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

 

4th July, 2006

 

HEALTH, BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A HEALTH BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANDWICK WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, TOWN HALL, 90 AVOCA STREET, RANDWICK, ON TUESDAY, 11TH JULY, 2006 AT 6.30 P.M.

 

Committee Members:                  His Worship the Mayor, Cr T. Seng, Cr B. Notley-Smith (Chairperson), Crs Andrews, Bastic, Belleli, Daley, Hughes, Kenny, Matson (Deputy Chairperson) Nash, Procopiadis, Sullivan, Tracey, White & Woodsmith.

 

Quorum:                                      Eight (8) members.

 

NOTE: AT THE EXTRAORDINARY MEETING HELD ON 28TH SEPTEMBER, 2004, THE COUNCIL RESOLVED THAT THE HEALTH, BUILDING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE BE CONSTITUTED AS A COMMITTEE WHOSE MEMBERSHIP CONSISTS OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND WITH FULL DELEGATION TO DETERMINE MATTERS ON THE AGENDA.

 

 

1           Apologies

 

2           Minutes

 

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE HEALTH, BUILDING & PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 13TH JUNE, 2006.

 

3           Declaration of Pecuniary & Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

4           Addresses to Committee by the Public

 

5           Development Applications

 

5.1                        

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 58/2006 –

29 ALFREDA STREET, COOGEE.  (DEFERRED)

2

 

5.2                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

351 RAINBOW STREET, SOUTH COOGEE.

17

 

5.3                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

30 KNOX STREET, CLOVELLY.

29

 

5.4                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

24 STEPHEN STREET, RANDWICK.

52

 

5.5                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

260-260A MAROUBRA ROAD, MAROUBRA.

66

 

5.6                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

32 RALEIGH STREET RANDWICK.

115

 

5.7                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

3 DARLEY ROAD, RANDWICK.

129

 

5.8                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

55 DENNING STREET, SOUTH COOGEE.

174

 

5.9                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

31 SACKVILLE STREET, MAROUBRA.

212

 

5.10                        

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

23 KING STREET, RANDWICK.

239

5.11

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

48A MIDDLE STREET, RANDWICK.

304

 

 

6           Miscellaneous

 

6.1                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 59/2006 - CLEARING OF VEGETATION IN LOT 66 OF THE PRINCE HENRY SITE.

331

 

6.2                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 60/2006 - PRINCE HENRY MASTERPLAN (DEEMED DCP) - PROPOSED AMENDMENT MAY 2006.

338

 

6.3                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 61/2006 -   DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (DA) APPLICANT SURVEY 2006.

351

 

 

7           Notice of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

 

…………………………………..

GENERAL MANAGER


 

Director, City Planning Report 58/2006

 

 

SUBJECT:

29 Alfreda Street, COOGEE

 

 

DATE:

23 June, 2006

FILE NO:

DA 73 / 1995 / C

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Council, at its Ordinary Meeting held on 18 April, 2006 resolved that the S96 application to extend the operating hours of the existing pool hall at 29-31 Alfreda Street be deferred in order to allow consultation with the Coogee Precinct Committee.

 

ISSUES:

 

On 8 June, 2006, Council wrote to the Coogee Precinct Committee seeking their comments on the proposed modification of the development consent. The Coogee Precinct Committee subsequently advised Council that at its monthly meeting held on 19 June, 2006, it resolved unanimously as follows:

 

That the Precinct strongly opposes any extension of trading hours of the Pool Hall and associated café at 29 Alfreda Street beyond midnight due to residents’ concerns about safety and issues in relation to anti-social behaviour of patrons associated with these premises.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

THAT Council as the responsible authority refuse its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Modify Development Consent No.073/95 on property 29-31 Alfreda Street, Coogee, to extend the existing operating hours from 10am to 1 am  for the following reasons:

 

1.       The proposed extension of trading hours is inconsistent with objective (c) of the General Business 3A Zone in Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, in that immediate residential properties will be adversely affected by the proposal from additional noise and anti-social behaviour.

 

2.       The NSW Police object to the proposal and have identified that the proposed extension of trading hours will further exacerbate existing amenity impacts in the area in respect to noise and anti-social behaviour.

 

3.       The proposed extension of hours of the use will create a further conflict of land uses in that the immediately adjoining properties to the west which are residential in nature and will unreasonably intensify the current use on site.

 

4.       The proposal is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, in that it will not be in the public interest.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Development application Report dated 20 April 2006.

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

KERRY KYRIACOU

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

MANAGER, DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

20 April, 2006

FILE NO:

DA73/1995/C

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 96 application to change the trading hours of the pool hall by extending the operating hours by an additional hour to close at 1am daily.

PROPERTY:

 29-31 Alfreda Street, Coogee

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Tararba Pty Limited

OWNER:

 Tararba 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.

 

An application has been submitted under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to extend the trading hours of the existing café / pool hall from 10am to 12 midnight, seven days per week (existing), to 10am to 1am, seven days per week.

The subject site is located on the southern side of Alfreda Street between Arden Street and Brook Street, Coogee.  The site is occupied by a three-level building, a tenancy within which has consent to operate - and is currently trading as - a pool hall.  The surrounding area is characterised by a mixture of commercial and residential development, and open space (Coogee Oval occupies land on the other side of Alfreda Street).

The application was notified to surrounding property owners and two submissions were received, which raised concern with impacts on the amenity of surrounding area with regard, primarily, to noise.  The application was referred to the Police who also raised concern with the proposal insofar as the extension of hours is likely to result in an increase in anti-social behaviour.

 

The recommendation is for refusal.

 

2.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Alfreda Street between Arden Street and Brook Street, Coogee.  The site is occupied by a three-level building that contains a number of tenancies including a gym, a video store and a pool hall, which is the subject of this application.  Section 3, below, provides a history of the relevant consent for the pool hall.  The pool hall is located on the eastern side of the building and its access is elevated above ground level.

The surrounding area is characterised by a mixture of commercial and residential development, and open space (Coogee Oval which occupies land on the other side of Alfreda Street).  The adjoining site to the west is occupied by a commercial building that is being used as a shop for diving equipment.  The next property to the west, and all others beyond it to Brook Street, are occupied by buildings containing residential dwellings.  The adjoining property to the east is improved with a three-storey residential flat building and the site beyond that, to the east, is improved with a four storey mixed commercial and residential building.  Figure 1 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area.

Figure 1: The subject site and its surroundings

 

3.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

On 10 April 1995, the Council granted its consent to change of use to restaurant with billiard tables.

On 18 June 1996, the Council granted a Section 102 (Section 96) application to delete condition No.2 & continue the use for an indefinite period.

On 15 August 2000, the Council granted a Section 96 application to delete condition 6 of consent relating to the use of video games, pinball machines or the like.

 

4.    THE PROPOSAL

 

It is proposed to extend the hours of trade of the pool hall from 10am to 12midnight, seven days per week, to 10am to 1am, seven days per week.

This would involve an amendment to condition No.4 of the original development consent, which states as follows:

The hours of operation are limited to 10.00am to 12.00 midnight.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The owners of adjoining properties were notified of the proposed amendments on the 20 February 2006.  As a result of this notification, the following submissions were received:

CJ and JN Conolly – 23-25 Alfreda Street

Issue

Comment

Disturbance to peace and quiet.

The proposed extension of trading hours has the potential to increase the impacts of the activity such as noise and anti-social behaviour.

Attract patrons from other venues that may close at earlier times.

Although this may occur, it cannot be substantiated.

Mr J Senakis – 1/33 Alfreda Street

Issue

Comment

Excess noise causing disturbance to sleep.

The proposed extension of trading hours has the potential to increase the impacts of the activity such as noise and anti-social behaviour.

No provision for parking will worsen the parking situation in the area.

The proposed extension of hours will not necessarily raise demand for parking in the area.  Also there is ample parking in the immediate vicinity of the site. E.g. Council’s public car park across the road which has vacancies later at night.

Traffic will be made worse.

The proposed extension of hours is likely to have negligible impact on traffic. 

An increase in littering.

This cannot be substantiated.

Anti-social incidents that will extend for an additional hour outside the premises.

The proposed extension of trading hours has the potential to increase the  impacts of the activity such as noise and anti-social behaviour.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

Environmental Health

 

The application was referred to Environmental Health for comment.  No objections were raised subject to conditions with any approval.  The following comments were made:

The proposal

The section 96 application is for an extension of trading hours of the pool hall facility at the subject premises till 1:00am, seven days.

 

Key Issues

Noise

The application does not stipulate any potential noise sources, i.e. air conditioning units and/or amplified music which may cause a nuisance to nearby residences and therefore standard conditions in relation to noise are to be attached to the consent so as to minimise any potential nuisances which may be created.

The information submitted with the application reveals that no alcohol is provided on site and therefore only minimal noise is generated from the premises.

 

Other

Nuisance issues which may arise through the potential operation of the premises till 1:00am, seven days are to be addressed by Council’s Compliance Officer.

 

Environmental Compliance

 

The application was referred to Council’s Building and Environmental Compliance Section for comment.  It was recommended that the application be refused.  The following comments were made:

 

INTRODUCTION

 

The application seeks to modify condition No. 4 of DA/73/1995 in respect to the permitted hours of operation at the subject premises. In this regard, the modification seeks an extension of operating hours of one (1) hour to permit the premises to operate till 1.00 am.

 

The reasons for the proposed extension of trading hours of the premises, contained within documentation accompanying the application, are as follows:

 

1.   Due to the nature of our business we cannot put time frames on patrons to complete a game of pool or snooker.

 

2.   Most businesses in the area open till 3am.

 

3.   We have had no complaints about our business from neighbouring dwellings.

 

4.   We don’t serve alcohol and therefore our patrons leave in an orderly state.

 

5.   The pool hall business is a well run operation with minimum noise and nuisance to neighbouring buildings.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The subject premises occupies the ground floor portion of an existing part 2/part 3 storey commercial building situated at 29 - 31 Alfreda Street, Coogee. The subject premises is located on land zoned 3A (General Business Zone) pursuant to Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, opposite Coogee Oval and is on the fringe of the Coogee Commercial Precinct.

 

As prefaced in the introduction, Development Consent No. DA/73/1995 was granted on the 10 April 1995, for permission to change the use of part of the ground floor of the building to a café including the installation of 19 pool tables, subject to conditions.

 

Relevantly, condition No. 4 of Development Consent No. DA/73/1995, states:

 

“4. The Hours of operation are limited to 10.00 am to 12.00 midnight.”

 

In addition, the consent was limited to a 12 month period, by virtue of condition No. 2, which stated:

 

“2. The development consent is limited to a period of twelve months…”

 

A subsequent application (made under the former section 102 of the EP&A Act) was granted by Council on the 18 June 1996, to delete condition No. 2 of Development Consent No. DA/73/1995, to allow for the continued use of the premises.

 

In April 2000, a further application was made to modify Development Consent No. DA/73/1995, in respect to condition No. 6, which stated:

 

“6. No video games, pinball machines or the like are to be installed.”

 

This application was determined by Council’s Health, Building and Planning Committee on the 15 August 2000, which resulted in condition No. 6 of the consent being amended to read:

 

“6. The number of video games/amusement machines shall be restricted to 5 only.”

 

Also of some relevance is the imposition of a condition of development consent, at the time of the initial determination in April 1995, which prohibits the supply and consumption of alcohol at the premises. In this regard, condition No. 5 of Development Consent No. DA/73/1995, states:

 

“5. No alcohol is to be served or consumed.”

 

ISSUES

 

Council officers have concerns in respect to the further extension of operating hours at commercial premises in the Coogee commercial area. These concerns, generally, relate to the cumulative impacts of a continued augmentation of late night operating hours upon the nearby residential amenity, particularly where a proposed extension has the potential to exacerbate or increase existing incidents of late night disturbance and/or anti-social behaviour.

 

The existing problems associated with incidents of anti-social behaviour and late night disturbances at Coogee are well documented and it is within this context that the comments contained within this Memorandum are made.

 

When assessing the suitability of an extension of operating hours for a particular premises, consideration should be given to existing and potential adverse impact upon the residential amenity of the locality.

 

In Randall Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Council [2004] NSWLEC 277, Tuor C considered the principles to be applied when assessing an application for an extension or intensification of a use which may have an adverse impact on residential amenity. She said:

 

“25.     Principles for the assessment of an extension or intensification of a use which may have an adverse impact on residential amenity, such as a hotel, are:

·    First, is the impact of the operation of the existing use on residential amenity acceptable?

If the answer is no, then an extension or intensification, would be unacceptable unless there is no overall increase in impact or there are measures proposed which would mitigate the existing impact.

·    Second, if the answer is yes, is the impact of the proposed extension or intensification still acceptable?

In answering the first question, it is not sufficient to assume that a use operating in compliance with its approval has an acceptable impact.”

 

Although Randall was concerned with an extension or intensification of a hotel use, in my opinion, the above principle would equally apply to the extension or intensification of other types of commercial uses.

 

Following from the above planning principle considerable weight should be given to the potential adverse impacts upon the nearby residential amenity, the proposed extended hours of operation of the premises may create.

 

Of further importance, it should be noted that at the time of making the original development application in 1995, the Applicant’s proposed hours of operation for the premises were 10.00am to 1.00am, Sunday to Thursday and 10.00am to 2.00am, Fridays and Saturdays. At that time, the Officer’s Report (from the then Director of Planning) dated 22 March 1995, stated, that:

 

Alfreda Street is partly zoned Residential “C1” and Business General “A2”. There is therefore, to some extent, a conflict of landuses [sic]. The Council needs to maintain a balance between the competing business and residential uses.”

 

The Report concluded, inter alia, that:

 

“It is considered that the proposed use can be approved provided that it is conditioned such that the hours of operation are limited to 12.00 midnight…”

 

In reviewing the Report, it is apparent that considerable weight was given to the potential impacts of patrons leaving the premises upon the amenity of the area, resulting in the imposition of a condition of development consent which restrict the hours of operation of the premises to midnight.  

 

A relevant consideration is the Applicant’s reasons for the proposed extension of operating hours. In this regard, the extension sought does not appear to be for the purpose of expanding patron numbers (notwithstanding that this may be a foreseeable consequence). Moreover, it appears that it is for the purpose of providing greater operational flexibility in accommodating existing patrons, engaged in pool and billiard activities, to a time which is not sanctioned under the existing development consent.

 

A further reason proffered by the Applicant for the proposed extension is that most businesses in the area are open until 3.00am. Whilst it is true that there are a number of premises, which are not licensed premises, permitted to operate to a later time then the subject premises, it is also the case that these other premises (McDonalds – corner of Alfreda and Arden Streets, DA/12/1991 determined on the 28 May 1991 and Coogee Yeeros – 204 Arden Street, approved to operate as a refreshment room since 1977) have the benefit of approvals which were granted many years ago, when either development consent was not required or development consent was granted absent of conditions which restrict the hours of operation. There are also three late trading takeaway food premises situated in Coogee Bay Road which are permitted to operate later than the subject premises.

 

Nevertheless, the use of the subject premises is quite different to these other uses. The difference properly characterised, is that the other late trading premises in the area (which are not licensed premises) are predominately takeaway food premises. Whereas, the subject premises is approved as a café providing amusement activities for patrons, which in my opinion, necessitates greater control.

 

Furthermore, there is the issue of proximity. As previously outlined, the subject premises is situated on the fringe of the Coogee commercial precinct in close proximity to the adjacent Residential C Zone. The proximity of the subject premises to nearby residential premises requires sufficient controls to maintain a reasonable level of residential amenity.  

 

In respect to existing impacts, a search of Council records has disclosed that there is no documented complaints history in respect to the operation of the premises. However, a late night inspection conducted by Council officers on the 4 December 2005 for the purpose of identifying late trading food premises at Coogee, disclosed that the subject premises was operating contrary to its permitted hours of operation. The inspection disclosed that the subject premises were in operation at 12.50am.

 

A subsequent advisory/warning letter was sent to the Proprietor of the subject premises on the 12 January 2006, which set out the permitted operating hours of the premises and the consequences should there be future breaches of conditions of development consent. This may have brought about the impetus for the extension of operating hours now sought.

 

In addition, the Applicant contends that because the premises are not licensed to sell or supply alcohol results in patrons leaving the premises in an orderly state. Whilst it is also true that the prohibition on the service and consumption of alcohol at the premises mitigates the potential for alcohol related anti-social behaviour of patrons in or around the premises, this in itself does not eliminate the potential for disturbances to the nearby residential area as a result of patrons leaving the premises at 1.00am.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Notwithstanding the recent non-compliance and the absence of a complaint history which may inform the Applicant’s proposition that the premises are “well run”, it may also be the case that it is the current restriction on operating hours that is the predominate factor which mitigates the likelihood of the subject premises having adverse impacts on the nearby residential amenity.

 

Having regard to the circumstances, including the proximity to the nearby residential zoning, the nature of the use of the premises (which permits amusement activities ancillary to the café use), the cumulative impacts to the area associated with an extension of operating hours at the premises and the problems currently being experienced at Coogee in respect to late night disturbances and anti-social behaviour, it is my opinion, that any increase in operating hours beyond what is currently permitted has the potential to adversely impact on the nearby residential amenity.

 

As previously outlined, at the time of the original grant of development consent for the use of the premises in 1995, similar operating hours were proposed to that which are now sought. At that time, considerable weight was given to the potential impacts of patrons leaving the premises resulting in the imposition of a condition of development consent which restricts the hours of operation of the premises to midnight . In this regard, there is nothing to suggest that there has been a change in the circumstances in respect to the operation of the premises which would lead Council to arrive at a different determination.   

 

For the reasons outlined in this report, I believe that the grant of the application for an extension of operating hours to permit the premises to operate to 1.00am would not be in the public interest.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

It is recommended, that:

 

(a)        The application made pursuant to section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, submitted to Council by Tararba Pty Limited on the 13 February 2006, to modify Development Consent No. DA/73/1995, to extend the hours of operation for premises situated at 29 Alfreda Street, Coogee to 1.00am, seven days per week, be REFUSED.

 

7.    EXTERNAL REFERRAL COMMENTS

 

The application was referred to the Eastern Beaches Local Area Command (Police Dept) for comment.  The following comments were received and endorsed by Senior Constable Condie, Sergeant Simpkins, Inspector Cassar and Commander Rogerson:

 

It is the opinion of Police that an increase in hours would increase the likelihood of anti-social behaviour between the patrons at the (subject) premises and other premises within the Coogee Basin.  This increase in hours will also impacts on neighbours by disturbing the quite good order of the community and finally Police are of the opinion that 12 midnight is a reasonable hour for closure.

 

I believe that the increase in trading hours for this establishment would most likely contribute to an increase in gatherings (particularly young persons) and would increase the frequency of anti-social related incidents.

 

8.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The site is zoned Business 3A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. 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.

 

9.    SECTION 96 AMENDMENT

 

9.1  Substantially the same

 

The proposed modifications are minor insofar as they are considered to represent substantially the same development.

 

9.2  Consideration of submissions

 

See section 5, above, for consideration of submissions.

 

10.  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.

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Clause 13 of LEP 1998 contains the objectives of the Business 3A zone.  They are as follows:

 

(a)    to maintain the viability of existing business centres, and

(b)    to facilitate development of land, in places identified by the Council as suitable to be used as business centres, for commercial, retail, residential and community purposes:

(i)     by introducing appropriate floor space ratio controls, and

(ii)    by encouraging economically viable retail cores which are centrally located and in close proximity to public transport, and

(iii)   by enhancing employment opportunities and servicing the needs of the local and regional community, and

(iv)   by encouraging and facilitating the use of public transport, and

(v)    by providing and enhancing pedestrian and public open space areas for shoppers and workers, and

(vi)   by maintaining and improving the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the City of Randwick,

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

(d)    to enable a mix of housing types to encourage housing affordability.

 

The existing operation of the premises is generally consistent with objectives (a) and (b) above.  However, the proposed extended trading hours are not considered to be inconsistent with objective (c), in that the potential increase in the operation of the activity has the potential to cause noise and anti-social behavioural impacts on the amenity of the existing nearby residential development on Alfreda Street.

 

The applicant has stated that the additional hour is needed as, currently, the existing permitted hours of trade do not allow enough time for patrons to finish a game of pool and leave the building within the limitations of the existing hours.  In other words, some patrons are part-way through a game when closing time arrives and then, despite the doors being closed, the last patrons do not have an opportunity to leave until after the official closing time.  However, this is not considered to be a reasonable argument or justification for extending the trading hours, since this is a time management and operational issue rather than a planning issue.

 

The Police, objectors and Council’s Compliance Officer have all raised concern with respect to the proposed extension of trading hours and the potential such would have on the amenity of the area.  The issues that have been raised are in relation to potential noise and anti-social behavioural impacts.  An extension of trading hours will take those existing problems later in the morning and will, therefore, cause greater disturbance to the immediate surrounding residents. 

 

The applicant has given other reasons for the application: most businesses in the area are open until 3am; the existing operation has not been subject to complaints; the business does not serve alcohol; and the business is well run with minimal disturbance.  The main businesses operating till approximately 3 am are the 2 main licensed premises in the area, The Palace and The Coogee Bay Hotel plus some smaller fast food / take-away shops.  These buildings have historically become institutions in the area.  Despite this, they have caused many complaints and problems due to their uses.  The proposal is not located in the heart of the Coogee commercial area (comprising mainly of Coogee Bay Road).  Alfreda Street is considered to be predominately residential in character and although the subject site is zoned General Business, activities for entertainment purposes are more intensive and likely to create increase amenity impacts such as noise and anti-social behaviour, on immediately adjoining residential environments.

 

Council’s Compliance Officer has addressed some of these arguments (see Section 6).  In respect of the arguments that relate to minimal disturbance and the absence of complaints, this has not been substantiated and the raising of objections by the residents and Police as part of this application indicate that there are impacts that are causing concern. 

 

11.  FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

12.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposed modification to the original consent satisfies Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 in that it will constitute substantially the same development.  However, approval of the modifications will result in significant additional adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the local environment. It is therefore considered that modifications to the original Development Consent are not reasonable.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority refuse its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Modify Development Consent No.073/95 on property 29-31 Alfreda Street, Coogee, to extend the existing operating hours from 10am to 1 am  for the following reasons:

 

1.           The proposed extension of trading hours is inconsistent with objective (c) of the General Business 3A Zone in Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, in that immediate residential properties will be adversely affected by the proposal from additional noise and anti-social behaviour.

 

2.           The NSW Police object to the proposal and have identified that the proposed extension of trading hours will further exacerbate existing amenity impacts in the area in respect to noise and anti-social behaviour.

 

3.           The proposed extension of hours of the use will create a further conflict of land uses in that the immediately adjoining properties to the west which are residential in nature and will unreasonably intensify the current use on site.

 

4.           The proposal is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, in that it will not be in the public interest.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

TOM HUTCHISON

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

13 June, 2006

FILE NO:

D/1114/2004

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 96(2) modification to approved new dwelling house

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 is referred to Committee as the original application was determined by Council as a deferred commencement consent at its Ordinary Council Meeting on 23 August, 2005, for a new dwelling house and swimming pool at No. 351 Rainbow Street, South Coogee.  The deferred commencement conditions included a requirement to lower the overall building height by 300mm to improve the view over the new dwelling from the upper floor of No. 349 Rainbow Street.  As well, Council imposed an additional requirement for the removal of the roof over the east facing balconies of Bedrooms 1, 2 and 3.  The consent became operable on 27 January 2006 when plans were approved which satisfied the above requirements amongst others.

 

A previous Section 96 (2) application to reinstate the roof over the east facing balconies of Bedrooms 1, 2 and 3 with other modifications similar to those in the current Section 96(2) application, was refused by Council at its Health Building and Planning Committee Meeting on 9 May, 2006. 

 

The current application seeks approval for the extension of the basement carparking area to provide an additional (third) car parking space; the addition of a spa and deck along the southern boundary adjacent to the approved swimming pool; the addition of a new operable skylight; inclusion of frosted glass louvres to the stairwell window on the western elevation of the new dwelling house and the inclusion of a natural gas fireplace and associated flue, similar to previously applied for, however this application does not seek the extension of the roof over the east facing balconies, due to the issues of view loss as previously raised by the owner of No. 349 Rainbow Street.

 

Objections have been received from adjacent properties to the east (No. 349 Rainbow Street) and to the south (No. 1 Garnet Street).  The submissions generally relate to the objectors’ opinion that the original proposal was over generous and any increase in size or further modification is unwarranted; potential view impacts arising from the proposed fireplace flue as well as health impacts associated with fumes emanating from the flue; potential glare from the new skylight; noise from the spa; and potential damage from increased excavation. 

 

The current Section 96 application was referred for mediation between the applicant and the objectors, prior to reporting the matter to Council.

 

A mediation meeting took place on the 8 June, 2006, however, it was unsuccessful.  The applicant has advised subsequently that she is willing to reduce the size of the new skylight to a minimum (795mm x 795mm), reduce the height of the flue to 350mm and to colour the flue similar to the roof with heat resistant paint to reduce reflection and has agreed to these as additional conditions of consent.

 

The proposal meets the requirements of a Section 96 modification in that the amended proposal is substantially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted.  It is considered, as per the recommendation of the report of the previous Section 96 application to Council, that there is minimal impact of the changes to adjoining properties and the proposal does not significantly change the proposal’s compliance as previously assessed with regard to Council’s Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions as agreed by the applicant.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The application is made pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended (EPA Act) to modify Condition 1 of the consent to Development Application No. 1114/2004 relating to amendments to the approved plans, that include the following:-

 

·          Extension of the basement carparking area to the south and the west, with the provision of an additional (third) car parking space.

·          Addition of a spa and deck along the southern boundary adjacent to the approved swimming pool.

·          Addition of one (1) new operable skylight 1.045m x 1.045m.

·          Addition of a natural gas fireplace between the living room and dining room and an associated flue 600mm high and 355mm in diameter.

 

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, prior to commencement

of demolition works

 

 

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

 

Previously existing on the site was a part one/part two storey brick and tile dwelling house, with a garage located under the house on its eastern side.  Demolition works are in progress on the site.  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

 

Council at its Ordinary Council Meeting held on 23 August, 2005, resolved to grant a deferred commencement consent to Development Application No. 1114/2004 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and the construction of a new dwelling house and swimming pool at 351 Rainbow Street, South Coogee.

 

The deferred commencement condition related to the submission for approval of details of external colours, materials and amended plans 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 roofing over first floor level eastern balconies of Bedrooms 1, 2 and 3;

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.

 

The determination was the subject of an appeal in the Land and Environment Court which was subsequently discontinued.

 

Amended plans detailing the above requirements and details of external colours, materials and finishes were subsequently submitted and the consent became operable on 27 January, 2006.

 

A previous Section 96 application was refused by Council at its Health Building and Planning Committee Meeting on 9 May, 2006 for the following reasons:

 

1.         The proposed development will have an intrusive impact on the view from adjoining properties.

2.         The proposal will result in intrusive noise impacts from the swimming pool spa.

3.         The proposal will result in an unacceptable increase in the floor space of the building.

 

The subject application was referred to a mediation meeting between the adjoining owner to the west (No. 349 Rainbow Street) and the applicant.  The mediation meeting took place on 8 June, 2006, however, no agreement was reached.  Subsequently, the applicant has agreed to conditions to reduce the size of the new skylight to 795mm x 795mm, lower the flue height to 350mm and paint the flue with a heat resistant paint a similar colour as the roof to reduce reflection.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans, until 2 June, 2006.  As a result, the following submissions were received:

 

5.1  Objections

 

N Stoker of 1 Garnet Street, South Coogee

 

·          Additional parking space.  The house is already well over the FSR and even though the applicant says it will not have a visual impact, it will alter the level of the landscaped area and disregards Council’s guidelines. 

·          Locating a spa next to the pool would add considerably to the noise.

·          The addition of a new skylight would be visually degrading, as would the addition of a flue for a fireplace, which would cause visual degradation to the view from No. 1 Garnet Street.

 

Mrs T Tadros and Mr R Tadros of 349 Rainbow Street, South Coogee and on behalf of Mrs Tadros a submission has been received from S Malik, MalikArchitects of Suite 17, Stones Arcade, 673 Pittwater Road, Dee Why

 

·          There has been no change in circumstances or design modification to justify movement from Council’s previously stated position.  The proposed amendments change the design in a way which result in a worse impacts.

·          There is no problem with parking in this section of Rainbow Street and no necessity for additional on site parking.

·          The approved development has a large skylight and all rooms have balconies and it does not need more natural ventilation, daylight or cooling, especially as the approved development adversely affects the natural and cross ventilation to No. 349 Rainbow Street.  Access to the roof for maintenance purposes should be by ladder.

·          The proposed flue is an unacceptable, unnecessary and unreasonable intrusion to the view to Wedding Cake Island and which will produce exhaust gases that will affect the health of the residents of No. 349 Rainbow Street. 

·          The proposed extra skylight would increase the level of sun reflection to No. 349 Rainbow Street and would be worse when opened.

·          The market value of No. 349 Rainbow Street would be greatly reduced due to the effects of the proposed amendments.

·          The excavation on the west side of the proposed building will be closer to No. 349 Rainbow Street and as the level of footings of the suspended swimming pool with underneath living area is much higher, any small cracks caused by the excavation will result in leakage to the underneath living room.

·          The proposed spa pool will result in intrusive noise impacts, especially as there is a non complying rear setback with the original approval and a non comply setback of the swimming pool and spa.

 

6.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

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

 

7.    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 Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies (DCP-Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies)

·        Randwick Development Control Plan – Parking (DCP-Parking)

·        Building Code of Australia.

 

8.    SECTION 96 AMENDMENT

 

8.1       Substantially the same development

 

Council must be satisfied, in the first instance, that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent was originally granted was modified.

 

In respect to the above requirement, it is considered that the development, the subject of the Section 96 (2) application, is fundamentally and materially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted.  The proposed modifications do not substantially alter the approved building’s envelope as defined by its height, footprint, floor space or the design of the building facades above ground level, including window openings.  As such, it is considered that fundamentally, the overall appearance and character of the development will remain the same as originally approved.

 

8.2       Consideration of submissions

 

The Section 96 (2) application was notified in accordance with the provisions of Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans until 2 June, 2006.  Submissions were received from two of the adjacent properties as detailed in Section 5.1 of this report.  The issues raised in the submissions are considered below.

 

Basement extension

 

Both objections raise issue with the extension of the basement for an additional parking space on the basis that the approved development is in excess of the preferred solutions for floor space, there is already sufficient on site parking provided in the development as approved and the proximity of the excavation to the western boundary would result in building damage to No. 349 Rainbow Street.

 

There is technically an increase in the floor space ratio due to the increased area of the basement garage, as only an area less than 40m2 is excluded from the definition of gross floor area as contained in the DCP-Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.  Notwithstanding the garage extension is below natural ground level and will not increase the visual bulk and scale of the building as approved.  While the approved development meets the minimum parking requirement for dwelling houses with 3 or more bedrooms, that is two (2) parking spaces, there is no maximum or limit to the number of on-site-parking spaces that may be provided under the DCP-Parking.  It should be noted, however, that under the DCP-Parking, a ‘home activity’, which is an exempt form of development in residential zones, requires an additional parking space to that required for a dwelling.  Further, it is understood that the applicant’s husband is a builder who intends to use the study as an office and the additional car parking space for a business vehicle.  Therefore the proposal would then satisfy the requirements of the DCP-Parking.

 

The basement car park is to be extended to the west by approximately 900mm and to be adjacent to the western boundary of the site.  The landscape level is proposed to be lowered along the western side and at the rear to RL 45.25 so as to be the same as the ground floor level of the house to prevent moisture penetration to the house walls.  Due to the depth of excavation, even as originally approved, a retaining wall is required to the western side of the site adjacent to No. 349 Rainbow Street (to an approximate height of 2m).  The basement wall in the new position will now fulfil both functions and is a more logical and cost effective approach to provide the necessary retaining to No. 349 Rainbow Street and maintain a landscape treatment along the western side of the new dwelling house.  Notwithstanding, the position of the basement wall as approved is still well within the zone of influence of the footings of the neighbouring property to the west.  Regardless of whether it stays in its approved position or in the modified position as proposed, it still has to be designed in a structurally adequate manner, so as not to cause damage to the neighbouring property to the west (No. 349 Rainbow Street). 

 

As such standard conditions have already been included in the consent requiring a professional engineer’s report for the proposed method of excavation, shoring or pile construction, including details of potential vibration emissions and that demonstrates the suitability of the proposed methods of construction to overcome any potential damage to nearby land/premises.  As well, a condition requiring a geotechnical engineer’s report for driven type piles/shoring demonstrating that damage should not occur to adjoining premises and also a condition for a dilapidation report detailing the current condition of all premises adjoining the subject site is already contained with the consent.

 

Accordingly the provision of an additional car parking space within the basement may be supported.

 

Spa

 

The Section 96 application proposes the addition of a spa adjacent to the swimming at the southern end of the property, adjacent to the boundary with No. 1 Garnet Street.  No. 1 Garnet Street has objected to the spa on the basis of noise.  Noise from plant and equipment, including swimming pool and spa pumps is already covered by standard conditions within the existing consent and includes specified hours for the operation of such equipment.  It is considered that people utilising their residential premises for their own recreational purposes in a responsible manner would not lead to adverse impacts in terms of the acoustic privacy of adjoining residents.

 

Skylight

 

Both No. 1 Garnet Street and No. 349 Rainbow Street have raised objections to the addition of the new skylight on the grounds that it will be visual degrading, is unneeded and will give rise to glare. 

 

It is maintained by the applicant that the new skylight is for access to the roof for maintenance purposes and subsequent to the mediation meeting, the applicant has advised a willingness to accept a condition, in order to address neighbour concern, to reduce the size of the skylight to a minimum (795mm x 795mm).  The addition of the proposed skylight would not substantially increase the building bulk or impede any view, given that it would be flush with the hob at its outer edges and would only have a slight dome.  To reduce any glare it is considered that the skylight could be made of white opaque glass or plastic.  As such, the proposal is considered reasonable and an additional condition of consent is included within the Recommendation of the report.

 

Fireplace and flue

 

Concerns have been raised on behalf of No. 349 Rainbow Street that exhaust fumes from the proposed flue to the new gas fire place will have adverse ventilation, health and view impacts to the occupants of No. 349 Rainbow Street, as well as be visually degrading to the view from No. 1 Garnet Street.  This objection cannot be sustained.  Natural gas provides a clean flame, which produces no discernible odour or visible plume.

 

In regard to the visual impact of the flue, the applicant has further advised that the flue as shown on the Section 96 plans, with a height of 600mm above the roof level can be reduced to a height of 350mm.  As such the height to the top of the flue is approximately 550mm below the bottom of the sill of the family room windows of No. 349 Rainbow Street and would not significantly interrupt the view to Wedding Cake Island from No. 349 Rainbow Street and have no substantial impact on the view from No. 1 Garnet Street, whose primary view is to the south-east and not to the north across the subject property.   Accordingly, an appropriate additional condition of consent is contained within the Recommendation reflecting the revised flue height as agreed by the applicant.

 

Market value

 

It is the opinion of No. 349 Rainbow Street that the market value of their property would be greatly reduced as a result of the proposed modifications, however it is considered that the impacts arising from the proposed changes to the approved design do not give rise to significant adverse impacts that could sustain such a claim nor has that claim been substantiated in any way.

 

8.3       Section 79C Assessment

 

Council, in determining a Section 96(2) modification, must take into consideration relevant matters referred to in Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended (EP & A Act).

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the EP & A Act, including the following relevant environmental planning instruments and policies:-

 

8.3.1    State Environment 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 original proposal was subject to a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP. The provision of a certificate indicates that compliance with the current targets set for energy and water conservation have been met by the development.  Condition 15 of the consent requires a relevant BASIX certificate and as such an amended BASIX certificate is required to be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issue of a construction certificate. 

 

8.3.2    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned Residential 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (LEP) and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The proposal does not alter the original assessment with respect to the 2A Zone objectives and the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area under Clauses 10 and 29 of the LEP respectively as there are no significant changes proposed to the overall appearance or form of the development. :-

 

8.3.3    Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

The proposal, as modified, does not substantially alter the original assessment with respect to the requirements of the DCP.  There is no change to the external wall height or building setbacks above the basement level.  There is technically an increase in the floor space ratio due to the increased area of the basement garage, as only an area less than 40m2 is excluded from the definition of gross floor area as contained in the DCP-Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.  It is considered however, that as the basement is located predominantly below existing ground level, the basement extension will not contribute to the visual bulk of the building.  It should also be noted that although the overall landscaped area has been reduced by the proposed modifications, it maintains compliance with the preferred solutions for the amount of landscaped area and permeable (soft) landscaping, being 40% and 20% respectively.

 

8.3.4    Development Control Plan – Parking

 

The proposal extends the area of the carpark with contiguous piling around the basement and the southern boundary for shoring and site stabilisation.  This increases the number of cars capable of being in the basement garage from two to three.  As previously discussed in the report, the proposal maintains its compliance with the numerical requirements for on-site carparking as contained within the DCP-Parking.

 

9.    FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

10.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposed modifications do not generate any significant additional impacts to surrounding properties or the streetscape and on a whole are beneficial to the building design subject to appropriate additional conditions as agreed by the applicant and as contained within the Recommendation of the report.

 

11.  RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its consent under Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to modify Development Application No 1114/2004 on property at 351 Rainbow Street, South Coogee in the following manner:-

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

 

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 as amended by the Section 96 plans with Project No. 04xsy019 and numbered 1 01 Amendment G dated 12 April 2006; 2 01 Amendment F, 3 01 and 3 02 both Amendment E, all dated 10 May 2006 and received by Council on 11 May 2006, only in so far as they relate to the modifications detailed in the Section 96 application and except as may amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans.

 

Additional conditions

 

91.       The skylight over the walk-in robe of the Master Bedroom shall be reduced in size to 795mm by 795mm and be flush with the hob at its outer edges, with only a slight dome consisting of white opaque glass or white plastic to minimise glare and view impacts to the neighbouring dwelling.  Details to be shown on the construction certificate plans to the satisfaction of the certifying authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

92        The flue to the natural gas fireplace shall have a maximum height above the roof level of 350mm to minimise any interruption to the view from the neighbouring dwelling and shall be painted with a heat resistant paint a similar colour as the roof to minimise reflection to neighbouring properties.  Details to be shown on the construction certificate plans to the satisfaction of the certifying authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID PIRIE

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

SENIOR ASSESSMENT PALNNER

 

 

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

15 June, 2006

FILE NO:

DA165/2006

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations and new first floor additions to the existing semi-detached dwelling house including new front and rear decks at first floor level, new deck above front garage, new rear spa pool with associated deck.

PROPERTY:

 30 Knox Street, Clovelly

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 Classic Plans

OWNER:

 Ms K J Locke

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 applicant is seeking approval to carry out alterations and new first floor additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including new front and rear decks at first floor level, a new deck above front garage and a new rear spa pool with associated deck.

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Knox Street between Greville Street and Manson Place in Clovelly and is presently occupied by a single storey semi-detached dwelling house. The site has a frontage width of 6.565m, a maximum side boundary depth of 35.48m and has an overall site area of 234m². The site falls from the rear towards the street with a difference in levels of up to 6m. Neighbouring the property to the north is a pair of single storey semi-detached dwelling (Nos. 28 & 28A Knox Street), to the south is the other half of the subject semi-detached dwelling (No. 32 Knox Street) and to the rear is a pair of single storey semi-detached dwellings fronting Greville Street (Nos. 27 & 29 Greville Street). The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of one and two storey semi-detached dwellings.

 

The subject application was lodged on 15 March 2006. An on-site meeting was held on 27 April 2006 and a number of issues relating to the bulk and scale of the proposed first floor additions, the extent of view loss impact to adjoining dwelling at No. 29 Greville Street and the proposed colours, materials and finished of the development were discussed. The applicant submitted the amended plans on 18 May 2006 which indicates a reduction to the first floor addition and privacy screens are provided to both sides of the rear deck.

 

The proposal including the amendments has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification and an objection was received from the owners of No. 29 Greville Street. The objection was concerned mainly with loss of views. The extent of the view loss impacts to No. 29 Greville Street is discussed in this report and was found to be satisfactory.

 

The amended proposal does not comply with the numerical requirements of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies in terms of FSR, external wall height and side setback. However, it has been demonstrated in this report that the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP are satisfied in each instance. It is not considered that the amended proposal will result in any significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The applicant is seeking approval to carry out alterations and new first floor additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including new front and rear decks at first floor level, a new deck above front garage and a new rear spa pool with associated deck.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Knox Street between Greville Street and Manson Place in Clovelly and is presently occupied by a single storey semi-detached dwelling house with a garage at the front. Figure 1 is a photograph of the subject site. 

Figure 1: The subject site

 

The site has a frontage width of 6.565m, a maximum side boundary depth of 35.48m and has an overall site area of 234m². The site falls from the rear towards the street with a difference in levels of up to 6m. Neighbouring the property to the north is a pair of single storey semi-detached dwelling (Nos. 28 & 28A Knox Street), to the south is the other half of the subject semi-detached dwelling (No. 32 Knox Street) and to the rear is a pair of single storey semi-detached dwellings fronting Greville Street (Nos. 27 & 29 Greville Street). The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of one and two storey semi-detached dwellings.

 

4.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

The subject application was lodged on 15 March 2006. An on-site meeting was held on 27 April 2006 and the following issues were discussed:

 

§ The first floor addition is excessive in bulk and scale and will not be consistent with the rear alignments of the existing upper level additions on the adjoining properties. The size of the first floor addition should be reduced and the rear deck should also be deleted or reduced to minimise overlooking impact on adjoining neighbours. The reduction of the size of first floor addition will also improve solar access to southern adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Knox Street.

 

§ The details of colours, materials and finishes of the proposed development.

§ The extent of view loss from the rear deck of adjoining dwelling at No. 29 Greville Street.

 

The applicant was advised to consider the above issues and redesign the proposal. Amended plans were received on 18 May 2006 which shows a reduction in the size of the first floor addition and additional privacy screens provided to both sides of the rear deck together with a sightline analysis showing the extent of view loss from the rear deck of No. 29 Greville Street.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The owners of the adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the original proposal in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. As a result of this notification, the following submission was received:

 

1.   Gaetano Celso Colli & Natalina Colli, owners of No.29 Greville Street, Clovelly

 

§ Loss of view

§ Devaluation of the objector’s property

 

The owners of the above property were notified of the amended proposal and the following submission was received:

 

§ Loss of view

 

Comment:

 

View loss to No. 29 Greville Street, including photograph of existing view opportunities from this dwelling, is discussed in Section 8.3 of this report and were found to be satisfactory.

 

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 has provided the following comments in relation to the amended proposal:

 

Landscape Comments

 

There is a Cotoneaster Tree located at the rear of the site, which Council considers undesirable and the applicant is required to remove this tree as part of development approval.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

§ Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

§ Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended)

§ Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

§ Building Code of Australia

 

8.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

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

 

8.1       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned Residential 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed development is permissible with Council’s consent. The amended proposal is considered to be consistent with the relevant objectives outlined for the Residential 2A zone.

 

8.2  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.

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.65:1 applies. 

The proposed FSR is 0.77:1. Does not comply – see assessment below.

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP are that developments are not excessive in bulk or scale; are compatible with the existing character of the locality; and minimise adverse effects of bulk on neighbours and the street.

The maximum preferred floor area is 152.1sqm and the amended proposal has a floor area of 180.23sqm, which equates to an excess of 28.13sqm. It is not considered that the above non-compliance will result in any significant adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining neighbours in that the subject dwelling is the northern half of the pair of semis, additional overshadowing will be contained generally within the existing overshadowed areas and mainly over roof areas of No. 32 Knox Street. In addition, the proposed first floor addition is setback from the front elevation behind a substantial portion of the existing roof form and the elevated nature of the dwelling above the street level reduces visual impact when viewed from the street. The amended proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant objective and performance requirement of the DCP in terms of bulk and scale.

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The amended proposal has a maximum external wall height of 7.4 metres where the site slopes towards the front boundary. 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.

Not applicable.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

The excavation for the spa pool is approximately 500mm from the northern side boundary. Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation of this report.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

The excavation for the spa pool is approximately 500mm from the rear boundary. Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation of this report.

S4

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

Not applicable. The southern wall is the common wall of the pair of semis.

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.

The proposed first floor addition is setback 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. Complies.

The Objectives of the DCP are that developments should not be excessive in height and scale and be compatible with the existing character of the locality; to ensure impacts in terms of privacy, natural light and views are minimised; and with respect to additions that they not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling.

The relevant Performance Requirements are that the height of buildings should relate to those in the existing streetscape and the topography; buildings be designed to enhance the existing desirable built form character of the street by adopting where relevant characteristics of mass and proportion, materials and finishes, roof form and pitch, facade articulation, window and door location and proportions, and verandahs, eaves and parapets; with respect to additions to semi-detached dwellings they integrate with the attached dwelling; and views are shared.

The proposal generally complies with the 7m external wall height requirement except for a small section of the northern wall which has a maximum height of 7.4m. The sloping nature of the site and the elevated subfloor area of the dwelling create constraints in achieving full compliance with the preferred solution. In this instance, the non-compliance is considered to be acceptable. Despite the non-compliance with the preferred solution, the amended proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements in that the proposal is compatible with the existing character of the locality, privacy and natural light access for neighbouring residents are largely maintained.

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

The proposal maintains the existing front boundary setback of the dwelling.

S2

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

The proposal maintains the existing rear boundary setback of the dwelling.

S3

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

The proposed development is set back approximately 1 metre from the northern side boundary. Complies.

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

The proposed first floor addition is to be built up to the southern side boundary and 1.35m from the northern side boundary. Does not comply - see assessment below.

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

Not applicable.

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

Whilst the setbacks of the proposed first floor level from the side boundaries do not comply with the preferred solutions, it has been demonstrated that the non-compliances will not result in any significant adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining dwellings with regard to loss of natural light and ventilation. It should be noted that the southern side of the subject dwelling shares a common wall with No. 32 Knox Street and no further setback is required in this instance. The amended proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

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.

The proposal does not have any habitable room windows that overlook those of adjoining dwellings within 9 metres. Complies.

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 rear deck is provided with 1.8m high privacy screens on both sides which will minimise the overlooking impact. Complies.

S1

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

The proposal windows on the northern elevation of the first floor addition do not have direct outlook to adjoining dwelling’s habitable room window. Complies.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Not applicable.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

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 at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

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.

There are no existing solar collectors on adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Knox Street. The proposal will not overshadow future solar collectors on No. 32. 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 not reduce solar access to less than 3 hours on north-facing windows. Complies.

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.

The proposal will not reduce solar access to private open space to less than 3 hours. Complies.

 

8.3       Issue raised by objector

 

8.3.1    Loss of view

 

 

District and distant views to Waverley cemetery and the ocean are currently enjoyed from the eastern side deck of 29 Greville Street across existing development on the western side of Knox Street.

 

Performance Requirement P6 under section 4.3 Height, Form and Materials of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies requires that “P6 Buildings are designed to allow a sharing of views”. The concept of ‘view sharing’ was further defined in the Land and Environment Court by Senior Commissioner Roseth in Tenacity v Warringah Council (2004). The Senior Commissioners discussion of the notion of view sharing is provided below as background:

 

25 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. (Taking it all away cannot be called view sharing, although it may, in some circumstances, be quite reasonable.) To decide whether or not view sharing is reasonable, I have adopted a four-step assessment.

 

26 The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (eg of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, eg a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured.

 

Photo 1: View looking east across the subject site from the

 eastern side deck of No. 29 Greville Street

 

Figure 2: Sightline analysis showing view line from the eastern side deck of No. 29 Greville Street over the roof of the proposed development

 

As indicated by the above photograph and the sightline analysis prepared by the applicant, it is not considered that the existing easterly views from the eastern side deck at No. 29 Greville Street will be significantly affected by the proposed development in that the top of the proposed pitched roof (RL 21.87) is approximately 810mm above the level of the rear deck (RL of 21.06). An average height person with an eye height of 1500mm will be able to enjoy the views over the top of the proposed pitched roof from the deck. The proposed development would only obscure part of the district views and the iconic view to Waverley Cemetery and ocean view to horizon will be retained.    

 

27 The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.

 

The view aspect from No. 29 Greville Street is to the east across the side boundary of the property. The views from the deck are currently available from seated and standing positions. As indicated by the sightline analysis above, the views from standing position will be largely maintained. The photograph above is taken from a standing position.

 

28 The third 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. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.

 

The existing views from the side deck and living rooms of this property are partly obscured by the existing developments adjacent to the subject site (see photos below). As discussed previously, the proposed development will result in loss of some district view to the east, however, the highly valued views to Waverley Cemetery and ocean will be retained. It is therefore considered that the extent of the impact on 29 Greville Street is minor.

 

Photo 2: View looking northeast across Nos. 28 & 28A Knox

Street from the eastern side deck of No. 29 Greville Street

 

Photo 3: View looking southwest across Nos. 34 & 34A Knox

Street from the eastern side deck of No. 29 Greville Street

 

29 The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.

 

The proposed development generally complies with the 7m external wall height limit along the northern elevation (except for a small section of wall where the site slopes towards the front of the site) and has a maximum building height of 9m. As indicated by Photo 1 and the sightline analysis above, the view loss impact to 29 Greville Street is considered reasonable given the ocean and majority of district views from the side deck/living rooms will be retained. 

 

9.    CONCLUSION

 

The amended proposal does not comply with the numerical requirements of the DCP in terms of FSR, external wall height and side setback. However, it has been demonstrated in this report that the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP are satisfied in each instance. It is not considered that the amended proposal will result in any significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No 165/2006 for Alterations and new first floor additions to the existing semi-detached dwelling house including new front and rear decks at first floor level, new deck above front garage, new rear spa pool with associated deck.  at 30 Knox Street, Clovelly, subject to the following conditions:-

 

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

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the amended plans numbered 022/06 Sheet Nos. 1 to 4, Issue B, dated 8 May 2006 and received by Council on 18 May 2006, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.         The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces of the proposed additions to the existing building are to be consistent with that indicated in the materials/colour samples schedule accompanying the subject development application and received by Council on 23 may 2006.

 

3.         There must be no encroachment of the structures onto any adjoining premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place, unless permission has been obtained from the owners of the adjoining land accordingly.

 

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

 

6.         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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

9.         New hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation and must also satisfy any relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

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

 

10.       Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

11.       External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to the adjoining premises.

 

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

 

12.       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.

 

13.       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.

 

14.       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.

 

15.       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.

 

16.       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.

 

17.       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; and

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

 

18.       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.

 

19.       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.

 

20.       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.

 

21.       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 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

22.       Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or residential 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.

 

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:

 

23.       The demolition, removal, storage, handling and disposal of building products and materials must be carried out in accordance with the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW, the NSW Department of Environment & Conservation (formerly the Environment Protection Authority) and Randwick City Council policies and conditions, including:

 

·        Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·        Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

·        WorkCover NSW Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos

·        Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·        The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

·        Relevant Department of Environment & Conservation (DEC) / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW Guidelines.

·        Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005)

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

24.       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.

 

25.       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.

 

26.       Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays and all building activities are strictly prohibited on Sundays and Public Holidays.

 

In addition, the use of any rock excavation machinery or any mechanical pile drivers or the like, is restricted to the hours of 8.00am to 5.00pm (maximum) on Monday to Friday only, to minimise the noise levels during construction and loss of amenity to nearby residents.

 

27.       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.

           

28.       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.

 

29.       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.

 

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.

 

30.       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

 

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.

 

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.

 

31.       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.

 

32.       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.

 

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

 

33.       A Certificate of Adequacy supplied by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure to support the additional storey.

 

The following conditions are applied to maintain reasonable levels of public health, amenity and safety:

 

34.       The demolition, removal, storage, handling and disposal of products and materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy and the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW and the NSW Department of Environment & Conservation (formerly the Environment Protection Authority), including:

 

·       Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·       Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

·       WorkCover NSW Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos

·       Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·       The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

·       Relevant Department of Environment & Conservation (DEC) / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW Guidelines.

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

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

 

35.       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 spa 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 SPA 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.

 

36.       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.

 

The following conditions have been applied to ensure that adequate security provisions are made for vehicular access, parking and public infrastructure:

 

37.       A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from Council's City Services Department prior to opening-up or carrying out any proposed works within the road, footpath, nature strip or other public place and all works including repairs are to be carried out to Council's satisfaction.

 

Civil Works Conditions

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

 

38.       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.

 

39.       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.

 

Service Authority Conditions

 

 

 

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

 

40.       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.

 

41.       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.

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

42.       That part of the naturestrip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf or similar. Such works shall be completed at the applicant’s expense prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

43.       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.

 

44.       The applicant is required to remove the Cotoneaster Tree located at the rear of the site.

 

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 (PCA) for this development.

 

Failure to obtain a Construction Certificate and appoint a PCA before commencing works is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

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:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

FRANK KO

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

20 June, 2006

FILE NO:

DA/485/2005

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 96 Application - to construct a recessed balcony on the streetscape elevation of an approved first floor addition and the relocation of the rear retaining walls (North Randwick Conservation Area)

PROPERTY:

 24 Stephen Street, Randwick

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 JPH Architectural Drafting

OWNER:

Mr Michael Homsey

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 Murray Matson, Paul Tracey, Margaret Woodsmith.

 

The subject development consent provides for a new first floor addition and associated alterations to an existing semi-detached dwelling house.  The Section 96 application requests a modification of the development consent to construct a balcony on the first floor of the streetscape elevation and relocate the rear retaining walls.  The subject property is part of the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area and is also part of a cohesive group of ten semi-detached cottages.

 

The proposal has received three objections, the main concerns of which included the impact of the balcony on the heritage value of the area, in particular the row of predominantly intact semis, the undesirable precedent the development will set and the impact on privacy.

 

The proposed amendment to the retaining wall, which is not supported by Council’s Landscape Development Officer, will result a significant impact on the Callistemon citrinus (Bottlebrush) at No. 22 Stephen Street.  Council’s Landscape Development Officer initially recommended the relocation of the retaining walls for the initial Development Application.  This amended design was agreed to by the applicant who submitted amended plans on the 5th of September 2005, prior to the original consent.  The plans submitted as part of this Application revert to the original design which would cause a significant and unreasonable impact on the tree at No. 22 Stephen Street.

 

The proposed recessed balcony will have a considerable impact on the heritage significance of the North Randwick Conservation Area as the heritage value of the area is derived in part from its predominantly single level scale, and dominant slate and terracotta tiled roofs.  This proposal compromises both the single scale nature of development as well as the style of roof.  Firstly, the approved upper level addition is largely contained within the roof which maintains a single storey scale to the dwelling.  The proposed recessed balcony will make the upper level very obvious, giving the dwelling a two storey scale that is incongruent with the character of the conservation area.  Secondly, very little of the dwelling, other than the front elevation is visible from the street.  Therefore any change to the front elevation of the dwelling, comprising only the front wall and the front plane of the roof, will significantly detract from the dwelling’s streetscape contribution and set a poor precedent for other inappropriate roof conversions.

 

The purpose of the recessed balcony is to access views as well as provide light and ventilation to the bedroom on the first floor.  Light and ventilation could be achieved through the provision of a skylight in the low pitched roof, which will not impact on the front plane of the roof, or windows in the side elevation to which there are no heritage objections. 

 

The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The current development consent is for alterations and additions to the existing semi-detached dwelling including a new first floor addition (comprising a bedroom, walk in wardrobe, bathroom and study) a new eastern side entrance and works to the rear private area and front yard fence.

 

This Section 96(2) application proposes two modifications to the development consent.  It is firstly proposed to construct a balcony on the first floor of the streetscape elevation, off the upper level bedroom and recessed onto the front plane of the roof.  It is secondly proposed to relocate the rear retaining walls closer to the east and west side boundaries.

 

The initial DA plans were amended at the recommendation of Council’s Landscape Engineer to protect the Callistemon citrinus (Bottlebrush) at No. 22 Stephen Street.  The amendment consisted of repositioning the retaining wall a further 300mm from the western boundary.  This amended design was agreed to by the applicant who submitted amended plans on the 5th of September 2005.  The plans submitted as part of this Application propose a relocation of the retaining wall to a position that would cause a significant and unreasonable impact on the tree at No. 22 Stephen Street.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Stephen Street in Randwick and was occupied by a single storey semi detached dwelling house, although construction of the first floor is now well under way.  The site has a frontage width of 6.31m, a side boundary depth of 42.6m and has an overall site area of 265.1m².  Neighbouring the property to the west is the adjoining semi-detached single storey dwelling house, to the east is a two storey semi-detached dwelling house and to the rear is a single storey dwelling house.

 

The immediate surroundings are within the North Randwick Conservation Area and the subject site is part of a group of semi-detached dwellings comprising no.’s 18 to 28 Stephen Street.  Each of the cottages within the group is set well back and elevated above the street, with a sandstone retaining wall to the front boundary. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of single-storey, semi-detached dwelling houses.

 

A large front dormer at No. 32 Stephen Street was approved in the late 1970s, well before the gazettal of the conservation area.  A front dormer window at No. 28 Stephen Street was approved in 2000, although the heritage comments for the development application recommended its refusal.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

The original application, lodged on the 16th of June 2005, included a dormer window to the front elevation, however Council’s Heritage planner recommended that this element be removed from the plans as it is inconsistent with the heritage character of the area.  The approval did not include the dormer window.

 

The proposed retaining walls in the original application were also altered as a result of issues raised by Council’s Landscape Engineer.  The original positioning of the retaining walls in the rear yard would have caused significant damage to the Callistemon citrinus (Bottlebrush) on the adjoining property, at No. 22 Stephen Street.  As a result amended plans which repositioned the retaining walls in the rear yard (and also deleted the dormer window) so that they did not affect the Callistemon citrinus were received by Council on the 5th of September 2005.

 

The DA was subsequently approved on the 29th of September 2005, with the dormer window deleted and the retaining wall repositioned so as not to affect the neighbours’ tree.

 

A Section 96(2) application, seeking to remove the south-western rear chimney flue along the shared boundary wall of No. 22 Stephen Street and change the wording of condition No. 11 of the current consent DA/485/2005 to indicate only frosted or translucent glass to be erected along the stair/hall windows and not the northern facing windows of the first floor rear study, was approved on the 24th of November 2005.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. The following submissions were received:

 

5.1  Objections

 

M. M. Bennett – 26 Stephen Street, Randwick

Issue

Comment

The proposal will compromise the heritage value of the row of original semis and the North Randwick Conservation Area.

Council’s heritage planner has reviewed the proposal and agrees that the recessed balcony would adversely impact the significance of the North Randwick Conservation Area.

The balcony will reduce privacy.

The balcony is located at the front the premises and would only have a potential privacy impact on the front yard of No. 26 Stephen Street.  Privacy within front yards is generally not highly valued as a dwellings primary private open space area is usually in the rear.  Therefore the proposed development is not considered to have an unreasonable impact on privacy.

The size of the semi is enormous.

This is not relevant to the assessment of the Section 96 application.

Susan Miles – 2 Chepstow Street, Randwick

Issue

Comment

The proposed front balcony will compromise Stephen Street which predominantly consists of Federation semis.

The proposed recessed balcony is not compatible with the predominant character of the locality or streetscape, as there are no other recessed balconies in the streetscape.

The proposed front balcony is not in accordance with the DCP with reference to:

i.    attic style additions should have no visible alteration to the front of previously unaltered buildings; and,

 

ii.    a balcony will affect outlook and privacy for neighbouring properties.

i. In reference to the first point, which states that attic style additions should have no visible alteration to the front of previously unaltered buildings, it is agreed that the proposal does not comply with this DCP requirement (from the draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation DCP).

ii. In reference to the second point, which refers the balcony affecting outlook and privacy, the proposed development would not have an unreasonable impact on privacy as it will not affect any dwellings private open space areas.

Randwick Council previously rejected a dormer window or opening to the street frontage to maintain the principles defined for the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area.

Council’s heritage planner has reviewed the proposal and agrees that the recessed balcony would adversely impact the significance of the North Randwick Conservation Area.

 

E. Johnson – 22 Stephen Street, Randwick

Issue

Comment

Strongly object to the balcony on the grounds that it will compromise the heritage value of the premises.

Council’s heritage planner has reviewed the proposal and agrees that the recessed balcony would adversely impact on the significance of the North Randwick Conservation Area.

Granting permission for this would open the floodgates for the future.

There is concern that the proposal, if approved, would set a poor precedent for further inappropriate roof conversions.

 

5.2  Support

 

No submissions of support were received.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

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

 

6.1  Landscape Issues

 

Councils’ Landscape Engineer has provided the following comments:

 

Condition 53 of the original consent required the retaining wall/planter proposed along the western boundary in the rear yard to be setback from the boundary in order to protect the rootzone of a Bottlebrush tree located in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the west, 22 Stephen Street, close to the common boundary.

 

Amended plans complying with this requirement were received; however, the plans submitted with this application show the wall being constructed along the common boundary again.

 

It is understood that this application will be recommended for refusal on heritage grounds; notwithstanding, Council’s Landscape Development Officer also recommends refusal of this proposal in its current form due to the impact that would be experienced to the tree.

 

6.2  Heritage Issues

 

Councils’ Heritage Officer has provided the following comments:

 

The subject site is within the North Randwick Conservation Area and is occupied by a semi-detached dwelling, part of a pair comprising No. 22 and No. 24 Stephen Street.  The pair is part of a cohesive group of semi-detached cottages comprising No.’s 18-28 Stephen Street.  Each of the cottages within the group is set well back and elevated above the street, with a sandstone retaining wall to the front boundary.  The cottage retains much of its original character including timber and ironwork façade detailing. 

 

The original application proposed alterations and additions at ground and first floor level.  At first floor level, the application proposed to provide two bedrooms, two bathrooms and a walk-in robe.  A dormer window to the front plane of the roof was refused on the grounds of adverse heritage impact.

 

A Section 96 application has now been received which proposes a balcony for the front upper level bedroom, recessed into the front plane of the roof. 

 

The balcony proposal was the subject of an informal pre-lodgement meeting at which concerns were raised in relation to the potential heritage impact. 

 

The original application was accompanied by a Conservation Report prepared by JPH Drafting.  The Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with the current proposal which argues that the proposed balcony is modest and unobtrusive and will “respect the line of existing semis” and “is far more sympathetic to the streetscape than the alternate option of a dormer as constructed on No. 28”.  The current application also includes three dimensional views indicating the appearance of the proposed balcony from the street.

 

The Statement of Significance for the heritage conservation area contained in the Draft Development Control Plan for the North Randwick Conservation Area notes that the heritage value of the area derives in part from its predominantly single level scale, and dominant slate and terracotta tiled roofs.  The Draft DCP includes a section on Roofing, which notes that the roof is often the most visible part of a building, and that alterations (including changes to materials) can severely detract from individual dwellings and the streetscape.  In relation to upper level additions the Draft DCP permits upper level additions in very limited circumstances, where roof space is converted to provide accommodation without intruding upon the streetscape presentation of an otherwise intact building; or the second level is confined to the rear, either out of sight or set back far enough to appear as a separate structure.  In relation to attic style additions, the Draft DCP notes that these may be permitted, but that there should be no visible alteration to the front of the previously unaltered buildings.  Front dormers are particularly discouraged where the building itself if a heritage item, or is part of a relatively unaltered semi-detached or row. 

 

The Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter, 1999 sets a standard of practice for those who provide advice, make decisions about, or undertake works to places of cultural significance, including conservation areas.  Article 3 of the Burra Charter notes that conservation is based on a respect for existing fabric, use, associations and meanings, and that it requires a cautious approach of changing as much as necessary but as little as possible.

 

It is noted that the dwelling is part of a semi-detached pair, within a group of closely spaced cottages, so that very little of the dwelling, other than the front elevation is visible from the street.  Therefore any change to the front elevation of the dwelling, comprising only the front wall and the front plane of the roof, will significantly detract from the dwelling’s streetscape contribution. 

 

The elevations and three dimensional drawings which have been submitted for the proposal indicate that the provision of the proposed recessed balcony will result in the removal of around 22% of the area of the front plane of the roof, creating a large hole in the roof volume.  This hollowing out of the roof will considerably detract from the integrity of the semi-detached pair and the group. 

 

The approved upper level addition is currently largely contained within the roof (which has been somewhat enlarged by extending the front plane of the roof to increase the height of the ridge) maintaining a single storey scale to the dwelling.  The proposed recessed balcony will make the upper level very obvious, giving the dwelling a two storey scale which will detract from the predominant single storey scale of the conservation area which is an important part of its heritage significance.

 

It is considered that the proposed recessed balcony will adversely impact on the significance of the North Randwick Conservation Area and set a poor precedent for further inappropriate roof conversions.  It is recommended that the proposed upper level balcony be refused. 

 

The refusal of the proposed balcony will reduce the light and ventilation available to the proposed bedroom.  There are no heritage objections to the provision of a skylight in the low pitched roof which will not impact on the front plane of the roof, or to windows in the side elevation.  Otherwise the upper level plan could be modified to utilise the lower part of the roof volume for the en-suite and walk-in robe, considerably enlarging the floor area of the bedroom itself. 

 

7.    MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

A Master Plan is not required as the site has an area of less than 4,000m2.

 

8.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

-           Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

-           Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

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

-           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.

 

9.1       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

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

 

The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 10 - 2A (Residential A Zone)

 

a.       to maintain the character of established residential areas, and

 

c.       to enable redevelopment for low density housing forms, including dwelling houses, dual occupancy, semi-detached housing, and the like, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development.

 

The proposed recessed balcony will be incompatible with the dominant and established character of the surrounding residential area.  The subject site is part of a cohesive group of semi-detached dwellings comprising no.’s 18 to 28 Stephen Street.  The proposal would detract from the aesthetic significance of the group of adjoining semi-detached dwellings and from the streetscape as well as setting a poor precedent for future attic conversions.  Therefore the proposal is not consistent with Clause 10 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

 

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

1.       The following development may be carried out only with the consent of the Council:

a.         demolishing, defacing, damaging or moving a heritage item or a building, work, relic, tree or place within a heritage conservation area, or

b.         altering a heritage item or a building, work or relic within a heritage conservation area by making structural changes to its exterior, or

c.         altering a heritage item or a building, work or relic within a heritage conservation area by making non-structural changes to the detail, fabric, finish or appearance of its exterior, except changes resulting from any maintenance necessary for its ongoing protective care which does not adversely affect its heritage significance, or

d.         moving a relic, or excavating land for the purpose of discovering, exposing or moving a relic, or

e.         erecting a building on, or subdividing, land on which a heritage item is located or which is within a heritage conservation area.

2.       When determining a development application required by this clause, the Council must take into consideration the extent to which the carrying out of the proposed development would affect the heritage significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area, including an assessment of:

          a.         the pitch and form of the roof, if any, and

          b.         the style, size, proportion and position of the openings for windows or doors, if any, and

          c.         the colour, texture, style, size and type of finish of the materials to be used on the exterior of the building.

3.       The Council may grant consent to a development application required by this clause only after it has considered a report that assesses the impact of the proposal on the heritage significance of the heritage item and its setting, or of the heritage conservation area.

The purpose of this clause is to establish consent requirements for development involving a heritage item or land within a heritage conservation area and also, to establish criteria for the assessment and determination of development applications arising from those consent requirements.

In specific reference to subclause No. 2, the proposal alters the pitch and form of the roof in a way that in unacceptable given the heritage significance of the property.  The proposed recessed balcony is incompatible with the style of the existing dwelling.  The size of the proposed hole in the roof, to accommodate the recessed balcony, is very large in proportion to the size of the roof and given its prominent position from the streetscape is considered unreasonable.  As such, due to the significant impact of the proposed recessed balcony on the heritage significance of the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area and the streetscape the proposal cannot be supported.

 

9.2     Development Control Plans and Council Policies

 

a.    Development Control Plan - Draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area

The requirements of the draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation DCP have been thoroughly considered in Section 5.2 of this report as part of Council’s heritage assessment.

In summary, the Draft DCP permits upper level additions in very limited circumstances, where roof space is converted to provide accommodation without intruding upon the streetscape presentation of an otherwise intact building.  It is stated that although attic style additions may be permitted, there should be no visible alteration to the front of the previously unaltered buildings.  The proposed recessed balcony does not comply with the requirements of the Draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area DCP as it will significantly alter the roof and the dwelling will present as a significantly altered two storey dwelling.

 

b.    Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancy Development Control Plan

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.

            Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

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.

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

Not applicable.

 

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

The Performance Requirements are that the size and dimensions of landscaping suit the needs of the occupants; location and design of open space takes advantage of aspect for year round use; indigenous species are used and existing vegetation is recycled where possible; planting does not obstruct or interfere with entries; and unpaved areas are maximised to allow stormwater infiltration.

 

The proposed amendments to the retaining walls in the rear yard, which are contrary to the recommendations made by Council’s landscape technicians will result in the loss of the Callistemon citrinus (Bottlebrush) at No. 22 Stephen Street.  Therefore the proposal does not comply with the objectives of the landscaping requirements in the DCP.

 

            Floor Area

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.65:1 applies. 

No change proposed.  Not applicable.

            Height, Form & Materials

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

Not applicable.

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.

Not applicable.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

Not applicable.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Not applicable.

S4

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

Not applicable.

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.

Does not comply.

The Objectives of the DCP are that developments should not be excessive in height and scale and be compatible with the existing character of the locality; to ensure impacts in terms of privacy, natural light and views are minimised; and with respect to additions that they not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling.

The relevant Performance Requirements are that the height of buildings should relate to those in the existing streetscape and the topography; buildings be designed to enhance the existing desirable built form character of the street by adopting where relevant characteristics of mass and proportion, materials and finishes, roof form and pitch, facade articulation, window and door location and proportions, and verandahs, eaves and parapets; with respect to additions to semi-detached dwellings they integrate with the attached dwelling; and views are shared.

The objectives of the DCP state that development should be “compatible with the existing character of the locality”, should “not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling” and should “enhance the predominant neighbourhood and street character”.  The proposed recessed balcony is not consistent with any of these objectives.  It is not compatible with the predominant character of the locality or streetscape as there are no other recessed balconies in this form in the streetscape.  The proposed recessed balcony will also detract significantly from the individual character and appearance of the dwelling as it will leave a large hole in the roof of the dwelling as it appears from the streetscape.  Therefore the recessed balcony will detract from the predominant street character and cannot be supported.

 

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.

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Not applicable.

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

The Performance Requirements include that overlooking of internal private living areas is minimised through appropriate building layout, location and design of windows and balconies; and separation, screening devices and landscaping be used to assist in minimising privacy impacts.

The proposed balcony is located at the front the premises and so would only have a potential privacy impact on front yards.  Privacy within front yards is generally not highly valued as a dwellings primary private open space area is usually in the rear.  Also, due to the location of front yards, between the road and the building line, privacy is often unattainable.  Therefore the proposed development would not have an unreasonable impact on privacy.

 

10.  SECTION 96 AMENDMENT

 

10.1.1  Substantially the same

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 proposal is substantially the same development.  The proposal is considered to be substantially the same development as it does not alter the main purpose of the application, which is to provide a first floor.

 

10.1.2  Consideration of submissions

 

The three submissions received regarding this proposal have been fully considered as part of this assessment.

 

11.  FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

12.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposal does not comply with the relevant assessment criteria, the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies and the draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation DCP, particularly in terms of landscaping, floor area, bulk and scale and visual impact and will result in an adverse impact upon the adjoining premises, the character of the locality and the North Randwick Conservation Area.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority refuse consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Modify Development Consent No. 485/2005/B on property 24 Stephen Street, RANDWICK NSW 2031 for the following reasons:-

 

1.         The proposed recessed balcony does not comply with Clause 43 of Randwick LEP 1998 as the proposed development would detrimentally affect the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area.

 

2.         The proposed recessed balcony does not comply with the requirements of the draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation DCP and will adversely impact on the significance of the North Randwick Conservation Area and set a poor precedent for further inappropriate roof conversions.

 

3.         The proposed recessed balcony does not comply with the objectives or performance requirements of the Height, Form & Material section of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancy DCP as it will result in the removal of approximately 22% of the area of the front plane of the roof, creating a large hole in the roof volume which would detract from the heritage significance of the area as well as detracting from the integrity of the group of ten semi-detached dwellings, which currently exhibit a reasonably consistent character.

 

4.         The proposed repositioning of the rear retaining walls does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the Landscaping section of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancy DCP as it would result in a significant and unreasonable impact on the Callistemon citrinus (Bottlebrush) at No. 22 Stephen Street.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

SARAH HUDSON

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ASSESSMENT OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

16 June, 2006

FILE NO:

DA 472/2005

 

PROPOSAL:

 Demolition of two existing dwelling houses and the construction of a part 3 storey multi unit housing development containing 8 x 2 bedroom dwellings with associated basement car parking for 12 vehicles.

PROPERTY:

 260-260A Maroubra Road, MAROUBRA

WARD:

 Central Ward

APPLICANT:

 CSA Architects

OWNER:

 A H Krochmalik and G I Hurwitz

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 Chris Bastic, Anthony Andrews, Alan White.

 

The application was submitted to Council on 15th June, 2005 and has been assessed as an Integrated Development Application, as it requires licensing under Part V of the Water Act, 1912.  The application was referred to the Department of Natural Resources who have advised that a License may be issued conditionally. 

 

This revised development proposal is a response to the Land & Environment Court determination of Development Application No.1068/2002.  The Court dismissed the appeal against Council’s refusal of the development application.  The current development application has been assessed by the external consultant involved in the Land and Environment Court proceedings on Council’s behalf.

 

The primary amendment is to lower a portion of the third floor level to reduce the potential overshadowing, bulk and view loss impacts on the units adjoining the subject land, being 262 Maroubra Road.  Following public notification the amended design has continued to generate public objection from adjoining landowners.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.        THE PROPOSAL

 

Proposal entails the following:-

 

·                    Demolition of the existing semi-detached housing at No.260-262 Maroubra Road and also the concrete parking platform located at the rear of the premises, off Galvin Street.  Demolition materials are proposed to be recycled off-site;

 

·                    Erection of a part two and three storey multi-unit housing building comprising the following :

-                     8 x 2 bedroom units;

-                     basement carparking for twelve (12) vehicles;

-                     restriction of site development by retaining undeveloped area off Galvin Street to accommodate proposed future road widening;

-                     Contemporary building design with articulated setbacks and roof form;

-                     Driveway access to the basement carpark is proposed via a two-way ramp along the western boundary;

-                     Building is to be constructed of rendered masonry, concrete framing and split face brickwork; and

-                     Landscaped area comprises areas of deep soil planting as well as landscaping over the basement carpark podium.

 

3.        THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

 

Figure 1: subject site and locality

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Maroubra Road between Cooper Street to the west and Flower Street to the east (refer Figure 1) and is identified as Lots X and Y in DP 402501.  The site currently accommodates a pair of single storey semi-cottages and is located within easy walking distance of Maroubra Junction Town Centre and Anzac Parade.

 

The site is rectangular in shape, with a frontage of 13.715m to Maroubra Road and a depth of 67.07m.  The site has a total area of 920m2 approximately, including an area of 62.7m2 designated as road widening along Galvin Street frontage.   The available developable site, excluding this road widening would be 857.3m2.

 

The site generally slopes from the rear (Galvin Street) to the front (north to south) with a fall of approximately 2 metres.  A driveway on the western side of the site provides access to the rear.

 

This section of Maroubra Road is characterised by a mix of single, two, three and four storey residential buildings constructed in various architectural styles including the subject site.  Properties adjoining the site to the east and west are zoned 2C Residential.  No.262 Maroubra Road adjoins the site to the east and contains an older style three-storey, brick and tile, residential flat building with undercroft ground level carparking.  To the west the land is adjoined by a pair of single-storey semi-detached dwellings (owned by the Department of Housing and upgraded for disabled access and use) at No.258 Maroubra Road whilst at the rear the land adjoins No.21 Galvin Street accommodating a two storey dwelling.

 

Properties to the south on the opposite side of Maroubra Road are zoned 2C Residential and accommodate a mixture of Multi-unit housing, dwellings and commercial uses.  Properties to the north of the site on the northern side of Galvin Street are zoned 2A Residential, is elevated above the subject land and accommodates detached housing.

 

4.        SITE HISTORY

 

APPLICATION HISTORY

 

·                    Application lodged on the 15th June, 2005; 

·                    Letter forwarded 12th July seeking clarification of whether the site would require dewatering during construction; 

·                    Application publicly notified on the 29th June, 2005 and generated 4 individual objections and 1 form letter objection, signed by 27 persons.

·                    Application renotified as an Integrated Development Application on 14th November following clarification by Applicant that dewatering of site is required.  This generated a further four (4) individual submissions and a copy of the original form letter submission.

·                    Department of Natural Resources responded to Integrated Development referral on 29th November, 2005.

·                    Meeting held on site with Objectors and interested parties in December, 2005 to discuss issues and procedures.

·                    Applicant forwards a State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Objection on 28th March, 2006, in response to the landscaped area standard due to extent of landscaping over podium level.

 

HISTORY OF SITE USEAGE

 

·                    The subject land has been occupied by the existing semi-detached dwellings for many years and retains a residential land use;

·                    DA387/98 was refused for a proposed 3 storey Residential Flat Building containing 12 dwellings and parking for 16 vehicles;

·                    DA D/1068/2002 was refused by Council on the 2nd December, 2003 for a 3 storey Residential Flat Building containing 9 dwellings and parking for 13 vehicles;

·                    Land & Environment Court (Case 11551/2003) refuses appeal by Applicant regarding Council refusal of DA 1068/2002.  In formulating the refusal the Court noted the following primary concerns with the proposed development:-

 

-                     Narrowness of site and consequent inability to comply with guidelines for setbacks from side boundaries;

-                     Amalgamation with No.258 Maroubra Road was not possible;

-                     Proposal had significant non-compliance with side setback controls;

-                     Precedence in permitting a 3 storey development on single allotment;

-                     Impact on No.262 Maroubra Road may be reduced by a lower building;

 

These issues will be discussed during the assessment of the proposal.

 

5.        COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal was notified and advertised as an Integrated Development in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans, until 14th December, 2005.  As a result, five (5) submissions were received, including one form letter/petition with 28 signatures, from the following:-

 

·                    C Greene of 2/244 Maroubra Road, Maroubra

·                    L A Peters of 4/262 Maroubra Road, Maroubra

·                    G Tirekidis of 5/262 Maroubra Road, Maroubra

·                    S Leong of 21 Galvin Street, Maroubra

·                    E and D Job of 10/262 Maroubra Road., Maroubra

 

5.1         Objections

 

The following issues were raised in the submissions to the proposal and are addressed below:

 

Site Frontage Width:

 

The Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan has a Preferred Solution requirement of a 20m width for such developments.  The subject proposal has a width of 13.7m only.  The Applicant contends that the adjoining lands, being in the ownership of the Department of Housing, are not available for redevelopment.  This advice is supported by email responses from the Department which confirm these comments.  This matter will be discussed further in the body of this Report.

 

Non-Compliance with Standards of LEP & DCP:

 

These matters are tabulated in Section 8 of this report and will be discussed in detail in the relevant section of this Report.

 

Building bulk, form & scale is inappropriate for this narrow site:

 

These issues directly relate to the proposals inability to comply with the development standards applicable to this form of development.  This is addressed in greater detail in a separate section of this Report.  The subject development has only minimal non-compliances with the development standards and the issue with bulk and form for this particular development emanates from the lack of site width, being 20m.  The current proposal has reduced overall dwellings yield and carparking needs from the original application in 1998 of 12 dwellings/16 carspaces to 8 dwellings/12 carspaces. 

 

The issues of bulk and scale raised with regard to the subject proposal are a direct result of the single allotment form of development.  The allotment is only 13.7m in width whereas multi-unit development sites are generally required to be a minimum width of 20m.  This minimum width of 20m enables a development to provide the required boundary setbacks, landscaped area, floor space area and building separations. 

 

The specific development standard non-compliances will be addressed in detail elsewhere in this report.

 

Although the development has a number of non-compliances these matters must be addressed in context with the allotments isolated nature and the expected development potential of the site.   Hence, consideration must be given to what is the appropriate scale of development for this particular isolated site and whether the reduced scale of development proposed in the current development application is suitable.

 

Overshadowing:

 

The subject allotment has a North-South orientation and hence has the potential of overshadowing the properties adjoining as follows:-

·                    to the west, being a two lot development comprising a single storey semi-detached house to the south-west and a two storey dwelling to the north-west. during the morning; and

·                    to the east, being a 3 storey above carparking residential flat building. during afternoons.

 

Due to the orientation of the allotment, the narrow nature of the land and the scale of development located on the eastern property it is unlikely that a development, whether of 2 or 3 storey scale could be erected on the subject land without overshadowing some of the lower units on the eastern property, being No.262 Maroubra Road.  It is noted that the subject development now complies with the height and side setback minimum standards but remains unable to comply with the Average Setback standard of 5m.  Full compliance with the average setback standard is generally difficult to achieve on small width lots.

 

Notwithstanding that the development complies with the primary minimum standards for setback and height it will overshadow the dwellings to the west and the lower and middle level units to the east.  In this instance the extent of overshadowing is considered acceptable and the amended design of the building has provided for some improvement in solar access to the middle units at No.262 Maroubra Road. 

 

The unit accommodation at No.262 Maroubra Road includes 3 levels accommodating units at the northern and southern end of the building, which are orientated towards Galvin Street and Maroubra Road, and 2 units in the middle for each level.  Hence, the primary units impacted by the proposed building are the 2 middle units on levels 1 and 2 of the building.  The design achieves the minimum side boundary setbacks and creates a larger gap at the upper level, by removing one unit, in order to promote solar access and decrease overall bulk.  The issues of solar access and bulk are partly exasperated by the existing building at No.262 Maroubra Road, particularly the balconies, being erected within the 3.5m setback required under the current DCP.

 

The proposal continues to create less than 3 hours solar access, being approximately 2.5 hours, to the middle units at No.262 Maroubra, although these units are overshadowed by its own building until after midday and currently does not achieve 3 hours solar access.  The non-compliance is considered reasonable in this instance as a suitable compromise for redevelopment of the subject land.

 

View Loss:

 

Objections have been raised by unit owners at No.262 Maroubra Road with regard to loss of distant views over the city as well as general loss of sky aspects due to the added building bulk.  This issue would primarily again relate to views from the middle units in the adjoining building which are orientated to front the subject land and have rooftop views of distant trees and buildings.  The views would not normally be considered as primary views but are considered more of an aspect or outlook. 

 

The applicant has responded to this issue by creating a gap in the proposed building at the 3rd level which will provide for a partial retention of this aspect for the middle units of the adjoining property.  This approach is considered a reasonable response to this issue.  The issue of view loss is not considered to be a significant issue and would not normally warrant the refusal of the proposal.

 

Stormwater Drainage, Dewatering & Impact on Groundwater:

 

Concerns have been raised, as they were as part of DA1068/2002, at the manner in which the site will be drained and how the proposal will deal with seepage and kerb/gutter discolouration due to groundwater seepage. 

 

The proposal has been referred to Council’s Engineers and these issues are considered to be controllable through standard conditions of consent should Council determine to approve the application.  These would include that the basement area accommodate a detention basin, the basement area being water-proofed (through outer membrane system cover, referred to as “tanking”) and the stormwater being designed as a slow-release procedure.

 

The proposal was also forwarded to the Department of Natural Resources as an Integrated Development due to the potential dewatering issues (Water Act, 1912) on the Groundwater Water Table.  The Department raised no objection to the proposal subject to suitable conditions to “Tank” the basement area and as it was considered that the depth of the excavation was not likely to result in any significant impact on the Water Table.

 

Based upon the above comments, and those specific matters addressed elsewhere within this report, it is considered that the issues raised by the Objectors may partly be resolved conditionally and do not warrant refusal of the amended development proposal.

 

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         Environmental Health and Building

 

Council’s Manager of Environmental Health and Building 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:

 

Environmental Health comments

 

No objections raised to the proposal subject to appropriate noise and pollution control conditions being imposed as part of any development consent.

 

Building comments

 

The building Code of Australia classifies the proposal as:

 

-                     Class 2 – Residential Units; and

-                     Class 7a – Car Park.

 

No objections were raised to the proposal subject to standard conditions of development consent being imposed.

 

6.2         Development Engineer

 

Council’s Development Engineer Co-ordinator has provided the following comments in relation to the proposal and appropriate conditions of consent as contained within the Recommendation of the report.

 

The Development Engineer has advised that the proposal may be approved conditionally with particular regard being given to the following matters:

-                     On site stormwater detention is required for this development.  To this end the submitted stormwater drainage is not to be approved as part of any consent as it shall require appropriate modifications;

-                     Dewatering will be required during the construction stage and how this is to be achieved will be required as part of the Construction Certificate;

-                     Seepage water must not be collected and discharged from the site to Councils kerb and gutter.  Details of how this would be managed will be required as part of the Construction Certificate; and

-                     Carparking should be provided in accordance with Council standards with suitable footpath crossing and ramp access.

 

6.3       Landscape Issues

 

The landscape plan as submitted with the application is generally acceptable subject to minor variations which can be resolved conditionally.  Specific comments on tree removal are as follows.

-                     Gum Tree (10m in height) located at rear of site is in poor health and may be removed;

-                     Olive tree (6m in height) located at rear of site is also in relatively poor condition and may be removed;

-                     Tea Tree (5m in height) located adjacent to the boundary in the rear of No.258 Maroubra Road appears sufficiently clear of the proposed development, however, conditions should be imposed to ensure its protection during construction;

-                     Willow Myrtle (4m in height) in rear yard of No.262 Maroubra Road will also require protection through suitable conditions of consent;

-                     Bangalow Palm (3m in height) is proposed to be removed and no objection is raised to its removal;

-                     No existing street trees are to be affected by the subject proposal;

-                     Banksia Trees of various sizes are clumped in the street reserve at the Galvin Street end of the site which will be required conditionally to be protected.

 

7.        MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

The total site area (920m2) is less than required for the submission of a master plan (4000m2).

 

8.        RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The site is zoned 2C Residential under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (LEP) and the proposal is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

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

·        State Environmental Planning Policy No.65

·        Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

·              Randwick Development Control Plan – Multi-Unit Housing

·        Randwick Development Control Plan – Parking

·               Section 94 Contributions Plan

·        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     State Environmental Planning Policy No.55

 

The application is subject to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land as this Policy applies to the State.  It introduced planning controls for the remediation of contaminated lands and provided guidelines in assessing contaminated lands.

 

As this land has previously been utilised for residential purposes and the adjoining lands are also used for residential purposes it is appropriate to assume that the land is suitable to continue as a residential development.

 

9.2     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65

 

The application is subject to the provisions under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65).  The design has been assessed in relation to the design quality principles for residential flat buildings, as set out in Part 2 of SEPP 65.  The proposal has not been assessed by a Design Review Panel however, the originally DA1068/2002, refused by Council and the Court, was assessed for building design and found to be satisfactory apart from the following issues:-

 

·                    Acoustic Privacy;

·                    Potential reorientation of balconies on western façade;

·                    Proposed roof reconfiguration.

 

Planning Comment

 

The design of the current proposal is not dissimilar to the original refused proposal, apart from creation of larger setbacks and reduction in third floor bulk.  Hence, it is reasonable to assume that similar issues would apply to this proposal and, as was originally advised, can be resolved conditionally for the acoustical issue whilst the balconies and roof form are considered to be acceptable in this locality.

 

The proposal is considered to demonstrate adequate design quality to satisfy the principles of SEPP65.

 

9.3     Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 2C Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan, 1998 (RLEP) and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following tabulated clauses of the RLEP apply to the proposal:-

 

Table 1

 

 

9.3.1.   Clause 31(3)-Landscaped area – podium areas

 

Under Clause 31(3) of RLEP 1998 a minimum landscaped area for the site is 50% (460m2) of which less than 50% (230m2, equivalent to 25% of total site area) shall be permitted over podium levels. 

 

The proposed development provides for 60% (554m2) of the site as landscaped area of which approximately 284m2 (or 30% of the total site area) would be over the podium levels.  Based upon the requirements of the RLEP 1998 the proposal does not comply.  It is noted that of the 554m2 landscaped area approximately 270m2 (29% of site area) will be available for deep landscaping purposes.

 

In response to this non-compliance the Applicant has submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standard objection.  This SEPP1 submission was lodged on the 28th March as the Applicant had considered that the wording of the RLEP88 required that at least 25% of the site area be available for deep landscaping, however, the clause should be interpreted to read that the restriction is placed on hard surface areas.

 

Consideration of the SEPP1 Objection to the Landscaped Area standard is as follows:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Objection

 

The Applicant has submitted a SEPP1 Objection and this appears to be consistent with the requirements of the SEPP.  It is the Applicants contention that the variation to this standard is warranted in this particular instance for the following reasons:-

 

 

Planning Comment

 

The standard to be varied is as follows:-

 

            31(3)    Landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas must not                             exceed 50% of the landscaped area requirements specified in subclauses                            (1) & (2).

 

The arguments put forward by the Applicant appear reasonable and it is concurred that the non-compliance is primarily an anomaly in the RLEP88.  The original intent of Clause 31(2) & 31(3) would appear to be to ensure a minimum deep landscaping area of 25% of the site area is achieved yet a non-compliance can result even when achieved.  It is further agreed that the applicant provides over 38m2 more deep landscaped area than is required and has the ability of providing suitable screen plantings along the podium levels. 

 

It is contended that the SEPP1 submission is well-founded and that the variation of the standard in this instance is supported.  Approval of the development would be subject to suitable notification being forwarded to the Minister for Planning in support of the variation of the Landscaping Standard under Clause 31.

 

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 (Draft SEPP 2004)

 

The Draft SEPP 2004 (Application of Development Standards) seeks to replace the provisions of SEPP 1 and has been publicly exhibited (concluding on 18 June 2004).

 

The new SEPP will introduce new provisions for assessing whether flexibility of a planning standard are acceptable or not.

 

The additional tests include whether the proposal will result in a better environmental outcome than a complying development, design quality and whether the development meets the objectives of the controls.  Notwithstanding, that the SEPP is a draft document requiring consideration under section 79C of the EP&A Act, Clause 14 of the draft document includes savings provisions that any development application made and not determined when the draft SEPP is gazetted is to be assessed against the existing provisions of SEPP No. 1.

 

Further, legal advice provided to Council considers that the draft SEPP should not be given any significant weight, as its final form is neither imminent nor certain and would not apply given that it contains a provision saving the subject application.  As such, further consideration of the Draft SEPP is therefore not required, however it is considered that the proposal results in a better environmental outcome on the site than that which could have been achieved had the standards been complied with due to its exceptional design quality, in particular its scale and form within the streetscape.  A thorough assessment of the proposal against the existing provisions of SEPP No. 1 and against Council’s statutory control and its objectives has been made in Section 9.3.1 of this report.

 

9.3.2  Clause 32-Floor Space Ratios

 

Under Clause 32(1), a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.9:1 is applicable for the site.  The proposed development has a FSR of approximately 0.78:1 which complies with this development standard.

 

The objective of the FSR standard under the LEP is as follows:-

 

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

 

The proposal complies with this standard.

 

9.3.3  Clause 33 – Building Heights

 

Clause 33 (2) of RLEP 1998 requires that the maximum building height for a building, within Zone No. 2C, be no more than 12m.  The proposed development has a maximum height of 11.1m approximately. 

 

Clause 33(4) of RLEP 1998 requires that the maximum wall height for a building within Zone No.2C, be no more than 10m.  The proposed development has a maximum wall height of 10.5m approximately where the gable ends and peak elements are measured.  The height relates to a small portion of the overall development and is as a result of design elements which add interest to the building design.  It is noted that the wall height to the standard ceiling height is less than 10m. 

In this instance the proposal complies with the standard as it relates to wall height only and this is defined as follows:-

 

          Wall height means the vertical distance from the highest point on an external wall to the ground level of the site.  Each external wall height measurement must include   gable ends and attic walls with an area over 6metres2and dormer windows that    protrude horizontally from the roof more than 2.5 metres.

 

Based upon this definition the wall height is acceptable as the gable ends do not exceed an area of 6m2 and thus the wall height complies.

 

9.4     Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing

 

The requirements of the DCP for Multi Unit Housing and the proposals compliance/non-compliance with the provisions of the DCP are tabulated as follows:

 

Table 2

 

 

9.4.1  Average Side Setbacks

 

The proposal provides for the minimum side setback requirements of 3.5m, thus achieving a 6m-7.7m separation from the units at No.262 Maroubra Road, but is unable to achieve the average setback of 5m.  The Applicant contends that it is unreasonable to require compliance with the standard considering:-

 

·   the narrow nature of the allotment would render the site virtually undevelopable;

·   the proposal has attempted to minimise the overall amenity impacts on adjoining properties;

 

It is agreed that due to the narrow nature of the allotment that full compliance with all development standards is unlikely to occur and in particular the requirement for an average setback of 5m along both boundaries.  The proposal does achieve some improvement in amenity impacts on adjoining allotments, through achieving compliance with the minimum side setbacks and reducing the bulk at the third level.  The subject proposal is considered to be worthy of support notwithstanding this non-compliance.

 

9.4.2  Unarticulated Wall Length

 

The proposal provides for extended lengths of walls well in excess of 10m, principally along the eastern boundary, and justification for this non-compliance is based upon a design premise, including colour changes, projecting hoods and louvres.  It is also noted that the extended wall lengths do not extend over the 3 levels but involve an articulated form diminishing in scale from the ground level upwards which achieves an overall softening in the bulk and scale of the proposed building.

 

The intent of this standard would appear to be two fold:

1.       to ensure large flat expanses of walls are not prominent in design; and

2.       to add interest to the design of a building. 

 

The design solutions proposed by the Applicant respond to the second point whilst the design and form change over the three levels satisfactorily respond to the first point.  Considering these approaches to the design of the building and the narrow nature of the site it is considered that the non-compliance in this instance is acceptable.

 

9.4.3. Building Separations   

 

The proposal cannot comply with the minimum building separation standard of 10m, providing separations between buildings as follows:-

 

·                        to the west, 4.9m to No.21 Galvin Street and 6m to No.258 Maroubra Road;

·                        to the east 6m to the balconies and 7.7m to the walls at No.262 Maroubra Road.

 

The preferred solution for a non-compliance is to off-set windows or provide sill heights of 1.6m.  The applicant proposes sill heights in excess of 1.6m to bedrooms along the eastern and western facades but not for kitchen and living room windows.  It is also appropriate that windows may be of obscure/translucent glazing in order to overcome privacy concerns.  The proposal generally complies through the use of 1.6m sill heights and it is recommended that the imposition of obscure glazing to the living/kitchen rooms to a height of 1.6m would be an acceptable design response to maintain neighbouring amenity. 

 

Based upon these changes being imposed conditionally it is considered that the non-compliance is acceptable as part of this development design.

 

9.4.4  Solar Access

 

The current design concept is an improvement upon the original application, DA1068/2002, in that overshadowing has been further minimised through a combination of increased setback and removal of third floor bulk.  However, the proposal does create additional overshadowing of the lower and middle units at No.262 Maroubra Road and the dwellings along the eastern boundary.  These issues are discussed below:-

 

1.             East: No.21 Galvin Street accommodates a 2 storey dwelling with a garage and rumpus room at ground level and bedroom and kitchen at first floor fronting the subject land.  The owners have formally objected to the subject development. The bedroom at ground level is currently shaded by a tree and bush during most hours of the day whilst the garage has no window on this boundary.  The proposal is unlikely to result in any significant overshadowing impact at ground level.  At first floor there is a rear window to the bedroom, windows to bathroom and window to kitchen.  The proposed building would only impact on the subject premises during early morning and I am of the view that the first floor level would achieve 3 hours solar access.

2.             East : No. 258 Maroubra Road semi-detached premise with minor windows located along the boundary.  The owner/occupier has not objected to the subject development.  This dwelling is currently overshadowed by the existing dwelling on No.260 Maroubra Road and by side boundary vegetation.  It is unlikely that the proposal would further adversely impact on solar access to habitable areas apart from early morning at the rear until shadows move around to the east by midday.

3.             West: No.262 Maroubra Road accommodates a 3 storey above carparking multi unit housing building.  The proposal provides for specific design changes from the concept refused by the Court under DA1068/2002, in order to improve solar access amenity to these units.  Based upon the shadow diagrams submitted it is clear that the units currently overshadow themselves until after midday during winter.  Between midday and 3pm it would appear that they currently achieve between 2 and 2 ½ hours of solar access due to orientation.  The subject proposal will create additional overshadowing of the lower units in the complex from approximately 1:30pm onwards although it would not completely cover the window areas.  Although the current proposal will result in additional overshadowing of some units it would be unlikely that full compliance with the average setback standard would lead to a compliance on solar access.

 

It is recommended that the non-compliance with the solar access standard be accepted as the design concept has provided a concerted effort to minimise overshadowing whilst providing for a reasonable scale of development on a narrow allotment.

Based upon the above assessment and consideration that the proposal results in only four non-compliances with standards under the Multi Unit Housing DCP it is recommended that the proposed development be supported and approved.

 

9.5     Development Control Plan - Parking

 

The parking provision for the amended proposal is fully compliant with Council’s DCP Parking (refer Table 2 below). 

 

Table 3: Parking requirements

 

Type of land use

Parking Requirements

Provided

Compliance

Multi-unit housing

 

 

 

    Residential

1.2 spaces per 8 x 2 Bed = 9.6 spaces

 

TOTAL = 9.6 spaces

   10 spaces

Yes

    Visitor

1 space per 4 units = 2 spaces including 1 car wash bay

TOTAL = 2 spaces

2spaces with 1 being a car wash bay 

Yes

    Bicycle (residential)

1 residential space per 3 units = 3 spaces

1 visitor space per 10 units = 1 spaces

TOTAL = 4 spaces

4 bicycle parking

Yes

 

9.6     Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

The calculations for the residential component of the proposed development are set out in Figure 1 below.  Please note a credit has been given for the existing two semi-dwelling houses (2 x 2 bedroom) on the site for the proposed development.

 

Figure 2: Levies for additional residential dwellings

 

Units

Open space levy per unit ($)

Total open

Space

($)

Community facilities levy per unit ($)

Total community facilities

($)

 

 

 

 

 

6 x 2 Bedroom

1,792.88

10,757.28

792.72

4,756.32

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL*

 

10,757.28

 

4,756.32

 

*Note: An administrative charge of $425.00 is payable for all developments.

 

9.7     Randwick Rainwater Tank Policy

 

Council’s Rainwater Tank Policy, effective from the 15th October, 2003, requires all new development to install a rainwater tank for the collection and reuse of roof water.  On site detention is proposed as part of the application and consequently it would not be difficult for the applicant to meet the rainwater tank requirements.  Accordingly an appropriate condition of consent is recommended to be included in any consent to reinforce the requirements of the DCP.

 

9.8       Land & Environment Court Decision Implications

 

On the 27th April, 2004 the Land & Environment Court (Case 11551/2003) refused appeal by Applicant with regard to Council’s refusal of DA D/1068/2002.  In formulating the refusal the Court noted the following primary concerns with the proposed development:-

 

-                     Narrowness of site and consequent inability to comply with guidelines for setbacks from side boundaries;

-                     Amalgamation with No.258 Maroubra Road was not possible;

-                     Precedence in permitting a 3 storey development on single allotment;

-                     Proposal had significant non-compliance with side setback controls;

-                     Impact on No.262 Maroubra Road may be reduced by a lower building;

 

The subject development remains on the single allotment with a width of 13.7m and as a result continues to have development standard non-compliances, however, the redesign has removed non-compliances with the minimum side setback and landscaped areas.

 

The amalgamation of the site to create a larger development site remains unattainable with the Department of Housing unwilling to sell or redevelop the adjoining land.  This has been formally revisited by the Department during 2006 and the land remains unavailable as the dwellings on the land have been purposely fitted out to accommodate disabled tenants.  Based upon this advice it is unlikely within the immediate to long term future that development of the adjoining land would be a possibility.  This outcome results in the subject land being an isolated allotment.

 

The issue of precedence has also lessened through the acknowledgement that adjoining lands are unlikely to become development sites due to long term disabled tenant needs.  Hence, it is unlikely that the sites would be developed as three narrow individual Multi Unit Housing buildings as suggested by the Commissioner.

 

The amended development concept now has only non-compliance with the average side boundary setback and the non-compliances are not as significant as originally proposed.  The current application reduces the density of units from 9 to 8, increases side boundary setbacks, reduces the bulk of the building and increases landscaped area.  These are all positive outcomes for the development of the site and are direct responses to the matters raised in the Courts determination.

 

Based upon the above comments the subject proposal is a significant improvement on the original proposal refused by the Courts.  It is neither the Council nor the Courts intention to restrict development potential of the land, being suitably zoned Residential 2C, however, refusal of the current proposal would be an unreasonable outcome.

 

10.              CONCLUSION

 

The subject proposal is considered to be acceptable in the circumstances of this application.  Despite non-compliances with Average Setback, Landscaped Areas (over Podiums), Maximum Wall Length, Building Separations and Driveway Gradients, the proposal provides for a reasonable scale of development on an isolated allotment.  The design submitted has improved amenity impacts on adjoining properties, compared to that previously refused under DA1068/2002, although clearly there remain impacts relating to bulk, overshadowing and building separation though these are considered to be reasonable impacts in the context of the subject site constraints and the scale/form of buildings on adjoining lands. 

 

It is recommended that the proposed development be approved considering the:-

 

·                    peculiaralities of this particular allotment being an isolated allotment;

·                    north-south orientation results in clear impacts on the adjoining properties with overshadowing but they are considered acceptable under the DCP;

·                    the Department of Housings determination not to sell/joint venture development has resulted in the site being isolated;

·                    the design has responded to the issues raised in the Land & Environment Court by submitting an amended development form which improves the amenity impacts on adjoining lands.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.                 THAT Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to vary the provisions of Clause 31 (3) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended) relating to the percentage of landscaped area over podiums or excavated basement areas on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality and the Director General of Planning be notified accordingly;

 

AND

 

B.      THAT Council, as the responsible authority, grant its development consent as a Deferred Commencement under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. 472/2005 for an 8 x 2 bedroom Multi Unit Housing Development, with associated basement carparking, at No.260 -260A Maroubra Road, Maroubra. subject to the following deferred commencement conditions:-

 

DEFERRED COMMENCEMENT CONDITION

 

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 to the building are to be compatible with the existing heritage building on the site and surrounding heritage buildings adjacent and nearby to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and finishes (i.e. a sample board keyed to all building elevations) are to be submitted and shall include the following:-

 

·        metal roof sheeting painted or colour bonded to minimise reflection and to be sympathetic and compatible with the building and surrounding environment

·        details and samples of the glass to be used.  The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent and certification of such is required with the sample board. 

 

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

 

C.      Subject to compliance with the deferred commencement condition, to the satisfaction of the Director City Planning, development consent be granted under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. Development Application No 472/2005 for an 8 x 2 bedroom Multi Unit Housing Development, with associated basement carparking, at No. 260 - 260A Maroubra Road, Maroubra, subject to the following conditions, subject to the following conditions:-

 

DEVELOPMENT CONSENT CONDITIONS

 

REFERENCED PLANS:  

 

1.                  The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered KRO-01 to KRO-04 , dated 1st April, 2005  and received by Council on 15th June, 2005, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the satisfaction of the deferred commencement condition and as may be shown in red on the attached plans and by the following conditions:-

 

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:

 

2.                  External colours, materials and finishes shall be in accordance with those approved by the satisfaction of the deferred commencement condition.

 

3.                  There must be no encroachment of the structure/s onto any adjoining premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place, unless permission has been obtained from the owner/s of the adjoining land accordingly.

 

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

 

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

 

In this regard, prior to occupation of the building, an application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, together with the required fee, for the allocation of an appropriate street number/s to the development.

 

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

 

8.                  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.

 

9.                  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.

 

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

 

11.              In accordance with the provisions of clauses 143A and 154A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a ‘Design Verification Certificate’ must be provided to the Certifying Authority and the Council, prior to issuing a construction certificate and an occupation certificate, respectively.

 

12.              Details of any proposed electricity power supply poles to be provided to service the development are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning, prior to installation.

 

13.              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.

 

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

 

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

 

16.              Each kitchen shall have a waste cupboard provided for the separation of recycling materials and adequate storage for one day’s waste.  Details demonstrating compliance with these requirements shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

17.              All balconies/terraces shall be fitted with a tap and have drainage to facilitate cleaning.  Details in satisfaction of the above shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

18.              Adequate lighting for personal safety and security shall be provided to common areas both internal and external to the building and shall be on a timer for energy efficiency purposes and adjusted for daylight saving. Details to be provided to the certifying authority prior to the issue of the occupation certificate.

 

ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT & ENERGY EFFICIENCY: 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

21.              Hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation and must also satisfy any relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

22.              Appliances provided within the development must satisfy as a minimum the following energy ratings:

 

·                    Clothes dryers minimum 2.5 star

·                    Dishwashers minimum 3 star

·                    Clothes washers minimum 4 star

·                    Fridge minimum 4 star

 

23.              A rainwater tank, of sufficient size to provide water for irrigation of landscaped areas within the development and for internal toilet flushing and clothes washing machine use, is to be provided to the development in accordance with Council’s Rainwater Tank Policy, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

The tank is to be located a minimum of a) 1.5m from the side boundaries and is to have a maximum height of 2.4 metres.  The tank is to be installed behind the front building line and is to be located at ground level and be incorporated into the relevant construction certificate, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

The noise level from the pump is not to exceed 5dBA above ambient background noise, measured at the property boundary and the pump must not be audible within any dwelling located upon any other premises between 10pm and 8am.

 

SECTION 94 Contributions

 

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

 

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

 

a)         for the provision or improvement of open space             $10,757.28

b)         for the provision or improvement of community facilities $4,756.32

c)         Administration fee $425.00                                                       $   425.00

 

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

 

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY AND DANGEROUS GOODS: 

 

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

 

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

 

26.              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

 

27.              Hazardous dust must not be allowed to escape from the site.  The use of fine mesh dust proof screens or other relevant measures is recommended.  Any existing accumulations of dust (eg, ceiling voids and wall cavities) must be removed by the use of an industrial vacuum fitted with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter or equally effective methods.  All dusty surfaces and dust created from work is to be suppressed by a fine water spray.  Water must not be allowed to enter the street and stormwater systems.  Demolition is not to be performed during high winds, which may cause dust to spread beyond site boundaries.

 

ASBESTOS POLICY REQUIREMENTS

 

The following conditions are applied to maintain reasonable levels of public health, amenity and safety:

 

28.              The demolition, removal, storage, handling and disposal of products and materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy and the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW and the NSW Department of Environment & Conservation (formerly the Environment Protection Authority), including:

 

·                    Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·                    Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

·                    WorkCover NSW Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos

·                    Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·                    The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

·                    Relevant Department of Environment & Conservation (DEC) / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW Guidelines.

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

29.              A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures.

 

The Work Plan must include the following information (as applicable):-

 

·                    The name, address, contact details and licence number of the Demolisher /Asbestos Removal Contractor

·                    Details of hazardous materials, including asbestos

·                    Method/s of demolition and removal of asbestos

·                    Measures and processes to be implemented to ensure the health & safety of workers and community

·                    Measures to be implemented to minimise any airborne asbestos and dust

·                    Methods and location of disposal of any asbestos or other hazardous materials

·                    Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented as identified in the Asbestos Survey

·                    Date the demolition and removal of asbestos will commence

 

The Demolition Work Plan must be submitted to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) if the Council is not the PCA, not less than two (2) working days before commencing any demolition works involving asbestos products or materials.  A copy of the Demolition Work Plan must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

Note it is the responsibility of the persons undertaking demolition work to obtain the relevant WorkCover licences and permits.

 

30.              A WorkCover licensed demolition or asbestos removal contractor must undertake removal of more than 200 m2 of bonded asbestos (or as otherwise specified by WorkCover or relevant legislation). Removal of friable asbestos material must only be undertaken by contractor that holds a current friable asbestos removal licence.

 

31.              On demolition sites involving the removal of asbestos, a  professionally manufactured sign must be clearly displayed in a prominent visible position at the front of the site, containing the words ‘DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” and include details of the licensed contractor. The sign shall measure not less than 400mm x 300mm and the sign is to be installed prior to demolition work commencing and is to remain in place until such time as all asbestos has been safely removed from the site.

 

32.              Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

Asbestos waste must be disposed of at an approved waste disposal depot (refer to the DEC or Waste Service NSW for details of sites). Copies of all receipts detailing method and location of disposal must be maintained on site and be provided to Council officers upon request, as evidence of correct disposal.

 

33.              A Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council upon completion of the works (prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued), which confirms that the relevant requirements contained in the Asbestos Survey and conditions of consent, in relation to the safe removal and disposal of asbestos, have been satisfied.

 

 

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:

 

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

 

In this regard, the operation of the premises and plant and equipment shall not give rise to a sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background (LA90), 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise source/s under consideration by more than 5dB(A).  The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq, 15 min and adjusted in accordance with the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s Industrial Noise Policy 2000 and Environmental Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance).

 

35.              The use of the premises and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance or damage to other premises.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION & CONTROL:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

 

36.              The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance and there are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to a public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

37.              The location and facilities for the collection, storage and disposal of wastes generated within the premises shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the commencement of works.

 

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:

 

38.              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.

 

39.              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.

 

40.              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.

 

41.              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 person’s 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.

 

42.              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.

 

43.              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”.

 

44.              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.

 

45.              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 must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

46.              In accordance with clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & 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.

 

47.              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 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

48.              The building is required to be provided with a smoke alarm system complying with Clause 3 of Specification E2.2a of the Building Code of Australia or a smoke detection system complying with Clause 4 of Specification E2.2a of the Building Code of Australia or a combination of a smoke alarm system within the sole-occupancy units and a smoke detection system in areas not within the sole-occupancy units.  The smoke detectors located within the stairway, corridors or the like must be interconnected.

 

Additional requirements regarding the design and installation of the smoke detection and alarm system may be specified in the construction certificate for the development.

 

STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY:

 

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

 

49.              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.

 

50.              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.

 

51.              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 abovestated premises, prior to the commencement of any works.

 

52.              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.

 

53.              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:

 

54.              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.

 

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

 

56.              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.

 

57.              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.

 

58.              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.

 

59.              Except with the written approval of Council ’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and (except as detailed below) between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays.

 

All building, demolition and associated site works are strictly prohibited on Sundays, Public Holidays and also on Saturdays adjacent to a Public Holiday.

 

In addition, the use of any rock excavation machinery or any mechanical pile drivers or the like is restricted to the hours of 8.00am to 5.00pm (maximum) on Monday to Friday only, to minimise the noise levels during construction and loss of amenity to nearby residents.

 

60.              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.

 

61.              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.

 

62.              A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics/vibration shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and a copy is to be provided to Council upon commencement of works, certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the construction of the development satisfies the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, Councils conditions of consent and relevant Standards relating to noise and vibration.  In support of the above, it is necessary to submit all relevant readings and calculations made.

 

Any recommendations and requirements contained in the report are to be implemented accordingly and should noise and vibration emissions not comply with the terms and conditions of consent, work must cease forthwith and is not to recommence until details of compliance are submitted to the PCA and Council.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

64.              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.

 

65.              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.

 

66.              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.

 

67.              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.

 

68.              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.

 

69.              During demolition excavation and construction works, dust emissions must be minimised, so as not to result in a nuisance to nearby residents or result in a potential pollution incident.

 

Adequate dust control measures must be provided to the site prior to the works commencing and the measures and practices must be maintained throughout the demolition, excavation and construction process, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

 

·                    Provision of geotextile fabric to all perimeter site fencing (attached on the prevailing wind side of the site fencing).

·                    Covering of stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material with adequately secured tarpaulins or plastic sheeting.

·                    Installation of a water sprinkling system or provision hoses or the like.

·                    Regular watering-down of all loose materials and stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material.

·                    Minimisation/relocation of stockpiles of materials, to minimise potential for disturbance by prevailing winds.

·                    Revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

70.              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 site 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.

 

71.              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.

 

72.              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.

 

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

 

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

 

75.              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.

 

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

 

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

 

Temporary fences or hoardings 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.

 

77.              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 or 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.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

a)         $1000.00         -           Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

The damage/civil works security deposit may be provided by way of a cash or cheque with the Council and is refundable upon:-

 

§           A satisfactory inspection by Council that no damage has occurred to the Council assets such as roadway, kerb, guttering, drainage pits footway, or verge; and

§           Completion of the civil works as conditioned in this development consent by Council.

 

The applicant is to advise Council, in writing, of the completion of all building works and/or obtaining an occupation certificate, if required.

 

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

 

Traffic conditions/Civil Works Conditions

 

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

 

79.              The vehicular access to the basement carpark and the basement carpark (including the driveway gradients, carpark layout and height clearances) shall be in accordance with Australian Standard 2890.1 (2004) and shall be certified as such by a suitably qualified engineer to the satisfaction of the certifying authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

 

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

 

a)                  Construct a heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Maroubra Road.

 

b)                  Reconstruct the kerb and gutter for the full Maroubra Road site frontage except opposite the vehicular access.

 

c)                  Carry out a full depth, 1.50 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full Maroubra Road site frontage.

 

d)                  Reconstruct the concrete footpath along the full Maroubra Road site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

e)                  Regrade and returf the full Galvin Street site frontage to match the issued alignment level.

 

81.              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.

 

82.              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.

 

83.              All new walls adjacent to vehicular crossings must be lowered to a height of 600mm above the internal driveway level for a distance of 1.50m within the site or splayed 1.5 metre by 1.5 metre to provide satisfactory sight lines.

 

84.              The driveway opening at the Maroubra Road site frontage must be 5.00 metres wide.

 

85.              The applicant shall dedicate a strip of land 4.57 metres wide along the full Galvin Street frontage of the development site for road widening purposes, prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate. The applicant shall meet all costs associated with the dedication.

 

No portion of the development (including basement structures and/or eaves overhang) shall encroach into the dedication.

 

86.              The applicant shall pay to Council the sum of $5,021 (based on a rate of $366.00 per lineal metre of road frontage along Galvin Street), as a contribution towards the cost of future construction of Galvin Street in conjunction with the road dedication and in compliance with the Council's subdivision policy in relation to Galvin Street. The payment is to be made prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

87.              A Works Zone is to be provided in Maroubra Road for the duration of the construction works.  The ‘Works Zone’ shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Randwick Traffic Committee and shall have a minimum length of 12 metres. The prescribed fee for the Works Zone must be paid to Council at least four (4) weeks prior to the commencement of work on the site.

 

It is noted that the requirement for a Works Zone may be waived if it can be demonstrated (to the satisfaction of Council’s traffic engineer) that all construction related activities (including all loading and unloading operations) may be undertaken wholly within the site.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

88.              The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has 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:

 

·               Maroubra Road: 20mm above the back of the existing Council footpath level at all points opposite the footpath, along the full site frontage.

         

·               Galvin Street: 150mm above the edge of the asphalt road at all points opposite the road along the full site frontage.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0923.

 

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

 

89.              The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) issued by Council and their relationship to the roadway/ footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate.

 

90.              The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $905 calculated at $33.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

SERVICE AUTHORITY CONDITIONS

 

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

 

91.              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.

 

92.              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.

 

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

 

94.              Any electricity substation required for the site as a consequence of this development shall be located within the site and shall be screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on all detailed landscape drawings and specifications. The applicant must liaise with Energy Australia prior to lodging the construction certificate to determine whether or not an electricity substation is required for the development.

 

95.              A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney water Act 1994 must be obtained. Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and charges paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Notice must be issued to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the construction certificate being issued.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development.

 

DRAINAGE CONDITIONS

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

b)         A layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of all drainage pipes and the connection into Council's stormwater system. 

 

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

 

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

 

i.          Roof areas

ii.          Paved areas

iii.         Grassed areas

iv.         Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

98.              All site stormwater must be discharged (by gravity) to the kerb and gutter in Maroubra road or the underground drainage system in Galvin Street.

 

Notes:

a.       All new kerb inlet pits shall be constructed in general accordance with Council’s standard drawing SD7.

b.      With the exception of the site discharge pipe, all new pipelines constructed within council’s road reserve shall be minimum 375 mm diameter, spigot and socket rubber ringed jointed, steel reinforced concrete pipeline (RRRCP). Prior to backfilling, all pipelines in council’s road reserve shall be inspected and approved by the Hydraulic Engineer certifying the works and Council.

 

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

 

Should no formal overland escape route be provided for storms greater than the design storm, the on-site detention system shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year storm event.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

101.          The maximum depth of ponding in above ground detention areas shall be as follows:

 

a)                      300mm in landscaped areas (where child proof fencing is not provided around the outside of the detention area and sides slopes are steeper than 1 in 10)

b)                      600mm in landscaped areas where the side slopes of the detention area have a maximum grade of 1 in 10.

c)                      1200mm in landscaped areas where a childproof fence is provided around the outside of the detention area

 

Notes:

·                        It is noted that above ground storage will not be permitted in basement carparks or in any area which may be used for storage of goods.

·                        Mulch/bark must not be used in onsite detention areas

 

102.          Any above ground stormwater detention areas must be suitably signposted where required, warning people of the maximum flood level.

 

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

 

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

 

104.          A childproof and corrosion resistant fastening system shall be installed on access grates over pits/trenches where water is permitted to be temporarily stored.

 

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

 

106.          Should a pump system be required to drain any portion of the site the system must be designed with a minimum of two pumps being installed, connected in parallel (with each pump capable of discharging at the permissible discharge rate) and connected to a control board so that each pump will operate alternatively. The pump wet well shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2 hour storm assuming both pumps are not working.

 

The pump system must also be designed and installed strictly in accordance with "Section 8.4 PUMP SYSTEMS" as stipulated in Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

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

 

107.          A sediment/silt arrester pit must be provided:-

 

a)                  within the site at or near the street boundary prior to the site stormwater discharging by gravity to the kerb/street drainage system; and

b)                  prior to stormwater discharging into any absorption/infiltration system.

 

The sediment/silt arrester pit shall be constructed in accordance with the following requirements:-

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·                    A galvanised heavy-duty screen located over the outlet pipe/s (Mascot GMS multipurpose filter screen or equivalent).

 

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

 

·                    A child proof and corrosion resistant fastening system provided for the access grate (e.g. spring loaded j-bolts or similar).

 

·                    A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

108.          Prior to occupation of the development, a "restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant" (under section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919) shall be placed on the title of the subject property to ensure that the onsite detention system is maintained and that no works which could affect the design function of the detention system are undertaken without the prior consent (in writing) from Council. Such restriction and positive covenant shall not be released, varied or modified without the consent of the Council.

 

Notes:

a.       The “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” are to be to the satisfaction of Council. A copy of Council’s standard wording/layout for the restriction and positive covenant may be obtained from Council’s Asset and Infrastructure Services Department.

b.      If new linen plans are being prepared for the site, the plans shall indicate the location and dimensions of the detention areas. 

 

109.          One covered car washing bay shall be provided for this development.

 

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

 

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

 

c)                  The car washing bay must be signposted with Exclusive Carwash Bay Use Sat 2:00pm – 5:00pm and Sunday 10:00am – 2:00pm, Visitor parking at other times’

 

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

 

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

 

110.          Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council a works-as-executed drainage plan prepared by a registered surveyor and approved by a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer. The works-as-executed drainage plan shall be to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and shall include the following details:

 

·                    The location of the detention basin with finished surface levels;

·                    Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·                    Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

·                    The location, diameter, gradient and material (i.e. PVC, RC etc) of all stormwater pipes;

·                    The orifice size(s) (if applicable);

·                    Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

·                    Details of any pumping systems installed (including wet well volumes).

 

111.          Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer confirming that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system complies with the conditions of development consent. The certification must be provided following inspection/s of the site stormwater drainage system by the certifying engineers and shall be provided to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

112.          As the above site may encounter groundwater/seepage water within the depth of the basement excavation, the basement carpark is to be suitably tanked and waterproofed. A Structural Engineer/Geotechnical Engineer shall certify the tanking & waterproofing has been carried out to an acceptable standard and a copy of the certification is to be forwarded to Council.

 

Notes:-

 

a)      Seepage water/groundwater must NOT be collected and discharged from the site.

 

b)      Any subsoil drainage (from planter boxes etc) is to be disposed of within the site and is not to be discharged to Council’s kerb & gutter and/or underground drainage system.

 

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

 

113.          A report must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority or an accredited certifier, prior to issuing of a Construction Certificate, detailing the proposed method of excavation and dewatering.  This report is to be prepared by suitably qualified and experienced Geotechnical, Hydrological and Structural Engineers and is to include but not be limited to:

 

·        The proposed method of shoring/piling and dewatering.

·        The zone of influence of any possible settlement.

·          The location of any proposed re-injection points in relation to the property boundaries (where re-injection equipment is to be located on land other than the subject premises, the written consent of the owner must also be provided to Council).

·          Monitoring of fluctuations of the water table during dewatering/construction to be undertaken by consulting engineers to ensure that the conditions of consent and other relevant requirements are satisfied.

·          The location of all proposed monitoring equipment in relation to the property boundaries (where monitoring equipment is to be located on land other than the subject premises, the written consent of the owner must also be provided to Council).

·          Details of any consultation and arrangements made with owners of any potentially affected nearby premises (i.e. in relation to access, monitoring and rectification of possible damage to other premises).

·          Details of groundwater quality and proposed disposal of any potentially contaminated groundwater in accordance with relevant requirements of the Department of Environment & Conservation, Council and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, in an environmentally sensitive manner.

·        The location of all pumping equipment in relation to the property boundaries.

·          The proposed method of noise attenuation for all pumping equipment, so as not to be more than 5dB (A) greater than the A – weighted L90 background sound pressure level between the hours of 7am to 10pm within any residential premises and not to be audible at all between the hours of 10pm and 7am within any residential dwelling.

·          Confirmation that the proposed methods of dewatering and excavation are appropriate and in accordance with ‘best practice’ principles and should not result in any unacceptable levels of settlement or damage of the adjoining or nearby buildings within the zone of influence.

 

The dewatering process must be monitored by the consulting engineer/s to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority and documentary evidence of compliance with the relevant conditions of consent and dewatering requirements must be provided to the principal certifying authority and the Council.

 

The site conditions and fluctuations in the water table are to be reviewed by the consulting Engineer prior to and during the excavation/construction process, to ensure the suitability of the excavation and dewatering process and compliance with Council's conditions of consent.

 

WASTE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONS

 

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

 

114.          The garbage room area shall be sized to contain a total of 8 x 240 litre bins (4 garbage bins & 4 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins.

 

115.          The waste storage areas are to be provided with a tap and hose and the floor is to be graded and drained to the sewer to the requirements of Sydney Water.

 

116.          The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

117.          Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to submit to Council and have approved by Council’s Manager of Waste a Waste Management Plan detailing waste and recycling storage and disposal for both the residential and commercial components of the development site, post construction.

 

LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS

 

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

 

118.          Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan prepared by Wallman Partners Pty Ltd Landscape Architects, drawing number L2, project number 02.10.2, dated March 2005, subject to the following additional requirements being provided:

 

a.          A site plan at an appropriate scale clearly showing the position, canopy spread (location of dripline), trunk diameter, height and names of all existing trees upon the site and adjoining sites within 6 metres of the common property boundary which are likely to be affected by the development.

 

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

 

c.                   A maximum of two only Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Tuckeroo’s) within the front setback (Maroubra Road frontage) of the site rather than the three currently shown in order to avoid overcrowding, as well as to avoid future security/surveillance concerns, given this species ability to attain a spread of 5 metres.

 

d.                  Restriction of one tree for the deep soil setback about halfway along the eastern edge of the proposed dwelling, rather than the two currently proposed given the width of this area being only 4 metres; (consideration shall be given to the selection of a suitably sized deciduous species in this area in order to maximize solar access during the winter months).

 

e.                   The provision or continuation of either a raised planter box or ground level planting along the southern edge of the proposed Unit 2 courtyard.

 

f.                    The use of three Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) and four Gordonia axillaris (Gordonia) is considered excessive given that the area is only 3.5m x 5.5m. A maximum of one medium-large tree species should be planted in the deep soil setback proposed for along the western boundary, between Units 2 and 3; with consideration to be given to the use of an appropriately sized deciduous tree to maximize solar access during winter months.

 

g.                   A review of area being undertaken with a view to more appropriately spaced and selected landscape treatment being provided in this area of the site (as both the number and species of plants proposed for the landscaped area at the northern end of the site is considered excessive, potentially resulting in overcrowding which will limit the usability of this area).

 

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

 

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

 

j.                    All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab having a minimum soil depth of 600mm.

 

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

 

119.          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.

 

120.          To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaped areas, an automatic drip irrigation system shall be installed throughout all planted areas with no overspray onto hard paved areas such driveways and pedestrian paths.

 

Details of the system shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans, and shall comply with all current Sydney Water requirements.

 

121.          The naturestrip on both of Council's footways 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, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate.

 

122.          The naturestrip upon Council's footway shall be maintained by the applicant in accordance with Council guidelines including, but not be limited to, watering, mowing, fertilising, and weeding.

 

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

 

124.          All detention tanks and stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm to allow for the establishment of landscaping.

 

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

 

125.          Landscaped areas must contain a predominance of species that require minimal watering once established or species with water needs that match rainfall and drainage conditions.

 

Tree Management

 

126.          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 (Angophora costata, Sydney Red Gum) on the eastern side of the proposed vehicular crossing at the completion of all works ($145.00 + GST).

 

The contribution shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

127.          Approval is granted for the removal of the following trees subject to the planting of a minimum number of 8 x 45 litre broad canopied replacement trees (not palms) throughout the deep soil zones of the site. The species selected shall be those that will attain a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity.

 

·                    One Eucalyptus species (Gum Tree) in the rear yard of 260A Maroubra Road

·                    One Olea europaea (Olive Tree) in the rear yard of 260 Maroubra Road

·                    One Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) near the northwest corner of the site.

 

128.          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.

 

129.          Permission is granted for the selective pruning of overhanging branches from;

 

·                    The eastern side of the Leptospermum patersonii (Tea Tree) located in the adjoining property to the west, 258 Maroubra Road, close to the common boundary, and

·                    The western side of the Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) located in the adjoining property to the east, 262 Maroubra Road, close to the common boundary.

 

This approval does not imply any right of entry onto a neighbouring property nor does it allow pruning beyond a common boundary; however, where such measures are desirable in the best interests of correct pruning procedures, it shall be necessary for the applicant to negotiate with the tree owner, with all pruning work to be undertaken by a qualified Arborist, with suitable qualifications in Arboriculture and to Australian Standard AS 4373-1996 'Pruning of Amenity Trees.’

 

130.          A refundable deposit in the form of cash or cheque, or bank guarantee for the amount of $8,000 shall be lodged with Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development to ensure the implementation and maintenance of the landscape works in accordance with the approved landscape documentation.

 

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

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS

 

A1.      In order to organise for an inspection for the release of the security deposit, the applicant shall contact the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to liaise with Council’s Landscape Technician to arrange for an inspection of the landscaping to be carried out. Should the landscaping be found to be unsatisfactory, thus necessitating further inspections, the applicant is advised that each additional inspection will be charged at $55.00 (incl.GST) and that this amount  shall be paid into Account Number 41901939, Code RGJ at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to any further inspection being carried out.

 

The applicant shall present the receipt to Council’s Landscape Technician to organise for a further inspection to be undertaken.

 

A2.      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

A3.      The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specification must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

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

 

a)         Part E1 -           Fire fighting equipment

b)         Part E2 -           Smoke Hazard Management

c)         Part E4 -           Emergency lighting, exit signs & warning systems

d)         Part F1 -           Damp and weatherproofing

e)         Part F5 -           Sound Transmission and Insulation

 

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

 

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

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

CHRIS KING

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

CONSULTANT PLANNER

 

 

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

26 June, 2006

FILE NO:

DA/959/2005

 

PROPOSAL:

 Hard stand car space, landscaping works within the front yard area and lily pond along the eastern side boundary

PROPERTY:

 32 Raleigh Street Randwick

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 C & J Millet

OWNER:

J Millet

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Council for determination at the request of Councillor’s Woodsmith, Matson and Hughes.

 

The application details the installation of a hard stand car space to the southern boundary of the site which fronts Raleigh Street and landscaping works to the eastern side of the property including excavating, and construction of a new concrete slab and levelling the eastern side of the property and the installation of an elevated lily pond along the eastern side boundary.

 

The main issue is the impact of the landscaping works and lily pond upon the visual amenity and privacy of the adjoining property at 29 Pauling Avenue Coogee due to the significant difference in the ground levels of the two properties.

 

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The application details landscaping works and a new concrete slab supported by piers within the front yard of the property to provide for a levelled yard area including pavers and pathway leading to the entrance of the dwelling and a 5.2m x 6.7m hardstand carspace within the access driveway of the site which is to the southern boundary at the end of the Raleigh Street cul de sac.  

 

It is also proposed to erect a fixed timber seating and dining area to the northern portion of the landscaped area and an elevated lily pond 1200mm x 11000mm in dimensions with a depth of 500mm along the eastern boundary. A new timber paling fence to the eastern boundary stepped across the site and to the under croft area beneath the lily pond is proposed which varies in height from 1500mm at the Raleigh street frontage corner, to a maximum of 2100mm at the highest point of the lily pond undercroft at the north eastern corner of the property, the lily pond will have an open style safety balustrade 1000mm in height to the eastern side, and at it’s highest point at the north eastern corner the combined height of the paling fence and balustrade will be approximately 3.25m.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is on the western side of Raleigh Street and is an L shaped allotment which has an access driveway at the end of the Raleigh Street cul de sac. The site has overall dimensions of 40.235m x 20.115m, with the driveway access having dimensions of 9.5m x 6.705m, and a total site area of 489m². The topography of the locality is characterised by the very steep hillside which falls from Carrington Road towards the bottom of Pauling Avenue, and the subject property has been filled to allow for a level area upon which the dwelling has been erected, the front yard area has not been completely levelled there being a difference in levels in this area of up to 3m.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

A previous Local Approval, LA 217/98, was approved for the demolition of the previous dwelling and erection of a new two storey dwelling. Other than that application there are no other relevant matters relating to this property.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

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

 

5.1  Objections

 

Mr & Mrs Rook of 29 Pauling Avenue Randwick (1st submission)

 

 

Mr & Mrs Rook of 29 Pauling Avenue Randwick (2nd Submission)

 

 

6.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

(a)          Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

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

 

7.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

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

 

7.1       Development Control Plans

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. 

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

75% of the site is landscaped area. Complies.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

34% of the site is permeable. Complies.

 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

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

The Performance Requirements include that overlooking of internal private living areas is minimised through appropriate building layout, location and design of windows and balconies; and separation, screening devices and landscaping be used to assist in minimising privacy impacts.

The proposed works will not result in any significant loss of privacy to the immediately adjoining properties in Pauling Avenue. The significant difference in ground levels results in direct sight lines from the subject property across the roof of the immediate adjoining dwellings in Pauling Avenue rather than down into the rear yards of these properties. In addition, any possible overlooking is further restricted by the coping of the lily pond being 1200mm from the eastern side boundary.

Therefore, having regard to the proposed works it is considered that the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP with respect to privacy are complied with.

 

Garages & Driveways

 

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

The combined dimensions of the parking spaces are 6.7m x 5m. Complies.

S1

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

The driveway width is essentially the width of the whole parking area, however there are no objections in this instance in that the access way to the carspace is at the end of the cul de sac and will not have any adverse impact upon the streetscape.

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 less than 1 in 8. Complies.

S2

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

There are no objections to the proposed carspace in that the position at the end of the cul de sac will not have any impact upon either the streetscape and adjoining properties.

 

8.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant assessment criteria and will not result in any significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and is recommended for approval subject to appropriate conditions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

THAT Council as the consent authority, grant development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No.959/05 for permission to carryout landscaping works, including a lily pond and hardstand carspace at 32 Raleigh Street Randwick subject to the following conditions: -

 

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

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA-01A, dated November 2005 and received by Council on the 6th March 2006 the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

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

 

3.         There must be no encroachment of any structures onto any adjoining premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place, unless permission has been obtained from the owners of the adjoining land accordingly.

 

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

 

4.         Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

5.         External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to the adjoining premises.

 

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

 

6.         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.

 

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

 

8.         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.

 

9.         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.

 

10.       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.

 

11.       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; and

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

 

12.       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.

 

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

 

14.       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 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

15.       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.

 

16.       Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays and all building activities are strictly prohibited on Sundays and Public Holidays.

 

In addition, the use of any rock excavation machinery or any mechanical pile drivers or the like, is restricted to the hours of 8.00am to 5.00pm (maximum) on Monday to Friday only, to minimise the noise levels during construction and loss of amenity to nearby residents.

 

17.       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.

           

18.       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.

 

19.       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.

 

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.

 

20.       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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

21        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.

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

23  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.

 

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

 

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

 

25        The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for the driveway access shall be:

·    50mm above the invert of the gutter at all points opposite the gutter, along the full site frontage.

 

26  The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $121.00 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

27        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.

 

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 (PCA) for this development.

 

Failure to obtain a Construction Certificate and appoint a PCA before commencing works is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

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:

 

Nil

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

 

PERRY HEAD

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

29 June, 2006

FILE NO:

DA 816/2006

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations and additions to existing dwelling house and conversion to childcare centre for 50 children with operating hours of 6:30am to 6:00pm, Monday to Friday.  (Heritage Conservation Area)

PROPERTY:

 3 Darley Road, RANDWICK

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 Mr A S Sidhu and Mrs S K Sidhu

OWNER:

 Mr A S Sidhu and Mrs S K Sidhu

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 Anthony Andrews, Michael Daley, Dominic Sullivan, and Councillors Margaret Woodsmith and Paul Tracey.

 

The proposal involves altering the internal layout of the existing dwelling and rear outbuilding and converting the property to a long day child care centre catering for 50 children. The applicant originally sought approval for 62 children and subsequently reduced the number to 50. The operating hours are 6.30am to 6pm, Monday to Friday.

 

Although the applicant has reduced the number of children to be catered for at the centre to 50, it is still considered that there will be a significant increase in the existing traffic and parking problems currently experienced in this section of Darley road.  The traffic report prepared by the applicant acknowledges that at some period of the day, namely the afternoon peaks there are no off-street car parking spaces for the development to rely on (and not all on site spaces can accommodate the demand generated by the development). Although the development does not provide for the  minimum required amount of off-street car parking stipulated by the RTA guidelines the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) is flexible and allows for a development to be considered if it is located on a road that provides for ample off-street car parking. This part of Darley Road is quite busy and the traffic report acknowledges that there are very few times of the day where there are many free on street car parking spaces. It is therefore considered that a child care centre catering for a maximum of 40 children is considered reasonable in this particular location. The calculation of this figure and basis of this assessment is included in more detail in the traffic and parking assessment in this report. (section 7)

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposed development involves the conversion of an existing single residential dwelling and a detached two storey rear outbuilding into a child care centre providing long-day care for 50 children (this was modified from 62) to operate between 6:30am to 6:00pm, Monday to Friday and to employ a total of 10 staff. The proposed development will require external works such as the construction of a semi-circular driveway off Darley Road, four on-site car parking spaces (this was reduced from 5 spaces to allow for more on site soft landscaped area), a sandpit, soft-fall play area and stage activity platform located between the existing dwelling and the garage to the rear. The proposal will include the construction of a ground and first floor storeroom and toilets to the rear garage. New landscaping has also been proposed for the site.

 

The proposal involves substantial internal alterations to the dwelling and rear outbuilding including the conversion of all living rooms into children play rooms, staff rooms, cot rooms, small kitchenette and the internal area of the rear garage into play rooms, kitchen, bathroom and storeroom. The proposal includes the installation of a lift at the rear for disabled access. The existing ground floor kitchen, bathroom and laundry and first floor bathroom to the main dwelling will remain.

 

It should also be noted that the main construction and building work to extent and alter the property was previously approved under Development Application No.1203/2003 so although there is some construction/building work involved in this application it is limited generally to seeking approval to convert the use of the property to the child care centre.

 

The applicant provided a detailed acoustic report and traffic assessment on the 30th and 31st January. Due to inaccuracies in the traffic report it was requested that an amended report be provided. This report was lodged with Council on 13 June 2006.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Darley Road, Randwick between No.1 and No.5 Darley Road and is presently occupied by an existing single storey dwelling and rear detached garage.  The site has a frontage width of 19.775 m, a eastern side boundary depth of 36.65 m, a western boundary depth of 25.495 m and has an overall site area of 706.54 m². Neighbouring the property to the west is a single storey residential dwelling, to west is a double single residential dwelling and to the rear of the site is the Randwick TAFE college.

 

The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of residential dwellings and non-residential land uses such as Centennial Park, Randwick Racecourse and the TAFE college. Figure 1 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area.

Figure 1: The subject site and surrounding area

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

A pre-lodgement application was lodged on 6 June 2005 for alterations and additions to convert the existing property to a child care centre accommodating 69 children. The applicant was advised that Council had several concerns with the proposal especially relating to traffic parking impacts, capacity of the site to cater to staff parking, amenity impacts such as the potential for excessive noise from children, and heritage impacts emulating from the new semi-circular front driveway. The advice also specifically noted the non-compliant floor space ratio of the proposal and the requirement for a SEPP 1 objection to address this matter.

 

The development application was lodged on 7 October 2005 and the two week notification and advertising period commenced on 9 November. Sixteen objections were received during this period and most objections raised concerns about the potential impact to the existing traffic flow on Darley Road, the increased pressure for on-street parking spaces, and the adverse impact of the development to the amenity of the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area.

 

A meeting with the applicant was held on 15 December 2005 to discuss the main issues of the development. A letter was sent to the applicant on 15 December 2005 and requested that the applicant provide additional information including an acoustic report, traffic and parking assessment study and a SEPP 1 objection for non-compliant floor space ratio (FSR).

 

Council received the acoustic report and traffic and parking assessment study on 30 January and 31 January 2006 respectively. A letter was sent to the applicant on 21 February 2006 requesting clarification of the traffic and parking assessment and additional information regarding the location of air-conditioning units, details of mechanical ventilation to the dwelling and food management.

 

An amended traffic assessment was submitted to Council on 13 June 2006 which was referred to Council’s Technical Services section. Some additional information addressing some acoustic related issues was lodged on the 28 February 2006.

 

The development application was called up on 10 April 2006 to be determined at the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting.

 

b.    HISTORY OF SITE USEAGE

 

Previous development applications for this site include:

 

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified and advertised in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan - Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of 16 submissions were received.

 

5.1  Objections

 

The following submissions were received during the notification period from 26 October to 9 November 2005.

 

1.   Ian and Linden Raymond – 37 Darley Road

2.   Mr Michael Orfanos – 11 Darley Road

3.   Diane Lee – 41 Darley Road

4.   Ms Olga Brown – 23 & 25 Darley Road

5.   Neville and Debbie Hausman – 49 Darley Road

6.   Lyndell Evans – 19A Darley Road

7.   David Thomas Bussau – 31 Darley Road

8.   Nicola Atmore – 27 Darley Road

9.   Jennifer Miles – 59 Darley Road

10. Kathy Koutsoukos, John Yannakis, Mary Yannakis and Nick Kamo – 35 Darley Road

11. Dr Mac Debden-Wilkins – 15 Darley Rd

12. Spiro and Annina Dimitriadis – 47 Darley Road

13. Joan and John Newnham – 33 Darley Road

14. Simon Rice – 5 Darley Road

15. Jill Anderson – 29 Darley Road

16. Randwick Precinct Committee

 

Issues Raised

 

Most of the submissions raised similar concerns which are summarised below;

 

1.   The proposal provides for inadequate on-site carparking.

 

Comment

Council’s Development Control Plan (DCP) for Parking requires 1 off-street car parking space per 2 staff members and ample space for the drop off/pick up of children. The development provides for 5 off street car parking spaces that are designated for staff which complies with the DCP requirement. The proposal also involves creating a semi-circular driveway which will allow for parents to drop off and pick up children. There are 3 to 4 spaces provided along this driveway. This generally will comply with the intention of providing a safe on site point for pick up and drop off in accordance with the Development Control Plan for Parking.

 

Although the proposal has been designed to comply with Council’s DCP for Parking concern is raised in respect to potential traffic conflicts that may occur since the subject site is located along a busy and fairly congested part of Darley Road. This issue is discussed in further detail in Section 6.5 and Section 7 of this report.

 

2.   The development will further adversely exacerbate the existing traffic congestion along Darley Road and will limit the availability of on-street parking for residents.

 

Comment

Concern has been raised in respect to the proposed use and additional traffic generation further exacerbating the existing traffic congestion on Darley Road and causing further traffic queuing and delays along this part of the street. There is also concern raised about the inadequate amount of on street car parking to facilitate the use and that the use will take up much needed resident parking. The TAFE also currently places quite a bit of pressure on parking along Darley Road and Moala Parade.

 

In respect to on street car parking the use will only take up street parking for a very short period of time since parents will be dropping off children and collecting them briefly and quickly and will not be using on street parking spaces for an extended period of time.

 

The traffic report submitted by the applicant (dated June) found that on average only 2 on street car parking spaces were available between the period of 7.30am till 9.30pm. From 7.30am till 8.30am there are between 6-7 on street spaces available this then gets reduced down to only 3 and 1 space between 8.30am till 9.30am since the pressure of Centennial Park and the TAFE reduce the amount of parking. In the afternoon there were no on street spaces available from 5.15pm till 7pm and between 4.30pm and 5.15pm there was an average of 4 spaces on the street. This further adds to the pressure for parents to find on street parking if the drop-off/pick-up bay is full. However the traffic report states that the child care centre would create no delays on Darley Road at either peak period. This is questionable. The additional pressure caused is generated by the scale of the development and the trip numbers it generates. In the case of 50 children this generates on average 5 trips per 15min interval and it is estimated that this will be slightly more in the typical peak periods being 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm in the afternoon. So if there were more than 5 trips per 15min then there would be more reliance on street parking which is obviously limited at more popular times.

 

A site visit by Council staff was conducted at 8:30am on Wednesday 22 March 2006 indicated that cars were finding difficulty in exiting their driveways and entering Darley Road however the traffic assessment provided by the applicant indicated that the proposed development would not significantly delay residents exiting their driveways. This seems to contradict the applicants traffic assessment which states there are critical times in the morning periods i.e 8.15am where cars are rolling, but banked up past the subject site, meaning that this will no doubt create problems for existing residents to exit their properties if cars are banked up past their property boundary. From the traffic report provided and the observations made by Council Officers it is suggested that the number of children catered for at the centre be reduced to 40 which would reduce the trip numbers to and from the site to an average of  4 per 15min interval which will mean there should be very little reliance on street parking (probably only 1space per 15min interval).

 

This is considered to be a reasonable outcome.

 

3.   The site is located in a dangerous location with the drop of and pick up of children being quite unsafe as there is no pedestrian crossing or traffic calming measures adopted to help pedestrians.

 

Comment

Although this street is quite a busy intersection the RTA has not classified this as an arterial or main road. Also with the northern side of the street, having restricted parking and “no stopping” zones there is no need for the provision of a pedestrian crossing or the like since these mechanisms can actually be more dangerous and unsafe particularly on busy roadways. It is suggested by way of a condition if consent is granted that a central median strip be included and constructed to remove the possibility of right hand “U” turns out of the centre.

 

4.   The original traffic assessment is flawed and full of inaccuracies.

 

Comment

This issue has been addressed and the applicant was given the opportunity to review the original traffic assessment. A new traffic assessment was lodged on 13 June 2006 which looked at a further day of traffic counts (18 May 2006) when the TAFE was in operation.

 

This traffic assessment is discussed in further detail in sections 6.5 and section 7 of this report.

 

5.   There is no formally designated delivery area.

 

Comment

Although there is no defined and designated delivery area the looped driveway can act as a delivery area since any deliveries to the site would be generally infrequent and would not stay for an extended period of time. The looped driveway has the benefit of creating off street space. There is also no formal requirement in Council’s Development Control Plan for parking for the provision of a specific delivery area for this type of use.

 

6.   The design of the proposed semi-circular driveway is inconsistent and out of character with the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area.

 

Comment

It is acknowledged that the design of the front driveway is not in keeping with the character of the Heritage Conservation Area however the actual site’s location and context needs to be considered. It is sited at the northernmost end of Darley Road with most of the immediately adjoining properties being modified in recent times and also having unsympathetic additions to them. For example No.5 Darley Road has a large brick fence at the front which hides the appearance of the home and the front façade. This is not an uncommon feature for other properties to the south, many having high front fencing for security and to help attenuate noise. Therefore this part of the street has not retained much of its original character. As such the proposed driveway is considered acceptable and aims to serve an important function.

 

This issue is discussed in greater detail in Section 7 of this report.

 

7.   The proposed use is unsuitable and incompatible with the nature of the Heritage Conservation Area.

 

Comment

The proposed use is permissible in the Residential 2A zone and there is no restriction or prohibition of this use in a Heritage Conservation Area.

 

The use and its intention generally complies with the objectives and intentions of the DCP for the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area.

 

Most of the building and construction work proposed is covered under a previous Development approval (DA 1203/2003) and if consent is granted the conditions of that consent will be linked to ensure there is consistency in any new work proposed within this application.

 

8.   The proposed addition/s to the dwelling are uncharacteristic of the nature of the heritage area.

 

Comment

Most of the proposed building and construction works are covered under a previous development approval as stated previously. The proposed work at the rear of the site will generally not be visible from the streetscape and is considered reasonable and will not adversely affect the visual appearance of the property.

 

9.   There are no garbage bins, storage areas or rainwater tanks provided on the plans.

 

Comment

The issue of the location of garbage bins has been covered by the referral comments from Council’s Development Engineer who will be providing appropriate conditions relating to the location and type of garbage area required. There are internal storage areas provided in both the rear building and main building which are adequate. No rainwater tanks are required for this use or for alterations and additions to the building. The NSW Department of Planning is looking at implementing new BASIX criteria which will require rainwater tanks for alterations and additions to all building. This policy has not been adopted yet.

 

10. The proposal fails to comply with Clause 30 (4) of the Department of Community Services Child care Services regulations in respect to a minimum of 7sqm of outdoor space per child.

 

Comment

The Department of Community Services requires a minimum licensed indoor space of 3.25sqm per child and 7sqm per licensed outdoor space per child. The floor space for the proposal amounts to over 500sqm which amounts to approximately 12.5sqm per child (based on a total of 40 children) and there is approximately 160sqm of outdoor space which only amounts to approximately 4sqm per licensed child (based on 40 children total) and only 3.2sqm per child (based on a total of 50 children) which is way below the requirement providing even more justification to reduce the overall number of children. This is under DOC’s minimum requirements however the applicant through the acoustic report states that only 15 children at any one time will be using the outdoor play area which amounts to approximately 10.6sqm per child which would therefore comply.

 

The Department’s requirements are separate to Council’s and will need to be complied with. The reduction in the number of children at the centre will ensure that DOC’s requirements are more closely met especially in respect to the required amount of outdoor space per child. A condition on the consent will ensure compliance occurs.

 

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

 

Building Services comments

 

The Proposal

 

The proposal provides for the change of use from a single dwelling to a child care centre which incorporates alterations to the existing building and the detached outbuilding adjoining the rear boundary.

 

 BCA Building Classification

 

Class - 9 b (Early Childhood centre)

 

Background

 

The existing building on site is a post war brick dwelling bounded by buildings of a similar nature.

 

Key Issues

 

Site Management:

 

Standard conditions are proposed to be included in the consent to address construction site management issues, such as the location of stock piled material or the storage and disposal of excavated materials, sediment and erosion control, public safety and perimeter safety fencing.

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

 

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

 

Access for people with a disability:

 

The proposal does not demonstrate compliance with the BCA requirements and Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) objectives, in relation to access and facilities for people with a disability.

 

Access for people with a disability is required to be provided to the premises and, sanitary facilities for people with a disability are also required to be provided to the development, in accordance with the provisions of the BCA.

 

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

 

The applicant or other person having the benefit of the consent is also advised to fulfil their obligations under the DA.

 

Conclusion:

 

No objections are raised in relation to the proposed development, subject to conditions being included in any development consent.

 

6.2  Engineering Issues

 

Landscape Comments

 

Growing within the adjoining property to the east, 5 Darley Road, about halfway along the common boundary, there is one Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) of approximately 10 metres in height, which despite being covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order, appears in average condition due to past pruning and the resulting sucker growth, with a large amount of its canopy overhanging into the subject site.

 

As it is located on an adjoining property, the applicant has a responsibility to ensure it remains unaffected by the proposed works, with conditions in this report granting consent for the minimal pruning of overhanging branches only. Any new fencing along this common boundary will also need to maintain a ‘cut out’ section around the one major branch growing into the subject site.

 

In the southeast corner of the site, there is one Olea europaea (Olive Tree) of approximately 10 metres in height which appears in poor condition and is located inappropriately close to the existing dwelling, possibly having grown from berries/seeds dispersed by birds.

 

This species is no longer covered by Council’s revised Tree Preservation Order as it is considered an environmental weed, and as such, conditions in this report require that it be removed as part of this application.

 

Traffic Comments

 

The Planning Officer is advised of the following comments made by Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer in regard to the redevelopment and conversion of residential sites to childcare centres:

 

Under Council's D.C.P. the proposed use would require one on-site car parking spaces for every two staff members in attendance. In addition adequate spaces for dropping off/picking up of children would be required, although the D.C.P. doesn't specify any parking rate for this purpose.

 

RTA Guidelines require one space per every four children in attendance. This is to cater for the needs of parents dropping off/picking up children. 

 

RTA Guidelines also states “consideration could be given to reducing the parking required if convenient and safe on street parking is available, provided that the use of such parking does not adversely affect the amenity the adjacent area.”

 

Further to the above comments, it is noted that the Development Engineer also recommends the provision of on-site parking for the dropping off / picking up of children.

 

It is noted that the applicant has submitted a Traffic Report by BJ Bradley & Associates dated 30 January 2006 as well as an addendum dated 28 February 2006. The report states that the traffic and parking impacts on Darley Road as a result of the additional traffic generated by the proposed Long Day Care Centre would be negligible.

 

However, there appears to be several discrepancies between this report and the other documentation submitted.

 

Concerns are also raised given the proposed spaces consist of a triple stacked and a double stacked parking space configuration which will require reversing onto Council’s road reserve in order to manoeuvre out of these spaces.

 

Noting the parking rates stated above, the provision of 5 staff car spaces would result in a 13 space deficiency for on site dropping off/picking up of children (assuming a total of 50 children for the site) based on RTA requirements.

 

The revised parking and traffic assessment was forwarded onto Council’s Development Engineer and their comments were received on 23 June 2006 and state the following;

 

The applicant has submitted a revised Traffic Assessment Report by B J Bradley & Associates dated 13 June 2006. There appears to be several discrepancies between this report and the other documentation submitted with the development application. For example, the Traffic Consultant notes that the proposed centre is intended to cater for up to 50 children and 6 staff members; however the submitted Statement of Environmental Effects and plans dated 25 July 2005 note the proposal is for 62 children and 10 staff members.

 

Further, the Traffic Consultant’s report states that there are 4 off-street car parking spaces to be provided on the site whereas the submitted Statement of Environmental Effects notes a total of 5 off-street car parking spaces to be provided.

 

 

Vehicular Access

        Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant will be required to install signposting (fronting Darley Road but located wholly within the site) clearly identifying the eastern driveway as the entry to the site and the western driveway as the exit from the site.

 

        Further, vehicles exiting the site will be restricted from performing right turn movements by the installation of ‘No Right Turn’ signposting located wholly within the site adjacent to the exit (western) driveway.

 

        Parking provisions

       According to Council's DCP – Parking, the proposed use would require one on-site car parking space for every two staff members in attendance. In addition adequate spaces for dropping off/picking up of children would be required, although the DCP does not specify parking rates for this.

 

      The RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments requires one space per every four children in attendance. It is understood Council’s Traffic Engineer previously advised the applicant that this figure may be utilised to determine the parking requirements for the proposed development. Accordingly, a total of 13 car spaces should be provided within the site (assuming a maximum of 50 children at the centre as stated in the submitted Traffic Assessment).

 

      The submitted Traffic Assessment notes that four off-street car spaces have been provided within the site as well as a drop off/pick up area for 3 – 4 vehicles. 

 

      The four car spaces are in two stacked arrangements which would each necessitate one or both vehicles parked in the spaces to reverse into the drop off/pick up area and onto Council’s road reserve in order to manoeuvre out of the spaces.

 

    Accordingly, a condition has been included in this report requiring the two front spaces (ie. the two southernmost spaces) to be allocated to staff parking only, to minimise the potential for vehicular conflict during operating hours.

 

Further, the drop off/pick up area is only wide enough to facilitate a single lane of traffic and any delays to the lead vehicle will delay all other vehicles. Given the layout of the drop off/pick up area; it is considered that a maximum of 2 parking spaces should be credited to the area.

 

    With a total of only six spaces considered available within the site, the proposed development has a shortfall of some 7 spaces. The RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments states that “consideration could be given to reducing the parking required if convenient and safe on-street parking is available, provided that the use of such parking does not adversely affect the amenity of the adjacent area.”

 

    The submitted Traffic Assessment includes parking surveys from 17 & 18 January and 19 May 2006 to determine the number of on-street parking spaces available within the vicinity of the site. Several concerns are raised with both the method and the results provided from these surveys, as listed below:

 

·    The studies were undertaken over only two days during the school/TAFE holidays and only one day during school/TAFE. It is considered that these values may not provide a true reflection of the average parking availability in the street (this was reinforced by the Planning Officer who was present for the study undertaken on 19 May 2006 and observed the traffic and parking conditions to be far less busy than those on previous site inspections);

·    The morning surveys began at 7:30am even though the centre will be operational from 6:30am and the RTA Guide suggests the peak drop-off period may be from 7am. Noting the high proportion of resident vehicles parked on-street overnight it is considered that parking availability may be highly restricted between 6:30am and 7:30am;

·    During the survey undertaken on 19 May 2006, an insufficient number of on-street spaces (that is, less than the required 7 spaces) were shown to be available from 8:00am – 9:30am and for the whole afternoon period of 4:30pm – 7:00pm (and in particular, from 5:15pm where no parking was available at all and additional vehicles were observed to be parked illegally).

 

The Development Engineer does not agree with the statement provided in the submitted Traffic Assessment that the traffic and parking impacts on Darley Road as a result of the additional traffic generated by the proposed Long Day Care Centre would be negligible.

 

Given that there were no parking spaces available in the afternoon peak, and limited parking in the morning peak, it is considered that the development application should not be approved with reliance on on-street parking.

 

Traffic impacts

Whilst the traffic assessment report notes that platoons in the traffic would help to minimise delays to vehicles waiting to enter or exit the site, concerns are still raised regarding the potential impact of east bound traffic waiting to turn right into the site from Darley Road during the morning peak. This matter could be addressed by preventing right turn into the site by construction of a concrete median island.

 

This matter was discussed with Council’s Traffic Engineer and it was determined that until the childcare centre is in operation, it will be difficult to determine whether a median is required. Consequently, in lieu of requiring the applicant to construct the median prior to occupation, a bond for $15,000 will be obtained from the applicant to cover the cost of the median if required. The bond will be released 2 years after occupation of the childcare centre if Council determines that the median and/or alternative traffic control measures are not required.

 

Scaling back the proposal to a childcare centre for only 24 children would half the traffic generation from the development and assist in minimising traffic impacts. According to the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, a long-day care centre for 24 children would generate 19 trips during the two hour morning peak (average of 9.5 trips/hour) and 17 trips during the 2 hour afternoon peak (average of 8.5 trips/hour).

 

The traffic generation rates from a childcare centre for 24 children are low when compared to the existing flows on Darley Road. Given that the applicant’s Traffic Consultant has analysed the traffic conditions around the proposed development and not raised any concerns; no objections are raised to a childcare centre for 24 children being approved on the subject site provided a bond to cover the cost for installation of a median island in Darley Road (or alternative traffic control measures deemed necessary by the Randwick Traffic Committee) is lodged by the applicant.

 

It is considered that the RTA guidelines are only a guide and are quite outdated so they are not the most accurate statistics to work from. They do provide some basic guide in calculating average trip generation from the use however their assessment in respect to parking need is considered to be unreasonable and very difficult for any development to comply with.  The traffic assessment prepared by the applicant is probably a more up to date and accurate assessment of traffic movements and existing parking conditions throughout one day. Several inspections of the site have been conducted by different Council Officers during different times of the morning and it is fair to say that parking conditions have varied throughout these inspections. At some times there has been ample on street parking and other times parking is limited.

 

It is recognised that the street does experience some difficulties in traffic and parking and after assessing the number of trip movements generated by a total of 50 children this will have a considerable impact on the existing traffic and on street parking along Darley Street. It is considered that reducing the number of children to 40 children would generate an average hourly trip movements of 16 vehicles per hour (based on RTA guidelines) being approximately 4 vehicles per 15minute intervals which means that these trips will be able to be catered for on site and wont rely on street  parking.

 

Waste Comments

 

The Planning Officer is advised that the applicant has not specifically stated how waste resulting from the proposed childcare centre is to be stored or disposed of.

 

Details of a Commercial Waste Contract are to be submitted to Council’s Manager of Waste for approval, and be approved, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate. This can be addressed by way of a condition if consent is to be granted.

 

1.    Heritage Issues

 

The subject site is within the North Randwick Conservation Area and is occupied by a single storey villa, which retains much of its original character, including face brick walls and timber detailing.  The dwelling is part of a group of four comprising nos.1-5 Darley Road.  There is a large garage structure along the rear boundary of the site.

 

A development application for alterations and additions, DA/1203/2003 was approved in March 2004.  At ground floor level the application proposed to make changes towards the rear including provision of a new bathroom, laundry, kitchen, family room area, and a carport to the western side.  At the upper floor level it was proposed to provide three bedrooms, two bathrooms and a storage room.  This upper level is currently under construction. 

 

The current proposal is for use of the site as a child care centre.  The child care use will occupy the existing dwelling, with some internal modifications, the new upper level and the rear garage. 

 

The application has been accompanied by a Heritage Statement prepared by Matt Holt and Assoc. Architects which concludes that the proposed addition at the rear will have little impact on the heritage significance of the house. 

 

A pre-lodgement meeting was held in relation to the use of the site as a child care centre, at which concerns were raised in relation to the impact of proposed internal and external changes, in relation to the impact of the proposed parking and drop-off/pick-up areas on the garden setting of the dwelling, and a number of design/detailing issues in the drawings.  Concerns were also raised in relation to a proposed upper level access bridge between the main dwelling and the rear garage and the location of the proposed lift.  The upper level bridge has been deleted and the lift has been relocated within the envelope of the existing building.

 

In relation to the internal changes, the proposal retains a greater proportion of the existing layout along the eastern side of the dwelling but a lesser proportion along the western side.  The reduced changes to the eastern side and the retention of the rear bay are supported.  The proposed changes will minimise impact on the building exterior, reducing the need to relocate windows and patch brickwork.  There are concerns that the removal of all of the existing walls in the vicinity of the new reception and staff area will result in considerable loss of internal detailing including timberwork and plasterwork.

 

In relation to the external changes, the drawings which have been submitted apparently propose a number of new windows.  It is noted that the condition of the dwelling has deteriorated significantly since it became vacant and during the course of construction work, including loss of a number of original windows.  Any remaining original windows should be retained and repaired if possible, rather than being replaced.  All required new windows should be manufactured to match as closely as possible the corresponding windows of nos.1 and 5 Darley Road.  For example the windows to the front bay appear to have been casement rather than double hung.  The elevations should be amended accordingly.

 

In relation to the upper level, the drawings do not clearly indicate whether the upper level to the proposed child care centre is of the same extent and design as the approved upper level now under construction, however a comparison of the two sets of drawings indicate that the proposed dormer windows to the eastern elevation have increased in height and moved forward, and that the ridge of the existing roof which was previously to remain unchanged is now to be modified to increase its height.  An important consideration in the assessment of the previous application was that the form of the upper level roof would allow the integrity of the existing roof to be maintained.  There are concerns that the form of the upper level addition will result in loss of fabric of the roof of the building and that the proposal to extend the plane of the existing roof to increase the ridge height will lead to confusion as to the original form of the building.

 

In relation to the curtilage and setting of the dwelling there are concerns that the proposed parking and driveway provision will detract from the garden setting of the dwelling.  It is noted that the proposal includes the provision of two visitor spaces to the east side of the dwelling, two visitor spaces to the west side of the dwelling and a drive through drop-off/pick-up area across the front of the dwelling.  The location of staff parking has not been indicated, unless it is proposed that staff cars utilize the courtyard areas to the east and west behind the visitor parking.  The parking and drive through provision will considerably reduce the area available for soft landscaping on the site, while the drive through will also require the removal of a substantial section of the front fence.  The landscape plan which has been submitted indicates turfed areas to the courtyard to the east and the rear courtyard between the sand pit and the stage.  The rear courtyard area however is covered by a shade structure, somewhat reducing the viability of the turf underneath. 

 

It is suggested that a meeting be organized to discuss these issues.

 

A meeting was held on the 15 December to discuss a number of issues. In respect to the lack of soft landscaping it was agreed that car space no.5 (on site) be removed in lieu of some improved on site boundary landscaping. This would reduce the amount of hard paving along both side boundaries. The applicant was adamant that the circular drive was important since it fulfilled the role of enabling 4 cars to drop off/pick up children on site in compliance with Council’s Development Control Plan No.2. It is fair to say that this is an important component of the development.  The adjoining properties No.s 1 and 5 have high front fences so it is perceived that the relationship and original character of all three properties has already been lost.

 

The issue relating to the existing windows and new dormer windows at the upper level, their design and scale, it was agreed that this could be dealt with as a condition of consent and ensure that the proportions, size and design of those and upper level addition dormers be the same as the consent issued in 2003 (DA 1203/2003). Also a condition will be included to ensure that any existing windows are repaired rather than replaced and if they must be replaced they are to be identical to the original windows and to match those of No.1 and No.5 Darley Road. Its important since the original windows are either casement or double hung and it is important that the scale, size and type of windows be the same as the original (or as close as possible) to ensure and maintain the historical integrity of the dwelling.

 

2.    Environmental Health Issues

 

The proposal

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions to an existing residence whilst converting the dwelling into a child care centre which is to be located at 3 Darley Road, Randwick.

 

Key Issues

 

Food safety requirement

 

As discussed with Matt Holt (applicant) on the 25 October 2005, the proposed child care centre will not be preparing/cooking food. The centre will only store food for the children. As such, food conditions will not be included in this report.

Noise from plant & equipment

 

Although an Acoustic Report has been submitted with this application it is considered that in the absence of the additional information requested in memo dated 8 February 2006, any potential detrimental impacts upon the amenity of surrounding residences cannot be fully considered at this stage.

 

However, should the application be considered for approval, appropriate noise conditions have been included if consent is to be granted.

 

Additional information was provided on 28th February which aimed to address the Environmental Health concerns. The acoustic report provided a series of recommendations that can be adopted by way of conditions if consent is granted.

 

6.5  Transport Engineer comments

 

The Traffic report was referred to Council’s Transport Management Group for comment. The following comments were made in respect to the original traffic report:

 

“I refer to the traffic assessment report prepared by BJ Bradley and Associates for the proposed long day care centre at number 3 Darley Road in Randwick.  The Transport Management Group has assessed this report and has determined the following aspects of the report to be unsatisfactory.

 

1.   Date of the traffic survey.

 

The traffic survey of the site was undertaken between January 17-18 2006.  This coincides with the holiday period of the adjacent Randwick TAFE.  Randwick TAFE is a significant trip generator and the students and employees who travel to the TAFE by car increase the demand for parking in Darley Road.  As such, the kerbside parking assessment undertaken by BJ Bradley and Associates cannot be considered as an indicative parking assessment for Darley Road outside of holiday times.  A site inspection held on Wednesday the 22 March at 9am reinforces this.  At this time the number of cars parked between no 1 and 11 Darley Road was 8, with the number of unoccupied spaces being 2.  The report undertaken in the holiday period shows the number of vehicles parked between no 1 and 11 to be 3, with the number of unoccupied spaces being 7.  Also, there was no parking available in the section of Darley road west of the roundabout, and very limited parking was available in the angled parking section on the northern side of Darley Road.

 

2. Provision of off-street parking

 

The report indicates that the proposed long day care centre will provide 4 spaces, with an additional four vehicles being accommodate within the drop off and pick up areas.  It is proposed that these four vehicle spaces will be in a stacked arrangement.  This parking arrangement effectively halves the number of spaces available as vehicles parked at the front of the stack cannot be moved if there is a vehicle parked behind.  Similarly, if the proposed drop off and pick up area is only wide enough to accommodate a single vehicle, it cannot be included in the assessment for parking availability as vehicle movements to and from the site may be restricted by a parked vehicle.

 

In addition to this, section 5.12.3 of the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments states that when assessing long day care centres, one vehicle spaces is to be provided for every four children in attendance.  If the centre is licensed for 50 children, 13 off-street spaces are to be provided.  The Guide also states that consideration may be given to reducing the number of spaces if there is provision for safe on-street parking.  Based on the observations of the site visit held on Wednesday 22 of March, there is little or no on-street parking available in the direct vicinity of the proposed development.  As such, consideration to reducing the number of off-street parking spaces cannot be supported.”

 

The applicant was provided with an opportunity to amend and review the original traffic assessment dated 30 January 2006 based on the comments above. An updated and modified traffic study was submitted to Council on 13 June 2006 which includes some further traffic counts conducted on 19 May 2006 (between the hours of 7.30am – 9.30pm and 4.30pm till 7pm). The results were also compared with the counts conducted on 18th January 2006.

 

This updated report was referred to Council’s Transport Engineer who stated “that Council’s Transport Management Group has assessed the report and has determined the following aspects of the report to be unsatisfactory”. In summary:

 

·    There is still a shortfall of some 9 on site car parking spaces which is not in accordance with the RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments for child care centres.

·    The parking study prepared in May states that there are some 12 on street car parking spaces available within the vicinity of the site. This does not take into account the mandatory “no stopping “ distances on the approach and departure side of the bus stop. Taking this restriction into account, there is only provision of some 9 spaces . These spaces are readily occupied  and the parking availability witnessed by Council Officers on numerous occasions shows that there are generally only one or two spaces available .

·    It should be noted that that even in the case of all these parking spaces (9) being available, the shortfall of 11 off-street parking spaces still can not be accommodated in the 9 on-street spaces.

·    The report states that the shortfall can be accommodated by introducing short term parking on the southern side of Darley Road. This suggestion will not be supported as it will increase the pressure for all day parking in adjacent streets.

 

As such Council’s Transport Management Group could not support the application. Although the Transport Management Group rely on the RTA guidelines as a measure to ensure what level of development is appropriate for the site it is virtually impossible for any development at Randwick to comply with the minimum car parking requirements stipulated by the RTA. In this case a minimum of 13 off street car parking spaces are required for the scale and size of the proposed use. The RTA is flexible and allows for some discretion if there is some provision for off-street car parking on the roadway. Although there is not much off street car parking within the immediate vicinity of the site it is fair to re-evaluate the scale and size of the use. As such it is considered that a centre catering for a maximum of 40 children would not place too much pressure on street parking on this part of the road and although it would still place some additional pressure on traffic the trip no.s generated (at approximately 4 vehicular trip movements per 15min interval) are considered to be reasonable.

 

The on street parking demand will also be reduced during approximately 12weeks when the TAFE college is on holidays. During these times there will be little impact generated by the child care centre in respect to street parking.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

(a)   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 2A (Residential A Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity of a child care centre is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Residential

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

30 - Min. Lot Size

NA

NA

NA

31 - Landscape Area

40%

40%

Yes

32 – FSR

0.5:1

Claimed 0.503:1 however calculation of figures reveals FSR of 0.75:1

 

n.b DA No.1203/03 which approved a first floor addition to the dwelling had a floor space ratio of 0.63:1

No

SEPP No.1 lodged

33 - Building Height

9.5 metres

6.7 metres wall height, 8.5 metres total height

Yes

Other Clauses

Effect

Applies

Comment

43

Heritage Item or in a Conservation Area

Yes

The subject site is located within the North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area.

 

(b) State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Floor Space

 

A letter was handed to the applicant on 15 December 2005 requesting that SEPP 1 objections be included to address the issue of floor space ratio non-compliance.

 

No SEPP 1 objection was received regarding this development proposal.

 

The development standard in question is clause 32(1) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan which states that “the maximum floor space for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house within zone 2A os 0.5:1”. The proposed floor space ratio for the proposed development is 0.73:1 which exceeds the control.

 

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

 

Under SEPP No.1 the following questions need to be answered;

 

Is the proposal consistent with the aims and objectives of the zone?.

 

The proposed alterations and additions to the dwelling are covered under a previous DA No.1203/2003 and is currently being constructed in accordance with the construction certificate No.604/2004. This older DA approved the first floor addition to the existing dwelling and amounted to a total floor space ratio of 0.63:1. The new work proposed in respect to the current application is for a new first floor addition above the rear garage/outbuilding. This amounts to 10% more floor space then what was approved under DA 1203/2003.

 

The new work to the rear of the building above the rear garage/outbuilding structure is considered to be small scale work that will not be visible from the street, hence the bulk and scale of the development is not out of character with immediately adjoining development.

 

The main aims and objectives of the 2A zone are;

 

a)   to maintain the character of established residential areas, and

b)   to allow for a range of community facilities to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors and;

c)   to enable redevelopment for low density housing forms, including dwelling houses, dual occupancy, semi-detached housing, and the like, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development and

d)   to allow people to carry out a range of activities from their homes, where such activities are not likely to adversely affect the environment of the locality.

 

The proposed development is permissible in the zone and complies with the general aims and objectives of the zone. The character and scale of the proposed extensions to the dwelling and out building will not be out of character and scale with immediately adjoining development. Towards the rear of the site is the TAFE building which is a large development. The scale and size of the proposal is comparable with immediately adjoining residential developments.

 

Why is the standard unreasonable and unnecessary?.

 

In examining what is a reasonable degree of floor space on a particular site it is important to see what immediately adjoining development is like and whether the development with a larger than required floor space will fit into the area and streetscape.

 

Darley Road is predominantly made up of residential dwelling houses which are varied in scale and size. There are many large scale dwellings along the eastern side of this road. Immediately to the east and west are dwelling houses mainly one and two storey’s in scale however at the rear of the site is the TAFE complex which is made up of fairly large scale buildings. The additional physical floor space to the dwelling is only approximately 10% more floor space which was approved under the previous DA no. 1203/03 which amounts to approximately 70sqm which numerically seems quite high however the additional floor space has been well designed in order to reduce physical bulk and visibility since the additional floor space has been catered for as a dormer style extension to the rear garage structure which makes it less visible and reduces its bulk. The proposal in this case would not be out of scale or character with immediately adjoining properties.

 

In this particular case the exceedence of the floor space control is considered to be generally well founded.

 

(c) Development Control Plan – Parking and Traffic

 

The aim of this DCP is to provide standards and guidelines to achieve adequate provision for vehicle parking, service and delivery areas and bicycle parking, based on sound design principles and safe access.

 

The following parking requirements apply to child care centres:

 

•           1 space for every 2 staff members in attendance plus adequate space for drop off/pick up of children.

 

The proposed development provides five on-site car parking spaces, arranged in two tandem car parking spaces on the eastern side of the site and 3 tandem car parking spaces on the western side of the site. All on-site car parking spaces will be designated for use by staff only. The amount of on site car parking for staff complies with Council’s DCP for parking since the applicant proposes 10 staff members. However one of the critical issues raised by Council’s Heritage Officer is the loss of soft landscaping created by the circular driveway at the front and by the amount of hardstand car parking along the periphery of the building. It was agreed at a meeting held with the architect on the 15 th December 2005 that along the western side of the site one of the furthermost spaces be removed and replaced with soft landscaping. This can be achieved by way of a condition if consent is to be issued.

 

The proposed loop driveway to the front of the property will provide the space for the drop off and pick up of children and is not included as on-site car parking. The circular driveway allows for approximately 3 to 4 vehicles to park and allow for the drop of and pick up of children.  Although the design of the driveway is uncharacteristic for development along this stretch of Darley Road which is in the heritage conservation area, it does contribute to providing some place off the street for a drop-off, pick-up of children in accordance with Council’s DCP for Car parking. Despite the circular driveway complying with the requirement under the DCP for a drop-off pick up zone there are a few problems that arise from its design;

 

1.   The traffic report prepared by the applicant (dated June) found that between 8am to 8.15am for example there were queues from the roundabout “rolling platoons occurred along straight on Darley Road past No.3 intermittently – cleared completely within 1 to 1 and a half minutes”.  At better times the queuing cleared at 15 second and 30 second intervals which means that the use is likely to add to the queuing and some cars may not be able to either find street parking or gain access to the site, if there are three to four cars already taking up the drop-off/pick-up zone. This could then cause further congestion and queuing to get into the site while those leaving have to wait for the queue to subside to exit the site. The southern side of Darley Road is a two lane road with one lane for parking and one lane for traffic. It seems that this use so close to the roundabout and prominent intersection will definitely add to the traffic congestion the street currently experiences. Additional queuing may cause cars to try to overtake cars waiting to enter the site and this could be dangerous on a busy road.

 

Logistically the time taken to remove smaller children from the car and into the child care centre may take several minutes, thus delaying entering vehicles. This may have potential impact to the queuing of vehicles, traffic congestion on Darley Road and affect residents in the immediate area exiting their driveways.

 

2.   The next problem the driveway creates is the possibility for parents to leave the centre and conduct a right hand turn since there are no double lines or median strip to prevent this from occurring. The applicants traffic engineer suggests in his report that a median strip can be constructed to alleviate this concern. Council’s Transport Management Group are not favourable for this to be introduced however if approval is granted this is an essential mechanism however this must be approved by the local traffic committee.

 

There are appropriate conditions if consent is issued (conditions 70, 72 and 73) relating to providing appropriate mechanisms to ensure that vehicles leaving the site obey general road rules. Condition No.73 in particular requests the imposition of a monetary bond to cover the cost (in the future) of particular traffic control measures if required once the child care centre is in operation such as the implementation of a median strip or the like.

 

(d) Development Control Plan – Draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area

 

The aims of this DCP are to ensure the heritage significance of the area is maintained, that clear controls are established to set high standards for development in the conservation area and to provide guidance on the appropriate design, form, style, siting and landscaping of development in the conservation area.

 

The main objective relating to fences in Section 2.7 of the DCP - Draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area states that any development to front fences should:

 

“...enhance the streetscape in keeping with the original Federation and Inter-War character of the area.”

 

The site currently features a dwelling that is in a deteriorated condition, however rectification work and alterations and additions to the dwelling are continuing as per the development consent 1203/2003. The proposed development will make substantial alterations to the front of the dwelling including hard stand parking areas for staff, a loop driveway providing entry and exit in a forward motion from the site, new front masonry fence and new landscaping to the entire site. Other proposed alterations and additions include activity equipment located to the rear of the dwelling and at the rear of the garage which will not be readily visible from Darley Road.

 

It is generally considered the proposed works will not adversely affect the appearance of the property and will generally be in keeping with the nature of the heritage area. If consent is granted then there will be restrictions placed on any signage that is to occur and that the colour scheme for the development must be in accordance with the nature and character of the streetscape and immediately adjoining properties.

 

In respect to the front of the property and the semi-circular driveway which has already been discussed earlier in this report element will take away the front landscaped area the design however will not detrimentally detract from immediately adjoining properties since any part of front fencing shall be low and there will be the ability for some soft landscaping to the front of the property. This would improve the visual appearance of the front of the property and improve it. Other properties immediately adjoining the subject site have been altered over time and are no longer in their original condition. There is not much uniformity of design and style retained along many of the Darley Road properties along this small section of the road.

 

In respect to Clause 43 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan the proposal generally complies with the intentions and objectives of this clause to ensure that any development maintains the character of the area and is sympathetic to the nature of the conservation area and is in keeping with the form of immediately adjoining properties. As discussed previously the development generally respects the scale and form of the streetscape and much of the new work will not be visible from the street. The imposition of specific heritage conditions will further ensure that any new works respect the existing character of the dwelling and its surrounds.

 

8.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

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

 

8.1     Impact on adjoining development

 

8.1.1      Acoustic issues

             

(i)           Noise generation from indoor and outdoor activities

 

The proposed use of the site as a child care centre will create the potential for adjacent neighbours to be affected by noise from children playing outdoors, motor vehicles entering and leaving the site and mechanical ventilation. The acoustic report titled ‘Noise Assessment Proposed Child Care Centre 3 Darley Road, Randwick, NSW’ prepared by Spectrum Acoustics Pty Ltd and received by Council on 30 January 2006 analysed the potential acoustic disturbance the proposed development may have on the surrounding area. The acoustic report took into account the maximum capacity of the child care centre being 49 children.

 

The existing sound levels were taken from No.7 Darley Road and not the adjoining properties, however it is considered that the ambient noise level does not significantly differ from No.5 to No.7 Darley Road and that the objective of the report is to provide an accurate approximation of the probable noise levels of the proposed development. The acoustic report requires that side boundary fencing be at a minimum height of 2.1m (along the side of the site where there is no parking provided). Otherwise fencing can taper down to 1.8m. The fence along the eastern side between No.3 and No.5 Darley Road is already 2.1m in height and is solid brick which will help noise attenuation.

 

The acoustic report outlines the following measures that will be undertaken during the operation of the proposed development to reduce noise impact to adjacent properties:

 

-     An emphasis on guided development of children with organised activities and set objectives,

-     Children will be distributed throughout the play areas in supervised groups,

-     No unrestricted play time that may cause excessive noise,

-     All activities will be supervised by qualified and trained staff members.

 

It should also be noted that the child care centre will restrict outdoor play and activity time to the hours before 10am and after 3pm to ensure the children are not exposed to harmful levels of ultra violet light. This measure is also considered to have a significant beneficial for nearby residents who are likely to be eating their midday meal without obtrusive noise.

 

The children attending the child care centre will spend a majority of the time indoors participating in activities that will not be overly noisy. To further reduce noise affecting the adjacent properties, the acoustic report included the following recommendations:

 

-     All window and doors are to be kept closed whilst the children are inside,

-     Signs should be erected in the car park area requesting people visiting the site to respect the amenity of neighbours and minimise noise whilst using the car park,

-     Staff to be appropriately trained to be aware of the need to maintain low noise levels and quickly minimise possible outbursts. Potentially noisy activities are to be located furthest from boundaries,

-     That a 2.1 metre fence is to be erected along the eastern boundary of the outdoor playground and a 1.8 metre fence along the eastern boundary of the car park.

The recommendations are considered to be appropriate and will effectively minimise noise disturbance to the surrounding area.

 

(ii)          Noise generation from air-conditioning units

 

The proposed development did not indicate whether the proposed child care centre would require mechanical ventilation. However the acoustic assessment report did note that mechanical ventilation of the internal areas of the centre would be required to ensure minimal noise would affect the adjacent properties. The acoustic report recommends that the:

 

“...selection and location of mechanical plant should be approved by an acoustic consultant prior to installation.”


Conditions of consent in line with the recommendations of the acoustic report could address the issues relating to noise eminating from any potential mechanical ventilation. It is suggested that any mechanical plant shall have a maximum dBA of 60 and shall be located a minimum of 1.5m from the side boundary. The site is quite large and this could be easily achieved.

 

(iii)         Noise generated from the car parking area

 

The acoustic report concluded that noise generated from the proposed car park area would not significantly impact the amenity of neighbouring properties. It should be noted that the use of the proposed car park will be not be greater than the noise generated from traffic on Darley Road. This is especially pertinent during the morning and afternoon peak traffic loads when motor vehicles will be travelling along Darley Road in their highest frequency.

 

The acoustic report includes some assessment regarding noise created from people shutting car doors, walking to and from motor vehicles and vehicles moving at low speed. The report includes the following findings:

 

“A noise level of 53dB(A) Leq was measured, at an average distance of 7m, over a relatively busy 5 minute period where six vehicles used the car park. This equates to an Leq sound power level of 78 dB(A).

 

This value has been used to approximate a 15 minute assessment period (i.e. assuming a rate of 18 vehicles moving in and out of the car park in a single 15 minute interval). It should be noted that this is considered a worst case scenario for the calculation of maximum impacts.

 

...The noise from traffic generated by the proposal will be approximately 20dB(A) below the existing traffic noise in the area and, therefore, will not add to that noise.”

 

It is concluded from the report that the proposed development will not add significant noise to the existing sound levels generated by the existing traffic on Darley Road.

 

Generally the proposed measures to minimise noise emissions generated from the children outdoors, potential mechanical ventilation and use of the car park are considered acceptable and will not significantly affect the amenity of the surrounding residential area and subject to the imposition of conditions this will ensure that the use and any associated plant and equipment will be appropriately selected and designed to minimise any adverse impact on adjoining properties.

 

8.1.1    Views, privacy & overshadowing

 

The proposed development will not add significant bulk to the existing dwelling. Proposed additions to the floor space will be to the rear of the two storey garage and will face the driveway and car parking area of the adjoining TAFE college. The additions will not be visible from Darley Road and will not have an adverse impact to the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area.

 

The proposed use of the site as a child care centre will not add any significant overshadowing to the private open space of any adjacent properties or obstruct important or iconic views. The proposed location of windows on the first floor remains unchanged from the previously approved development for the site which included significant alterations and additions to the existing dwelling. As such, a loss of privacy for adjacent properties is considered minimal.

 

8.2     Landscaping/Open Space

 

8.2.1      Provision of open spaces, its function and landscaping

             

The proposed landscape plan provides an appropriate mix of plant types to soften the appearance of the dwelling and to create visual interest to the streetscape. The proposed selection of plants will not grow to heights that will detract from the visual amenity or reduce solar access of adjacent neighbours.

 

The proposed landscaping plan is considered to provide sufficient planting to the front of the dwelling to satisfy the objective of Section 2.8 ‘Gardens’ of the DCP - Draft North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area which states gardens should:

 

-     Provide an attractive front garden area in keeping with those of the area’s original houses,

-     Improve the streetscape setting of all buildings in the conservation area.

 

The proposed landscape plan includes plant species that are comparable to the traditional plants of the federation period and recommended in the DCP. It is considered the selection of plant species will maintain the dominant character of surrounding residential area, will improve the site and be compatible with the heritage quality of the streetscape.

 

8.3.2    Child Care Policy

 

On the 13th of June Council endorsed the implementation of the Child Care Centres policy which aims at providing guidance for applicants and residents in respect to the location, siting and general planning considerations that are taken into account when assessing an application for the establishment of a child care centre within the City of Randwick.

 

The main aims of the policy are;

 

·    To guide the location and design of child care centres in order to minimise environmental and social impacts.

·    To encourage centres with high levels of safety, security, environmental health and amenity and,

·    To provide a clear and concise document which guides applicants and the community on child care centre provision.

 

The policy requires any new applicants to submit a checklist for compliance with Department of Community Services (DOC’s) requirements. Since this application was lodged prior to the adoption of the policy a checklist hasn’t been lodged however a condition on the consent will be included to ensure compliance and it is unlikely that the development wont comply as the site area is quite large and with the reduction of children proposed the development should be able to comply.

 

The proposal generally complies with section 7 of the policy which relates to the planning, location and design of the child care centre.

 

In general the proposal complies with the aims, objectives and general intentions of the policy.

 

9.    FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

10.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposed development for the change of use of the residential dwelling to a child care centre will involve minor internal alterations to the existing dwelling and significant alterations to the front of the site and to the rear of the dwelling. The additions to the rear garage are not considered significant and will not be readily visible from Darley Road. The applicant has amended the proposed number of children to occupy the facility from 62 to 50 and based the Traffic Assessment and Acoustic report on this figure.

 

The number of trips the use generates is a key component in assessing its likely impact on street parking and on existing traffic conditions. The RTA clearly states that if the development can not accommodate all the necessary on site car parking required then concessions should be granted if there is ample on street car parking. The applicants traffic study acknowledges that at some critical morning and afternoon peaks there are no or a very limited amount of street parking. This means that any additional trips generated (beyond what the site can handle) will be catered for on the street. In this case there will be too much reliance on street parking at times where there is none or very limited numbers which will further create traffic pressures especially as there is no availability for parking on the northern side of the site. 50 children generates average trip no.s of 5 per 15min interval which although doesn’t seem much means that 3 spaces are catered for on site and a further 2 need to be catered for on street. During times such as 5.15pm till 7pm there are no parking spaces on the street (with the peak collection time being between 4-6pm). The problem comes down to the intensity and scale of the use. If the use was reduced to 40 then the average trip numbers would be approximately 4 per 15min interval. Three to four spaces could be catered on the site and the reliance on street parking would be minimal.

 

Furthermore the proposal (based on the applicant total number of children being 50) will not comply with DOC’s minimum requirements for outdoor space per licensed child. This is a further justification that the proposed numbers are considered unreasonable.

 

As such it is considered reasonable to permit the development but restrict the numbers to a maximum of 40 which would reduce the impacts on the road network. This particular section of Darley Road is a busy one and therefore the appropriate scale of a child care centre must be carefully considered.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to a series of conditions, namely reducing the scale and size of the proposed operation.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with clauses 32 (1) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended) relating to Floor Space Ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.      THAT Council as the responsible authority approve development consent under Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. 816/2005 for alterations and additions to existing dwelling house and conversion to child care centre for 62 children with operating hours of 6.30am-6.00pm, Monday to Friday (Heritage Conservation Area) at 3 Darley Road, Randwick subject to the following conditions:

 

Development consent conditions

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans drawing numbers A02 C, A03 C, A04 C, A05 C, A06 C, A07 C, A08 C, and received by Council and stamp dated 7 October 2005, the landscape plan no.0531 prepared by Birdwood Landscape Design and received by Council on 7 October 2005, the Noise Assessment prepared by Spectrum Acoustics dated January 2006, the amended Traffic Assessment prepared by BJ Bradley and Associates dated 13 June 2006 and any amended and additional information submitted with the application, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.         The total/maximum number of children to be accommodated for at the centre at any one time shall be 40. The operator/proprietor of the centre shall provide Council with a copy of the Department of Community Services license which shall comply with the maximum number of children specified in this condition.

 

3.         A maximum of 8 staff shall be employed at the centre at any one time.

 

4.         The hours of operation shall be restricted to 6.30am to 6pm, Monday to Friday.

 

5.         The proposed development shall be constructed/adapted in accordance with the NSW Children and Young Persons (Care Protection) Act 1998, and the NSW Children’s Services Regulation 2004 (Department of Community Services requirements).

 

6.         A detailed Management Plan shall be prepared and approved by the Director of City Planning prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate and shall outline (but not be limited to)

·    System of signing children in and out of the centre

·    How waste disposal and deliveries to and from the site will be managed

·    Times of activities for outdoor and indoor areas

·    Management of parking and stopping along the front driveway

·    The preparation of a basic manual that is to be handed out to all parents outlining that they must comply with all the general road rules e.g no double parking, u-turns into and out of the site and that they must exit the site in a forward direction and that they must obey all the general traffic rules and conditions.

·    Specify house rules to all staff relating to ensuring the centre is operated in a safe manner.

 

 

7.         Outdoor play areas and outdoor activities shall be restricted to the following times only;

·    Between 8am to 10am, Monday to Friday

·    Between 3pm to 6pm, Monday to Friday

 

8.         There shall be no more than 15 children at any one time in the outdoor play areas.

 

9.         All vehicles entering and exiting the site shall do so in a forward direction at all times

 

10.       When children are indoors all doors and windows shall to be closed in accordance with the recommendation in the noise assessment report prepared by Spectrum Acoustics and dated January 2006.

 

11.       Side and rear boundary fencing shall have a minimum height of 2.1m around all play areas. The side boundary fencing adjacent to the parking spaces can be reduced to a minimum height of 1.8m

 

12.       The location, type, style and design of the proposed mechanical plant and equipment shall be selected and approved by a Qualified Acoustic Consultant prior to the approval of the Construction Certificate being issued. In selecting the proposed mechanical plant and equipment it shall not emit noise greater than 60dBA and shall be sited a minimum of 1.5m from any side boundary. Details of the location and type of plant and equipment shall be lodged with the construction certificate along with certification from the Qualified Acoustic Consultant.

 

13.       The proposed 4 on site car parking spaces noted as “visitor” on the landscape plan shall be formally designed as “staff” parking exclusively and shall be appropriately and clearly sign posted on the ground to indicate this and limit the amount of visual signage.

 

14.       The 5th car parking space located along the western side which doubles as a “courtyard” which is noted on the landscape plan shall be deleted and this area shall become a turfed area with greater screen planting along the western boundary similar to the turfed courtyard located along the eastern side of the site. The alteration shall be noted on the construction certificate plans.

 

15.       A detailed and amended landscape plan shall be submitted with the construction certificate which shall include the following details;

·    Permeable paving to be included for the front driveway and associated visitor spaces.

·    The type and size of plants to be planted along the periphery of the driveway mainly along the northern (front) boundary. There shall be evergreen shrubs having a maximum height of 1.5m so as not to obstruct vision out and into the site.

·    The courtyard long the western side of the site shall be turfed and shall have larger screen plants along the western boundary which are evergreen and reach a height of 3m.

·    Landscaping along the front of the main dwelling shall reflect what was included in the landscape plan prepared by Birdwood and dated 23/8/05.

 

16.       Any front fence shall have a maximum overall height of 900mm and shall be constructed of sandstone or brick to resemble the existing brick finish of the dwelling. There shall be no electric or other gates along the driveway entry or exit. The driveway area shall remain open and unobstructed.

 

17.       The front of the property shall be signposted to indicate vehicular entry and exit to the site. This shall be accompanied by appropriate sign posting at the front of the site.

 

18.       Any physical signage shall be limited to indicating the entry and exit to the site and allowing for one main sign to note the use. This sign shall have maximum dimensions of 900mm by 600mm and approval by Council of the content and location of the sign is to be provided prior to the approval of the construction certificate.

 

Heritage Conditions

 

19.       The proposed building works to the main dwelling shall be totally in keeping with the approved plans (DA1203/2003) especially in relation to the scale, size, location and proportions of the roof and any associated dormer windows.

 

20.       Any new proposed dormer windows shall have the same size and proportions as those approved under development application no.1203/2003.

 

21.       If any existing windows are to be replaced they are to be new double hung or casement timber windows that resemble as closely as possible the existing windows in the dwelling and that of No.s 1 and 5 Darley road. Any old windows should look at being restored and being replaced in any new parts of the proposal if possible.

 

22.       The external materials, colours and finishes of the building are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building. The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be compatible with the existing building.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (ie- a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

23.       Details of the proposed paint scheme are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.  Unpainted surfaces, eg- brickwork/stonework are to remain unpainted.

 

24.       The design, materials and colour of the roofing to the proposed building/s are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing roof.

 

Building Conditions

 

25.       Eaves, gutters, hoods and similar structures or attachments are required to be setback from the side boundaries of the allotment a minimum distance of 500mm and details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate details.

 

26.       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.

 

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

 

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:

 

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

 

In this regard, the operation of the premises and plant and equipment shall not give rise to a sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background (LA90), 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise source/s under consideration by more than 5dB(A).  The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq, 15 min and adjusted in accordance with the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s Industrial Noise Policy 2000 and Environmental Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance).

 

29.       The use of the premises and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance or damage to other premises.

 

30.       All recommendations detailed in the Spectrum Acoustics report submitted in January 2006, and additional information received on 28th February 2006 shall be fully complied with.

 

31.       A plan of management shall be prepared by an acoustic consultant with regards to the use and operation of outdoor play areas. The plan of management is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager of Environmental Health and Building Services, prior to occupation certificate being issued for the development.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

 

32.       The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health nuisance to the adjoining/nearby premises or environment.

 

33.       There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to a public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure compliance with the Food Act 2003 and to ensure public health and safety:

 

34.       The premises is to be designed, constructed and operated in accordance with the Food Act 2003, Food Regulation 2004 and Food Standards Code and details of compliance are to be included in the documentation for the construction certificate to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

35.       The food premises must be registered with Council’s Environmental Health Section and the NSW Food Authority must also be notified of the food business in accordance with the Food Safety Standards, prior to commencement of food business operations.

 

36.       Food safety practices and operation of the premises must be in accordance with the Food Act 2003, Food Regulation 2004, Food Standards Code and Food Safety Standards at all times, including the requirements and provisions relating to:

 

·        Food handling – skills, knowledge and controls.

·        Health and hygiene requirements.

·        Requirements for food handlers and businesses.

·        Cleaning, sanitising and maintenance.

·        Design and construction of food premises, fixtures, fitting and equipment.

 

A failure to comply with the relevant food safety requirements is an offence and may result in legal proceedings, service of notices and/or the issuing of on-the-spot penalty infringement notices.

 

37.       The design and construction of food premises must comply with the following requirements, as applicable:-

 

·        The floors of kitchens, food preparation areas and the like are to be constructed of materials which are impervious, non slip and non abrasive.  The floor is to be finished to a smooth even surface, graded and drained to a floor waste connected to the sewer.

 

·        The intersection of walls with floor and plinths is to be coved, to facilitate cleaning.

 

·        Walls of the kitchen preparation areas and the like are to be of suitable construction finished in a light colour with glazed tiles, stainless steel, laminated plastics or similar approved material adhered directly to the wall adjacent to cooking and food preparation facilities or areas, to provide a smooth even surface.

 

The glazed tiling or other approved material is to extend up to the underside of any mechanical exhaust ventilation hoods and a minimum of 450mm above bench tops or other facilities and equipment.

 

·        Walls where not tiled are to be cement rendered or be of rigid smooth faced non-absorbent material (i.e. fibrous cement sheeting, plasterboard or other approved material) and finished to a smooth even surface, painted with a washable paint of a light colour or sealed with other approved materials.

 

·        The ceilings of kitchens, food preparation areas, storerooms and the like are to be of rigid smooth-faced, non absorbent material i.e., fibrous plaster, plasterboard, fibre cement sheet, cement render or other approved material.

 

·        All stoves, refrigerators, bain-maries, stock pots, washing machines, hot water heaters, large scales, food mixers, food warmers, cupboards, counters, bars etc to be supported on wheels, concrete plinths a minimum 75mm in height, metal legs minimum 150mm in height, brackets or approved metal framework of the like.

 

·        Cupboards, cabinets, benches and shelving may be glass, metal, plastic, timber sheeting or other approved material.  The use of particleboard or similar material is not permitted unless laminated on all surfaces.

 

·        Adequate fly screens and doors with self-closing devices, (where applicable), are to be provided to all external door and window openings. 

 

·        Wash hand basins must be provided in convenient positions, with hot and cold water, together with a sufficient supply of soap and clean towels.  Such hot and cold water shall be supplied to the wash hand basins through an approved mixing device.

 

·        Ceramic tiles being provided to a height of 450mm above bench tops, wash hand basins and similar fittings.

 

·        A numerically scaled indicating thermometer or recording thermometer, accurate to the nearest degree Celsius being provided to refrigerators, cool rooms, other cooling appliances and bain-maries or other heated food storage/display appliances.  The thermometer is to be located so as to be read easily from the outside of the appliance.

 

·        All food that is to be kept hot should be heated within one (1) hour from the time when it was prepared or was last kept cold, to a temperature of not less than 60°C and keep this food hot at or above the temperature.  Food that is to be kept cold should be cooled, within four (4) hours from the time when it was prepared or was last kept hot, to a temperature of not more that 5°C and keep this food cold at or below that temperature.

 

38.       Trade/commercial waste materials must not be disposed via council’s domestic garbage service.  All trade/commercial waste materials must be collected by Council’s Trade Waste Service or a waste contractor authorised by the Waste Service of New South Wales and details of the proposed waste collection and disposal service are to be submitted to Council prior to occupation of the building.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

41.       New hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation and must also satisfy any relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

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

 

42.       Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

43.       External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to the adjoining premises.

 

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

 

44.       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.

 

45.       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.

 

46.       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.

 

47.       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.

 

48.       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.

 

49.       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”.

 

50.       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.

 

51.       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 must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

52.       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.

 

53.       The building is required to be provided with a smoke alarm system, which is installed in accordance with Australian Standard 3786, and be powered from the consumers main source.

 

Additional requirements regarding the design and installation of the smoke detection and alarm system may be specified in the construction certificate for the development.

 

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:

 

54.       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.

 

55.       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.

 

56.       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.

 

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

 

58.       Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written 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.

 

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

 

59.       Access, for people with disabilities must be provided to and within the building in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS1428.1, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.  Details of the proposed access for people with disabilities are to be included in the plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

60.       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.

 

61.       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.

 

62.       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.

 

Traffic conditions/Civil Works Conditions

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

 

63.       Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

a.   Remove the existing laybacks and construct two heavy duty concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks at kerb opposite the proposed vehicular entrance and exit to the site.

 

b.   Replace/reconstruct any damaged sections of kerb and gutter along the full site frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit points.

 

c.   Reconstruct the asphalt footpath along the full site frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit points. 

 

64.       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.

 

65.       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.

 

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

 

67.       The driveway openings at the Darley Road frontage must each be minimum 3.50 metres wide and located at least 1.0 metre clear of each side property boundary.

 

68.       Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall install suitable signposting (fronting Darley Road but located wholly within the site) clearly identifying the eastern driveway as the entry to the site and the western driveway as the exit from the site.

 

69.       Clear directional markings shall be provided within the site at the entry and exit points to show the direction of travel through the drop off/pick up area.

 

70.       Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall install ‘No Right Turn’ signposting located wholly within the site, adjacent to the exit (western) driveway.

 

71.       Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the drop off/pick up area shall be clearly signposted with ‘Drop off/pick up area – 5 minute parking only’

 

72.       The front space in each stacked parking arrangement (that is, the two southernmost spaces) shall be allocated to staff parking, to minimise the potential for vehicular conflict during operating hours. Suitable linemarking and signposting shall be installed to define these staff spaces prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

73.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall submit a bond or bank guarantee to the amount of $15,000 to cover the cost for implementing any traffic control measures in Darley Road required to manage right turn movements into the site from the east bound lane of Darley Road.

 

Such measure may include installation of a concrete median island to restrict the right turn movement or provision of a formal slip lane to prevent right hand turn vehicles obstructing the flow of traffic. The traffic control measures shall be installed by Council or a council approved contractor to the satisfaction of the Randwick Traffic Committee, and all cost associated with the works shall be met by the applicant.

 

If traffic control measures are not required in Darley Road as a result of the childcare centre, the applicant shall make application to Council 2 years from the date of occupation for release of the bond.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

74.       The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0923.

 

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

 

75.       The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) issued by Council and their relationship to the footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate.

 

76.       The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $121 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Service Authority Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

78.       The applicant must meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia and Sydney Water to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

79.       A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.

 

Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to the Building Developing and Plumbing section of the website www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to “Water Servicing Coordinator” under Developing Your Land” or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will advise of water and sewer infrastructure to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator, since building of water/sewer infrastructure can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Notice must be issued to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the construction certificate being issued.

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development.

 

Waste Management Conditions

 

80.       Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to submit to Council and have approved by Council’s Manager of Waste Services, a Waste Management Plan detailing waste and recycling storage and disposal for the development site.

 

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

 

81.       The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

82.       Details of a Commercial Waste Contract are to be submitted to Council’s Manager of Waste for approval, and be approved, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

Landscape Conditions

 

83.       Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan prepared by Birdwood Landscape Design Pty Ltd, drawing number 0531, dated 23/08/05 and stamped received at Council on 7th October 2005 prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate and shall be maintained in accordance with those plans

 

Tree Management

 

84.       The applicant will be required to remove the following tree as part of the proposed works as it is considered an environmental weed.

 

a) One Olea europaea var. africana (African Olive), located in the southeast corner of the site.

 

85.       Permission is granted for the selective pruning of only those overhanging branches from the western side of the Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda), growing within the adjoining property to the east, 5 Darley Road, close to the common boundary, which need to be removed in order to avoid damage by site machinery during demolition/construction works. This approval does not imply any right of entry onto a neighbouring property nor does it allow pruning beyond a common boundary; however, where such measures are desirable in the best interests of correct pruning procedures, it shall be necessary for the applicant to negotiate with the tree owner. All pruning must be undertaken by a qualified Arborist, with suitable qualifications in Arboriculture and to Australian Standard AS 4373-1996 'Pruning of Amenity Trees.’

 

NOTE: This condition does NOT grant consent for removal of the one major branch growing through the existing fence. any new fencing along the common boundary with 5 Darley Road will need to maintain a ‘cut out’ section to accommodate this one major branch.

 

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).

 

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

 

            a)     Clause C1.10 & Specification C1.10        -   Fire Hazard Properties 

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

 

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

 

A3       The applicant/owner is advised that this approval does not guarantee compliance with the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and the applicant should therefore consider their liability under the Act.  In this regard, the applicant is advised that compliance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standard 1428.1 - Design for Access and Mobility does not necessarily satisfy the objectives of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

The applicant/owner is requested to give consideration to providing access and facilities for people with disabilities in accordance with Australian Standard 1428 Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4 - Design for Access and Mobility, which may be necessary to satisfy the objectives of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

A4       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.

 

A5       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.

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

LARISSA OZOG

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

TEAM LEADER ASSESSMENTS


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

26 June, 2006

FILE NO:

D/0695/2005

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations and additions to existing dwelling including extension of bedroom and living areas to the rear at first and second floor level, modification of dwelling entry, extension of existing garage from single to double garage, extension of ground floor patio to the rear, landscaping works to the rear year including new swimming pool and spa and retractable awning over pool.

PROPERTY:

 55 Denning Street, South Coogee

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Archispectrum

OWNER:

Mr J and Ms M Christopher

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Council for determination at the request of Councillors Anthony Andrews, Chris Bastic, Murray Matson, Bruce Notley-Smith, Alan White, Margaret Woodsmith. The estimated cost of the works is $300,000.

 

It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, primarily extending the building envelope towards the rear (east) of the site at first and second floor. Internal alterations to accommodate the proposed changes such as moving the internal circulation stair are also proposed. The building entry will be modified to be more rectilinear and the garage extended from a single to a double garage. External landscaping works are proposed including enlargement of existing patio areas and removal of the existing spa pool and construction of a new pool incorporating spa with retractable awning over.

 

The proposal as originally submitted was notified to surrounding properties resulting in six submissions. The main issues raised by the submissions were the adequacy of information provided with the application, including survey details, view loss and structural adequacy of the proposal. A letter of issues was sent to the applicant on 14 December 2005 and the applicant responded with amended plans on 16 March 2006. These plans are the subject of this assessment. The plans were renotified to affected properties and previous objectors, resulting in three submissions. The submissions raised the following issues:

 

§ Stormwater impacts from swimming pool and new awning

§ Overlooking

§ Concern regarding survey information and lack of shadow diagrams

§ Concern landscaping will contribute to view loss impacts

§ Overdevelopment

 

The proposal generally complies with the preferred solutions of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and non-compliances do not contribute to substantial adverse impacts on adjoining properties. As such, the   recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

It is proposed to construct alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including the extension of bedroom and living areas towards the rear of the site at first and second floor level. The extension will be accommodated in part by incorporating a portion of the existing balconies to these levels as internal floor area and extending the building footprint eastwards approximately 1.7-2.7 metres. Internally it is proposed to reconfigure the internal access stair between the lowest floor level and first floor level, remodel the bathroom, ensuite, walk-in robe and master bedroom at first floor level and extend the meals room and remodel the dwelling entry at second floor level.

 

External modifications include extension of the existing garage from single to double garage, extension of ground floor patio to the rear, landscaping works to the rear yard including new swimming pool and spa and retractable awning over pool.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Denning Street between No.57 and No.53 in South Coogee and is presently occupied by an existing 3 storey dwelling.  The site has a frontage width of 12.9 m, northern and southern boundaries of 38.33 and 35.03 m respectively, and has an overall site area of 457 m².  Neighbouring the property to the south is a 3 storey dwelling, to the north is a 3 storey dwelling and to the rear is a 2 storey dwelling. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of 2 and 3 storey dwellings. The site is located within the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

A site inspection was undertaken on 7 November 2005 at No.2 Pearce Street to view the various impacts of the proposed development to the objector’s property. A site inspection was also held on 23 November 2005 to No.57 and No.51 Denning Street. The main concerns of the neighbours related to the potential view loss from the proposed development and the adverse impact the proposal would have to the visual amenity currently enjoyed.

 

A letter was sent to the applicant on 14 December 2005 outlining the main issues with the development and the need to address the concerns of the surrounding neighbours. The responsible officer met with the applicant on 23 February 2006 to view the proposed amended plans. Amended plans were submitted on 16 March 2006. The following changes were made:

 

-   Reduction in size and increase southern boundary setback to 3 metres for the proposed balcony on the 3rd floor.

-   Setback of the proposed garden terrace as per the existing terrace.

-   The side access at the front of the dwelling reconfigured to allow vegetation to be planted to provide visual screen to northern adjoining neighbour.

 

The surrounding neighbours were renotified of the amended plans for a 2 week period.

 

b.    HISTORY OF SITE USAGE

 

Previous development applications for the site include: