heritage grounds.

 

6.5       Heritage Council of NSW

 

The Heritage Office has indicated that the proposal has been assessed and that the development does not require approval of the Heritage Council under section 57(1) of the Heritage Act.

 

No further comment from the Heritage Council is required.

 

A letter from the Heritage Office was received on 11 August 2003 that highlights the importance of the Cinema in heritage terms and states that the Heritage Office supports the ongoing economic viability of the Cinema and its continued use for the purpose for which it was originally constructed.

 

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

As the site has an area less than 4,000m2, the Master Plan provisions of the LEP do not apply.

 

8.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

-           Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (RLEP)

-           State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

-           Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended (EP&A Act)

-           Building Code of Australia (BCA)

 

(a)   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 3(b) 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:-

 

Commercial

Clause

Effect

Applies

Comment

43

Heritage Item of Conservation Area

Yes

See discussion below

46

Vicinity of Heritage Item/ Conservation Area

Yes

See discussion below

47

Provides incentives to allow ongoing conservation of Heritage Items

Yes

See discussion below

 

The relevant objectives of the 3(b) zone are:

 

(a)  to provide opportunities for local retail and business development in the City of Randwick

(d) to minimise the impact of development on adjoining and nearby residential zones

 

These objectives are similar to those in DCP 22. The proposal to increase patron numbers is considered to fulfil objective (a) by supporting the continued viability of the cinema operation on the site. The Ritz also encourages further development in its vicinity by supporting uses such as cafes and restaurants. The proposal meets objective (a) of the 3(b) zone.

 

The proposal has minimised the impacts of the additional patronage by providing additional patron parking and encouraging use of the Prince of Wales carparking for patrons to the Spot. Impacts on residents living in proximity to The Spot such as traffic and parking, graffiti, noise and rubbish cannot be attributed soley to the cinema use. The expected increase in patronage will not significantly increase impacts on surrounding residents. The proposal meets objective (d) of the 3(b) zone.

 

Clause 43 – Protection of heritage items, heritage conservation areas and relics

 

The applicant does not propose any changes to the building fabric as a result of this proposal. The provisions of Clauses 43(1) and 43(2) relate to building works and do not require detailed consideration for this proposal. Subclause (3) relates to the provision of a heritage impact report for all applications involving heritage items. A report by David Scobie Architects P/L has been considered in this assessment and the requirements of Clause 43 have been met by the proposal.

 

Clause 46– Development in the vicinity of heritage items, heritage conservation areas and potential archaeological sites

 

The subject site is located adjacent and opposite to The Spot Heritage Conservation Area. Although the Ritz Cinema is located outside the boundaries of the conservation area, its proximity to the conservation area contributes to the overall character of The Spot. The art deco external façade of the cinema makes a positive contribution to character of St Pauls Street and at the eastern end of the commercial precinct provides a clear delineation between The Spot and adjacent residential zones. The current proposal to increase the number of patrons allowed to occupy the cinema will contribute to the overall character of the conservation area by providing the funds necessary to maintain and conserve the exterior of the building.

 

The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to Clause 46 of the LEP.

 

Clause 47 – Conservation incentives

 

Clause 47 of the LEP provides incentives to encourage conservation of heritage items by allowing a relaxation of the permissible uses within a zone and relaxation of the FSR standards contained within the LEP. Legal opinion on the application of this clause of the LEP has been provided which states that a liberal interpretation of the clause is appropriate in order to achieve the objective of the clause (which is conservation). The applicant has provided details that the cost of conservation and maintenance works to the building equates to $532,835 annually. The current rate of decline in patronage to the cinema is 17% and is greater than the breakeven point previously accepted by the Land and Environment Court of 14.9%. The applicant has asserted that ongoing conservation of the heritage item will not be possible if patronage continues to decline at this rate and that current restrictions on patronage are limiting the operators ability to generate sufficient funds for conservation. In this instance Clause 47 may be used to relax controls that are potentially hindering ongoing conservation of the cinema.

 

The Statement of Significance contained within the Heritage Report prepared by David Scobie Architects P/L states that “The operation of the Cinema is the foundation of the significance of the item”. This is supported by correspondence from the Heritage Office that indicates that the use of the building as a working cinema is appropriate to the heritage value of the building. The ongoing viability of a cinema use within the building is considered vital to its heritage value. The figures reported in the application indicate that patronage is declining to a point where the operation of the cinema will no longer be economically viable. The increased availability of seats will allow the cinema operator greater potential for income and will ensure the continued cinema operation on the site.

The ongoing economic viability of the cinema use depends on the revenue gained from ticket and candy bar sales. This revenue is directly linked to the number of patrons able to attend each session at the cinema. As noted by Council’s Heritage Planner, an increased allowable patronage will provide additional funds to support maintenance and conservation costs commensurate with the age, frequent use and architectural detailing of the building. Additional details of the numbers of patrons declined access to the Cinema have been provided that indicate the numbers of patrons turned away range from 5 to 100. On one occasion noted the number was in excess of 200, however it is unclear as to whether this was due to restrictions or due to internal scheduling arrangements with a popular film being shown in one of the smaller theatres. These figures indicate that there is demand for the cinema over and above the current approval and that the relaxation of the current parton limit will make a contribution to the long term viability of the cinema.

 

The applicant has demonstrated that the heritage significance of the Ritz Cinema relies heavily on its continued operation as a working cinema. The increased patronage will ensure the medium to long-term viability of this use. Clause 47 may be used to support the application to increase the number of patrons allowed on the site despite the inability to provide off street parking in accordance with Council’s DCP. In addition, the applicant has provided details of works required to maintain and conserve the fabric of the building. The increased patron numbers will provide additional revenue that is required to fund the ongoing conservation of the building in accordance with Clause 47 of the LEP.

 

(b)   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

Clause 7(1)(a) of the SEPP requires Council to consider whether the land is contaminated in the consideration of development applications. The longstanding use of the site for a cinema is unlikely to have resulted in contamination of the site such that it is unsuitable for continued use as a cinema. The proposal is satisfactory with regard to SEPP 55.

 

8.1  Policy Controls

 

a.    Development Control Plan No. 22 “The Spot” and Surrounds Coogee Precinct

 

DCP 22 applies to the subject site. As no building works are proposed the application of the DCP is limited to the objectives and car parking controls for the Commercial zone. The cinema is listed as a Heritage Item under Part 2 of the DCP, however the provisions of the DCP largely relate to building works in relation to heritage items. The issue of heritage is covered in detail in Sections 6.4 and 8(a) of this report.

 

Part 3 Commerical Zone

 

The relevant aims and objectives of DCP 22 are to conserve and enhance the environmental heritage of “The Spot “ and identified heritage items and to increase the availability of car parking and improve the pedestrian environment by reducing pedestrian/ vehicular conflicts within the commercial centre. The proposal will assist in the conservation and enhancement of the cinema, which is a heritage listed item under RLEP98 and the State Heritage Register. The proposal will provide additional valet parking and therefore increases the availability of parking in The Spot. Increased patronage to the Ritz will improve the pedestrian environment in The Spot by providing greater casual surveillance of the area and creating a vibrant atmosphere in the commercial centre.

 

The objectives of the DCP are underpinned by reference to Council’s DCP – Parking and Section 94 Contributions Plan. As discussed in the relevant sections of this report, the DCP-Parking recognises that parking requirements may not always be achieved for heritage buildings and s94 plan does not include provision for additional parking in the vicinity of the cinema. The proposal meets the general objectives for DCP 22.

 

DCP 22 provides objectives and controls specific to the Commerical zone. Objectives (a)-(c) relate to the conservation and enhancement of the commercial streetscape and include that original features be reinstated and that colour schemes are chosen appropriate to the heritage streetscape. The ongoing conservation and maintenance of the Ritz Cinema is directly related to the increased patronage and therefore the proposal will support the achievement of objectives 3.1(a)-3.1(c) of DCP 22.

 

Relevant objectives under part 3.1 are as follows:

 

e)   To minimise the potential of buildings within the commercial zone to adversely affect the amenity of adjoining residential land

f)    To maintain a minimum level of commercial floorspace in new development to enhance the  commercial viability, retail quality and continuity within the “Spot”

 

Although nearby residents have raised concern regarding traffic, parking, noise and graffiti it is difficult to separate the impact of the cinema use from other commercial activities in the area. The use of additional seats within the cinema is expected to result in additional traffic and parking demand.

 

It is recognised that the number of spaces provided by the applicant will not accommodate the expected additional parking demand. The existing traffic and parking conditions in The Spot are currently under review by Council. The additional impacts of increased traffic in this area are considered to be less than in an area where there are currently no traffic volumes or parking pressures. The pressure on parking in the area is expected to discourage patrons from driving and encourage alternative means of transport. The applicant has attempted to mitigate impacts through the provision of a small number of valet parking spaces and has suggested the use of parking at the Prince of Wales Hospital site.

The proposal is considered to minimise the potential for adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining residential areas and achieves objective (e) of the DCP.

 

The proposal to increase the allowable number of patrons to The Ritz Cinema is considered to contribute to the commercial viability of the Spot. The Ritz Cinema is a major attractor to the area and contributes to the ongoing success of restaurants and cafes within the precinct. The applicant has put forward a case that due to increased pressures of competition and rising costs, the viability of the cinema relies on increased patronage. The applicant has also argued that being able to use the full capacity of the 1,815 seats that exist in the complex will assist in achieving an increased patronage. Figures provided with the application indicate that at the current declining patronage rate the cinema has fallen below breakeven point. It is likely that the cinema will close if its economic viability can’t be maintained. It is considered that closure of the Ritz would have a detrimental impact on the commercial precinct of The Spot. The proposal meets objective (f) of the DCP.

 

DCP 22 also requires that development meet the car parking controls contained within DCP – Parking. A discussion of compliance with the DCP is included below.

 

b.  DCP – Parking

 

The DCP parking does not provide any standard parking rates for theatres and places of assembly. Instead, the DCP requires assessment based on a transport survey. The applicant has provided an Activity and Parking Assessment report for the proposal. The conclusion of this report is that the estimated parking demand for a peak session on a Saturday night would be 200 spaces.

 

A credit may be applied to this demand for the 1,253 existing seats within the cinema. This leaves a parking requirement of 122 spaces. The applicant proposes to provide 18 spaces including 2 spaces for staff use. At present only 3 of these spaces are available for the use of cinema patrons. The parking shortfall is therefore calculated to be 107 spaces (122 less 15 spaces). This shortfall is calculated based on all seats within cinema being occupied at the rates stated in the applicant’s traffic report. From attendance figures provided with the application, and the overall decline in cinema patronage, a ‘full-house’ (1,815 patrons) represents a small percentage of the sessions held over the course of a week.

 

The additional parking demand of 122 additional vehicles represents the maximum number, reached when the cinema reaches its maximum capacity of 1,815 patrons. The average number of additional vehicles requiring parking during the peak session on Mondays would be 16 cars and during the peak session on Saturdays would be 60 cars total. The achievement of a capacity crowd in the cinema is considered to be a rare event and this is supported by existing patronage information provided in the Activity and Parking Assessment. The likely impact of the proposal ranges from 15-60 additional on street parking spaces, with occasional peaks of 107 spaces.

 

The Activity and Parking Assessment provides that there are 796 on-street parking spaces available within The Spot precinct. This includes spaces within a 500m radius of the Ritz Cinema. The use of a 500m radius as a comfortable distance for patrons to walk between the cinema and parking spaces by the applicant’s consultant is considered reasonable given the existing parking demand in the area.

 

From patronage figures provided, the average peak session on a Monday generates a total requirement of 51 spaces. This results in a parking shortfall of 36 spaces or 4.5% of the total on-street availability. During a Saturday peak session (generally the busiest day of the week), the required parking is 206 spaces. This results in a parking shortfall of 191 spaces or 24% of the total on-street availability. Therefore during the peak session on a typical Saturday evening, the busiest night of the week for the Cinema, three-quarters of the on-street parking spaces will be available for the use of residents or patrons of other commercial uses. Attendees of the cinema would often be expected to also visit restaurants and cafes in the vicinity of the cinema, further reducing the overall parking demand. For every additional 100 patrons attending the cinema, 21 parking spaces are required, or an additional 2.7% of the existing on-street availability in the vicinity of the site.

 

The figures from the parking survey are unclear as to the number of local residents (within a 500m radius) that drive to The Spot and contribute to the overall parking demand in the area, when walking would be a viable alternative. The traffic generation of the Cinema would also be contributed to by local residents who ‘drop off’ patrons rather than walking.

 

The applicant proposes to use spaces in other properties owned by the applicant to provide parking to patrons and staff. Patron parking will be made available via a valet arrangement. This is proposed to be managed with signage on Perouse Road directing patrons to Aeolia Street and providing an indication of when valet parking spaces are full. The applicant has nominated that a $4.00 per hour charge will apply to cinema patrons who use the service. The valet scheme will be advertised via on-screen advertising, signage at the ticket office Further details of the valet parking scheme are required under deferred commencement condition 2.

 

The need to address concerns raised by residents with regard to the enforcement of resident parking schemes and safety aspects of vehicles parking illegally in The Spot and surrounds is apparent. Council is currently addressing these concerns via the current review of parking conditions, with the intent of developing a comprehensive residents’ parking scheme (refer to section 6.2).

 

Although comments made by Council’s traffic engineer indicate concern over resident parking schemes limiting parking for commercial visitors, the provision of resident parking in the area is not considered to exacerbate the traffic and parking problems experienced by visitors to the commercial centre of The Spot. On-street parking spaces will be available for use by the general public, as well as residents but may be time limited for non-residents. This will ensure that turnover of spaces increases, effectively increasing the availability of parking for patrons of commercial premises in the area and residents.

The Prince of Wales Hospital parking, that is available to the public after 6.00pm Monday to Friday and on weekend days has not been relied upon in the assessment of the proposal’s impact. However, it is recognised as making a positive contribution to the provision of parking within the locality and should be encouraged as much as possible.

 

The cinema already runs concurrent blockbuster movies under the current restrictions that allow for multiple cinemas to show films concurrently so long as the total patron numbers do not exceed 1,253. Current operating hours of the cinema preclude all night movie marathons from being shown. It is acknowledged that the cinema will be encouraging additional patronage, however given the current rate of decline in patron numbers (17%), the actual increase to patron numbers is considered to be minor and traffic and parking impacts will be commensurate with this minor increase.

 

Discrepancies in the number of additional vehicles calculated by Council’s traffic consultant and development engineers, are considered to be the result of rounding of car occupancy rates to be 1 car per 4 seats. Using the applicants survey data, the rate is slightly less, resulting in the discrepancy of 20 spaces.

 

Section 2.1 of the DCP- Parking provides objectives for parking that include:

“To recognise the need for flexibility and site specific solutions for development.” The current application for increased patronage to the existing Ritz Cinema requires a site-specific solution. The provision of additional parking on the site or in surrounding streets is not achievable due to the heritage constraints and existing development in the area. In this instance the DCP allows for flexibility in finding solutions to parking. The applicant proposes to provide valet parking and encourage the use of the Prince of Wales Hospital carpark out of hours. These solutions are considered to offer some benefit in terms of the overall parking situation in The Spot and will reduce the impacts of this proposal in particular.

 

Section 2.1.2 of the DCP states that “The importance of parking must be kept in perspective in the overall development process.” It also requires that applicants demonstrate that the overall planning benefits of proposed development outweigh any deficiencies. This proposal is considered to result in a benefit in terms of the viability of The Spot commercial centre and heritage aspects of the Ritz Cinema. This benefit outweighs the likely impacts of the development in terms of traffic and parking and non-compliance with the numeric controls in the DCP – Parking.

 

8.2  Council Policies

 

a.    Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

The site is included in the Randwick town centre under Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan. A contribution is payable with regard to commercial carparking as the development falls short of the current requirement under the DCP - Parking.

 

The Ritz was originally constructed with 1,000 seats. A subsequent application increased the seating capacity to 1,253. The existing 1,253 seats are considered to be outside the scope of this assessment in terms of impact on parking. The application proposes to use the 1,815 seats that currently exist within the cinema. This represents an increase of 562 seats on the existing provision. This would require 122 carspaces be provided under Council’s DCP – Parking. The application intends to provide an additional 15 spaces as part of this application. The basis for a contribution would therefore be 107 spaces. The rate of contribution for parking in the Randwick Town Centre is $11,833 per space. The total contribution payable for the use of additional seats would be $1,266,131.00.

 

The Section 94 Contributions Plan provides for 30 spaces to be provided in Waratah Street, Randwick (over 500m from The Ritz Cinema). An amount of $141,996.00 (significantly less than the calculated contribution) is still outstanding to cover the cost of spaces not already collected for.

 

Payment of such a large contribution would be counterproductive to the intent of the conservation incentive clause and the ongoing commercial viability of the cinema operation. Section 94 Contributions include funds for a Parking and Traffic Study, which is currently underway. Additional parking is proposed in Waratah Avenue, off Belmore Road in Randwick. Parking in this location is not considered to provide any additional benefit to the subject site, as it will not increase parking in the vicinity of the cinema. Levying of contributions are not appropriate in this instance as a nexus cannot be established between the demand for parking generated by the additional seats and the car spaces that would be provided.

 

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.

 

(b)    the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality,

 

The proposal to increase the allowable patronage to the Ritz Cinema is considered to result in significant social and economic benefits to the locality in terms of heritage, the viability of the commercial precinct and the identity of the area. The proposal may also increase the range of movies screened at the cinema, providing greater choice and amenity to local moviegoers.

 

There will be no fixed environmental impact as a result of the proposal as no physical changes are proposed to the existing building. Variable environmental impacts as a result of increased patronage will be limited to increased traffic and parking demand. The additional patronage will not lead to significant increases in noise and disturbance to residential neighbours. The additional resources required to accommodate more patrons at the cinema are considered negligible in the context of the Spot precinct overall. Given the social and economic imperatives to ensure the cinema use continues within this heritage listed building the traffic and parking impacts of the proposal are considered acceptable.

 

(c)    the suitability of the site for the development,

 

The site was originally constructed as a cinema in 1937. The cinema building is heritage listed and is of State significance. The application seeks consent to use existing seats within the Cinema complex in order to ensure the ongoing conservation, maintenance and use of the building as a cinema. These are important heritage objectives that cannot be achieved on any other site within Randwick City. The site does not afford opportunities for significant additional off street parking, however the need to retain this heritage building as a focus for the precinct of The Spot is considered to be of greater weight than traffic and parking impacts.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development.

 

(d)    any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations,

 

Issues raised by submissions have been considered in section 5.1 and discussed under section 8.1, above.

 

(e)    the public interest.

 

The maintenance and conservation of the Ritz Cinema building is considered to be in the public interest as it is a heritage item of state significance. The applicant has provided information indicating reduced patronage (revenue) of the cinema is eroding the viability of its continued operation. The Heritage Office and various consultants reports have noted that a major contributor to the significance of the item is its use as a working cinema. The application of conservation incentives within RLEP98 to relax parking requirements is considered to be appropriate in order to achieve the greater public interest of protecting this important heritage item.

 

The development is considered to be in the public interest.

 

10.  CONCLUSION

 

Under clause 47 of RLEP98, Council must be reasonably satisfied that the necessary funding for the immediate and ongoing conservation of the heritage item would not be available unless the development is allowed to proceed. The applicant has demonstrated to Council that the conservation of the heritage item depends on the granting of consent for the proposed development.

 

The proposal is expected to achieve social benefits in terms of ongoing conservation of a state significant heritage item and an independent cinema use within Randwick City. The ongoing viability of the commercial precinct of The Spot, including existing restaurant and café uses that rely on the cinema as a major attractor will also benefit from any proposal that ensures continued use of the building as a cinema.

 

Although the proposal will result in increased traffic and parking demand in the area, in this instance, the significant benefits of the proposal are considered to outweigh these impacts. The issue of traffic and parking within The Spot and surrounding residential areas has been raised previously with Council and is currently being addressed. The existing situation in the area is a result of the majority of buildings in the precinct predating current controls. The limited supply of parking at present, results in significant deficiencies at certain times. The situation is such that the additional demand for parking and increased traffic will not be as significant as in an area where the cinema use had not previously existed. The lack of parking should discourage patrons from using vehicles wherever possible and encourage the use of alternative modes of transport. Based on current patronage levels, the likely additional parking demand for the majority of sessions at the cinema will not exceed the capacity of the existing street network. The required parking for the increased patronage represents between 4.5% and 24% of the available on-street parking and is considered to be acceptable given that the Ritz Cinema is the largest commercial use in the precinct.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions of consent.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent as a Deferred Commencement under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No 615/2003 for Increase the allowable number of patrons in the Ritz Cinema from 1,253 to 1,815 and increase available parking for patrons and staff to a total of 18 spaces at 39-47 St Paul's Street, Randwick subject to the following conditions:-

 

Deferred Commencement Conditions

 

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

 

1.        The applicant shall demonstrate that 5 parking spaces at No. 50 St Pauls Street, Randwick (Lot 1, DP 605406) will always be available for use by the cinema after 5:00pm on Fridays and on Saturday and Sunday, and that the 2 spaces at No. 25-31 Perouse Road (strata approved currently Lot 100, DP 1046616) will be available for use by the cinema at all times, even if the ownership of either development changes. It is noted that this shall include, but not be limited to, creating formal lease agreements for the use of the parking spaces.

 

2.        A car parking management plan supported by appropriate quantification and prepared by a qualified traffic or parking consultant shall be submitted to and approved by Council. The management plan shall demonstrate that the valet system will be managed in a safe and efficient manner and at minimum, cover the following issues:

 

a.         Method of drop off and car retrieval (It is noted that the valet parking system must not result in queuing in any public streets and must not disrupt traffic flows on surrounding streets, nor decrease the number of on-street parking spaces).

 

b.         Method of payment and proposed parking rates (if applicable).

 

c.         Method of ensuring that the valet system gets used by patrons (i.e making the system ‘user friendly’ so as to not deter patrons.

 

d.         Arrangements to indicate when the valet carparks are full.

 

e.         Staffing levels required for each period of the week to ensure satisfactory operation of the valet system.

 

f.          Provision for ongoing monitoring of the carparking performance.

 

Evidence required to satisfy the above conditions must be submitted to Council within 12 months of the date of this consent.

 

Development Consent Conditions

 

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

 

1.        The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the Heritage Impact Report prepared by David Scobie Architects Pty Ltd, revised September 25, 2003 and the Activity and Parking Assessment prepared by urban Research and Planning Pty Ltd dated September 2003 and the Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by SPD Town Planners dated 3 October 2003, all stamped received by Council on 9 October 2003, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.        Conservation and maintenance works must be carried out in accordance with The Conservation Management Plan, 1996 prepared by Architectural Projects Pty Ltd and the recommendations of any future studies or conservation plans for the site.

 

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

 

3.        The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

Failure to comply with these legislative requirements is an offence and may result in the commencement of legal proceedings, issuing of `on-the-spot` penalty infringements or service of a notice and order by Council.

 

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

 

4.        Prior to implementation of the development and increase in number of patrons, a report is to be provided to Council’s Manager Environmental Health and Building, from an accredited building certifier, which demonstrates and confirms that the existing design and configuration of the building (including exit systems) satisfies the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia for the increased, maximum number of patrons.

 

5.        In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 an application to amend your current approval to operate as a Place of Public Entertainment (dated 18 October 2001) is required to be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to increasing the number of patrons above 1,253.

 

6.        The valet parking system shall be operated in accordance with the carpark management plan approved in conjunction with deferred commencement condition 2.

 

7.        The car parking spaces must be available for use by Cinema patrons in perpetuity, in accordance with the requirements of deferred commencement condition 1.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Map showing location of objectors

 

………………………………

………………………………

 

RACHEL AITKEN

DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

ASSESSMENT OFFICER

 

 

 


 

Director Planning & Community Development's Report 106/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

1599-1601 Anzac Parade, La Perouse

 

 

DATE:

9 December, 2003

FILE NO:

D/0891/2003

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT  

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Attached is the Development Assessment Report for the demolition of the existing structures and the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development containing 12 residential apartments, commercial/retail space and basement car parking. Strata subdivision of the development is also proposed.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the development application in accordance with the recommendations contained in the attached report.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Development Application Report dated 27 November, 2003

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

 

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

 

DATE:

27 November, 2003

FILE NO:

D/0891/2003

 

PROPOSAL:

 Demolition of existing structures and the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development containing 12 residential apartments, commercial/retail space and basement car parking.  Strata subdivision of the development is also proposed.

PROPERTY:

 1599-1601 Anzac Parade, La Perouse

WARD:

 South Ward

APPLICANT:

 Architectus

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

1.           EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Committee as it is valued at $2.8 million.

 

The application proposes the demolition of the two existing dwellings and the construction and strata subdivision of a mixed use commercial and residential building with basement car parking for 36 cars in the.

 

The proposed development has a three and four storey stepped elevation to Anzac Parade and a two storey elevation to the north towards Goorawahl Avenue.

 

Located directly opposite to the south is the La Perouse Peninsula, which contains a number of heritage items, while located directly opposite to the north in Goorawahl Avenue is another heritage item, a 1920s style bungalow residence (27 Goorawahl Avenue).

 

The proposed development exceeds the floor space ratio and height limits applicable to the site in the 3B Local Business Zone.  Submissions pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 have been received in regard to these statutory standards.  It is considered that the SEPP 1 objections are well founded and should be supported. 

 

The height of the proposed development has been distributed such that a two storey building form faces the residential area to the north in Goorawahl Avenue, while the higher built form to Anzac Parade is appropriate to the scale of the La Perouse open space precinct.  The proposed building bulk between the two building forms with an open communal courtyard, with the street elevations presenting a well modulated and highly articulated facades.  Along Anzac Parade it is considered the proposed building provides a more cohesive and integrated built edge, which will better define the open space of the La Perouse historic precinct.

 

The historic buildings, structures and monuments on the La Perouse peninsula were designed to face the water and the primary views to these heritage items contain the sea, bays and headlands as the backdrop.  It is considered that the proposal will not detract from the setting of the items.

 

No significant overshadowing or privacy impacts arise from the proposed development and while there is some loss of views towards the Macquarie Watchtower from the residential precinct to the north, particularly from the road reserve, however it is considered unreasonable for a view to this heritage item to be maintained from every angle.  As such, it should be noted that a building built on the northern boundary of the site to the maximum 9m permissible would have a greater impact on the outlook, vistas and character of Goorawahl Avenue than the current proposal.

 

The Design Review Panel in consideration of the design quality principles under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 consider the proposed development has merit and will fit in well with its current context, providing good amenity for its future occupants.  Accordingly the recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.           THE PROPOSAL

 

The application proposes the demolition of the two existing dwellings and the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential building with basement car parking.  Strata subdivision is also proposed.

 

The proposed development has a three and four storey stepped elevation to Anzac Parade and a two storey elevation to the north towards Goorawahl Avenue.  The four storey form is located on the south-eastern corner of the site.

 

The proposed development is comprised of 12 residential apartments, three commercial spaces at ground floor level to Anzac Parade and parking for 36 cars, including 3 visitor car spaces, 12 commercial spaces and 21 residential spaces.  The residential component consists of the following:-

 

·          Seven (7) x two bedroom units

·          One (1) x two bedroom plus study unit

·          Three (3) x three bedroom units

·          One (1) x three bedroom plus study unit

 

The proposed development also includes the following:-

 

·          Car parking at basement and ground level.  Entrance to the carpark is located off Anzac Parade at the south-western end of the site, with egress to Goorawahl Avenue on the north-western end of the site.

·          Visitor and commercial parking is located at the basement level.

·          Three commercial units along Anzac Parade.  The shop fronts have three independent pedestrian entries from grade along the footpath of Anzac Parade, with a terrace level breaking the step of the natural slope of the site.

·          Pedestrian access to the residential component of the development is from Goorawahl Avenue on the eastern side of the site.

·          The proposed development consists of two distinct building forms:  A two storey residential flat building in the form of ‘row’ or ‘townhouse’ style apartments on the north and north-eastern frontages of the site, comprising Units 10, 11 and 12, with their own separate street entrances and a three/four storey residential flat building in the form of ‘stepped’ apartments on the south and south-eastern frontages of the site.  The two building forms wrap around and define a central open space that forms a communal courtyard.  The open space area separates the building bulk and allows for natural light and north-south orientation for most units, with natural light to residential lobbies in the stepped apartments.

·          Cross ventilation is provided to all apartments.

·          Units 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 are served by a lift from the car parking levels, allowing for flexibility in use for persons with a disability, however, it is noted that no parking for people with a disability has been provided in the proposed development.

·          Unit 12 is configured as a home/office arrangement with the office on the first floor level (ground level to Goorawahl Avenue) with residence above.

 

3.           THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the north side of the circular terminus of Anzac Parade on the La Perouse Peninsula, adjacent to the intersection of Anzac Parade with Goorawahl Avenue.  The site has frontages to Anzac Parade to the south, and Goorawahl Avenue to the north and to the east.  The site is identified as Lot 1 in DP 90871 and Lot 284 in DP 752015 and is irregular in shape, having a total site are

 

a of 1,346.8m2 (refer Figure 1). 

 

 

Figure 1: map of surrounding area (site shaded)

 

Located to the south is Botany Bay National Park, which contains a number of heritage items, including:-

 

·          The La Perouse Memorial

·          The Old Cable Station (and La Perouse Museum)

·          The Macquarie Watchtower

·          The tomb of Pere Le Receveur

·          Bare Island Fort and Causeway

 

Existing on the site are two detached dwelling houses.  Both dwellings have vehicle access from the northern boundary on Goorawahl Avenue.  The dwelling at 1599 Anzac Parade comprises a single storey brick building, while the dwelling at 1601 Anzac Parade comprises a two storey brick building, both properties have ancillary structures in the form of garages and sheds (see Figures 2 and 3).  The site falls from the north-east to the south-west, with a fall of around 2m.

 

 

Figure 2 – 1599 Anzac Parade

 

 

Figure 3: 1601 Anzac Parade on the right

and 1603 Anzac Parade on the left

 

Located on the adjoining site to the west on Anzac Parade is a two storey building (1603 Anzac Parade) containing a restaurant at ground floor level with residential units above (its relationship with the subject site can be seen in Figure 3 above).  To the east of the subject site is open space between Goorawahl Avenue and a turning circle off Anzac Parade (refer Figure 4).  To the north are predominantly detached dwellings in Goorawahl Avenue.  Directly opposite to the north is No. 27 Goorawahl Avenue, a heritage listed 1920s bungalow (refer Figure 5).

 

 

Figure 4 – Open space to the east,

between Goorawahl Avenue and turning circle

 off Anzac Parade

 

 

Figure 5 – 27 Goorawahl Avenue opposite to the north

 

4.           APPLICATION HISTORY

 

A formal pre- lodgement meeting for the proposed development was held with Council Officers on the 28th July, 2003 and issues identified to the applicant by letter dated the 1st August, 2003.

 

The pre-lodgement application was referred to the meeting of the Design Review Panel on the 1st September, 2003 for comment under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65

 

The development application was lodged on the 29th September, 2003 and was notified and advertised and referred to the Design Review Panel on the 10th November for comment.

 

5.           COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified, advertised and referred to Precinct Committee in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans.  Submissions were received from the following:- La Perouse Precinct Committee c/- 1587 Anzac Parade, La Perouse; C and C Abela of 1587 Anzac Parade, La Perouse; Mr and Mrs S Romeo of 2 Elaroo Avenue, Philip Bay; M Crain of 8 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; Professor S Kjelleberg and Associate Professor P Conway of 22 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; P Cooper of 18 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse;  M and E Taylor 5 Endeavour Avenue, La Perouse; Mr and Mrs Stubley of 9 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; N Hobson of 1597 Anzac Parade, La Perouse; G Tring of 11 Grose Street, Little Bay; B Glenny of 10 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; K and L Patterson of 17 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse;  M and J Hurne of 26 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; M Nikolaidis of 11 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; R Neville 27 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse;  E S Moyce of 19 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; N Kelly of 43 Reservoir Street, Little Bay;  C and G Swivel of 30 Reservoir Street, Little Bay; J and I Ratcliffe of 28 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; D. L. and M Anderson of 28 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse; L Newnham at littora@bigpond.com; S Pappas of 16 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse.

 

5.1  Objections

 

Heritage Impact

 

·          The bulk and scale of the proposed building will severely impact on the heritage significance of the area.  The site is a very prominent corner when viewed from important historical parts of the La Perouse precinct, eg: from Pere Receveur’s grave, from the French memorial, from the approach to the boathouse, from the bus terminal, and on the roads approaching to and from the site.  As such, design on the site should be sensitive to the low scale nature of the area, the openness of the La Perouse National Park, and should take some clues from the style of the architecture that presently exists in the historic part.  The proposed building does not do this and does not therefore comply with heritage principles.

 

·          The proposed building is inimical to the preservation of the heritage values of historic La Perouse and to the sense of arrival and sense of place:- bulk; height; style; proportions; appearance.

·          The proposed building is dominating and out of character, thereby detracting from the qualities that the historic La Perouse Plan of Management (POM) seeks to preserve.  The POM is of major relevance and importance as a planning document in assessing the proposal.

 

·          The proposed building will adversely affect the sense of arrival and sense of place, especially because of the raised portion of the eastern end.  On approaching the loop, travelling in a southerly direction, the white tall building will be dominant in the general vista and will therefore detract from the natural and historical aspects of the experience.  Rather than making a statement at this corner, any proposed building at this point should be low, subdued and mute.  On viewing the commercial/residential facades from the La Perouse Museum, the historic monuments or the Macquarie Watch Tower, would again be dominating and out of character and spoil the sense of place.

 

·          The proposed building is completely out of character to the surrounding buildings in the area, particularly facing the Museum and the other commercial buildings, which have not added well in terms of architectural style, but have not affronted the eye in terms of bulk and scale.  The scale of the commercial buildings look more like shop top housing rather than the proposed brand new, over- developed, block of flats.

 

·          This is an important recreation area for families in Hillsdale, Matraville, Chifley, as well as those that live in the precinct at Yarra Bay, La Perouse and Little Bay.  Instead of moving more cars onto the streets of La Perouse and taller buildings onto the streetscape, Council should be considering the needs, current and future, of those who need the area for their recreation and those who are attracted to the area for its historical significance.

 

·          The proposed building will effect the setting of the heritage building opposite (27 Goorawahl Avenue), as well the historic landing place of Captain Cook, visited by thousands of tourists, due to its excessive size and streetscape impact. 

Comment:

 

The Historic La Perouse Management Plan was prepared for Randwick City Council and the National Parks and Wildlife Services.  It applies only to non-residential areas of the La Perouse headland, including Community Lands, Crown Reserves under the care and control of Randwick City Council, areas of Botany Bay National Park and roadways.  It is not a planning document but a conservation orientated management plan. 

 

Clause 46 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan provides the appropriate vehicle for the consideration of the proposed development.  This clause applies to development in the vicinity of heritage items, heritage conservation areas and potential archaeological sites and requires that Council must take into consideration the likely effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage item/s, heritage conservation area or potential archaeological site and on their settings.  An assessment has been made by Council’s Heritage Planner (refer Section 6.1 of the report) and it is considered that the proposal will not be out of scale with the ridgeline; is appropriate to the scale of the La Perouse open space precinct; will provide a built edge which will better define the open space of the historic precinct; and will not detract from the setting of the heritage items in the vicinity or views toward them from the water.

 

Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

 

·          The proposed development is not appropriate for the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area, as its height will dominate the surrounds, consisting of low density housing. The proposed development will set an undesirable precedent for this important area, if allowed to exceed any of the performance requirements stipulated by Council.

 

·          The style and high density of the development is incompatible with the style of housing existing in the area and would detract from the aesthetic appearance of the area.

 

Comment:

 

The subject site is not located within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area, however, the residential area to the north and north-east of the subject site in Goorawahl and Endeavour Avenues is within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area.  The proposed development is two storey in scale facing the residential area to the north. The proposal is considered to have high architectural merit and will not detract from the adjacent foreshore scenic protection area by way of its form, colours, materials and finishes as conditioned. Please refer to the Environmental Assessment Section of this report.

 

Colours, materials and finishes

 

·          The predominantly white appearance should be replaced with colours that appear in the area, such sandstone, beach sand and vegetation. The colours should be recessive, so that it does not dominate the heritage nature of the area.

 

Comment:

 

An indicative sample board of materials, finishes and colours has been submitted with the application, and is considered generally satisfactory as it uses neutral colour tones of sepia, shale and various beiges, as well as natural materials including hardwood louvres and terraces and stone cladding of lower levels.  The sample board, however, needs further clarification and as such a deferred commencement condition is contained within the Recommendation.  Additionally reflectivity of the glass and other surfaces such as window frames should be limited in order to minimise glare from the proposed development.

Height

 

·          The building is too high, as it exceed the maximum permissible height of 9m.

 

·          The proposed height of 12.3m will affect the skyline from a number of locations in the area, eg the bus shelter, which has historical foundations and significance.

 

·          It is recommended that the fourth level at the eastern end be eliminated.  This would bring the height down and be more in keeping with the planning controls and general character of the area.  The resulting horizontal appearance would be less imposing when viewed on entry to the area and from within the loop, thereby reducing the visual impact.

 

Comment:

 

The proposed height of the development is discussed in Section 9.2 of the report.

 

Floor Space

 

·          The proposal exceeds the maximum permissible floor space ratio (FSR) and is too big and overbearing, especially at the south-east corner of Goorawahl Avenue.

 

·          The FSR should be brought back to 1:1, thereby reducing the bulk and prominence of the building, which is exacerbated by the almost closed balconies.

 

·          No adequate justification for the increased FSR has been put forward by the applicant.

 

·          Receding terraces should be introduced on the south and east elevations to minimise the confronting appearance of the building.

 

·          The proposed design exacerbates the excesses of both bulk and scale by including large covered and substantially enclosed balcony areas to each of the units.

 

·          The proposal should provide a wide radial setback to the south-east corner of the site and the building should be truncated at 45 degrees at the south corner.

 

Comment:

 

Floor space ratio is discussed in Section 9.1 of the report.

 

Setbacks

 

·          There is insufficient separation to allow for privacy of the neighbours of the adjoining shop.

 

·          The design is particularly imposing as it goes right to the boundaries.  An internal courtyard is not visible and does not benefit surrounding housing.

 

Comment:

 

Development within the 3B Local Business Zone may be built to the boundary, as evident on 1603 and 1605 Anzac Parade, 51-53 Endeavour Avenue.  The open space communal area internal to the site breaks the bulk of the building with a two storey scale to the residential area in Goorawahl Avenue and a three/four storey building form more appropriately located along the Anzac Parade frontage.

 

Waste

 

·          The number of domestic waste bins will be excessive on the street.

 

Comment:

 

The residential component will require 12 x 240 litre mobile garbage bins, 6 of which are for garbage collection and 6 are for recycling collection.  Garbage will be presented once a week, while the recycling will be collected fortnightly. 

 

The garbage room for the residential units is located on the first floor podium level at the north –western corner of the site, with the residential mobile garbage bins being presented at the kerb of Goorawahl Avenue.  There is sufficient space on the street for the bins to be presented for collection and no apparent reason for them to remain on the street outside the scheduled collection period.  It is considered that the bins will not block or impede pedestrian access along the footpath that is proposed to be constructed along Goorawahl Avenue as required by a condition of consent.

 

A garbage room has been provided on the ground floor level of the proposed development for the storage of commercial waste.  The proposed garbage room has the capacity to hold the required number of bins.  A designated garbage collection point on Anzac Parade has been nominated on the submitted plans, however, this will depend on the contractual arrangements for the collection of commercial waste.  It may also be picked up directly from within the commercial garbage room.

 

Traffic and parking

 

·          36 vehicles all entering and exiting from Goorawahl Avenue is a significant number of vehicles in a small residential area, which at the moment has a limited traffic thoroughfare.  This will generate substantial noise and will be a safety hazard for local children who ride their bikes, scooters, skateboards and play games in the street.  The road has a defined bend that causes poor visibility of oncoming traffic and pedestrians, particularly young children on the street.

 

·          The surrounding street system does not have the capacity for off-site parking, as it is anticipated that each unit will require 2 to 3 car parking spaces, especially given the summer tourist demand for street parking.

 

Comment:

 

The proposed development provides parking for 36 vehicles in excess of Council’s requirements.  It is estimated using the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Guide to Traffic Generating Development that the proposed development will not result in a substantial increase of traffic into the surrounding street system (approximately 8.8 vehicle trips in weekday peak hour).  It should be noted, that to reduce the impact on Goorawahl Avenue, the entrance to the car park is provided off Anzac Parade, with vehicles only egressing the site into Goorawahl Avenue.  As well a footpath is to be provided around the Goorawahl frontages of the site, thus improving pedestrian safety.

 

Views

 

·          The views of 22 Goorawahl Avenue will be totally blocked and existing view corridors will be destroyed.

 

·          From the historic tram shed the views over Frenchman’s Bay are exceptional, but these will be lost if the proposed development is allowed to proceed in its current form.

 

·          The scale and height of the proposed development obscures important views from neighbouring residences including heritage items, the bus terminus area, the Jessie Stuart fountain and Cann Park.

 

·          The proposal blocks the view of the Macquarie Watch Tower enjoyed by people walking down Goorawahl Avenue.

 

Comment:

 

There will be a loss of views to the Macquarie Watchtower from the front yard of 22 Goorawahl Avenue (refer Figure , however, there will be no significant loss of view from the house itself as a result of the proposed development.  No, 22 Goorawahl Avenue is the only property raising a specific view loss issue, although it is acknowledged that some properties may have some loss of views towards the La Perouse Peninsula diminished from their first floors.  As well, there will be a loss of view to the Macquarie Watchtower from various vantage points within the road reserves and some front yards.

 

View loss toward a heritage item will diminish the ‘sense of place’ currently experienced in this residential precinct, however a view cannot be maintained from every location when considering an application within the framework of the current controls.  A view analysis from Goorawahl Avenue, submitted by the applicant, demonstrates that a development built to the maximum permissible height of 9m fronting Goorawahl Avenue would have a far more detrimental impact to the outlook and vistas from within Goorawahl Avenue than is the case in the current proposal, where the height is well below the 9m maximum along Goorawahl Avenue although an increased height to Anzac Parade is proposed.

 

 

Figure 6: View to Macquarie Watchtower

 from front yard of 22 Goorawahl Avenue

 

Public domain

 

·          As the proposed shops will almost inevitably include at least one restaurant, a reasonable setback from Anzac Parade should be provided so that chairs and tables will not block the public footpath.

 

Comment:

 

The application does not propose the use of the commercial spaces, as restaurants, cafes or the like, and any such use would require a separate development consent of council.  An appropriate condition of consent is included within the Recommendation.  Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that there may be a future demand for such uses in a recognised tourist area.  As such, it should be noted that additional car parking has been provided within the proposed development that allows flexibility to cater for any such future proposal.  As well, the proposal has included a terrace area to the Anzac Parade frontage of approximately 54m2, onto which all three of the commercial spaces open and this area could be utilised for any outdoor seating requirements.

 

Streetscape

 

·          For both residents and tourists entering La Perouse from Anzac Parade and also those looking over from the Captain Cook Landing Place in the National Park at Kurnell, this bland white box style development surrounded by no other high rise will stand out and be unavoidable and will be seen as totally out of character in the area.  Also being white, the proposed building will reflect the sunlight and will be glary.

 

·          Apart from the heritage impact to Anzac Parade, as the building turns the corner into Goorawahl Avenue, there is not a sufficient domestic scale about the architecture to take up the prevailing context in that street and there is not sufficient landscaping to deal with the landscaped context.  This results in an imposing façade that both dominates and impacts negatively on the residential streetscape.

 

·          The proposed development appears as a factory style façade and form.  The proposed development is no way sympathetic to the historical significance of the area and beachside village atmosphere.

 

Comment:

 

The proposal is considered to have an appropriate contextual fit when considered in relation to Botany Bay National Park opposite, the existing commercial and mixed use development adjacent to the west and north-west and the residential area to the north.  Colours, materials and finishes are the subject of a deferred commencement condition of consent as previously discussed.  Please refer to the Environmental Assessment Section of the report for further comments in relation to the issues raised.

 

Planning controls

 

·          The proposal is incompatible with the zoning requirements of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan, no EIS has been provided and the proposal is tantamount to a motel development.

·          The proposal does not comply with the principles of SEPP 65, which requires serious consideration of the building in its context.

·          There is insufficient justification that could be placed on the site, which looks relatively easy to develop, without breaking the rules.

·          The proposal fails to meet the objectives of the 3B Local Business Zone, especially as the proposal virtually ignores the primary business function of the zone, as the proportion of floor space designated for the commercial is less than one sixth of the total floor space proposed.

 

Comment:

 

The 3B Local Business zoning of the site allows multi-unit housing when attached to a permissible use in the zone.  Commercial uses are permissible in the zone and are included in the definition of “business premises” under Clause 49 of the Randwick Local Environment Plan 1988 (LEP).  The proposal does not require an Environmental Impact Statement under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, however a Statement of Environmental Effects, as required, has been submitted with the application.  The zone objectives and compliance with the requirements of the LEP are discussed in later sections of the report as are the proposal’s assessment with regard to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (SEPP 65).

 

Precedence

 

·          Should Council approve this development, other properties zoned Local Business will take advantage of Council’s leniency and apply to develop their properties in greater proportions.

·          Should Council approve the application, it will create a precedent and the area will look like a mini Brighton Le Sands.

 

Comment:

 

Approval of the application does not necessarily create precedence.  Statutory controls on height and floor space apply to properties in the immediate vicinity zoned 3B Local Business.  Variations to these controls may only be permitted after Council has considered submissions pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) and it is considered that strict compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary given the particular circumstances of the application.

 

It is considered that the design has considerable merit and will not detract from the surrounding area ( refer Environmental Assessment section of the report).

 

Site management

 

·          Access to Goorawahl Avenue should not be limited during the construction process.

 

Comment:

 

Appropriate conditions of consent for the management of the construction process have been included within the Recommendation of this report.

 

Use

 

·          There should be a provision in any consent to ensure that the commercial units cannot at any time be used as a bottle shop.  The area has particular sensitivities and any consultation with the police would verify that a bottle shop in the vicinity would severely aggravate the situation.

 

Comment:

 

The use of the commercial units will be the subject of separate development consent/s.  As such, the merits of the various proposals will be assessed at this time.

 

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           Heritage Planner

 

Council’s Heritage Planner has provided the following comments in relation to the proposed development:-

 

The subject site is prominently located on the peninsula between Congwong Bay and Frenchmans Bay, facing across the open space at the end of Anzac Parade towards Bare Island and Botany Bay.  The surrounding coastal areas are within the Botany Bay National Park Conservation Area and there a number of heritage items in the vicinity of the site.  Within this open space area is an important group of buildings and objects, including the former Cable House (1882), now a Museum, Macquarie Watchtower (1810), the La Perouse Memorial, and the Tomb of Pere le Receveur.  The Bare Island Fort and Causeway are also listed are also listed as heritage items under Randwick LEP 1998, and on the State Heritage Register.  The site is also adjacent to no.27 Goorawahl Avenue, a 1920s style bungalow.

 

A formal pre-application meeting has been held in relation to the proposal, where it was noted that Clause 46 of Randwick LEP 1998 requires that Council take into consideration the likely effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage items.  Given the importance of buildings and monuments within the La Perouse precinct and the visibility of the site from this area, it was noted that the design of the building should be carefully considered.  The site forms a backdrop to the La Perouse buildings and monuments and an edge to the open space precinct which contains them.  It was suggested that the south and east facing facades of the building should be of simple and unified design, which does not seek to draw attention to itself.

 

The application proposes a mixed residential/commercial development comprising residential development of two, three and four levels, over ground level commercial floor space and carparking.

 

The existing buildings on the site comprise a two storey building and a single storey dwelling.  The two storey building is possibly of early construction but considerably altered.  The single storey building on the corner of Goorawahl Avenue, was apparently constructed in the 1960s or 1970s.  To the west of the site are two storey buildings with their ground level facades built to the street, and upper level balconies.

 

The application has been accompanied by an Assessment of Heritage Impact prepared by Graham Brooks and Associates.  The Assessment does not address archaeological issues.

 

The submission to the Randwick Municipality Conservation Study prepared by the National Parks and Wildlife Service in 1983 includes a map, which provides an indication of archaeological resources.  The map indicates several midden and engraving sites in the La Perouse Peninsula area.  Aboriginal archaeological relics are more likely to be found in less disturbed areas, than in areas which have been subject to development.  However, given that the recorded aboriginal sites in the vicinity of the subject site and the history of European visitation to the area, it is suggested that consent conditions be included to advise of procedures to be followed in the event that Aboriginal or European archaeological relics are discovered.

 

The Assessment prepared by Graham Brooks and Associates, notes that the single family residences that currently occupy the site have no heritage significance.  The Assessment recommends that new development be brought forward of the traditional suburban setbacks to form a unified footpath frontage that visually frames the precinct, and that receding colours and textures should be chosen to avoid strong contrasts with the heritage setting.

 

The Assessment has analysed views to the site from each of the heritage structures on the peninsula.  The Assessment notes that the essential views and vistas of the peninsula are southerly and seaward to Botany Bay, the headland and the Ocean.  Of the six structures on the peninsula- the Cable House, the Watchtower, the La Perouse Memorial, the Tomb of Pere le Receveur, the Fort and Causeway, and the Jessie Stuart Broomfield fountain, the Assessment considers that the sightlines of three will be affected by the proposal.  The Assessment argues however, that from the La Perouse memorial, the tomb of Pere le Receveur, and the fountain, that the proposal will define and consolidate the northern edge of the precinct and strengthen the ground level streetscape.  The Assessment further notes that the ground level terraces will provide an additional vantage point for appreciation of the precinct.  The Assessment notes that from the Watchtower, the proposed development is within the horizon line of existing development, from the Fort and Causeway, the proposal is obscured by the crest of the Watchtower hill, and from the Cable Station, the proposal is screened by existing plantings.

 

The La Perouse peninsula consists of a higher ridge of land along its eastern side, following the line of Anzac Parade towards Bare Island, together with a west facing slope falling away from the ridge.  The Watchtower is located on this higher ridgeline with the other monuments on lower ground to the west.  The proposal is sited on the west facing slope, and it is considered that the proposed taller corner element will not be out of scale with the ridgeline immediately to the east.  It is considered that the height of the proposed development is appropriate to the scale of the La Perouse open space precinct, and will provide a built edge, which will better define the open space of the historic precinct.  It is noted that the historic buildings, structures and monuments on the La Perouse peninsula were designed to face the water and the main views towards them are from this direction.  The proposal will not detract from the setting of these items or views towards them from the water.  There are no objections to the modern design of the proposed buildings.  It is and important principal for infill buildings for in heritage conservation areas that such new buildings should be clearly seen as such, and should not attempt to replicate original buildings in the area.  The proposed materials and finishes appear to be well unified and generally compatible with existing buildings and structures in the area.  A more detailed sample board should be submitted however, relating the sample board to building elevations.

 

The rear of the site is opposite no.27 Goorawahl Avenue, so that the Goorawahl Avenue elevation faces the front elevation of the heritage item.  It is noted that the Goorawahl Avenue elevation of the development has a two storey scale and will improve the existing streetscape, which currently comprises garages, and back fences.

 

6.2           Environmental Health and Building Services

 

Council’s Manager of Environmental Health and Building Services has provided the following comments:-

 

The Proposal

 

The proposal provides for the demolition of two (2) existing dwellings, carport and garage and the erection of a mixed commercial and residential multi unit housing building, with basement level car park.

 

BCA Building Classification

 

Class 6        -           Retail/Shops

Class 2        -           Residential units

Class 7a      -           Car park

 

Background

 

The existing buildings on site are brick cottages bounded by a restaurant with flats above.  A search of Council’s records could not disclose any previous use of a potentially contaminating nature.

 

Key Issues

 

Site Management:                                     

 

Although a Sediment Control Plan has been provided with the DA, it does not address issues such as, the location of stock piled material or the storage and disposal of excavated materials, sediment and erosion control, public safety and perimeter safety fencing. Standard conditions can be included in the consent to address construction site management issues.

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):         

 

Full details of compliance with BCA and fire safety provisions are not included in the DA documentation and therefore further detailed information would need to be incorporated in the documentation for a construction certificate.

Access for people with a disability:         

 

The proposal does not appear to satisfy the BCA requirements and DDA objectives, in relation to access and facilities for people with a disability.

 

Access for people with a disability is required to be provided to the basement car park and the ground floor shops and, sanitary facilities for people with a disability are also required to be provided to the development, in accordance with the provisions of the BCA.

 

Standard conditions could be included to address these requirements, although compliance will require changes to the design of the building to accommodate a lift and/or ramp system and sanitary facilities, complying with the BCA and AS1428.

 

Acoustics

 

An acoustic report has not been submitted assessing road traffic noise, potential aircraft noise intrusion, proposed plant and equipment noise or existing plant and equipment noise from surrounding developments.

 

It is considered that an acoustic assessment is required to ensure the acoustic amenity of the proposed units and therefore conditions will need to be attached to the consent requiring the submission of an acoustic report.

 

Odour / air pollution

 

Due to the close proximity and height of the proposed residential and commercial development, the smoke and odour associated with the adjoining food premises may cause nuisances to the proposed occupants, which may be difficult for the Council to overcome. 

 

Further to this, the close proximity of the existing and proposed commercial premises may adversely affect the amenity of the proposed residential development due to noise (associated with air conditioning units, equipment and the like), odour (emanating from mechanical ventilation systems) and traffic (noise and emissions issues).

 

All future fit outs and development of the commercial and retail premises will require further assessment in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

 

Contamination

 

The Statement of Environmental effects, prepared by Architectus, dated September 2003 states that, “the previous uses of the site have been known as residential and the site has not been subject to any likely sources of contamination ”.

 

A preliminary investigation report, prepared by A.D. Envirotech Australia PTY LTD, dated 26 November 2003 was submitted with the development application. In summary, the report states that;

 

There is no evidence to indicate subsurface contamination on the site;

The site is suitable for a residential/commercial development;

No further environmental investigation of the site is warranted.

 

6.3           Assets and Infrastructure Services

 

Council’s Director of Assets and Infrastructure Services has provided the following comments in regard to the proposal:-

 

Landscape Comments

 

There are a variety of street trees on the Goorawahl Avenue nature strip of varying height from 3-5 metres, including Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Christmas Tree) and Leptospermum laevigatum (Coastal Tea Tree), all of which appear in reasonable condition. In order to accommodate the widening of the proposed footpath on Anzac Parade, approval is granted for the removal of the Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) growing on the Anzac Parade nature strip as indicated. Due to the small size of the tree, the applicant will not be charged for removal costs but will be required to reimburse Council for loss of amenity.

 

Also, due to the demise of the Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Christmas Tree) within the City as a result of Jewel Beetle attack/infestation, it is recommended that the specimen close to the corner of Anzac Parade and Goorawahl Avenue be removed with a suitable replacement to be provided in its place. Again, due to the relatively small size of the tree, the applicant will not be charged for removal costs or loss of amenity.

 

There is one Lagunaria patersonii (Norfolk Island Hibiscus) of approximately 7 metres in height in the rear yard of 1599 Anzac Parade, close to the eastern property boundary. It is covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order and appears in reasonable condition. The plans show this tree as being removed as it is not possible to proceed with construction as indicated and still retain it; as such, approval is granted for its removal, subject to suitable replacements being provided elsewhere within the site.

 

There is one Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palm) in the rear of the site that is approximately 6 metres in height. It is covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order and appears in poor condition. Approval is granted for removal of this palm as has been shown on the plans.

 

There is one Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Christmas Tree) and one Lagunaria patersonii (Norfolk Island Hibiscus), both about 4-5 metres tall against the rear property boundary. As both appear in average condition and are not significant specimens, permission is granted for their removal as is indicated on the plans.

There is one Callistemon sp. (Bottlebrush) about 2 metres tall, and one Eucalyptus ficifolia (Gum tree) approximately 5 metres in height on the Goorawahl Avenue nature strip at the northwest corner of the site. Approval is granted to remove these trees in order to allow for construction of the proposed driveway, with suitable replacement street trees to be provided in their place.

 

There is also one Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palm) of about 6 metres in height in the front yard of 1601 Anzac Parade that is covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order. It has not been shown on the plans, but approval is granted for its removal to allow for construction to proceed as indicated, with replacements to be provided in its place elsewhere on the site.

 

Drainage Comments

 

On site stormwater detention is not required for this development.

 

Flooding Comments

 

The subject development site is located adjacent to a localised low point in Goorawahl and may be subject to stormwater inundation during major storm events.

 

The applicant has submitted a flood study by AKY Civil Engineering dated 17 September 2003 (appendix E), which determines that water may pond in Goorawahl Avenue up to a maximum depth of RL 13.85 (AHD) during a 1 in 100 year storm event (assuming that the existing piped system is completely blocked).

 

To protect the basement carpark from being inundated by stormwater from Goorawahl Avenue, the applicant has provided a high point across the full width of the driveway exit from the basement carpark to RL 14.09 (AHD). Based on the flood level determined by AKY Civil Engineering, this provides a freeboard of some 240mm, which is considered to be satisfactory.

 

To protect the habitable (building) floor areas from stormwater inundation, the submitted plans show the floor levels along the Goorawahl site frontage being raised to RL 14.20 (AHD). This is some 350mm above the determined 1 in 100 year flood level and is considered to be satisfactory.

 

Any windows, vents or other openings into the basement carpark along the Goorawahl site frontage shall be located at a minimum RL of 14.09 (AHD).

 

A high point shall be provided across the full width of the western pedestrian access off Goorawahl Avenue (located adjacent to the carpark exit) to a minium RL of 14.09 (AHD). This is to prevent stormwater from Goorawahl Avenue entering the development site.

 

Traffic Comments

 

The EPCD Dept is advised that the AIS Dept does not support the proposed Commercial & Residential Tandem Parking spaces (see Council’s DCP-Parking – 3.1.3 DCP Controls Item 6 Tandem or Stack parking). Should the EPCD Dept consider approving the proposed tandem parking they should consider conditioning the consent so that residential tandem parking spots are allocated to the same unit and the commercial tandem parking spaces have the 1st tandem parking space allocated to staff.

 

The AIS Dept recommends the EPCD Dept consider condition the development consent so that( the entry/exit point of the basement car park level be widened to a minimum 5.50m wide (clear width)) so as to minimize vehicle conflict where vehicles enter from the driveway ramp and exit into the driveway ramp at the same time.

 

All new walls adjacent to the existing vehicular crossing must be lowered to a height of 600mm above the internal driveway level for a distance of 1.50m within the site or splayed 1.5 metre by 1.5 metre to provide satisfactory sight lines.  Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

The driveway exit at the Goorawahl Ave frontage must be  a minimum 3.5 metres wide and located at least 1.5 metres clear of the side property.

 

The internal driveways must be a minimum 3.5 metres wide (clear width).

 

7.           MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

The total site area (1,0346.8m2) is less than that required for the submission of a master plan (4,000m2).

 

8.           RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

8.1           Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 3B Local Business 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

32 - FSR

1:1

1.23:1*

No – SEPP 1 submitted

33 - Building Height

9m

 

11.5m top of parapet

12.52m lift over-run

No – SEPP 1 submitted

Other Clauses

Effect

Applies

Comment

29

Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

No

Residential area to north /north-west is within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

46

Vicinity of Heritage Item

Yes

North

27 Goorawahl Avenue

South

On La Perouse Peninsula: Macquarie Watchtower, La Perouse Memorial, Tomb of Pere Le Receveur and the La Perouse Museum (Old Cable Station) Bare Island Fort and Causeway.

East

Jessie Stuart Broomfield Fountain

 

 

Note:

*      1.34:1 is the stated floor space ratio (FSR) in the Statement of Environmental Effects and the SEPP 1 submission.  Calculations based on the submitted plans indicate that the proposal has a FSR of 1.23:1.  This revised figure has been verbally confirmed by the architect whose original figures included external walls.

 

8.2           Zone Objectives

 

The objectives of Zone No. 3B are:

 

a)     to provide opportunities for local retail and business development in the City of Randwick , and

b)     to provide opportunities for associated development such as car parking, service industries and the like, and

c)     to provide opportunities for residential accommodation in local business centres where it does not interfere with the primary business function of the zone , and

d)     to minimise the impact of development on adjoining and nearby residential zones.

 

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the 3B Local Business Zone as the proposed development provides opportunities for local retail and business by the inclusion of ground level commercial spaces facing Anzac Parade suitable for local shops or later conversion to restaurant use.  Associated car parking is provided at the basement and at the rear of the ground floor level.  As well, residential accommodation is suitably located at upper levels facing Anzac Parade and along the eastern and northern Goorawahl frontages.  The siting of the residential component will not interfere with commercial focus of Anzac Parade, while residential development to Goorawahl Avenue is considered a more appropriate interface than commercial uses facing the residential area to the north in Goorawahl Avenue.  In this way, the impact of the proposed development to adjoining and nearby residential areas is minimised.

 

8.3           State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65

 

The application was referred to the Design Review Panel (DR Panel) convened under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65).  The design was considered by the DR Panel, both as a pre-lodgement application on the 1st September, 2003 and again after the lodgement of the development application on the 10th November, 2003, in relation to the design quality principles for residential flat buildings, as set out in Part 2 of SEPP 65, as follows:-

 

8.21         Pre-lodgement application

 

1.     Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

 

The formal application will require more contextual information to confirm the advice noted here.

 

2.     The Scale of the Proposal

 

The Panel considered that the proposed design fits the context in an excellent manner and that the marking of the corner at the eastern edge of the site with a higher building and reducing heights towards the western end of the site is an excellent contextual solution. The Panel considered that the lower scale to the rear of the site would be an appropriate transition to the existing nearby houses.

 

3.     The Built Form of the Proposal

 

The proposed massing, site planning and the provision of a central courtyard are supported.

 

4.     The Proposed Density

 

The density is not considered excessive in this location where there is an abundance of open space and there are no problems of overshadowing.

 

5.     Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

 

The proposal at this stage provides a good framework for satisfying this principle.

 

6.     The Proposed Landscape

 

The car park area should be reconfigured to increase deep soil planting, particularly in the courtyard.

The on-site surface car parking to the rear of the development should be eliminated and replaced with a planted area.

 

The DA is to include landscape plans, specifying plant selections appropriate top the exposed environment.

 

7.     The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

 

This is likely to be high

 

8.     The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

No comment supplied

 

9.     Social issues

 

No comment supplied

 

10.   The Aesthetics of the Proposal

 

The design promises to have high aesthetic quality

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

The Panel considers this to be an excellent proposal and does not wish to view it again until a formal Development Application is lodged.

 

8.22         Development Application

 

1.     Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

 

The panel considers that this application fits in well within its current context and will provide a sympathetic response to its location.

 

2.     The Scale of the Proposal

 

The panel considers that massing is generally well considered.

 

3.     The Built Form of the Proposal

 

The proposed massing, site planning and the provision of a central courtyard are supported.

 

Panel commends the design of the proposal.  The relationship of the proposal to the locality and streetscape is considered appropriate.  The design of buildings, in relation to the open space located on site is commended.

 

4.     The Proposed Density

This appears to be justified.

 

5.     Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

 

The proposal at this stage provides a good framework for satisfying this principle.

 

6.     The Proposed Landscape

 

The panel noted that the environment was quite exposed.  The panel requires the applicant to ensure that all of the proposed trees are specifically nominated with appropriate species taking the site conditions into consideration

 

The proposed tree planting within the footpath reserve is commended.

 

Additional tree planting is required on the eastern side of the site adjoining the pedestrian entry point.

 

Existing trees nominated on the northern side of the site to be removed on the landscape plan should be replaced with new tree planting responding to the layout of the outdoor terraces and balconies.

 

7.     The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

           

The Panel considers that the proposal is generally well planned, providing good amenity. 

 

The panel recommends that the ground floor commercial premises be designed to accommodate future restaurant and food uses to ensure the future amenity of residents is protected in terms of the emanation of cooking odour.

 

8.     The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

No comment provided

 

9.     Social issues

 

Ensure that exhaust fans are installed within shops, to ensure that regardless of what future use will occupy the premises, maximum amenity is received by adjoining residents.

 

10.   The Aesthetics of the Proposal

 

No comment provided.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

Generally this is a good application.  Panel believe that subject to minor amendments this proposal should progress to its subsequent stages.

8.23         Comment

 

The following comments are made in regard to those aspects of the development application that the Design Review Panel did not provide comment.

 

The Safety and security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

The proposal achieves safety and security for the residents of the building by utilising secure lobbies to the residential units in the stepped apartments and individual entrance from Goorawahl Avenue for the townhouse apartments.  All apartments provide surveillance either from windows or balconies to both Goorawahl Avenue and Anzac Parade, as well as to the internal common courtyard.  The small number of units within the complex will allow for familiarity within the resident population, which will foster a sense of ownership and security.   It is considered that security may be enhanced by having a secure entrance to both the carpark and the gated entrances to the stepped apartments and townhouses off Goorawahl Avenue.  As well, the lift which services both residential and commercial tenancies should have a security system allowing only residents to access residential levels.  Appropriate conditions of consent are contained within the Recommendation.

 

The Aesthetics of the Proposal

 

The contemporary design of the proposal incorporates a highly articulated façade that utilises quality materials and finishes compatible with the local surrounds.  It is considered that the design responds well to the site constraints and opportunities by breaking the building bulk with a lower building form to Goorawahl Avenue to the north and a higher building form facing the open space to the south.  It is considered that the proposal provides a more cohesive and integrated built edge to the La Perouse Peninsula and although the subject of some controversy with surrounding residents, will be seen in the longer term as an attractive new element in the streetscape.

 

8.4           Development Control Plan - Parking

 

Figure 7 – Parking Requirements

 

 

 

 

 

 

Type of land use

Parking Requirements

Provided

Compliance

Business Premises

5.4 spaces*

12 (8 tandem** spaces)

Yes

Multi-unit housing

 

 

 

·   Residential

1.2 spaces per 2 bedroom unit = 9.6 spaces

1.5 spaces per 3 bedroom unit = 6 spaces

 

TOTAL = 15.6 spaces

21 spaces (6 tandem **spaces) 

Yes, subject to allocation of tandem spaces to individual units

·   Visitor

3 visitor car spaces

3 visitor spaces

Yes

·   Bicycle (residential)

     Bicycle (residential visitor)

4 residential bicycle spaces

1.2 visitor bicycle spaces

 

12 bicycle spaces

Yes

·   Car wash bays

1

1

Yes

Service and delivery

0.24 multi unit housing

0.05 commercial

 

TOTAL= 0.29

spaces

1 van

Yes

Parking for people with a disability

0

0

Yes subject to condition

 

Notes:

*      The parking requirement calculation for 5.4 car spaces has been made on the basis the proposed commercial spaces will be used as shops or offices, however if it is proposed (at a later date) to use all of the commercial space for restaurants, coffee shops, cafes or the like, then 8.9 car spaces would be required.  The proposal has provided flexibility for such an intensification of use.

 

**                  Tandem spaces are allocated to individual residential units or commercial tenancies by condition of consent

 

8.5           Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

The calculations for the residential component of the proposed development are set out in Figure 8 below.  Please note, a Section 94 contribution is not applicable for the commercial component of the development under Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan (July 2003).

 

Figure 8: Levies for residential development

Units

Open space levy per unit ($)

Total open

Space

($)

Community facilities levy per unit ($)

Total community facilities

($)

8 x 2 Bedroom

1,792.88

 14,343.04

792.72

 6,341.76

4 x 3 Bedroom

2,732.00

 10,928.00

1,208.00

4,832.00

Total

 

25,271.04

 

11,173.76

Less credit for existing 2 dwellings each 3 Bedrooms)

2,732.00

   5,464.00

1,208.00

  2,416.00

Grand total

 

19,807.04

 

8757.76

 

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           Floor Space

 

The proposed development has a floor space ratio (FSR) of 1.23:1 and therefore exceeds the maximum FSR established for the 3B Local Business Zone (1:1) under Clause 32 (3) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (LEP).  Many of the submissions raise the non complying FSR as an issue and consider that compliance with FSR will reduce perceived impacts of building bulk.

 

The purpose of the FSR control as defined in the LEP is as follows:-

 

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

 

The applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) which argues that strict compliance with the numerical standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance, as the proposed building satisfies the underlying intentions of the control without unreasonably impacting on the amenity of adjoining or nearby properties.  The following reasons are used to support the argument:-

 

·          The bulk and scale of the proposal relates well to the site context and topography, providing an appropriate two storey transition to the residential precinct to the north.

 

·          The proposed built form steps down the hill from the site’s eastern frontage towards the west in a more consistent manner than the existing dwellings on the site.

 

·          The building bulk has been kept away from the balcony and windows facing the site from the adjoining first floor residential unit at 1603 Anzac Parade.

 

·          No significant or unreasonable adverse impacts are likely to adjoining or nearby residential properties as a result of the proposed FSR.

 

·          The site is comparatively large in relation to adjoining and nearby properties and the amount of development proposed is not unreasonable in that context.

 

·          The built form also maintains existing view corridors and fits well with the form of the street.

 

·          The proposal provides definition to the corner, marking an entry to the commercial precinct leading down to Yarra Bay.  The refocussing of the building height from the western portion of the site to the eastern section is consistent with best practice principles and is a positive outcome of the design.

 

The SEPP 1 submission is generally considered well founded and may be supported for the following reasons:-

 

·    The building height and bulk do not result in any significant shadow impact to adjoining properties.  The submitted shadow diagrams for the winter solstice (June 21) demonstrates that the main shadow impact is to the road reserves of Anzac Parade and Goorawahl Avenue, with only very minor shadowing occurring to the adjoining property to the north-west (1603 Anzac Parade) at 9.00am.  The shadow to this neighbour disappears by approximately 9.30am.

 

·    There is only a minor loss of views, and these are generally from positions within the road reserve in Goorawahl Avenue looking toward the Macquarie Watchtower.  These are not the primary views from surrounding residential dwellings.

 

A number of objections consider that the building bulk should be reduced on the south-east corner of the site.  It is difficult to support such a design change, as it is considered that the building has been carefully designed to locate building bulk away from the northern boundary of the site, closest to the adjoining residential area and also away from the flats above the restaurant immediately adjacent to the west.  A building built to the northern boundary of the site to the maximum permissible height (9m) and complying FSR, instead of the 6.5m-7.2m height as proposed, will have a far greater impact on the outlook from within the road reserve than the current proposal.

 

It is considered that, the greater height and hence bulk of the development on the south-east corner of the site, expresses the importance of this corner as the “edge” of the residential/ commercial area and the gateway to the historic precinct and is desirable treatment of the corner in delivering urban design.

 

·    The proposed density is considered appropriate for the site, given its context of the open space to the south, south-west and east.  The Design Review Panel, at the pre-lodgement meeting of the 1st September, 2003, considered that the density is not “excessive in this location where there is an abundance of open space and there is no problem of overshadowing”.

 

·    The building bulk is broken by way of a central common courtyard and with a two storey building form located to the north and north-eastern frontages of Goorawahl Avenue to present an appropriate interface with the residential properties in Goorawahl Avenue.  The higher built form is more appropriately located to Anzac Parade and the open space of the La Perouse Peninsula.  The southern elevation to Anzac Parade is highly articulated and well modulated with a stepped form in keeping with the site topography.  This helps to break down the perceived bulk on this elevation.

 

·    The central common courtyard has landscaping provided along the western boundary of the site between the two proposed building forms to minimise privacy impacts to the eastern side of the top shop housing on the adjacent property to the west (1603 Anzac Parade).

 

9.2           Height

 

Clause 33 (5) of the LEP requires that:-

 

The maximum height for buildings within Zones 3A and 3B are shown by distinctive shading on the map.

 

The map shows that the maximum height to be 9m.

 

The proposed building height of the townhouse component of the development   along the northern elevation to Goorawahl Avenue, varies from 5.7m to 6.8m, with skylights projecting from the roof to give a maximum overall height on this elevation of 7.2m.   The building height on this elevation complies with the numerical requirement of Clause 33.

 

Along the eastern elevation to Goorawahl Avenue, the building height varies with the two different building forms proposed.  The stepped apartments, at the south-eastern end of the site, vary in height from 10.16m to 10.32m approximately, with the lift over run and skylights giving a maximum overall height of 11.6m approximately. The townhouses at the north-eastern end have a variable height of 6.09m to 6.3m approximately, with the skylights giving a maximum overall height of 7m approximately.

 

Along the western elevation, the town houses, at the north-western end, have a variable height between 7.2m  and 8.3m, while the stepped apartments, at the south-western end, have a variable height between 8.5m and 9.8m approximately.

 

Along Anzac Parade frontage (southern elevation) the proposed building steps with the site topography, from 7.4m approximately at the south-western end to 11m approximately at the south-eastern end, with a maximum building height of 12.52m at the lift over-run.  It should be noted that the lift over-run is excluded from the definition of building height if Council is satisfied that it will not adversely affect the amenity of nearby land.

 

The purpose of the development standard is stated as:-

 

To set upper limits for the height of buildings in residential and business zones that are consistent with the redevelopment potential of land in those zones given other development restrictions, such as floor space and landscaping and have regard for the amenity of surrounding areas.

 

The applicant has lodged a SEPP 1 submission with regards to building heights and argues that strict compliance with the development standard is unnecessary and unreasonable for the following reasons:-

 

·    The height along the northern frontage of the site has been kept lower to provide a transition to the adjoining residential precinct and allow for views over the site towards the open space and foreshore areas.

 

·    The modelling of the site with lower buildings on the northern boundary maximises winter sun access for this site and neighbouring properties.

 

·    A lower scale along the western edge of Anzac Parade minimises adverse impacts to the first floor unit on the adjoining site at 1603 Anzac Parade.  The proposal has a maximum height of 7.4m immediately adjoining this building.

 

·    The LEP does not contain any requirements for landscaped area in the 3B Zone.  However, proposed deep soil landscaping provided will minimise impacts of the proposal on adjoining and nearby residential zones in a manner consistent with the zone objectives.  It will also enable screening and amenity benefits to the future site occupants and the broader community.

 

·    There are no overshadowing impacts on park or properties.

 

·    The proposed development fits within the scale of the street.

 

The SEPP 1 submission is generally considered well founded and may be supported for the following reasons:-

 

·          The building height and bulk do not result in any significant shadow impact to adjoining properties.  The submitted shadow diagrams for the winter solstice (June 21) demonstrates that the main shadow impact is to the road reserves of Anzac Parade and Goorawahl Avenue, with only very minor shadowing occurring to the adjoining property to the north-west (1603 Anzac Parade) at 9.00am.  The shadow to this neighbour disappears by approximately 9.30am.

 

·          As considered by the Design Review Panel, the proposed design provides an “appropriate transition” to the residential area to the rear (north) of the site, with the building heights on the northern elevation under the maximum 9m permissible in the 3B Zone.  This also serves to make a positive contribution to the streetscape of Goorawahl Avenue by having two storey dwellings address the street, especially important within the context of the bungalow at 27 Goorawahl Avenue (a heritage item), instead of the rear fences and garage structures that presently occupy the rear of the site.

 

·          The height has been redistributed to the front (south) of the site, in particular to the south-eastern corner, in order to minimise the impacts to the adjoining building to the west (1603 Anzac Parade), in a stepped form to accommodate the site topography.

 

·          The marking of the south-eastern corner by the higher building form has been commended by the Design Review Panel and is considered an appropriate architectural expression in the façade design to ensure the proposed building responds to the environment and the context.

 

·          The composition and detailing of the building façade are considered to be well articulated and modulated to give an appropriate scale, rhythm and proportion to minimise any perceived visual impacts of the additional height to the adjacent open space of the La Perouse Peninsula.

 

9.3           Heritage

 

The majority of the submissions express concerns regarding the impact of the building on the La Perouse historic sites and museums, the bus shelter and the heritage bungalow at 27 Goorawahl Avenue.

 

Council’s Heritage Planner has considered the proposal and has found that the proposal is generally acceptable with regard to its relationship to the heritage items in the vicinity (refer Section 6.1 of the report).

 

The views to and from the heritage items are considered to be the significant element in an assessment of their setting at La Perouse Point.  The primary views of the Macquarie Watchtower, the tomb of Pere Le Receveur and the La Perouse Monument are gained with the sea/headlands/bay panorama to the south as the backdrop, Bare Island Fort and Causeway Macquarie Watchtower.

 

These views from the watchtower to the sea and bay are of particular historical importance and are considered the primary views from this site and remain unaffected by the proposal (refer Figure # below).

 

Bare Island Fort and Causeway

 

The view from the Causeway at the entrance gates to Bare Island (refer to Figure 9 below) indicates that only the topmost section of the proposed development may be visible from the Causeway, with a greater view of the proposed development available from the top of Bare Island.  This will be at a considerable distance from Bare Island and like the Watchtower, the primary views to and from the Causeway and Bare Island encompass the sea, headlands and bays (refer Figure 10 below).  It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not have a significant effect on the setting of this heritage item.

 

Figure 9: View to the north/north west toward the

Macquarie Watchtower and the proposed development site

 

 

Figure 10: View to Causeway and Bare Island

 

Macquarie Watchtower

 

Views to the proposed development site can be gained to the north-west from the base of the Macquarie Watchtower, however, the predominant vista is the silhouette of the tower to the sea beyond, rather than the suburban background to the north-west (refer Figures 11 and 12).  The proposed development will form another element within the suburban backdrop although of a contrasting contemporary nature.

 

Figure 11: Macquarie Watchtower with

views to headland and water beyond

 

 

Figure 12: Macquarie Watchtower with view to north-west

toward the proposed development site

 

The Cable Station

 

The Cable Station (and La Perouse Museum) is orientated to the west and as such is viewed from the front in an easterly direction.  This view generally does not include a backdrop that contains the proposed development, these being oblique views.  Standing on the verandah of the Cable Station, the view is to the Frenchmans Bay, Botany Bay and the Molyneux Point to the west, with the view to the proposed development site concealed by dense foliage adjacent to the verandah.  The impact of the proposed development on the vistas and setting of the Cable Station is therefore considered negligible.

 

La Perouse Monument

 

The view to the La Perouse Monument, with the Botany Bay background is considered the most significant view of this item (refer Figure 11).  This is also the way the monument is orientated for visitor viewing. This view remains unaffected by the proposal.

 

 

 

Figure 11: La Perouse Monument with Botany Bay

and Molyneux Point in the background

 

Tomb of Pere Le Receveur

 

The grave of Pere Le Receveur has as its backdrop Botany Bay and also has a visual connection to the La Perouse memorial (refer Figures 12 and 13), which is reinforced by a pathway between the two sites.

 

 

Figure 12: Tomb of Pere Le Receveur

 

 

Figure 13: Tomb of Pere Le Receveur in foreground

and La Perouse Memorial in background

 

Looking to the north-east from the monument and the tomb, as well as north-west from the watchtower, the proposed development site is visible and will alter the horizon silhouette substantially, defining a new boundary edge treatment for the commercial and residential precinct to the north and north-west (refer Figures 14 and 15).  This treatment is not considered to be necessarily detrimental, although different to that existing.  The existing architectural form along Anzac parade and Endeavour Avenue that forms the 3B Local Business Zone is not cohesive and has little architectural merit to recommend it.  It is considered that the proposed development provides a better, more cohesive and integrated built edge to the residential and commercial precinct.  As well,

The proposed built form is considered to have high architectural merit and will provide enhanced opportunities for public appreciation of the peninsula from the proposed terraces along Anzac Parade.

 

 

Figure 14: View from La Perouse Memorial to north/ north-east towards

 the proposed development site in the background

 

Figure 15: View from Tomb of Pere Le Receveur to north/north-west

and existing development along Anzac Parade, Endeavour Avenue and  northern ridge

 

10.         CONCLUSION

 

The application proposes a mixed use development of commercial and residential units of a contemporary design, considered to have considerable architectural merit.  Although contrasting to development within the vicinity, it will provide a unified and cohesive edge to the border of the La Perouse Peninsula and is considered not to have any significant impact on the setting of the heritage items in the vicinity.  It responds to the residential character to the north of the site by providing a two storey form along the northern boundary to Goorawahl Avenue and re-distributes the building bulk and height to face the open space of La Perouse Peninsula

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.            That the Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause 32 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (relating to floor space ratios) on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of locality as follows, and that the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources be advised accordingly:

 

AND

 

B.            That the Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause 33 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (relating to building heights) on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of locality as follows, and that the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources be advised accordingly.

 

C.            THAT Council, as the responsible authority, grant its development consent as a Deferred Commencement under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No 89/103/GG for demolition of existing structures and the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development containing 12 residential apartments, commercial/retail space and basement car parking.  Strata subdivision of the development is also proposed. at 1599-1601 Anzac Parade, La Perouse subject to the following deferred commencement condition:-

 

Deferred Commencement Condition

 

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

 

1.             The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be compatible with surrounding buildings and heritage listed buildings and monuments.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. – by way of a sample board keyed to all elevations) are to be submitted for  approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Community Development.

 

D.            Subject to compliance with the deferred commencement condition, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community Development, development consent is granted under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No 89/103/GG for demolition of existing structures and the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development containing 12 residential apartments, commercial/retail space and basement car parking.  Strata subdivision of the development is also proposed. at 1599-1601 Anzac Parade, La Perouse subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.             The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans prepared by Architectus and numbered DA-01, Issue C, DA–02 and DA-03, both Issue D, DA–04 to DA-06, all Issue C, DA-07, Issue A, DA-09 and DA-10, Issue C and DA-11, Issue A, all dated 29 September, 2003 and received by Council on 29 September, 2003 and DA-08, Issue B dated 4 December, 2003 and received by Council on 5 December, 2003; Landscape Plans LA01 and LA02, both Revision A, dated 18 September, 2033 and prepared by Taylor Brammer Landscape Architects and received by Council on 29 September, 2003; Draft Strata Plans, with Surveyor’s Reference 030918 DSP, Sheets 1-7, prepared by Mark John Andrew  and received by Council on 29 September, 2003; the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the details approved pursuant to the deferred commencement condition and 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.             Should any Aboriginal deposits or objects (engravings, middens, etc.) be exposed, site work is to temporarily cease within the vicinity while advice is sought from archaeologists, the La Perouse Aboriginal Land Council and the National Parks and Wildlife Service.  A copy of any archaeological excavation permit required under the National Parks and Wildlife Act, shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Community Development.

 

3.             Should any European archaeological relics be exposed, site work is to temporarily cease within the vicinity while advice is sought from archaeologists, and the NSW Heritage Office.  A copy of any excavation permit required under Section 140 of the Heritage Act, 1977, shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Community Development.

 

4.             In order to provide a safe and secure environment for residents and commercial tenants, security mechanisms for pedestrian building entry shall be provided, including an audio or video intercom system located at the building entry in Goorawahl Avenue for visitors to communicate with residents. Details shall be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

5.             In order to ensure that the basement car park is secure for residents and visitors a security door to the basement car park shall be provided with intercom facilities at the car park entrance, for visitors to both residents and commercial tenants and capable of being accessed by people with a disability.  Details shall be provided to the satisfaction of the certifying authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

6.             The lift shall have security access to ensure that commercial tenants and their clients cannot access residential levels in the proposed development.  Details shall be provided to the satisfaction of the certifying authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

7.             The consent of Council must be obtained prior to the erection of any advertising unless exempted under Council’s Development Control Plan – Exempt and Complying Development.

 

8.             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.

 

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

 

10.           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.

 

11.           External walls sited less that 500mm from the boundaries of the site are to be erected as ‘face brickwork’ or other maintenance free materials, to ensure that adequate provisions are made for maintenance purposes within the property boundaries.

 

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

 

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

 

14.           Apartment 12 and the associated office is to be used as a single residential dwelling only at all times and must not be used for dual or multi-occupancy purposes without obtaining the prior written development consent from the Council.

 

15.           No cooking facilities or sanitary fittings other than those indicated on the approved plans are to be installed in the premises without the prior written consent of the Council.

 

16.           Power supply and telecommunications cabling to the development shall be underground.

 

17.           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.

 

18.           The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent.  The details and samples of the glass to be used are to be submitted with the colour and material schedule for the approval of Council’s Director of Planning & Community Development, prior to the commencement of works.

 

19.           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.

 

20.           The finished ground levels external to the building are to be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised (other than for the provision of paving or the like on the ground) without the written consent of Council.

 

21.           Where access is required to adjoining premises for construction purposes, the 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.

 

22.           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.

 

23.           Upon completion of the development and prior to the issuing of the 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.

 

Details of critical phase inspections carried out by or on behalf of the principal certifying authority together with any certification relied upon and the occupation certificate for the building must also be provided to Council prior to approval of the strata subdivision plans.

 

24.           The fence on the street alignment is to be a maximum height of 1.8m and be designed so that the upper two thirds of the fence is at least 50% open, to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the adjoining residential development and the streetscape.

 

The following conditions are imposed to promote ecologically sustainable development and energy efficiency:

 

25.           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 noted in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

26.           External timber or metal framed and brick veneer walls and roofs are to be provided with insulation (i.e. bulk insulation and a reflective building membrane/reflective sarking/foil insulation), having a minimum total thermal resistance R–value of 3.0 in roofs and 1.5 in external walls.  The insulation and reflective building membrane is to be installed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the manufacturers details.

 

Details of compliance with the requirements for insulation are to be included in the construction certificate application.

 

27.           Hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation, in accordance with the relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

28.           The hot water system installed in the development must achieve a minimum greenhouse score of 3.5 as detailed SEDA’s Energy Smart Homes Policy.  Any electric clothes dryers to be provided in the development must also have a minimum 2 star energy rating.

 

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

 

30.           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               $19,807.04

b)   for the provision or improvement of community facilities   $  8757.76

c)   Administration fee $425.00                                                         $       425.00

 

The contribution must be paid in cash or by bank cheque prior to

 

a)   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 ensure that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

31.           The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

 

Failure to comply with these legislative requirements is an offence and may result in the commencement of legal proceedings, issuing of `on-the-spot` penalty infringements or service of a notice and order by Council.

 

32.           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.

 

33.           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.

 

34.           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.

 

35.           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.

 

36.           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.

 

37.           The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, is to be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, in accordance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

38.           Development consent is required to be obtained in relation to the specific ‘use’ of commercial tenancies/occupancies and ‘shop fit-outs’, in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

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

 

39.           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.  The report, must demonstrate the suitability of the proposed methods of construction to overcome any potential damage to nearby land/premises and the report is to detail 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, must be fully complied with and incorporated into the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

A copy of the engineers report is to be submitted to the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority.

 

40.           Driven type piles/shoring must not be provided unless a geotechnical engineer’s report is submitted to the certifying authority, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, which states that damage should not occur to any adjoining premises and public place as a result of the works.

 

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

 

·          All of the premises adjoining the subject site

 

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

 

42.           The installation of ground or rock anchors underneath any adjoining premises including (a public roadway or public place) must not be carried out without specific written consent of the owners of the affected adjoining premises and (where applicable) details of compliance must be provided to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of any excavation or building works.

 

43.           A Certificate of Adequacy prepared by a professional engineer is to be submitted to the principal certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the principal 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:

 

44.           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.

 

45.           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.

 

46.           The building works are to be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or other suitably qualified person approved by 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 details of compliance with Council’s approval is to be maintained by the Principal Certifying Authority.  Details of critical phase inspections carried out and copies of certification relied upon shall be forwarded to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

Upon inspection of each stage of construction, the Principal Certifying Authority (or other suitably qualified person approved by the Principal Certifying Authority) is also required to ensure that the relevant site management, public safety and sediment and erosion requirements specified in Council’s consent are being satisfied.

 

47.           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 supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

Retaining walls, shoring or piling 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 and buildings, if the soil conditions require it.  Adequate provisions are also to be made for drainage.

 

Retaining walls, shoring, or piling must be designed and installed in accordance with appropriate professional standards and the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standards.  Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring or piling are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority for the development prior to commencing such excavations or works.

 

48.           If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must:-

 

·          preserve and protect the building /s on the adjoining land from damage; and

·          if necessary, underpin and support the building and excavation in an approved manner; and

·          at least seven (7) days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land (including a public road or public place), give notice of the intention to do so to the owner of the adjoining land. Particulars of the excavation are to be provided to the owner of the adjoining land and also the owner of the land where the building is being erected or demolished.

 

49.           A 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.

 

50.           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 footings or first completed floor slab (prior to the pouring of concrete), showing the area of the 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.

 

51.           All building, demolition and associated site 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.

 

52.           Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents and the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 must be satisfied at all times.

 

53.           Noise and vibration from any rock excavation machinery and pile drivers (or the like) must be minimised by using appropriate plant and equipment and silencers and a construction noise and vibration minimisation strategy, prepared by a suitably qualified consultant is to be implemented during the works, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

54.           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.

 

55.           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.

 

56.           Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works.

 

The roadway, footpath and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe condition and free from any obstructions, materials, soils or debris at all times.  Any damage caused to the road, footway or nature strip must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from the Council and other relevant Authorities prior to excavating or opening-up the road or footway for services or the like.

 

57.           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.

 

58.           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.

 

59.           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”.

 

60.           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.

 

61.           During demolition excavation and construction works, dust emissions must be minimised, so as not to result in a nuisance to nearby residents or result in a potential pollution incident.

 

Adequate dust control measures must be provided to the site prior to the works commencing and the measures and practices must be maintained throughout the demolition, excavation and construction process, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

·          Provision of geotextile fabric to all perimeter site fencing (attached on the prevailing wind side of the site fencing).

·          Covering of stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material with adequately secured tarpaulins or plastic sheeting.

·          Installation of a water sprinkling system or provision hoses or the like.

·          Regular watering-down of all loose materials and stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material.

·          Minimisation/relocation of stockpiles of materials, to minimise potential for disturbance by prevailing winds.

·          Revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

62.           Public safety must be maintained at all times and 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.

 

Fences or hoardings 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.

 

Details of the proposed temporary fences located upon the site are to be submitted to the principal certifying authority and 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.

 

63.           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 and erosion 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.

 

64.           Stockpiles of soil, sand, aggregate or other materials must not be located on any footpath, roadway, nature strip, drainage line 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, nature strips, in any public place or any location which may lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater drainage system

 

65.           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.

 

66.           A ‘B Class’ overhead type hoarding is required is be provided to protect the public, located adjacent to the development, prior to the commencement of any works on the site which comprise:-

 

·        any works or hoisting of materials over a public footway or adjoining premises, or

·        any building or demolition works on buildings which are over 7.5m in height and located within 3.6 metres of the street alignment.

 

Details of the proposed fences or hoardings located upon the site are to be submitted to the principal certifying authority and 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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

69.           Access and sanitary facilities for persons with disabilities being provided to the shops and the residential building, in accordance with Parts D3 and F2 of the Building Code of Australia.  Details of compliance are required to be provided in the relevant plans/specifications for the construction certification for the development.

 

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

 

70.           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 smoke detectors located within the stairway, corridors or the like must be interconnected.

 

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

 

71.           Any new information, which comes to light during, demolition or construction works, which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination, shall be notified to the Council and the Principal Certifying Authority immediately.

 

72.           All trucks and service vehicles leaving the site shall go through a suitably constructed on site truck wash down area, to ensure no tracking of material occurs from the site onto roads adjoining the site. Details are to be submitted to Council in the Site Management Plan.

 

73.           Prior to the commencement of works adequate sediment and stormwater control measures shall be in place and maintained on site at all times.  Sediment laden stormwater shall be controlled using measures outlined in the manual Managing Urban Stormwater Soils and Construction produced by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

74.           Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition process being removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover NSW and the Environment Protection Authority, and with the provisions of:

 

·          New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 2000;

·          The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001;

·          The Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 2001;

·          Protection Of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) and

·          Environment Protection Authority's Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non Liquid Wastes (1999).

 

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:

 

75.           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 operation of the premises shall not give rise to a sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background LA90, 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise source/s under consideration by more than 5dB(A).  The source noise level shall be assessed as a LAeq, 15 min noise level, adjusted in accordance with the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s Industrial Noise Policy and the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s Noise Control Manual (for sleep disturbance).

 

76.           The use and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance.

 

77.           A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics shall be submitted to Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. The assessment is to be completed and comply with the relevant provisions of the Australian Standards (including but not limited to AS 2107, AS 2021, AS 3671, AS1055) and the NSW Environmental Protection Guidelines, namely the Industrial Noise Policy, Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance) and the Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise.

 

78.           A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the development comply with the provisions of the Australian Standards (including but not limited to AS 2107, AS 2021, AS 3671, AS1055) and the NSW Environmental Protection Guidelines, namely the Industrial Noise Policy, Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance) and the Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise.

 

79.           The use and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance.

 

80.           A Demolition and Construction noise management plan is to be prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant and be implemented to minimise the impacts of construction noise to nearby premises. The necessary measures identified in the report must be implemented to comply with this report and address any concerns raised.  A copy of this plan is to be provided to the Council and the Principal Certifying Authority and a copy is to be kept onsite. Should noise complaints during demolition and construction be received, Council’s Authorised Officers may also issue directions to address any reasonable noise concerns.  

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

 

81.           The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

82.           There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to a public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

83.           Liquid trade waste materials are to be disposed of in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water, Trade Waste Department and details of compliance are to be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of works.

 

84.           The location of the discharge point serving the car park mechanical ventilation system is to be not less than 6m from a property boundary and it must discharge vertically and satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1668.  Details of compliance are to be provided in the plans and specifications for the construction certificate.

 

85.           Development consent is required to be obtained in relation to the specific ‘use’ of commercial tenancies/occupancies and ‘shop fit outs’, in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

86.           Garbage storage enclosures are to be fitted with a hose cock and the floor is to be graded and drained to an approved floor waste connected to the sewer.

 

87.           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 provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

 

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

 

a)         $10,000.00      -           Security damage deposit

 

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

 

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

 

89.           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)         $10,000.00      -           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:

 

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

 

a)         Construct new heavy-duty concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance/exit points to/from the site.

 

b)         Remove any redundant concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks and to reinstate the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

c)         Re-construct any damaged kerb and gutter including associated roadworks which is the result of the proposed development

 

d)         Construct a concrete footpath along the full Goorawahl Avenue site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

e)         Remove the existing Council footpath along the Anzac Pde frontage and install full width paving in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for La Perouse (Note: The applicant shall submit a landscape design for this work – see landscaping Conditions)

 

91.           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.

 

92.           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.

 

93.           The entry/exit point of the basement car park level shall be widened to a minimum of 5.5m (clear width) to minimise vehicle conflict.  Details showing compliance shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.

 

94.           All new walls adjacent to vehicular crossing exit in Goorawahl Avenue shall be lowered to a height of 600mm above the internal driveway level for a distance of 1.50m within the site or splayed 1.5 metres by 1.5 metres to provide satisfactory sight lines.  Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

95.           The driveway opening at the Goorawahl Ave frontage shall be a minimum 3.5m wide and be located at least 1.5 metres clear of the side property. Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

96.           Internal driveway gradients shall comply with the Australian Standard AS 2890.1. Details showing compliance shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

97.           The internal driveways must be a minimum 3.5m wide (clear width). Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

98.           The driveway entrance & exit shall be clearly signposted with Entry Only – Exit via Goorawahl Ave & Exit Only – Entry via Anzac Pde  in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard. Details are to be shown on the plans submitted for the construction certificate.

 

99.           The basement carpark be line marked with a stop line along the entry/exit point of the basement carpark (along the prolongation of the eastern edge of the thru driveway ramp up to the ground floor). Details are to be shown on the plans submitted for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

100.         The Council’s Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services has inspected the above site and have determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must be as follows:

 

·    Anzac Parade Frontage – 90mm above the Council kerb level at all points opposite the kerb in Anzac Pde.

 

·    Goorawahl Avenue Northern Boundary Frontage –150mm above the existing Council kerb level at all points opposite the kerb.

 

·    Goorawahl Avenue Eastern Boundary Frontage – 150mm below the existing Council kerb level at all points opposite the kerb.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Assets & Infrastructure Services Department on 9399 0923.

 

101.         The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) issued by Council and their relationship to the kerb must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate prior to the issuing of the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

102.         The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services  have been issued at a prescribed fee of $3,051.00 calculated at $27.50 (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:

 

103.         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.

 

104.         The applicant must meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia and Sydney Water to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

105.         Any electricity substation required for the site as a consequence of this development shall be located within the site and shall be screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on all detailed landscape drawings and specifications. The applicant must liaise with Energy Australia prior to lodging the construction certificate whether or not an electricity substation is required for the development.

 

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

 

106.         A high point shall be provided across the full width of the driveway exit from the basement carpark to a minimum RL of 14.09 (AHD) (as shown on the submitted First Floor Plan, Drawing DA-03, Issue D, dated 29 September 2003).

 

107.         Any windows, vents or other openings into the basement carpark along the Goorawahl site frontage shall be located at a minimum RL of 14.09 (AHD).

 

108.         All habitable, office, and storage areas located along the Goorawahl site frontage shall be located at a minimum RL of 14.20 (AHD) or suitably waterproofed up to this same level.

 

109.         A high point shall be provided across the full width of the western pedestrian access off Goorawahl Avenue (located adjacent to the carpark exit) to a minium RL of 14.09 (AHD). The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

110.         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 (i.e. above the 1 in 20 year storm) to the proposed drainage system.

 

d)         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.

 

111.         All site stormwater leaving the site must be discharged by gravity to the Council stormwater pit located at the front of the property, near the eastern boundary, in Anzac Parade.

 

112.         A childproof and corrosion resistant fastening system shall be installed on access grates over pits/trenches where water is permitted to be temporarily stored.

 

113.         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 wet well shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2 hour storm assuming both pumps are not working.

 

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.

 

114.         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; and

 

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.

 

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

 

116.         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.

 

117.         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 signposted with ‘Exclusive Carwash Bay Use Sat 2:00pm – 5:00pm and Sunday 10:00am – 2:00pm, Visitor parking at other times’.

 

d)         The car washing bay must be constructed with a minimum 20mm bund around the perimeter of the car washing bays (or equivalent)

 

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

 

118.         Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council’s Director of Asset and Infrastructure Services, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer confirming that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system complies with the conditions of development consent. The certification must be provided to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

119.         As the above site may encounter groundwater/seepage water within the depth of the basement excavation, the basement carpark or similar structures are to be suitably tanked and waterproofed. A Structural Engineer\Geotechnical Engineer shall certify the tanking & waterproofed 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).

 

120.         Any seepage water must be drained directly into an absorption pit within the site. Seepage water must not be drained from the site.

 

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

 

121.         The garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a total of 12 x 240 litre bins (6 garbage bins & 6 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.

 

122.         All garbage storage areas are to be provided with a tap and hose and the floor is to be graded and drained to an approved floor waste to the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

123.         Prior to the credited certifier issuing an occupation certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to contact Council’s Manager of Waste in regards to meeting Council’s requirements for waste services to the development.

 

124.         A separate garbage area will have to be provided for the proposed 3 retail/commercial  shops. The required size of this garbage area is to be able to contain a minimum of 6 x 240 litre bins.

 

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

 

125.         The landscaped areas shown on the plan number LA-01 and 02 dated 18.09.03 shall be the subject of detailed landscape drawings and specifications, which are to be submitted to, and approved by, the 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 and species 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.

 

The applicant is to provide documentary evidence, from suitably qualified personnel, that the size and depth of the proposed deep soil planter is feasible, adequate and capable of sustaining the proposed tree (Sydney Red Gum) for its life term. If not, the applicant will be required to amend the plans to reflect selection of a more suitable species in this location.

           

            This also applies to areas ‘over slab’, where trees that will attain a greater height than 3-4 metres at maturity are proposed.

 

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.   The landscape plan shall show a minimum of two (2) x 75 litre broad canopied trees (not palms) suitably located along the northern frontage of the site, with a height at maturity of 5m and a minimum soil depth of 1.2m shall be provided for their planting over the excavated basement carpark or concrete slab.  As well, one (1) x 75 litre broad canopied tree (not a palm), capable of reaching 6 metres at maturity shall be shown suitably located adjacent to the pedestrian entrance on the eastern elevation, with a minimum soil depth of 1.5m where located over excavated basement carpark or concrete slab and one (1) x 75 litre broad canopied tree (not a palm) suitably located on the south-eastern corner of the site not over over excavated basement carpark or concrete slab capable of attaining a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity.

 

h.   All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape plans.

 

i.    The plan shall respect the prevailing coastal influences and the coast's special design considerations and requirements, and shall be designed accordingly. Generally, species selection shall be restricted to local indigenous coastal species that require minimal watering once established or species with water needs that match rainfall and drainage conditions.

 

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

 

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

 

Documentary evidence is to be obtained from a suitably qualified Landscape Architect and submitted to the principal certifying authority (PCA) (and the Council, if the Council is not the PCA) prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate which confirms that the landscaping works have been completed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans and relevant conditions of development consent, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

127.         The applicant shall submit a landscape design for the Anzac Parade street frontage of the development in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for La Perouse. The landscape design shall include furniture, pavements, tree grates and trees as required by Council’s Landscape Architect – 9399 0786.

 

The Landscape Design plans shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director A & I Services in accordance with Section 80A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to the certifying authority issuing a construction certificate for the development. The design shall include Council’s issued alignment levels for the Anzac Pde site frontage (Note: see Alignment level conditions)

 

All street furniture is required to be purchased through Council. Due to supply constraints, the applicant is required to place an order and pay for the required furniture three months prior to the estimated date for the completion of street frontage works.

 

The applicant shall note that the approved landscape works carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council property. An application for the cost of the landscape works on Council property 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 checking 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.

 

A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque of $3,000.00 shall be lodged with Council prior to issue of a construction certificate for the proposed development in order to ensure the construction of the approved landscape works along the Anzac Parade site frontage.

 

128.         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.

 

129.         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 with Kikuyu Turf or similar. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

130.         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.

 

131.         In order to visually 'soften' the expanses of hard pavement, brick unit pavers, stenciled concrete (or similar) shall be used throughout the driveway areas on the site. Such details shall be shown on the detailed engineering documentation and shall include all structural design details including pavement/subgrade thickness.

 

Such details shall be in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard and shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

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

 

133.         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.

 

134.             Landscaped areas must contain a predominance of species that require minimal watering once established or species with water needs that match rainfall and drainage conditions.

 

Tree Management

 

135.         The applicant shall submit a total payment of $1,400.00 to Council,

 

a.         Being the cost for Council to supply and install 8 x 45 litre street trees at the completion of all works ($1,160.00 + GST), and

 

b.         To compensate Council for the loss of amenity caused by the removal of the Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) street tree on the Anzac Parade nature strip ($240.00).

 

The contribution shall be paid into Fee Code 525 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.

 

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

 

·          Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) growing on the Anzac Parade nature strip as indicated

·          Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Christmas Tree) near the corner of Goorawahl and Anzac

·          Lagunaria patersonii (Norfolk Island Hibiscus) in the rear yard, against the eastern property boundary

·          Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palm) near the rear of the site

·          Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Christmas Tree) against the rear property boundary

·          Lagunaria patersonii (Norfolk Island Hibiscus) against the rear property boundary

·          Callistemon sp. (Bottlebrush) on the Goorawahl Avenue nature strip at the rear of the site

·          Eucalyptus ficifolia (Gum tree) on the Goorawahl Avenue nature strip at the rear of the site

 

Tree Protection Measures

 

137.           In order to ensure the retention of the various street trees along the Goorawahl Avenue nature strip in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a)   All detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application shall show the retention of the existing tree specimens with the position of the tree trunks and full diameter of the tree canopies clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b)   The trees are to be physically protected by the installation of protective fencing around the trees using 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing. This fencing shall be located to a minimum radius of 2 metres from the outside edge of the tree trunk.

 

      This fencing shall be installed prior to the commencement of demolition and construction works and shall remain in place until all works are completed.

 

c)   Within this zone there is to be no storage of materials or machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of in the area, no stockpiling of soil or rubble, or any works listed in Point b.

 

            Any works required within this zone (only as approved on the construction certificate) shall be under the direction of, and to the satisfaction of, a suitably qualified Arborist.

 

d)   Any excavations required for footings, structures, retaining walls, services, pipes, paving etc within 2 metres of the tree trunks shall be undertaken by hand and under the direction of, and to the satisfaction of, a suitably qualified Arborist with all roots being cleanly cut.

 

e)   The erection of signage on the fence with the following words clearly displayed: “TREE PROTECTION ZONE", "DO NOT ENTER".

 

f)    A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque of $3,560.00 shall be lodged with Council prior to issue of a construction certificate for the proposed development in order to ensure the preservation of the tree in accordance with the requirements described in this condition.

 

 

   QUANTITY

 

        SPECIES       

 

   AMOUNT

 

10

 

Various, including Leptospermum laevigatum (Coastal Tea Tree) and Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia)

 

$3,560.00

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

$3,560.00

 

The refundable deposit is placed to ensure that the tree protection measures as described in this condition are undertaken throughout the demolition and construction period. The refundable deposit will be released twelve (12) months from the time of issue of a final occupation certificate by the certifying authority providing the tree protection measures (including amendments to the plans) have been undertaken throughout the demolition and construction period and the trees have been retained in good health.

 

Any contravention of Council's conditions relating to the trees at any time during the demolition and construction period or prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate will result in the Council claiming all of the lodged security.

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works:

 

139.           The applicant shall create suitable right of carriageway, easements for services and internal stormwater lines, as required. The applicant shall be advised that the minimum easement width for any internal stormwater line is 0.9 metres.

 

140.           The conditions of development consent must be satisfied and all public roads and reserves must be satisfactorily restored prior to the finalisation of the strata subdivision.

 

141.           Tandem car parking spaces shall be allocated on the strata plan to individual residential and commercial units within the development.

 

142.           The relevant requirements of the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be complied with and 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, please refer to the “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Following application, a “Notice of Requirements” will be provided, 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 issuing an occupation certificate or release of the subdivision linen plan, as applicable.

 

143.           The applicant shall provide Council with a survey plan of the property prior to receiving strata subdivision approval.

 

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:

 

d)     Part D3        -         Access for people with disabilities

e)     Part E1         -         Fire fighting equipment

f)      Part E2         -         Smoke Hazard Management

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

h)     Part F2         -         Sanitary and other facilities

i)      Part F4         -         Light and ventilation

 

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.      In order to organise for an inspection for the release of the security deposit, the applicant shall contact the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to liaise with Council’s Asset & Infrastructure Department to arrange for an inspection of the landscaping to be carried out. Should the landscaping be found to be unsatisfactory, thus necessitating further inspections, the applicant is advised that each additional inspection will be charged at $55.00 (incl. GST) and that this amount shall be paid into Account Number 41901939, Code RGJ at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to any further inspection being carried out.

 

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

 

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 plans

Perspectives

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

 

DAVID PIRIE

DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

TOWN PLANNER

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director Planning & Community Development's Report 107/2003

 

 

SUBJECT:

14 - 16 Daintrey Crescent and 4 Dudley Street, Randwick. Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a multi unit residential development containing 18 units and 34 carparking spaces. Mediation held 2 December 2003.

 

 

DATE:

4 December, 2003

FILE NO:

03/0197

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting held 18 November 2003 Council resolved the following:

 

“that this application be deferred to give the affected parties the opportunity to take part in mediation in order to consider issues including the geotechnical advice and the view loss of the neighbours”

 

It is noted that, since the committee meeting, the applicant has lodged a Class 1 appeal in the Land & Environment Court for a deemed refusal.

 

ISSUES:

 

A mediation meeting was held on 2 December, 2003 at Council. The applicant Mr Richard Smyth, several objectors and the Mediator, Tim Stewart, were present.

 

It was resolved at the mediation (copy attached) that the applicant would consult with the owner to determine if a 2m reduction in height of the building at Daintrey Crescent was worthy of exploration.

 

The applicant advised by fax on 3 December 2003 (copy attached) that he had discussed the matter with the client and that the request of the neighbours was not a reasonable request in this instance.

 

A further objection has been received from Paul Chilcott representing the Spot Precinct  The matters raised in the submission are addressed below.

 

Excess Floor Space Ratio (FSR)

 

The Precinct requests clarification of the calculation of the FSR as detailed in Council assessment is 1.12:1 in place of 1.22:1 shown by applicant.

 

Comment: As stated in the Development Application report to the Health, Building & Planning Committee held 18 November 2003, the proposed FSR is 1.12:1. The applicant provided the revised FSR calculation after they were made aware that the current definition of gross floor area is calculated from “the inner face of the external enclosing walls”.

 

The Precinct considered it was inappropriate for Council to be providing amended data on behalf of the applicant and were obliged to consider the application as lodged to Council. The assessors report should have made mention of the errors in the application.

 

Comment: The report to the Committee provided the accurate FSR calculation for the proposal, which was provided by the applicant and checked by the assessment officer. Council is obliged to consider the application under the applicable controls, not controls that have been repealed. The original calculation of floor space by the applicant was correct at the time of lodgement as it was based on the previous definition of gross floor area.

 

Vast  excess over the FSR guideline of 0.9 to 1 for this site. The excess FSR can not be considered minor or incidental.

 

Comment: The issue of the FSR exceedance is extensively examined in the Development Application report and it was concluded that the variation in FSR was appropriate and would not result in a significant loss to the amenity enjoyed by adjacent residents.

 

Justification for FSR & the question of “Voids”

 

Precinct objected to assessors report stating that for those apartments facing Daintrey Crescent which are below street level can be excluded from FSR.

 

Comment: The report does not state that the space can be excluded from the FSR. The report argues that if the space were not included as usable floor space it would be left as a void and would not result in a reduction in the bulk of the building.

 

The Precinct considers that the comments made in the assessors report regarding the excess floor space and that creating voids would not reduce the height and bulk of the building (which is the intention of the FSR control) is incorrect and misleading and should be withdrawn from the report.

 

Comment: The report was not misleading or incorrect in stating that the excess floor space if it were not used for residential use would be used as voids. The point that was made was that the building could be designed with the same height and massing from Daintrey Crescent with or without the additional floor space. The applicant is making use of space  which would otherwise be a void if strict compliance with the FSR control were required.

 

Setback & View Sharing

Loss of views from some private properties and completely from the street. The current proposal is not considered to be view sharing. The non-compliance with side setbacks requirements is not considered minor.

 

Comment: The performance requirements in the DCP require that development minimises effects on views and demonstrates steps that have been taken to mitigate view loss, in particular view loss of significant features such as the ocean, coastline, nearby open space areas and significant landmarks or buildings.

 

The proposed development will result in a loss of the view to the east/northeast of  the hills, suburbs and ocean view from Daintrey Street and from the ground floor of buildings to the west across Daintrey Street (directly opposite the site). From the first floor of the same buildings, the view is preserved albeit decreased. The suburbs, hills and ocean will still be partly visible from this level. It is important to note that the proposed development at the Daintrey Street level readily complies with Council’s height restriction and sits lower than the adjacent building to the south. Whilst some views will be lost as a result of the proposal, other views are maintained and new views are created to the new apartments. It is considered that the proposal does not selfishly take away views and is consistent with performance requirements of the DCP in relation to view sharing.

 

The side setbacks proposed, whilst they result in minor non-compliances with the preferred solutions, are much greater than for the existing buildings on the site.

 

Stacking of parking spaces

 

Ongoing parking issues as a result of the commercial centre at the Spot. It is essential that the parking DCP requirements be rigorously applied to Daintrey Crescent which is unable to accommodate additional demands for on-street parking.

 

Comment: The proposed development contains 7 x 2 bedroom apartments and 11 x 3 bedroom apartments that generate a requirement of 25 residential parking spaces and 5 visitors spaces under the DCP.

 

It is proposed to provide 34 car parking spaces to the development of which 5 spaces are for visitors and 29 are for residents. Some residential units are provided for with two car parking spaces that are in a stacked arrangement. The proposed development provides more than adequate car parking in compliance with the DCP requirements and the access to the car park off Dudley Street is preferred over Daintrey Crescent.

 

The Spot Precinct Committee has raised concerns that the proposed development will result in an increased impact to the already tight off-street parking situation in Daintrey Crescent. This is argued on the basis that the pedestrian entrance to the largest building (ie the building fronting Daintrey Crescent) is off Daintrey Crescent and visitors will park on the street rather than accessing the car park. It is considered appropriate to have a pedestrian entrance to this building off Daintrey Crescent purely because it improves the accessibility of the site. It should be noted that there are two pedestrian entrances to the site – one at Dudley Street and one at Daintrey Crescent - and both of these entrances are accessible to both buildings. The proposed car park provides adequate visitors space in compliance with the DCP to accommodate the demand for space by visitors. It is undesirable having an access off Daintrey Crescent to the proposed car park due to the residential nature of the road, its narrowness and low carrying capacity. Further, the construction of a driveway off Daintrey Crescent into the proposed basement car park for vehicles would be difficult due to the steep gradient and would require additional space. There is no evidence that suggests that visitors to the proposed development would park in Daintrey Crescent instead of the proposed car park. It is already difficult to find parking on Daintrey Crescent and this in itself would deter visitors from using it for access when they can easily access both buildings from within the visitors car parking area.

 

The proposed car parking arrangement is therefore consistent with the performance requirements of the DCP and is supported.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The mediation resulted in no resolution of the issues raised by objectors and the proposal remains unaltered from the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting held 18 November 2003.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council assume the concurrence of the Director of the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources to vary the provisions of Clause 32  of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended) relating to Floor Space Ratio under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1.

 

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 03/00197/GE for Demolition of existing buildings on site and erection of a multi unit residential development containing 18 units and 34 carparking spaces at 14 - 16 Daintrey Crescent and 4 Dudley Street, Randwick subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA-01 issue A, DA-03 issue A, DA-05 issue A, DA-06 issue A, and DA-08 issue A to DA 11 issue A, dated 23.04.2002 and received by Council on 12 March 2003, DA-00 issue B, dated 02.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, DA-02 issue B dated 02.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, DA-04 issue C dated 09.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, and DA-07 issue B dated 02.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, LA01 issue B received by Council 12 March 2003, 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 shall be in accordance with the external finishes board prepared by Allen Jack & Cottier and dated April 2002.

 

3.         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.

 

4.         All existing outbuildings on the site must be demolished and removed in conjunction with the development.

 

5.         The balcony to the disabled unit no. 8.1 is to be expanded to have a minimum area of at least 8 sq.m.

 

6.         Public access to the visitor’s carparking spaces 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.

 

7.         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.

 

The following conditions are imposed to promote ecologically sustainable development and energy efficiency.

 

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 noted in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

9.         External timber or metal framed and brick veneer walls and roofs are to be provided with insulation (i.e. bulk insulation and a reflective building membrane/reflective sarking/foil insulation), having a minimum total thermal resistance R–value of 3.0 in roofs and 1.5 in external walls.  The insulation and reflective building membrane is to be installed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the manufacturers details.

 

Details of compliance with the requirements for insulation are to be included in the construction certificate application.

 

10.       Hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation, in accordance with the relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

11.       The hot water system installed in the development must achieve a minimum greenhouse score of 3.5 as detailed SEDA’s Energy Smart Homes Policy.  Any electric clothes dryers to be provided in the development must also have a minimum 2 star energy rating.

 

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

 

12.       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               $ 37,138.16

b)       for the provision or improvement of community facilities   $ 16,421.00

c)       Administration fee $425.00                                                         $      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 have been applied to ensure that noise emissions from the development satisfy legislative requirements and maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

 

13.       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.

 

In this regard, 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.

 

14.       The use of the premises and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance.

 

15.       A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics shall be submitted to Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the development will comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and relevant conditions of approval.

 

16.       A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the development comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and conditions of Council’s approval.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

 

17.       The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

 

18.       There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises which will give rise to an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

19.       The location of the discharge point serving the car park mechanical ventilation system is to be not less than 6m from a property boundary and it must discharge vertically and satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1668.

 

Details of compliance are to be provided in the plans and specifications for the construction certificate.

 

20.       The location and height of the discharge of mechanical ventilation systems are required to satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1668 and details are to be provided in the relevant plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

21.       Pollution control devices shall be installed and maintained to ensure there will be no water borne pollutants discharging or are likely to discharge into any natural water course or the stormwater or sewerage drainage systems.

 

Full details of the proposed pollution control devices to be installed are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment in accordance with Section 80 A(2)  of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

22.       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.

 

23.       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:

 

24.       Documentary evidence prepared by a suitably qualified professional geotechnical engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, certifying the suitability and stability of the site for the proposed building and certifying the suitably and adequacy of the proposed design and construction of the building for the site.

 

25.       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.

 

A copy of the engineers report is to be submitted to the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority.

 

26.       Driven type piles/shoring must not be provided unless a geotechnical engineer’s report is submitted to the certifying authority, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, which states that damage should not occur to any adjoining premises and public place as a result of the works.

 

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:

a.   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.

 

28.       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:

 

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.       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.

 

32.       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.

 

Upon inspection of each stage of construction, the Principal Certifying Authority (or other suitably qualified person, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority) 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 consent:

 

·    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, sand, soil, debris, waste containers or other obstructions.

 

33.       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. 

 

34.       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.

 

35.       If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must:

 

·    preserve and protect the building /s on the adjoining land from damage; and

·    if necessary, underpin and support the building in an approved manner; and

·    at least seven (7) days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land (including a public road or public place), give notice of the intention to do so to the owner of the adjoining land. Particulars of the excavation are to be provided to the owner of the adjoining land and also the owner of the land where the building is being erected or demolished.

 

36.       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.

 

37.       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.

 

38.       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

 

39.       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.

 

40.       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 footings or first completed floor slab (prior to the pouring of concrete), showing the area of the land, building and boundary setbacks.

 

 (b)       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.

 

 (c)       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.

 

41.       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.

 

42.       The use of any rock excavation machinery or any mechanical pile drivers is restricted to the hours of 8.00am to 5.00pm (maximum), Monday to Friday inclusive and from 8.00am to 1.00pm on Saturday, to minimise the noise levels during construction and loss of amenity to nearby residents.

 

A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics shall be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of any excavation or building works, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the construction of the development will comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the Noise Control Manual published by the Environment Protection Authority and relevant conditions of this approval.

 

43.       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.

 

44.       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.

 

45.       A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics shall be submitted to Council upon commencement of works, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the construction of the development complies with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the Noise Control Manual published by the Environment Protection Authority and relevant conditions of approval.  In support of the above it is necessary to submit all relevant readings and calculations made.

 

Should noise and vibration emissions not comply with the terms and conditions of consent, work must cease forthwith and is not to recommence until details of compliance are submitted to Council.

 

46.       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.

 

47.       Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works.

 

A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from the Council and other relevant Authorities prior to excavating or opening-up the road or footway for services or the like.

 

Any damage caused to the road or footway must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

48.       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.

 

49.       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.

 

50.       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”.

 

51.       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.

 

52.       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

 

Details of the proposed sediment control measures must be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority prior to the commencement of any site works.  The sediment and erosion control measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and a copy of the approved details must be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

Details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures shall include; a site plan; indicating the slope of land, access points & access control measures, location and type of sediment & erosion controls, location of existing vegetation to be retained, location of material stockpiles and storage areas, location of building operations and equipment.

 

53.       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.

 

54.       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.

 

55.       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.

 

56.       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.

 

57.       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.

 

58.       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.

 

Fences or hoardings 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.

Details of the proposed temporary fences located upon the site are to be submitted to the principal certifying authority and 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.

 

59.       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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

62.       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 ensure adequate environmental protection.

 

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

 

·    Occupational health and Safety Act 1983 (NSW)

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

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

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

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

 

64.       All site works shall comply with the occupational health and safety requirements of the NSW WorkCover Authority.  In this regard all contractors and employees shall adopt work practices in accordance with the requirements of WorkSafe’s Control of Inorganic Lead at Work (NOHSC:102(1994) and NOHSC:2015(1994).

 

65.       Hazardous dust must not be allowed to escape from the site.  The use of fine mesh dust proof screens or other relevant measures is recommended.  Any existing accumulations of dust (eg, ceiling voids and wall cavities) must be removed by the use of an industrial vacuum fitted with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter.  All dusty surfaces and dust created from work is to be suppressed by a fine water spray.  Water must not be allowed to enter the street and stormwater systems.  Demolition is not to be performed during high winds, which may cause dust to spread beyond site boundaries.

 

66.       Following demolition activities, soil must be tested by a person of suitable expertise, to ensure the soil lead levels are below acceptable health criteria for residential areas.  Full certification is to be furnished to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority prior to final inspection.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

67        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)         $5000.00         -           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.

 

Traffic conditions/Civil Works Conditions

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

 

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

 

a)         Construct a heavy-duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

b)         Remove any redundant concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks and to reinstate the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

c)         Re-construct kerb and gutter for the Dudley Street frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit points.

 

d)         Carry out a full depth, minimum 1.00 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full site frontage.

 

e)         Reconstruct a concrete footpath along the Dudley Street frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

f)          Re-construct kerb and gutter with associated roadworks for the Daintrey Crescent frontage as well as footpath and step reconstruction and possible retaining walls and landscaping to Asset and Infrastructure Dept’s requirements.

 

69        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.

 

70        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.

 

71        All new walls adjacent to vehicular crossings must be lowered to a height of 600mm above the internal driveway level or splayed 1.5 metre by 1.5 metre so that a driver of a stopped vehicle 2 metres behind the street boundary line can observe pedestrians up to 2 metres from the crossings. Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

72        The driveway opening at the Dudley Street frontage must be located at least 1.2 metres clear of the side property.

 

73        A work zone is to be provided in Dudley St for the duration of the construction works. The ‘workzone’ shall have a minimum length of 12 metres and the prescribed fee for the work zone must be paid to Council at least four (4) weeks prior to the commencement of building works.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

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

 

74        The Council’s Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services has inspected the above site and have determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, shall be:

 

Dudley Street Frontage –      Match the existing Council footpath levels at all points along the full site frontage.

 

Daintrey Crescent Frontage – The pedestrian gate entrance is to be 150mm above the existing asphalt footpath/driveway at this location.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Assets &  Infrastructure Services Department on 9399 0923.

 

75        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.

 

76        The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services have been issued at a prescribed fee of $1,485.00 calculated at $27.50 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Service Authority Conditions

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

 

77        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.

 

78        The applicant must meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia and Sydney Water to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

79        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.

 

80        Any electricity substation required for the site as a consequence of this development shall be located within the site and shall be screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on all detailed landscape drawings and specifications. The applicant must liaise with Sydney Electricity prior to lodging the construction certificate whether or not an electricity substation is required for the development.

 

81        A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney water Act 1994 must be obtained. Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and charges paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator, since 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 the issuing of an occupation certificate or prior to receiving strata subdivision approval.

 

Drainage Conditions

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

 

82      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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

84        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.

 

85        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.

 

86        A "restriction as to user and positive covenant" shall be placed on the title of the subject property prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate. 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.

 

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

 

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

 

89.       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).

 

90.       A childproof and corrosion resistant fastening system shall be installed on access grates over pits/trenches where water is permitted to be temporarily stored.

 

91.       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 wet well shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2-hour storm assuming both pumps are not working.

 

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.

 

92.       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)

 

93.       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

 

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.

 

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

 

95.       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.

 

96.       Two covered car washing bays shall be provided for this development.

 

a)         The car washing bays 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 bays must be located outside any required/approved stormwater detention system and must be suitably signposted.

 

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

 

A water tap shall be located adjacent to the car washing bays.

 

97.       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.

 

98.       As the above site may be present within a fluctuating water table the basement carpark  or similar structures are to be suitably tanked and waterproofed. A Structural Engineer\Geotechnical Engineer shall certify the tanking & waterproofed 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).

 

Any seepage water must be drained directly into an absorption pit within the site. Seepage water must not be drained from the site.

 

Waste Management Conditions

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

 

99.       The garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a total of 18 x 240 litre bins (9 garbage bins & 9 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.

 

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

 

Landscape Conditions

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

 

101.     The landscaped areas shown on the plan number LA01 B, dated 02-04-2002 shall be the subject of detailed landscape drawings and specifications, which are to be submitted to, and approved by, the 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.         The landscape plan shall show a minimum number of 4 x 100 litre broad canopied trees (not palms) suitably located within the site. The trees selected shall be of a species that attain a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity.

 

h.         All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape plans.

 

i.          The plan shall respect the prevailing coastal influences and the coast's special design considerations and requirements, and shall be designed accordingly. Generally, species selection shall be restricted to local indigenous coastal species.

 

102.     Landscaped areas must contain a predominance of species that require minimal watering once established or species with water needs that match rainfall and drainage conditions.

 

Landscaped areas must include an area and facilities dedicated for onsite composting and porous paving should also be used in all pathways, wherever practicable, to maximize on-site absorption of rainwater and details are to be provided on the landscape plans.  Details of the proposed landscaping, including plant species and paved areas are to be included with the construction certificate application.

 

103.     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.

 

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

 

            Documentary evidence is to be obtained from a suitably qualified Landscape Architect and submitted to the principal certifying authority (PCA) (and the Council, if the Council is not the PCA)  prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate which confirms that the landscaping works have been completed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans and relevant conditions of development consent, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

105.     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 with Kikuyu Turf or similar. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

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

 

107.     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

 

108.     The applicant shall submit payment of $2212 to Council,

 

a.     Being the cost for Council to remove the existing street tree specimens of two (2) Metrosideros species (New Zealand Christmas Bush) ($682) and

 

b.     Being the cost for Council to supply and install 2 x 25 litre street trees at the completion of all works ($440), and

 

c.     To compensate Council for the loss of amenity caused by the removal of the street tree street trees ($1090)

 

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.

 

109.     Approval is granted for the removal of the following trees subject to the planting of 6 x 75 litre broad canopied replacement tree/s (not palm/s) within the site. The species selected shall be one/those that will attain a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity.

 

a)         Three (3) Cyathea species (Tree Fern) located within the front yard of No. 14 Daintrey Crescent.

 

b)         Three (3) Cupressus species (Cypress) located within the front yard of No.4 Dudley Street.

 

c)         Two (2) Metrosideros species (New Zealand Christmas Bush) located on the nature strip in front of No.16 Daintrey Crescent

 

d)         Two (2) Hedyscepe canterburyana (Umbrella Palm) located within the front yard of No. 14 Daintrey Crescent

 

110.     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.

 

111.     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.

 

Tree Protection Measures

 

112.     In order to ensure the retention of the Eucalyptus cinerea (Argyle Apple) located on the nature strip in front of 16 Daintrey Crescent in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.         All detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application shall show the retention of the existing tree specimen with the position of the tree trunk and full diameter of the tree canopy clearly shown on all drawings.

 

 

b.         All detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application shall show no alteration in the existing soil levels or the location of any structures, services, footings, paving, detention tanks, stormwater infiltration systems, pipes, cutting or battering of the existing soil profile, or any excavations within a radius of 3 metres from the outside edge of the tree trunk.

 

c.         The tree is to be physically protected by the installation of protective  fencing around the tree using 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing. This fencing shall be located to a minimum radius of 3 metres from the outside edge of the tree trunk.

 

This fencing shall be installed prior to the commencement of demolition and construction works and shall remain in place until all works are completed.

 

d.         Within this zone there is to be no storage of materials or machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of in the area, no stockpiling of soil or rubble, or any works listed in Point b.

 

Any works required within this zone (only as approved on the construction certificate) shall be under the direction of, and to the satisfaction of, a suitably qualified Arborist.

 

e.         Any excavations required for footings, structures, retaining walls, basement carparks, services, pipes, detention tanks, stormwater infiltration systems, paving etc within 3 metres of the tree trunk {add one metre to the radius quoted in Point c.} shall be undertaken by hand and under the direction of, and to the satisfaction of, a suitably qualified Arborist with all roots being cleanly cut.

 

f.          The installation of woodchip mulch to a depth of 75mm within the fenced off protection area as described in Point c.

 

g.         Watering of the tree (within the fenced off area) three times a week for the duration of the period of the refundable deposit described in Point h.

 

h.         A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque of $2900.00 shall be lodged with Council prior to issue of a construction certificate for the proposed development in order to ensure the preservation of the tree in accordance with the requirements described in this condition.

 

 

   QUANTITY

 

        SPECIES       

 

   AMOUNT

 

One (1)

 

Eucalyptus cinerea

 

$2900.00

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

$2900.00

 

 

The refundable deposit is placed to ensure that the tree protection measures as described in this condition are undertaken throughout the demolition and construction period. The refundable deposit will be released twelve (12) months from the time of issue of a final occupation certificate by the certifying authority providing the tree protection measures (including amendments to the plans) have been undertaken throughout the demolition and construction period and the tree/s have been retained in good health.

 

Any contravention of Council's conditions relating to the {tree or trees} at any time during the demolition and construction period or prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate will result in the Council claiming all of the lodged security.

 

113.     A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque, or bank guarantee for the amount of $18,000.00 shall be lodged with Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development to ensure the implementation and maintenance of the landscape works in accordance with the approved landscape documentation.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

SUBDIVISION:

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works:

 

114.     The consolidation of the separate lots into a single lot must take place, prior to the use or the occupation of the development.  Details of the consolidation of lots are to be provided to Council prior to occupation of the development.

 

115.     Suitable easements for services and internal stormwater lines shall be created as required.  The minimum easement width over any stormwater line is to be 0.9 metres.

 

Advisory Notes

 

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 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 C1                  -           Fire resistance and stability

            b)         Part C2                  -           Compartmentation and separation

            c)         Part C3                  -           Protection of openings

            d)         Part D1                  -           Provisions for escape

            e)         Clause D1.2           -           Number of exits required

            f)          Clause D1.4           -           Exit travel distances

            g)         Part D2                  -           Construction of exits

            h)         Part D3                  -           Access for people with disabilities

            i)          Part E1                   -           Fire fighting equipment

            j)          Part E2                   -           Smoke Hazard Management

            k)         Part E3                   -           Lift Installations

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

            m)        Part F1                   -           Damp and weatherproofing

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Original development application report, mediation notes and response fax from applicant.

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

LUKE JACKSON

DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

SENIOR ASSESSMENT PLANNER

 

 


Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

 

DATE:

17 June, 2003

FILE NO:

03/00197/GE

 

PROPOSAL:

 Demolition of existing buildings on site and erection of a multi unit residential development containing 18 units and 34 carparking spaces

PROPERTY:

 14 - 16 Daintrey Crescent and 4 Dudley Street, Randwick

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Smyth Planning

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Committee as it is valued at $2,300,000.

 

The subject site contains a disused nursing home and two dwelling houses and has frontages to both Dudley Street and Daintrey Crescent. Surrounding and adjacent uses consist of residential development from single level to 5 storey multi unit housing development.

 

The proposed development involves demolishing the existing structures and constructing a multi unit residential development containing 18 dwellings and basement parking. The proposed building has a contemporary façade to both street frontages and is broken into two separate buildings that are divided by extensive landscaping.

 

Objections to the proposal included excessive FSR/Scale, excessive height, view loss from Daintrey Crescent, streetscape impact, overshadowing, setbacks, parking and traffic problems to Daintrey Crescent, inadequate landscaping and loss of property values.

 

The site is located in a 2C Residential zone and is permissible with Council consent. The proposal is subject to the provisions of the Development Control Plan (DCP) -Multi Unit Housing.

 

The assessment of the application reveals that whilst the proposal exceeds the FSR requirement, the scale, height, setbacks and parking aspects of the proposal are appropriate. The proposal will not dominate the streetscape but will add a contemporary face that is consistent in scale with its adjacent neighbours. The proposed floor space is not unreasonable as much of the excess will be contained below what is now ground level. The proposed development will cause some minor view loss to dwellings on Daintrey Crescent. However views from other properties are preserved and many new views created. Internally the proposal has a high degree of amenity with split level apartments that have dual frontages, extensive views to the east and north, high quality landscaping and open spaces as well as an accessible apartment and extensive parking with storage areas. Overall the assessment of the application reveals that the proposal is worthy of approval.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposed development involves the demolition of the existing structures on site and the erection of a multi unit residential development entailing the following:

 

·    Two buildings containing 18 dwellings (7 x 2 bedroom and 11 x 3 bedroom units) with one building containing 5 dwellings (fronting and accessed off Dudley Street) and the other building containing 13 dwellings (fronting and accessed off Daintrey Crescent).

·    A 34 space car park of which 29 spaces are for residents and 5 are for visitors. The carpark is contained within two basement levels and vehicular access is off Dudley Street,

·    Storage areas are contained within the carpark,

·    All units contain private open space and most are split level with dual orientation to improve access to ventilation, sunlight and views,

·    Landscaping is proposed between the property boundary and the proposed buildings and also between the two buildings. The landscaped areas include a wide range of species from grasses to trees, a water feature, and areas for deep planting purposes.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Dudley Street and the eastern side of Daintrey Crescent, Randwick and has frontages to both streets. The site is comprised of three allotments and is L shaped  with a 35.5m frontage to Daintrey Crescent, an 18.5m frontage to Dudley Street, a 61.6m length on the southern boundary and a 39m length on the northern boundary with a total area of 1867 sq.m. There is a considerable fall on the site from the Daintrey Crescent boundary to the Dudley Street Boundary of approximately 9m. The site contains three substantial buildings comprising a former three storey nursing home on the northern side of the site and two residential dwellings on the southern side of the property with one fronting Dudley Street and the other fronting Daintrey Crescent.

 

The surrounding area is a mix of single dwellings and multi unit housing varying in size from single storey to 5 storeys. Along Daintrey Crescent, the adjacent building to the south is a four storey multi unit development and the adjacent building to the north is a two storey residential dwelling. Along Dudley Street, the adjacent building to the  south contains a three storey dwelling including a garage at street level and the adjacent building to the north contains a four storey multi unit housing development including garages at street level.

 

 

       

 

      Subject site from Daintrey Street looking east/northeast.

 

  

 

  Southern side of site and adjacent units        Development to the west of the site across

 from Daintrey Crescent.                                           Daintrey Crescent.

 

   

 

     Development to the west of the site              Development to the north of the site on     across Daintrey Crescent.                                                   Dudley Street.

 

    

 

Subject site from Dudley Street.            View of the site showing adjacent buildings

    The nursing home is visible at rear right.                          from Dudley Street.

 

     

 

View of buildings to the south on Dudley Street. The Multi Unit development to   the south of the site on Daintrey Crescent is visible at rear.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

The three sites have a history of previous development approvals however none of them are relevant to the proposed development application.

 

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

 

Marie Page

7/18 Daintrey Crescent

Randwick 2031

 

·    The proposed development will exacerbate the current on street parking problems,

·    Excessive height and floor space will cause blocking of views.

 

Sam Kutner

10 Daintrey Cres,

Randwick,

 

·    Excessive floor space can not be justified,

·    Using vehicle stackers would be contrary to the requirement to enter and leave the site in a forward direction,

·    Significant view loss from Daintrey Crescent of Coogee and the Ocean,

·    Residents gaining access of Daintrey Cres to apartments are likely to park onstreet rather than in the proposed car park due to access difficulty,

·    The excessive profits to be gained will compromise environmental amenity.

 

Peri Diestelow and Amaranth Jones

12/12 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick 2031

 

·    View loss to ocean as a result of excessive height. Height should be lowered,

·    The proposed contemporary design does not complement existing architecture in the street,

·    The proposal will cause on-street parking congestion/problems on Daintrey Street.

 

Pro Forma Letter from the following residents:

 

T Spinolo,

22 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick 2031

 

Lynette Pierse

4/18 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick 2031

 

J & D Slomovits

6/11 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick 2031

 

Patricia Rihana

5/11 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick 2031

 

·    Floor space ratio exceeded (by over 35%),

·    Total floor space exceeded (by over 35%),

·    Minimum soft landscaped area,

·    Setbacks to boundaries,

·    Car parking provisions (i.e. stack or tandem parking has been allowed for the majority of the spaces),

·    Loss of views (both public and private),

·    Incompatibility with streetscape and surrounding development,

·    Will cause overshadowing and loss of visual and aural privacy

·    On-street parking and traffic problems will be exacerbated by the proposal.

 

Mark Rohanna

1/7 and 4/7 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick NSW 2031

 

·    Floor space is exceeded by 35% and there is no need to have so many small units that will only benefit a greedy developer and will adversely impact upon existing owners, environment, and traffic/parking.

·    Total floor space exceed,

·    The minimum amount of soft landscaping has been provided. The development is designed for profit generation rather than making an aesthetic contribution to the area,

·    Setbacks to boundaries,

·    Impact of proposal on parking problems on Daintrey Crescent,

·    Loss of views (both public and private),

·    Incompatibility with street scape,

·    The proposal will cause overshadowing to neighbours properties and loss of visual and aural privacy,

·    Residents will access the site from Dudley Street and therefore will park on Dudley Street exacerbating the existing poor parking situation.

 

P.J. and J.M Campion,

5 Daintrey Crescent,

Randwick NSW 2031.

 

·    Loss of significant view to ocean which is a recognised part of the heritage of the area,

·    Proposal is unsympathetic to the existing architectural styles on Daintrey Crescent. The proposed development will not harmonise with the present buildings in the street and threatens to be prominent, looming and intrusive,

·    The proposal should be redesigned  to have a more sensitive option that does not result in views loss or poor landscaped areas,

·    The proposal will exacerbate the existing parking problem in Daintrey Street,

 

Di Verolli and Scotton,

Chartered Architects and Interior Designers,

68 Oxford Street,

Woollahra

 

On behalf of the following residents:

 

-     Mr P and Mrs J Champion, No. 5 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick,

-     Mr mark Rohanna, Units 1 and 4, No. 7 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick,

-     Mrs Helen Sava, Units 2 and 3, No. 7 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick,

-     Ms A Xanthis and Mr B Peterson, No. 9 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick,

-     Mr Sam Kutner, No. 10 Daintrey Crescent, Randwick.

 

·    Total overdevelopment – being 35% over the permissible floor space,

·    Proposal requires extensive excavation – the topography and slope will therefore be extensively modified,

·    The extensive excavations will adversely impact upon drainage at the site,

·    Public views and corridors – especially from Daintrey Crescent will be substantially lost,

·    Access requirements will be compromised encouraging on street parking on Daintree Crescent which is already narrow and congested,

·    The 18.505m Dudley Frontage does not comply with the minimum frontage requirement of 20 metres,

·    The height causes adverse impact on neighbouring properties by way of loss of views (both public and private), decreased solar access, increased overshadowing, loss of privacy. The proposal dramatically changes the character of the streetscape and surrounding area,

·    The proposal totally disregards the average setback to Daintrey Crescent and will have a serious impact on the streetscape in terms of bulk and height in close proximity to a narrow street,

·    The proposal does not comply with side setback requirements and will adversely affect the neighbours solar access, overshadowing, privacy and opportunity for landscaping between buildings,

·    The proposal has an excessive FSR, exceeding the Council requirement by 35% which contributes to the excessive bulk and scale, loss of views, loss of solar access, overshadowing, loss of aural and visual privacy, excessive parking, traffic problems, reduced soft landscape area, setback non-compliance, excessive excavation,

·    The SEPP 1 objection should not be supported as it fails to justify the excessive FSR,

·    Very Little area will be available for soft landscaping,

·    Loss of visual and acoustic privacy to neighbours,

·    Overshadowing is excessive and the diagrams should be verified for accuracy,

·    Loss of Public views to Ocean from Daintrey Cres,

·    Severe loss of private views from a variety of properties,

·    Parking and building design creates the problem of new residents wishing to park  on Daintrey Crescent,

·    Tandem parking is proposed but this is not permitted under the Parking DCP,

·    The excessive number of units contributes to the additional parking requirements, additional excavation for the carpark, additional traffic problems and additional demands for on-street parking to both Dudley Street and Daintrey Crescent,

 

Jennifer Pilmer

Secretary

12 Daintrey Strata Committee,

12 Daintrey Crescent

Randwick 2031

 

·    Streetscape impact, height is significantly more than adjacent dwellings,

·    View loss,

·    Loss of property values caused by view loss,

·    Overhsadowing,

·    Height should be lowered instead of ground anchoring to adjacent sites,

·    Proposal not consistent with surrounding dwellings in Daintrey Crescent,

·    The main pedestrian entrance is to Daintrey Crescent which will not support visitors and residential parking due to its narrowness and being one-way,

·    The public driveway between 12 Daintrey and the subject site should not be obstructed at any time,

·    Overlooking into 12 Daintrey Crescent from proposed new windows resulting in a loss of privacy.

 

Eddy Ottaviano,

Strata Manager,

(on behalf of 314-2 Dudley Street, Randwick),

Sommerville First National Real Estate

PO Box 11

Ashfield 2131

 

·    Proximity to 2 Dudley Street and large height and scale could undermine adjacent building,

·    Noise and air pollution will affect residents with respiratory difficulty,

·    Increased traffic movement will affect busy Dudley Street,

·    Potential loss of rent due to building work,

·    Size of development will impact services such as sewerage.

 

Helen Savva

2/7 & 3/7 Daintrey Crescent

Randwick NSW 2031

 

·    Floor space exceeded (by over 35%),

·    Minimal soft landscaping,

·    Setbacks to boundaries,

·    Car parking provisions – impacts to Daintrey will be chaotic,

·    Loss of public and private views,

·    Incompatible with streetscape,

·    Overshadowing and total loss of visual and aural privacy,

·    Traffic and parking impacts, particularly to Daintrey Cres which is the main entrance to the building.

 

Paul Chilcott

PO Box 172,

St Pauls NSW 2031

 

·    Significantly exceeds Council’s FSR,

·    Area already intensely developed,

·    No real reasons given in SEPP1 as to why variation in FSR should be allowed,

·    Poor appearance to streetscape (bulky look, akin to a warehouse),

·    More innovative design is required to improve streetscape appearance.

 

Mr Andrew A Tosti

PO Box A640

SYDNEY SOUTH NSW 1235

 

·    FSR exceeded,

·    Height, bulk and scale excessive,

·    Increased traffic and noise,

·    Loss of Views for numbers 7 & 9 Daintrey Crescent.

 

Anne & Brad Peterson

9 Daintrey Crescent

Randwick NSW 2031

 

·    Height of Building,

·    Congestion in area,

·    Incompatible with Streetscape character,

·    View sharing should be controlled,

·    Overshadowing,

·    Loss of privacy,

·    Loss of landscaping,

·    Parking congestion in area due to cinema will be exacerbated.

 

 

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

 

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

 

1.         One (1) Eucalyptus cinerea (Argyle Apple) located on the nature strip in front of 16 Daintrey Crescent. This tree is approximately 5-7 metres tall and in good health. This tree should be retained and tree protection measures will be required during construction.

 

2.         Two (2) Metrosideros species (New Zealand Christmas Bush) located on the nature strip in front of No.16 Daintrey Crescent. These trees are approximately 3 metres tall and in average to poor health. As such permission should be granted for the removal of these trees, subject to planting two replacements trees.

 

3.         Three (3) Cyathea species (Tree Fern) located within the front yard of No. 14 Daintrey Crescent. These ferns are approximately 1-2 metres tall and in average health. As such permission should be granted for the removal of these ferns.

 

4.         Three (3) Cupressus species (Cypress) located within the front yard of No.4 Dudley Street. These trees are approximately 5-7 metres tall and in average health. As such permission should be granted for the removal of these trees, subject to three replacements (not palms) located within the site.

 

5.   Two (2) Hedyscepe canterburyana (Umbrella Palm) located within the front yard of No. 14 Daintrey Crescent. These palms are approximately 4-5 metres tall and in average health. As such permission should be granted for the removal of these palms, subject to one replacement (not palm) located within the site.

 

Drainage Comments

 

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

Traffic Comments

 

The average traffic generation for the proposed residential development consisting of 18 residential units will be in the range of 72 to 90 vehicle movements per day.

 

The expected peak flow volume of approximately 9 vehicles per hour is considered low and no delays should be experienced in Dudley Street as a result of this development.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

-     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development and the Residential Flat Design Code.

-     Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998,

-     Building Code of Australia,

-     Development Control Plan – Multi-unit Housing.

 

(a)   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 2C Residential 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

31 - Landscape Area

50%

50.6% (at least half of this - or 25.5% of total site area - is soft landscaping)

Yes

32 - FSR

0.9:1

1.12:1 (0.92:1 is above ground)

No, SEPP 1 objection submitted

33 - Building Height

12m max height and 10m max external wall height

12m overall max height and 10m max external wall height

Yes

 

Clause 32 – Floor Space Ratio

 

Clause 32 (1) states “The maximum floor space ratios for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, with Zone 2C is 0.9:1”.

 

The proposed development has an FSR of 1.12:1 which exceeds the LEP control by 0.22:1 or 410 sq.m. The FSR of the proposed development above ground level is 0.92:1, which exceeds the LEP control by 0.02:1 or 37 sq.m.

 

The applicant has submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 objection to the floor space standard for the following reasons:

 

·    The additional floor space makes for more economic use of the land and meets that objective of the Act;

·    The proposal is consistent with the aims/objectives of the RLEP,

·    The proposal meets the objectives of the Density control and the performance requirement in Clause 3.4.4 of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP, in ensuring that the building bulk is compatible with surrounding built forms and minimizes impact of building bulk on nearby buildings, open spaces and the streetscape. Indeed the proposed design has significantly less impact on the neighbours than the existing buildings presently on the site;

·    The additional floor space does not result in any excessive bulk to the proposed development, but rather utilizes what would otherwise be void space;

·    The subject site is relatively steep and is L shaped (although the cross is wider that the stem is long) and the proposed development is consistent with the environmental capacity of the land;

·    The proposal provides a substantial amount of landscaped area;

·    The proposal provides good and useable private open space for each dwelling unit;

·    The bulk and scale of the proposal does not result in any unreasonable impacts on adjoining properties, and indeed the proposed design and massing opens up vistas for parts of the neighbouring property on the north west corner of the site;

·    The small non-compliance does not result in any significant traffic implications;

·    The extent of non-compliance is small and will not be apparent to any person living in the locality as the additional floor space is located in what would otherwise be a void;

·    The small non-compliance does not raise any matters of state significance;

·    The proposal is one of outstanding design and considered appropriate on merit when assessed in terms of SEPP 65 and under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Whilst the proposed development significantly exceeds the LEP numerical control by 410 sq.m, 373 sq.m of this is located below what is the current ground level. Due to the significant fall in elevation from Daintrey Street to Dudley Street of 9m and to accommodate the car park that is accessed off Dudley Street, a considerable amount of excavation is proposed in the centre of the site and on the Daintrey Crescent side of the site. To provide an appropriate grade in compliance with Council controls, the base of the car park is proposed to be sited 9m below the existing ground level at the Daintrey Crescent side of the site. The main building fronting Daintrey Crescent is sited partly above the carpark and up to 4m of the residential component of this building is proposed to be located below the existing ground level. This area is 373 sq.m and if it were not included as usable floor space it would be left as void and would not result in a reduction in the bulk of the building. The above ground exceedance in numerical floor space proposed is 37sq.m. Strict compliance in the numerical standard would result in the loss of the 373sq.m residential area proposed under the current ground level and the 37 sq.m above the ground level. Manipulation of the building to effect strict compliance with the FSR standard would not necessarily result in a building that would appear any less bulky from either streetscape. The minor above ground exceedance in FSR is not considered significant and removing this area to ensure compliance would not necessarily result in any greater amenity to adjacent neighbours nor would it result in a better design.

 

The proposed design takes advantage of the height limit to maximise views to the east. Such height complies with the maximum requirement in the LEP and is consistent with, but does not dominate, the height of adjacent buildings. Any loss in floor space within the building would not be transferred to a loss in height as the design is focused on accessing views. Rather it would result in a small loss to the floor space within the proposed units, resulting in diminished amenity to the proposed units without any greater benefit to adjacent residents.

 

It is considered that under the circumstances of the case and from the reasons presented in the SEPP 1 objection, the variation in FSR is appropriate and will not result in a significant loss to the amenity enjoyed by adjacent residents.

 

Clause 33 – Building height

 

Under this clause, the following is stipulated with respect to height:

 

(1) The maximum height for a building, other than a dwelling house, within Zone 2C is 12 metres measured vertically from any point on ground level.

 

(4) The maximum height for any external wall of a building, other than a dwelling house, within Zone No 2C is 10 metres measured vertically from any point at ground level.

 

The proposed development has a maximum height of 12m above existing ground level and a maximum external wall height of approximately 10m above existing ground level. The height of the proposed building to Dudley Street is 9m above the existing ground level and to Daintrey Crescent 7 to 10m above existing ground level (however only 5 to 8 metres or 2.5 storeys is visible from road level).

 

The adjacent building to the south of the site fronting Daintrey Crescent is a four storey multi-unit housing development and adjacent to the north is a two storey residence. The height of the proposed development steps evenly between the height of the two adjacent buildings. The southern side of the proposed development is 5m to 9m lower than the adjacent multi-unit housing building to the south. The northern side of the proposed development is 2.5m higher than the adjacent dwelling to the north. Therefore the height of the proposed development acts as a transition in height between its two adjacent neighbours on Daintrey Crescent. It is considered that this height is not excessive and not out of scale with adjacent buildings and performs a reasonable solution in terms of marrying the height of the two adjacent buildings.

 

The adjacent building to the north of the site on Dudley Street is a four storey Multi-Unit housing development that will be 2m lower than the northern edge of the proposed development. The adjacent three storey dwelling to the south on Dudley Street will be 1.2m lower than the southern edge of the proposed development. Whilst the proposed development will be slightly higher than its adjacent neighbour to the north, it is not out of context with the generally very high buildings in Dudley Street which are three to five storeys.

 

Overall, the height of the proposed development is not considered excessive and is generally consistent with adjacent buildings. The height of the proposal will not appear out of scale with other development in the area and is therefore considered appropriate.

 

(b)   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

The applicant has submitted the following information with respect to the principles of SEPP 65:

 

Principle 1: Context

 

The subject site is located in an area, which has been zoned to allow for multi-unit housing and apart from the dwelling at the southeast corner of the site is otherwise surrounded by multi unit housing in the form of Residential Flat Buildings. The proposed design solution is related to all aspects of the current context and is in line with the desired future character and identity of the locale. The proposed design implements the current planning policies.

 

Principle 2:  Scale

 

The proposed design solution is appropriate in bulk and scale since it complies with setbacks and falls within the Council’s building envelope. It does however exceed the Council’s floor space ratio for the site, but this has been achieved by utilizing the slope of the site and excavation to include more building area within the envelope.

 

Principle 3: Built Form

 

The proposed design blends into the existing building form in the area. The building alignment, proportions, and building type fits well into the pattern of existing development and confirms the existing definition of public domain and streetscape. The existing vistas, internal amenity and outlook are complemented by the design, building separation and setbacks.

 

Principle 4: Density

 

The proposed density in terms of the proposed Floor Space Ratio is greater than allowable under the current planning policies, but is consistent with the performance requirement of the Randwick Multi Unit Housing DCP. This performance requirement is that “building bulk is compatible with surrounding built form and minimizes impact of building bulk on nearby buildings, open spaces and the streetscape.

 

Principle 5: Resources, energy and water efficiency

 

The passive solar design principles are implemented to the extent where the majority of the units are provided with access to the northeastern sunlight. The solar access to the main habitable rooms is carefully considered, given the shape and orientation and fall of the land. The energy consultant has estimated that all of the units achieve a Nathers rating of between 3.5 stars and 4.5 stars.

 

Principle 6:  Landscape

 

In the proposed design solution, the landscape is an integral part of the architectural design. The landscape design aims at improving the amenities of the occupants and achieve a clear definition between various parties areas of private open space and the public space  which is heavily planted. The design builds on the existing natural elements and topography and contributes positively to the contextual character of the development and the area.

 

Principle 7: Amenity

 

The shape and the size of the rooms in the proposed development allow for appropriate use of such rooms. Internal circulation and alternative possibilities to furnish such spaces are carefully considered. The visual and acoustic privacy within the proposed development and its relationship with the surrounding residential units have also been carefully considered.

 

Principle 8:  Safety and security

 

The proposed design provides adequate means to overlook the private spaces and the public domain. The main entries to the development are directly located from the street. The public access areas are overlooked and well to ensure the safety of the residents and their visitors.

 

Principle 9: Social dimension

 

The internal layout and the size of the units and the fixed furnishings and inclusions respond to the requirements of the market in the Coogee area. The construction cost and the price of the end product is carefully balanced against the size of the units and the provision of the ancillary items. The mix of units is achieved through providing a variety of number of bedrooms, unit sizes with a range of private open space provisions over various levels, outlooks and orientations.

 

Principle 10: Aesthetics

 

Through the use of contemporary architectural style and balancing the composition of building elements, finishes and materials, the proposed development complies with the requirements of this design principle.

 

SEPP 65 Design Panel.

 

The proposed development was referred to Council’s SEPP 65 Design Panel on 2 June 2003.

 

The Panel offered the following comments:

 

1. Context

 

Satisfactory

 

2.    Scale

 

Satisfactory

 

3.    Built Form

 

It was considered that the floor space for units on level 9 & 10 could be slightly modified for better functioning in relation to the terraces. The overall built form is considered satisfactory.

 

4.    Density

 

Although the building is over the FSR it is understood it complies with the height. The committee considers the proposal does not appear to have excessive impact and is satisfactory.

 

5.    Resource, Energy, Water Efficiency

 

Satisfactory

 

6.    Landscape

 

Deep soil planting – taller trees to edge have deep soil planting.

 

Require more detail on larger trees on northern corner of the site.

 

Deeper planting required on NE face of car park 2 – need to extend out 2.5m

 

Requires 13.50 overall depth

 

Generally the plan must ensure the optimum conditions for medium height planting where possible.

 

7.    Amenity

 

Generally Satisfactory.

Concern was expressed about apartment 8.1 with regard to its length and its all-western orientation. It was suggested that the floor plan could change to provide better internal amenity to this unit.

 

8.    Safety & Security

 

Satisfactory

 

9.    Social Dimensions

 

Satisfactory

 

10.  Aesthetics

 

Well resolved – commendable

 

Conclusion

 

The Panel consider this application to be well designed and is a commendable aesthetic quality. Subject to some consideration to the west-facing apartment on the lower floor and further consideration being given to the soil depths for landscaping the Committee consider that the application should now progress to Council.

 

The views of the panel were referred to the applicant and minor amendments were made to satisfy the minor issues raised. Overall the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the principles of SEPP 65. The high quality landscaping, modulation of the building, split level apartments and overall contemporary design and materials form a building which is highly compatible with the principles of SEPP 65. The internal amenity to the apartments is of extremely high quality with most apartments receiving good cross ventilation, extensive solar access and views, large open space areas and ample off street parking. The proposed development provides a high degree of surveillance to the street and front entrances are clearly visible. The height, bulk and scale are consistent with adjacent development and the facades will introduce a contemporary design that will not be out of context with the existing streetscape. The proposed development is therefore supported and is considered consistent with the principles of SEPP 65.

 

7.1  Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan - Multi Unit Housing (DCP)

 

CONTROLS

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

PREFERRED SOLUTIONS

COMPLIANCE

 (how applicant has achieved performance requirements of performance solutions)

 

 

BUILDING SETBACKS

 

Front  boundary setbacks

P1        The front setback consistent  with streetscape/adjoining dwelling.

Side boundary setbacks

P2        Ensure that:

·      solar access is maintained and overshadowing minimised.

·      privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their own spaces provided.

·      Landscaping and privat open space provided.

·      Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 5 metres.

No part closer than 3.5 metres. 

Maximum length of wall section is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average setback to Daintrey Cres building is 4m (north side) to 4.5m (south side). Minimum is 3.5m. No part of wall length greater than 10m.

 

Average setback of Dudley Street building is 2.5m (north side) and 3.5m (south side). No part of wall length greater than 10m. Setbacks are greater than for existing building.

 

 
Rear Boundary Setback

P3        Ensure that:

·      solar access and overshadowing minimised.

·      Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

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

·      Building built across site.

 

 

 

Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 8 metres.

No part closer than 6 metres.

Maximum length any wall section 10 metres. Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

 

 

The Daintrey Cres building has a rear setback of 17m to No. 2 Dudley Street. This complies with Council requirements and is landscaped to provide a good visual and acoustic buffer between the buildings.

 

 

 

DENSITY

 

P1 Building bulk compatible with surrounding built forms

 

 

 

Complies – refer to previous section.

 

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.

 

 

1m high palisade fence to Daintrey Crescent – complies. 1.6m to 2.4m high wall with a 1m high palisade fence on top to Dudley Street.

 

LANDSCAPING AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE

 

Landscaped Areas

P1 Sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

 

 

S1  Minimum dimension for landscaped area 2 metres.

 

 

Complies

 

 

P2        Landscaped areas around flat buildings be undivided

communal open space.

 

 

Complies

 

 

Private Open Space

General

P3   

·      Provides privacy.

·      is accessible from main living areas.

 

P4 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 8 m2 and a minimum dimension of 2 metres.

 

 

 

 

Does not comply with minimum area, one unit has 6 sq.m only. Refer to Landscaping section below.

 

PRIVACY

 
Visual Privacy

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

Complies.

 

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VIEW SHARING

 

 
Acoustic Privacy

 

P3 Building layout and design minimises noise transmission.

“Quiet areas” separate noise generating activities.

 

P4 Building construction minimises transmission of noise.

 

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

 

 

 

 

S4 Walls and floors insulation and sound consistent with

Building Code of Australia.

 

 

 

 

Complies, conditions can be imposed to ensure compliance.

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

The proposal will result in view loss from Daintrey Crescent itself and from the lower levels of buildings fronting Daintrey Crescent. This is discussed further below.

 

 

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 Living areas of neighbours sunlight less than 3 hours per day.

P1.3 At least 50% of the principal landscaped areas of neighbours have sunlight less than 3 hours per day.

* If less than this is available the new development is not to reduce this further.

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

75% of dwellings achieve 3.5 star 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.

 

Note:

Central ducted heating/cooling system requires  a  minimum of 4.5 stars Nat HERS rating.

 

 

 

 

 

Complies, all units achieve a minimum 3.5 star rating and many achieve higher than this.

 

 

P5   Roof design and orientation suitable for solar collectors.

 

S5  Solar collector roof area  to face 45 degrees east and 45 degrees west of north, and slope between 15 and 55 degrees to the horizontal.

 

Complies

 

 

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.

P7 External lighting not intrusive.

 

 

Complies

 

Complies

 

Front fence on Dudley Street has a high wall however this is due to the natural steep slope in land.

 

 

Complies

 

Complies

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

Note:  The parking requirements are set in Randwick Parking DCP. The requirements are:

 

studio apartment*

1 space per two studios

1 bedroom dwelling

1 space per  dwelling

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

3 or more bedroom   

1.5 spaces per dwelling
dwelling
                                

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

25 Residential spaces required

(7 x 2 bedroom units = 7 x 1.2 spaces per dwelling = 8.4 spaces. 11 x 3 bedroom units = 16.5 spaces).

29 Residential spaces provided.

The proposal therefore complies with parking requirement.

 

 

 

 

Visitor parking is 1 space  per 4 dwellings.

 

 

4.5 spaces required for 18 units proposed. 5 spaces are provided therefore the development complies with the parking requirement.

 

DRIVEWAYS AND MANOUVERING AREAS

 

P1 Driveways and manoeuvring areas minimised.

 

 

Complies

 

 

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

 

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

 

Complies

 

 

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

 

S3  Long driveways provide passing bays.

 

Complies

 

 

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

 

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

 

Complies

 

 

P5 Materials and finishes consistent.

 

S5  Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

 

Complies

 

 

P6  Driveway gradients safe.

 

S6  Driveway gradients do not exceed 1 in 6 or 1 in 5  for ramps over 20m (see Parking DCP).

 

Complies

 

STORAGE

 

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

 

S1  10m2  of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1 metres.

 

At least 50% of the storage space is within the dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area.

 

Storage facilities may be in basement or sub floor areas, or attached to garages .

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

Storage areas provided in carpark only.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

BARRIER-FREE ACCESS

 

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

 

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

 

Complies

 

 

P2  Dwelling requirements are: 

 

  0 – 14 dwellings    0

15 – 29 dwellings    1

30 – 44 dwellings    2

45 – 60 dwellings    3  and so on.

 

The requirements of AS 1428.1 and AS 4299 are  to be considered.

 

 

1 barrier free unit provided to the development in accordance with AS requirements.

 

 

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

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

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

 

 

Lift provides access to all units and the carpark.

 

WASTE MINIMISATION AND MANAGEMENT

 

P1 Waste collection and separation facilities are  provided.

 

S1  Storage cupboard in each kitchen  of sufficient size to enable separation of recyclable material.

Holding at least a single day’s waste.

Landscaped areas provide composting.

 

Complies

 

 

P2  Garbage and recycling containers in centralised garbage/ recycling room accessible to garbage compactors  where bins can be easily wheeled for collection. Facilities to meet the needs of the dwellings and the garbage /recycling collection service.

 

 

Complies

 

 

P3  Collection  facilities  complement design of t and is not obtrusive.

 

S3  Waste facilities not to  be located between the front alignment of the building and the road.

 

Complies

 

Building Setbacks

 

The preferred solutions for side setbacks under the DCP require an average setback of 5m from any side boundary, that no part of the building is closer than 3.5m from any side boundary and that the maximum length of any one section of wall is 10 metres.

 

The average side setback for the building fronting Daintrey Crescent building is 4m to 4.5m with a minimum of 3.5m and no part of the wall length is greater than 10m.

The side setback for the proposed building fronting Daintrey Crescent is therefore not consistent with the preferred solution of an average 5m side setback. The side setback of this building varies between 3.5m and 6m and the separation distance between it and adjacent buildings to the north and south varies between 5m and 8m. The existing building has an average side setback of 1.5m with a minimum setback between 1m and 1.5m. The proposed development therefore increases the side setback by between 2.5m and 4m and increases the average setback by 2.5m. This increase in setbacks allows greater ventilation and solar access between buildings and provides greater opportunities for landscaping between buildings. Whilst the setback for the proposed building fronting Daintrey Crescent marginally falls short of the preferred solution, the proposal is a vast improvement on the existing situation and greatly improves amenity within the site and to adjacent buildings.

 

The minimum side setback for the proposed building fronting Dudley Street is between 2m and 3m with an average side setback of 2.5m and 3.5m. The separation distance between the proposed development and the adjacent buildings to the north and south is 5m. The existing building has a minimum side setback of between 1.2m and 1.6m and a minimum separation distance between the adjacent buildings to the north and south of between 2.8m and 3.2m. The proposed development will therefore result in an increased minimum side setback of between 0.8m and 1.4m above the existing setback and will result in an increased minimum separation between adjacent buildings of between 1.8m and 2.2m. No part of the proposed walls have a length greater than 10m. The proposed setbacks are therefore considerably greater than those existing and improve amenity in terms of solar access, ventilation and in providing greater landscape opportunities.

 

It is considered that the proposed setbacks, whilst they don’t strictly comply with the preferred solutions, are a vast improvement on the existing situation and will improve amenity within the site and to adjacent sites. The proposal is therefore consistent with the performance requirements.

 

The proposed side setbacks are also generally greater than the side setbacks of other buildings in both streets and as such provide greater amenity than currently exists in the area.

 

The front setback of the proposed development to both street frontages is consistent with the alignment of adjacent buildings and varies between 5m and 5.7m.

 

Fences

 

The performance requirements of the DCP state that fences integrate with the streetscape, complement the architectural design of locality, highlight the entrance to a site and are softened by planting (that also provides privacy). The preferred solution to achieve this is a solid front fence no higher than 1.2m or a 1.8m high fence that has openings that make it at least 50% transparent.

 

A 1m high palisade fence is proposed to the Daintrey Street frontage and landscaping is proposed fronting the fence. The fence provides an adequate delineation between Council property and the subject site as well as providing a physical barrier to prevent access but at the same time is low enough to enhance surveillance between the street and the property which in turn improves public safety and security. The proposed fence will integrate with the streetscape  which is typified by low level fencing in a variety of forms. The proposed fence at the Daintrey Street level complies with the performance requirements and the preferred solutions.

 

The fencing to Dudley Street consists of a 1.6m to 2.4m high decorative retaining wall with a 1m high palisade fence on top. The retaining wall is provided due to the steep and immediate rise in land height away from Dudley Street. Whilst the height of the wall is not consistent with fencing height provisions, the variation is considered appropriate given the steep rise in land and that the proposal is consistent with other retaining walls in the streetscape. The proposed fencing allows clear highlighting of the main entrance to the site by using different materials for the retaining wall and the entrance, and the landscaping and variety of materials used to the Dudley Street fencing provides an improved visual amenity that blends in with the streetscape.

 

Landscaping & Private Open Space

 

The performance requirements provide that landscaped areas are to be of a sufficient size to enable recreational activities or grow substantial vegetation and that landscaped areas are to be treated as communal space for all residents.

 

The proposal provides wide areas of landscaping along the southern, northern and eastern boundaries of the site. These areas are proposed to be heavily landscaped with a wide variety of species and are to be communal space. The communal landscaped areas are not intended for recreational activities and purely perform the role of a visual and acoustic buffer between properties.

 

With regard to private open space, the performance requirements are that such spaces provide privacy for users, are readily accessible from main living areas, provide outdoor recreation and living opportunities (e.g. dining, sitting, gardening, etc) and each dwelling has its own courtyard, balcony, deck or roof garden. The preferred solution is for a minimum 8 sq.m area to each apartment with a minimum dimension of 2 metres.

 

Each unit in the proposal is provided with a private open space attached to the living area in the form of a balcony, deck, courtyard or terrace and all are generally at least 8 sqm and comply with the minimum depth of 2m. Unit 8.1 is the only unit that falls short of the minimum 8 sq.m requirement for open space areas and it provides 6sq.m. It is considered that this unit can be slightly enlarged without causing any adverse privacy impact to adjacent neighbours as it faces Daintrey Crescent and is not capable of creating overlooking opportunities to adjacent private areas by way of its position fronting the street. A condition shall be imposed requiring that the balcony be enlarged. Overall, these proposed units provide a great deal of useability and comfort for residents in terms of open space and are consistent with the preferred solutions and performance requirements.

 

Privacy

 

The preferred solutions with respect to privacy are to offset, angle or screen windows where there is a horizontal separation of 10m.

 

The proposed building has been designed with minimal windows to side boundaries. The Dudley Street building has a few bedroom windows on the upper levels that face the building to the south. These windows will overlook roof space and will not impact upon the adjacent neighbours privacy. There are a large number of east facing balconies to the Daintrey Street building that face the multi-unit housing development to the east. There is a considerable separation distance between these balconies and the adjacent rear boundary of the site to the east of 16m. The area inbetween is proposed to be heavily landscaped and this provides a vegetative screen that provides privacy and an aesthetic barrier between the properties. Overall the proposed development will not result in a loss of privacy to adjacent residents.

 

View Sharing

 

The performance requirements in the DCP require that development minimises effects on views and demonstrates steps that have been taken to mitigate view loss, in particular view loss of significant features such as the ocean, coastline, nearby open space areas and significant landmarks or buildings.

 

The proposed development will result in a loss of the view to the east/northeast of  the hills, suburbs and ocean view from Daintrey Street and from the ground floor of buildings to the west across Daintrey Street (directly opposite the site). From the first floor of the same buildings, the view is preserved albeit decreased. The suburbs, hills and ocean will still be partly visible from this level. It is important to note that the proposed development at the Daintrey Street level readily complies with Council’s height restriction and sits lower than the adjacent building to the south. Whilst some views will be lost as a result of the proposal, other views are maintained and new views are created to the new apartments. It is considered that the proposal does not selfishly take away views and is consistent with performance requirements of the DCP in relation to view sharing.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

The preferred solutions with respect to energy efficiency require that 75% of new dwellings achieve a 3.5 star NatHERS rating and that no dwelling receives less than 3 stars. All of the units achieve a minimum 3.5 star energy efficiency rating with many achieving 4 and 4.5 stars. To further improve the energy efficiency of the building, ESD conditions will be imposed with respect to wall and roof insulation, hot water systems and water consumption.

 

Shadow diagrams submitted with the application show that the adjacent properties on the southern side will be affected by additional overshadowing at 3pm during the winter solstice. Additional overshadowing will affect the open space area between the two buildings to the south and to the open space fronting Dudley Street and will affect the north facing walls of the lower level windows of both buildings by 3pm. The impact of overshadowing from the proposed development to the adjacent southern properties at 9am and midday is similar to that for the existing buildings. The proposed development complies with Council’s performance requirements of maintaining 3 hours of sunlight to adjacent dwellings and open spaces throughout the year.

 

Parking

 

Performance requirements with respect to car parking under the DCP – Parking include that garages and parking structures do not dominate the street frontage, parking spaces for people with disabilities are considered, accessible, safe and secure storage facilities for bikes are provided and that parking is provided at the following rates:

 

·      studio apartment – 1 space per two studios,

·    1 bedroom dwelling – 1 space per dwelling,

·    2 bedroom dwelling – 1.2 spaces per dwelling,

·    3 or more bedrooms – 1.5 spaces per dwelling.

·    Visitors – 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

The proposed aluminium grille garage door to Dudley Street is approximately 6m wide and absorbs 32% of the Dudley Street frontage. The garage entrance therefore will not dominate the Dudley Street frontage and is not inconsistent with other double entrances to car parks in Dudley Street. A disabled parking space is provided within the proposed car park for the users of the barrier free unit. Two bicycle storage areas capable of housing 8 bikes are provided on the first level car park.

 

The proposed development contains 7 x 2 bedroom apartments and 11 x 3 bedroom apartments that generate a requirement of 25 residential parking spaces and 5 visitors spaces.

 

It is proposed to provide 34 car parking spaces to the development of which 5 spaces are for visitors and 29 are for residents. Some residential units are provided for with two car parking spaces that are in a stacked arrangement. The proposed development provides more than adequate car parking in compliance with the DCP requirements and the access to the car park off Dudley Street is preferred over Daintrey Crescent.

 

Dudley Street is a wide thoroughfare that is frequently used and is capable of moving more traffic than Daintrey Crescent. Dudley Street provides access to through traffic and local residences and it acts as a link between several roads in the area including Coogee Bay Rd, Arden Street, Brook Street, and Mount Street. Daintrey Crescent is a narrow road used mainly for residential access to dwellings and flats along it. Accordingly the proposed Dudley Street access is preferred in terms of reducing traffic impacts to Daintrey Crescent.

 

Council’s Assets and Infrastucture section has advised that the average traffic generation for the proposed development will be 72 to 90 vehicle movements along Dudley Street per day. The expected peak flow volume of approximately 9 vehicles per hour is considered low and no delays should be experienced  in Dudley Street as a result of this development.

 

Objectors have raised concerns that the proposed development will result in an increased impact to the already tight off-street parking situation in Daintrey Crescent. This is argued on the basis that the pedestrian entrance to the largest building (ie the building fronting Daintrey Crescent) is off Daintrey Crescent and visitors will park on the street rather than accessing the car park. It is considered appropriate to have a pedestrian entrance to this building off Daintrey Crescent purely because it improves the accessibility of the site. It should be noted that there are two pedestrian entrances to the site – one at Dudley Street and one at Daintrey Crescent - and both of these entrances are accessible to both buildings. The proposed car park provides adequate visitors space in compliance with the DCP to accommodate the demand for space by visitors. As mentioned previously, it is undesirable having an access off Daintrey Crescent to the proposed car park due to the residential nature of the road, its narrowness and low carrying capacity. Further, the construction of a driveway off Daintrey Crescent into the proposed basement car park for vehicles would be difficult due to the steep gradient and would require additional space. There is no evidence that suggests or proves that visitors to the proposed development would park in Daintrey Crescent instead of the proposed car park. As mentioned in the objections, it is already difficult to find parking on Daintrey Crescent and this in itself would deter visitors from using it for access when they can easily access both buildings from within the visitors car parking area.

 

The proposed car parking arrangement is therefore consistent with the performance requirements of the DCP and is supported.

 

Storage

 

The DCP requires that developments provide readily accessible and separately contained storage areas for each dwelling. This is achieved by providing 10 sq.m of storage space for each dwelling with a minimum clearance height of 2.1 metres and 50% of this is to be within the dwelling near the hallway or living room. Storage areas can also be provided in basement or subfloor areas.

 

The proposed development provides a separate storage area to each apartment within the basement car park and most of these have an approximate area of 10 sq.m and a clearance height of 2.9m. One of the storage areas is 6 sq.m and another is 7 sq.m which falls slightly short of the 10 sq.m preferred solution. Whilst these storage areas contain a considerable shortfall, the increased clearance height enables greater capacity then the required minimum height of 2.1m and overall these storage areas provide an adequate area for the storage requirements of the units.

 

Barrier Free Access

 

New development is required to provide access for people with special access needs. This includes access to public foyer areas, parking areas and landscaped areas and access to a dwelling is to be provided for these people on the following rates:

 

* 0 – 14 dwellings        0,

* 15 – 29 dwellings      1,

* 30 – 44 dwellings      2,

* 45 – 60 dwellings      3 and so on.

 

The proposal provides one special needs unit in the Daintrey Crescent building that has its own disabled parking space and is wheel chair accessible from the both streets, the car park and to all other units in the building and the various, foyers, lift lobbies and the garbage storage area. The proposed development complies with Council’s requirements with respect to barrier free access.

 

Waste Management

 

The preferred solutions of the DCP are that a kitchen in each dwelling has a waste storage cupboard sufficient to enable separation of recyclable material. Facilities are capable of holding a single days waste and allow for source separating of garbage, recyclable and compostible material. Design of landscaped areas makes provision for on-site composting. Waste facilities should not be located between the front alignment of the building and the road.

 

A garbage/recycle area is located at the Dudley Street level adjacent to the carpark. The areas is accessible to all residents and to Dudley Street and is designed for 10 x 240l recycle bins and 20 x 240l garbage bins. Sufficient area is available within the proposed kitchens for waste storage as required by the DCP.

 

8.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended. The assessment of the various requirements of the Multi Unit Housing DCP above has revealed that the proposed development is one of high environmental integrity with a contemporary design that results in minimal adverse amenity impacts to adjacent neighbours and is consistent with the scale, context and streetscape surrounding it.

 

8.1     Issues raised in Submissions

 

Issues raised by objectors which have not already been addressed in the body of the assessment above are as follows:

 

·    Noise and air pollution will affect neighbours.

 

Comment:  Conditions will be imposed with respect to noise and air pollution during the construction phase to ensure that the developer complies with environmental regulations and does not affect the amenity of the neighbours.

 

·    Loss of rent due to building work and loss of overall property value.

 

Comment: There is no evidence available that suggests that the construction of the proposed building will result in rental losses or devaluation of properties.

·    The development will impact upon the sewer services.

 

Comment:  Council is aware that several services run along various sections of the site. It will be the developers responsibility to ensure that these services are maintained during their relocation. Suitable conditions are included in the recommendation.

 

·    Impact of proposed development on drainage and topography.

 

Comment:  The proposed development will drain to Dudley Street and conditions will be imposed to ensure compliance with relevant standards and regulations. The topography of the site will be slightly altered by excavation. This alteration will not be visible from either street and excavation is common practice to facilitate new buildings sited on heavily sloping land, as is the case in this situation. Suitable conditions are included in the recommendation with respect to excavation and impact to adjacent properties.

 

9.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposed development generally complies with Council’s assessment criteria however it exceeds the numerical floor space ratio requirement. Whilst the building exceeds the floor space ratio, most of this is on excavated ground and the proposal complies with the height controls. The proposal has a consistent height and bulk with surrounding development and will not be out of scale or context with adjacent development or the streetscape. The proposal results in minor additional overshadowing in the afternoon during the winter solstice to the adjacent southern buildings and there are no overlooking issues with the proposal. The proposal provides a contemporary building to the site that contains spacious units with good orientation, cross ventilation, solar access and open spaces. The car park and access to it from Dudley Street is supported and the impact to traffic and parking on local streets will be minimal. The overall impact to the amenity of adjacent residents will be minor. The proposed development is therefore supported subject to conditions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

C.      THAT Council assume the concurrence of the Director of the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources to vary the provisions of Clause 32  of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended) relating to Floor Space Ratio under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1.

 

D.      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 03/00197/GE for Demolition of existing buildings on site and erection of a multi unit residential development containing 18 units and 34 carparking spaces at 14 - 16 Daintrey Crescent and 4 Dudley Street, Randwick subject to the following conditions:-

 

2.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA-01 issue A, DA-03 issue A, DA-05 issue A, DA-06 issue A, and DA-08 issue A to DA 11 issue A, dated 23.04.2002 and received by Council on 12 March 2003, DA-00 issue B, dated 02.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, DA-02 issue B dated 02.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, DA-04 issue C dated 09.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, and DA-07 issue B dated 02.09.2003 and received by Council on 10 September 2003, LA01 issue B received by Council 12 March 2003, 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:

 

67.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building shall be in accordance with the external finishes board prepared by Allen Jack & Cottier and dated April 2002.

 

68.       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.

 

69.       All existing outbuildings on the site must be demolished and removed in conjunction with the development.

 

70.       The balcony to the disabled unit no. 8.1 is to be expanded to have a minimum area of at least 8 sq.m.

 

71.       Public access to the visitor’s carparking spaces 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.

 

72.       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.

 

The following conditions are imposed to promote ecologically sustainable development and energy efficiency.

 

73.       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 noted in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

74.       External timber or metal framed and brick veneer walls and roofs are to be provided with insulation (i.e. bulk insulation and a reflective building membrane/reflective sarking/foil insulation), having a minimum total thermal resistance R–value of 3.0 in roofs and 1.5 in external walls.  The insulation and reflective building membrane is to be installed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the manufacturers details.

 

Details of compliance with the requirements for insulation are to be included in the construction certificate application.

 

75.       Hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation, in accordance with the relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

76.       The hot water system installed in the development must achieve a minimum greenhouse score of 3.5 as detailed SEDA’s Energy Smart Homes Policy.  Any electric clothes dryers to be provided in the development must also have a minimum 2 star energy rating.

 

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

 

77.       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               $ 37,138.16

b)       for the provision or improvement of community facilities   $ 16,421.00

c)       Administration fee $425.00                                                         $      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 have been applied to ensure that noise emissions from the development satisfy legislative requirements and maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

 

78.       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.

 

In this regard, 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.

 

79.       The use of the premises and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance.

 

80.       A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics shall be submitted to Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the development will comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and relevant conditions of approval.

 

81.       A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the development comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and conditions of Council’s approval.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

 

82.       The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

 

83.       There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises which will give rise to an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

84.       The location of the discharge point serving the car park mechanical ventilation system is to be not less than 6m from a property boundary and it must discharge vertically and satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1668.

 

Details of compliance are to be provided in the plans and specifications for the construction certificate.

 

85.       The location and height of the discharge of mechanical ventilation systems are required to satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1668 and details are to be provided in the relevant plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

86.       Pollution control devices shall be installed and maintained to ensure there will be no water borne pollutants discharging or are likely to discharge into any natural water course or the stormwater or sewerage drainage systems.

 

Full details of the proposed pollution control devices to be installed are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning and Environment in accordance with Section 80 A(2)  of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

87.       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.

 

88.       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:

 

89.       Documentary evidence prepared by a suitably qualified professional geotechnical engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, certifying the suitability and stability of the site for the proposed building and certifying the suitably and adequacy of the proposed design and construction of the buil