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

 

19 August 2005

 

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT AN ORDINARY 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, 23RD AUGUST 2005 AT 6:00 PM

 

1           Council Prayer

 

2           Apologies

 

3           Minutes

 

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 16TH AUGUST, 2005.

 

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 26TH JULY, 2005.

 

4           Declaration of Pecuniary & Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

5           Addresses to the Council by the Public

 

6           Mayoral Minutes

 

6.1                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 111/2005 - SONJA ST LEON MEMORIAL EATING DISORDERS RESEARCH FUND.

2

 

6.2                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 112/2005 - FUN RUN/OKTOBERFEST AND MARKET DAY.

6

 

6.3                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 113/2005 - WAIVING OF FEES - MAROUBRA SEALS WINTER SWIMMING CLUBS ANNUAL CHAMPIONSHIPS.

8

 

 

7           General Manager's Reports

 

7.1                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 34/2005 - JUNE 2005 QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT - 2004-07 MANAGEMENT PLAN.

10

 

7.2                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 35/2005 - COUNCIL GRANTS, DONATIONS AND SUBSIDIES.

12

 

7.3                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 36/2005 - LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN.

44

 

7.4                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 38/2005 -  BUNDOCK COMMUNITY CENTRE - LICENCES

47

 

7.5                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 39/2005 - AFFIXING OF THE COUNCIL SEAL.

51

 

7.6                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 40/2005 - AFFIXING OF THE COUNCIL SEAL.

53

 

7.7                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 41/2005 - FUNDING REQUEST BY LA PEROUSE PONY CLUB.

56

 

7.8                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 42/2005 - BRONTE - COOGEE AQUATIC RESERVE - DRAFT OPERATIONAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL AND DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES.

58

 

7.9                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 43/2005 - TOWN HALL PROPOSED REFURBISHMENT COSTS.

74

 

7.10                        

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 44/2005 - 2004/2005 BUDGET - REVIEW AS AT 30 JUNE 2005.

78

 

 

8           Director City Services' Reports

 

  8.1                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 94/2005 - PRINCE HENRY SITE PARK NAMING PROPOSAL.

80

 

 

9           Director City Planning Reports

 

9.1                        

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 51/2005 –

351 RAINBOW STREET, SOUTH COOGEE.  (DEFERRED)

83

 

9.2                        

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 52/2005 –

820A-824 ANZAC PARADE & 5 ALMA ROAD, MAROUBRA.

138

 

9.3                        

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 53/2005 –

65 BYRON STREET, COOGEE.  (DEFERRED)

168

 

9.4                        

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 54/2005 –

47-53 DUDLEY STREET, COOGEE.

200

 

9.5                        

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 55/2005 –

10-14 DUKE STREET, KENSINGTON.

288

 

 

10         Petitions

 

11         Motions Pursuant to Notice

 

11.1                        

Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Sullivan, Daley & White – Ordinary Council Meeting, Tuesday, 26th July, 2005 – Item 9.3 – Acting Director City Planning Report 46/2005 – 47-53 Dudley Street, Coogee. 

327

11.2

Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Hughes, Matson & Woodsmith – Ordinary Council Meeting, Tuesday, 26th July, 2005 – Item 9.5 – Acting Director City Planning Report 48/2005 – 10-14 Duke Street,

Kensington. 

327

11.3

Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Andrews, White, Bastic, Sullivan & Daley – Ordinary Council Meeting, Tuesday, 26th July, 2005 – Item 11.5 –Motion Pursuant to Notice by Councillor Notley-Smith – Dunningham Reserve Playground. 

328

11.4

By Councillor Belleli – Toilet Block at La Perouse. 

360

11.5

By Councillor Andrews – Motion of No Confidence.

360

 

 

12         Urgent Business

 

13         Confidential Reports

 

13.1                        

CONFIDENTIAL MAYOR'S MINUTE 114/2005 - GENERAL MANAGER'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW.

359

 

13.2                        

CONFIDENTIAL GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 37/2005 - GOLD'S GYM, HEFFRON PARK.

362

 

13.2                        

CONFIDENTIAL GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 45/2005 - 88A BEACH STREET – COURT CASE.

367

13.3                        

CONFIDENTIAL DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 95/2005 - TENDER T040/05 SUPPLY OF TROMMEL SCREEN.

369

 

13.4                        

CONFIDENTIAL DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 96/2005 - VOLUNTEER CONTROLLER PERFORMANCE REVIEW - 2005.

373

 

 

14         Committee-of-the-Whole

 

15         Report of Committee-of-the-Whole

 

16         Notice of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

…………………………

GENERAL MANAGER.


 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 111/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

SONJA ST LEON MEMORIAL EATING DISORDERS     RESEARCH FUND

 

 

DATE:

18 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/07396

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Mr Reg St Leon, has written to Council requesting a donation to the Sonja St Leon Memorial Eating Disorders Research Fund. The fund was established in memory of Sonja St Leon, who passed away from Anorexia Nervosa.

 

ISSUES:

 

Sonja St Leon was an active member of the Randwick community and was involved in driving Council’s Offshore Rescue Boat. Sonja held a distinguished academic record and sporting career at Randwick Girls Technology High and volunteered at the Prince of Wales Hospital.

 

Council has been requested to provide a contribution towards the Sonja St Leon Memorial Eating Disorders Research Fund, in memory of Sonja St Leon.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

In the event that Council accepts the report recommendation, the direct financial impact to Council will be a $500 contribution to the Sonja St Leon Fund. Currently there are sufficient funds in the 2005/06 Contingency Fund to cover this contribution.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Given the contribution made by Sonja St Leon to the Randwick community, and the benevolent nature of the fund, it is considered appropriate for Council to provide a contribution.

 


RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:-

 

1.   Council agree to support the Sonja St Leon Memorial Eating Disorders Research Fund by voting $500 from Council’s 2005/06 Contingency budget.

2.   The Fund is requested to acknowledge Council’s contribution where appropriate.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Letter received from Reg St Leon on behalf of The Sonja St Leon Memorial Eating Disorders Research Fund.

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MURRAY MATSON

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 112/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

FUN RUN/OKTOBERFEST AND MARKET DAY

 

 

DATE:

8 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/07550

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

An application has been received from Mr Richard Walsh on behalf of the Maroubra and Districts Chambers of Commerce, Maroubra Lions Club, Rotary Club of Maroubra and the South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club to hold their annual Fun Run/Oktoberfest and Market Day on Sunday 23rd October, 2005. Mr Walsh has requested that Council’s fees regarding all activities and food vendors attending the event be waived.

 

 

ISSUES:

 

An assessment of the applicable fees are as follows:

 

Hiring of Stage                                                              $1,030.00

Five mobile food vans & food stalls ($90 each)             $   450.00

Hiring of Arthur Byrne Reserve                                     $   275.00

Administration Fee                                                                    $   320.00

Bin Hire x 12 (supply and remove)($55.00 each)                      $   660.00

 

                                                Total:                                        $2,735.00

 

It is considered that the Maroubra Fun Run, Oktoberfest and Market Day is a non-profit community event and that funds be allocated to cover the costs of hiring a stage and other fees associated with the event.

 

Often in the conducting of large events such as this, Council’s property is damaged.  It is necessary that the organiser of the event Mr Richard Walsh, on behalf of the Maroubra and Districts Chambers of Commerce, Maroubra Lions Club, Rotary Club of Maroubra and the South Maroubra Surf Lifesaving Club be advised in writing that should Council property be damaged in any way the organisers of the event are liable and that the organisers acknowledge this in writing prior to the event.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

In the event that Council accepts the report recommendation, the direct financial implication to Council will be a contribution of $2,735.00 from Council’s 2005/06 Contingency Fund.

 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Given that the level of support being offered by Council is substantial, it would be appropriate that Council be treated as a co-operative partner and be included in the event promotion.  This will ensure Council is acknowledged for its support of local community events in the eyes of the community.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That

 

a)   Council vote $2,735.00 to cover the costs associated with Council’s contribution towards the organising of the Maroubra Fun Run, Oktoberfest and Market Day to be held on Sunday 23rd October, 2005, and that these funds be allocated from the 2005/2006 Contingency Fund.

 

b)   Council advise the organisers of the Maroubra Fun Run, Oktoberfest and Market Day, that Council be given adequate and appropriate acknowledgement for its contribution to the running of this event.  Such acknowledgement to include Council’s logo for inclusion on promotional literature and Council’s banner be displayed at the event.

 

c)   The organisers be advised that Council requires an acceptance in writing that should Council property be damaged in any way the organisers of the event will compensate Council for the repair or replacement of the damaged item(s).

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MURRAY MATSON

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 


 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 113/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

WAIVING OF FEES - MAROUBRA SEALS WINTER SWIMMING CLUBS ANNUAL CHAMPIONSHIPS

 

 

DATE:

8 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2005/00500

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR        

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

By letter dated 31 July, 2005, the Maroubra Seals Winter Swimming Club seeks Council’s assistance with the waiving of fees associated with a barbeque function organised by the Maroubra Seals Winter Swimming Club at Jack Vanny Memorial Park on Saturday 17 September, 2005.

 

ISSUES:

 

The Winter Swimming Association of Australia is holding its annual championships at Botany Pool on Sunday, 18th September and the Maroubra Seals Winter Swimming Club feel it would be a great opportunity to showcase the Randwick area to the affiliated clubs.  Mr Williamson, Honorary Secretary, advises the intention is to hold a 6 x 30m relay in the Mahon Pool followed by a BBQ at Jack Vanny Memorial Park.  A similar successful community event was held in 2002 and the Club estimates that this year there will be about 250 members of the Winter Swimming Association of Australia attending the swim.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

In the event that Council accepts the report recommendation, the financial implication to Council will be $550.00, to be budgeted from Council’s 2005/06 Contingency Fund.

 

The associated fees to hold this activity include:-

 

Application Fee                                                                       $130.00

Food Stall fee                                                                           $  90.00

Supply & Remove 6 (240lt) sulo bins                            $330.00

 

TOTAL                                                                                   $550.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Maroubra Seals Winter Swimming Club is a non-profit organisation and consists mainly of local members of the community. It is considered that the lunch time barbeque is a worthwhile community event and deserving of Council’s support. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the associated fees of $550.00 be waived for the Maroubra Seals Winter Swimming Club to hold its barbeque and swim on Saturday 17 September, 2005 and funds to be provided from the Contingency fund 2005/2006.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MURRAY MATSON

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 34/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

JUNE 2005 QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT - 2004-07 MANAGEMENT PLAN

 

 

DATE:

16 August, 2005

FILE NO:

 F2005/00380

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER     

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

The purpose of this Report is to update Councillors on the implementation of the 2004/07 Management Plan.

 

ISSUES:

 

This is the June 2005 Quarterly Review of the 2004/07 Management Plan.

 

Under the Local Government Act 1993, there is the requirement that a Report must be provided after the end of each quarter, detailing the extent to which performance indicators and targets set by Council’s Management Plan have been achieved during the quarter.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Each Department has reviewed those targets not being achieved, and comments on those matters are included in the Report. Currently there are six Principal Activities being reported on.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the information contained in the June 2005 Quarterly Progress Report – 2004/07 Management Plan be received and noted.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

June 2005 Quarterly Progress Report - 2004/07 Management Plan - under separate cover

 

 

 

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


.

 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 35/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

COUNCIL GRANTS, DONATIONS AND SUBSIDIES

 

 

DATE:

16 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2005/00469

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Randwick City Council provides a range of grants, donations and subsidies to individuals, community groups and non-profit organisations.  It is the role of Council to support community groups and organisations through such activities; however, as considerable funds are allocated the processes must be transparent, equitable and meet Randwick Council’s strategic directions.

 

In relation to the grants and donations Council must be able to adequately report to the community in terms of –

§ What organisations are supported financially by Council

§ The basis upon which decisions are made to provide funding

§ The total budget allocated on a yearly basis.

§ Outcomes achieved through the provision of funding

 

This paper documents the available information on the various grants, subsidies and donation schemes that are delivered by Council to the community.  It provides information from an internal audit review and clearly identifies the range of schemes and the level of funding, outlines the major issues in relation to these programs and provides recommendations for improvements in the systems and processes.

 

ISSUES:

 

1. DEFINITIONS

Based on current practice, the following definitions for grants, donations and subsidies have been applied within this report.

 

 

Definition

Grant

A grant refers to the money that is provided through the following programs:

§ Small Grants Section 356 Scheme

§ Community Grants Scheme

 

Donation

A donation is a payment provided through the:

§ Contingency Fund allocated for expenditure by  Councillors

§ Mayoral Donations

§ Nursery Donations.

 

Subsidy

Financial assistance or assistance in kind provided to organisations through subsidised rental payments, subsidised waste services or a direct financial contribution. Subsidies are generally recurrent and the subsidised service may be reflected in the lease or licence documentation

 

 

However, throughout this paper these schemes will be collectively referred to and described as Council grant funds.

 

2.  COMMUNITY GRANTS AND SUBSIDIES AUDIT

 

An independent internal audit review of community grants and subsidies was undertaken by Council’s internal auditor, Internal Audit Bureau (IAB) in June 2004.  The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy of Council processes in managing both grant monies received and subsidies and grants given out.

 

Whilst it was found that the processes used to provide monies through grants, donations and subsidies were operating as intended a number of identified improvements were suggested in the report. These included:

·    A strategic approach to the management of grants so as to clearly delineate the purpose of the grants and subsidies and the criteria for the allocation of monies

·    Formal accounting recognition of informal or ‘hidden’ subsidies (or income foregone) for all services that are charged below current market value

·    Transparency in internal transfers

·    Central database to consolidate information on all grants, donations and subsidies

 

The internal audit report acknowledged that Council has an active role to play in the provision of community funding to assist in the provision of services by worthy organisations. There is a need however, to ensure that the programs funded align with the corporate direction of Council and that there is a strategic, transparent approach in both identifying recipients and allocating funds.

 

3. POLICY

 

At this stage Council has not adopted a clear policy that guides practice in determining and allocating Council grant funds. This is required if the approach is to be consistent and aligned with Council’s strategic directions. The policy must be based on and refer to the principles that will drive Council’s financial support of community organisations, facilities and activities. It is proposed that the principles on which decisions in relation to the provision of any grants, donations and subsidies are:

 

§ Contribute to improving the quality of people’s lives

§ Provide an effective use of Council’s resources

§ Transparent processes for grant applications, allocation and management

§ Achieve equity

§ Produce better outcomes for the community

§ Foster accountability.

 

While the actual process of preparing the policy may identify other essential principles it is critical that these proposed principles be taken into consideration in its development. 

 

The policy and strategy, once adopted by Council, should be documented in Council’s Management Plan and the community should be informed annually on which organisations and community programs will be supported by Council through either the direct provision of funds or an indirect subsidy. Similarly, the Annual Report should provide information on Council’s grant funding process and recipients.

 

4.  CURRENT GRANT FUND SCHEMES

 

The following Table A provides a summary of the funds that are allocated through the various grants, donations and subsidies schemes by Council. 

 

Table A: Summary of all grants, donations and subsidies provided in 2004/05

 

GRANT FUNDS

Dollar Amount

 

Grant

 

 

Small Grants 356

$27,502

 

Community Grants

$110,064

 

Total

 

$137,566

Donation

 

 

 

Contingency Fund

$149,997

 

Mayoral Donations

$1,471

 

Nursery Donations

$1,018

 

Total

 

$152,486

Subsidy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Section F

$22,987

 

Rental Subsidies Identified in Budget

Additional Maintenance

$764,480

$6,365

 

Rental Subsidies Not in Budget

 Additional maintenance 

$332,871

$13,225

 

Users- Des Renford Aquatic Centre

$22,000

 

Community Library Facilities

$4,000

 

Operational & Cap  Subsidies

$192,000

 

Total

 

$1,357,928

TOTAL GRANT FUNDS

 

 

 

$1,647,980

 

4.1 Grants

 

Small Grants Section 356 Scheme:

The Small Grants Section 356 Scheme is administered by Council’s Community Development Section.  This programme is available to non-profit organisations and applications for grants are sought on an annual basis. Funds are not recurrent and new applications must be submitted each year. This scheme is focused on the target groups identified in Council’s Social Plan.

 

Organisations wishing to receive monies under the Small Grants Section 356 Scheme must demonstrate that the funds will be used to –

§ provide services, resources and events within the local community

§ deliver a small project

§ co-ordinate activities or pay for items in a larger scale project

§ pay for a specific activity or piece of equipment

§ provide a community service or education

§ employ short-term contract staff.

 

The community organisations submit formal applications which are assessed by Council officers prior to the approval and allocation of the funds by Council on a basis of demonstrated need.  The monies allotted are minor amounts, ranging between $100 and $1,000, and are considered ‘one-off’ in nature. Those organisations that receive funds must provide Council with an evaluation of monies spent. 

 

There were 71 applications received by Council in 2004/2005 and a total of $63,256.92 was requested.  However as only $27,502.00 was available for allocation, this means that only 43.5% of the amount requested was actually provided to community groups.

 

The Section 356 Grants Scheme is not recurrent and requires community groups to formally apply for funding against established criteria As such it has greater transparency than any other grants fund scheme.

 

Community Development Grants Scheme

The Community Grants scheme is also administered by the Community Development Section.  Historically this scheme was set up to provide monies to non-profit organisations to assist in the delivery of community services and programmes. 

 

In 2004/2005 individual amounts ranging between $500.00 and $31,500 were given to various groups within the community for activities such as volunteer training and education, contributions toward operational and rental costs, transportation and events. The total amount provided under this scheme is $110,064.

 

The key features of this scheme are:

·    Funds allocated are recurrent, that is, the organisations listed under this scheme receive the same funds every year and do not have to submit an application. 

·    There is no requirement for the organisations to submit to Council any justification for the continuation of the funding

·    Until this year the organisations have not provided any information to Council on the outcomes achieved through the provision of the funding. In 2004/2005 an evaluation process was introduced and the organisations are now required to provide formal feedback to Council but there is no process in place yet for discontinuing the funding if deemed necessary by Council

·    There is no opportunity for new organisations to gain access to this funding as the list of recipients is not subjected to any regular review.

·    The scheme is non-competitive. 

·    It does not reflect the changes in community needs over time

·    There is limited documentation to indicate the initial reasons for Council making some of the allocations as many decisions were made more than 10 years ago.

 

Summary Grants Schemes

It was acknowledged in the internal audit review that access to the Small Grants is fair, equitable and meets accountability requirements under this scheme.  It is however significantly under funded given that over 56% of applications are unsuccessful. This suggests a need to perhaps broaden the grants scheme which might be achieved by increasing funding or amalgamating the two grants schemes into one so that a greater pool of money is created to assist these organisations.

 

As the Community Grants Scheme does not meet the principles of equity and transparency it must be reviewed and more equitable processes for application, review and allocation implemented.

 

4.2       Donations

 

Councillors’ Donations -Contingency Fund

The Contingency Fund was set up for the purpose of providing ‘one-off’ donations to community organisations to meet specific needs.  A list of organisations that have received a payment in 2004/2005 is given in Attachment 2 and this shows that the amounts donated varies between $500.00 and $10,000.00.

 

In 2004/05, $149,997 has been allocated under this program to a diverse range of recipients including surf clubs, churches, multi-cultural associations and schools. A number of the recipients apply for similar amounts each year for the same event and/or activity.

 

There is no systematic way for applying for donations under this fund as decisions to provide a donation result from Council Resolutions and are usually initiated by a Motion Pursuant to Notice or a Mayor’s Minute. The process is solely dependent on the level of awareness of the person or organisation seeking financial assistance of the availability of the funds under this scheme and/or whether the individuals or organisations contact the elected representatives. 

           

There is a lack of transparency and equity in the distribution of the Contingency funds as the availability of and the process for applying for donation is neither publicised nor openly communicated and promoted to the community.

 

There are also many hidden costs in some of the donations as often staff time is not considered. This obviously impacts on the ability of staff to deliver other services or programs that have been agreed to in the Management Plan

 

Mayoral Donations

The Mayoral Donations budget is set up to provide ‘one-off’ payments to individuals and organisations seeking small amounts of money to assist with an activity or event or the provision of flowers at funerals.  These donations are approved by the Mayor or General Manager and according to Council policy can only be given to the maximum amount of $100.00.

 

Very few donations have been made in 2004/2005 to date ($1,471) and as with the Contingency Fund the provision of monies is dependent on the level of awareness of the individual or organisation seeking assistance of the availability of the donations.

 

Nursery Donations

The Nursery provides free plants to community groups who request them through either the Mayor’s Office or another Council area.  These donations are approved by the Mayor or General Manager and in 2004/05 $1,018.50 worth of plants have been donated up to March. There is a budget established for these donations. 

 

Each plant is worth $4.50 on average and generally no more than $100.00 worth of plants is donated at any one time. The plants are generally donated for fetes or other fund raising activities

 

Summary Donations

There are no documented processes for the provision of donations. This is not such an issue for the two small schemes, Mayoral and Nursery, but is a major shortcoming in the allocation and management of the more substantial contingency funds as there is no process for determining the most deserving groups.

 

The reasons for allocating donations not always documented accurately and the outcomes or benefits of donations are not known.

 

As both the Mayoral and Nursery Donations allocate very small amounts and are used sparingly they could continue in their present form. However more equitable, transparent processes need to be developed and implemented in relation to the Contingency Fund that ensures that all community groups are informed of their availability and that assessment is based on criteria established by Council.

 

4.3       Subsidies

There are a number of ways by which organisations are provided with a subsidy from Council.

 

Trade Waste Services -Section F Customers

‘Section F’ customers are provided with fully subsidised Trade Waste Services.  The customers on this list are non-profit community groups.

 

The budget allocated for the Section F Scheme is maintained by Community Development and the services are delivered by Waste Services as part of Trade Waste program. This currently represents a subsidy of $23,000 and the level of the subsidy increases annually along with general increases in Trade Waste charges.

 

The subsidy for Trade Waste removal is not promoted by Council and is again dependent on the level of awareness of the customer.  A customer wishing to receive this service normally needs to be informed by Council about the opportunity for the subsidy.  Community Development monitors the budget and provides an internal transfer of monies to the indoor Waste area to cover costs of service delivery.

 

As seen with previously described schemes the provision of a subsidy here is dependent on the knowledge of its availability. There is no policy, no promotion of the scheme and no systematic processes are applied. There are no documented criteria upon which decisions are made and the customer list is not publicised. The responsibilities for the subsidy lie with three different Council sections.  No new customers were added to the list in the last financial year.

 

Rental Subsidies

Council owns a number of buildings and sites that are leased to community, mainly child care and sporting organisations, for very low rentals.  As such the rental for these premises is subsidised by the Randwick ratepayers as there is considerable foregone revenue as well as capital replacement costs. In addition Council often provides further funds for maintenance and for utility expenses in relation to these buildings.

 

Some of the actual subsidies have been identified in Council’s budget and are reflected as an internal transfer of funds between Community Development and the Property Unit. 

 

Table B provides a summary of the community organisations who are accommodated in Council owned properties at subsidised rents. These subsidies are reported in Council’s budget as an internal transfer. Where available, information is also provided on any additional funding provided by Council in relation to the property.

 

Table B : Rental Subsidies Identified in the Budget

 

Organisation

Rent Paid

Per Annum

Value of Rental Subsidy

Other Costs Paid in 2004/05

Comments

 

Baby Health Centre Clovelly

 

$41,600

576.16

 

Benevolent Society

Eric Callaway House Nursing Home  – dementia care

$1

$190,000[1]

 

Council owns the land & Benevolent Society constructed the Nursing home

Burnie Park Community Hall

Management of hall contracted out

 

$26,000

 

Council receives no income from hiring of hall

Clovelly Child Care

 

$1

$52,000

619.19

 

Clovelly Senior Citizens Centre

 

 

 

Built 1954

Department of Housing

Affordable housing 133a Boyce Road, Maroubra

$1

$21,000

 

 

Duffy's Child Care

$24,650

$41,600

1,432.40

Built in 1989 with State & C’wealth funding on Crown Land

Kingsford Legal Centre

$6,240

$20,800

 

Will relocate to UNSW in new Law Faculty build

Kingsford Meals on Wheels

Nil

$16,000

 

 

Malabar Child Care

Prince Edward Street Malabar

$121

$26,000

508.33

Council renovated premises in 1979

Maroubra Senior Citizens

 

$52,000

2,114.59

Purpose built in 1979; rent from other users goes to Management Committee;

Matraville Youth Hall

- - -

$10,000

1,114.55

 

 

Peter Pan Kindergarten

La Perouse

$50

$38,000

 

 

Rainbow Child Care

 

$70

$50,000

 

 

Randwick Community Gardens

$70

$10,400

 

 

Randwick Information & Community Centre (RICC) Occupy a shop & 300m² office space in the Bowen Community Centre

$49,400

$52,000

 

 

ROCC

Waratah Street Randwick

$31,200

$50,000

 

Recently granted 18 month occupancy extension

South East Neighbourhood Centre

$520

$25,480

 

 

Total

 

 

 

 

$764,480.00

 

A number of other community organisations, mainly sporting, are provided with subsidised rent in Council owned premises, however, these subsidies are not identified in Council’s budget as there is no internal transfer of funds. This means that these subsidies are hidden and the community, Councillors and many Council staff do not know the actual value of the subsidies or even the fact that they are provided.

 

Table C provides information on these subsidies. While market valuations have been prepared for some of the properties on the list, an estimation of the market rental has been made for others. In the case of the Surf Clubs, the estimated market rental relates only to the entertainment areas and is based on a % of the hire fees. It is important to include these estimations as they assist in providing a more realistic picture of the level of subsidy provided to community groups by Council.

 

Table C: Rental Subsidies Currently Not Identified in Budget

 

Organisation

Rent Paid

Estimated Rental Subsidy

Other Costs Paid

Clovelly Bowling Club

$8,750

$8750

 

Clovelly Surf Lifesaving Club

Club house

 

$70

$25,000

 

Coogee Bowling Club

$3,165

$10,835

 

 

Coogee Croquet Club

$658

$5,000

 

 

Coogee Fishing Club

$100

$5,000

 

 

Coogee Surf Lifesaving Club

Car park

Kiosk

Club house

Boatshed

 

$70

$70

$70

$70

 

Nil

$50,000

$28,000

$5,000

 

Gordon’s Bay Fishing Club

$100

$3,000

 

 

Kensington Bowling Club

$3,164

$6,836

 

 

La Perouse Pony Club

Land

$2,333

$5,000

 

Malabar Boat Owners

Ramp

$100

$500

 

Maroubra Surf Lifesaving Club

 

$70

$25,000

$4,255

Off Shore Rescue Boat

Ramp and boatshed

$.70

 

nil

 

Randwick Rugby Union Club

Jeff Sayle Pavilion Latham Park

Nil

$10,000

$9,000

South Coogee Bowling Club

 

$3,750

$3,750

 

South Maroubra Surf Lifesaving Club

$70

$17,000

 

Surfing NSW Board riders

Office space

$7,800

$19,200

 

Ladies Baths

 

$70

$5000

 

Wylies Baths

Pool & functions areas

$762

$100,000

 

Total

$31,172

$332,871

 

$13,255

 

The Randwick Rugby Club is another sporting organisation that receives an unreported rental subsidy for its use of the Jeff Sayle Pavilion in Latham Park. This building which could be used by many community groups is currently set aside for the exclusive use of the Rugby Club who do not pay any rent  to Council.  Currently there is no lease agreement although one is in the process of being prepared. In the new lease the annual rent will be set at $350 and the lease will document the Club’s responsibilities for maintenance.

 

The actual revenue received by Council from the community and sporting organisations is minimal and in the majority of cases reflects the fee set by the Department of Lands who previously specified a minimum fee of $70.00 per annum in relation to the rents for a facility located on a Crown Reserve although this minimum rental is being increased to $350.00 per annum. 

 

The key features in relation to these subsidised rentals are:

·    The decisions to grant these organisations a subsidised rental have not been reviewed for a number of years.

·    The subsidised rent is a recurrent subsidy and many of the organisations have long leases/licenses with Council

·    There is little documentation that provides the background to Council’s decisions to grant these groups such a high level of support.

·    There is no policy to guide Council in determining appropriate rentals for community and sporting organisations

 

The issue of a lack of policy or clear rationale in relation to the levels of rent charged was noted previously in a Community Facilities Study that was undertaken in 1992. This report suggested that Council would be more likely to make informed rent setting decisions by maintaining funding source and other data about the occupants of its facilities allowing them to better understand the capacity of the tenants to pay rent.

 

Operational Subsidies

There are subsidies that are provided each year to a number of organisations to assist with general operations. Again these are not clearly identified in the budget as subsidies and the community, residents and ratepayers are generally unaware of the level of subsidies provided. Table D provides information on these subsidies.

 

Table D: Subsidies Provided for General Operations

 

ORGANISATION

SUBSIDISED AMOUNT ($)

Clovelly Surf Lifesaving Club

 

30,000

Coogee Surf Lifesaving Club

 

30,000

Maroubra Surf Lifesaving Club

 

30,000

Off Shore Rescue Boat

 

25,000

Off Shore Rescue Boat – amortised Capital

22,000

South Maroubra Surf Lifesaving Club

30,000

Wylies Baths

 

25,000

 Total

 

192,000

 

These subsidies are provided on an annual basis, are historical in nature and with the exception of the subsidy to Wylies’ Baths support the provision of volunteer surf life saving services.

 

The Wylies Baths’ operational subsidy of $25,000.00 is a recurrent subsidy that is provided each year to this group and there is no requirement for them to account for how operational funds are spent.

 

An operational subsidy of $25,000.00 is provided to Off Shore Rescue Boat and in addition Council provides ‘half the cost of boat replacement’, approximately $110,000, which is required about every 5 to 7 years, and is amortised as $22,000 per annum over 5 years.

 

Des Renford Aquatic Centre

Subsidies are provided through the Des Renford Aquatic Centre to four community groups, these being, WAVES, the Maroubra Swimming Club, PCYC and Special Olympics.  The total amount of subsidies provided is approximately $22,000 which is for either the use of lanes or the pool free of charge or at a minimal rate.

 

In addition Council supports the Victor Chang Heart Foundation through foregoing entrance fees and providing a range of other support including staff for the Des Renford Charity Day which is held in October each year.

 

Library Facilities

Meeting rooms in Council’s Libraries are available to community groups at both a (reduced) community rate and in some cases for no fees.  The venues include the Vonnie Young Auditorium and the HACC meeting rooms at Bowen Library and the meeting room at the Randwick Branch.  The annual total amount of usage provided at no charge is estimated to cost Council $4,000.00 per annum.

 

Summary Subsidies

Additional Maintenance Assistance Provided to Organisations Receiving Rental Subsidies

The total rental revenue received by Council for these rental-subsidised properties is low and often does not cover the cost of administering the leases and licences.  While the leases and licences generally contain clauses relating to the lessee’s responsibility in relation to maintenance, the reality is that many of the recipient organisations make further approaches to Council for additional funding to provide for maintenance in relation to the buildings. This means that the fact of occupying a Council building often results in the organisation gaining additional financial benefits that a commercial landlord would not provide for other community groups.

 

On the other hand, organisations who do not receive the benefit of subsidised rental in a Council building, do not apply for additional funding that would relate to the occupancy of a Council owned building. This may in fact exacerbate the level of inequity in terms of Council’s support of community groups.

 

The costs associated with maintenance have been reduced over the last two years due to the implementation of new leases and licences and a more consistent and proactive approach by Council in encouraging the lessees and licensees to adhere to the terms within these agreements.  However, many of the lessees and licensees still have expectations that Council will pay for their maintenance and despite all efforts to require the parties to honour their responsibilities, Council still incurs additional costs for maintenance and repairs. In many cases it is found that if the organisations are told that maintenance is their responsibility by the Council Property Officer, they will often then approach another Department or even an elected representative for further assistance.

 

Council will need to continue to manage the leases and licences carefully to ensure that the lessees assume their responsibilities for maintenance and upkeep.

 

Under Reporting of Level of Subsidies

The extent of the rental subsidies not identified in Council’s budget means that Council is under reporting the level of assistance that it provides to community and sporting organisations. Further, it is likely that the benefiting organisations are not really aware of the extent of Council’s assistance.

 

The underreporting could also negatively impact on the reporting of Council’s performance against all other Councils in the annual Comparative Information. In particular Council’s reported performance in relation to Net recreation and leisure expenses per capita and Community services expenses per capita. would not reflect the actual expenditure.

 

It would be preferable if all subsidised rentals were identified in the leases or licences and clearly reported to the community in Council’s Annual Report.

 

Estimating Market Rents

It is difficult to provide an estimate of market rentals for the Surf Clubs who occupy Council owned properties.

 

The Surf Clubs have two different areas within the buildings: the area that is directly related to surf life saving activities  and the entertainment areas. The estimated market rental for the Surf Clubs has been calculated on the entertainment areas only and this is approximately based on 30% of the letting fees assuming two lettings per week. This does not include the additional earnings realised by the clubs through alcohol sales at functions and the monies earnt through Open Bar days. It is also acknowledged that Council makes other allowances for the Surf Clubs such as permitting some to collect donations from beach users who park in Council car parks.

 

The estimate of the rental for the kiosk on Coogee Beach was based on 33% of the rental paid by the commercial operator of the kiosk in Goldstein Park at Coogee Beach. This estimate is based on the potential of the kiosk and is a conservative estimate of its market value.

 

Market rental valuations have been obtained for two of the bowling clubs (Clovelly & South Coogee) and these valuations were used to estimate the market rentals for the other bowling clubs and the Croquet and Fishing Clubs. These estimates were based on the location, facilities, income producing potential and other possible community uses. In the recently negotiated leases it was agreed that the Clovelly and South Coogee Bowling Clubs will pay 50% of the market rental value.

 

The Process for Granting Subsidies

In summary it is noted that:

·    The process for granting subsidies is quite inequitable

·    There is very little documentation outlining the reasons why subsidies were awarded to various groups in the first instance.

·    Monies are provided on a recurrent basis for an indefinite period without assessing the validity of requests particularly in the case of Section F customers, the rental subsidies and the operational subsidies. There are many deserving organisations who are excluded from applying for a subsidy

·    Organisations receiving subsidies are not required to recognise or acknowledge the provision of funds by Council. This means that the users of these organisations and the community in general are not aware that Council’s provides financial assistance

·    In most instances organisations are not required to report back to Council on the benefits provided to the community in respect of the subsidies.

 

As many of the organisations have been occupying a Council owned premises on a subsidised rental or been on the Section F list for many years, it will be difficult to make many changes. However it is essential that there be a review of all subsidies and that policies and strategies be developed in order to achieve greater equity and to ensure that Council provides support in the area of greatest need.

 

5.  FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF GRANTS, DONATIONS AND SUBSIDIES

 

Each of the schemes described in the present report has a separate budget or is managed through a separate accounting code.  As noted in the internal audit report the financial systems used do not meet best practice in terms of the principles of transparency.  The data is coded inconsistently with the result that there is no accurate data that shows the funds that are provided by Council to the community in the form of grants, donations and/or subsidies. This results in Council , the elected representatives and the community not being fully informed on the extent of the support provided

 

It was also noted in the internal audit report that:

§ There are subsidies that are not even captured in Council’s accounting system

§ The degree of community support is further understated by the fact that there are ‘hidden costs’ associated with the provision of monies particularly with property rentals and leases (e.g.  maintenance, utility and staff costs); these additional costs are not accurately recorded against the subsidy so that the ‘real’ cost to Council is not recognised

§ Where there are services that are charged below cost or at a community rate (e.g.  Trade waste services) the true value of these subsidies is not correctly recorded.

 

These issues should be addressed through the implementation of improved accounting procedures if Council seeks to better manage and account for expenditure.

 

 

6.   SUMMARY OF ALLOCATION OF FUNDS ACROSS TARGET GROUPS

The allocation of funds in 2004/2005 was reviewed to assess the level of equity in the overall allocations in terms of the seven community target groups. It identified significant differences though in some cases this merely reflects the fact that some target groups receive greater funding from State and Federal Governments.

 

6.1 Children’s Services

Children’s services received the largest amount of funding of all target groups ($367,992).  Appendix 1 (Attachment 1) shows the recipients, which  comprise child care centres and services, preschools and school programs, and the level of funding received. This data shows that:

 

·    There are seven organisations ( Clovelly Child Care, Duffy’s CC, Malabar OCC, Moverley CC, Peter Pan Kindergarten, Rainbow CC, and ROCC) receiving a rental subsidy and this places them at a clear commercial and quality advantage compared with other children’s services in the community who do not receive any rental subsidies.  In addition the Clovelly, Rainbow Street and Duffy’s Child Care Centres also receive free Trade Waste collection with Clovelly receiving further additional funding through the small grants scheme and contingency fund.

·    The same seven organisations collectively received $310,236 in 2004/2005 which represents 84.3% of the total expenditure across all schemes for Children’s Services ($367,992) .

 

As there are many organisations providing child care related services across Randwick City it is evident that there are large inequities in the access to Council grant funding.

 

Further research is required to see whether the rental support by Council is reflected in lower child care rates or other advantages for the community; to identify the pattern of funding giving consideration to type of centre (community or private); fees charged; and other sources of grant funds such as the Dept. of Community Services.

 

A policy with clear guidelines is required in relation to the application of grant funding to child care centres.

 

6.2 Aged / Disability

Eleven organisations were classified as delivering aged or disability services and the total amount of funds provided to these groups in 2004/05 was $303,170These allocations are shown in the  Appendix 2 (Attachment 1).

           

When considering the reported rental subsidy for The Benevolent Society it must be noted that while Council owns the land in Adina Ave, Little Bay, the buildings were constructed by the Benevolent Society. A market valuation was prepared for this site a number of years ago and the reported rental value is used in determining the level of the rental subsidy.  However, if the site was without improvements it is unlikely that a rental of $190,000 would be achieved. This organisation provides a valuable service to the community.

 

6.3 Youth

Collectively Youth services and programs obtained $57,879 in funds as is outlined in Appendix 3 (Attachment 1). Youth Services do not receive the same level of assistance as compared with Children’s services or Aged/Disability services. Only one youth program, The Shack Youth Services, received funding from more than one scheme. The amount provided to youth services is relatively low even though it was identified through the consultation for the Community Facilities Study that this group does not receive adequate funding.

 

6.4 Neighbourhood / Community Centres

There are two Community Centres that received funding from Council in 2004/05, these being Kooloora and RICC. Kooloora received a total of $7,579 while RICC received $87,061. RICC , which provides considerable services to the Randwick community, received a rental subsidy; a recurrent community grant and a trade waste service.

 

7. SURF LIFESAVING CLUBS

The local Surf Lifesaving Clubs make a contribution to the quality of community life within Randwick City by providing surf lifesaving services throughout summer at Clovelly, Coogee and Maroubra beaches.  The services are provided on weekends and public holidays from the beginning of October until March. The other significant community activity that they manage relates to the provision of Nipper activities.

 

Council supports the Surf Clubs with subsidised rentals that are not identified in Council’s budget, with annual grants for operational activities, 50% of the replacement cost for the offshore rescue boat and a range of small grants for different activities. 

 

Table D provides a summary of all funds provided to the Surf Clubs during 2004/05.

 

RECIPIENT

TYPE of GRANT FUNDS

AMOUNT

TOTAL

Clovelly Surf Club

 

 

Club house -Rental Subsidies Not Identified

$25,000

 

Operational Subsidies

$30,000

 

Total

 

$55,000

Coogee Surf Club

 

 

 

Contingency Fund

$1,912

 

Club house-Rental Subsidies Not Identified

Kiosk –Rental Subsidies Not Identified

Boatshed - Rental Subsidies/Not Identified

$28,000

$50,000

$5,000

 

Operational Subsidies

$30,000

 

Total

 

$114,912

Maroubra Surf Club

 

 

Club house -Rental Subsidies Not Identified

$25,000

 

Operational Subsidies

Other

$30,000

$4,255

 

Total

 

$59,255

Off Shore Rescue Boat

 

 

Building -Rental Subsidies Not Identified

Nil

 

Operational Subsidies

Other – contribution to boat replacement

$25,000

$22,000

 

Total

 

$47,000

South Maroubra Surf Club

  

Contingency Fund

$4700

 

Club house -Rental Subsidies Not Identified

$17,000.

 

Operational Subsidies

$30,000

 

Total

 

$47,470

Total

 

 

 

$323,637

 

Whilst there is no question that the provision of monies to these groups is seen as worthy, these organisations also have the potential to attract considerable funding from other sources. For example, the four clubs received a total of $160,665 from the CDSE Category 1 Grants in 2004 and this represented approximately 50% of all the funds provided by the local licensed clubs. The Surf Clubs are also eligible for CDSE Category 2 Grants but Council has no details as to how they were allocated.

 

In the recent May 2005 State budget, $2 million was provided to Surf Life Saving NSW as the first instalment of a four year $8 million initiative for the enhancement of club premises and other life saving items. The surf clubs also gain sponsorship and support from other local businesses.

 

The contribution of the Surf Clubs to community well being is acknowledged.  The partnership approach of the Surf Clubs and Randwick Council’s Beach Inspectors is of paramount importance.  It is Council’s Beach Inspectors who are ultimately responsible for providing a safe recreational environment for all beach users and they coordinate all activities on the beaches including the overall operations of the surf clubs.

 

However, due to the overall high level of sponsorship that the Surf Clubs receive from a variety of sources they are actually better resourced in terms of equipment than Council’s own Beach Inspectors. This fact must be taken into consideration when allocating grant monies to this group as any decisions must ultimately deliver the greatest level of safety to our beach users.

 

Community Access to Surf Club Facilities

While the surf club buildings vary in size they all contain facilities related directly to the provision of lifesaving services such as operational rooms, lookouts, equipment storage etc. In addition they also provide for other ancillary recreational activities such as recreation, entertainment areas and meeting rooms. The public entertainment areas in the four local clubs are hired for weddings, parties and other functions.

 

It does not appear that the use of the club house facilities by other individuals and community groups is encouraged. The Randwick community does not seem to consider the surf clubs as multi use community facilities and some community groups have expressed concerns that the Surf club facilities are not accessible to others in the community. Some councils, such as Manly, have actually implemented policies that have resulted in the surf club buildings becoming more accessible to other users.

 

It would be preferable if some other community groups could gain more access to surf club facilities for  meeting spaces and consideration could be given to the development of agreements between Council and the Surf Clubs regarding the access of other community groups and sporting bodies to their facilities.

 

Sustainability of Surf Club Facilities

All the surf clubs have been leased for periods of 20 years. The lessees with the permission of Council are permitted to sublease part of their premises and Clovelly has recently put a sublease in place with a catering firm which provides them with additional income.

 

The surf clubhouses are ageing buildings and a critical issue for the clubs and Council is maintenance and sustainability. It is clear that considerable investment is required if the buildings are to be maintained adequately and the leases state that all maintenance work is at the sole cost of the lessee. Council needs to work with each surf club to assist them in developing a long term sustainability plan as this will be the only way that they can meet their requirements in relation to maintenance of their buildings.

 

The Surf Clubs do not always publicly acknowledge the contribution that is provided by Council as they do with some of their other sponsors. This needs to be addressed. 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

As detailed in this report.

 

CONCLUSION:

Some principles for the administration and management of Randwick City Council’s grants, donations and subsidies programs were provided at the beginning of this report and an application of these principles to current practice reveals that there are significant issues with respect to the management of the grants, donations and subsidies schemes:

 

§ There is no policy in place for the provision of grants, donations and subsidies with clear priorities linked to community need and processes that ensure equity, transparency and accountability.

 

§ With the exception of the Section 356 Grants Scheme the processes followed are based either on traditional reactive responses to community groups who seek financial assistance or historical reasons rather than any formal system that includes selection criteria, regular assessment and evaluation

 

§ Recurrent funds are awarded to the same groups across different schemes without an assessment of how the monies have benefited the community

 

§ No one, including Council officers, elected representatives or the community, is aware of the full extent of Council’s provision of grant funding. This is a significant lost opportunity

 

§ Many deserving community groups who may have high priority needs are not given an opportunity to apply for funding support from Council.

 

§ The basic principles focused on equitable, transparent and effective practices are not met by the schemes in terms of process

 

As an imperative a policy that documents Councils position with a clear direction for the provision of grants, donations and subsidies must be developed and adopted by Council.

 

A clear strategy, linked to other Council strategic plans such as the Randwick City Plan and Community Facilities Plan is required so that Council can ensure that all decisions made in relation to grants, donations and subsidies will actively support the achievement of Council’s strategic directions and outcomes.

 

Council needs to consider broadening the formal grants scheme.  As suggested earlier the two grants schemes could be amalgamated to create a greater pool of funds.  There would be an annual call for applications and grants could be made for varying periods thus providing some continuity of funding for some projects. This single Community Grant Scheme would have objective assessment criteria, a proper review process, clearly stated justification for funds, accountability on the part of recipients to report on how monies are spent and follow-up by Council to ensure that reporting is undertaken by recipients and that reports comply with Council’s rules. Council should also ensure that they are acknowledged in formal documentation of recipients for the provision of funds

 

In line with this an ongoing application process for funding from the Contingency funds would remove the present bias and would make the allocation of funds more equitable, ensure that community groups properly account for how money is spent and create a more transparent and consistent approach to the dissemination of funds.  This approach is used at other councils where there is a single grant scheme and all funds are provided through this scheme.

 

Council needs to develop and implement accurate and consistent recording of information in accounting systems. A central database should be established to consolidate information, improve monitoring and enable regular and accurate reporting from one central location. There needs to be a more accurate estimate of the value of the subsidised rental that is currently not recorded in the financial system to enable full and accurate reporting to the community of the actual value of subsidies provided to the community.

 

The level of rental subsidies should be the subject of an ongoing review that takes both an ‘industry’ approach (child care centres) and also considers each situation on a case by case basis. The expectation of the community would be that Council adopts a consistent and equitable approach. Council requires a clear rental policy that states both its commitment to assist the community to provide needed services and the requirement to maximise economic return on properties for the community.

 

Council needs to work with the Surf Clubs to assist them in developing long term management plans that will support the sustainability of their facilities. These plans could also take into consideration factors such as the ability of the Clubs to earn income through their club facilities.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

It is recommended that:

 

1.   A policy be developed and brought to Council by November 2005 on the allocation of grant funds and subsidies by Randwick City Council. This policy is to include reference to a set of basic principles as proposed in this paper

 

2.   The Management Plan is to identify Council’s strategy in management of grant funding and to clearly report to the community on the total allocation of grant monies each year

 

3.   The Annual Report (starting with the 2004/2005 Annual Report) provides details on all grants, donations and subsidies allocated during the period in review

 

4.   Formal accounting processes be developed by January 2006 and implemented in July 2006 to address all identified accounting issues

 

5.   All recipients of grant funds in excess of $20,000 per annum be required to publicly acknowledge Council’s contribution by way of appropriate signage and inclusion in their Annual Reports or the like

 

6.   The Small Grants and Community Grants is combined into a single scheme with transparent, equitable processes developed and implemented for application, allocation and evaluation. A paper on this is to be brought to Council by November 2005

 

7.   All recipients of the recurrent Community grants be informed by end of 2005 that while the grants will continue to be provided for 2006/2007, in all subsequent years they will need to apply for these funds according to established procedures

 

8.   The availability of Contingency funds is to be advertised broadly to the community and that the community groups are invited on a quarterly basis to apply for funding to an established limit. This will allow both community groups and Council to plan more appropriately. The list of applicants will be brought to Council for final decision making.

 

9.   A policy on subsidised rentals be prepared for Council by December 2005

 

10. A further report is brought to Council by March 2006 on the provision of grant funding to child care centres. This report is to include information on the range of services provided, fees charged, number of available places, and classification. The report should propose strategies for achieving greater equity in the allocation of Council funds to child care centres

 

11. Greater consideration be given to the provision of support for youth services

 

12. The Surf Clubs are assisted to develop long term management plans by June 2006 that will support the sustainability of their facilities and take into consideration factors such as the ability of the Clubs to earn income through their club facilities and the development of agreements that clarify the use of their facilities by other community groups.

 

13. Where sporting and community groups attract income from the use of Council facilities, they be required to provide to Council on an annual basis, audited financial statements.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1. Summary of data on Grant Fund Programs.

2. Councillor Donations from Contingency Fund 2004/05 - DGFS Report 30/2005 to Admin & Finance Committee meeting 12th July 2005.inancial statements

 

 

 

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1:

 

SUMMARY of DATA on GRANT FUND PROGRAMS

 

 

 

APPENDIX 1: Grant Funding Allocations to Children’s Services

 

APPENDIX 2: Summary of Grants – Aged and Disability Services

 

APPENDIX 3: Summary of Grants – Youth Services

 

APPENDIX 4: Summary of Other Organisations Receiving Funds


APPENDIX 1: Grant Funding Allocations to Children’s Services

 

RECIPIENT

TYPE of GRANT FUNDS

AMOUNT

 

TOTAL

Clovelly Child Care

 

 

 

Section F

$3,561

 

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Contingency Fund

$600.00

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$52,000

 

Total

 

$57,161

Duffy's Child Care

Section F

$1,862

 

 

Small Grants 356

$530

 

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$41,600

 

 

Total

 

$43,992

Baby Health Centre Clovelly

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$41,600

 

Total

 

$41,600

Blue Gum Cottage

 

Small Grants 356

$300

 

Total

 

$300

Burnie Child Care

 

Section F

$630

 

Total

 

$630

Claremont College

Contingency Fund

$1,086.00

$1,086

Dolphin Street Playgroup

 

Contingency Fund

$1,000

 

Total

 

$1,000

Eastern Suburbs Aftercare

 

Small Grants 356

$500

 

Total

 

$500

Home After School Care

 

Small Grants 356

$800

 

Total

 

$800

In Safe Hands Before and After School Care

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Total

 

$1,000

Kensington Primary

Contingency Fund

$200.00

$200

La Perouse Public School

 

Small Grants 356

$600

 

Total

 

$600

Malabar Occasional Child Care Centre 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$26,000

 

Small Grants 356

$500

 

Total

 

$26,500

Maroubra Neighbourhood Children’s Centre

Small Grants 356

$376

 

Total

 

$376

Moverley Child Care

 

 

Small Grants 356

$600

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$41,600

 

Total

 

$42,200

National Association for Prevention of Child Abuse

Contingency Fund

$540

 

Total

 

$540

Peter Pan Kindergarten

 

Rental Subsidies

$38,000

 

Total

 

$38,000

Rainbow Child Care

 

 

Section F

$2,383

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$50,000

 

Total

 

$52,383

Randwick 2 Playgroup

 

Small Grants 356

$600

 

Total

 

 

$600

Randwick Family Day Care

 

 

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Community Grants

$4,822

 

Total

 

$5,822

Randwick Guides 

Small Grants 356

$600.00

 

Total

 

$600

ROCK

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$50,000

 

Total

 

$50,000

SOS Preschool

 

Small Grants 356

$700

 

Total

 

$700

The Polish School of Sydney 

Small Grants 356

$500

 

Total

 

$500

 Total

 

 

$367,992

 

 


APPENDIX 2: Summary of Grants – Aged and Disability Services

 

RECIPIENT

TYPE of GRANT FUNDS

AMOUNT of GRANT FUNDS

TOTAL

 

ALERT

 

 

Small Grants 356

$500

 

Community Grants

$1,079

 

Total

 

$1,579

*Benevolent Society

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$190,000

 

Total

 

$190,000

Eastern Respite and Recreation 

Community Grants

$8,386

 

Total

 

$8,386

Irabina Association

 

Community Grants

$2,148

 

Total

 

$2,148

Kingsford Meals on Wheels 

 

Section F

$1,246

 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$16,000

 

Total

 

$17,246

Learning Links

 

Small Grants 356

$430

 

Total

 

$430

Little Bay Coast Centre for Seniors 

Community Grants

$5,241

 

Contingency Fund

$660

 

Total

 

$5,901

Maroubra Senior Citizens 

 

Section F

$1,205

 

Rental Subsidies

$52,000

 

Total

 

$53,205

Mindfields

 

Small Grants 356

$500

 

Total

 

$500

Randwick Waverley Community Transport

 

Small Grants 356

$900

 

Community Grants

$5,241

 

Total

 

$6,141

Special Olympics

 

Des Renford Aquatic Centre

$6,250

 

Total

 

$6,250

WAVES

 

 

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Des Renford Aquatic Centre

$8,000

 

Total

 

$9,000

Windgap 

Section F

$2,383

 

Total

 

$2,383

 

 Total

 

 

$303,170

 


Appendix 3: Summary of Grants – Youth Services

 

RECIPIENT

TYPE of GRANT FUNDS

AMOUNT of GRANT FUNDS

TOTAL

Bondi Community Youth 

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Total

 

$1,000

Matraville Youth Hall

 

Property Rental Subsidy

$10,000

 

Total

$10,000

$10,000

Randwick Girls and Boys High Schools

Contingency Fund

$8,114

 

Total

 

$8,114

Shack Youth Services

 

 

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Community Grants

$36,165

 

Total

 

$37,165

WAYS

 

Small Grants 356

$1,000

 

Total

 

$1,000

 Total

 

 

$57,879

 


APPENDIX 4: Summary Of Other Organisations Receiving Funds

 

Twenty-eight organisations were classified as ‘Other’ and the source of funds for these groups is shown in the following table:

 

RECIPIENT

TYPE of GRANT FUNDS

AMOUNT

Association International Students

Contingency Fund

 

$2,500

Australia Indonesia Business Council

Mayoral Donations

 

$100

Banner across Coogee Bay Rd

Contingency Fund

 

$1086

Burnie Park Hall

Property Rental Subsidy

$26,000

Coogee Chamber of Commerce

 

Contingency Fund

 

$5,305

Department of Housing 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$21,000

Ephemera Reconciliation Monologues

Contingency Fund

 

$3,750

Golf Sydney Tours

 

Mayoral Donations

 

$681

Inner Sydney Regional Council

 

Community Grants

 

$1,079

Kingsford Legal Centre 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$20,800

Level 3 Meeting Room

 

Subsidised hire

 

$118

Matraville Families First

 

Contingency Fund

 

$408

Nursery Plants

 

Nursery Donations

 

$1,018

Peninsula Work Ventures

 

Section F

 

$1,246

Prince of Wales Hospital

 

Contingency Fund

 

$1,085

Radio Eastern Sydney

 

Community Grants

 

$2,096

Randwick Branch Meeting Room 

Library Facilities

 

$1,867

Randwick City Tourism

 

Contingency Fund

 

$1,625

Randwick Community Gardens 

Rental Subsidies Identified

$10,400

Randwick Literary Institute

 

Section F

 

$1,205

Randwick/Waverley Philharmonic Society

Community Grants

 

$4,035

Regional Study for Tourism

 

Contingency Fund

 

$2,500

South Eastern Neighbourhood Food Distribution

Property rental Subsidy & Small Grants 356

$26,480

St Vincent De Paul Society Maroubra

Small Grants 356

 

$500

Ted Noffs Foundation

 

Small Grants 356

 

$520

UNSW

 

Contingency Fund

$2,200

Vonnie Young Auditorium 

Library Facilities

$1,105

Welcome Overseas Students

 

Contingency Fund

 

$3,500

Wylies Baths 

Operational Subsidies

$25,000

 

Total

 

 

$183,907

 

 


ATTACHMENT 2:

 

COUNCILLOR DONATIONS FROM CONTINGENCY FUND 2004-05 – PREVIOUSLY TABLED

 

ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE COMMITTEE                                                                                  12 JULY 2005

 

Director, Governance & Financial Services' Report 30/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

COUNCILLORS' DONATIONS FOR THE 2004/2005 FINANCIAL YEAR

 

 

DATE:

28 June, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/07396 xr F2005/00182  

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES  

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

To keep Councillors aware of the progressive amount of Councillors’ donations, allocations, waiving of fees and other similar issues for the current financial year.

 

ISSUES:

 

In the 2004/05 financial year there were sixty nine (69) Councillors’ donations totalling

$149,997.37 as listed in the table below.

 

MEETING

DETAILS

AMOUNT

Works Committee – 13th July 2004

Greek Glendi

($7,695.00)

Cancelled

Community Services Committee – 10th August 2004

National Association for Prevention of Child Abuse & Neglect

$540.00

Ordinary Council – 27th July 2004

Barry Watterson – Shakespearean Theatre

$3,114.30

Ordinary Council – 27th July 2004

POW Hospital

$1,085.00

Ordinary Council – 27th July 2004

Randwick Girls & Boys High Schools (Rock Eisteddfod)

$3,114.30

Ordinary Council – 27th July 2004

Dolphin Street Playgroup (Temporary Fencing)

$1,000.00

Ordinary Council – 24th August 2004

Maroubra Fun Run & Oktoberfest

$3,734.00

Ordinary Council – 21st September 2004

Regional Study of Changing Tourism Dynamics in Sydney (Backpackers)

$2,500.00

Ordinary Council – 21st September 2004

Bali Tragedy 2nd Anniversary Commemorations

$8,678.00

Ordinary Council – 19th October 2004

Des Renford Aquatic Centre Charity Day

$5,320.40

Ordinary Council – 19th October 2004

St George Coptic Church Fete

$796.00

Ordinary Council – 19th October 2004

South Maroubra Village Green Art Show

$85.00

Ordinary Council – 19th October 2004

South Maroubra Carols by Candlelight

$1,906.00

Ordinary Council – 19th October 2004

St Paul’s Anglican Church – Carols by the Sea

$1,871.80

Works Committee – 9th November, 2004

Salvation Army – BBQ

$210.00

Works Committee – 9th November, 2004

Salvation Army – Carols By Candlelight in Kokoda Park

$2,301.80

Works Committee – 9th November, 2004

Coogee & South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Clubs – Use of Beaches (Surf Carnivals)

$1,742.00

Works Committee – 9th November, 2004

Coogee Bowling  Club – Use of Goldstein Reserve (Bowls Mobile)

$1,330.00

Health, Building & Planning Committee – 9th November, 2004

UNSW Sustainable Living Centre – Sponsorship of Sustainable Schools Awards

$2,200.00

Health, Building & Planning Committee – 9th November, 2004

Association of International Students of Science, Economics & Commerce – Sponsorship of Sustainability Seminars Program

$2,500.00

Ordinary Council – 23rd November, 2004

Randwick City Tourism – Filming of Tourism Video

$1,625.00

Ordinary Council – 23rd November, 2004

Coogee Surf Life Saving Club – Use of Coogee Beach (ocean swim event)

$640.00

Ordinary Council – 23rd November, 2004

Coogee Chamber of Commerce – Use of Goldstein Reserve (Coogee Family Fun Day)

$5,305.50

Ordinary Council – 23rd November, 2004

Barry Watterson – Musical Events in Grant Reserve

$798.80

Ordinary Council – 23rd November, 2004

United Nations Development Fund for Women – Purchase of Ribbons for White Ribbon Day

$150.00

Health, Building & Planning –

7th December, 2004

Sydney Body Art Ride

$3,000.00

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

Indonesian Welfare Association – Street Fair

$3,365.00

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

 

Castellorizian Ladies Auxiliary – Carol Singing

$302.20

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

Matraville Families First – Matraville Family Fun Day

$408.00

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

Greek Orthodox Church of Australia – Greek Epiphany Celebration

$1,173.50

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

Randwick Information & Community Centre- Removal Expenses

$4,000.00

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

La Perouse Local Aboriginal Community – Christian Convention in Aid of Suicide Prevention

$1,987.50

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

New Year’s Eve Fireworks – Coogee Beach

$5,000.00

Ordinary Council – 14th December, 2004

Welcome Overseas Students’ – Pilot Program

$3,500.00

Extraordinary Council – 27th January, 2005

Donation Tsunami Relief Appeal

$10,000.00

Extraordinary Council – 27th January, 2005

Sri Lankan Fundraiser Walk Centennial Park – Hire & Erection of Stage

$1,561.96

Works Committee – 8th February, 2005

Eastern Beaches Local Area Command –  Community v  Police  Cricket Day

$1,542.00

Works Committee – 8th February, 2005

Surf Life Saving Sydney Inc. – Use of Maroubra Beach

$855.00

Works Committee – 8th February, 2005

Trees for Mum Program – Use of Central Park

$1,200.00

Works Committee – 8th February, 2005

Grace  Point Christian Church – Clean Up Australia Day

$3,480.00

Works Committee – 8th February, 2005

Malabar RSL Swimming Club – Malabar Clear Water Classic Swim

$1,079.10

Administration & Finance Committee – 8th February, 2005

Indonesian Consul General – Tsunami Appeal Luncheon

$500.00

Administration & Finance Committee – 8th February, 2005

Friends of La Perouse Museum – La Perouse Commemoration Day

$3,700.00

Ordinary Council – 22nd February, 2005

Surfing NSW – South side Eliminations – Use of Maroubra Beach

$855.00

Ordinary Council – 22nd February, 2005

Living In Harmony Festival – Use of Goldstein Reserve

$8,338.00

Ordinary Council – 22nd March, 2005

Maroubra Surfers Organisation & Southend Boardriders

$4,025.00

Ordinary Council – 22nd March, 2005

Randwick Girls’ & Boys’ High School Rock Eisteddfod Team

$5,000.00

Ordinary Council – 22nd March, 2005

Wild Street, Church Festival

$1,534.80

Ordinary Council – 22nd March, 2005

Maroubra Swimming Club – Hire of DRAC

$680.00

Ordinary Council – 22nd March, 2005

Sydney Airport  - Campaign Against The Proposed Redevelopment

$1,830.40

Works  Committee – 12th April, 2005

Banner Across Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

$1,086.00

Community Services – 12th April, 2005

Living in Harmony Festival

$974.00

Community Services – 12th April, 2005

Ephemera Reconciliation Monolgues

$3750.00

Ordinary Council – 26th April, 2005

Salvation Army's Red Shield Appeal - Request For Waiving Of Fees For Installation Of Banner Across Coogee Bay Road. 

$1,086.00

Ordinary Council – 26th April, 2005

Claremont College, Randwick - Request For Waiving Of Fees Associated With Installation Of Banner Across Coogee Bay Road. 

$1,086.00

Ordinary Council – 26th April, 2005

South Maroubra Community Fair

$1,135.00

Administration & Finance – 10th May, 2005

Reconciliation Week 2005

$1,300.00

Works Committee Meeting – 10th May, 2005

Request from Kensington Public School for Donation of Plants

$200.00

Works Committee Meeting – 10th May, 2005

Clovelly Child Care – Request for installation of Ramp

$600.00

Health, Building & Planning

10th May, 2005

Sydney Airport Expansion – Update on recent rally

$3,773.21

+ $5,000.00 (for future use, included in total)

Ordinary Council Meeting – 24th May, 2005

Surfing NSW – State Titles Maroubra Beach

$855.00

Ordinary Council Meeting – 24th May, 2005

Kropka Theatre – Hire Town Hall

$700.00

Ordinary Council Meeting – 24th May, 2005

Coast Centre for Seniors – Donation of Chairs

$660.00

Ordinary Council Meeting – 28th June, 2005

NAIDOC Week

$1910.00

Ordinary Council Meeting – 28th June, 2005

Thai Awareness Day

$2860.00

Ordinary Council Meeting – 28th June, 2005

Randwick District Offshore Rescue Boat

$1556.50

TOTAL                                                                                                        $ 149,997.37

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Council allocated $150,000.00 in the 2004/2005 Budget, for contingencies.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the Director, Governance & Financial Services Report No. 30/2005 dated 28th June, 2005 in relation to the final amount of Councillors’ donations, allocations, waiving of fees and other similar issues for the 2004/05 financial year be noted.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

………………………………

………………………………

GEOFF BANTING

 

DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 36/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

Long Term Financial Plan

 

 

DATE:

18 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2005/00308

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER   

 

 

BACKGROUND:

 

Section 402 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires councils to prepare draft management plans, which include financial plans, for the management of its area covering a period of three years.

 

However while councils are not required to prepare long term financial plans beyond the three-year period such plans are valuable as they enable councils to better plan and understand their long term financial requirements, which include consideration of sustainability, service provision levels and the creation, upgrading and renewal of infrastructure.

 

At the Administration and Finance Committee Meeting on 10 August 2004 the Mayor Councillor Murray Matson tabled the Mayor’s Minute 55/2004.  Council subsequently resolved in part that;

 

“Council prepare a long term financial plan…”

 

Randwick City Council has now prepared a financial plan for the thirty years[2] 2005/06 to 2035/36 that includes a 30 year capital expenditure program. This 30-year financial plan has been developed using the Long Term Financial Planning Model.

 

ISSUES:

 

In developing the Long Term Financial Plan three key objectives were identified as the foundation of the plan.

 

 

 

 

 

Key Objectives

Rationale

 

1. Maintaining reliance on rate revenue to 50% of the total revenue.

 

·    Rates revenue in 2003/04 accounts for 49.9% of total revenue

·    Will make the organisation focus on getting revenue from sources other than rates

·    Will result in a more business focused culture

 

 

2. 25% of total expenditure to be spent on capital works or income producing projects

 

 

·    This will ensure that there is a reduction in operational expenditure

·    Will result in a more efficient organisation

 

3. 10% reduction in employment costs

 

·    Currently annual employee costs are $35m .

·    Does not mean a reduction in actual staff numbers – rather increased efficiency and smarter ways of working

·    More strategic workforce planning & training so that staff can effectively work in cross-functional roles

·    Increased efficiencies in associated employee costs such as workers compensation

 

 

Randwick City Council is in a sound financial position. The audited financial report for the year ended 30 June 2004 showed:

 

·    Operating surplus of $5.5 million

·    Cash deposits of $42.7 million

·    No debt

 

Council’s auditors, Spencer Steer, Chartered Accountants, in their summary of the Financial Reports dated 30 June 2004 said,

 

Council’s overall financial position, when taking into account the above financial indicators is, in our opinion, sound.

 

However, by preparing a long term financial plan Council will be more capable of addressing needs identified in a number of reports such as the Community Facilities Plan. It will do this by adopting a more strategic business approach that aims to reduce our reliance on rate revenue, meet the present and future needs of the community and achieve our vision of being a Council that is both a leader in Local Government and a leader in our community.

 

 

A briefing session was conducted with Councillors on 16 August 2005 on the Long Term Financial Plan.  It is important to note that as at 16 August 2005 the 30 year Long Term Financial Plans was complete.

 

Council’s decision at the extra ordinary Council meeting on 16 August 2005 to abandon and reject the installation of paid parking has required that Long Term Financial Plan be revisited, so as to ensure that the three key objectives are achieved.

 

A further report will be provided to Council when the Long Term Financial Plan is reviewed.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The Long Term Financial Plan will have a significant positive effect on Council’s financial position when considered by Council.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The preparation and implementation of a long term financial plan will ensure that Council will be more capable of addressing current and future needs in terms of the building and maintenance of physical assets and the provision of social infrastructure and quality programs for all members of the community.

 

It will do this by adopting a more strategically focused business approach that aims to reduce our reliance on rate revenue, be highly efficient and effective in terms of service delivery and achieve our vision of being a Council that is both a leader in local government and a leader in our community.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 38/2005 38/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

Bundock Community Centre - Licences  

 

 

DATE:

18 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/06336

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

A new community centre has been constructed as part of the redevelopment at Bundock Street Kingsford. The Centre, has been designed to house three of the existing tenants who occupied the community centre on Commonwealth site.

 

The design and layout of the new centre was customised for these services which include:

·    Annabelle House

·    Randwick Family Day Care Centre

·    S.O.S. Pre School

 

The facility includes two single level buildings. Annabelle House will occupy the front building which comprises an area of approximately 217 square metres with the Day care Centre and preschool being located in the second building which has an area of approximately 414 square metres.

 

As Randwick Council will be the owner of the new community centre, Council officers has been working with these three organisations to finalise arrangements including the Deeds of License pending the organisations moving into the new centre later in the year.

 

ISSUES:

 

Determination of Rental Value

 

When determining the  rental valuation for a community facilities in leases and licences a number of factors are taken into consideration. Through the process of market rental valuations Council looks at comparable facilities to see what other organisations pay and this helps to deliver equity.

 

Council also considers the aims that were detailed in the Policy for Hiring Community Facilities that was adopted by Council in July 2004. While this policy is only applicable to casual users and hirers the aims are worthy of reference. These included the need to set aside a portion of fees for a sinking fund to cover the cost of major maintenance and capital works in the future.

 

As part of the process for determining a fair rental for the three tenants,  in August 2004 Council had a market rental evaluation prepared by Preston Rowe Paterson.

The market rental evaluation looked at rental evidence from other similar centres with the following examples provided:

 

 

Name

Area (m²)

Annual Gross Rental

Rate per m²

Comments

Coogee Bear Day Care Centre

Not known

$84,500 net

n/a

Licensed for 59 children, shows a rate per child of $1,432 per annum

Cremorne Early Childhood Centre

149

$26,075

$175

Older style cottage

Neutral bay Community centre

459

$80,325

$175

2-3 story inclusive ground floor retail

McMahon’s Point Community Centre

308

$46,200

$150

2 level brick building

Kendal Community Centre Cammeray

516

$77,400

$150

Older style building, good location

 

The report also noted that negotiations were underway for the KU Kindergarten in Balmain with the anticipated rental being $110,000 per annum representing a rental cost of approximately $1830 per child per annum. Research indicated that rentals for child care accommodation varies across Sydney between $1000- $2000 per child per annum.

 

After undertaking analysis the report from PRP indicated that the total market rental valuation for the centre was $70,000 per annum based on a cost of $110 per m² which is less than the examples provided above.

 

The proposed rentals have been based on a relevant analysis of rentals paid by other community organisations for similar facilities. While these levels of rentals may not have included adequate funds to support the sinking fund at the level required Council felt that they were equitable and did take into consideration the ability of the organisations to pay. 

 

 

Deed of License Agreements

It must be clearly stated that these organisations were never told by Randwick Council that they could occupy the new, customised designed premises at their existing rentals.

 

Council has now prepared draft deeds of License and proposed the following rents, which are based on comparable market rental advice, the area occupied, other sources of funding and the nature of the services provided, for each organisation. These are:

 

1.   Annabelle House –                               $35,000 plus GST

2.   Randwick Family Day Care                  $14,870.38 plus GST

3.   SOS Pre School                                   $20,129.62 plus GST

 

Annabelle House has agreed to conditions in their Deed of Agreement but the other two organisations have indicated that they are not willing to pay these amounts and have asked that Council provide a subsidised rental equivalent to their current rental as well as a range of other of assistance which includes Council paying for all outgoings including utility costs, regular small maintenance and Trade Waste. 

 

The three organisations are currently occupying old dilapidated premises on the Commonwealth site. The age and condition of those existing premises would have been taken into consideration when the original rents for these organisations were set. It is not seen that there should be a direct link to the rents paid for their current premises as that proposed for the new facilities.

 

Other Sources of Funding

The Randwick Family Day Care Centre is provided with an operational subsidy (2004/05) of $168,730 from the Department of Family and Community Services. Council also provided a recurrent grant of $4,822 which has previously paid the majority of their current rent ($6,172pa)  and in 2004/05 an additional  Small Grant of $1000 was provided by Council.

 

The SOS Preschool apart from fees paid by parents also receives a grant from the Department of Community Services of $70,000. They currently pay a rent of $5,500pa.

 

Council’s Responsibility

Randwick City Council is the custodian for the community of the assets that it owns and manages. In relation to buildings Council needs to ensure that it has adequate funds for major maintenance and capital works in the future. This responsibility which relates to both the future sustainability of the buildings and Council’s responsibility for future generations must be taken into consideration in setting fair rentals for community properties.

 

Review of Grants, Donations & Subsidies

The report on the  Review of Grants, Donations & Subsidies was also presented to Council on the meeting of August 23 2005 and this noted the inequities that currently exist in our process of rental subsidies. The report has recommended that there be a report prepared on the provision of grant funding to child care centres (due March 2006) and also that a policy on subsidised rentals be prepared for Council by December 2005.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is a direct recurrent financial impact for this matter. If the two organisations pay rent at their current levels then this represents a recurrent cost to Council of $24,870 which will increase annually.

 

In addition while Council has not been able to accurately determine the cost of the other subsidies that these two organisations have requested,  it would be approximately $20,000 for both organisations based on expenditure at other child care centres.

 

The total of the request from the two organisations represents an additional recurrent cost to Council of $44,630 which will increase annually with CPI and with increased maintenance costs.

 

However, if Council adopts the recommendation in this report, then the financial impact for Council is $18,083 for 2005/06 which will need to be funded from the Councillors’ Contingency funds.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

As two reports that are highly relevant to setting appropriate rentals for child care related centres will be prepared for Council over the next six months it would not be appropriate at this time to recommend further substantial rental subsidies to two child care centres without consideration of the full extent of the issues identified in the review of Subsidies. 

 

Accordingly an interim strategy for applying a rental is proposed which involves setting a rental below Council’s recommended level for the first year with this to be reviewed on the first anniversary by which time the other related reports and policies will have been adopted by Council. However, it is proposed that these organisations will be asked to assume responsibility for all outgoings to the same level of other community groups.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that:

1.   For the first year of the lease that the rents for Randwick Family Day Care Centre and SOS Pre School be set at 50% of Council’s recommended rent, this being $7,435.19 for the Randwick Family Day Care Centre and $10,648.10 with the subsidy of $18,083 for these rentals to be provided from the Councillors’ Contingency Fund

2.   The rentals contained in the lease will be reviewed on the first anniversary and set at a level that reflects Council policy and the rental valuation as determined in August 2004.

3.   The deed of licence agreements with the Randwick Family Day Care Centre and SOS Pre School provide for the two organisations to take responsibility for outgoings and maintenance as per normal practice.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 39/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

AFFIXING OF THE COUNCIL SEAL

 

 

DATE:

17 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/06862

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Clause 48 of the Local Government (Meetings) Regulations 1993 requires that the Seal of the Council must not be affixed to a document unless the document relates to business of the Council and the Council has resolved (by resolution referring to the document) that the Seal be so affixed.

 

ISSUES:

 

It is necessary for the Council’s Seal to be affixed to the ‘Withdrawal of Caveat’ form to remove a caveat number ‘K843355’ from the title of property at 1 Peters Place, Maroubra (Folio Identifier: 250/231907).  This caveat placed a restriction on the re-sale of the said property within a period of three (3) years from the date of its acquisition by the current registered proprietors, James Doyle & Katherine Mary Doyle. 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

As Clause 48 of the Meeting Regulation required that the Council pass a resolution authorising the affixing of the Seal, it is necessary for this action to take place to comply with legal formalities set by the Land and Property Information Office. 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That authority is granted for the Council’s Common Seal to be affixed to the ‘Withdrawal of Caveat’ form relating to the property at 1 Peters Place, Maroubra.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 40/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

AFFIXING OF THE COUNCIL SEAL

 

 

DATE:

17 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/06336, F2004/07593

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Clause 48 of the Local Government (Meetings) Regulations 1993 requires that the Seal of the Council must not be affixed to a document unless the document relates to business of the Council and the Council has resolved (by Resolution referring to the document) that the Seal be so affixed.

 

ISSUES:

 

It is necessary for the Council’s Seal to be affixed to the signing of agreements between the Council and –

 

1.         Eastern Suburbs Tennis Association Inc. in relation to a lease for part of J.V. Dick Reserve more particularly described as Coogee Tennis Centre courts for a period of five (5) years.

2.         Arthur Adamopoulos (T/As Vino Vino) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 30 St Pauls Street, Randwick.

3.         Elspeth Livingstone in relation to a residential lease over 4/32 Belmore Road, Randwick for a period of twelve (12) months.

4.         Joseph Ajaka (T/As Trade Winds) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 196-204 Maroubra Road, Maroubra.

5.         John McPike in relation to a residential lease over Unit 1/6 Barrett Place, Randwick for a period of twelve (12) months.

6.         Wesley Kuo in relation to a residential lease over 129 Boyce Road, Maroubra for a period of six (6) months.

7.         Jenny Dafforn in relation to a residential lease over Unit 3/32 Belmore Road, Randwick for a period of twelve (12) months.

8.         Alexander Mastoris & Xiao Hong Li (T/As Coogee Yeeros Café) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 204 Arden Street, Coogee.

9.         Shahin Saracoely (T/As Little Istanbul Turkish Restaurant) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 26 Perouse Road, Randwick.

10.       The Trustees of the Sisters of Brigidine Congregation in relation to a Transfer of Title for Lot 102/DP1082501 more particularly known as part of Aeolia Street, Randwick.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Council will receive in signing of these agreements the following income –

 

1.   A lease agreement with Eastern Suburbs Tennis Association Inc will generate an annual income of $79,000.00 + GST.

2.   An outdoor dining licence with Arthur Adamopoulos (T/As Vino Vino) will generate an annual income of $1,568.64 + GST.

3.   A residential lease agreement with Elspeth Livingstone will generate an annual income of $11,439.96.

4.   An outdoor dining licence with Joseph Ajaka (T/As Trade Winds) will generate an annual income of $4,891.41 + GST.

5.   A residential lease agreement with John McPike will generate an annual income of $5,199.96.

6.   A residential lease agreement with Wesley Kuo will generate an annual income of $14,299.92.

7.   A residential lease agreement with Jenny Dafforn will generate an annual income of $12,999.96.

8.   An outdoor dining licence with Alexander Mastoris & Xiao Li (T/As Coogee Yeeros Café) will generate an annual income of $16,942.65 + GST.

9.   An outdoor dining licence with Shahin Saracoely (T/As Little Istanbul Turkish Restaurant) will generate an annual income of $1,210.53 + GST.

10. There is no direct financial impact in regard to the signing of the transfer of Title in relation to Lot 102/DP1082501 to The Trustees of the Sisters of Brigidine Congregation.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

As Clause 48 of the Meetings Regulation required that the Council pass a resolution authorising the affixing of the Seal, it is necessary for this action to take place to facilitate legal formalities being completed.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That authority be granted for the Council’s Common Seal to be affixed to the agreements between the Council and –

 

1.   Eastern Suburbs Tennis Association Inc. in relation to a lease for part of J.V. Dick Reserve more particularly described as Coogee Tennis Centre courts for a period of five (5) years.

2.   Arthur Adamopoulos (T/As Vino Vino) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 30 St Pauls Street, Randwick.

3.   Elspeth Livingstone in relation to a residential lease over 4/32 Belmore Road, Randwick for a period of twelve (12) months.

4.   Joseph Ajaka (T/As Trade Winds) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 196-204 Maroubra Road, Maroubra.

5.   John McPike in relation to a residential lease over Unit 1/6 Barrett Place, Randwick for a period of twelve (12) months.

6.   Wesley Kuo in relation to a residential lease over 129 Boyce Road, Maroubra for a period of six (6) months.

7.   Jenny Dafforn in relation to a residential lease over Unit 3/32 Belmore Road, Randwick for a period of twelve (12) months.

8.   Alexander Mastoris & Xiao Hong Li (T/As Coogee Yeeros Café) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 204 Arden Street, Coogee.

9.   Shahin Saracoely (T/As Little Istanbul Turkish Restaurant) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 26 Perouse Road, Randwick.

10. The Trustees of the Sisters of Brigidine Congregation in relation to a Transfer of Title for Lot 102/DP1082501 more particularly known as part of Aeolia Street, Randwick.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 41/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

FUNDING REQUEST BY LA PEROUSE PONY CLUB

 

 

DATE:

29 July, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/06336

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Randwick Council holds permissive occupancy over the land known as 627R Bunnerong Road, Matraville.  Council resolved to grant a licence to the La Perouse Pony Club for conducting a pony club.

 

ISSUES:

 

The covenants of the licensee under the licence agreement includes but is not limited to maintenance of all improvements within the licensed area, maintenance of the grassed area, destruction of all noxious plants or weeds as declared under the Local Government Act, maintenance of fencing and protection of the remnant areas of natural vegetation.

 

The Club has approached Council for funding to help eradicate the noxious plants and weeds and maintain the premises and provide written support for their application for a Capital Assistance Grant to the NSW Government Department of Sports & Recreation.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The financial impact to Council would be a cost of $7,500.00 to be funded from Council’s Bushland program.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The La Perouse Pony Club Inc. intends to use the $7,500 together with the Capital Assistance Grant towards eradication of noxious plants and weeds, enabling them to comply with the conditions imposed under the terms of the licence agreement.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

Council supports the La Perouse Pony Club’s application for funding assistance in the sum of $7,500.00 to be used towards ground maintenance and eradication of noxious plants and weeds.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 42/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

Bronte - Coogee Aquatic Reserve - Draft Operational Agreement between Randwick City Council and Department of Primary Industries (DPI incorporates NSW Fisheries)

 

 

DATE:

16 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2005/00036

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER     

 

The Mayor has requested a report be prepared regarding the recent invitation from the Department of Primary Industries, which incorporates NSW Fisheries, to Randwick City. The invitation if acceptable to Council would be the first of its kind for the State and provides the framework for the cooperative management of the Bronte-Coogee Aquatic Reserve, the majority of which falls within our Local Government Area. It consists of a draft Operational Agreement, a package of educational resources, research monitoring and a future Plan of Management.

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

In June 2001 Council supported the Aquatic Reserve Consultation Paper and resolved to advise NSW Fisheries:

(i)      that Randwick City Council supports the declaration of both the Bronte-Coogee and the La Perouse candidate sites as Aquatic Reserves

(ii)      that Randwick City Council considers the proposed boundaries of both the Bronte-Coogee and the La Perouse candidate sites to be appropriate

(iii)     that Randwick City Council considers that the long-term management arrangements for each aquatic reserve, should be developed in consultation with stakeholder groups (including inter-tidal zone experts) and the community at the earliest opportunity

(iv)     that if specific studies determine it appropriate, the declaration of the reserves as sanctuary areas may be appropriate and necessary to ensure the objectives of the aquatic reserve are achieved, with those objectives being the conservation of marine biological diversity and to the ecologically sustainable use of marine resources

 

The Bronte-Coogee Aquatic Reserve includes the whole foreshore from the southern end of Bronte Beach to the rock baths at Coogee Beach - 4000m of coastline - and extends 100m seaward from mean low water.


Bronte Map

Cloverlly


The reserve was declared on 31 March 2002 and the following restrictions apply:

·      Within the aquatic reserve, people can line fish and collect rock lobster, sea lettuce and baitweed.

·      Recreational fishing competitions within the reserve require a permit.

·      It is prohibited to take groper by all methods of fishing from the northern end of Clovelly to the southern end of Gordon's Bay, and the adjoining waters out to 100m offshore.

·      It is prohibited to spearfish from the northern end of Clovelly to the southern end of Gordon's Bay. Spearfishing in the rest of the reserve is subject to normal restrictions in the rest of the aquatic reserve.

·      It is prohibited to collect cunjevoi, commonly used as bait, all invertebrates (dead or alive), including anemones, barnacles, chitons, cockles, crabs, mussels, octopus, pipis, sea urchins, starfish, snails and worms, and empty shells.

·      The taking of abalone is already prohibited under a fishing closure for the area.

 

The Health, Building and Planning Committee Meeting 8 February 2005 resolved that the Mayor seek to meet and discuss the management arrangements, enforcement issues and educational opportunities within the Randwick City LGA for our aquatic reserves and in particular activities in Clovelly Bay.

 

At the subsequent meeting with NSW Fisheries 20 April 2005 the Mayor called for a protocol to proactively manage interests and issues relating to Aquatic Reserves. From which the offer to Council to be part of a pilot project for an Operational Agreement eventuated. The offer for consideration includes a number of progressive outcomes which will be mutually beneficial to Council, Fisheries, and community interests.

 

ISSUES:

 

Draft Operational Agreement

 

A draft operational agreement has been sent to Council, via the Mayor, for its consideration and comment. Its purpose is to establish cooperative management and planning of the Aquatic Reserve between Council and DPI (incorporates NSW Fisheries). It is understood that the intent of the agreement is not to create any legally enforceable rights or obligations on the parties, and that actions within it are to be voluntary, carried out when and where practical.

 

In this regard a number of minor amendments are suggested, see attachment. In general the majority of matters in the agreement mirror existing responsibilities, such as, DA referral, domesticated animals and litter control on beaches. There are however voluntary variations to the status quo with regard to management planning, enforcement and educational promotion.

 

Council Rangers are currently authorised officers under Fisheries Management Act and any fines arising from a penalty infringement notices (PIN) issued by Council would stay with Council. This situation would remain under the agreement and Council Rangers will also, should they so wish:

·    receive training from Fisheries staff to enforce land based activates,

·    undertake joint patrols where possible and practical,

·    provide 3 monthly reports (Dec, Jan & Feb) to Fisheries on authorised officer activity in the Reserve, report form provided by Fisheries.

·    in the event of legal challenges arising from a PIN and for multiple offences Fisheries will assume the lead role in prosecution.

 

Plan of Management

 

Despite the intention outlined by Fisheries in 2001 no long-term management plans for any of the Aquatic Reserves in the State have eventuated and therefore a management gap exists. Fisheries have now indicated that Ministerial approval has been given for the Bronte-Coogee Aquatic Reserve to be the first Plan of Management. This work will be conducted and funded by Fisheries in consultation with Randwick and Waverly Councils and the local community.

 

Research monitoring project

 

Fisheries in conjunction with local dive shops and Council, in whatever form it wishes, will undertake a tagging and listening research project. Commencing in Spring the condition and movement of the local Groper population will be monitored in Clovelly Bay. “Bluey and his mates” will be tracked, at no cost to Council, using state of the art real time tracking, which researchers and the community will be able to view over the internet.

 

The project will be the first of its kind, it will generate considerable community interest and Fisheries believe the project will also attract international recognition. The aim of the project is to ensure that the 100m closure area (see figure above) is sufficient to protect the local Groper population, which has developed an iconic status.

 

Joint promotion and educational resources

 

The regulatory signage provided by Fisheries and erected by Council for the Aquatic Reserve does not appear to be highly successful, more successful management may be achieved by focusing on educational aspects.

 

In this regard Fisheries have offered to develop for Council a draft education and promotional package for the Aquatic Reserve tailored for our specific needs, which both organisations can use. Fisheries have offered, at no cost to Council, their photographs, art work and drafting for a flyer, a fact sheet and a brochure to promote the reserve. Multi lingual brochures could also be produced in house by Fisheries. Fisheries will also cover the costs of the first print run, following Council’s input into and approval of the art work. Subsequent print runs would be on a 50/50 cost share basis.

 

Fisheries will also make available their recourse for Council and in particular the Environment Levy Team to utilise, should it wish to install information shelters in areas such as the coastal walk or BBQ areas anywhere in the LGA. Fisheries have also offered, on a 50/50 cost share basis, to undertake targeted community surveys, should Council wish.

 



 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The cooperative management and planning of the Bronte-Coogee Aquatic Reserve between Council and DPI would be mutually beneficial to all parties. As the first in the State it would be seen as a model for others to follow, it will promote Council as a responsible manager of its unique aquatic resources, it will enhance Councils environmental education capabilities and will secure the iconic status that “Bluey and his mates” have with the local community and visitors. The intent of the agreement is not to create any legally enforceable rights or obligations on the parties and actions within it are to be voluntary, carried out when and where practical.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

1)   Council give in principle support to the draft Operational Agreement and advise DPI accordingly, and

2)   The General Manager sign the Operational Agreement on behalf of Council, pending the inclusion of amendments deemed necessary.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1)   Schedule of amendment to draft Operational Agreement between Randwick City Council and Department of Primary Industries.

2)   Draft Operational Agreement between Randwick City Council and Department of Primary Industries.

 

 

 

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 


ATTACHMENT 1

 

Schedule of amendment to draft Operational Agreement between Randwick City Council and Department of Primary Industries.

 

The following amendments are recommended:

 

Main text:

6.1,    second line delete ‘of’.

6.1,    second line delete ‘obligations set out in’ insert instead ‘intent of’.

6.1,    last dot point delete ‘as defined in the attached schedule’ as no further clarification is in schedule.

7.2,    delete second paragraph, considered unnecessary in this instance due to the existing land uses surrounding the aquatic reserve, the existing integrated development referral requirements under Fisheries Management Act for development and the REF and EIS consultation in 8.1

8.1,    first dot point insert ‘in its view’ after may

8.1,    first dot point insert at end ‘(defined in the attached schedule)’

8.2,    first line delete ‘any’ insert instead ‘a’

8.2,    insert after development application ‘, under 8.1’

8.2,    delete ‘proposed within or adjacent to Bronte-Coogee Aquatic Reserve’

8.3.    insert new point, ‘DPI will submit comment or consent as applicable for development applications, under 8.01, to Council within 14 days of receipt, or as otherwise agreed to.”

10.4, insert at beginning of first paragraph, ‘Under normal circumstances all money raised through the issuing a penalty infringement notice will remain with the authority who issued the infringement notice. However,..’

10.8, insert at start of paragraph, ‘Where possible and practical’

 

Schedule 1

Management Planning, second paragraph, delete paragraph and insert instead ‘Coastal developments on lots as defined between Council and DPI on its GIS system, up to 100 metres from the Aquatic Reserve, that require either an REF or EIS.’











 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 43/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

TOWN HALL PROPOSED REFURBISHMENT COSTS

 

 

DATE:

9 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/07744

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER      

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 24 May 2005 Council resolved “that a report be prepared and submitted to Council for its consideration, on options and costs for improving:-

 

a)         the forecourt of Randwick Town Hall;

b)         the Town Hall interior; and

c)         Council Chambers and surrounds.

 

The report should address issues such as parking, plantings, lighting, signage etc., recognising the historical significance of the Town Hall.

 

A. Town Hall Forecourt Upgrade

 

In May 1994, a sketch plan was prepared for improvement works to the forecourt of the Randwick Town Hall and grounds to the north of the building. The works were not undertaken at the time. The design was prepared by landscape planning and conservation consultants following historical analysis of the area to be upgraded.

 

B. & C. Town Hall Interior, Council Chambers & Surrounds

 

An inspection was carried out by Council’s Property Officer and Senior Civic Support Officer of the Town Hall interior and Council Chambers to identify improvement options.

 

ISSUES:

 

A. Town Hall Forecourt Upgrade

 

The design for the forecourt upgrade allows for new paving, planting, lighting, seating, interpretive and directional signage together with resurfacing of the ‘carriage loop’ and parking bays.  Additionally, the design allows for works to the northern garden areas adjacent the Town Hall to include paving, planting, outdoor furniture and a pond and pergola. 

 

The preliminary estimate to undertake these works are as follows:

1.   Design Development & preparation of Tender/Construction Plans - $14,000

2.   Contract Administration - $6,000

3.   Forecourt Area  - $76,000

4.   Side Garden - $106,000.

 

B. & C. Town Hall Interior, Council Chambers & Surrounds Identified Improvements

 

The inspection identified a range of possible projects and a cost estimation (not formal quotations) has been provided for each of the options.

 

B.         The Town Hall improvements could include, but is not limited to:

 

1.         Installation of a new roof.  Est. cost: $200 K

2.         Installation of upgraded air-conditioning.  Est. cost: $200 K

3.         Repainting of Town Hall ceiling and all internal areas and removal of all wallpaper and remove timber panelling and re-plaster all walls to match textured finish. Est. cost: $150K

4.         Upgrade of bathrooms, including new toilets and mirrors.  Est. cost: $35K

5.         Installation of directional signage.  Est. cost: $4K

6.         Installation of fire alarm system (hard wired).  (Separately tendered in conjunction with fire protection upgrade works on Administration building)  Est. cost: $60K

7.         Swipe card readers on glass doors.  Est. cost: $10K

8.         Sanding of all floors and staining.  Est. cost: $10K

9.         Replace all glass with safety glass with window frosting including install fixed glass pain above entry door from vestibule into hall. Est. cost: $40K

10.       Install metal trays with plants from nursery in entrance to vestibule.  Est. cost: $1K

11.       Remove all curtains. - NIL

12.       Remove obsolete lighting and replace with new.  Est. cost: $5K

13.       Install ceiling fans (exhaust fans are too noisy).  Est. cost: $5K

14.       Replace all chairs and carrier (price dependent upon type of tables & chairs).  Est. cost: $20K

15.       Change light (old chandelier) in foyer.  Est. cost: $1K

16.       Polish timber stairwell hand rail and other timbers.  Est. cost: $2K

                                                                              (Total estimated cost: $743,000)

 

C.        The Chambers improvements could include:

 

1.         Remove the ceiling and install a new suspended ceiling.  Est. cost: $15K

2.         Remove all wallpaper and repaint.  Est. cost: $10K

3.         New chairs. (price dependent upon type of tables & chairs).  Est. cost: $40K

4.         New Tables. (price dependent upon type of tables & chairs).  Est. cost: $25K

5.         Moving screens & monitors.  Est. cost: $1K

6.         Moving of Councillor tables and chairs to accommodate additional seating in the gallery.  Est. cost: $5K

 

            The surrounds of the Chambers improvements could include:

 

1.         Repainting of bathroom vanities and replacement mirrors in upstairs bathrooms.  Est. cost: $1K

2.         Replacement of some tiles.  Est. cost: $1K

                                                                              (Total estimated cost: $98,000)

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

A. Town Hall Forecourt Upgrade

 

The likely cost to develop plans, undertake the work and to supervise construction is in the order of $200,000. Funding of these works was not identified during the preparation of the 2005-06 Capital Works Program.

 

B. & C. Town Hall Interior, Council Chambers & Surrounds Identified Improvements

 

To carry out the above mentioned refurbishment works the financial impact to Council would be in excess of $841,000.00.  Some costs are unknown.  Logistics and design plans need to be prepared to provide a more accurate cost estimate.  At least $1,000,000.00 needs to be allocated to fund the works.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

A. Town Hall Forecourt Upgrade

 

The Randwick Town Hall is both a symbolic place and the primary place of contact for many residents and other people that attend functions and business meetings in dealings related to Council.  The Randwick Town Hall is also a heritage listed building by Council and thus provides Council with an opportunity to provide the community with an example of its policies being put into practice.

 

Changes to the forecourt of the Town Hall building have over the years diminished the aesthetics of the premises.  The plan prepared in 1994 aims to appropriately improve the sense of arrival and to add to the aesthetics of the building setting generally whilst also providing for some improvements to the facilities that may be available to potential hall hirers and to staff/visitors alike.  The lack of identifiable funding for this project in Council’s current budget means that the project will need to be considered for funding in the 2006-07 management plan or other future management plans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

B. & C. Town Hall Interior, Council Chambers & Surrounds Identified Improvements

 

Funding of Works

 

The funding for these options has not been included in the Property Budget for 2005/2006.  The current budget consists of maintenance costs only.  No upgrade works for the Town Hall were identified in the 2005/06 budget.  The costs detailed for the options are estimates only.

 

Timing of Works

 

The works could be prioritised and staged over the next three (3) financial years with funding to be allocated to the Property Budget.

 

There are obviously some projects that would need to be undertaken initially.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A. Town Hall Forecourt Upgrade

 

That consideration be given to funding the identified works in the 2006-07 management plan.

 

B. & C. Town Hall Interior, Council Chambers & Surrounds Identified Improvements

 

1.   That Council receives and notes this Report.

2.   Council identifies any further works required.

3.   A more detailed report be prepared and brought to Council outlining a three (3) year plan for the refurbishment program and outlining options for Council’s considerations.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

A3 plan under separate cover of the Town Hall Forecourt proposed upgrade

 

 

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 44/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

2004/2005 BUDGET - REVIEW AS AT 30 JUNE 2005  

 

 

DATE:

18 August, 2005

FILE NO:

98/S/5310

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

This report is a review of the Council’s 2004/2005 current budget and the anticipated budget result for the year ended 30 June 2005.

 

ISSUES:

 

a)         LOCAL GOVERNMENT (FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT) REGULATION 1999

 

Part 2 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 1999 requires that at the close of each quarter, a Budget Review Statement be prepared and submitted to Council that indicates the latest estimates of income and expenditure for the 2004/2005 year, based on current trends.  The statement must be prepared on an accrual basis and must also show the original estimates as adopted in the Management Plan.

 

The regulation also requires that the budget review statement must include, or be accompanied by:

 

I.          A report as to whether or not the responsible accounting officer believes that the Statement indicates that the financial position of the Council is satisfactory, having regard to the original estimate of income and expenditure; and

 

II.         If that position is unsatisfactory, recommendations for remedial action.

 

b).        JUNE  2005 QUARTER BUDGET REVIEW STATEMENT

 

The following table summarises the anticipated result (surplus) as at 30 June 2005 compared to the current adopted budget for 2004/2005.  It should be stressed that the position is indicative only. There is a considerable amount of accounting work to be completed prior to the preparation of the final statutory reports. These statutory reports will be submitted to the Council on their completion for formal adoption prior to being placed on public exhibition and submission to the Department of Local Government.

As well there is a need for a close review of some budget areas as some of the variations could be considered excessive. The figures shown above assume that incomplete items in the construction programme will be revoted in the 2005/2006 financial year and in the meantime the unspent funds will be held in reserves. 

 

Overall the projected result is considered good based on the Council’s total  budget of some $96M. The overall variation represents a percentage variation of .32%

 

Estimated result against budget for the year ended 30 June  2005

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current

 

Anticipated Result Variation

 

 

Budget

 

(Surplus)

 

 

 

 

 

  Deficit

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City Services

 

24,856,701

 

1,214,631

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City Planning and Development

7,917,791

 

(953,295)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Governance and Financial Services

(40,856,428)

 

(801,373)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Executive Strategy

 

3,714,343

 

230,825

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total -  Estimated Surplus

 

0

 

(309,212)

 

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Council’s Financial Services Manager as the responsible accounting officer, advises that the projected financial position is considered satisfactory.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

 

That the report be noted

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

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

GENERAL MANAGER

 


 

Director, City Services' Report 94/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

Prince Henry Site Park Naming Proposal

 

 

 

DATE:

4 August, 2005

FILE NO:

F2004/07140

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES       

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At Council’s Ordinary Meeting held on 28th June 2005 on the Motion of Councillor Woodsmith and Councillor Hughes, the following resolution was passed:

 

(a)  Council reconsider the park name proposals with the view to amending one or more of the park names to commemorate the role nurses played at the former Prince Henry Hospital;

 

(b)  Council proceed with the suggestion from Landcom that Six Track Park be renamed in accordance with the TNA preferences;

 

(c)  the name Bob a Day park be retained as it has historical significance; and

 

(d)  the Geographical Names Board be notified of Council’s willingness to reconsider the park name proposals with the view to amending one or more of the park names to commemorate the role nurses played at the former Prince Henry Hospital.

 

The Geographical Names Board (GNB) was notified of this resolution in a letter dated 4 July 2005.

 

Consequently, a letter from the GNB, dated 25 July2005 with an attached letter from the Prince Henry Hospital Trained Nurses Association (PHHTNA) dated 21 July 2005 (attached) requests that Council consider the name “The Coast Hospital Memorial Park” to replace the name “Six Track Park”.

 

 

ISSUES:

 

The letter sent by the PHHTNA to the GNB was in response to Council’s willingness to “reconsider the park name proposals with the view to amending one or more of the park names to commemorate the role nurses played at the former Prince Henry Hospital.”  The PHHTNA has requested the name “The Coast Hospital Memorial Park” to replace the name “Six Track Park” be considered. 

 

The GNB has requested that Council consider this name change and advise them of its decision. If Council is in agreement with the name “The Coast Hospital Memorial Park”, once advised the GNB will recommence the naming process for the three parks within the Prince Henry site.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The process of naming Public Parks undoubtedly provides an opportunity to commemorate and associate the local history and culture of a site.  The heritage significance of the Prince Henry Hospital site should be well reflected through the naming of the Parks within the site.  The Prince Henry site has an abundant heritage encompassing its medical significance, the past and present Aboriginal association and its relationship to the local community.  Hence it is ideal that the recommended names be derived from these sources.

 

As there are no objections to the naming of two of the proposed parks to be dedicated to Council to reflect the significant nursing and medical history of the site, it is recommended that the park name “Six Track Park” be changed to “The Coast Hospital Memorial Park” to commemorate the former Prince Henry Hospital.

 

If it is resolved to adopt this name for the park, the Geographical Names Board will be notified.

 

Following notification of Council’s decision the GNB will recommence the naming process for the three parks within the Prince Henry site.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

(a)        Council accept the name proposal suggested by the PHHTNA that Six Track Park be renamed The Coast Hospital Memorial Park; and

 

(b)        the Geographical Names Board be notified of Council’s decision.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

UNDER SEPARATE COVER -

Letter sent to the Geographical names Board of New South Wales

Letter from the Geographical names Board of New South Wales

Letter from the Prince Henry Hospital Trained Nurses Association

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

JORDE FRANGOPLES

MARK LEONG

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

ASSET ENGINEER DRAINAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 51/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

351 Rainbow Street, SOUTH COOGEE

 

 

DATE:

15 August, 2005

FILE NO:

111/2004

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the Health Building and Planning Committee meeting held on 9 August 2005 Council resolved that “this application be deferred to the next available meeting to allow for mediation to address the re-design of the outline of the building, including the height of the north-east corner and the rear setback.”

 

The Applicant was advised of Council’s resolution and has formally declined attending a Mediation.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the Development Application in accordance with the recommendation contained in the attached report.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.   1. Development Application Report dated 15 July 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID PIRIE

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ASSESSMENT OFFICER

 

 

 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

15 July, 2005

FILE NO:

D1114/2004

 

PROPOSAL:

 Demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a new dwelling house and swimming pool.

PROPERTY:

 351 Rainbow Street, South Coogee

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 X Pace Design Group

OWNER

I Dermatis

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Bradley Hughes, Murray Matson, Margaret Woodsmith.

 

The application proposes the demolition of the existing house and the construction of a new four bedroom dwelling house over four levels, with basement parking and a new swimming pool.

 

The subject site is located within the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area and has a steep slope from its south-west corner to its north-east corner, with a level differential of approximately 4.6m.  The site and surrounding properties enjoy sweeping views to the South Pacific Ocean, particularly those to Wedding Cake Island and Coogee Beach and its northern headland.

 

The proposal as originally submitted failed to comply with the preferred solutions of the Development Control Plan-Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies (DCP) with regards to floor space ratio (FSR), landscaped area and external wall height.  In addition, the proposal included a roof terrace and projection of stairway structure on the roof.  In response to neighbours objections and Council Officer’s concerns regarding view loss particularly to No. 349 Rainbow Street and No. 1 Garnet Street, height poles were erected to assess the associated view impacts resulting from the proposal.

 

Subsequently the overall height of the proposal has been revised and amended plans were lodged which included the deletion of the roof terrace and reduction in area of the basement garage resulting in compliance with the preferred solution for landscaped area on the site.  Although the floor area of the proposed dwelling house has been reduced and the overall height lowered by 500mm, there is still non compliances with the preferred solutions for floor space, external wall height and building setbacks to the rear and eastern side boundaries.

 

Objections to the amended proposal have been received from No. 349 Rainbow Street, the adjoining property to the west and No. 1 Garnet Street, the adjoining property to the rear (south) of the site.  Concerns raised include the non compliances with the preferred solutions of the DCP, overshadowing, removal of the two Banksia trees on the site and in particular view loss issues.

 

It is considered that subject to deferred commencement conditions that include the lowering the overall building height by 300mm and locating the skylight flush with the roof, the view impacts to adjoining properties are minimised to a reasonable level. Building bulk may also be further minimised by the deletion of the secondary front terrace over the driveway entrance, minimising the impact of the development to the street. Overshadowing to adjoining properties is considered acceptable within the site context and the circumstances of neighbouring properties and subject to the deletion of eastern first floor balconies to Bedrooms 1 and 2, privacy impacts to neighbouring properties are acceptable.  The recommendation is for a deferred commencement approval.

 

 

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The application proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling house and the construction of a new dwelling house and swimming pool.  The new dwelling house is proposed to be constructed over four levels, consisting of the following:-

 

Basement level

 

·            Parking for two cars, with the ability to manoeuvre and egress the site in a forward direction.

·            Pool plant room.

·            Storage room

·            Internal stairs to entry level

 

Entry level

 

·            Foyer

·            Study

·            Internal stairs to basement level

·            Circular stairs to ground floor level

 

Ground floor level

 

·            Living room and dining room opening onto paved terrace area at the front (north) of the dwelling.  The terrace area at the front of the building is both elevated and stepped to within 1.2m of the front of the site and 900mm of the eastern side boundary.

·            Kitchen and family room opening onto an elevated paved eastern terrace area and swimming pool.

·            Laundry, bathroom and storage centrally located within the building adjacent to the circular stairs leading to entry and first floor levels of the building.

 

First floor level

 

·            Master bedroom with ensuite and walk-in wardrobe.  The master bedroom opens onto a north facing balcony.

·            Three (3) bedrooms all opening onto an east facing balcony.

·            Bathroom

·            Circular stairs to ground floor level with adjacent void area to kitchen below  and with skylight above

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Rainbow Street, Coogee, between Garnet Street to the west and Wolseley Road to the east (refer Figure 1) and is identified as Lot  1 in DP 434975.  Rainbow Street rises steeply from Wolseley Road to its closed off section with Garnet Street (adjacent to its western neighbour - No. 349 Rainbow Street).  The area is characterised by the sweeping views to the South Pacific Ocean, particularly those to Wedding Cake Island and Coogee Beach and its northern headland. 

 

 

 

Figure 1: Site locality map

 

The site is fairly regular in shape, with a frontage of 13.485m to Rainbow Street; a depth of 29.125m along its eastern boundary with No. 353 Rainbow Street; 28.99m along its western boundary with No. 349 Rainbow Street; and 13.485m along its rear (southern) boundary with No. 1 Garnet Street.  The site has a total area of 391.8m2 approximately and a topography that falls from its south-west corner to its north-east corner with a level differential of approximately 4.6m.

 

 

Figure 2: subject site

 

Figure 3: No. 353 Rainbow Street to the east of the site

 

Existing on the site is a part one/part two storey brick and tile dwelling house, with a garage located under the house on its eastern side.  Located on the neighbouring property to the east at No. 353 Rainbow Street is a part one/part two storey dwelling house (refer Figure 3), while on its western side is a part three/part two storey dwelling house with an elevated swimming pool to the rear (refer Figure 4).

 

 

Figure 4: No. 349 Rainbow Street to the west of the site

 

Located to the rear at No. 1 Garnet Street is a two storey dwelling house which has a current approval (DA No. 955/2003) for alterations and a new third storey addition.

 

 

Figure 5: No. 1 Garnet Street

 looking from the rear of the subject site

 

4.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

The subject application was lodged on 23 December, 2004 and notified until 28 January, 2005, which was extended until 4 February to give a neighbour, the owner of No. 1 Garnet Street, located in South Africa time to respond.

 

The application was referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee of Council on 14 February, 2005.  Following a preliminary assessment of the application, the applicant was advised on 23 February that the proposal could not be supported by Council’s Planning Officers, due to its excessive floor space, shortfall in landscaped area, extent of basement excavation and the height of the proposal, including proposed roof terrace and stairwell.

 

The applicant requested leave to lodge amended plans and to this end, height poles were erected on the site to assess the view impacts to Nos. 349 Rainbow Street and No. 1 Garnet Street.  Since then, the overall height of the proposal has been revised and the poles changed to match.  Amended plans were lodged on 20 June 2005 and notified until 12 July, 2005.  Confirmation that the present height of the poles as being in accordance with that proposed in the latest amended plans was received on 13 July, 2005.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

5.1     Original proposal

 

The proposal was originally notified and advertised in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans, until 28 January, 2005.  As a result, a petition with 14 signatories and four (4) objections were received from the following:

 

·        J Gowing of 310 Rainbow Street, Coogee

·        F. J Hezlett of 312 Rainbow Street, Coogee

·        N and C Stoker (owners of 1 Garnet Street, Coogee) of PO Box 9882, Edenglen 1613, South Africa)

·        S Malik (Architect on behalf of 349 Rainbow Street) of Suite 17, 673 Pittwater Road, Dee Why.

 

Concerns raised include the following:-

 

·        Excess floor space

·        Exceeds height limit

·        Non compliance with setback controls

·        Overlooking and noise from proposed roof terrace

·        Bulk, size and scale will detract from streetscape

·        Out of character with surrounding homes

·        Loss of privacy to Nos. 310 Rainbow Street, 1 Garnet Street and 349 Rainbow Street.

·        Construction noise, inconvenience and traffic problems in a narrow, inclined and dead-end street.

·        Overshadowing of Nos. 1 Garnet Street and 349 Rainbow Street

·        Loss of views from Nos. 1 Garnet Street and 349 Rainbow Street

·        Proximity of swimming pool and associated noise to No. 1 Garnet Street

·        Blocking of ocean breeze and natural ventilation to No. 349 Rainbow Street.

·        Heat and glare from proposed gravel roof toNo. 349 Rainbow Street

·        Loss in property value to No. 349 Rainbow Street

 

Correspondence was later received advising that 4 signatories on the petition actually supported the proposal contrary to the intent of the petition.

 

5.2     Amended proposal

 

The amended proposal was notified in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans, until 12 July, 2005.  As a result, a petition with 12 signatories and three (3) objections were received from the following:

 

·        S Malik (Architect on behalf of 349 Rainbow Street, Coogee) of Suite 17, 673 Pittwater Road, Dee Why.

·        R C and T Tadros of 349 Rainbow Street, Coogee

·        N and C Stoker (owners of 1 Garnet Street, Coogee) of P O Box 9882, Edenglen 1613, South Africa

 

The following issues were raised in the submissions to the amended proposal:-

 

Non compliances with DCP

·        The amended proposal is well above the permitted floor space ratio and the garage is a voluminous area, with a height up to 3.84m above natural ground level and should be added to the FSR.

·        The proposal exceeds the permitted height by 2.23m.

·        The proposal does not comply with the 4.5m minimum rear setback nor is it consistent with the rear setback of adjoining properties and as such will break the harmony of the local character in this sensitive coastal area.

·        The proposal does not comply with the 3m side boundary setback when a building is three levels.

·        The effect of the non compliances is to increase the building bulk.

·        The building is incompatible and out of character with the topography of the natural environment.

 

View loss

·        The amended proposal would block the views of the main windows of the family area of No. 349 Rainbow Street in addition to blocking the views of the lower floor containing bedrooms, which mainly face east as the west side is underground.

·        The north-east corner of the proposed building is the most critical in causing view loss and this is 2.23m above the permitted 7m height limit.  It should be set back further for the purpose of view sharing.

·        The additional height of the proposed building above 7m will have a direct impact on the northern view from No. 1 Garnet Street towards Coogee Beach and Gordons Bay.

 

Natural ventilation

·        The lower floor level of No. 349 is built against excavated rock, lacking the benefits of cross ventilation and the proposed building will block the ocean breeze.  This will have health impacts on the occupants of No. 349 Rainbow Street.

·        The proposed construction needs to comply with the 4.5m rear setback to preserve fresh air, natural light and privacy.

 

Overshadowing

·        The proposed development will reduce the morning sun for the lower bedroom floor of No. 349 Rainbow Street.  These bedrooms do not receive the western sun as the west side is rock excavation.

·        Due to the lack of rear setback, the proposed construction will shadow No. 1 Garnet Street from mid-morning.

·       

Vegetation

·        Loss of valuable endemic plant species and wildlife habitat, which also provide important privacy screening to No. 349 Rainbow Street.

 

Area character

·        The proposed building is imposed onto the landscape and does not follow the natural flow of the land.  It is not in keeping with the dominant character of existing buildings and does not follow the objectives of Zone No. 2A (a) and (c).

 

·        Loss in property value of No. 349 Rainbow Street

 

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     Development Engineer

 

Council’s Development Engineer Co-ordinator has advised that the following are key issues in relation to the proposal, which may be addressed by appropriate conditions of consent which are contained within the Recommendation of this report:-

 

Landscape Comments

 

One tree is shown about halfway along the western boundary of the site on the plans; however, a site inspection revealed that this tree (Frangipani) is too small to be covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order, and as such, conditions have not been included for this tree in this report.

 

In the rear yard, in the southwest corner of the site, there are two (2) Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) both of approximately 6 metres in height. They appear in reasonable condition, are covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order and provide a reasonable amount of screening between this site and adjoining properties to the west (349 Rainbow Street) and the south (1 Garnet Street).

 

The plans show the proposed construction of an excavated basement level, setback a distance of approximately 700mm from the most western tree and 1.5 metres from the most eastern tree. Excavation and construction associated with this structure will necessitate the removal of about ¼ of the root plate of both trees. It is highly unlikely that these trees will be able to sustain such a loss, and if they were to be retained, would also pose a threat of future de-stabilisation or failure, especially given their exposure to high winds in this coastal location. A greater setback from the trees to the proposed basement is possible; however, given the fact that neither tree is deemed overly significant, approval is granted for their removal subject to the provision of suitable replacements being provided in this area of the site.

 

In the neighbouring property to the south, 1 Garnet Street, close to the common boundary, there are two (2) Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palms) both of approximately 6 metres in height. They appear in reasonable condition and are covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order. Both these palms are sited a reasonable distance from the proposed works, and as such, will remain unaffected by this proposal.

 

Drainage Comments

 

Stormwater runoff shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrestor pit that drains to a 5 m2 base infiltration area/rubble pit. An over flow pipe shall be provided from the silt arrestor pit that drains to Council’s kerb and gutter (or underground drainage system).

 

The requirement for an infiltration/rubble pit will not be enforced should the ground conditions preclude the construction of the infiltration pit (i.e. rock and/or the water table is near the surface). If the infiltration area is not constructed (due to demonstrated unsuitable ground conditions), all site stormwater shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter via a sediment/silt arrestor pit.

 

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

The total site area (391.8m2) is less than required for the submission of a master plan (4,000 m2).

 

8.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

·        Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended

·        Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000

·        Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

·        Randwick Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

·        Randwick Development Control Plan – Parking

·        Building Code of Australia.

 

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 and the following relevant environmental planning instruments and policies:-

 

9.1       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 2A 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:-

 

9.1.1    Clause 10 Zone No. 2A

 

The proposed new dwelling house and swimming pool is consistent with the objectives of Zone No. 2A and is considered not out of character with the form of development established in the surrounding residential area.

 

9.1.2    Clause 29 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

 

Clause 29 of Randwick LEP 1998 requires the consideration of the aesthetic qualities of any development within the foreshore protection area.  It is considered that the aesthetic appearance of the proposed new dwelling house is consistent with other forms of development within the area and subject to deferred conditions of consent relating to the submission of a sample board of materials, finishes and colours and the removal of the secondary front terrace over the driveway entrance, it is considered that the proposal will not adversely affect the character or amenity of the locality.

 

9.2       Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

The DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies states that a proposal is deemed to satisfy the Objectives and Performance requirements of the DCP if it complies with the corresponding Preferred Solutions. Therefore, the tables below assess the proposal against the Preferred Solutions, and where non-compliance results, assessment is made against the relevant Objectives and Performance Requirements.

 

9.2.1      Landscaping

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

40% of the total site area is provided as landscaped area.

49.01% of the site is landscaped area. Complies.

S1

A minimum of 25m² of useable private open space is to be provided.

The rear yard has an area of 40.45m2. Complies.

S1

Each dwelling must provide an area of private open space capable of containing a rectangle of minimum dimensions of 3m x 4m with minor changes in level.

The above area has dimensions of 3m x 13.485m.  Complies

S1

Private open space in the front yard area is located behind the building line.

The principal area of private open space is located on the eastern side of the proposed dwelling behind the front building line. Complies.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

17.1% of the site is permeable. Does not comply – see assessment below.

 

As seen in the above table, the amended proposal complies with the preferred solutions with regards to the total amount of landscaped area provided on the site and the configuration and minimum area of private open space provided at the rear of the proposed new dwelling.  It is acknowledged that the principal area likely to be used for private open space is the eastern side terrace which includes the proposed new swimming pool.  This area also complies with the minimum area and dimensions for private open space as set out in the preferred solutions, however it is elevated above existing ground level by approximately 600mm at its southern end and approximately 3m at its northern end.  As such, only a portion of it is included within the landscaped area calculation.

 

Two issues arise with regard to the proposed landscaped area for the new dwelling.  Firstly, the proposal as detailed on the architectural drawings does not clearly demonstrate compliance with the minimum site area with a permeable treatment, falling approximately 11.25m2 short of that required by the preferred solutions.  This can be easily remedied by providing deep soil landscaping within the front setback which will also provide softening to the quite stark geometric proportions of the front façade.  Accordingly appropriate landscape conditions are contained within the Recommendation of the report.

 

Secondly, an issue has been raised by way of objection to the proposed removal of two existing Banksias of approximately 6m in height located in the south-west corner of the site.  These trees provide screening for No. 349 Rainbow Street with respect to No. 1 Garnet Street, particularly having regard to potential screening of an approved third storey addition granted to this dwelling house by Development Application No. 955/2003.  The objection also claims that these trees provide a valuable resource for wildlife habitat. 

 

Council’s Landscape Technician has commented on the proposal (refer to Section 6.2 of this report) and has granted permission for their removal as they are not deemed overly significant.  The issue of privacy and overlooking may be addressed by way of replacement tree planting in a similar position along the common boundaries with Nos. 349 Rainbow Street and 1 Garnet Street using three (3) native tree species that will gain a similar height at maturity.  This will compensate for native bird life habitat.  An appropriate condition of consent is contained within the Recommendation and in this regard the proposal is consistent with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

9.2.2      Floor Area

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.61:1 applies. 

The proposed FSR is 0.98:1. Does not comply – see assessment below.

 

The proposal has a floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.99:1 when calculated in accordance with the DCP.  This includes the area of the ground floor terrace (elevated more than 1m above ground level) and first floor balconies in excess of 40m2, but excludes car parking and internal access to that parking and the barbeque area.  It should be noted that the calculation also includes portions of the proposed dwelling that are located predominantly below the existing ground level and are well excavated into the site.  These areas include the entry foyer, study, stairs and storage.  These basement areas are located predominantly below existing ground level due to the steep cross fall in the topography of the land and do not generally contribute to the visual bulk of the building.  Accordingly, given the dispensation for the basement areas and disregarding the elevated nature of the terrace provided which thus forms the building platform, the proposal results in a habitable FSR of 0.72:1, which is consistent with other recent approvals granted within the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area.

 

The proposed variation to the FSR preferred solution is considered acceptable for the following reasons:-

 

·          The height, bulk and scale of the proposed new development is generally consistent with that of other recent development in the vicinity and with the building on the adjoining property in Rainbow Street (No. 349 Rainbow Street), which is a large dwelling consisting of two storeys constructed over a garage/basement level.  Further reductions in the perceived bulk of the building to the streetscape may be conditioned by way of a deferred commencement condition requiring the removal of the extension of the terrace area over the driveway entrance to the basement carpark.  This is located forward of the building line of adjoining buildings and is inconsistent with the Rainbow Streetscape.  An appropriate deferred commencement condition is contained within the Recommendation of the report.

·          The amended proposal has made a significant attempt to minimise the view loss to the property immediately adjacent to the west (No. 349 Rainbow Street) by lowering the overall height of the building and this is considered acceptable subject to further decrease in height by 300mm as discussed in Section 9.2.10 of the report.

·          Overlooking impacts from the proposal may be minimised to an acceptable level by way of a condition deleting the first balconies of Bedrooms 1 and 2 which will overlook the private open space of the adjoining property to the east (No. 353 Rainbow Street) – refer Section 9.2.4 of the report.

·          Overshadowing impacts have been minimised to an acceptable level –refer Section 9.2.12 of the report.

 

9.2.3      Height, Form & Materials

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The proposed dwelling has a maximum external wall height of 9.25 m. Does not comply – see assessment below

S1

External wall height of buildings or additions to the rear does not exceed 3.5 m.

Not applicable.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

5.16m (max) excavation.  Does not comply – see assessment below

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

Excavated to 900mm to the eastern and western side boundaries.  Complies

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Basement excavated to 6m from the rear boundary.  Complies

S4

The length of a second storey portion is no greater than 12m at less than 1.5m from a southern boundary.

The entire southern elevation of the proposed dwelling is 3m from the southern side boundary at first floor level. Complies.

S5

The second storey portion of a semi-detached dwelling be confined to within the existing roof space or be set back from the front elevation behind a substantial portion of the existing roof form and the design respects the symmetry of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling.

Not applicable.

 

The proposal provides a deeply excavated basement (refer to Section 6 of the submitted drawings), which results in a podium level at this point approximately 2.5m above existing ground level at its maximum point and a maximum clearance within the basement carpark of 4.1m. 

 

Section 6 of the submitted drawings is taken horizontally north-south through the site along the line where the land is generally at its lowest, while Section 5, taken further to the west along the same north-south axis, is where the land is generally at its highest.  It is apparent that this generally is the alignment of the land for which the ground floor of the proposed dwelling house (RL 45.55) has been designed to as a median level, with the rear yard cut and filled to a level platform at RL 46.  As a result the external wall height along the western boundary of the site, ranges from 5.06m at its southern end to a maximum of 7m at its northern end and does not exceed the 7m maximum set by the preferred solutions as contained within the DCP.  This is also the maximum overall height of the building along this elevation due to the flat roof adopted to minimise view loss to the adjoining property to the west at No. 349 Rainbow Street.

 

Due to the steep cross fall in the land, the external wall height along the eastern elevation varies from 6.8m at its southern end to 9.3m approximately at its northern end.  This is a result of maintaining a level floor for the proposed building across what is relatively narrow site and this is considered reasonable in the circumstances.  Although the north-east corner adds 2.3m of additional wall height, the eastern side wall tapers down to a such that the rear (southern) wall of the proposed building is fully compliant with the 7m external wall height preferred solution.

 

It is considered that notwithstanding the non compliant section of external wall height along the eastern elevation, the proposed building design is similar in character to other development constructed on steeply sloping sites and that the resultant impacts have been minimised to adjoining properties, subject to appropriate conditions of consent as contained within the Recommendation of the report (refer Sections 9.2.10 and 9.2.12 regarding and view loss and overshadowing).

 

9.2.4    Building Setbacks

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

The proposed dwelling is generally set back 3.3m from the front boundary, except for the elevated paved terrace over the driveway entrance which is set back 1.2m from the front boundary and is forward of the building line of the adjoining dwelling houses. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S2

No part of the building is closer than 4.5m from rear boundary.

The proposed dwelling is 3 metres from the rear boundary. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S3

Side setbacks be 900mm for any part of the building at ground level.

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

 

The proposed development is set back 1.5m from the western side boundary and adopts a staggered setback from the eastern side boundary with a minimum of 1.5m to a maximum of 4.3m from the side boundaries.  Does not comply – see assessment below..

 

The proposal has been amended to ensure that the front wall of the proposed new dwelling is consistent with the building line of dwelling houses on the adjoining properties to the east and west, however the front terrace has been extended forward of this front building line by way of a secondary terrace area located over the driveway entrance to the basement parking.  Not only is this inconsistent with the performance requirements and objectives for building setbacks, it accentuates the basement entrance making it a dominant element within the streetscape, uncharacteristic with the established front setbacks within this section of Rainbow Street, unnecessarily increasing building bulk.  According an appropriate deferred commencement condition is contained within the Recommendation of the report deleting this element from the building design.

 

The rear setback of the proposed dwelling has been setback 3m from the rear boundary instead of the 4.5m required by the preferred solution.  The original proposal splayed the rear wall such that it was 4m at its western end and 2.3m at its eastern end, however, the applicant in acceding to Council’s request to pull the front wall of the building back from the front boundary to achieve consistency with the dominant building line set by the dwelling houses on the adjoining property ‘straightened’ the rear wall with a uniform 3m rear setback.

 

There is no consistent rear building line established between No. 349 Rainbow Street and No. 353 Rainbow Street.  No. 349 Rainbow Street is built to within 0.5m of the rear boundary with an elevated pool and deck with rooms underneath, while the rear building line of No. 353 Rainbow Street is set back 8m approximately from the rear boundary.  The objections received from both No. 349 Rainbow Street and No. 1 Garnet Street request enforcement of the 4.5m rear setback (or greater) relate to the retention of the existing Banksia trees in the south-west corner, loss of privacy, loss of views, overshadowing and loss of natural ventilation.

 

With regard to the loss of the two Banksias, this has previously been commented on by Council’s Landscape Technician (refer to Section 6.2).  In order to minimise the impacts to these trees it is considered that it would be necessary to have an excavation free zone a minimum of 5m from either the western side or rear (southern) boundaries.  Further Council’s Landscape Technician has verbally advised that these trees are well-known for either part or permanent failure so that such a setback would not necessarily guarantee their survival.  While these trees provide some screening between No. 349 and No. 1 Garnet Street, Council’s Landscape Technician has provided a condition requiring three new replacement native trees to be located within the rear yard, one of which in the south-west corner.  Advanced specimens would provide screening to this area at a quicker rate and the condition has been changed accordingly.  

 

The encroachment of the proposed building within the 4.5m rear setback of the preferred solutions is considered minor in its impact on air flow to adjoining properties.  The situation with lack of cross ventilation to ground floor rooms of No.349 Rainbow Street is a result of its own building design which should not restrain the potential development of adjoining land.

 

The rear (southern wall) only contains one window (being the bathroom window) at first floor level which is proposed with frosted glazing. The ground floor glazed doors from the family room to the rear yard will be located below the line of a 1.8m high boundary fence along the rear boundary and will not result in any overlooking to No. 1 Garnet Street to the rear.

 

The western wall in the area of the reduced rear setback contains no windows.  As well, the rear wall is extended to the east as a blade wall to shield overlooking between No. 1 Garnet Street and proposed first floor glazing on the eastern elevation of the new dwelling.  Accordingly it is considered that no significant privacy impacts result from the reduced rear setback.

 

Loss of views and overshadowing are addressed in later sections of this report (refer to Sections 9.2.10 and 9.2.12) but are not considered significant to require conformity with the 4.5m preferred solution.

 

Along the western side of the proposed new dwelling, the proposal complies with the 1.5m setback required under the preferred solutions, however along the eastern side the proposal which attains the height of three levels above existing ground level due to the site topography has a staggered setback.  At the first floor level, which requires a 3m side boundary setback under the preferred solutions, the proposed eastern wall has a setback varying from approximately 4m at its southern end to 1.6m at its northern (street) end, while at the ground floor level, the proposed eastern wall has a varying setback at its southern end of approximately 6m to 2m at its northern end in compliance with the preferred solution requirement of 1.5m.  It should be noted that the elevated terrace is setback from the eastern boundary by a planter approximately 900mm wide.  Due to its elevated nature of the site and the proposed new dwelling to No. 353 Rainbow Street to the east, it is considered that no significant adverse overlooking impacts result to the adjoining property to the east as the proposal will predominantly overlook the skillion roof forms of the dwelling located on this property.  It is considered, however, that the balconies to Bedrooms 1 and 2 at the first floor level of the proposed new dwelling should be deleted by way of a deferred commencement condition to minimise overlooking to the private open space (rear yard) of No. 353 Rainbow Street and No. 1 Garnet Street.

 

9.2.5      Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Habitable room windows within 9m of another dwelling’s windows are offset by 45 degrees or have fixed obscure glazing below 1.5m above floor level.

Windows proposed on the western elevation within 9m of those of adjoining properties are all detailed as frosted glass.  Clear glazing is proposed predominantly along the eastern and northern elevation, however are considered to have minimal privacy impacts to neighbouring properties..

S1

Direct view into open space of an adjoining dwelling is obscured or screened within 9m and is beyond a 45 degree angle.

The first floor balconies and associated rooms at the rear of the proposed dwelling will overlook the rear yard areas of the adjoining properties to the east and south-east – refer Section # above.

S1

Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more or fixed obscure glazing below that height.

Windows on the western and southern elevations have frosted glass, which complies, however full length clear glazing is proposed on the eastern elevation.  Impact to privacy of private open space of No. 353 Rainbow Street and No. 1 Garnet Street minimised by deletion of balconies to Bedrooms 1 and 2– see assessment above in Section 9.2.4.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Conditioned to comply with the BCA.

 

9.2.6    Safety & Security

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

The proposed front door faces the street. Complies.

S1,3

Dwellings have at least one habitable room window overlooking the street.

The proposed dwelling has windows that overlook the street. Complies.

S2

A Council-approved street number is conspicuously displayed at the front of the dwelling or front fence.

Suitable condition included.

 

 

The proposal meets the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP, which seek to ensure that a safe physical environment and crime prevention is promoted through design, including that buildings are designed to face the street and other public areas to provide for surveillance; dwellings and their entrances are readily identifiable by street numbering and design of front fences; and landscaped areas allows for safe access to the dwelling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.2.7      Garages & Driveways

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Council’s Parking DCP requires 1 space, for dwellings with 2 bedrooms or less, or 2 spaces, for dwellings with 3 bedrooms or more.

The proposed dwelling has parking for 2 cars. Complies.

S1

Car parking spaces have a minimum dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m.

The dimensions of the parking spaces are in compliance

S1

Driveways have minimum width of 3m and are set back at least 1m from the side boundary.

The proposed driveway is 3 metres wide and is set back at least 1 metre from the side boundary. Complies.

S1

Driveways have a maximum width of 3m at the property boundary.

The proposed driveway is 3 metres at the front boundary. Complies.

S1

Driveway gradients should not exceed a maximum of 1 in 8 for the first 5m from street alignment and 1 in 6 thereafter.

The proposed driveway gradient is too steep, however it may achieve compliance by condition of consent as contained within the Recommendation. 

S1

With respect to garages and carports to rear lanes these should be set back 1m to improve pedestrian visibility.

Not applicable.

S2

Parking and access is provided from the rear of the allotment where possible.

Not applicable.

S2

Garages and carports located behind the building line where parking only available from the front of the site.

The proposed garage is located forward of the building line.  Does not comply – refer Section 9.2.2 of report where previously discussed.

S2

Driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment

The proposed garage occupies about 24% of the width of the site frontage. Complies

 

9.2.8      Fences

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

Not applicable.

S1

Solid front fences or on street frontages in front of the building line are no higher than 1.2m.

Fences in front of the building line or on street frontages may be up to 1.8m provided that the upper two thirds is at least 50% open.

The proposed fence along the front alignment has a solid maximum height of 1.47 metres.  An appropriate condition of consent is contained within the Recommendation ensuring that the maximum solid portion of the fence complies with the preferred solutions.

 

9.2.9      Foreshore Development

 

 

Performance Requirements

Assessment

P1

No encroachments on Foreshore Building Line at identified properties.

Not applicable

P2

Building form, colour, materials and finishes are sympathetic.

Subject to deferred commencement consent for a sample board of materials finishes and colours.  Schedule provided inadequate for accurate assessment.

P3

Stepped buildings on sloping sites are articulated.

Building displays articulation but is not stepped –

P4

Buildings incorporate sufficient setbacks to allow fair sharing of views.

See view loss assessment below

P5

Ancillary structures do not detract from the appearance of developments.

Secondary terrace over driveway detracts from appearance of building by introducing additional bulk with the front setback –refer Section 9.2.2 above in report

 

9.2.10    View loss

 

Objections have been received regarding the loss of views from both No. 349 Rainbow Street to the west of the site and No. 1 Garnet Street to the south.  Height poles were erected on the subject site, for both the original and amended proposal. 

 

The concept of view sharing as contained in Performance Requirement 4 (above) of the DCP and also Performance Requirement 6 for Building Height, Form and Materials which states:-

 

“Buildings are designed to allow a sharing of views”.

 

The objectives for Building Height, Form and Materials also state:-

 

“To ensure that buildings preserve privacy and natural light access for neighbouring residents and allow a sharing of views”.

 

The explanation of view sharing provided in the DCP states that “view sharing requires design which considers the preservation of existing views from neighbouring property while allowing development (which meets other Council controls and guidelines) to take advantage of available views”.

 

The abovementioned clauses do not state what is view sharing or when view sharing is reasonable.  In this regard it should be noted that the Land and Environment Court have expanded on the concept of view sharing by way of comments by Senior Commissioner Roseth in Tenacity v Warringah Council (2004):

 

“The notion of view sharing is invoked when a property enjoys existing views and a proposed development would share that view by taking some of it away for its own enjoyment”.

 

Senior Commissioner Roseth adopts a four part assessment based on the following:-

 

1.   An assessment of the view affected. 

2.   An assessment from what part of the property the views are obtained.

3.   An assessment of the extent of the impact.

4.   An assessment of the reasonableness of the proposal causing the impact.

 

In applying the above principles to views obtained from No. 349 Rainbow Street, the views are obtained from the upper level of the dwelling house which contain the living areas.  These consist of a family area at the southern end with panoramic views over the subject property to the east to the ocean and Wedding Cake Island and a more formal sitting area at the northern end of the house with views to the ocean, Wedding Cake Island and to Coogee Beach and its northern headland.  While the family area and the formal sitting area are separated by doors they are able to be opened up to form a continuos area.  Wedding Cake Island forms an iconic view and is valued highly as part of the view panorama. 

 

As noted by Senior Commissioner Roseth, “the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries”.  In addition consideration should be given to whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position.  Also noted by Senior Commissioner Roseth, “sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views". The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic”.

 

 

Figure 6: View from the family room in a standing position

to Wedding Cake Island with height pole in the foreground

 

 

Figure 7: View to Wedding Cake Island

 from the family room in a sitting position

 

The next step is to assess the extent of the impact.  This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. 

 

Height poles were erected for both the proposal as originally submitted and for the amended proposal.  Figures 6 and 7 above show the view to Wedding Cake Island from the family room from both the standing and sitting position with respect to the height poles for the amended proposal.  The height poles demonstrate that the proposed height of the new dwelling will allow the retention of the view to Wedding Cake Island when standing and the view impact could be considered as moderate, with the view to Wedding Cake Island allowing a depth of water below the rocks giving the view its context.  In a sitting position the view impact is more severe, with the top of the building almost level with the rocks with no water view below the rocks.

 

 

Figure 8: View from formal sitting area to Wedding Cake Island

 

 

Figure 9: View to the north from formal sitting area

 

The height poles for the amended proposal demonstrate that the degree of view loss from the formal sitting area is relatively minor with the views to Wedding Cake Island and the northern headland of Coogee Beach and Gordons Bay remaining largely unaffected by the proposed new building (refer Figures 8 and 9 above).

 

In consideration of the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact, it is noted that the western wall of the proposed building complies with the planning control set by the preferred solution and this in turn sets the overall height of the new building, with a flat roof adopted to minimise the view impact.  Although the height of the new building at its north-east corner has the most impact on the view to Wedding Cake Island from the family room, it is considered that the relocation of this corner of the building closer to the west would only have a relatively minor change to the view experienced from No. 349 Rainbow Street.  A change in the design, by decreasing the floor to the underside of the ceiling for the entry foyer from 2.7m to 2.4m could provide the applicant with the same development potential and similar amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours by lowering the overall height of the building by a further 300m. This would improve the view from the sitting position in the family area and would be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable, especially as the view from the formal sitting area is to the north and north-east is largely unaffected by the proposal.  It should be noted that the skylight over the stair well adds an additional 100mm to the overall height of the building at this point and a condition requiring it to be flush with the roof is contained within the Recommendation.

 

The property experiencing the greatest impact to their view was seen to be No. 349 Rainbow Street, with the degree of view impact to No. 1 Garnet Street, even on the original proposal as considered minor, with the main views obtained from this property to the east and the north-east unaffected by the proposal - refer Figures 10 and 11 below.  As such it cannot be considered that there will be a substantiated loss in property values as a result of the proposed development.

 

 

Figure 10: View to the north across the subject site from

the balcony of No. 1 Garnet Street with height pole

 showing the south-eastern corner of the new dwelling

as originally proposed

 

Figure 11: View to the north-east to Wedding Cake Island

over No. 353 Rainbow Street remains unaffected

by the original proposal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.2.11    Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

New dwellings comply with a minimum of 3.5 stars on the NatHERS.

Basix certificate provided with original proposal but not amended proposal.  Subject to a deferred commencement condition of consent – refer below.

S2

Private open space receives at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The rear yard will receive less than 3 hours of sunlight over the majority of its surface. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S2,8

North-facing windows to living areas receive at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The proposal includes north-facing windows that will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

S9

Solar access to existing or future solar collectors on adjacent buildings is maintained between 9am and 3pm each throughout the year.

The proposal will not overshadow solar collectors on adjoining properties. Complies.

S9

North-facing windows to living areas of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.  If currently less than 3 hours, it is not further reduced.

The proposal will reduce solar access to less than 3 hours on north-facing windows of 1 Garnet Street. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S9

Principal outdoor recreation space of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.  If currently less than 3 hours, it is not further reduced.

Shadow diagrams appear to contain inaccuracies, however it is considered that proposal will not reduce solar access to private open space to less than 3 hours. Complies.

 

The overall Objectives of the DCP seek to ensure that development promotes and has regard to the concept of Ecologically Sustainable Development. In this respect the objectives promote energy efficiency in design and construction; encourage the use of appropriate resources and passive solar design; and protect solar access enjoyed by the adjoining premises.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 (SEPP: BASIX) requirements came into force for all new dwellings, dual occupancies and some transient residential accommodation where development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2004. A BASIX assessment is a mandatory component of the development approval process under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) Regulation 2004 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

 

The proposal is for a new dwelling and the applicant has provided a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP for the original proposal. The provision of a certificate indicates that compliance with the current targets set for energy and water conservation have been met by the development.  Clause 55A of the EP & A Regulation requires that a new BASIX certificate be lodged for amended plans, however the applicant has not done so and the plans do not indicate, as required, all the energy commitments as originally certified, in particular those relating to the swimming pool, natural lighting for each bathroom and toilet and hot water system.  With regards to the hot water system, the BASIX certificate as originally lodged provides for a solar (gas boosted system), however the provision of solar panels on the roof in this sensitive coastal location where there are already view loss issues is not considered appropriate.  As such an alternative energy efficient system should be incorporated as part of the deferred commencement certification.  Appropriate conditions of consent are contained within the Recommendation.

 

9.2.12    Overshadowing

 

Concerns have been raised by No. 1 Garnet Street regarding the amount of overshadowing resulting to their property from the encroachment of the proposed new dwelling within the rear setback (4.5m) set by the preferred solutions.  As well, No. 349 Rainbow Street raises concerns regarding the loss of sun for bedrooms which are located on the lower floor of that dwelling house. 

 

In regards to No. 349 Rainbow Street, it should be noted that the performance requirements of the DCP only relate to north facing windows of living areas of neighbouring dwellings.  The proposal complies with both the external wall height and setback requirements of the preferred solutions along the western elevation and overshadowing to windows on the eastern side of No. 349 Rainbow Street is largely unavoidable during the morning at the winter solstice by any proposal to develop the subject site.

 

Overshadowing to the ground floor north facing living room windows of No. 1 Garnet Street occurs as a result of the proposal during the day at the winter solstice.  In this regard it should be noted that shadow from No. 349 Rainbow Street already overshadows these windows to a varying extent, while a 1.8m high boundary fence would also cause shadow to these windows.    Further it should be noted that the approved alteration and additions for No. 1 Garnet Street locate the main living, dining and kitchen area on the new third storey.  Under the circumstances the shadow impact from the proposed new dwelling is considered acceptable.

 

9.2.13  Rainwater Tank Policy

 

Council’s Rainwater Tank Policy requires all new developments to install a rainwater tank for the collection and re-use of roof water.  For new dwelling houses, the minimum tank size is 2,000 litres but the preferred size is 5,000 litres.  The amended proposal notates the provision of a rainwater tank with a capacity of 22,000 litres located under the driveway, which is well in excess of the capacity required under the Rainwater Tank Policy.

 

10.  FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

11.  CONCLUSION

 

The amended proposal is considered to have minimised the amenity impacts to adjoining properties and surrounding locality subject to deferred commencement conditions as contained within the Recommendation of this report.

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 1114/2004 for demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a new dwelling house and swimming pool at 351 Rainbow Street, South Coogee, subject to the following deferred commencement conditions:-

 

DEFERRED COMMENCEMENT CONDITIONS

 

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

 

1.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces of the front building façade are to be compatible with surrounding foreshore scenic protection area to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and finishes shall be submitted in the form of a sample board keyed to the elevations.

 

2.       Amended plans shall be submitted detailing the following:-

 

i)          deletion of the secondary front terrace area over the driveway entrance to the basement carpark;

ii)         deep soil landscaping within the front setback;

iii)         the overall height of the building shall be lowered by 300mm, with the top of the roof being RL (AHD) of 51.450;

iv)        the skylight shall be shown flush with the top of the roof;

v)         deletion of first floor level eastern balconies of Bedrooms 1 and 2;

vi)        driveway gradient in accordance with Australian Standard (AS) 2890.1 (2004);

vii)        all the energy commitments submitted in a BASIX certificate for the proposal as amended, including an alternative hot water system to a solar hot water system.

 

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

 

 

 

DEVELOPMENT CONSENT CONDITIONS

 

B.      Subject to compliance with the deferred commencement conditions, to the satisfaction of the Director Planning and Community Development, development consent be granted under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. 1114/2004 for demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a new dwelling house and swimming pool at 351 Rainbow Street, South Coogee subject to the following conditions:-

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 101 Amendment B, 201, 301 and 302 all Amendment A, dated 2 June, 2005, prepared by X. Pace, all received by Council on 20 June, 2005, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the details approved with the deferred commencement conditions and by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AMENTITY:

 

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:

 

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

 

2.         The fence on the street alignment is to be a maximum height of 1.2m to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the adjoining residential development and the streetscape.

 

An allowance of up to 150mm is permitted at required ‘step-downs’ or changes in level.

 

3.         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.

 

4.         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.

 

5.         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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

9.         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.

 

10.       Landscaping shall be provided to the site to reduce the impact of the development upon the amenity of the environment and a landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of City Planning, in accordance with section 80A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to issuing a construction certificate.

 

11.       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.

 

12.       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.

 

13.       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.  An Application for a Section 73 Certificate 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 the 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.

 

A copy of Sydney Water’s ‘Notice of Requirements’ must be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Construction Certificate.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing an occupation certificate or subdivision certificate (whichever the sooner).

 

14.       Solar hot water heaters or other structures are not permitted to be installed on the roof of the building unless the prior written approval of Council’s Director of Planning has been obtained beforehand.

 

ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT & ENERGY EFFICIENCY: 

 

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

 

BASIX Conditions

 

15.       In accordance with Section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that all of the required commitments listed in the relevant BASIX Certificate for this development are fulfilled.

 

16.       In accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a relevant BASIX Certificate and associated documentation must be submitted to the Certifying Authority with the Construction Certificate application for this development.

 

The required commitments listed and identified in the BASIX Certificate are to be included on the plans, specifications and associated documentation for the proposed development, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

17.       The following provisions are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant BASIX Certificate and details are to be included in the Construction Certificate documentation (as applicable), to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority:

 

·    Stormwater management (i.e. rainwater tanks)

·    Water efficiency (i.e. triple A rated taps and showers, dual flush toilets and water re-use)

·    Landscaping provisions

·    Thermal comfort (i.e. construction materials, glazing and insulation)

·    Energy efficiency (i.e. cooling & heating provisions and hot water systems)

 

18.       In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue a final Occupation Certificate for this development, unless it is satisfied that each of the required BASIX commitments has been fulfilled.

 

Relevant documentary evidence of compliance with the BASIX commitments is to be forwarded to the Council upon issuing the final Occupation Certificate.

 

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY AND DANGEROUS GOODS: 

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure adequate environmental protection and occupational health and safety:

 

19.       All site works shall comply with the occupational health and safety requirements of WorkCover NSW.

 

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

 

·    Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·    Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

·    Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 2001; and

·    The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and relevant Environmental Protection Authority Guidelines

 

21.       The removal, cleaning and disposal of any lead-based paints must be carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions of AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures, The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the requirements and guidelines of the Environmental Protection Authority.

 

NOISE EMISSION CONDITIONS:

 

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

 

22.       The 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 plant and equipment shall not give rise to an LAeq, 15 min 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) in accordance with relevant NSW Department of Environment & Conservation Noise Control Guidelines.

 

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

 

24.       The operation of swimming pool/spa pool pump and equipment is restricted, if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises, the equipment shall not be operated during the following hours, or, as otherwise specified in relevant Noise Control Regulations:

 

·      before 8.00am or after 8.00pm on any Sunday or public holiday; or

·    before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on any other day.

 

25.       The installation of rainwater tanks and greywater treatment systems shall comply with the following noise control requirements:-

 

a)         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 plant and equipment shall not give rise to an LAeq, 15 min 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) in accordance with relevant NSW Department of Environment & Conservation Noise Control Guidelines.

 

b)         Plant and equipment associated with rainwater tank(s) and greywater treatment systems are to be enclosed in a sound absorbing enclosure or installed within a building, to minimise noise emissions and possible nuisance to nearby residents.

 

c)         The operation of plant and equipment associated with the rainwater tank(s) and greywater treatment systems are to be restricted, if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises:

 

·          before 8.00am or after 8.00pm on weekends or public holiday; or

·          before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

PRESCRIBED BUILDING & FIRE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS:

 

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

 

26.       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.

 

27.       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.

 

28.       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.

 

29.       Prior to the commencement of any building works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:-

 

i)          appoint a Principal Certifying Authority for the building work, and

 

ii)         appoint a principal contractor for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, obtain an owner-builder permit in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing, and

 

iii)         unless the person having the benefit of the consent is the principal contractor (i.e. owner-builder), notify the principal contractor of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority, and

 

iv)        give at least two days notice to the Council, in writing, of the persons intention to commence building works.

 

In relation to residential building work, the principal contractor must be the holder of a contractor licence, in accordance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

30.       The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or another certifying authority if the Principal Certifying Authority agrees), in accordance with sections 109 E (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 162A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, to monitor compliance with the relevant standards of construction, Council’s development consent and the construction certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected in accordance with section 81A (2) (b1) (ii) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 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 consent is to be maintained by the Principal Certifying Authority.  Details of critical stage inspections carried out and copies of certification relied upon must also be forwarded to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

The principal contractor or owner-builder (as applicable) must ensure that the required critical stage and other inspections, as specified in the Principal Certifying Authority’s “Notice of Critical Stage Inspections”, are carried out to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority and at least 48 hours notice (excluding weekends and public holidays) is to be given to the Principal Certifying Authority, to carry out the required inspection, before carrying out any further works.

 

31.       A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site, which contains the following details:

·         name, address, contractor licence number and telephone number of the principal contractor, including a telephone number at which the person may be contacted outside working hours, or owner-builder permit details (as applicable)

·         name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority,

·        a statement stating that “unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited”.

 

32.       An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any occupation of the building work encompassed in this development consent (including alterations and additions to existing buildings), in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

An Occupation Certificate must not be issued for the development if the development is inconsistent with the development consent.  The requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

33.       Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, a statement is required to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority, which confirms that the development is not inconsistent with the development consent and the relevant conditions of development consent have been satisfied.

 

Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority together with any other certification relied upon and must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

34.       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 provisions 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 principal building contractor and compliance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989 (i.e. Details of the principal licensed building contractor and a copy of the Certificate of Insurance) are to be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of works, with the notice of appointment of the PCA / notice of intention to commence building work.

 

35.       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.

 

At the time of this development consent, Long Service Levy payment is applicable on building work having a value of $25,000 or more, at the rate of 0.2% of the cost of the works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY:

 

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

 

37.       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.

 

38.       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 potential vibration emissions.  The report, must demonstrate the suitability of the proposed methods of construction to overcome any potential damage to nearby land/premises.

 

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.

 

39.       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 demonstrates that damage should not occur to any adjoining premises and public place as a result of the works.

 

Any practices or recommendations specified in the engineer’s report in relation to the avoidance or minimisation of structural damage to nearby premises or land must be fully complied with and incorporated into the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

40.       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, verandahs, 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 and condition 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.

 

41.       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.

 

42.       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.

 

CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT:

 

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:

 

43.       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.

 

44.       Any building/demolition works involving asbestos products are to be carried out in accordance with WorkCover New South Wales requirements, guidelines and codes of practice.

 

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 made available to the Council officers and all building contractors for assessment.

 

46.       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.

 

47.       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.

 

48.       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.

 

49.       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.

 

50.       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.

 

51.       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.

 

52.       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 levels of the building.

 

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.

 

53.       Temporary toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site throughout the course of demolition and construction, to the satisfaction of WorkCover NSW and the toilet facilities must be connected to a public sewer or other sewage management facility approved by Council.

 

54.       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.

 

55.       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, soil and debris at all times.

 

56.       Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval 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 Development Control Plan for Exempt & Complying Development and Council’s Local Approvals Policy.  Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Building Services section.

 

57.       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.

 

Temporary site fences are to be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional 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.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings 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.

 

58.       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.

 

59.       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 are to be detailed in a soil and water management plan and 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 be maintained throughout construction.  A copy of the approved details must be forwarded to the Council and a copy is to be maintained on-site and 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, methods of sediment control, details of drainage systems and details of existing and proposed vegetation.

 

60.       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.

 

61.       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.

 

62.       A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

·        Install or erect any site fencing, hoardings or site structures

·        Operate a crane or hoist goods or materials over a footpath or road

·        Placement of a waste skip (grater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

63.       Any part of Council’s nature strip which is damaged as a result of the work must be back-filled, top-soiled and re-turfed with kikuyu turf prior to occupation or finalisation of the development, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

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

 

a)         car parking and vehicular access

b)         landscaping

c)         stormwater drainage

d)         external finishes and materials

e)         swimming pool safety fencing/barriers and acoustic enclosure to pool equipment

 

WASTE MANAGEMENT:

 

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

 

65.       Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage and removal of waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

66.       A demolition and construction Waste Management Plan (WMP) must be development and implemented for the development, to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

The Waste Management Plan must provide details of the type and quantities of demolition and construction waste materials, proposed re-use and recycling of materials, methods of disposal and details of recycling outlets and land fill sites.

 

Where practicable waste materials must be re-used or recycled, rather than disposed and further details of Council's requirements including relevant guidelines and pro-forma WMP forms can be obtained from Council's Customer Service Centre or by telephoning Council on 9399 0999.

 

67.       Details and receipts verifying the recycling and disposal of materials must be kept on site at all times and presented to Council officers upon request.

 

SWIMMING POOLS & SPAS: (Assessment Officer)

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

69.       Spa pools are to be provided with a child resistant barrier, in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and regulations.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

The operation of swimming pool/spa pool pump and equipment is restricted, if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises, the equipment shall not be operated during the following hours, or, as otherwise specified in relevant Noise Control Regulations:

 

            before 8.00am or after 8.00pm on any Sunday or public holiday; or

            before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on any other day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

CIVIL WORKS CONDITIONS

 

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

 

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

 

a)         Construct the concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

b)         Remove the redundant concrete vehicular crossing and layback and to reinstate the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification

 

c)         Construct any retaining walls on Council’s property as required.

 

73.       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.

 

74.       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.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

75.       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 as follows:

 

Vehicular access:

·    RL 41.70 on the eastern edge

·    RL 41.70 on the western edge

 

Pedestrian Access:

·    RL 42.15 on the eastern edge.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Assets & Infrastructure Services Department on 9399 0923.

 

The design alignment level at the property boundary must be strictly adhered to.

 

76.       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. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

77.       The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Department of Asset & Infrastructure Services have been issued at a prescribed fee of $593.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

78.       The top of footings of any structures constructed on the boundary alignment must be at least 150mm below the alignment level as specified for the vehicular access. 

 

SERVICE AUTHORITY CONDITIONS

 

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

 

79.       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.

 

80.       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.

 

DRAINAGE CONDITIONS

 

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

 

81.       Generally all site stormwater shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrester pit that drains to an infiltration area with a minimum 5 m2 base area. An overflow pipe shall be provided from the silt arrestor pit to drain to Council's kerb and gutter.

 

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

 

Notes:

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

 

i.    within the site at or near the street boundary.

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

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

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

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

 

b.         The infiltration/rubble pit shall:-

     

i.    have a minimum 300 mm of soil cover (600 mm where the pit is located under a garden/landscaping area).

ii.    be located a minimum of 3.0 metres from the dwelling or other structure (closer if a structural engineer certifies that the infiltration area will not adversely affect the structure) and 2.1 metres from the adjacent side or rear boundaries.

iii.   be constructed with a minimum 200 mm thick layer of 20 mm basalt/blue metal (or similar) that is wrapped in a suitable geotextile material covering with a high filtration rating (Geofabrics Bidim "A" range of filtration fabrics or equivalent). A suitable means of dispersing the stormwater over the area of infiltration is to be constructed.

Note:  other equivalent methods of infiltration may be adopted.

iv.   have a minimum base area of 5.0 square metres (m2).

 

The outlet from the silt arrestor pit to the infiltration area shall be located at least 50 mm below the outlet from the silt arrestor pit to the kerb and gutter.

 

c.         The requirement for an infiltration/rubble pit will not be enforced should the underground soil conditions preclude the construction of the infiltration pit (eg rock is located within 300 mm of the base of the infiltration area). If the infiltration/rubble pit is not constructed then all site stormwater shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter via a sediment/silt arrestor pit (as detailed in note a. above).

 

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

 

d.         The overflow pipe/s from the rainwater tank/s shall be directed into the infiltration area.

LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS

 

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

 

82.       Landscaping shall be provided to the site to enhance its amenity and reduce the impact of the development upon neighbouring properties. A landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning & Community Development, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

83.       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.

 

84.       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.

 

85.       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.

 

86.       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.

 

87.       In order to visually 'soften' the expanses of hard pavement, brick unit pavers, stencilled concrete or similar shall be used throughout the driveway and carpark 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.

 

TREE MANAGEMENT

 

88.       The applicant shall submit a total payment of $159.50 to Council,

 

a.         Being the cost for Council to supply and install 1 x 45 litre street tree (Cupaniopsis anacardioides, Tuckeroo, on the western side of the driveway) at the completion of all works ($145.00 + GST)

 

The contribution shall be paid into Tree Amenity Income Code R39 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.

 

89.       Approval is granted for the removal of the following trees subject to the planting of 3 x 100 litre broad canopied replacement native trees (not palms) within the deep soil zone along the southern boundary, with one of these trees being specifically located in the southwest corner in order to compensate for the loss of established canopy cover from this site. The species selected shall be those that will attain a minimum height of between 4-7 metres at maturity.

 

a) Two (2) Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksias) in the southwest corner of the site.

 

90.       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.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1       Building or excavations works must not be commenced until a construction certificate has been obtained from Council's Building Certification Services or an Accredited Certifier and either Council's Building Certification Services or an Accredited Certifier has been appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority for this development.

 

A2       The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specification must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and the construction certificate must not be inconsistent with the development consent.

 

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

 

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.

 

You are therefore advised to ensure that the development is not inconsistent with Council's consent and to consult with Council’s Building Certification Services or an accredited certifier prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

A3.      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

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID PIRIE

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ASSESSMENT OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 52/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

820A-824 Anzac Parade & 5 Alma Road, MAROUBRA

 

 

DATE:

15 August, 2005

FILE NO:

795/1999 C

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Attached is Development Application Report No 795/1999 “C” to alter and improve the internal layouts of units, replace residential units with commercial units, delete planter boxes and replace with privacy screens and louvres to balconies, railings to become glass and other internal reconfigurations.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the Development Application in accordance with the recommendation contained in the attached report.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1. Development Application Report dated 14 August 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID ONGKILI

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

Environmental PlANNER

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

14 August, 2005

FILE NO:

D/0795/1999

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 96 application to alter and improve the internal layouts of units, replace residential units with commercial units, delete planter boxes and replace with privacy screens and louvres to balconies, railings to become glass and other internal reconfigurations.

PROPERTY:

 820A-824 Anzac Parade and 5 Alma Road, Maroubra

WARD:

 Central Ward

APPLICANT:

 K-EL-K Pty Limited

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Council as the original application was determined by Council. The approved development comprises the erection of an 8 storey mixed commercial, retail and multi-unit residential development with 2 levels of basement carparking fronting Anzac Parade and a 3 storey residential building fronting Alma Road.

 

The application seeks to amend the approved development essentially as follows: 

 

§ modifying the internal layout of the basement carparks resulting in improved circulation/planning and the provision of 5 additional carspaces

 

§ modifying the internal layout and services of the proposed shops on the ground floor to improve  access and amenity;

 

§ converting previously approved dwelling units on the ground and first floor levels into commercial units;

 

§ modifying the internal layout and services within dwelling units to improve  access and amenity;

 

§ minor readjustment in the levels of balconies to match the internal finished floor levels of dwelling units;

 

§ deletion of planter boxes on select balconies of relevant dwelling units on all levels and replacing these with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above.

 

§ revision of external façade treatment for the overall building including new colours, materials and textures and a redesign to the top-floor balconies to units 26 and 27 on Level 7 involving the deletion of framed roof elements and replacement with pergola structures.

 

These changes to the approved development are detailed in Section 2 below.

 

The proposed modifications to the approved development are considered acceptable, do not substantially change the originally approved development other than to improve its presentation, accessibility and amenity, and do not give rise to any adverse impacts on adjoining and surrounding properties subject to an additional condition to ensure adequate privacy to the adjoining eastern property. 

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

 

 

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The application primarily seeks to amend the approved development as follows:

 

Basement Level 2

 

1.   Create 4 additional carspaces (designated as carspaces Nos. 44, 57, 58 and 73).  

 

2.   Grease arrestor room deleted and now proposed to be used as a storage room for bicycle parking.

 

3.   Fire stairs relocated at the northwest corner to accommodate proposed sub-station at ground level above as required by Energy Australia.

 

4.   Lift dimensions reduced.

 

5.   Boiler room deleted and converted into store room.

 

6.   Lift motor room to be deleted and converted into store room.

 

Basement Level 1

 

1.   Fire stairs relocated at the northwest corner to accommodate proposed sub-station at ground level above as required by Energy Australia.

 

2.   Switch room now to be used as meter room.

 

3.   Gas meter location added to northwest corner of basement off driveway.

 

4.   Create 1 additional carspace in southeast corner of basement (designated as carspace No. 5).

 

Ground Floor Level

 

1.   Fire stairs relocated at the northwest corner of shop No. 5.

 

2.   Relative Levels for all shops 1 to 5 have been amended to work better with footpath Relative Levels at Anzac parade.

 

3.   Ramp added to shop 5.

 

4.   Fire exit added to shop 5 and stairs added to connect office space above with shop 5.

 

5.   Southwest fire egress next to shop 1 has been increased in width from 1.0m to 1.130m.

 

6.   WC has been added to all shops 1 to 5.

 

7.   WC at the rear of shop 3 and 4 deleted and converted to a cleaner’s/store room and disabled WC.

 

8.   The stairs next to the cleaner’s/store room has been moved back 1.8m.

 

9.   Electrical room increased in size next to lift.

 

10. Dwelling units Nos. 31 and 32 converted to commercial/office units.

 

11. All French doors leading to balcony have been replaced with glass sliding doors for units 33, 34 and 35.

 

12. Units Nos. 33, 34 and 35 balcony RL's have been lowered to match unit internal F.F.L RL's.Units 33, 34 & 35.

 

13. Laundry room for dwelling units Nos. 33, 34 and 35 to be relocated from bathroom to behind entry door.

 

14. Dividing wall between shop 1 and shop 2 removed.

 

15. Planter boxes on east-facing balconies of living rooms to units Nos. 33, 34 and 35 deleted and replaced with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above. Obscure glazing originally proposed to the living room doors has been deleted.

 

16. Unit No. 33 north facing planter box deleted and replaced with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above to eastern and western edges.

 

First Floor Level

 

1.   Re-design internal access from shop No: 5 to office above.

 

2.   Add WC to each office space.

 

3.   Reduce the void area between offices and increase office area.

 

4.   Delete common kitchen and toilet area and transfer this floor area to office.

 

5.   Electrical room increased in size next to lift.

 

6.   All French doors leading to balcony have been replaced with glass sliding doors to dwelling units No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

 

7.   Dwelling units Nos.1 and 2 converted to commercial/office units.

 

8.   Planter boxes on east-facing sections of balconies of living rooms to units Nos. 4 and 5 deleted and replaced with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above. Obscure glazing originally proposed to the living room doors has been deleted.

 

9.   Install 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above  along the eastern edge of the front balcony to unit 3.

 

10. All balcony levels have been lowered to match the internal Finished Floor  Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

Second Floor Level

 

1.   All originally proposed French doors leading to balcony have been replaced with glass sliding doors to units Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.

 

2.   All balcony levels have been raised to match internal Finished Floor Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

3.   Delete the planter box along the northern edge of the balcony to Unit No. 8 and replace with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above and increase the size of the balcony.

 

4.   Laundry cupboard in dwelling unit No. 9 to be repositioned to behind the main entry door.

 

5.   Ensuite, laundry room and wardrobe in bedroom 1 of dwelling unit No 10 to be internally reconfigured.

 

6.   Reconfigure bedroom 1 layout and add laundry to bathroom in dwelling unit No. 7.

 

7.   Reposition bed 2, reconfigured kitchen & bathroom layout in dwelling units Nos. 6.

 

Third Floor Level

 

1.   All French doors leading to balcony replaced with glass sliding doors to dwelling units Nos. 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15.

 

2.   All balcony levels to be raised to match internal Finished Floor Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

3.   Delete the planter box along the northern edge of the balcony to Unit No. 13 and replace with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above and increase the size of the balcony.

 

4.   Laundry cupboard in dwelling unit No. 14  to be repositioned to behind the main entry door.

 

5.   Ensuite, laundry room and wardrobe in bedroom 1 of dwelling unit No 15 to be internally reconfigured.

 

6.   Reconfigure bedroom 1 layout and add laundry to bathroom in dwelling unit No. 12.

 

8.   Reposition bed 2, reconfigured kitchen and bathroom layout in dwelling units Nos. 11.

 

Fourth Floor Level

 

1.   All French doors leading to balcony to be replaced with glass sliding doors to dwelling units Nos. 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20.

 

2.   All balcony levels to be raised to match internal Finished Floor Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

3.   Delete the planter box along the northern edge of the balcony to Unit No. 18 and replace with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above and increase the size of the balcony.

 

4.   Laundry cupboard in dwelling unit No. 19 to be repositioned to behind the main entry door.

 

5.   Ensuite, laundry room and wardrobe in bedroom 1 of dwelling unit No 20 to be internally reconfigured.

 

9.   Reconfigure bedroom 1 layout and add laundry to bathroom in dwelling unit No. 17.

 

10. Reposition bed 2, reconfigured kitchen and bathroom layout in dwelling units Nos. 16.

 

Fifth Floor Level

 

1.   All French doors leading to balcony to be replaced with glass sliding doors to dwelling units Nos. 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25.

 

2.   All balcony levels to be raised to match internal Finished Floor Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

3.   Delete the planter box along the northern edge of the balcony to Unit No. 23 and replace with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above and increase the size of the balcony.

 

4.   Laundry cupboard in dwelling unit No. 24 to be repositioned to behind the main entry door.

 

5.   Ensuite, laundry room and wardrobe in bedroom 1 of dwelling unit No 25 to be internally reconfigured.

 

11. Reconfigure bedroom 1 layout and add laundry to bathroom in dwelling unit No. 22.

 

12. Reposition bed 2, reconfigured kitchen and bathroom layout in dwelling units Nos. 21.

 

Sixth Floor Level

 

1.   All French doors leading to balcony to be replaced with glass sliding doors dwelling units Nos. 26, 27, 29 and 30.

 

2.   Add powder rooms to dwelling units Nos. 26 and 27.

 

3.   All balcony levels to be raised to match internal Finished Floor Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

4.   Main entry to unit 28 to be changed with entry door moved and a wet bar added.

 

5.   Delete the planter box along the northern edge of the balcony to Unit No. 28 and replace with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above and increase the size of the balcony.

 

13. Ensuite, laundry room and wardrobe in bedroom one of dwelling unit No 30 to be internally reconfigured.

 

14. Add pantry to kitchen under stairs in dwelling unit No. 26.

 

15. Reposition and reconfigure ensuite/bathroom layout in dwelling units Nos. 26 and 27.

 

16. Replace and reposition powder room behind stairs with laundry in dwelling unit No. 27.

 

17. Reconfigure the internal layout of the upper floor of dwelling unit No. 28 including deletion of linen cupboard and addition of entry from lobby, reconfiguration of bathroom and repositioning of laundry.

 

Seventh Floor Level

 

1.   All French doors leading to balcony to be replaced with glass sliding doors to dwelling units Nos. 26, 27 and 28.

 

2.   All balcony levels to be raised to match internal Finished Floor Levels of associated dwelling units.

 

3.   Units 26 & 27 have had W.I.R added to bed 3.

 

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Anzac Parade and southern side of Alma Road. The site is irregular in shape and broadly comprises two lots, one lot having frontage to Anzac Parade and another having frontage to Alma Road.

 

The Anzac Parade allotment has a western boundary to Anzac Parade of approximately 38.4m, a southern boundary of 39.27m, an eastern boundary staggered into two sections measuring approximately 16m and 36.6m each, and a northern boundary measuring  approximately 48m. The Alma Road allotment has a northern frontage to Alma Road of approximately 14.3m, a western boundary of 27.3m, a southern boundary of 14.5m and a western boundary of 27.2m.

 

The subject site is currently vacant and undergoing construction works.

 

To the north of the subject site is a three-storey residential flat building at no. 820 Anzac Parade and further north across Alma Road is a 8 storey residential high-rise building at No. 818 Anzac Parade and a single storey building at No. 2 Alma Road. Immediately to the east is a 2 storey brick dwelling house at No. 7 Alma Road. To the south is a 2 to 3 storey brick building containing shops at No. 826-828 Anzac Parade. Across Anzac Parade to the west is an 8 storey residential high-rise building at 701-702 Anzac Parade and the Pacific Square development at 707 Anzac Parade.

 

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

4.1   Application History

 

Development Application No. 795/1999 for the erection of an 8 storey mixed commercial, retail and multi-unit residential development with 3 levels of basement carparking fronting Anzac Parade and a 3-storey residential building fronting Alma Road was approved on 16 November 1999. The approved development was subsequently amended by the following approved Section 96 applications:

 

·    Section 96 modification to delete one basement level and increase area of remaining two basement levels, reconfigure the ground level entry/lobby, lift, shops and garbage area; reconfigure east-facing apartments in the Anzac Parade building; and install planter and balconies to the Alma Street building was approved on 31 May 2000.

 

·    Section 96 modification to amend RL’s in basement levels and ground and first floor levels, sewer in basement and ramps in basement was approved on 4 August 2004.

 

 

 

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The application was notified and advertised in accordance with Council’s DCP – Public Notification. The following submissions were received:

 

Mr M. English, Donovan Oates Hannaford Lawyers, PO Box 41, Port Macquarie (solicitor on behalf of Mrs Beatrice McNaughton, owner of No. 7 Alma Road, Maroubra)

 

·    Proposed louvres along the east-facing balconies of the Alma Road building should be replaced by privacy screen to avoid loss of privacy.

 

Comment: The applicant has proposed the installation of 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above on all east-facing balconies of living rooms to units 3, 4, 5, 33, 34 and 35 to address any overlooking concerns arising from these balconies. The objector has requested that the proposed louvres along these east-facing balconies be replaced by privacy screen to avoid loss of privacy. It is considered that the applicant’s use of obscure glazing and louvres along the eastern edges of the above-mentioned balconies constitutes adequate screening for privacy and is a more superior form of privacy screening than the previously approved planter boxes along these edges. The use of louvres above the obscure glass balustrades along these balconies is appropriate in that it will provide for privacy screening to the objector’s property whilst maintaining adequate ventilation to the relevant dwelling units of the proposed development. The use of a solid non-perforated screening material for privacy as suggested by the objector is considered excessive and detrimental to the amenity of the balconies of the relevant dwelling units. Furthermore, the proposed glazed balustrades and louvres will be fixed (i.e., not moveable) for the full length of the subject balconies. Notwithstanding this, a condition will be applied requiring the blades of the louvres to the ground, first and second floor balconies to units 3, 4, 5, 33, 34 and 35 to be fixed upwards to ensure privacy to the objector’s property.

 

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

 

No objections in relation to building and construction issues are raised to the application.

 

6.2  Assets and Infrastructure Issues

 

No objections in relation to assets and infrastructure issues are raised to the application.

6.3  Traffic/Parking Issues

 

No objections in relation to traffic/parking issues are raised to the application.

 

6.4  Waste Management Comments

 

No objections in relation to waste management issues are raised to the application.

7.    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

-   Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended

-   Building Code of Australia

 

8.    SECTION 96 AMMENDMENT

 

Under the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the development as modified is substantially the same development as originally approved.

 

8.1  Substantially the same development

 

The proposed modifications to the approved development will result in a development that is substantially the same as that originally approved as discussed in Section 8.3 below.

 

8.2       Notification and Consideration of Submissions:

 

The application was notified and advertised in accordance with Council’s DCP – Public Notification, and a submission was received. The concerns raised in the submission are addressed in Section 8.3.2.2 below.

 

8.3       Section 79C 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. This assessment is contained in the following sub-sections:

 

8.3.1   Built Form and Design

 

The majority of the modifications will be for internal reorganisation of the layout of shops and dwelling units to improve their space efficiency. There will be no changes to the approved building envelope and, accordingly, no increase in the overall approved height and floor area of the proposed development.

 

The proposal also involves the deletion of planter boxes to all balconies on all levels from the Ground Floor to Level 6 and their replacement with 1 m high selected obscure glazed balustrading with 600m high privacy louvres above. The deletion of the planter boxes is considered acceptable as it would improve the visual presentation of the building without compromising the privacy of adjoining properties (through the use of a neater element comprising obscure glazed balustrading and associated privacy screens).   

 

The applicant has also proposed the revision of the external/façade treatment for the overall building including new colours, materials and textures, replacement of originally approved French windows/doors with glass sliding doors, a redesign to the top-floor balconies to units 26 and 27 on Level 7 involving the deletion of framed roof elements and replacement with pergola structures. Following discussions with the applicant, an appropriate colour and texture scheme has been agreed upon for the external/façade of the building which is considered an improvement over the previously approved scheme.

 

Overall, the proposed replacement of originally approved French windows/doors with glass sliding doors and the deletion of framed roof elements on the top floor together with the proposed new external colour and materials scheme results in a development that will be more in keeping with the existing surrounding high-rise residential character of development in Maroubra Junction, and will significantly improve the visual quality of the approved development.

 

8.3.2  Impact on adjoining development

 

8.3.2.1             Loss of sunlight

 

The proposal will not involve any changes to the building envelope of the approved development and therefore will not result in any increase in overshadowing to that generated by the approved development.

 

8.3.2.2             Loss of Privacy

 

Concern has been raised by the owner of the adjoining eastern dwelling house at No. 7 Alma Road regarding the potential loss of privacy arising from the proposed use of louvres above the balustrades of east-facing balconies in the proposed Alma Road Building. The objector’s concern is considered unwarranted for the following reasons:

 

§ the applicant’s use of obscure glazing and louvres along the eastern edges of the east-facing balconies of living rooms to units 3, 4, 5, 33, 34 and 35 constitutes adequate screening for privacy and is a more superior form of privacy screening than the previously approved planter boxes along these edges.

 

§ The use of a solid non-perforated screening material for privacy as suggested by the objector is considered excessive and detrimental to the amenity of the balconies of the relevant dwelling units. The use of louvres above the obscure glass balustrades along the subject balconies is appropriate in that it will provide for privacy screening to the objector’s property whilst maintaining adequate ventilation to the relevant dwelling units of the proposed development.

 

§ the proposed glazed balustrades and louvres will be fixed (i.e., not moveable) for the full length of the eastern edge of the east-facing balconies of living rooms to units 3, 4, 5, 33, 34 and 35.

 

§ The proposed Alma Road building has an approved setback in excess of 1.5m from the eastern common boundary 

 

Notwithstanding the above, a condition will be applied requiring the blades of the louvres to ground, first and second floor balconies to units 3, 4, 5, 33, 34 and 35 to be fixed upwards to ensure privacy to the objector’s property.

 

8.3.2.3             Loss of views

 

The proposed modifications will have negligible impact in terms of loss of views for surrounding properties.

 

9.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposed modifications to the approved development are considered acceptable, do not substantially change the originally approved development other than to improve its presentation, accessibility and amenity, and do not give rise to any adverse impacts on adjoining and surrounding properties subject to an additional condition to ensure adequate privacy to the adjoining eastern property.  In view of the above, it is recommended that the section 96 application be approved. 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.        THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to modify Development Consent 795/1999 to alter and improve the internal layouts of units, increase amount of commercial space by decreasing the amount of residential units, delete planter boxes and provide privacy screens and louvres to balconies, railings to become glass and other internal reconfigurations at 820A-824 Anzac Parade and 5 Alma Road, Maroubra in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read as follows:

 

“1.        The development shall be implemented substantially in accordance with the details set out on the plans numbered DA.08, DA.09, DA.10, DA.11A, DA.12A, DA.13, DA.14, DA.15A, DA.16A, DA.17A, DA.18 and DA.19, and stamp-dated on 15 July 1999, and amended plans numbered DA.05A, DA.06A and DA.07A, and stamp-dated 21 September 1999, and DA.02B, DA.03B and DA.04B, and stamp-dated 18 October 1999, and amended plans numbered DA.07B, DA.08A, DA.09A, DA.10A, DA.11B, DA.12B, dated and received by Council on 16 December 1999, and amended by the plan stamped “Randwick City Council” received 9 March 2000, and the plans numbered DA.05B, DA.06B, DA.07B, DA.08A, DA.09A, DA.10A, DA.11B, and DA.12B stamped received on 17 April 2000, and amended plans numbered CC04 to CC07 and CC14 to CC19 all dated 14-07-2004 and received by Council on 16 July 2004, and amended plans numbered CC04 to CC20, Issue G, dated 3 August 2005, and stamped received by Council on 4 August 2005, and CO01 to CO04, Issue G, dated 3 August 2005, and stamped received by Council on 4 August 2005, and the Concept Landscape Plan dated 3 August 2005 and stamped received by Council on 4 August 2005, and on the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:”

 

Amend Condition No. 3 as follows:

 

“3.        The external colours, materials and finishes of the proposed development shall be in accordance with the sample board details received by Council on 4 August 2005, and perspective received by Council on 26 July 2005.”

 

Add a condition as follows:

 

“87.      The proposed louvres above the glazed balustrades along the full length of the eastern edge of all balconies of dwelling units 3, 4, 5, 33, 34 and 35 shall have blades fixed upwards to ensure privacy to the adjoining eastern property. Details shall be provided to Council for approval prior to the issue of an amended Construction Certificate for the development.”

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.    A4 Attachments

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID ONGKILI

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 53/2005

 

 

SUBJECT:

65 Byron Street, COOGEE

 

 

DATE:

15 August, 2005

FILE NO:

871/2004

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

  

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the Health, Building and Planning Committee Meeting held on 9 August, 205, it was resolved that this application be deferred to the next Ordinary Council meeting to allow for greater consultation and analysis of the business report by the community.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the Development Application in accordance with the recommendation contained in the attached report.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1. Development Application Report dated 7 June 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

PERRY HEAD

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ASSISSMENT OFFICER

 

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

7 June, 2005

FILE NO:

DA 871/2004A4 Plans

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations and first floor addition to existing dwelling house.

PROPERTY:

 65 Byron Street Coogee

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Catherine Dixon

OWNER:

 Ms Katie Marie Kui Young, Mr Sherman Young, Ms Renee Young

 Ms Amanda Baldwin

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Council for determination at the request of Councillors Notley-Smith, Nash & Belleli.

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to provide for a new upper level, the installation of a new in ground swimming pool and deck and filling in of the existing in ground swimming pool.

 

The main issue is the level of overshadowing of the adjoining dwellings in Oberon Street that will arise as a result of an upper level being provided to the dwelling.

 

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The application details alterations and additions to the dwelling including the reconfiguration of the existing ground floor level to provide for four bedrooms, three bathrooms, family room, laundry and double garage, and provide a new upper level comprising a study and open plan living areas leading to a covered balcony to the rear upper level. It is also proposed to demolish the existing patio to the rear of the dwelling and erect a new deck to the rear with a return to the southern elevation including a pergola to the eastern edge and a swimming pool change room beneath, and an external spiral staircase connecting the lower deck to the deck above. It is also proposed to fill in the existing swimming pool to the rear of the dwelling and install a new lap pool to the southern side of the site and carryout landscaping works within the existing front yard.

 

The proposed building works will provide for an additional 150m² of additional floor area to the dwelling.

         

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The premises is within a residential locality which contains a variety of single and two storey semi detached and free standing dwellings and multi unit housing development.

 

The subject premises is on the eastern side of Byron Street on the crest of hillside which is at the highest point in this section of Coogee and adjoins an unnamed reserve at the end of the cul de sac. The site has overall dimensions of 13.3/14.95m x 49.735/50.075m with a site area of 705m², and the site falls from the street frontage towards the rear of the site with a difference in levels of up to 3m, and across the site from the northern side to the southern side boundary with a difference of 7m at the rear and 3m at the front of the site.

 

4.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. The following submissions were received:

 

 

 

 

4.1     Objections

 

A and S Cleaver of 155 Oberon Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

There will be a loss of direct sunlight to their property during winter which has serious implications for energy efficiency.

Shadow diagrams included with the application indicate that during the winter solstice there will be some additional shadow cast upon the rear yard of this property from mid morning until early afternoon, and as a result the DCP preferred solution requirement that a minimum of at least 3 hours of sunlight being provided to the outdoor recreation space is not complied with. However it is considered that the proposal, subject to a reduction in height, meets the performance requirements as the extent of overshadowing, has been minimised.

There will be a significant invasion of privacy in the principal outdoor living area.

An inspection of the premises including upon the existing skillion roof of the dwelling which is in the same position and level as the proposed upper level new deck to the dwelling indicates that due to the significant difference in height between this dwelling and the lower level dwellings in Oberon Street the direct overlooking of the private outdoor areas of the objectors premises is restricted and a deferred commencement condition to reduce the depth of the upper level terrace and deck to the southern and eastern elevation is recommended to further restrict potential overlooking.

The sheer bulk and presence of the proposed development is out of character with the surrounding area.

Having regard to the nature of the adjoining development in Byron Street which includes two and three level dwellings of very much larger bulk and scale it is not considered that the proposed development could be considered excessive in the context of the local streetscape.

There may be increased noise levels resulting from the use of the additional outdoor entertaining areas and the lap pool.

Suitable conditions of consent may be imposed with respect to the enclosure of all pool plant and equipment to mitigate noise emissions.

There will be an adverse impact upon the desirability and consequently the economic value to the surrounding premises.

There is no evidence to suggest that the proposal will result in the loss of property values for surrounding premises.

 

 

I Hamilton of 157 Oberon Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

The proposal will result in a complete loss of sunlight to the backyard for up to half of the year.

See previous comments and Assessment Section.

The addition will contain a number of windows and a deck and balcony which will look directly into the backyard.

An inspection of the premises including upon the existing skillion roof of the dwelling which is in the same position and level as the proposed upper level new deck to the  dwelling indicates that due to the significant difference in height between this dwelling and the lower level dwellings in Oberon Street the direct overlooking of the private outdoor areas of the objectors premises is restricted and a deferred commencement condition to reduce the depth of the upper level terrace and deck to the southern and eastern elevation is recommended to further restrict potential overlooking.

The proposed development will create a permanent dominating presence because of its bulk and scale.

To some extent due to the difference in levels between the premises in Oberon and Byron Street any upper level to the subject premises can be viewed within the rear yards of the premises in Oberon Street however the building is articulated with varying southern boundary setbacks between 2.5m to 6.5m which will have a very different outlook than if the southern boundary setback at ground level was maintained.

The style of development is out of character with the properties within the row of dwellings.

The row of dwellings within the section of Oberon Street which adjoins the subject premises are of a consistent bulk and scale, however the section of Byron Street which immediately relates to the subject premises contains a variety of development which is able to accommodate the proposed development in the existing streetscape.

 

 

P Aiden and R Byrne of 159 Oberon Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

There will be a substantial loss of sunlight to their north facing backyard especially during the winter months.

 

 

See previous comments and Assessment Section.

The addition will be of an oppressive height.

Having regard to the nature of the adjoining development in Byron Street which includes two and three level dwellings of very much larger bulk and scale it is not considered that the proposed development could be considered excessive in the context of the local streetscape.

There will be a significant loss of privacy from the large terrace at the eastern end of the building.

An inspection of the premises including upon the existing skillion roof of the dwelling which is in the same position and level as the proposed upper level new deck to the  dwelling indicates that due to the significant difference in height between this dwelling and the lower level dwellings in Oberon Street the direct overlooking of the private outdoor areas of the objectors premises is restricted and a deferred commencement condition to reduce the depth of the upper level terrace and deck to the southern and eastern elevation is recommended to further restrict potential overlooking.

There will be increased noise as a result of the lap pool along their rear boundary.

Suitable conditions of consent are included with respect to the enclosure of all pool plant and equipment to mitigate noise emissions.

 

I Kitney of 161 Oberon Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

The proposal will result in the amount of sunlight to the backyard being seriously diminished.

Shadow diagrams included with the application indicate that there will be additional overshadowing to this property from the mid afternoon onwards with the existing levels of sunlight during the morning and up until 1pm being maintained which complies with the objectives and performance of the DCP.

The rear yard of the site has been elevated to be levelled and the existing swimming pool which is in part above ground level may be unstable if filled.

There are no proposed alterations to the existing ground levels of the premises as part of this application, however conditions of consent have been included to require that the levels of the rear yard are to be maintained and that the stability of the existing retaining wall to the southern boundary adjoining this swimming pool being investigated, and any rectification measures, which may be the subject of a separate development application being carried out prior to any occupation certificate being issued.

The proposed spiral staircase and deck will result in a loss of privacy.

An inspection of the premises including upon the existing skillion roof of the dwelling which is in the same position and level as the proposed upper level new deck to the  dwelling indicates that due to the significant difference in height between this dwelling and the lower level dwellings in Oberon Street the direct overlooking of the private outdoor areas of the objectors premises is restricted and a deferred commencement condition to reduce the depth of the upper level terrace and deck to the southern and eastern elevation is recommended to further restrict potential overlooking.

The residence adjoins a heritage item and the proposed development will be out of character with the character of the neighbourhood.

The row of dwellings within this section of Oberon Street which adjoins the subject premises are of a consistent bulk and scale, however the section of Byron Street which immediately relates to the subject premises contains a variety of development which is able to accommodate the proposed development in the existing streetscape.

The proposal has also been considered by Councils Heritage Planner who has advised that the proposed development is not inconsistent with the bulk and scale of the adjoining development in Byron Street and will not have any impact upon the significance of the heritage item at 153 Oberon Street in that the view of the heritage item will not be compromised.

 

The proposed floor space ratio does not comply with Council controls.

Having regard to the  nature of the adjoining development in Byron Street which includes two and three level dwellings of very much larger bulk and scale it is not considered that the proposed development could be considered excessive in the context of the local streetscape.    

There is already an imposing wall to the southern boundary adjoining the objectors premises and there is no indication as to what modifications are to be made to that wall to make it more appealing and reduce its height.

There are no proposed alterations to the existing wall to the southern boundary as part of this application.  

The proposed lap pool is very close to the side boundary and there is no indication as to where the swimming pool pump will be housed or noise from the pump reduced.

Suitable conditions of consent have been included with respect to the enclosure of all pool plant and equipment to mitigate noise emissions.

 

T and A Wright of 163 Oberon Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

There will be a loss of solar access in the rear yard which will result from the considerable increase in overshadowing.

The shadow diagrams included with the application indicate that there will be additional overshadowing to this property from late afternoon onwards with sunlight for the majority of the day being maintained in its current form which complies with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

The placement of windows and the proposed deck/balcony will overlook their rear private yard.

An inspection of the premises including upon the existing skillion roof of the dwelling which is in the same position and level as the proposed upper level new deck to the  dwelling indicates that due to the significant difference in height between this dwelling and the lower level dwellings in Oberon Street the direct overlooking of the private outdoor areas of the objectors premises is restricted and a deferred commencement condition to reduce the depth of the upper level terrace and deck to the southern and eastern elevation is recommended to further restrict potential overlooking.

The placement and use of the outdoor areas may result in loud noise and an infringement upon acoustic privacy.

Suitable conditions of consent have been included with respect to the enclosure of all pool plant and equipment to mitigate noise emissions.

 

Joint submission from the owners of 155, 157, 159, 161 and 163 Oberon Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

All six premises will have varying degrees of adverse loss of sunlight.

There will be varying degrees of loss of sunlight from minor to major losses. As has been discussed there will be a loss of sunlight to the premises 155,157 & 159 Oberon Street.  See Assessment Section.

All properties will have their backyard recreation area overlooked by the proposed east facing first floor deck.

An inspection of the premises including upon the existing skillion roof of the dwelling which is in the same position and level as the proposed upper level new deck to the dwelling indicates that due to the significant difference in height between this dwelling and the lower level dwellings in Oberon Street the direct overlooking of the private outdoor areas of the objectors premises is restricted and a deferred commencement condition to reduce the depth of the upper level terrace and deck to the southern and eastern elevation is recommended to further restrict potential overlooking.

Due to the difference in height of the premises the planned extension will result in the equivalent of a three storey building next door.

The proposed alterations to the dwelling will result primarily in a two storey dwelling with a three storey section at the rear of the dwelling which includes the existing subfloor level of the dwelling and given that for the most part the dwelling is only two storeys there are no objections in this regard.

The overall bulk and scale of the dwelling will be out of character with the design of the existing dwellings.

Having regard to the nature of the adjoining development in Byron Street which includes two and three level dwellings of very much larger bulk and scale it is not considered that the proposed development could be considered excessive in the context of the local streetscape.

The location of the swimming pool very close to the rear boundaries raises concerns as to noise from the pool filter and people using the pool.