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

 

 

5th September, 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, 12TH SEPTEMBER, 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/Granting of leave of absences

 

2           Confirmation of the Minutes

 

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE HEALTH, BUILDING & PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 8TH AUGUST, 2006.

 

3           Declaration of Pecuniary & Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

4           Addressing of Committee by Members of the Public

 

5           Urgent Business

 

6           Development Applications

 

6.1                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

15 PETERS PLACE, MAROUBRA.

2

 


 

6.2                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

32-42 BARKER STREET, KINGSFORD.

29

 

6.3                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

9 GARNET STREET, SOUTH COOGEE.

110

 

6.4                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

40 HUGHES AVENUE, MAROUBRA.

120

 

6.5                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

29 PARK STREET, CLOVELLY.

141

 

6.6                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT –

238 BEAUCHAMP ROAD MATRAVILLE.

180

 

 

7           Miscellaneous

 

7.1                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 73/2006 - BUILDING CERTIFICATION SERVICES SURVEY.

186

 

7.2                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 74/2006 - SECTION 54 REPORT - RANDWICK LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1998 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW.

193

 

7.3                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 75/2006 -  BACKPACKER TASKFORCE.

200

 

7.4                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 76/2006 - UPDATE ON THE PROGRESS OF THE COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMITTEE.

206

 

7.5                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 77/2006 - S94 DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN.

219

 

7.6                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 78/2006 - APPOINTMENT OF ST GEORGE COMMUNITY HOUSING ASSOCIATION TO MANAGE COUNCIL'S AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING PROGRAM.

225

 

 

8           Confidential Items (Closed Session)

 

9           Notice of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

 

 

……………………………….

GENERAL MANAGER

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

23 August, 2006

FILE NO:

DA/69/2006 & PROP036352

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations & additions to an existing dwelling, including a first floor addition, a front extension, conversion of a carport to a garage, replacement of a rear deck with a new larger deck and installation of a swimming pool to the side of the deck.

PROPERTY:

 15 Peters Place, MAROUBRA

WARD:

 South Ward

APPLICANT:

 Mario Ahumada

OWNER/S:

Mr G P Read & Ms E Langley

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

1.       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

          The development application is referred to Council as the owner of the subject site is a Council staff member.  The subject application was submitted on the 8 February and subsequently notified for a 14 day period whereby two objections were received.

 

          The application has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, particularly the relevant provisions of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the Randwick Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.  After an initial review, the applicant was approached regarding a number of issues.  The applicant subsequently amended the design and lodged amended plans with Council.  These amended plans were further notified to the neighbours and only one further submission was received.

 

          The main issues considered in the assessment are the non-compliances of the proposal with Council’s preferred solutions for FSR and ground floor setbacks.  Despite the departures from the numerical solutions, the development is designed in an acceptable manner.  It responds to the constraints presented by the site and meets the associated objectives of the controls.  Importantly adverse impacts to the amenity of neighbouring properties have been minimised whilst the amenity needs of future residents have been supported.

 

          For these reasons it is considered that the proposal, in balance, is satisfactory from an environmental planning perspective.  The recommendation is for approval, subject to conditions.

 

2.       THE PROPOSAL

 

          The development application proposes alterations and additions to the existing single storey dwelling.  The alterations and additions primarily include the following:

 

§  A first floor addition to the rear of the existing single storey dwelling that will accommodate a TV room, a study and two bedrooms (Bedroom 4 and a Master Bedroom).  Each bedroom will consist of an ensuite and a Juliet balcony with metal railing.  The balconies will be located on the rear elevation.

§  Demolition of the front porch and carport.

§  Erection of a single garage in a similar location to the existing carport, attached to the dwelling. 

§  Provision of a deck and verandah in the front yard.

§  Demolition of the existing front concrete pathway and 1.8m high screen wall around the front yard (along the front and side boundaries).

§  Erection of a new front gate and fencing along the northwest side boundary and part of the front boundary. 

§  Change to the internal layout including altering the existing single garage to a laundry and kitchen and the demolition of some internal walls.

§  Provision of new aluminium framed windows on the front and rear elevation at ground level.

§  Demolition of the existing rear deck and erection of a new larger timber deck.

§  Installation of a fibreglass swimming pool to the side of the deck, including a safety fencing and a lockable gate.

§  Installation of skylights in the front roof portion, one skylight in the new garage roof and four skylights in the rear first floor roof portion and one skylight in the rear ground level roof portion.

 

The dwelling will retain the gable roof form at ground level and consists of angled roof forms over the first floor level.  The garage will consist of an almost flat roof.  Both the new roof forms will be constructed of colour bond sheets.  Walls will be bagged and painted, except for the first level walls on the front and rear elevations which will be timber cladding.  Windows and doors will consist of aluminium black coloured framing and all new balustrade will consist of metal railing.

 

3.       THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site, Lot 244 in DP 230712, has a total site area of 301m2.  It is rectangular in shape, with a 10.975m frontage to Peters Place and a depth of 27.43 m.  The site currently consists of a single storey dwelling house with a gabled tiled roof.  The dwelling extends up to both side boundaries and abuts the dwellings on neighbouring properties, 17 and 11 Peters Place.  The dwelling was built in the early 1970’s.

 

The area within the front building line setback consists of turfed areas and some ancillary structures.  A carport structure is attached to the front southern corner of the dwelling.  Vehicular access to the carport is directly from Peter Place via concrete driveway strips located adjacent to the side boundary.  A verandah extends along the remainder of the front elevation.  The main pedestrian entry into the site consists of a concrete footway that extends from the public footpath to the veranda.  Around the front yard, along the front and side boundaries, is a 1.8m high brick screen wall.

 

Attached to the rear of the dwelling is a raised timer deck.  A set of steps provide access from the dwelling onto the deck and another set of steps provide access from the deck into the rear garden.  The rear yard consists of central paving and soft landscaping around.  Boundary fencing around the rear yard consists of colour bond fencing.  The fencing along the southeast side has a height of 1.8m and a 0.8m high lattice screen above.  The fencing along the northwest side has a height of 1.5m and a 0.8m lattice screen above.  The fencing along the rear boundary has a height of 1.5m.

 

Adjacent to the rear boundary are three 2m high trees.  One tree, with a larger canopy, is a Eucalypt.  The trees are the only established trees on the subject site.  There are two street trees located adjacent to the frontage of the site on the grass verge.  They are also 2m in height.

 

There are only two easements that affect the site.  They are easements for support and relate to the walls along the common side boundaries.

 

The existing ground level has a distinct slope in part.  It is relatively flat within the front building line setback but then slopes under the dwelling to the rear yard.  The dwelling is slightly raised above the ground level along its front elevation (approximately 0.2m by the footings) and more considerably raised above the ground level along its rear elevation (approximately 1.6m).

 

Peters Place is a cul-de-sac, with an almost north-south orientation and fall in a northerly direction along its length.  It is located to the southern end of Maroubra, behind Malabar Road.  The subject site is located on the most eastern side of Peters Place.  It is adjoined by the three residential properties that are listed below:

 

§ 17 Peters Place, Maroubra adjoins the southeast side boundary;

§ 11 Peters Place adjoins the northwest side boundary; and

§ 12 Meagher Ave adjoins the rear boundary.

 

As indicated previously, the dwellings of 17 and 11 Peter Place are attached to the sides of the dwelling on the subject site.  They are similar in appearance to the dwelling on the subject site having a tiled and gabled roof and face brick walls. The dwellings, either as a group and individually, have no significant architectural merit worthy of retention.  They are not identified as being heritage items or within a conservation area.

 

The dwelling of 17 Peters Place is located on a slightly higher land level given the fall of the street.  Its maximum ridge aligns in location with that of the dwelling on the subject site but is higher.  The dwelling of 17 Peters Place has a ridge of RL of 37.21, whereas the dwelling on the subject has a ridge of RL of 36.61.  The front and rear building lines of the dwelling of 17 Peters Place align with those of the dwelling on the subject site.  The ridge height of the dwelling of 11 Peters Place is lower, at RL 35.97.

 

Other properties in Peters Place are both single and two storey in character.  The southern side of the street generally consists of two storey dwelling houses with gabled roof forms.

 

4.       SITE HISTORY

 

APPLICATION HISTORY

 

Nil.

 

5.       COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

          The owners of adjoining properties and the Precinct Committee were notified of the proposed development for a period of 14 days.

 

5.1     Objections

          In response to the notification, exhibited between 14 February and 1 March 2006, objections were received from the owners of 11 and 20 Peter Place.  The issues raised are listed below.

 

Concerns:

 

1.     The drawings do not clearly indicate the existing building superimposed on the proposed building with the structures to be erected, demolished or altered.

 

2.     The Statement of Environmental Effects has failed to address all the issues and guidelines provided in the DCP or the RLEP and has not complied by a suitable qualified Town Planner, Architect or the like, as requested in the DCP of Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies (DCP – DH & ADO).

 

3.     The proposed maximum height of the wall is approximately 8.78m from the natural ground level, which is not permitted as per Clause 33 of 4.3.2 LEP controls.  This will create building bulk, loss of natural light and ventilation.

 

4.     The shadow diagrams should indicate that front yard of 11 Peters Place is also affected.

 

5.     No. 17 Peters Place will not get 3 hours of sunlight during winter period and is not permitted as per Figure 5.1 of the DCP.

 

6.     The proposed side setback from the southeast boundary indicates 1050mm and from the northwest boundary 1950mm.  As per 4.4 S3 of DCP-DH & ADO, the setback of the two storey building, on both sides to be a minimum 1500mm and the proposal does not comply.  This will create excessive bulk and overshadowing on 11 Peters Place.

 

7.     Northeast elevation indicates two huge glazed doors with two balconies over looking private courtyard of 11 Peters Place.  The balconies to be deleted or reduce the size of the windows in addition to screening it properly for the privacy of rear private garden, as per 4.5 of DCP – DH & ADO.

 

8.     The southwest elevation of the front elevation of the building has failed to address the street properly as it does not harmonise with the existing character of Peters Place. First floor additions are not compatible with adjoining properties and vastly alter integrity of dwelling.

 

9.     The proposed garage is projecting outside the building line and has a roof form with entirely different character from proposed building and overall character of Peters Place.

 

10.   The new pool and deck is 1.93m above natural ground level and only 0.9m away from the boundary.  A person sitting on the deck can clearly see the private rear garden of 11 Peters Place.

 

11.   First floor addition will block off view of Maroubra Bay from 20 Peters Place and hence affect the value of the property.

 

12.   First floor addition will lead to addition of first floor construction on other 6 properties adjoining the subject site, which will block out the water view enjoyed from 20 peters Place.  This will drastically affect the value of our property.

 

A further submission was received after the second notification period.  The new submissions raised the following new concerns:

 

1.      There is a concern regarding development using the common wall of the development at No. 11.

 

2.      Concerns over building wall height and corresponding bulk and scale issues.

 

3.      Bulk and scale of elevations.

 

Responses to the concerns raised are outlined below.

 

Adequacy of Plans

A comparison between the submitted ‘existing’ and ‘proposed’ floor plans and survey plan gives an indication of the extent of the proposed works.  Furthermore the applicant has subsequently clarified the details of the proposed development and provided verification of a detailed list of works.  This has enabled a proper understanding and assessment of the development application.

 

The DCP only requires a statement prepared by a qualified Town Planner, Architect, or the like where a non-compliance is proposed to a ‘preferred solution’ of the DCP is proposed.  The statement needs to demonstrate compliance with the related ‘performance requirements’ of the ‘preferred solution’.  The applicant has subsequently submitted such a statement in relation to the additional non-compliances of the proposed development.

 

Height Controls

The height standards prescribed under Clause 33 do not relate to the erection of a dwelling house and thus the proposed development.  The relevant height provisions are contained under the Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.  They are discussed in Section 8 of this report.

 

Overshadowing

The front yard of 11 Peters Place is not affected by the proposed development.  The property 11 Peters Place is located to the north of the subject site.  Shadows from the proposed development will be cast in a southerly direction.

 

The proposed development will achieve compliance with the sunlight solar provisions of Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, as discussed in Section 8 of this report.  The development will provide less than 3 hours sunlight access to a minor portion of the front yard of 17 Peters Place.  This portion does not form a principal private open space and is already impacted by the existing common boundary wall.  No north facing windows will be affected.

 

Side Setbacks

The proposed variance to the southeast side boundary setback and associated environmental impacts are discussed in the Section 8 of this report and are found to be satisfactory.  The garage should be located wholly within the subject site and a condition placed on any approval to ensure this is the case.

 

Privacy

There have been changes to the extent of balconies and decks in the amended plans to overcome privacy concerns.  The decks around the pool area have been reduced and additional planting has been provided.

 

The two most likely windows are the rear facing bedrooms on the upper level.  Bedrooms are less likely than living areas to result in privacy concerns given the nature of the room’s usage.  (Also refer to the discussion in Section 8 of this report on landscaping and privacy).

 

Streetscape

The impact on the streetscape is not significant to warrant refusal of the application on this basis.  The existing character does not consist aesthetic or architectural merit that is worthy of reinforcing or preserving, nor is the streetscape identified within a heritage conservation area, whereby careful consideration is required to the impact of development on the heritage significance of the area.  The impact is discussed further in Section 8 of this report.

 

The roof form is satisfactory given that it would minimise the overshadowing impact to the adjoining property 17 Peters Place, provide adequate runoff and reflect the angled roof forms of the proposed first floor level.  In terms of building lines, the Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies does not consist of any setback or envelope requirements for garages, but consists of 35% width requirement.  The proposed development is compliant with requirement as it achieves a width of 32.7%.  It is noted that it will be located in a similar position to the existing carport.

 

However to minimise the dominance of the garage structure and ensure no encroachment onto neighbouring properties caused by guttering and downpipes a condition should be imposed on any development consent to ensure that the proposed garage does not encroach outside the subject site.

 

Privacy

The applicant has amended the plans to provide for a reduced bond beam around the pool area.  This reduces the ability for people to stand around the edges of the pool and overcomes any corresponding privacy concerns.  The privacy has been further protected by the provision of lattice screening and additional landscaping along the sides of the property.

 

Views

The proposed addition will have some impact on the views from nearby properties.  The views are district views and are available across a number of dwellings.  The objector was also concerned that the first floor addition will lead to addition of first floor construction on other 6 properties adjoining the subject site, which will block out the water view enjoyed from 20 peters Place. 

 

The views that will be affected by the proposed development are views that could be lost as a result of development on a number of land parcels.  The properties to rear of the subject site are single storey and are potentially developable to two storeys in heights.  The adjacent streetscape already has a mix of single and two storey developments.

 

To constrain the proposed development which complies with upper level setbacks and the height control, would be unreasonable under the circumstances.  Aspects of the height controls and setbacks are also discussed in Section 8 of this report.

 

In summary, it considered that the concerns of the neighbours have generally been overcome by the amended plans or are such that changes to the plans are not warranted.

 

6.       TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

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

 

6.1  Landscape Issues.

 

An application has been received for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling at the above site including a new garage and first floor.

 

Landscape Comments

 

There are 2 Bottlebrush trees located on Council’s nature strip which will not be affected by the proposed works. There are also no trees covered by council’s Tree Preservation Order located within the rear yard where the works are proposed.

 

7.       RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

-       Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

-       Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

-       DCP - Parking

 

8.       SECTION 79C ASSESSMENT:

 

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

 

8.1         Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned Residential 2(a) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. There are no statutory standards with which the proposal should comply. The site is located within the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

8.2       Randwick Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and attached Dual Occupancies 2000 (DCP). 

 

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.

22% of the site is landscaped area. Does not comply.

S1

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

Complies.

S1

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

Complies.

S1

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

Adequate private open space provided in the rear yard. Complies.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

22% of the site is permeable. Complies.

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 application includes a landscape plan for general improvements over the site.  The improvements include new screen planting along the side boundaries to protect privacy.  It also includes the retention of existing vegetation that already contributes to the landscape solution for the site.

The proposal includes several deck areas which are permeable and allow water infiltration back into the ground.  The decks provide continuity between the raised floor levels of the dwelling and the private open space areas in the rear yard.  In summary, the decks and planting provide a comprehensive solution to improve the landscaped setting of the dwelling.

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.595:1 applies. 

The proposed FSR is 0.66:1. Does not comply.

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 site area of 304m² allows a floor space ratio of 0.6:1.  If the site area had been 5m² less, the allowable floor space ratio would have been 0.65:1.  The proposed floor space ratio of 0.66:1 only marginally exceeds the maximum floor space requirement.

The difference in the floor space does not result in any significant amenity impacts to the neighbours.  This includes any impacts resulting from the bulk and scale of the dwelling when viewed from either the neighbouring properties or the public domain.

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The proposed dwelling has a maximum external wall height of 7 metres.  The dwelling has a gable roof form on the side elevation.  The gable is a split gable but in accordance with the DCP, this area is excluded from the wall height measurement.

 

S1

External wall height of buildings

 

Not applicable.

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 proposed additions represent a new form of building for this side of Peters Place.  Despite this, the properties on the opposite side of the street contain a greater presence of two storey developments and therefore contribute to a two storey streetscape.  As the DCP allows two storey development throughout the area, constraining the development on this site to single storey would be unreasonable.  The height, bulk and scale of the development are consistent with the form of development generally allowed by the DCP.

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

Dwelling complies with the setbacks for existing dwellings.  The proposed garage will intrude into this setback, see comments below under Garages and Driveways.

S2

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

The proposed dwelling complies with this requirement by being setback approximately 8.5m.  The deck attached to the rear of the dwelling is located 3.8 metre from the boundary. Does not comply.

S3

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

No change to existing ground level setback. 

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

The proposed development is set back 1.5 and 1.95 metres from the side boundaries. Complies.

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

Not applicable.

The setbacks of the upper level comply with the DCP requirements.  As a consequence, the reduced setbacks of the lower level are of less consequence.  The alterations and additions utilise these walls and there removal for compliance with the DCP would be unreasonable.

The dwelling complies with the setback requirements of the DCP.  The rear deck encroaches to within 3.8 metres of the rear boundary but is at a lower height than the floor level of the dwelling.  The deck plays an important role in linking the raised dwelling height to the rear open space and therefore providing a more usable private open space area.  The small amount of deck that extends to the rear will not pose significant impacts on the amenity of the property to the rear.

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 ground floor and first floor rear decks will overlook the rear yard areas of the adjoining properties. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

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

The proposal includes 1 new window to the southern elevation with sill heights above 1.5 metres. Complies.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Conditioned to comply with the BCA.

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 design of the proposed development has resulted in minimal opportunities for overlooking of neighbouring development.  The first floor additions have bedroom windows facing to the rear boundary giving only angled views to the neighbours.  The rooms that are more likely to create privacy issues are the upstairs TV room and study.  These rooms look out over the public domain and therefore provide a surveillance of the street.

There were potential concerns relating to the visual and acoustic privacy of the neighbours from the rear pool and deck.  The amended plans have a reduced pool bond beam and therefore minimising the opportunity to congregate around the pool and close to the neighbours.  To supplement this, the existing side fences have lattice screens above fence height to further assist privacy.

As also discussed earlier in Section 8 of this report, the landscaping between the deck and the boundary is to be improved.  This will further assist in maintaining privacy between the neighbours.

Generally the proposed location of decks and windows will not significantly affect the privacy of surrounding neighbours.

Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

The proposed dwelling has parking for only one vehicle.  Whilst this is a non-compliance wit the DCP, the provision of two vehicles on the site (being only 304m²) would detract from the appearance of the development from the streetscape and would erode the available living space at the ground floor level.

S1

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

Complies.

S1

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

Complies.

S1

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

S1

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

Does not comply.  The proposed garage replaces a carport which was also located at the front of the site.

S2

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

Complies.

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP include that car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive and do not detract from the appearance of the dwelling and the streetscape; and structures are compatible in scale, form, materials and finishes with the associated dwelling.

The conversion of the carport to a garage does not significantly change the form of the structure when viewed from the street.  The carport roof form and that of the proposed garage are not so vastly different as to make the change significant.  This impact is further reduced by the presence of high front fencing on the site.  This reduces the appearance that the garage will have from the street as the fence screen the structure behind.

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Not applicable.

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.

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

S9

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

The proposal will 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.

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

In terms of Performance Requirements, as a general guide new dwelling houses and attached dual occupancies must demonstrate that they have been designed to achieve energy efficiency; achieve a NatHERS, rating of 3.5 stars; and buildings are orientated and internally configured to take advantage of and maximise solar access.

The overshadowing diagrams demonstrate that the proposal performs well in terms of energy efficiency.  The proposal complies with the requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses in relation to solar access.

 

9.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:

 

Better design and sustainability across all development.

 

Direction:

4a. Improved design and sustainability across all development- The proposal achieves an energy efficient design, good levels of solar access and provides for a contemporary built form that will make a positive contribution to the streetscape.

 

10.     FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

11.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposed alterations and additions proposed under this application generally meet the objectives, performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse impact upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality, including the foreshore scenic protection area. The proposal may be approved subject to compliance with conditions of consent.

 

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 69/2006 for alterations and additions to existing dwelling including a first floor addition, modifications to the ground floor level of the dwelling, construction of a new garage, extension of ground floor decking to the front and rear and landscaping works including new swimming pool at 15 Peters Place, Maroubra 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 Sheets 1,1b,2,3,4,5,6,6.1,6(section),7.1,7.2,7.3,8 and 9  and stamped as received by Council on 26 July 2006, the application form and any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions:

 

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

 

Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of 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 relevant building works.

 

3.         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.

 

4.         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.

 

5.         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 are imposed to promote ecologically sustainable development and energy efficiency.

 

6.         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.

 

7.         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.

 

8.         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:

 

9.         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.

 

10.       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:

 

11.       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.

 

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

 

13.       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.

 

14.       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.

 

15.       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.

 

16.       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”.

 

17.       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.

 

18.       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.

 

19.       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 (ie. 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.

 

20.       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.

 

21.       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:

 

22.       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.

 

23.       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.

 

24.       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.

 

25.       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.

 

26.       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.

           

27.       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.

 

28.       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.

 

29.       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.

 

30.       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.

 

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

 

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.

 

35.       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.

 

36.       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.

 

37.       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.

 

38.       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.

 

39.       A Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (ie 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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

43.       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:

 

44.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to install vehicular crossings and 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. 

 

45.       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.

Service Authority Conditions

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

 

46.       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.

 

47.       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:

 

48.       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 applicants expense prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

49.       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.

Advisory Conditions

 

1.       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

STUART HARDING

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

WILLANA ASSOCIATES



 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

30 August, 2006

FILE NO:

D/287/2006

 

PROPOSAL:

 The demolition of existing buildings and construction of a part 3, part 4 and part 5 level multi-unit housing development comprising 3 buildings, 65 dwellings and 2 levels of basement carparking for 85 vehicles and including a private communal facility containing library and swimming pool.

PROPERTY:

 32-42 Barker Street, Kingsford

WARD:

 West Ward

APPLICANT:

 STC Architects

OWNER:

Hidwon Pty Ltd

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The subject application is for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a part 3, part 4 and part 5 level multi-unit housing development comprising of 3 buildings, 65 dwellings and 2 levels of basement carparking for 85 vehicles and including a private communal facility containing library and swimming pool.

 

The application is referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee as the proposed development is valued at $13.5 million.

 

The proposal is permissible under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. However, the proposal has an FSR of 1.65:1 which breaches the maximum FSR control of 0.65:1, and maximum wall and building heights of 14m and 17.4m respectively which breach the maximum wall height control of 7m and maximum building height control of 9.5m. The applicant originally claimed the site enjoys the benefits of ‘existing use rights’ under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act on the basis that it has been granted development consent and has operated commercially for motel purposes prior to the coming into force of RLEP 1998, and that this use has continued to operate since the original approval. Accordingly, the applicant contended that the relevant controls of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 do not apply to the proposed development. However, in view of the recent amendments to the recent amendments made to Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 which took effect on 29 March 2006, Council sought legal advice to ascertain primarily whether the proposed development would be subject to the development standards applicable under the Randwick LEP 1998 necessitating a SEPP No.1 objection to vary the standards given the proposal’s non-compliance with the FSR, wall and building height controls. The legal advice was obtained in May 2006 and essentially advised that, as a consequence of the amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Regulation 2006, the existing use rights provisions of the EP&A Act do not apply to the proposed development (see more detailed discussion in Section 8.1 below), and that the relevant development standards in the Randwick LEP 1998 would apply to the proposal. As such, the development application must be accompanied by relevant objections pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards before Council may consent to the proposed development. The applicant, in response, sought their own legal advice on the matter which essentially confirmed the earlier advice sought by Council that the relevant development standards contained in the Randwick LEP 1998 would apply to the proposal. 

 

The necessary SEPP No. 1 objections have been duly lodged by the applicant. The non-compliances have been assessed (see Sections 10.1.2.1 and 10.1.2.2 below) and found acceptable especially having regard to the following:

 

·    The locality in which the proposed development is located is an area with predominantly medium to high density residential developments adjacent to the institutional uses of the University of NSW and Randwick Hospitals complex. Specifically, the locality has an eclectic mix of four storey walk-up flat buildings many with ground level garages, larger residential flat buildings such as the Barker Apartments on the opposite side of Barker Street, and high-rise apartment buildings further towards the Kingsford Commercial Centre. In this context, the proposal will not be visually incongruous or intrusive and will instead complement the existing character of the locality and streetscape along Barker Street

 

·    The redevelopment of the subject site for the residential use at the density and height proposed accords with the strategic intention for the locality as provided for in the Randwick City Plan and the broader State Metropolitan Strategy. The locality has been identified in the Randwick City Plan as a key area for development and growth linking and strengthening residential uses with educational and institutional centres. This specific strategic direction of the Randwick City Plan is, in turn, consistent with the State Government’s Metropolitan Strategy which incorporates the subject site and its immediate vicinity within the “Global Arc” zone of the Metropolitan Strategy.

 

·    The proposal seeks to replace the existing non-conforming motel use with a conforming residential use which as a matter of planning principle should be encouraged.

 

·    The proposal will not will not result in adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring developments in terms of overshadowing, loss of privacy or views and overbearing bulk and scale.

 

·    The proposed non-compliance does not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of the 2B zone in which the site is located as it will contribute towards the variety of housing types in the area and enable residential development in a variety of medium density form where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development in the area.

 

The application does not meet with the relevant preferred solutions of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing in relation to height, density, setback, adaptable housing for people with a disability, and configuration of landscaped areas. However, these features of the proposal meet the performance requirements of the DCP (see Section 9.1 assessment in Section 10.3.1 below) and, where appropriate, have been further addressed by way of relevant conditions.

 

The proposal also complies with the provisions of the DCP – Parking with the exception of carparking numbers, falling short by 1 carspace. The shortfall is minor and can be off-set by the creation of 3 parking spaces on Barker Street as a result of the removal of the existing driveway to the motel. Furthermore, the shortfall in parking will not result in any significant impact on the overall parking and traffic situation in the locality as indicated in the applicant’s traffic report.

 

The recommendation is for deferred commencement approval of the application subject to conditions.

 

2.       THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposal is for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a part 3, part 4 and part 5 level multi-unit housing development comprising of 3 buildings, 65 dwellings and 2 levels of basement carparking for 85 vehicles and including a private communal facility containing library and swimming pool.

 

The proposed development will contain the following uses:

 

Building A (a 5-level building on the northern part of the site fronting Barker Street)

2 x  studio            

3 x 1       Bedroom

20 x 2     Bedroom

4 x 3       Bedroom

Total – 29 units

 

Building B (a 4-level building on southern part of the site fronting Harbourne Lane)

3 x studio

2 x 1           Bedroom

17 x 2         Bedroom

3 x 3  Bedroom

Total – 25 units

 

Building C (a 3-level building on the southern part of the site fronting Harbourne Lane and to the east of the proposed Building B)

7 x studio

4 x 1  Bedroom

Total – 11 units

 

The three buildings will have two common basement levels with a central deep soil planting area and containing the following uses:

 

Basement 1

·        41 resident (10 stacked) and 15 visitor carparking spaces

·        Storage space

·        Electrical plant room

·        Communications and services rooms

·        Rainwater filtration and tank 

·        Garbage compactor and bin storage rooms

 

Basement 1

·        29 resident (8 stacked) carparking spaces

·        Storage space

·        Plant room

 

The proposal will also include the provision of a common library and swimming pool situated at the ground floor level of Building C.

 

Access to the basement carparks is provided via a driveway from Harbourne Lane. Pedestrian access is proposed from Barker Street with the main pedestrian access extending along the eastern side boundary to the rear.

 

 

 

3.       THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Barker Street, between Forsyth  Street and Harbourne Road. The subject site is irregular in shape having a main northern frontage to Barker Street of 53.6m and a secondary eastern frontage to Harbourne Lane of 80.5m with a portion of the site extending as a “dog-leg” along Harbourne Lane towards Forsyth Street. Existing on the site are basically two two-storey buildings comprising the Barker Lodge Motel. The buildings are essentially located along the perimeter of the site with one sited across the Barker Street frontage and the other in an L-shape arrangement stretching along the western and southern boundaries of the site. The area in between the buildings is wholly taken-up flat hard-surfaces for access and parking areas for the Motel.

 

Development in the locality is predominantly comprised of a variety of medium to high density residential uses as described below.

 

To the north:

 

Across Barker Street to the north is the UNSW campus with the Shalom residential college (maximum 3 storeys) and residential units comprising the Barker Apartments  (maximum 5 storeys with high sloping roof space in parts) and the Rupert Myers Buildings (maximum part 4 and part 5 storeys high) two storey dwelling houses.

 

To the east:

 

Directly adjacent the site to the east are a pair of semi-detached dwelling houses at Nos. 44-46  and 48-50 Barker Street. The subject site also wraps around the rear of these four properties as a”dog-leg” which then adjoins the rear of the lot occupied by the Kanga House child-care centre at Nos 52-54 Barker Street. Further to the east are  single-storey semi-detached dwellings and three-storey residential flat building facing Forsyth Street.  

 

To the south :

 

Across Harbourne Lane to the south are predominantly two-storey residential units fronting Harbourne Lane as well as garages serving dwellings fronting Middle Street.

 

To the west :

 

Directly adjacent the site to the west is a semi-detached dwelling house at 30 Barker Street and the rear of two dwelling house lots fronting Harbourne Road.

 

In summary, the site is essentially located in an area that ranges in built form from the higher densities of the UNSW campus through to a medium to high density predominantly 3-4 storey walk-up residential flat buildings immediately to the west and south, to the high density multi-unit housing development and strip shopping centre in the Kingsford commercial centre to the west.

 

4.       SITE HISTORY

 

The following relevant development/building applications have previously been lodged for the subject site:-

 

 

Development Application No.

Description

Approved/refused

DA/5684/1961

Establishment of a motel

Approved

3/10/1961

BA/143/1962

Erection of motel buildings

Approved

21/8/1962

DA/11111/1964

Convert existing room into conference room

Approve

4/2/1964

DA/3604/1966

Erect two storey building containing motel units and store room.

Approved

20/12/1966

BA/25/1968

Addition/Extension to motel including new manager’s flat

Approved

19/3/1968

DA/376/1969

Establish a new private hospital

Refused

2/9/1966

DA/267/1973

Extend existing motel

Refused:

27/11/1973

DA/49/1979

Make alterations and extension to existing restaurant

Approved:

8/5/1979

DA/66/1980

Alterations and additions to existing motel

Approved

28/10/1980

DA/316/1983

Alterations and additions to existing motel

Approved:

14/3/1980

 

In summary, the subject site has been approved for motel use since 1961 and used for motel purposes since 1962 when building approval was granted (No. 143/62) for motel buildings.

 

A prelodgement meeting was held on 16 December 2005 (PL 62/2005) to discuss development concepts for the proposed development.

 

5.       COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

 

5.1     Advertising/Notification

 

The proposal was notified and advertised in accordance with the DCP - Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. In response to the two-week notification period ending on 17 May 2006, submissions were received from the following:

 

A. Franzis, 12 Middle Street, Kingsford

 

·    Proposal out of scale with existing development in the area and will adversely affect the amenity of adjacent owners

 

Comment: The area surrounding the subject site is predominantly characterised by medium to high density development such that the proposed development will not be out of scale. The proposal will not give rise to any adverse impact on adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing, loss of privacy and views, and overbearing building bulk because of well-considered design, planning and layout of the proposed development. SEPP 1 objections have been lodged in respect of variations from the FSR and height controls and, following assessment, considered well founded. This issue is addressed further in Section 10.4.2.1 below.

 

·    Overshadowing of objector’s property

 

Comment: Shadow diagrams submitted with the DA indicate that the increase in overshadowing associated with the proposal will not result in any significant and adverse sunlight loss on adjoining properties. Specifically, the proposal will only overshadow the rear garage of No. 12 Middle Street in the winter morning, noon and afternoon. This issue is addressed in Section 10.4.2.2. below.

 

L. Murray, 8 Forsyth Street, Kingsford

 

·    Overshadowing across objector’s property

 

Comment: Shadow diagrams submitted with the DA indicate that the increase in overshadowing associated with the proposal will not result in any significant and adverse sunlight loss on adjoining properties. Specifically, the proposal will not overshadow the objector’s property at No. 8 Forsyth Street in the winter solstice. This issue is addressed in Section 10.4.2.2. below.

 

·    Lack of carparking within the development adds to the shortage problem in the area

 

Comment: The shortfall in carparking will be only 1 carspace which is considered minor and is off-set by the creation of 3 parking spaces in Barker Street as a result of removal of the driveway for the motel. Appropriate justification has been provided by the applicant’s traffic consultant as addressed in Section 10.4.2.4 below.

                                                    

·    Increase in traffic flow in Harbourne Lane and detrimental impact on existing kindergarten.

 

Comment : The applicant has submitted a traffic report which assessed, amongst other things, the impact of traffic from the proposed development on surrounding streets including Harbourne Lane. As discussed in Section 10.4.2.4 below, the impact of traffic on the operation and amenity of Harbourne Lane will be acceptable.

 

T. and D. Vlahos, 50 Barker Street, Kingsford

 

·    Loss of privacy to backyard from Building C

 

Comment: There will be potential overlooking of the objector’s backyard from the balcony of the living room to the proposed unit C304 on the second floor level of Building C. A condition will be applied requiring the installation of an appropriate fixed privacy screen to the living room balcony of this proposed unit. Overlooking from the balconies to bedrooms of dwelling units in Building C is not considered a concern as the nature and use of the bedrooms and their balconies will not be conducive to overlooking.

 

·    Backyard will be “boxed-in” from the proposal and other existing adjoining developments.

 

Comment: No. 50 Barker Street has only one common boundary with the subject site being the southern boundary of the objector’s property facing the proposed Building C which will be setback more than 5m from the common boundary. The side boundaries of No. 50 Barker Street adjoin a semi-detached terrace on the western side and the Kanga House Child-care Centre on the eastern side. As such, the objector’s backyard is not considered to be overwhelmed or “boxed-in” by the proposal but rather adequately open for sunlight and air circulation.

 

S. Yan, 1A Harbourne Road, Kingsford

 

·    Height of proposal incompatible with surrounding residential area.

 

Comment : As discussed in Section 10.4.2.1 below, the height and scale of the proposal  will not be incompatible or visually intrusive in the context of the existing streetscape which comprises predominantly a mix of medium to high density multi-unit residential developments ranging from town-house and 3-4 storey walk-up flats to high density student housing in the UNSW site and 7 to 10 storey high-rise residential flat buildings in the Kingsford commercial centre. SEPP 1 objections have been lodged in respect of variations from the FSR and height controls and, following assessment, considered well founded.

 

·    Detrimental impact of construction activity

 

Comment : Appropriate condition requiring a construction management plan including dust control measures and hours of demolition and building works will be applied to ensure the amenity of the neighbourhood during construction.

 

G. Caus, 52 Barker Street, Kingsford (President, Board of Directors, Kanga’s House Childcare Centre Inc.

 

and

 

P. West, 52 Barker Street, Kingsford (Director, Kanga’s House Childcare Centre Inc.

 

·    Increase traffic impact on Harbourne Lane

 

Comment : The applicant has submitted a traffic report which assessed, amongst other things, the impact of traffic from the proposed development on surrounding streets including Harbourne Lane. As discussed in Section 10.4.2.4 below, the impact of traffic on the operation and amenity of Harbourne Lane will be acceptable.

 

·    Lack of footpath along the proposal’s frontage to Harbourne Lane forcing children to walk on the roadway.

 

Comment : A concrete footpath will be provided along the proposal’s frontage to Harbourne Lane.

 

·    Location of waste storage and removal in Harbourne Lane degrades amenity of Harbourne Lane.

 

Comment : The use of Harbourne Lane for garbage collection is considered appropriate especially in view of the provision of service/loading bay on Harbourne Lane to facilitate garbage collection.

 

·    Construction vehicles in Harbourne Lane will compromise safety of children.

 

Comment : A standard condition will be applied requiring that public safety and convenience be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works. Drivers of construction vehicles will be required to observe this condition whilst exercising their own responsibility as licensed drivers of these vehicles under the traffic law.

 

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 Engineering Comments

 

Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

“An application has been received for the construction of a residential flat building at the above site containing 65 units with two levels of basement carparking for 85 vehicles.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

Statement of Environmental Effects by Design Collaborative Pty Limited dated April 2006;

Traffic Impact Assessment by Christopher Stapleton Consulting dated March 2006;

Geotechnical Report by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd dated 21 February 2006;

Flood Report by Lyall & Associates dated March 2006;

Ground Floor Plan DA02 Rev A by STC Architects;

Basement 01 Plan DA08 Rev A by STC Architects;

Basement 02 Plan DA08 Rev A by STC Architects;

Landscape Concept Plan LCP.01/B by Botanica dated April 2006;

Landscape Site Section A-A Plan LSS.01A by Botanica dated April 2006;

Survey Plan Ref No. 98128 by Philip C. K Hooi Pty Ltd dated 6 September 1998.

 

Landscape Comments

There are several Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palms) along the length of the northern boundary, fronting onto Barker Street which can be removed without Council consent as they are no longer covered by the revised Tree Preservation Order. Similarly, the two 6 metre tall Cocos Palms within the adjoining property to the west, 30 Barker Street, close to the common boundary, should remain unaffected, with conditions relating to them not required.

 

Within the site, on the eastern side of the internal vehicle entry, there is one Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) of about 6 metres in height which appears in good condition and is covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

 

While being the only significant vegetation at the site, it would not be physically possible to retain this tree and proceed with the proposed works as shown, and as it is a very common species, a redesign to accommodate its retention is not warranted, with consent for its removal therefore included in this report.

 

There are two Melia azedarach (White Cedars) each of around 4-5 metres in height, comprising one each within the rear yards of 44 and 46 Barker Street, along the southern (rear) boundaries. Other than the need for pruning to avoid conflict with site machinery during the course of the works, both trees should remain unaffected given their relatively small size, the setback provided from their trunks to any proposed works as well as the presence of impervious surfacing (asphalt carpark) within the subject site, which should result in an absence of roots in this area.

 

It is considered that both trees should remain unaffected, with conditions relating to their protection not required.

 

There are a variety of shrubs/small trees along the eastern boundary of the site, represented as trees 13-16, and 18-21 on the tree schedule contained on the landscaper plan, adjoining 44 Barker Street; however, the site inspection confirmed that only the Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) and Persea americanna (Avocado Tree) were covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

 

None of these specimens are deemed worthy of retention, and as such, approval is granted for their removal on the basis of implementing a comprehensive landscape proposal as has been proposed.

 

There is another Cocos Palm towards the southeast corner of the site of approximately 6 metres in height; however, as outlined above, this species is no longer covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order, and therefore, can be removed without the consent of Council.

 

Traffic Comments

Car parking requirements

The submitted plans and the Traffic Impact Assessment indicate that the development will provide 85 parking spaces, however, Council’s DCP - Parking requires a total of 86 spaces for the 7 x 3 bedroom, 37 x 2 bedroom, 9 x 1 bedroom and 12 x studio units proposed; representing a deficit of one space. The submitted Traffic Impact Assessment by Christopher Stapleton Consulting dated March 2006 states that the provision of 85 parking spaces will fully meet the demands of the site and is actually significantly in excess of the real demand for the site. Consequently, no objections are raised to this minor deficiency.

 

It is noted that 18 of the proposed parking spaces are in tandem configuration. The Planning Officer should ensure that a suitable condition is included in the approval requiring each of the tandem sets to be allocated to the same 2 or 3 bedroom unit.

 

(Under this arrangement it is noted that 4 of the studio apartments will not be allocated any parking spaces.)

 

It is understood that the Planning Officer is including a condition regarding allocation of the parking spaces.

 

The carpark layout (including space dimensions, aisles widths, height clearances etc) and circulation ramps (including transitions) shall comply with AS2890.1 (2004).

 

Service vehicles parking requirements

For a development of this size, Council’s DCP – Parking requires the provision of 1.3 service vehicle spaces. The submitted plans show a loading zone located at ground level within the site, adjacent to Harbourne Lane, sized to contain two Austroad rigid service vehicles. It is noted that the proposed footpath has been maintained around this loading zone to provide continuous pedestrian access along the Harbourne Lane frontage.

 

A condition has been included in this report requiring the applicant to create an easement for access and an easement for garbage collection (benefiting Randwick City Council) over the loading zone and adjoining section of pedestrian footpath located within the subject development site. This condition has been included as garbage collection vehicles will be required to drive into the loading zone to collect wastes and pedestrians within Harbourne Lane will be directed around the loading zone and into the site.

 

The registered proprietor of the subject development site will be required to maintain the loading zone and section of concrete footpath located within the site.

 

Bicycle parking requirements

For a development of this size, Council’s DCP – Parking requires the provision of 28 secure bicycle parking spaces. The submitted plans show 11 bicycle racks located in an outdoor landscaped area behind the library and swimming pool. Concerns area raised that the proposed area is neither sufficiently sized nor appropriately located for 28 bicycle spaces. It is recommended that the Planning Officer include a condition in the consent to address this matter.

 

Vehicular Access

Council’s Traffic Coordinator has advised that no objections would be raised to having the vehicular access into the site off Harbourne Lane. Further, no objections were raised to the proposed indented loading bay.

 

The two-way access driveway off Harbourne Lane shall be a minimum of 6 metres wide (clear width) and set back from the side property boundary by a minimum of 1 metre. The submitted plans demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

All new walls/plantings 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 requirement.

 

Service Authority Comments

At the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting on 8 November 2005, Council resolved that:

 

(a)     the applicants of development applications be required to meet all costs associated with replacing overhead wires with underground cables in the vicinity of the development site when the cost of works on the site exceeds $2 million;

 

(b)     the applicants of development applications be required to meet all costs associated with replacing overhead wires with Aerial Bundled Cables in the vicinity of the development site, when the cost of works on the site exceeds $1 million up to $2 million; and

 

(c)     the Director, City Planning investigate the feasibility of funding the undergrounding of existing overhead cables for new development under the new options provided for in the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act (Developer Contributions) Act 2005.

 

Given that the proposed works will be in excess of $2 million the applicant will be required to meet all costs associated with replacing the overhead wires with underground cables in the vicinity of the development site.

 

An inspection of the site revealed that with the exception of the feeder lines into the subject site there are no overhead cables along the Barker Street site frontage. Consequently, the applicant will only need to underground the cables servicing the subject development site together with the overhead cable located along the Harbourne Lane site frontage.

 

The applicant shall meet the full cost for Energy Australia to relocate the street light located within the proposed vehicular access in Harbourne Lane.

 

Land dedication

Council’s Traffic Coordinator has advised that the applicant shall be required to dedicate a 0.60 metre wide strip of land along the full Harbourne Lane site frontage. The dedication will facilitate the provision of a pedestrian footpath to cater for the increased pedestrian flows resulting from the proposed development. It is noted that the Development Engineer has included a condition in the report to address this matter.

 

Groundwater Comments

A geotechnical report by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd dated 21 February 2006 was submitted with the development application. The report states that groundwater seepage was encountered during drilling at levels ranging between RL 19.80 (AHD) and RL 20.0 (AHD). Given the depth of the basement carpark extends to only approximately RL 21.30 (AHD), the application does not require referral to the Department of Natural Resources as integrated development. However, noting the potential for variations or fluctuations in the groundwater level by the time of construction, a condition has been included in this report requiring the basement carpark to be tanked and waterproofed, should groundwater be encountered within the depth of the excavation for the basement carpark.

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

The Planning Officer is advised that the submitted drainage plans should not be approved in conjunction with the DA, rather, the Development Engineer has included a number of conditions in this memo that relate to drainage design requirements. The applicant is required to submit detailed drainage plans to the certifying authority for approval prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

Flooding Comments

The Planning Officer is advised that the subject development site is located adjacent to a localised low point in Barker Street and may be subject to stormwater inundation during major storm events.

 

At the prelodgement stage, the applicant was advised that a flood study would need to be submitted in conjunction with the development application, determining the 1 in 100 year flood level. Accordingly, a flood study by Lyall & Associates dated April 2006 has been submitted with the development application (received by Council on 22 August 2006).

 

The report states that the depth of inundation in the entrapped low point during a 1 in 100 year storm event will be between RL 26.90 AHD (the threshold height to overland flow) and RL 27.15 AHD (the depth of inundation with no overland flow).

 

Based on these determined flood levels, all new habitable and storage areas shall be at a minimum of RL 27.45 (AHD).

 

The submitted plans show the ground floor level of the units fronting Harbourne Lane being at RL 27.55 (AHD) and the vehicular entry point into the basement carpark being at RL 27.45 (AHD). These levels are considered adequate.

 

However, the submitted plans show the units fronting Barker Street being at RL 27.30 (AHD). This is not adequate and a condition has been included in this report requiring the floor levels to be raised to RL 27.45 (AHD).

 

It is understood from discussions with the Planning Officer that the overall building may be raised the required 150mm without adversely affecting adjoining properties. Alternatively, the applicant has indicated that they may raise the ground floor level without increasing the overall building height. The Planning Officer should ensure that an appropriate condition addressing how the building is to be raised is included in the approval.

 

Waste Comments

Garbage: The proposed development is required to provide chute fed automatic compactors for residential garbage, with the garbage storage areas sized to contain the compactors (with safe working area) plus a total of 17 x 240 litre garbage bins (1 bin per 4 units). The submitted plans show the provision of two waste storage areas with a compactor and chute feed into each. A minimum of 2 x 240 litre garbage bins must be accessible by residents (outside each of the compactor rooms) to facilitate disposal of wastes that will not fit through the chutes.

 

Recycling: The recycling storage areas shall be sized to contain 33 x 240 litre recycling bins (1 bin for every 2 units). Given that the proposed recycling rooms are not accessible by residents, provision shall be made for a minimum of four recycling bins to be located outside each of the restricted access storage areas (i.e. a total of eight accessible recycling bins). The caretaker shall be responsible for ensuring that full recycling bins are moved out of the area accessible by residents and replaced with empty bins as required.

 

Council’s Waste Compliance Officer has reviewed the submitted Waste Management Plan dated 10.03.2006 and advises that the proposed waste management arrangements are satisfactory subject to a minimum of 8 recycling bins and 2 garbage bins being accessible by residents to facilitate disposal of recyclables and garbage that will not fit through the chutes.

 

Further, Council’s Waste Compliance Officer has advised that no objections are raised to the bins being collected from the loading zone at the rear of the property in Harbourne Lane as proposed in the submitted documentation.

 

Should the application be approved the following conditions shall apply:”

 

6.2     Building Services Comments

 

The Manager of Environmental Health and Building Services advises as follows:

 

BCA Building Classification

 

Class   -           2          (Residential Units)

Class   -           7a        (Carpark)

 

Background

 

The existing building on site is a post war brick motel bounded by dwellings and the UNSW.

 

Key Issues

 

Noise:

There is potential for the generation of noise from the proposed development due to the installation of plant and equipment, such as any mechanical exhaust system serving the basement car park. Conditions should be imposed on the consent to address potential noise emissions from the development.

 

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 is required to be incorporated in the documentation for a construction certificate.

 

Access for people with a disability:

Access and facilities for people with disabilities is required under Councils DCP for multi unit housing developments and appropriate conditions are included.

 

Conclusion:

No objections are raised in relation to the proposed development, subject to the following conditions being included in any development consent.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

Should the approval be granted to the application, the following conditions should be included in the development consent.”

 

7.       MASTER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

 

Clause 40A of Randwick LEP requires the preparation and adoption of a master plan for the redevelopment of sites having an area in excess of 4,000 square metres and which must be adopted and in force prior to the grant of development consent.

 

The subject site, being 3769 sqm in area, is not subject to the provisions of Clause 40A.

 

8.       RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

8.1         Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The applicant originally submitted the DA on the basis of that the subject site enjoys existing use rights claiming that the site has been used continuously for motel purposes, being the approved use of the site, and not abandoned. Accordingly, the applicant argued that pursuant to Section 108(3) any provisions in an instrument that would derogate from the “incorporated provisions” of the Act would have no force or effect on the proposed development (that is, the development standards of the Randwick LEP 1998 and relevant DCPs do not apply to the proposed development).

 

Council subsequently sought legal advice on the validity of the applicant’s claim to existing use rights in view of the recent amendments made to Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 which took effect on 29 March 2006. Specifically, Council sought advice as to whether the proposed development would be subject to the development standards applicable under the Randwick LEP 1998 necessitating a SEPP No. 1 objection to vary the standards given the proposal’s non-compliance with the prescribed density and height controls under the LEP. Council’s legal advice essentially indicates that the amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, specifically in relation to “rebuilding” under Clause 44 (2)(a), has effectively restricted rebuilding only “for the existing use of the building or work and for no other use” (whereas the previous unamended Regulation allowed rebuilding to occur also for  a changed existing use). In other words, the incorporated provisions of Clause 44 only apply to a rebuilding for the existing use, in this case, for the rebuilding of the purposes of a motel but not to a changed use such as the proposed multi-unit housing development. Accordingly, the development standards in Clause 32 and 33 apply to the proposed development, and any variation from these standards require SEPP No. 1 objections to made for Council to consider the variations.

 

The applicant has also provided legal advice which essentially confirms Council’s legal advice stating specifically that pursuant to the amended form of Clause 44 as contained in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Regulation 2006, any rebuilding of the subject site for the proposed changed use, that is the permissible use of multi-unit housing, is subject to development standards in the Randwick LEP 1998 and accordingly, given the proposed variation to the standards, requires a SEPP No. 1 Objection for Council to consider the proposal.

 

In view of the above advice, the applicant has submitted SEPP No. 1 objections to the FSR and building and wall height controls contained in the Randwick LEP 1998. The merits of the objections are assessed accordingly in Section 10.1.1 below.

 

The subject site is zoned Residential 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (LEP 1998).  The proposal being for the purposes of a multi-unit housing development is permissible with development consent. In addition, the following table indicates the proposal’s compliance with the relevant numerical controls:

 

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

31(2) – Landscape Area (minimum)

50% of site area

sqm

51.8% of site area

1954 sqm

Yes

31(3)- Landscaped Area over basements (maximum)

Not to exceed 50% of landscaped area requirement

 

47% of landscaped area over basement

 

 

 

Yes

32(1) – FSR

0.65:1

(2449 sqm)

1.65:1

(6247 sqm)

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

 33 (2)– Building Height

9.5m

 

Max 17.4m to roof-line of Building A.

 

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

33 (4)- External Wall Height

7m

 

Max 14m to northern façade of Building A. 

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

 

 

The following relevant clauses apply to the proposal (and are addressed in detail in Section 10.1 below):

 

Clause 40        Excavation and filling of land

Clause 42B      Contaminated Land

 

8.2     Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies

 

State Environmental Planning Policies that are relevant to the proposal are :

·    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Contaminated Land

·    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

8.3     Draft SEPP (Application of Development Standards):

 

This Draft SEPP seeks to replace the provisions of SEPP 1 and has been publicly exhibited (concluding on 18 June 2004). The new SEPP will introduce additional objectives (such as requiring non-compliances to result in better environmental planning outcomes than a complying development) when assessing whether flexibility of a planning standard is acceptable or not.

 

Legal advice was provided by Deacons Solicitors on 27 October 2004 with respect to the weight that should be given the Draft SEPP. Deacons have advised that contact made with the Department of Planning (then Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources) indicates that the Draft SEPP 1 will be implemented over a three and five year period subject to re-exhibition. It is noted in Deacons advice that the Land and Environment Court adheres to the principle of “imminence and certainty” with respect to the weight given to a draft instrument. Deacons conclude that the draft SEPP 1 should not be given any significant weight, but should be considered as part of Council’s general Section 79C consideration.

 

The additional objectives proposed under Draft SEPP 1 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 standards. The proposed development is considered appropriate and consistent with the draft SEPP for development standards in respect to the non-compliance with the floor space and height standards. The scale of development is consistent with the desired future character of the locality.

 

The proposal is considered to result in a better environmental outcome than a complying development and is considered to be of high design quality. The development is satisfactory with regard to Draft SEPP 1.

 

The application of these policies to the proposal is addressed in Section 10.1 below.

 

9.         POLICY CONTROLS

 

The following Development Control Plans (DCPs) applicable in the subject site:

 

9.1       Development Control Plan  – Multi-unit housing

 

The DCP for Multi-Unit Housing 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. 

 

Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

Site analysis plan provided

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

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

Frontage of 56.3m to Barker Street and 80.5m to Harbourne Lane.

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

Not applicable

Height

P1 Heights of walls, their location and orientation do not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties.

 

Wall height does not comply with RLEP control but SEPP No. 1 Objection has been lodged (see Section below). Location and orientation of buildings do not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties.

 

P2 Variations in massing and height create visual interest, distribute the bulk of the building and minimise amenity impacts on the streetscape and adjoining properties.

 

Building bulk is distributed over three proposed buildings with adequate visual interest in terms of articulation and façade treatment to minimise amenity impacts on the streetscape and adjoining properties.

 

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

4.5m front setback consistent with adjoining dwellings and existing streetscape.

P2  Side boundary setbacks

Side setbacks to ensure:

§ Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

§ Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

§ Landscaping and private open space provided.

§ Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

S2  Zone 2B

No part closer than 2.5 metres.

Minimum average setback 4 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

West

Building A

Yes - 5.265m (closest part)

Yes - 4.0m (min) average

Yes - 6.85m (max) length of wall

Yes - 1.9m (min) step

Building B

Yes - 7.165m (closest part)

Yes - 4.0m (min) average

Yes - 6.85m (max) length of wall

Yes - 1.9m (min) step

East

Building A

Yes - 6.075m (closest part)

Yes - 4.0m (min) average

No - 19.8m (max) length of wall (see Section 10.3.1)

Yes - 0.425m (min) step

Building C

Yes - 6.090m (closest part)

Yes - 4.0m (min) average

No - 13.360m (max) length of wall (see Section 10.3.1)

0.550m (min) step

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

Ensure that:

§ Solar access and overshadowing are minimised.

§ Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

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

§ Building built across site.

S3  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 6 metres.

No part closer than 4.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

South

Building B

No - 4.0m (closest part) (see Section 10.3.1)

No - 4.0m (min) average (see Section 10.3.1)

Yes - 4.1m (max) length of wall

 

Building C

No - 4.075m (closest part) (see Section 10.3.1)

No - 4.0m (min) average (see Section 10.3.1)

Yes - 4.1m (max) length of wall

P4  General

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

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

No adverse impacts on adjoining properties arising from eaves, window hoods and other sun-shading or weather protection

Density

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

 

As discussed in Section below, bulk and scale of the building when viewed from adjoining public spaces and private properties is visually compatible with surrounding buildings;

 

Fences

P1  Fences to be/have:  

§ consistent with streetscape;

§ Entrances highlighted; and

§ Planting used to soften and provide privacy.

S1 Solid front fences no higher than 1.2 metres. May increase to 1.8 metres when 50 % transparent.

 

Timber batten fence to street front (ie. no solid fences to street fronts).

Landscaping and Private Open Space

P1  Landscaped Areas

Areas are sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

S1 Minimum for landscaped area 2 metres.

Yes

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

 

No-however a substantial communal open space in the form of a central linear courtyard.is provided. Allocation of private open space to individual ground floor units is considered appropriate given configuration of these units facing Barker Street and Harbourne Lane (see P3 below).

 

P3  Private Open Space

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

 

Yes – private open space in the form of garden terraces for ground floor dwelling units fronting Barker Street and Harbourne Lane.

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

 

Yes – terrace dwelling arrangements to Barker Street and Harbourne Lane is conducive to private open spaces at the front.

 

P5  Townhouses

Each dwelling is provided with an area of useable private open space or courtyard area, at ground or podium level.

S5 Minimum area of 25m2 and a minimum dimension of 3 x 4 metres.

N.A.

P6  Flats and apartments

Each dwelling has direct access to an area of private open space.

 

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

Ground floor apartment will have front gardens while apartments above will be provided with balconies.

Privacy

P1  Visual Privacy

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

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

Yes (see Section 10.4.2.2 below) One condition applied to ensure privacy to No. 50 Barker Street.

 

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

Yes

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

Yes

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Australia (BCA).

Required to comply with BCA

View Sharing

P1 Design and location of buildings considers surroundings for assessing impact on views.

 

No view affectation

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

 

As above

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

N.A.

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

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

 

Yes (see Section 10.4.2.3 below)

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

 

N. A.

P1.2 Living areas of neighbours’ dwellings receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

Yes (see Section 10.4.2.3 below)

P1.3 Neighbour’s principal private outdoor open space receives 3 hours of sunlight over at least 50% of its area throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

Yes (see Section 10.4.2.3 below)

P4  Building Layout, Design and Construction

Protect from prevailing strong winds and adverse weather.

§ Living areas are orientated to the north.

§ Larger windows are located on the north.

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

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

Proposal achieves compliance with BASIX targets (see Section 10.4.2.5 below).

P5 Buildings have roofs with pitch suitable for solar collectors.

S5  Adequate area of roof between 45 degrees east and 45 degrees west or north, and a slope between 15 and 55 degrees to the horizontal for installation of solar collectors.

 

N. A. – solar collectors not proposed

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Yes

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

Yes

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

Yes

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

Yes

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

Yes by condition

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

Yes by condition

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

Yes by condition

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

Yes by condition

Parking

Required On-site Parking

1 bedroom dwelling

1 space per  dwelling

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

3 or more bedroom    

1.5 spaces per dwelling

Visitor parking is 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

See Section 10.4.2.4 below.

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

 

Yes – all carparking in basement.

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

 

Condition to be applied for compliance.

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

 

Yes on ground level

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

Yes

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

Yes

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

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Driveway is largely internal within the basement carpark.

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

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

N.A.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

Yes

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

Yes by condition to comply with Australian Standard

Storage

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

S1 10m2 of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1m. At least 50% of storage space is within dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area. Storage facilities may be in basement areas, or attached to garages.

No –refer assessment below

Barrier-free access

 

 

Access for people with a disability is provided to and within one dwelling at the following rate:

0-14 dwellings     0

15-29 dwellings   1

30-44 dwellings   2

45-60 dwellings   3

and so on.

 

Yes by condition

Utilities/Site Facilities: subject to  appropriate conditions of consent

Waste Minimisation and Management

P1 Waste collection and separation facilities for each dwelling.

S1 Each kitchen has a waste cupboard for separation of recycling materials, with adequate storage for one day’s waste.

Yes by condition

P2 Waste storage to be provided in a centralised position that has easy access for moving bins to the street for collection.

 

Yes – two centralised garbage storage areas are provided at basement level.  1.

P3 The location and design of waste facilities does not visually detract from the development or the streetscape.

S3 Waste facilities not to be located between the front building alignment and the road.

Waste facilities provided in basement level therefore not visible from street.   

 

An assessment of the provisions of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing in relation to the proposal is given in Section below.

 

9.2       Development Control Plan - Parking

 

Table 3: Compliance with DCP – Parking

USE

REQUIREMENT (DCP – Parking)

PROPOSED NUMBER AND/OR FLOOR AREA

REQUIRED PROVISION

PROPOSED PROVISION

Residential

1 space per 2 studio dwellings

12 x studio dwellings

6 spaces

 

 

1 space per one bedroom dwelling

9 x one bedroom dwellings

9 spaces

 

 

85 residential carspaces

 

1.2 spaces per two bedroom dwelling

37 x two bedroom dwellings

44 spaces

 

1.5 spaces per three bedroom dwellings

7 x three bedroom dwellings proposed

11 spaces

 

Visitor:

1 space per 4 units

Total dwellings = 65

16 spaces

TOTAL

 

 

86 spaces

85 spaces

 

 

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.

 

10.1   Statutory Controls – S79C(1)(a)

 

10.1.1         Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

10.1.1.1           Floor Space Ratio

 

A floor space ratio of 0.65:1 is applicable to the subject site pursuant to Clause 32 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal development has a FSR of 1.65:1

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with clause 32 of Randwick LEP No 1998 is unreasonable and unnecessary. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP No. 1 objection the following matters are addressed:

 

1.         Whether or not the planning control is a development standard

 

The FSR control in question is a development standard contained in the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

            2.         The underlying object or purpose of the standard

 

The underlying object/purpose of the standard, as outlined in Randwick LEP 1998, is:

 

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

 

3.         Consistency of the development with local planning objectives for the locality, aims of SEPP No.1 and the objectives of the Act.

 

The locality in which the proposed development is located is an area with predominantly medium to high density residential developments adjacent to the institutional uses of the University of NSW and Randwick Hospitals complex. Given this characteristic, the locality has been identified in the Randwick City Plan as a key area for development and growth linking and strengthening residential uses with educational and institutional centres. This specific strategic direction of the Randwick City Plan is consistent with the State Government’s Metropolitan Strategy which specifically. In particular, the subject site and its immediate vicinity fall within the “Global Arc” zone of the Metropolitan Strategy (that is, a zone over the metropolitan area that is endowed with economic growth opportunities primarily provided and driven by international, ie. global, trends and influences). In this context, the redevelopment of the subject site for the residential use at the density proposed accords with the strategic intention for the locality both in terms of the Randwick City Plan and the broader State Metropolitan Strategy.

 

Furthermore, the proposal seeks to replace the existing non-conforming motel use with a conforming residential use which should be encouraged. Accordingly, it is considered that there are proper and sound and planning principles in upholding the SEPP No. 1 Objection. 

 

The proposed non-compliance does not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of the 2B zone in which the site is located as it will contribute towards the variety of housing types in the area and enable residential development in a variety of medium density form where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development in the area. Overall, the proposal will contribute to a better urban environment whilst ensuring an orderly and economic use of land for residential use in close proximity to the University and hospital precinct as well as the Kingsford commercial centre with minimal adverse environmental and amenity impacts on neighbouring uses.

 

4.         Whether compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

It is considered that a development compliant with the prescribed FSR control would be unreasonable in the subject site in that it would not achieve a reasonable and efficient level of redevelopment for the subject land given the large nature of the site, the need to maximise its residential function vis-à-vis the needs of the adjacent university, hospital and other institutional uses and .

 

In contrast, the proposed development would allow for a reasonable redevelopment of the land but with a bulk and scale that would be visually compatible with surrounding buildings when viewed from surrounding streets. In particular, the surrounding locality has an eclectic mix of buildings with including predominantly 4-storey walk-ups such that the bulk and scale of the proposal would be not be incongruous in this setting and would represent an appropriate transition between neighbouring buildings providing for harmony and continuity in the streetscape. 

 

As discussed in Section 10.3 below, the façade of the new building will be designed to reduce its apparent scale and respond to the buildings use and contextual character, including a balance of vertical and horizontal elements which provide symmetry to the building, and articulation and modulation that breaks the visual bulk of the building form. Accordingly, the proposed new building achieves articulation and modulation due to architectural design, and the proposed materials and finishes also contribute to the “breaking-up” of the building.

 

In addition, the new building will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining and neighbouring properties in terms of solar access and privacy (see Section 10.4.2.2 below). In particular, the shadow diagrams reveal that the impact of the proposed Buildings B and C on properties to the south fronting Harbourne Lane will be minimal with most of the shadow falling on Harbourne Lane, driveways and parking areas.   

 

It should also be noted that the scale and nature of the non-compliance does not give rise to matters of state or regional significance, nor do the non-compliances adversely impact the public interest.

 

In view of the above it is considered that the compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

5.         Whether the objection is well founded.

 

An assessment of the SEPP No. 1 objection indicates that the applicant  has:

 

§ Articulated the underlying stated objectives of the standard clearly.

 

§ Demonstrated that there are no adverse environmental impacts arising from the proposed development in terms of view loss, loss of privacy, overshadowing and general overbearing impacts.

 

§ Addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying stated objectives of the standard, the local planning objectives for the locality, and objectives of the Act.

 

§ Stated why compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary, namely:

 

·    the proposed buildings step down in height from the Barker Street frontage to the Harbourne Lane frontage effecting a transition between the height and scale of development on the UNSW campus immediately to the north and the lower scale development to the south of the site.

·    The bulk and scale of the proposed buildings are reduced by the design of the individual buildings through the use of increased setbacks at the upper levels;different façade treatments which break-up the building facades into distinct elements to visually differentiate the building; inclusion of rooms in the roof. 

·    The proposal will meet the underlying objective of the standard by providing a built form, bulk and scale which is appropriate in the context of the site and the surrounding development.

·    The site is in proximity to the UNSW and the Randwick Hospitals Complex both of which are recognised in the Randwick City Plan and Background Papers as “key institutions” in Randwick City.

 

It is considered that SEPP 1 objection is well founded and should be supported.

 

10.1.1.2           Building Heights

 

A maximum wall height control of 7 m and maximum building height control of 9.5m is applicable to the subject site pursuant to Clause 33 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal development has a maximum wall height of 14m and a maximum building height of 17.4m.

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with clause 33 of Randwick LEP No 1998 is unreasonable and unnecessary. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP No. 1 objection the following matters are addressed:

 

1.       Whether or not the planning control is a development standard

 

The building and wall height controls in question are development standards contained in the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

2.       The underlying object or purpose of the standard

 

The underlying object/purpose of the standard, as outlined in Randwick LEP 1998, is:

 

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

 

3.       Consistency of the development with local planning objectives for the locality, aims of SEPP No.1 and the objectives of the Act.

 

The proposed development will be consistent with planning objectives for the locality in that it will support and promote the Randwick City Plan’s direction (Direction 8c) for economic growth and development that strengthens the City’s hospital and university precinct. Specifically, the Randwick City Plan identifies the university and hospital together with its immediately surrounding residential and commercial areas as areas of future growth. This area also falls within the State Government’s Global Ark zone as identified in the Metropolitan Strategy . In particular, the subject site and its immediate vicinity fall within the “Global Arc” zone of the Metropolitan Strategy (that is, a zone over the metropolitan area that is endowed with economic growth opportunities primarily provided and driven by international, ie. global, trends and influences). In this context, the proposal will contribute towards an increase in the variety of density and housing forms near the university and hospital precincts which will potentially create linkage to these institutions ensuring a consolidation of their future roles and functions. The height at which the proposed development is set is considered appropriate for area and its future strategic direction.

 

Additionally, the proposed development will result in an improved urban environment, ensuring an orderly and economic use of land for residential use (ie. urban consolidation) in the university and hospitals precinct with minimal adverse environmental and amenity impacts on neighbouring uses and located in close proximity to public transport, regional centres and services.

 

The proposed non-compliance does not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of the 2B zone in which the site is located as it will contribute towards the variety of housing types in the area and enable residential development in a variety of medium density form where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development in the area.

 

4.       Whether compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

It is considered that a development compliant with the prescribed maximum building and wall height would be unreasonable in the subject site as it would preclude the provision of a conforming residential development with a scale and height that would viably replace the existing non-conforming motel use.

 

In contrast, the proposed development would allow for a reasonable redevelopment of the land with landscaping and setbacks that comply with the requirements of the Randwick LEP 1998 and DCP – Multiunit Housing. In addition, the height and scale of the proposal will not be visually intrusive in the context of the existing streetscape which comprises predominantly a mix of medium to high density multi-unit residential developments ranging from town-house and 3-4 storey walk-up flats to high tower student housing in the UNSW site and 7 to 10 storey residential flat buildings in the Kingsford commercial centre. Accordingly, the proposed development would not be incongruous in the setting and would represent an appropriate visual transition between neighbouring buildings, providing harmony and continuity in the streetscape.

 

As discussed in Section 10.3 below, the façade of the new building will be designed to reduce its apparent scale and respond to its overall context. The proposal will also provide a high quality contemporary design that is sympathetic to the desired future character of the area.

 

In addition, the new building will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining and neighbouring properties in terms of solar access and privacy (see Section 10.4.2.3 below).

 

In view of the above it is considered that the compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case

 

5.       Whether the objection is well founded.

 

An assessment of the SEPP No. 1 objection indicates that the applicant has:

 

§  Articulated the underlying stated objectives of the standard clearly.

§  Demonstrated that there are no adverse environmental impacts arising from the proposed development in terms of overshadowing, loss of privacy and views,  and general overbearing impacts.

§  Addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying stated objectives of the standard, the local planning objectives for the locality, and objectives of the Act.

§  Stated why compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary, namely that:

 

·    Provides for a height of development that is compatible with the existing characteristics of the area

·    Minimise the effects of the height of the new development by having a varied, attractive and innovative design

·    Provides for a use of the site which is compatible with the adjoining development and which will not result in significant amenity adverse on neighbouring developments in terms of operational characteristics, loss of privacy or overshadowing

·    The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Residential 2B zone

·    the proposed buildings step down in height from the Barker Street frontage to the Harbourne Lane frontage effecting a transition between the height and scale of development on the UNSW campus immediately to the north and the lower scale development to the south of the site.

 

It is considered that SEPP 1 objection is well founded and should be supported.

 

Clause 40            Excavation and filling of land

 

Clause 40 of the RLEP contains provisions for undertaking of excavation and filling of land. The proposal will require earthworks to be undertaken to construct the buildings and basement car parking areas. This work will not result in any significant impact on the topography of the site, is unlikely to interrupt the drainage patterns of the site or result in soil instability and will not adversely impact upon the scenic quality of the site and locality. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to the provisions of Clause 40.

 

10.2            Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies

 

State Environmental Planning Policies that are relevant to the proposal are:

 

SEPP 55 –      Remediation of Contaminated Land

 

This SEPP provides a state wide practice for the remediation of contaminated land. The applicant has provided documentary evidence of the history and use of the site for the current use, that is the motel, and residential use prior to this. Accordingly, the applicant advises that the site has been largely sealed and is not known to be the subject to any likely sources of contamination.

 

The documentary evidence provided by the applicant is appropriate and indicates unambiguously that the use of the subject site has been for non-contaminating residential and motel uses since 1951. To further augment this evidence, a condition will be applied requiring a preliminary site contamination investigation (desk-top analysis) be undertaken by an independent appropriately qualified environmental consultant to provide information on past and current activities and uses that may have occurred on the site, and to indicate that the site will be suitable for the intended use. The report is to be submitted and accepted by Council prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

SEPP 65 – State Significant Development– Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

This SEPP aims to improve the design quality of residential flat development through the submission of a detailed SEPP 65 Design Quality Report and a review by a SEPP 65 Design Review Panel. The assessment of the SEPP 65 Panel is detailed in Section 10.4.2.1 below. In summary the Panel generally finds that the proposal achieves the objectives and requirements of SEPP 65, with the following pertinent summary comments on selected aspects of the proposal:

 

·   In relation to site analysis and context: “The application is supported by a thorough analysis of the wider context, and expert opinion.”

 

·    In relation to the scale of the proposal: The proposal has the potential to act as a model for any new development in the vicinity.”

 

·    In relation to the density of the proposal : “It is noted that amendments made to the design have reduced the FSR to 1.65:1, which is considered reasonable. Amenity impacts have been extensively considered, suggesting that the project is not an unreasonable density for the site.”

 

·      In relation to the aesthetics of the proposal: “The Panel wishes to commend this proposal, as now configured, to the Council and does not wish to review it again.

 

10.3             Policy Controls – 79C(1)(a)

 

10.3.1         Development Control Plan – Multi-unit Housing

 

The proposal has been assessed in relation to the DCP – Multi-unit Housing containing performance criteria and controls to guide builtform, and provide environmental and amenity standard. In addition, the proposal generally complies with the range of preferred solutions and performance criteria for key elements of the DCP including side setbacks, solar access, privacy and safety and security. There are non-compliances in relation to height and density but the proposal in terms of these two criteria meets the performance requirements relating to height and density (see also assessment in Section 10.4.2.1 and 10.4.2.2 below) in that :

 

·    The heights of the non-complying walls roof, their location and orientation, do not cause substantial adverse impacts on the streetscape or adjoining properties.

 

·    The variations in massing and height in the proposal creates visual interest, distributes the bulk of the building and minimise amenity impacts on adjoining properties and the streetscape.

 

·    The overall building bulk resulting from the proposed FSR is compatible with surrounding built forms and minimises impact of building bulk on nearby buildings, open spaces  and streetscape

 

Furthermore, the non-compliances with the FSR and building height have been address in the assessment of the SEPP 1 objections in Section 10.1.1 above.

 

The proposal also does not comply with the preferred solution of the DCP relating to the maximum length of wall that is unarticulated (in the east elevation of Buildings A and C) and rear setbacks (the southern setback of Building B and C to the rear boundary). These non-compliances have been assessed and the proposal, in terms of these two criteria, meets the performance requirements relating to wall articulation and rear setbacks (see also assessment in Section 10.4.2.2 below) in that:

 

·    Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

·    Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

·    Landscaping and private open space provided.

·    Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

In relation to the provision of adaptable dwellings for people with a disability, a condition will be applied requiring the provision of 4 dwellings to be adapted. 

 

10.4            Likely impact of the development - S79C(1)(b)

 

10.4.1         Natural Environmental Impacts

 

The subject site is located in an urban area close to the Kingsford commercial centre and is substantially built upon by the existing Barker Lodge Motor Inn development. As such, there are no items of natural and/or environmental heritage existing on the site that will be affected by the proposal. 

 

10.4.2         Built Environmental Impacts

 

10.4.2.1      Urban Design

 

The Barker Street elevation of Building A will be rendered masonry external walls with select paint and textured finish interspersed with light-weight vertical and adjustable powder-coated metal louvres and glass balustrades with metal hand-rails to select bays. In addition, Building A will have adjustable glass louvres to the eastern end-bay. Each bay of Building A will contain fully recessed balconies of varying depths reflecting the fact that the living rooms and bedrooms in north-facing dwelling units within Building A are linked by common balconies. The façade treatment to Building A will create a visually definable base, middle and top when viewed from Barker Street.

 

The north elevation of Building B mirrors the front façade of Building A in terms of a similar bay articulation with identical louvre, balustrade and glazing elements, as well as a definable base middle and top presentation. The south elevation of Building B will also have a bay treatment albeit with a more open format given that there will be no balconies contained within these bays but large glazed openings some with  low-sill windows serving bedrooms. The south facing wall of the fourth level of Building will be a sloping Mansard style roof cladding with dormer windows serving bedrooms.  Overall, the southern façade of Building B provides an appropriate frame to Harbourne Lane,  creating  visual interest that complements existing development in the lane.

 

Building C, being only a three-level building, will have a massing and scale that will not be overbearing on the adjoining dwelling houses to the north and the child-care centre to the east. Its façade  will have a similar bay arrangement as buildings A and B which will be articulated further with identical louvre, balustrade and glazing elements.

 

It is noted that the immediate adjoining properties to the east and west of the proposed Building A the subject site are single storey semi-detached terraces. Whilst Building A will be 5-levels in height, it will not be overbearing or overwhelming in relation to these adjoining terraces for the following reasons:

 

·    Levels 1 – 4 of Building A will be have western and eastern walls that will be setback a minimum 7.165m and 6.3m respectively which provides a significant separation distance between the proposed building and the adjoining terraces to the west and east. The fifth level of Building A will be even further setback by 10.64m from the western boundary and 10.4m from the eastern boundary as well as 6.46m from the northern boundary ensuring that the visual impact of the building at this upper level in relation to the two adjoining residential terraces is even further reduced.

 

·    Building A will have a well articulated façade to the northern front and  western and eastern sides which will break down the bulk and scale of the building in relation to the immediate adjoining residential properties.

 

·    The adjoining residential allotments to the west and east of the subject site are zoned Residential 2B so that they can potentially be redeveloped in the future to medium density commensurate with the zoning. In this context, the proposal will be consistent with the desired future character of the locality as defined in the Randwick LEP 1998 and the DCP –Multi-unit Housing.

 

Overall, the use of recessed balconies, and louvred and hooded openings combined with a sloping roof-frame on the south elevation of Buildings A, B and C provides a strong articulation to the building that enhances the site whilst facilitating solar access to the central courtyard. It also assists in breaking down the bulk and scale of the overall proposal so that it would relate better with the existing medium density developments in the locality.  Accordingly, the proposal will have a modern and superior design and visual character that will enhance the streetscape in this part of Barker Street. The applicant has provided a photo-montages of the proposal showing the proposed treatment to the façades of Building A, B and C together with a sample board. The sample board indicates that the elevations will be rendered and painted with appropriate colours and textures that are consistent with the existing surrounding uses, in particular the nearby existing modern residential flat and institutional buildings. No objections have been raised by the SEPP 65 Design Review Panel and accordingly these colours, materials and textures are considered acceptable.

 

The orientation of three proposed buildings will result in apartments overlooking streets and the communal open space. Accordingly, the proposal has been designed to allow casual surveillance of the street with all entry points clearly visible from both the proposed development and surrounding streets.

 

Under the provisions of SEPP 65, a Design Review Panel reviewed the proposal on 1 May 2006 and has found the proposal satisfactory on all the SEPP 65 assessment criteria as detailed below. The Panel’s comments are listed in italics below (with Council’s comments in bold wherever necessary):

 

“1.       Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

 

The proposal, located in Barker Street, is opposite the three to five storey scale buildings on the campus of the University of New South Wales.  Generally however the buildings immediately surrounding its site are one and two storeys, a mixture of houses and walk up apartments.  Some of the flat buildings are 3 to 4 storeys in height. The site is conveniently located near Kingsford Town Centre, which features high density development.

 

The application is supported by a thorough analysis of the wider context, and expert opinion.

 

Council should consider a widening of Harbourne Lane at the rear and require a setback of one metre to allow for a footpath and planting.  All ground floor dwellings along the lane frontage should have secure gates to give access and activation to the lane.The Panel notes that, in agreement with the Council’s engineers, Harbourne Lane has been widened to create a 600mm wide footpath and that a further widening has been created to allow garbage and other service vehicles to stand.

 

 Individual entrances have been provided to the Lane.

 

2.         The Scale of the Proposal

 

The project comprises two parallel buildings, separated by a courtyard. The site enjoys rear lane access.

 

The proposal could be described as relating well to the opposite side of the street but not to the existing scale of its neighbours. The Panel however considers that the land between Forsyth Street and Anzac Parade could usefully be rezoned to permit development of similar scale to this proposal.

 

Council’s Comment : the relationship of the proposal to its  immediate neighbours to the east and west has been addressed in Section 10.4.2.1 above.   

 

The proposal has the potential to act as a model for any new development in the vicinity.

3.         The Built Form of the Proposal

 

The built form of the proposed buildings is logical and well considered, however as discussed below, their bulk and height would result in some loss of amenity caused by over shadowing across the proposed courtyard.

 

It is unclear why the northern block has been set so high above Barker Street.  Its proposed height exacerbates the overshadowing of the courtyard and makes access more difficult.  The difference in level does not appear to be used to ventilate the car park.

 

The Panel would prefer to see the driveway buried within the building mass, and the western setback freed up to accommodate deep soil planting.

 

Council’s Comment : These comments by the Panel concerning the bulk and height of the northern block, Building A, and the driveway, (in the preceding three paragraphs) have been reproduced from the Panel’s earlier assessment of the prelodgement proposal in December 2005. The applicant, in the current DA proposal, has addressed the Panel’s concerns as reflected in the following comments of the Panel:

 

Following further discussion, The Panel does not wish to push for relocation of the driveway. 

It is noted that the building has been lowered in relation to Barker Street and that this will increase solar access to the courtyard and ground floor apartments in the southern building, Block B.

The blade wall at the entry to Harbourne Lane could be reconsidered to be less prominent.

Council’s comments : A condition will be applied requiring the blade wall in Harbourne Lane to be made less prominent.

 

4.         The Proposed Density

 

The development is relying upon Existing Use Rights and there is no stipulated FSR for the site.  It is however the Panel’s view that the proposed density at 1.8:1 is excessive and is the reason for the problems it has with what is otherwise a well designed proposal.  It is considered that an FSR of, or perhaps below, 1.5:1 would result in a more suitable level of amenity and a better long term standard for the neighbourhood.

 

Council’s Comment : These comments by the Panel concerning FSR have been duplicated by the Panel from the Panel’s earlier assessment of the prelodgement proposal in December 2005. The applicant in the current DA proposal has reduced the FSR to 1.65 :1 and addressed the Panel’s concerns as reflected in the following comments of the Panel:

 

It is noted that amendments made to the design have reduced the FSR to 1.65:1, which is considered reasonable. Amenity impacts have been extensively considered, suggesting that the project is not an unreasonable density for the site.

 

5.   Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

 

Due to the well considered site plan, all units are cross ventilated and have good orientation and sun control.  The proposal should rate well in terms of Basix criteria.

 

Some further sun shading will be required for large unprotected north facing glass areas.

Council’s comments: A condition will be applied requiring the installation of sun-shading devices in the areas of unprotected north-facing glass in Buildings A and B.

 

6.         The Proposed Landscape

 

The landscape strategy appears to be sensible.  Consideration could be give to extending it into the public domain to provide more space for the establishment of major street trees that could balance the scale of trees on the Campus opposite and commence a process of upgrading Barker Street.

 

The suggested reduction in density would reduce the car parking demand and the extent of the basement. This would allow a larger area of deep soil planting in the courtyard, or deep soil landscaping to the western boundary. The proposed deep soil planting zones to both street and lane are supported.

 

Upgrading of the lane should also form part of the proposal

 

Council’s Comment : These comments by the Panel concerning landscaping have been duplicated by the Panel from the Panel’s earlier assessment of the prelodgement proposal in December 2005. The applicant, in the current DA proposal, has addressed these concerns by providing deep soil planting areas to Barker Street which will be appropriately landscaped to complement the scale of trees on the Campus opposite. The current proposal also incorporates a reduction in density from that proposed in the prelodgement proposal.

 

The deep soil areas proposed are well located and adequate in their extent, however an improved ramp design between the basement car parking levels could increase the deep soil area to the central courtyard.

 

Council’s comments : A condition will be applied requiring the internal ramp between Basement Levels 1 and 2 to be placed below the main ramp from the street access to Basement Level 1 to further increase the deep soil planting area.

 

7.         The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

 

The amenity of the units should be good, however the central courtyard and the ground floor units in the rear building would be deprived of winter sun.  The units are generally well planned.

 

The north facing balconies would benefit from being deeper throughout, and the architect should refer to the RFDC.

 

Long internal access corridors would benefit from more natural light and air, particularly at the western end. Design quirks such as the open stair at the eastern end of the Barker Street block are well considered.

 

Council’s Comment : These comments by the Panel concerning the amenity of the units and the north-facing balconies have been duplicated by the Panel from the Panel’s earlier assessment of the prelodgement proposal in December 2005. The applicant in the current DA proposal has improved the solar access to the central courtyard and addressed the Panel’s concerns as reflected in the following comments of the Panel:

 

As noted above solar access to the ground for units in Block B has been improved by the lowering of Block A.  This could be further improved by moving Block A closer to Barker Street (in the order of 300mm) in line with the neighbouring buildings.

 

Council’s comments : The current proposal has a front setback of 4.5m to Barker Street. This setback is an integral part of the proposal as it assists in mitigating the bulk and scale of the Building A, and the proposal as a whole, when viewed from Barker Street. As such, the reduction in the front setback by 300mm is not supported and would in effect compromise the visual amenity of the building in the streetscape.

 

Balconies are now generally of an acceptable width, however it is not clear why those in block C are not also 2.00 metres in width.

 

Council’s comments : The applicant advises that the balconies in Building C are smaller in width so as to mitigate any potential overlooking impact into the rear yards of the adjoining properties to north of Building C. This advice is considered acceptable given that there has been one objection from the owner/resident of one of these properties at No. 50 Barker Street. Accordingly, the balconies should remain at a width of 2m which complies with the Residential Flat Design Code.

 

It is noted that internal corridors now enjoy daylight and fresh air at their ends.

 

It is suggested that the stair at the eastern end of Block A could be an open stair to lighten its appearance from the courtyard and increase solar penetration.  It is also suggested that there could be windows in the south wall to the stair between Blocks B and C.  (subject to BCA compliance) 

 

Council’s comments: The applicant advises that the solar impact from the removal of the enclosing walls to the stair-well at the eastern end of Block A will be minimal as solar penetration will still be blocked by the requirement for a roof over the stairwell. The applicant also advises that  an open stair would have a detrimental impact on the amenity and safety of the bedrooms of all the immediate dwelling units to the west of the stairwell on levels 1 to 5. The applicant’s advice is considered reasonable and acceptable. In relation to the Panel’s requirement for windows to be provided in the south wall to the stair between Blocks B and C, a condition will be applied accordingly should approval be granted.

 

It was further suggested to the architect that minor changes to internal planning could improve the amenity of the small bedrooms on the south face of Block A on the second and third floors.

 

Council’s comments: An assessment of the internal layout of the small bedrooms on the south face of Block A indicates that the amenity of the bedrooms will be adequate, especially in terms of access to daylight and ventilation. Accordingly, changes to the layout of these bedrooms will not be necessary.

 

8.   The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

Generally satisfactory.

 

9.   Social issues

 

This would appear to be a good use for this site and the variety of unit types proposed is good.

 

10.   The Aesthetics of the Proposal

 

With further refinement this could be a good building.  In particular the face brick ends, while responding to the brickwork on the student building opposite needs further consideration.

 

Council’s Comment : These comments by the Panel concerning the visual impact of the face brick ends have been duplicated by the Panel from the Panel’s earlier assessment of the prelodgement proposal in December 2005. The applicant in the current DA proposal has improved the visual quality of the subject wall and addressed the Panel’s concerns as reflected in the following comments of the Panel:

 

It is the Panel’s view that the design refinements made have been successful, in particular in the treatment of the western end of Block A.

 

Summary and Recommendations

This is a well considered and designed proposal, however too much space is being proposed.

Consideration should be given to the lowering of the building or removal of one floor from the northern block to improve solar access to the courtyard and the ground floor units in the southern block and slightly reducing the scale to the street.

The design of the face brick western end of the buildings, although well intentioned needs refinement.

This refinement has been made, and the density decreased 

The landscape should be configured to permit a view to the lane to the south of the development

The Panel wishes to see the DA in due course.

 

Council’s Comment : These summary and recommendation comments by the Panel in the preceding paragraphs have been duplicated by the Panel from the Panel’s earlier assessment of the prelodgement proposal in December 2005. The applicant in the current DA proposal has addressed these concerns as reflected in the following comments of the Panel:

 

As noted above, the Panel wishes to commend this proposal, as now configured, to the Council and does not wish to review it again.

 

10.4.2.2      Sunlight, Privacy and Views

 

The subject site is bounded by Harbourne Lane to the south with Building B and Building C setback by a minimum 4m from the Harbourne Lane boundary.  Accordingly, shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that at 9am, 12 noon and 3pm in the winter solstice, overshadowing will fall predominantly on Harbourne Lane. The exception to this will be morning overshadowing of the front yards of the townhouses to the south-west of the subject site at No. 3-5 Harbourne Road and overshadowing of the rear driveway of the two-storey residential flat building to the south at No. 14 Middle Street. In relation to No.3-5 Harbourne Road, the front yards of the town-houses at this address will be free from overshadowing from the proposed development between 12noon and 3pm thus achieving the DCP requirement for principal landscape areas of neighbouring dwellings not to have access to sunlight reduced to less than 3 hours per day. In relation to No.14 Middle Street, whilst it is noted that the overshadowing will occur on the rear driveway of No 14 Middle Street from 9am to 3:00pm in the winter solstice with the open space of this property (oriented towards Middle Street) free from overshadowing from the proposed development.

 

Objections have been received from the owner/residents of No. 12 Middle Street and 8 Forsyth Street raising concerns regarding overshadowing of their properties. These concerns are addressed as follows:

 

§  No. 12 Middle Street

 

The shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that overshadowing of No. 12 Middle Street from the proposal will occur only on the rear garage of this property in the winter morning, noon and afternoon. The proposal will not overshadow any open space or internal living areas of the residence on this property. Accordingly, the proposal’s overshadowing impact on No. 12 Middle Street is considered acceptable and reasonable

 

§  No. 8 Forsyth Street

 

The shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that there will be no overshadowing of No. 8 Forsyth Street from the proposal at anytime during the winter solstice.

 

In view of the above, the proposal will not result in any adverse overshadowing of surrounding residential properties.

 

Approximately 81% of the proposed apartments will have dual aspect so that most dwelling units within the proposed development will have access to a minimum 3 hours solar access between 9am and 3 pm in mid-winter. The elevations have been treated to modulate solar access by the use of louvres and articulation to the northern façade of Buildings A, B and C.

 

In relation to loss of privacy, one objection has been received from the resident/owner of No. 50 Barker Street raising concerns about overlooking from Building C into the objector’s backyard. The objector’s property fronts Barker Street and shares a common boundary with the subject site at the rear. Potential overlooking of the objector’s backyard may occur from the balcony of the living room to the proposed unit C304 on the second floor level of Building C. Accordingly, a condition will be applied requiring the installation of an appropriate fixed privacy screen to the living room balcony of this proposed unit. Overlooking from the balconies to bedrooms of dwelling units in Building C is not considered a concern as the nature and use of the bedrooms and their balconies will not be conducive to overlooking.

 

Apart from the potential impact on No. 50 Barker Street, the proposal overall will perform well in terms of privacy especially given that :

 

§  The proposal complies fully with the setback requirements of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing.

 

§  The apartments in Building A will have living areas that predominantly face Barker Street while the living areas of Buildings B will face the central linear courtyard.

 

§  The proposal will have a generous separation distance of approximately 16m to the residential properties to the south on the opposite side of Harbourne Lane.

 

§  The proposal will have adequate separation (13.5m) between the proposed Buildings A and B.

 

In terms of views, the proposal will have minimal impact on the outlook of adjoining and nearby properties given the generally flat topography in the immediate area.

 

Overall, the proposal is satisfactory with regard to solar access, privacy and views.

 

10.4.2.4      Parking, traffic and access

 

Applying the DCP – Carparking rate for multi-unit development, the proposal will require 70 residential and 16 visitor carspaces. The proposal provides for a total of 85 carspaces resulting in a shortfall of 1 carspace. The applicant’s traffic/parking report has provided the following justification for the shortfall:

 

·    The proposal complies with RTA Parking Code which, if applied to the proposal would  require a total of 65 carspaces, a full 20 spaces fewer than that proposed.

 

·    It is highly probable that a high percentage of the proposed residential units will be occupied by university students who will have no significant parking demands, living as the will across the road from the University.

 

·    The reinstatement of kerb in Barker Street (replacing the existing driveway will provide for at least 3 additional on-street parking spaces.

 

The above-listed justifications for the shortfall are considered acceptable. Additionally, the shortfall is considered minor and can be adequately accommodated in that it will mean that one dwelling unit in the proposed development will be disadvantaged by the loss of one carparking space. In this regard, in order to ensure that the shortfall is not allocated to the visitor carparking, a condition will be applied requiring that all the 16 visitor carparking spaces required under the DCP be provided on site.

 

The applicant’s traffic report indicates that the proposal is expected to generate approximately 19 peak hour vehicles trips, and up to 190 daily vehicle trips. The traffic report considers that the addition of 19 peak hour trips, distributing to and from Harbourne Lane at Harbourne Road, Forsyth Street and Barker Street would have no significant impact on the operation of the local traffic environment. The applicant’s traffic consultant has applied INTANAL modelling of the traffic generation and shown that the intersections serving the proposed development will operate at a high level of service.

 

Specifically, in relation to Harbourne Lane, concern has been raised by the adjoining child-care centre at No. 52 Barker Street regarding traffic impacts on the Lane and the child-care centre. The applicant’s traffic consultant has indicated specifically in the traffic study that the additional traffic flows from the proposed development “…will have no impact on the operational or amenity capacity of Harbourne Lane, with peak flows remaining well below 100 vph in the peak period, and likely below 1,500 vph.” Accordingly the proposal is considered appropriate in relation to traffic and its impact on other users of Harbourne Lane.

 

Overall, the increase in traffic generation in the proposed development is not considered to have a significant traffic impact on the adjacent classified road network.

 

 

10.4.2.5      Ecologically Sustainable Development

 

The applicant has also provided a BASIX assessment of the proposal in accordance with BASIX modelling requirements which indicates compliance with the targets for multi-unit housing , achieving 41% in water saving and 31% in energy consumption and a “pass” for Thermal comfort.

 

Specifically, the proposal achieves cross-ventilation for a significant majority of units (82%); 86% of proposed units will receive a minimum 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in midwinter (minimum 70% required under the Residential Flat Design Code) and north-facing indoor and outdoor living areas for 97% of dwelling units achieve sunlight access during mid-winter.

 

The proposed development will be well served by public buses along Anzac Parade, linking the subject site to the CBD, Railway Square, Bondi Junction, and Randwick Junction in keeping with an increasing trend towards the promotion of public transport usage as a primary means of enhancing ecological sustainability and the reduction of greenhouse gases in the Sydney Region.  The proposal would assist in encouraging the use of public transport in line with ESD principles.

 

Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable in relation to Ecologically Sustainable Development issues.

 

10.4.2.7      Site Remediation

 

As described in Section 10.2 above, documentary evidence has been provided by the applicant indicating that the use of the subject site in the past has been for non-contaminating residential and motel uses. To formalise this evidence, a condition will be applied requiring a preliminary site contamination investigation be undertaken by an independent appropriately qualified environmental consultant to provide information on past and current activities and uses that may have occurred on the site, and to indicate that the site will be suitable for the intended use. The report is to be submitted and accepted by Council prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

10.4.2.8      Social and Economic Impacts – S79C(1)(b)

 

The proposal will increase the availability of housing and promote the key directions and actions for the Randwick City Plan and the objectives of the Residential 2B zone contained in the Randwick LEP 1998. The effect of the proposal would be to bring more people to the locality who would potentially be linked to the existing economic, institutional and service facilities in the area. Overall the proposal presents a positive impact within the site and locality.

 

10.4.3         Suitability of the site – S79C(1)(c) 

 

The subject site is zoned Residential 2B. The subject site is therefore suitable for the proposal which will introduce a conforming medium density residential development whilst removing the existing non-conforming motel use.

 

The site is well located in relation the UNSW campus, hospitals and other  institutional uses in the area. Public transport, shops and services are also available in the immediate locality.

 

10.4.4         Any submissions made – S79C(1)(d)

 

The original proposal was notified and advertised between 18 January 2005 and 1 February 2006. The amended proposal (incorporating the changes under the withdrawn DA 1063/2005) was renotified on 8 March 2006. The issues raised in submissions to this notification/advertising process have been addressed in relevant sections of this report as indicated in Section 5 above.

 

9.3.5                The public interest – S79C(1)(e)

 

The proposed development will be in the public interest as it will provide additional housing stock in an area that will potentially experience a significant demand due to the proximity of the subject site to the University and hospitals precinct as well as shops and services in the Kingsford Commercial centre.  Accordingly, the proposal will consolidate the role of this precinct and the commercial centre as centres for economic growth, employment and services in accordance with the Randwick City Plan and the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

11        RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

11.1     Outcomes

 

Outcome  : Leadership in sustainability – The proposal will achieve the BASIX targets for water conservation, energy consumption and thermal comfort as well as achieve high levels of cross ventilation, dual aspect and solar access for dwelling units.

 

Outcome  : Excellence in urban design and development  – The proposal has a good architectural quality in that it has skilfully and competently maximise the potential of the subject site in the context of the existing surrounding development whilst minimising impacts on adjoining and nearby residential properties.

 

Outcome  : A strong local economy – The proposal will introduce a conforming and good quality residential development that will support and consolidate the University and hospitals precinct as well as the nearby Kingsford commercial centre, and encourage the growth and patronage of this precinct and centre,  all of which will contribute to a strong local economy.

 

11.2     Directions and Actions

 

Direction 4a & associated key action : Improved design and sustainability across all development –The proposal will achieve the BASIX targets for water conservation, energy consumption and thermal comfort as well as achieve high levels of cross ventilation, dual aspect and solar access for dwelling units.

 

Direction 8b & associated action : Vibrant town centres that adequately serve the community and support local business – The proposal, in providing for a new conforming residential development at the density and height proposed, will facilitate the provision of services to the community as well as the growth of local economy thus contributing to the creation of a vibrant town centre for Kingsford.  

 

Direction 8c & associated action : Economic growth and development that strengthens our hospital and university precinct – The proposal being in close proximity to the UNSW and hospitals precinct, will provide for a new conforming residential development at the density and height proposed, which will strengthen and consolidate the role and growth of this precinct with minimal adverse amenity impacts on adjoining and nearby residential uses.

 

11.     FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

12.     CONCLUSION

 

The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site. The proposal does not comply with the maximum FSR, wall and building standards contained in the RLEP, and carparking. SEPP No.1 objections to the maximum FSR, and the maximum building and wall height standards have been submitted with the application and considered to be well founded in the circumstances. In particular, the proposal has a scale and density that would be compatible in a locality with a significant degree of medium to high density developments in close proximity to the University and hospitals precinct  and identified in the Randwick City Plan for future economic growth. The proposal also provides an opportunity to replace the existing non-conforming motel use with a conforming residential use that will have a good architectural quality complementing the existing streetscape and locality.

 

The proposal does not meet with the preferred solutions in the DCP - Multi-unit Housing in relation to the height, density, setback, adaptable housing for people with a disability and configuration of landscaped areas. However, these features of the proposal meet the performance requirements of the DCP and, where appropriate, have been further addressed by way of relevant conditions.

 

The shortfall in carparking has been assessed and is considered minor and acceptable.

 

The proposal will not have a significant impact on the amenity of surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy.

 

The recommendation is for deferred commencement approval of the application subject to conditions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning No. 1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 32(1) and 33(1)&(3) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended), relating to maximum floor space ratio and building height, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of the clauses and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised 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 D/287/2006 for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a part 3, part 4 and part 5 level multi-unit development comprising of 3 buildings, 65 dwellings and 2 levels of basement carparking for 85 vehicles and including a communal facility containing library and swimming pool at 32-42 Barker Street, Kingsford, subject to the following conditions:

 

Deferred Commencement Conditions

 

The consent shall not operate until the following amendments and details have been submitted to and approved by the Director of City Planning.

 

1.       Amended plans and elevations showing the following:

 

·    Installation of an appropriate fixed privacy screen along the balcony to the living room of the proposed unit C304 in the proposed Building C to ensure the privacy of the rear yard of the adjoining existing property at No. 50 Barker Street.

 

·    Installation of appropriate sun shading devices in all areas of unprotected north-facing glass in Buildings A and B in a manner that continues the materials and devices proposed in areas of protected north-facing glass in these buildings.

 

·    Redesign of the blade wall at the entry to Harbourne Lane to make this wall less prominent.

 

·    Redesign of the internal ramp between Basement Levels 1 and 2 by placing this ramp below the main ramp that links the street access to Basement Level 1 so as to further increase the area for deep soil planting.

 

·   The ground floor level of Building A being raised by 150mm to RL 27.45 (AHD) to provide adequate floor levels for habitable and storage areas above determined flood levels for the area; and a commensurate reduction in the floor to floor heights as detailed below (to ensure that the overall building height is not increased):

 

*    Reduction in the floor to floor height of the ground floor by 30mm

*    Reduction on the floor to floor height of the levels 1 to 3 by 40mm per floor.

 

2.       Details of the provision of 4 dwellings that will be adapted for people with a disability as required in the DCP – Multi-unit Housing.

 

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

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

1.         The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA02 to DA14 all Rev. A and stamped received by Council on 19 April 2006, and the application form, and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the details/amendments approved pursuant to the deferred commencement conditions and by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

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

 

2.         The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces of the new building are to be consistent with that indicated in the sample board accompanying the subject development application and received by Council on 19 April 2006.

 

3.         Details of bicycle storage providing for 28 bicycle parking spaces as required in the Development Control Plan – Parking shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development.

 

4.         Each pair of tandem carparking spaces shall be allocated to a corresponding 2 or 3 bedroom dwelling.

 

5.         The development shall provide 15 visitor carparking spaces on-site as required under the DCP - Parking.

 

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

 

7.         The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent. 

 

8.         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.

 

9.         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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

13.       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                            $112439.06

b)       for the provision or improvement of community facilities                  $43260.39

c)       Administration fee                                                                              $425.00

 

The contribution must be paid in cash or by bank cheque a construction certificate being issued

 

for the proposed development, together with payment of the required Section 94 Administration Fee of $425.00.  Council’s Section 94 Contribution Plans may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick.

 

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

 

14.       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)         $5000.00         -           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.

 

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

 

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

 

Barker Street frontage:

 

16.       Remove all redundant concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks and to reinstate the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

17.       Reconstruct the kerb and gutter along the full Barker Street site frontage.

 

18.       Carry out a full depth minimum 1.5 metre wide, road reconstruction in front of the new kerb and gutter and layback along the full site frontage.

 

19.       Reconstruct the concrete footpath along the full Barker Street site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

Harbourne Lane frontage:

 

20.       Construct a heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Harbourne Lane. Note: The applicant will be required to liaise directly with Energy Australia and organise for the existing light pole (located within the proposed vehicular access) to be relocated prior to construction of the new vehicular crossing.

 

21.       Construct a concrete layback along the projected kerb alignment opposite the loading zone. Note: This will include removal/relocation of the existing signposting located directly adjacent to the proposed layback. 

 

22.       Construct kerb and gutter along the full Harbourne Lane site frontage except opposite the loading zone and vehicular entrance.

 

23.       Carry out a full depth minimum 1.5 metre wide, road reconstruction in front of the new kerb and gutter and layback along the full site frontage.

 

24.       Construct a new full width concrete footpath behind the kerb along the site frontage in Harbourne Lane (over the 600mm wide parcel of land to be dedicated to Council).

 

25.       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.

 

26.       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.

 

27.       The proposed loading zone within the site shall be constructed with kerb and gutter around the outside to separate the pedestrian footpath and the loading area. The loading area shall also be constructed with a 1.5% fall towards the layback to facilitate suitable drainage. To ensure that the loading zone matches with the civil works in Harbourne Lane, construction details for the proposed loading zone and footpath shall be submitted to Council for approval prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

28.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall install, wholly within the site, suitable pavement markings and signposting clearly delineating the loading zone located adjacent to Harbourne Lane. The signposting shall clearly state that no parking is permitted within the loading zone.

 

29.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall meet the full cost for the existing parking restrictions along the full site frontage in Harbourne Lane to be modified to suit the proposed development. The signposting shall be provided to the satisfaction of Council’s Traffic Engineer. Note: It is recommended that the applicant make early contact with Council’s Traffic Engineer (ph: 9399 0927) to avoid potential delays in the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

30.       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 metres by 1.5 metres to provide satisfactory sight lines. Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

31.       The two-way access driveway off Harbourne Lane shall be a minimum of 6 metres wide (clear width) and set back from the side property boundary by a minimum of 1 metre.

 

32.       The internal driveway must be designed to allow entering & exiting vehicles to pass within the site. The submitted ground and basement floor plans (DA02 (Rev A) and DA 08 (Rev A) by STC Architects) demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

33.       A Works Zone is to be provided in Barker Street 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.

 

34.       Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit for approval and have approved by Council's Traffic Engineer a detailed construction traffic management plan. The plan shall demonstrate how construction and delivery vehicles will access the development site during the demolition and construction phase of the development.

 

35.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall dedicate to Council a strip of land 0.60 metre wide along the full Harbourne Lane site frontage. All costs associated with the dedication shall be borne by the applicant. It is noted that no portion of the development (including the basement carpark / detention tanks) shall encroach into the parcel of land to be dedicated to Council.

 

36.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall create an easement for access and an easement for garbage collection (benefiting Randwick City Council) over the loading zone and adjoining section of pedestrian footpath located within the subject development site. This condition has been included as garbage collection vehicles will be required to drive into the loading zone to collect wastes; and pedestrians within Harbourne Lane will be directed around the loading zone and into the site.

 

37.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, a positive covenant shall be created over the loading zone and adjoining pedestrian footpath. The terms of the positive covenant shall be as follows

 

The registered proprietor of the lot burdened does hereby covenant for itself its successors in title and assignees in relation to the easements for access and garbage collection created over the loading dock and adjoining footpath:

 

1.         to keep the loading zone and adjoining footpath clean and free from rubbish

 

2.         to maintain, renew and repair the whole or any part of the loading zone and adjoining footpath so as to keep it safe and useable

 

3.         to carry out renovation, repair and cleaning of the loading zone and adjoining footpath at its own expense.

 

4.         not to erect any gate or other structure or make any alterations to the loading zone and adjoining footpath without the prior written consent of Randwick City Council (“the Council”).

 

5.         to indemnify and keep indemnified the Council against all and any claims for damages arising out of injury to any person or persons lawful upon the loading zone and adjoining footpath.

 

6.1       to keep current at all times a policy of public risk insurance in respect of the loading zone and adjoining footpath for an amount of not less than $20million (being the amount which may be paid arising out of one single accident or event) or such higher amount as the Council may from time to time require.

 

6.2       such policy must be effected with an insurance company approved by the Council (which approval will not be unreasonably withheld) and the registered proprietor will, if so requested by the Council, provide the Council with a copy of the policy and from time to time with a Certificate of Currency for the policy.

 

7.1       to comply with the terms of any written notice (“the Notice”) issued by the Council in relation to any of these matters contained in this Positive Covenant within the time stated in the Notice.

 

7.2       if the registered proprietor fails to comply with the terms of the Notice the Council or its authorised agents may enter the site of the easement with all necessary equipment to perform the required work to ensure safety of users of the easement and recover from the proprietor any cost of performing the work. If necessary the Council can recover the cost by legal proceedings and entry of a covenant charge under Section 88F of the Conveyancing Act.

 

Identity of authority whose consent is required to release vary or modify the Positive Covenant referred to in the abovementioned plan

 

            Randwick City Council”

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

38.       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:

 

·     Barker Street: Match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage

 

·     Harbourne Lane:

 

o At the vehicular entry point and within the loading zone area - 70mm above the centreline of the laneway at all points opposite the laneway.

o At the pedestrian entry points – 110 mm above the centreline of the laneway at all points opposite the laneway.

 

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

 

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

 

39.       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.

 

40.       The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer has been issued at a prescribed fee of $5900 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

41.       The top of footings of any structures constructed on the Harbourne Lane boundary alignment must be at least 150mm below the alignment level as specified for the vehicular access (in order to accommodate footpath construction at this location).

 

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

 

42.       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.

 

43.       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.

 

44.       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.

 

45.       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.

 

46.       The applicant shall meet the full cost of the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site to be relocated underground and all redundant power poles to be removed. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be relocated. All wires cables must be relocated underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.

 

47.       Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall meet the full cost for Energy Australia to relocate the street light located within the proposed vehicular access in Harbourne Lane. The applicant shall liaise directly with Energy Australia regarding this matter.

 

48.       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.

 

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

 

49.       The floor level of all habitable and storage areas (excluding the basement carpark) shall be at a minimum RL of 27.45 (AHD).  The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

50.       The proposed internal driveway (and any other openings into the basement carpark) must be designed with a high point to RL 27.45 (AHD). The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

51.       All structural walls on the ground floor level shall be designed to structurally withstand hydrostatic pressure/stormwater inundation from floodwater during the probable maximum flood (PMF) event as defined in the Floodplain Management Manual (New South Wales Government, January 2001). Structural Engineering certification confirming that this condition has been complied with shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

It is noted that this requirement does not necessitate the development being flood proof/water tight up to the PMF event, rather the requirement is to ensure that the development will not be structurally damaged in manner that could endanger lives during the PMF event.

 

52.       Stormwater drainage plans have not been approved as part of this development consent. 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.

 

53.       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.

 

54.       All site stormwater must be discharged (by gravity) to either:

 

a)         The underground drainage system in Barker Street; OR

b)         A suitably sized infiltration system (subject to geotechnical investigation confirming that the ground conditions are suitable for an infiltration system).

 

Note: Discharge to the underground drainage system in Barker Street will necessitate the applicant meeting all costs associated with constructing a new kerb inlet pit (in general accordance with Council’s standard drawing SD7a) in Barker Street in front of the development site, and extending Council’s underground drainage system to connect into the new kerb inlet pit.

 

55.       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.

 

56.       Site discharge pipelines shall cross the verge at an angle no less than 45 degrees to the kerb line.

 

57.       All drainage details (for the external drainage works) shall be prepared by a suitably qualified hydraulic consultant who shall, at the completion of the works, certify that the drainage works have been constructed in accordance with the approved drainage plans and relevant standards. The plans and specifications for all drainage works on Council property shall be submitted to and approval by Council prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

58.       A work-as-executed plan (for the external drainage works) prepared and signed by the hydraulic engineer or a registered surveyor, must be submitted to Council prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, detailing the as constructed details for all works within Council’s road reserve (including detailed levels).

 

59.       Should stormwater be discharged to Council’s street drainage system, 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 Council.  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 has to be a minimum of 2.0 metres below the base of the tank.

 

60.       Should stormwater be discharged to an infiltration system, the infiltration area shall be  sized for all storm events up to the 1 in 20 year storm event with provision for a formal overland flow path to Council’s Street drainage system.

 

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

 

61.       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.

 

62.       The detention area/infiltration system must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure it functions as required by the design.

 

63.       The maximum depth of ponding in above ground detention areas (and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage) 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

 

64.       Any above ground stormwater detention areas (and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage) must be suitably signposted where required, warning people of the maximum flood level.

 

65.       The floor level of all habitable and storage areas adjacent to any detention area and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage 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 may require a new or amended development consent from the Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development).

 

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

 

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

 

68.       A reflux valve shall be provided (within the site) over any pipelines discharging from the site to ensure that stormwater from Council drainage system does not surcharge back into the site stormwater system.

 

69.       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.

 

70.       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 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.

 

71.       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/infiltration system is maintained and that no works which could affect the design function of the detention/infiltration 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 Development Engineer.

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

c.     The works as executed drainage plan and hydraulic certification must be submitted to Council prior to the “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” being executed by Council.

 

72.       A minimum of three covered car washing bays shall be provided for this development.

 

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

 

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

 

c)         The car washing bays may be located within the visitor parking spaces provided they are 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 bays must be constructed with a minimum 20mm bund around the perimeter of the car washing bays (or equivalent)

 

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

 

73.       Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall submit to 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:

 

a)       The location of the detention basin with finished surface levels;

b)      Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

c)       Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

f)       Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

74.       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.

 

75.       Should groundwater be encountered 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)   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.

 

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

 

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

 

76.       The waste storage areas shall be sized to contain:

 

a)    a compactor (with safe working area) for each chute feed;

b)    a total of 17 x 240 litre additional garbage bins; and

c)    a total 33 x 240 litre recycling bins.

 

The compactor/s shall be managed by a caretaker and shall be located in areas that are not accessible to residents. However, at least two garbage bins shall be located outside of the compactor area in each of the waste storage areas to enable residents to dispose of rubbish that will not fit through the chutes.

 

A minimum of eight recycling bins shall be accessible by residents (four in each of the waste storage areas) to facilitate disposal of recyclables. The caretaker shall be responsible for ensuring that full recycling bins are moved out of the area accessible by residents and replaced with empty bins as required.

 

The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall be amended to demonstrate compliance with this condition. In particular, the plans shall show each of the two resident accessible waste storage areas being sized to contain a minimum of 2 x 240 litre garbage bins and 4 x 240 litre recycling bins.

 

77.       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.

 

78.       The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

79.       The applicant shall comply with any future Council direction regarding presentation of waste bins for collection.

 

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

 

80.       The landscaped areas shown on the revised Landscape Concept Plan prepared by Narelle Sonter, Landscape and Horticultural Specialists, drawing number LCP.01/B, job number 050803, issue B, dated April 2006 and stamped received at Council on 19th April 2006 (the landscape plan) shall be amended to show the following amendments/additional requirements, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority, prior to the issue of a construction certificate:

 

81.       ‘CA’ is proposed for under-planting beneath the Cabbage Palms along the eastern boundary, adjoining the pedestrian walkway, but is not included in the plant schedule and needs to be identified.

 

82.       Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Xmas Bush) shall be deleted from the landscape plan and planting plan as this species is susceptible to Jewel Beetle attack which has resulted in the death of a large number of this species in the Randwick LGA. Cultivars or an alternative species shall be nominated.

 

83.       Similarly, HM (Hydrangea macrophylla, Hydrangea) and AAM (Azalea indica ‘Alba Magna’, Azalea) shall be deleted from the planting plan and plant schedule as neither species is considered tolerant of current drought conditions. More resilient, alternative species shall be nominated. 

 

84.       In order to soften the bulk and appearance of the northern elevation of the proposed development, as well as to assist with its integration into the streetscape, two of the Gleditsia triacanthos ‘Sunburst’ (Honey Locusts) which are proposed within private courtyards along this northern frontage shall be replaced with two evergreen trees which can attain a minimum height at maturity of 10 metres so that canopy cover is maintained during the cooler months when the deciduous species proposed will be completely devoid of foliage.

 

85.       While a desirable species, the use of SJ, Strelitzia juncea (Crane Flower) within those raised planters along the northern boundary, fronting onto Barker Street is not supported in this instance due its ability to overhang onto the public footpath and impede/affect pedestrian access. An alternative species which will be able to be wholly contained within the raised planters without the need for regular and ongoing maintenance to contain their size or shape shall be selected in this area.

 

86.       For maintenance and practicality purposes, those areas of lawn proposed within private courtyards in Block B and C, as well as surrounding the common area pedestrian path running along the western edge of proposed Block A shall be deleted, and is to be replaced with decorative gravel or mulch and associated appropriate planting.

           

87.       Deletion of the narrow strip of turf proposed between the southern length of proposed Block A and the stepping stones, to be replaced with suitable accent planting.

 

88.       Additional details of the proposed water features, including depth, function and water source/usage.

 

89.       Inclusion of appropriate screen planting of the two raised voids/vents at the eastern and western ends of the deep soil zone in the proposed central courtyard.

 

90.       Extension of garden beds and associated screen or feature planting in front of the northern and eastern edges of the raised planter proposed at the western end of the grassed courtyard, above the proposed driveway ramp.

 

91.       A minimum of one evergreen tree which can attain a minimum height of 12 metres at maturity shall be provided within the deep soil zone of the proposed central courtyard at the expense of one of the deciduous trees indicated for use in this area. 

 

92.       The planter proposed along the eastern boundary, adjacent the pedestrian path at the northeast corner of the site shall be extended to match up with the proposed letterbox/covered pergola.

 

93.       Replacement of SA (Syzygium australe, Lilly Pilly) which is proposed for use along the eastern boundary at the southeast corner of the site with an alternative species which will attain a minimum height of 4 metres at maturity in order to afford adequate screening and privacy between this site and the adjoining property to the east.

 

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

 

e.         All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape plans.

 

f.          In order to reduce the amount of stormwater generated by the site, as well as to recharge groundwater supplies, any hard surfacing proposed over deep soil areas throughout the site shall be porous in nature. Details are to be provided with the construction certificate application.

 

g.         To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaping, an automatic drip irrigation system shall be installed throughout all planted areas. The plans submitted for the construction certificate will be required to demonstrate that the system will be connected to the sites rainwater tanks, with back-up connection to the main supply, to current Sydney Water requirements.

 

94.       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.

 

95.       Documentary evidence is to be obtained from a suitably qualified Landscape Architect and submitted to the principal certifying authority (PCA) (and the Council, if the Council is not the PCA) prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate which confirms that the landscaping works have been completed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans and relevant conditions of development consent, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

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

 

97.       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.

 

98.       Any substation required shall be screened from view. The proposed location, elevation and screening method shall be shown.

 

99.       All detention tanks and below ground stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm.

 

Tree Management

 

100.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $858.00 (including GST) to Council,

 

a.         Being the cost for Council to supply and install 8 x 25 litre street trees (Jacaranda mimosifolia, Jacaranda’s) evenly spaced along the Barker Street frontage at the completion of all works ($780.00 + GST).

 

The contribution shall be paid into Tree Amenity Income account no 4001.768401 at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

101.     Permission is granted for the removal of all vegetation within the subject site, subject to implementation of landscaping at the site which is in accordance with the landscape plan approved for the construction certificate.

 

102.     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.

 

103.     Permission is granted for the selective pruning of only those lower growing, overhanging branches from the southern sides of the two Melia azederach (White Cedars, represented as trees 24 & 25 on the landscape plan), comprising one each within the rear yards of 44 & 46 Barker Street, close to the common boundary, which need to be removed in order to avoid conflict with site machinery during the course of the works.

 

104.     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.’

 

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

 

105.     Prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development, a preliminary site contamination investigation must be undertaken by an independent appropriately qualified environmental consultant in order to provide information on land and ground water contamination and migration in relation to past and current activities and uses that may have occurred on the site.

         

The report is to be prepared in accordance with Council’s Contaminated Land Policy 1999 and relevant Guidelines made or approved by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (formerly EPA), including the Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites and the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM) 1999.  Also, as detailed in the Planning Guidelines to SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land, the report is to assess the nature, extent and degree of contamination upon the land.  The preliminary site contamination report must be sufficiently detailed and be submitted to and accepted by Council’s Manager of Environmental Health & Building Services prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

 

Should the Preliminary Site Investigation Report demonstrate that the land and groundwater is not contaminated, the conclusion to the report must clearly state that ‘the land is suitable for its intended land use, posing no immediate or long term risk to public health or the environment and is fit for occupation by persons, together with clear justification for the statement.  The report must demonstrate that any site contamination satisfies the relevant criteria in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999.

 

The written concurrence of Council must be obtained before a construction certificate is issued for the development.

 

106.     Should the preliminary site investigation report identify potential contamination, a detailed site investigation report must be undertaken by an independent and qualified environmental consultant. Should the detailed Site Investigation Report identify that the land is contaminated and the land requires remedial works to meet the relevant criteria in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM) 1999, the following matters must be complied with:-

 

i.           A Remediation Action Plan (RAP) is required to be prepared and be submitted to Council prior to commencing remediation works.  The RAP is also required to be reviewed by an independent NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) Accredited Site Auditor.

 

ii.          The RAP is to be prepared in accordance with the relevant Guidelines made or approved by NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), including the Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites.

 

          This RAP is to include procedures for the following:

 

·        Excavation of Hydrocarbon-contaminated soil,

·        Validation sampling and analysis,

·        Prevention of cross contamination and migration or release of contaminants,

·        Site management planning,

·        Ground water remediation, dewatering, drainage, monitoring and validation,

·        Unexpected finds.

 

iii.         Prior to commencing any remediation works, a written statement is to be provided to the Council by the Site Auditor, which confirms that the Remediation Action Plan satisfies the relevant legislative guidelines and requirements and that the land is able to be remediated to the required level and be suitable for the intended development and use.

 

iv.         The applicant is to engage a NSW Department of Environment and Conservation Accredited Site Auditor, accredited under sections 49 & 50 of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. The Site Auditor is to assess the suitability of the site for its intended development and use.  The Site Audit Statement and Summary Site Audit Report is to be submitted to Council and must verify that the land has been remediated and the site is suitable for the intended development and satisfies the relevant criteria in the NEPM 1999.

 

Any additional conditions that are specified in the Site Audit Statement and Summary Site Audit Report by the EPA accredited site auditor, form part of this consent and Council must be consulted with prior to the development and imposition of any conditions.

 

The Site Audit Statement must be submitted to Council, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the development.

 

v.          Remediation works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997, environmental planning instruments applying to the site, guidelines made by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation and Department of Infrastructure Planning & Natural Resources, Randwick City Council’s Contaminated Land Policy 1999 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

 

vi.         The site remediation including ground water must fully comply with all relevant Commonwealth and State Legislation, Regulations and Standards.

 

vii.        Any fill importation to the site is to be monitored and classified by the Site Auditor appointed for remediation of the site or a person with his qualifications. Only ‘Virgin Excavated Natural Material’ (VENM) is to be imported to the site, as defined within the NSW EPA ‘Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and management of Liquid and Non-Liquid Wastes. 1999’.

 

viii.       A Site Remediation Management Plan must be prepared prior to the commencement of remediation works by a suitably qualified environmental consultant and be implemented throughout remediation works. A copy is to be forwarded to Council. The Site Remediation Management Plan shall include measures to address the following matters:

 

·      general site management, site security, barriers, traffic management and signage

·      hazard identification and control

·      worker health & safety, work zones and decontamination procedures

·      cross contamination

·      site drainage and dewatering

·      air and water quality monitoring

·      disposable of hazardous wastes

·      contingency plans and incident reporting, and

·      details of provisions for monitoring implementation of remediation works including details of the person/consultant responsible.

 

ix.          Remediation must be completed to the satisfaction of the Accredited Site Auditor and the written concurrence of Council must be obtained prior to the issuing of the construction certificate.

 

x.           The works shall not give rise to environmental pollution or public nuisance or, result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or NSW Occupational Health & Safety Act (2000) & Regulations (2001).

 

107.     Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition, excavation and remediation process being removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover NSW and the Environment Protection Authority, and with the provisions of:

 

·        New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 2000;

·        The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001;

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

·        Protection Of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) and

·        Environment Protection Authority's Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non Liquid Wastes (1999).

 

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

 

108.     The residential units are to achieve the following internal acoustic amenity criteria:

 

a)       In naturally ventilated residential units; the repeatable maximum LAeq (1 hour) shall not exceed:

 

·        35 dB(A) between 10pm and 7am in sleeping areas when the windows are closed;

·        45 dB(A) in sleeping areas when windows are open;

·        45 dB(A) in living areas (24 hours) when the windows are closed, and

·        55 dB(A) in living areas when the windows are open.

 

b)       In residential units provided with mechanical ventilation, air conditioning or other complying means of ventilation, when doors and windows are shut, the repeatable maximum LAeq (1 hour) shall not exceed:

 

·        38 dB(A) between 10pm and 7am in sleeping areas;

·        46 dB(A) in living areas (24 hours).

 

Details of compliance with the relevant criteria is to be included in the construction certificate application and written confirmation of compliance is to be provided to the Council and the Certifying Authority, by the Acoustic consultant, prior to the construction certificate being issued.

 

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:

 

109.     There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises which 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 have been applied to ensure that noise emissions from the development satisfy legislative requirements and maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

 

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

 

In this regard, the operation of the plant and equipment (excluding plant and equipment during the construction phase) shall not give rise to an LAeq, 15 min sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background LA90, 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise source/s under consideration by more than 5dB(A) in accordance with relevant NSW Department of Environment & Conservation Noise Control Guidelines.

 

111.     A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, which demonstrates and certifies that noise and vibration emissions from the development comply with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW Environmental Protection Authority Noise Control Manual & Industrial Noise Policy and conditions of Council’s approval, to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager Health, Building & Regulatory Services.

 

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:

112.     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 that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

113.     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.

 

114.     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.

 

115.     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.

 

116.     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.

 

117.     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.

 

118.     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”.

 

119.     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.

 

120.     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.

 

121.     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.

 

122.     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.

123.     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.

 

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

 

124.     Documentary evidence prepared by a suitably qualified professional geotechnical engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, certifying the suitability and stability of the site for the proposed building and certifying the suitably and adequacy of the proposed design and construction of the building for the site.

 

125.     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.

 

126.     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.

 

127.     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, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc.) located upon:

 

a)         all of the premises adjoining the subject site.

 

The report is to be supported with photographic evidence of the status 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.

 

128.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

130.     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.

 

131.     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.

 

132.     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.

 

133.     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.

 

134.     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.

 

135.     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.

 

136.     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.

 

137.     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.

 

138.     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.

 

139.     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.

 

140.     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.

 

141.     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.

 

142.     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.

 

143.     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.

 

144.     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.

 

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.

 

145.     A temporary timber, asphalt or concrete 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.

 

146.     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.

 

147.     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.

 

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 any part of the footpath, nature strip or any 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.

 

148.     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.

 

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

 

149.     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.

 

150.     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.

 

151.     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.

 

152.     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.

 

153.     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.

 

154.     A Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (ie 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.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide reasonable levels of access for people with disabilities:

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

a)       Part B1                      -       Structural provisions

b)       Part C1                      -       Fire resistance and stability

c)       Part C3                      -       Protection of openings

d)       Part D3                      -       Access for people with disabilities

e)       Clause D3.5               -       Car parking for people with disabilities

f)        Part E1                       -       Fire fighting equipment

g)       Part E2                       -       Smoke Hazard Management

h)       Part E3                       -       Lift Installations

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

j)        Part F1                       -       Damp and weatherproofing

k)       Part F2                       -       Sanitary facilities for employees

l)        Part F4                       -       Light and ventilation, in particular, the carpark

m)      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 (as applicable) prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

2.         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.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil.

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID ONGKILI

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

8 August, 2006

FILE NO:

DA/ 537/2006 & PROP036126

 

PROPOSAL:

 Use of a portion of existing dwelling house for bed and breakfast accommodation

PROPERTY:

 9 Garnet Street, SOUTH COOGEE

WARD:

 East Ward

APPLICANT:

 Ms Jackie Bowmer

OWNER:

Ms. J A Bowmer

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is referred to Council for determination at the request of Councillors Matson, Notley-Smith and Hughes.

 

The application details the use of the upper level of the dwelling for bed and breakfast accommodation.

 

The main issue is the potential impact upon the amenity of the adjoining residents.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The existing dwelling is over three levels and steps down the site from the Garnet Street frontage towards the rear, with a difference in levels of up to 6m. The dwelling contains five bedrooms, three bathrooms, a single kitchen, and living areas with balconies to each level, two garages with direct access from Garnet Street and an in ground swimming pool to the rear yard. The applicant proposes to utilise the two bedrooms, bathroom and living room within the upper level of the dwelling for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three guests. It is not intended to provide for any meals for guests other than self catered breakfast.

 

The proposed use does not require any building works or installation of any additional services and the owner and a family member will remain residing in the dwelling.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Garnet Street between Rainbow and Cairo Streets and is presently occupied by an existing three storey dwelling. The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of free standing dwellings and duplexes, multi unit housing development and bed and breakfast accommodation. The locality as a whole is within the Foreshore Scenic Protection area.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

The site has been the subject of previous applications including alterations and additions to the dwelling to provide for a separate living area within the upper level, DA 297/94 and LA 1434/94 (the kitchenette which was included with those works has since been removed), the installation of an in ground swimming pool, LA348/97 and the erection of a deck surrounding the swimming pool, DA 986/00.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

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

 

5.1  Objections

J Perks of 2 Garnet Street Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

Strongly objects to another bed and breakfast in this street in that there will be additional traffic congestion in the street.

The proposal details the use of a double and single bedroom and a shared bathroom for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three people. It is expected because of the shared bathroom that this accommodation would be for a family with a single vehicle. In addition, the parking provided on site is for five vehicles which exceeds the Parking DCP and it is not considered that the proposed use will result in any significant additional traffic movements within this street.

 

C Churchill of 11 Garnet Street Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

The use of the property as a bed and breakfast accommodation will lead to a loss of privacy with access to the bottom part of site via stairs adjacent to their premises and in addition any privacy screens to the upper level balcony will lead to a loss of view.

The proposed use does not include any additional building works to the dwelling or alterations to the existing dwelling and there will not be any additional loss of privacy to any of the adjoining properties.

The use will lead to further traffic congestion in this street.

The proposal details the use of a double and single bedroom and a shared bathroom for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three people. It is expected because of the shared bathroom that this accommodation would be for a family with a single vehicle. In addition, the parking provided on site is for five vehicles which exceeds the Parking DCP and it is not considered that the proposed use will result in any significant additional traffic movements within this street.

The coming and going of guests will compromise the security of their dwelling.

The bed and breakfast accommodation is a low intensity use of a portion of the dwelling with a maximum of three guests at any one time and there would not be any significant movement of guests to and from the dwelling which could reasonably be argued would compromise the security of the adjoining and surrounding developments.

Garnet Street is residential not commercial and another bed and breakfast in this street will destroy the character of the street.

Bed and breakfast accommodation is not a prohibited use in a 2A residential zone.

 

D & D Guerriau of 15 Garnet Street Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

They already run a bed and breakfast in this street and one should be enough because of parking and noise problems.

There are a total of 5 off street parking spaces available on site, two in garages and three within the existing driveway which readily complies with the parking requirements for bed and breakfast accommodation as defined in the Parking DCP. With regards to noise, the owners will be living on site and will be in a position to closely monitor and respond to any nuisances. In addition, this type of accommodation generally attracts a more discerning mature traveller and it would not be expected that a significant nuisance would result to adjoining residents that may arise from the operation of a back packer’s hostel. 

 

J & A Downie of 17 Garnet Street Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

The street is zoned residential and a second bed and breakfast will destroy the character of the area, and there are already nuisances from other short term accommodation in the immediate area.

Bed and breakfast accommodation is not a prohibited use in a 2A residential zone.

The use will lead to further traffic congestion in this street.

The proposal details the use of a double and single bedroom and a shared bathroom for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three people. It is expected because of the shared bathroom that this accommodation would be for a family with a single vehicle. In addition, the parking provided on site is for five vehicles which exceeds the Parking DCP and it is not considered that the proposed use will result in any significant additional traffic movements within this street.

The constant flow of visitors will compromise the security of the area.

The bed and breakfast accommodation is a low intensity use of a portion of the dwelling with a maximum of three guests at any one time and there would not be any significant movement of guests to and from the dwelling which could reasonably be argued would compromise the security of the adjoining and surrounding developments.

 

Ms V Ward of 1 Cairo Street Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

Strongly objects to a bed and breakfast accommodation as the area is zoned residential.

Bed and breakfast accommodation is not a prohibited use in a 2A residential zone.

It would be hard to monitor the number of people accommodated because access is directly from the street with the owner living in the lower level.

The definition of bed and breakfast accommodation includes that the owner of the building is a permanent resident of the dwelling and therefore the number of guests and their behaviour could be easily monitored by the resident owner.

There may be nuisance caused from noise and behaviour of the guests.

The owner will remain in residence in the dwelling and will be in a position to closely monitor the behaviour of guests.

The use will lead to problems with privacy and security.

The bed and breakfast accommodation is a low intensity use of a portion of the dwelling with a maximum of three guests at any one time and there would not be any significant movement of guests to and from the dwelling which could reasonably be argued would compromise the security of the adjoining and surrounding developments.

 

The use will lead to further traffic congestion in this street.

The proposal details the use of a double and single bedroom and a shared bathroom for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three people. It is expected because of the shared bathroom that this accommodation would be for a family with a single vehicle. In addition, the parking provided on site is for five vehicles which exceeds the Parking DCP and it is not considered that the proposed use will result in any significant additional traffic movements within this street.

 

C & J Giannakopoulos of 5 Cairo Street Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

The street is zoned residential and a second bed and breakfast will destroy the character of the area, and there are already nuisances from other short term accommodation in the immediate area.

Bed and breakfast accommodation is not a prohibited use in a 2A residential zone.

The use will lead to further traffic congestion in this street.

The proposal details the use of a double and single bedroom and a shared bathroom for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three people. It is expected because of the shared bathroom that this accommodation would be for a family with a single vehicle. In addition, the parking provided on site is for five vehicles which exceeds the Parking DCP and it is not considered that the proposed use will result in any significant additional traffic movements within this street.

 

The constant flow of visitors will compromise the security of the area.

The bed and breakfast accommodation is a low intensity use of a portion of the dwelling with a maximum of three guests at any one time and there would not be any significant movement of guests to and from the dwelling which could reasonably be argued would compromise the security of the adjoining and surrounding developments.

 

 

6.    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

 

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

 

Clause 10 -2A Zones

 

Clause 10 of the LEP sets out the objectives of the 2A residential zone which are, to maintain the character of the established residential areas, allow for a range of community facilities to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, to enable development for low density housing where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and to allow for people to carryout a range of activities from their homes where such activities are not likely to adversely affect the environment of the locality.

 

Bed and breakfast accommodation is a permissible use within this zone and it is considered that the proposed use will not be inconsistent with the objectives of this clause in that the use of a portion of the existing dwelling for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of 3 visitors will not result in any significant adverse impact upon the amenity of the surrounding residential areas.

 

Clause 29 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

 

Clause 29 of the LEP requires that Council may only grant consent after consideration has been given to the aesthetic appearance of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore. The proposal does not seek to alter the external appearance of the dwelling, with only minor internal works proposed, and therefore there will not be any impact upon the existing appearance of the building within the foreshore scenic protection area.

DCP – Parking

 

Bed and breakfast accommodation attracts a parking requirement of 1 space per guest and 1 space for the dwelling component. Under these controls 4 parking spaces are required. The premises has a total of 5 off street parking spaces which readily complies with the parking DCP.

 

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.

 

Suitability of the Site:-

 

It is considered that the use of the upper level portion of the existing dwelling for bed and breakfast accommodation for a maximum of three guests will not result in any significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining and surrounding residents.  Any potential noise impacts associated with the operation of the Bed & Breakfast would especially be of concern to nearby residents at night and would only be likely to result from the use of the rear upper balcony of the existing building.  However, given that a maximum of 3 guests is proposed and that the owner will be resident within the dwelling and will be able to monitor the behaviour of the guests, it is not expected that the proposal will operate at an intensity that will interfere with the amenity of neighbouring properties.

8.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

Outcome 8: A strong local economy.

 

Direction 8a: The proposal will contribute positively to the diversity of business opportunities and the survival of small businesses in the City of Randwick.

 

9.    FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

10.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposed use of the upper portion of the dwelling as bed and breakfast accommodation complies with the relevant assessment criteria and will not result in any significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

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. 537/06 for permission to use the upper level of the existing dwelling for bed and breakfast accommodation at 9 Garnet Street, Coogee 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 and application received by Council on the 4th July 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.       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.

 

3.       The maximum number of guests accommodated at any one time is limited to 3.

 

4.       The owner of the dwelling shall be in residence at all times that the bed and breakfast accommodation is provided.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

6.       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 a 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).

 

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:

 

7.       The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health nuisance to the adjoining/nearby premises or environment.

 

8.       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:

 

9.       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, in relation to the requirements and provisions for:

 

·    Food handling – skills, knowledge and controls.

·    Health and hygiene requirements.

·    Requirements for food handlers and businesses.

·   Cleaning, sanitising and maintenance.

 

10.     The 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 the business.

 

11.     All persons carrying out any food handling and/or food storage activities must have appropriate skills and knowledge in food safety and food hygiene matters, as required by the Food Safety Standards.

 

12.     A numerically scaled indicating thermometer or recording thermometer, accurate to the nearest degree Celsius being provided to refrigerators, cool rooms or other cooling appliances.

 

13.     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.

 

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

 

15.     The bed and breakfast facilities, including the kitchen facilities and associated equipment must be maintained in a safe, clean and healthy condition at all times.

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

PERRY HEAD

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

14 August, 2006

FILE NO:

DA/1051/2005/2  & PROP048700

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 82A Review of Council's refusal of alterations and additions to a dwelling house, including a new deck and pool.

PROPERTY:

 40 Hughes Avenue, Maroubra

WARD:

 Central Ward

APPLICANT:

 Kurt & Lynn Koeppl

OWNER:

Mr K. Koeppl

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

On the 14 th of July 2006 an application which requested a review of a determination, as permitted by Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) (EP&A Act 1979), was lodged.  The application is referred to Committee as the original application was determined by Council.

 

The subject Development Application proposes alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including, on the ground floor level, a new small deck, a minor extension to the family room and a new swimming pool, and on the first floor, a new study and deck.

 

The plans submitted for this 82A review amend the application as refused by Council by significantly reducing the size of the deck from 15.53m² (4400 x 3530mm) to 7.1m²  (2000 x 3530mm) and providing a 1.8m privacy screen along the depth of the western elevation of the balcony.

 

The main issues are the perceived loss of visual and acoustic privacy to No. 38 Hughes Avenue and the impacts of the increased bulk and scale on No. 128 Broome Street.

 

The recommendation is for Council's original determination to be rescinded and that Council grant development consent, subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The subject Development Application proposes alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including:

 

Ø a new first floor deck (3530 x 2000mm) with privacy screens located over part of the existing carport at the front of the dwelling;

Ø a new study (2830 x 3710mm) at first floor level at the front of the dwelling;

Ø a minor extension to the family room (2550 x 2940mm) on the ground floor at the rear of the dwelling;

Ø the erection of a small deck (1350 x 2550mm)off the ground floor family room; and,

Ø a new in-ground swimming pool in the front yard.

 

The proposed works will provide for an additional 18m² of floor area to the dwelling.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the south-eastern side of Hughes Avenue adjacent to the corner of Broome Street and is presently occupied by an existing two storey semi-detached dwelling house which adjoins the property to the south-west (a two storey a terrace house) and is set back approximately 375mm from the eastern side boundary.  The site has a frontage width of 8.655m, a maximum side boundary depth of 28.09m and has an overall site area of 233m².  The site falls from the rear towards the street with a difference in level of up to 1.5m.  The subject property is the eastern most house that is part of a row of four two-storey terrace houses along Hughes Avenue which were originally erected as a group of dwellings in the late 1960’s and have since been significantly altered.  To the north of the subject site, off Broom Street, are two storey detached dwelling houses which back onto the subject site.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

A previous Development Application (DA/257/2005) which proposed similar but more extensive alterations and additions to the dwelling was refused under delegated authority on the 17th of May 2005 for the following reasons:

 

1. The proposal does not comply with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to landscaping in that the conversion of the whole front yard area into hard landscaping does not retain the existing landscaping and will not facilitate infiltration of stormwater.

2.   The proposal does not comply with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to floor area in that the development will be excessive in bulk and scale and will not minimise adverse effects of bulk on the neighbours.

3.   The proposal does not comply with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to building setbacks in that the front and side boundary setbacks of the addition will not integrate with the established setbacks of the street and adjoining premises and will not maintain adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air.

4.   The proposal does not comply with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to visual and acoustic privacy in that the new deck to the front of the premises will allow for the direct overlooking of the adjoining premises which will result in a severe loss of privacy to the adjoining premises.

5.   The proposal does not comply with the Objectives of Clause 10 of the Randwick LEP 1998 in that the development does compromise the amenity of the surrounding premises.

 

As a result of that refusal the owners met with Council Officers to discuss an amended proposal.  Subsequently a new Development Application (DA/1051/2005) was lodged on the 20th of December 2005.  DA/1051/2005 differed from the refused application (DA/257/2005) in the following ways:

 

Ø The proposed first floor bedroom extension at the rear of the dwelling was deleted;

Ø The proposed first floor deck increased the side setback on the western boundary from 10mm to 970mm;

Ø As a result of the increased side setback the proposed first floor deck was reduced in size from 20.5m² to 15.5m²;

Ø The proposed first floor study increased the side setback on the eastern boundary from approximately 410mm to 1570mm; and

Ø As a result of the increased side setback the proposed first floor study was reduced in size from 14.8m² to 10.5m².

 

As a result of the notification of DA/1051/2005 objections were received from No. 38 Hughes Avenue and No. 128 Broome Street.  The main concerns related to a perceived loss of visual and acoustic privacy and the increase in bulk and scale.  The application was referred to Council’s Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting on the 14th of March 2006 for determination at the request of Councillor’s Woodsmith, Matson and Hughes.  The application was refused by Council for the following reasons:

 

1. The proposal does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to floor area in that the development will be excessive in bulk and scale and will not minimise adverse effects of bulk on the neighbours;

2. The proposal does not comply with the Objective and Performance Requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to building setbacks in that the front and side boundary setbacks of the addition will not integrate with the established setbacks of the street and adjoining premises and will not maintain adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air;

3. The proposal does not comply with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwelling and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to visual and acoustic privacy in that the new deck to the front of the premises will allow for the direct overlooking of the adjoining premises which will result in a severe loss of privacy to the adjoining premises; and

4. The proposal does not comply with the Objectives of Clause 10 of the Randwick LEP 1998 in that the development does compromise the amenity of the surrounding area.

 

Subsequently, on the 14th of July 2006 an application which requested a review of a determination, as permitted by Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), was lodged.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

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

 

5.1  Objections

 

        J. Clifford - 38 Hughes Avenue Maroubra

 

Issue

Comment

Concerned the proposed front deck will invade privacy.

Privacy screens have been provided along the length of the western elevation.

Concerned the proposed front deck will cause noise pollution.

The small size of the front deck (7.1m²) will limit its potential to compromise the acoustic privacy of 38 Hughes Ave.

Concerned the extension will result in a vast amount of overshadowing.

Due to the north-south orientation of the blocks, and as illustrated in the shadow diagrams, there will be a minor increase in overshadowing in the morning only, which will comply with the Preferred Solutions for solar access as stated in the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancy DCP.

 

E. Manning - 128 Broome Street Maroubra

 

Issue

Comment

Concerned it will interrupt line of vision from inside house, the balcony and the backyard.

A site visit revealed that from the first floor and balcony that there will be only a minimal impact on the outlook of No. 128 Broome St.

Concerned about the bulk of the eastern wall.

The proposed family room extension will increase the bulk of No. 40 Hughes Ave as viewed from No. 128 Broome St, but as the extension has been limited to the ground floor the increase in bulk is not considered unreasonable.

 

5.2  Support

 

No submissions of support were received.

 

6.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

(a)  Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended)

 

Section 82A – Review of Determination

 

Substantially the same development

 

As defined by Section 82A 4(c) of the EP&A Act 1979 in the event that the original application has been amended, the consent authority must be satisfied that the amended development is substantially the same development as the development described in the original application.

 

The amendments to the original application were limited to reducing the size of the proposed front first floor deck and providing a 1.8m high privacy screen along the western elevation of the proposed deck.

 

As these changes are minor in nature and do not change the intent of the proposal it is considered that the applicant is for substantially the same development and that it can be assessed as per Section 82A 4(c) of the EP&A Act 1979.

 

            Reason for the review

 

The applicant has amended the proposal to address some of the reasons for refusal and request that Council reconsider the original determination.  The applicant has provided an analysis and response of the reasons for refusal, as summarised below:

 

The proposal does not comply with the DCP with respect to floor area and will be excessive in bulk and scale and will not minimise adverse effects on neighbours.

 

-       The proposal has been considerable scaled back since the initial DA (DA/257/2005) as the first floor rear extension was deleted, the study was reduced in size;

-       A significant proportion of the floor area is at basement level which does not increase the bulk & scale;

-       The proposed brick wall for the ground floor rear extension will increase privacy for the occupants of 40 Hughes Ave; and,

-       Council has approved a number of developments in the vicinity which are built to the boundaries.

 

    The proposal does not comply with the DCP with respect to side and front setbacks and will not integrate with the established setbacks of the street and adjoining premises and will not maintain adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air.

 

-       The depth of the front deck has been reduced from 4.5m to 2m which has increased the front setback;

-       The side setbacks of the study and deck have been significantly increased since DA/257/2005;

-       The side boundary set back is consistent with what already exists at ground level;

-       Council has approved numerous DAs in the vicinity which are built to the boundaries;

-       There is no effect on natural light, sunlight or ventilation as seen in the architects’ drawings and described in the planning report.

 

The proposed new front deck does not comply with the DCP with respect to visual and acoustic privacy as it will allow for the direct overlooking of the adjoining premises.

 

-       The deck has been significantly reduced in depth and privacy screens have been included to preserve privacy;

-       The purpose of the deck is to improve light and ventilation and give the house a more modern look;

-       There are numerous examples of front raised terraces in the area; and,

-       No. 38 Hughes has a large upstairs front balcony.

 

The proposal does not comply with the Objectives of Clause 10 of the Randwick LEP 1998 in that the development compromises the amenity of the surrounding area.

 

-       The proposal has been progressively modified to comply with the objectives of the Randwick LEP 1998.

    

(b)   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 - Residential 2A Zone

The objectives of the Residential 2A zone include:

a)       maintain[ing] the character of established residential areas, and

b)       enabl[ing] the redevelopment of low density housing forms, including dwelling houses… where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development.

The proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives of the Residential 2A zone as stated in Clause 10 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.  The immediate area is residential in nature and consists of a mix of detached, semi-detached and attached dwelling houses that vary between one and three storeys in height.  The architectural design and aesthetic character of these dwellings is very diverse and allows for flexibility in building design.

 

The subject site is part of a row of four two-storey terrace houses which were erected in the late 1960’s.  They have all since been significantly altered including No. 36 being rendered unlike the others, No. 38 having a balcony up to 2.5m deep across the front of the first floor and all have different styles of fencing.

 

As discussed in detail in Section 6(c) below the proposal will not compromise the amenity of the surrounding area, or the neighbouring dwellings.  The proposal will result in a slight increase in overshadowing in the morning at No. 38 Hughes Ave and will increase the bulk of No.40 Hughes, as viewed from 128 Broome St, but these impacts are considered to be minor in nature.

 

Therefore, given the eclectic nature of development in this locality, and that the proposal will not compromise the amenity of the surrounding area, the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Residential 2A Zone.

 

(c)  Policy Controls

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.

47.4% is proposed as landscaped area.  Complies.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

At present less than 5% of the site is permeable.  No change is proposed - not applicable.

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 0.74:1. 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 application proposes an FSR of 0.74:1 which exceeds the Preferred Solution of 0.65:1.  The existing FSR already exceeds the Preferred Solutions, as do the majority of the surrounding dwellings.  The application proposes an increase of floor area of 18m2 to accommodate a small family room extension at the ground floor at the rear and an extension on the first floor at the front of the dwelling to accommodate a small study.  The propose study is setback 1.57m from the eastern side elevation and has been designed to minimise any adverse impacts on neighbouring dwellings.  The proposed family room extension will increase the bulk of No. 40 Hughes Ave as viewed from No. 128 Broome St, but as the extension has been limited to the ground floor the increase in bulk is not considered unreasonable.

Therefore, although the proposal does not comply with the Preferred Solution for FSR, it does comply with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP as it is not excessive in bulk or scale and given that the surrounding development includes two and three storey dwellings detached and attached dwellings, it is considered it will be compatible within the locality.

On the basis of the above considerations, it is considered that the development adequately satisfies the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The proposed dwelling has a maximum external wall height of 5.8 metres. Complies.

S1

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

The proposed extension at the rear has a maximum external wall height of 3.5 metres.  Complies.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

Excavation is proposed to be a maximum of 1.5 metres.  Does not comply – see assessment below.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

Excavation is proposed to be 500mm from the eastern side boundary.  Does not comply – see assessment below.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

The pool is proposed in the front yard - 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.

Not applicable.

 

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 proposed excavation for the proposed front yard swimming pool does not comply with the preferred solutions in terms of depth and proximity to the eastern side boundary.  Notwithstanding, it will not compromise the amenity of neighbours and is considered necessary and reasonable, for the construction of the proposed swimming pool.

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S3

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

The proposed family room extension to the rear of the dwelling is sited up to 375mm from the eastern side boundary.  Does not comply – see assessment below.

S3

Side setbacks be 1500mm at second floor level.

The proposed second floor level setback to the eastern side boundary is 1570mm and 970mm to the western side. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S2

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

The proposed ground extension is 4.5m from the rear boundary.  Complies.

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.

The proposal does not comply with the Preferred Solution for side setbacks.  In reference to the proposed ground floor family room extension, which does not comply with the Preferred Solution for side setbacks, on the eastern boundary it is noted that the proposed 2.3m extension continues the alignment of the existing eastern wall.  The proposed extension complies with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP as it will not compromise access to sunlight, daylight or fresh air and due to the north-south orientation of the block will not result in any additional overshadowing.

In reference to the first floor deck, which is setback 970mm from the western side boundary, it is not considered that the 2m deep, unroofed deck will result in any significant adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining premises.  The proposed deck complies with the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP as it will not compromise access to sunlight, daylight or fresh air and, due to the north-south orientation of the block, will only result in a nominal increase in additional overshadowing that will primarily be limited to the morning.

On the basis of the above considerations, it is considered that the development adequately satisfies the 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.

None of the proposed windows will result in a loss of privacy.  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 proposed first floor front balcony has a 1.8m high privacy screen along the length of the western elevation. Complies.

S1

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

None of the proposed windows will result in a loss of privacy.  Complies

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 proposal includes the removal of the existing carport roof and the replacement with in part a new metal deck roof and fibre cement sheeting with tiles above to form a new deck to the front of the dwelling.  The proposed deck is 7.1m² (2000 x 3530mm) and is sited 970mm from the western side boundary.  A 1.8m privacy screen has been proposed along the western elevation which will prevent overlooking into No. 38 Hughes Avenue.  The limited size of the deck means that it is unlikely that it will result in any acoustic privacy problems.  The resulting deck will also be consistent with the depth of balconies and decks to the front of other dwellings in this group and is smaller than the existing balconies at the front of No. 38 Hughes Avenue.

Therefore, in terms of visual and acoustic privacy the proposal complies with the Objectives, Performance Requirements and the Preferred Solutions of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancy DCP.

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.

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

S9

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

The proposal will 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.

 

7.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

Direction 5a & associated key action : Improved design and sustainability across all development –The proposal will have a good contemporary architectural design and thus contribute to the overall pool of well-designed buildings in Randwick City

 

8.    FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

9.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies as well as the objectives of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.        That Council's original determination of Development Application No. 1051/2005 dated the 14th of March 2006 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including, on the ground floor level, a new small deck, a minor extension to the family room and a new swimming pool, and on the first floor, a new study and deck at 40 Hughes Avenue, MAROUBRA, be rescinded.

 

B.         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. 1051/2005 for permission to construct alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including, on the ground floor level, a new small deck, a minor extension to the family room and a new swimming pool, and on the first floor, a new study and deck at 40 Hughes Avenue, MAROUBRA  NSW  2035 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-01 through to DA-12, dated July 2006 and received by Council on the 14th of July 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 are to be compatible with the adjacent development to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of 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 relevant building works.

 

2.         Metal roof sheeting is to be painted or colour bonded to minimise reflection and to be sympathetic and compatible with the building and surrounding environment.

 

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.         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 are imposed to promote ecologically sustainable development and energy efficiency.

 

5.         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.

 

 

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

 

6.         Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter 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.

 

7.         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:

 

8.         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.

 

9.         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.

 

10.       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.

 

11.       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.

 

12.       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.

 

13.       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”.

 

14.       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.

 

15.       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.

 

16.       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.

 

17.       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.

 

18.       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:

 

19.       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.

 

20.       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.

 

21.       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.

 

22.       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.

 

23.       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.

           

24.       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.

 

25.       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.

 

26.       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.

 

27.       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.

 

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

 

29.       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:

 

30.       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:

 

31.       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:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

34.       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.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

SARAH HUDSON

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ASSESSMENT OFFICER


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

18 August, 2006

FILE NO:

1082/2005

 

PROPOSAL:

Alterations to the existing dwelling including a rear split level addition with skillion roof, a new double garage at the rear (off Campbell Lane) with paved terrace above, new front fence and additional detail to the street façade

PROPERTY:

 29 Park Street, Clovelly

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 B J Kirkman

OWNER:

 Mr W S Owens and Mrs S A Owens

 

 

 

 

 

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 Hughes, Matson and Woodsmith.

 

The proposal involves the alterations to the existing dwelling including the demolition of the rear section of the existing dwelling and the construction of a new ground floor addition comprising of a kitchen, dining and living room. The proposal also includes a new deck on the northern side of the site, a new double car garage to the rear of the site, new paved terrace above the garage and a staircase along the southern boundary from the terrace to Campbell Lane at the rear.

 

A new front picket fence and masonry wall is also proposed including minor alterations to the street facade of the existing dwelling. The original proposal included a deck area to the front yard, however this addition was considered unacceptable and deleted from the proposal.

 

A number of objections were received from the northern neighbouring dwellings with concerns regarding the proposed bulk and height of the proposal and the potential impact to ocean and coastal views. An objection was received from the southern adjoining neighbour, also with concerns regarding the bulk and height of the proposal, however these related to the negative impact the design would have to solar access.

 

The application was amended with a small reduction to the total height of the proposal, however the changes did not satisfactorily address the concerns of the surrounding neighbours. Several objections were received and reiterated similar concerns of excessive height, visual bulk and view loss as well as impact to solar access.

 

A second set of amended plans were submitted on 26 June 2006 in response to the objections. Fewer objections were received in respect to these plans as the changes made significant reductions to the height, bulk and an increase in the rear boundary setback of the proposal.

 

The overall impact of the proposal in respect to view loss, overshadowing and visual amenity is considered to be minor and the rear addition has a modest form and scale that is compatible with the scale of other dwellings in the surrounding area. The proposed additions will add negligible bulk to the street and will not have an adverse impact to the character of Campbell Lane and to the dwellings at the rear of the site.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposed development is seeking consent to demolish the rear section of the existing dwelling and to construct a new ground floor addition comprising of a kitchen, dining and living room. The proposal also includes a new deck on the northern side of the site, a new double car garage to the rear of the site, new paved terrace above the garage and a staircase along the southern boundary from the terrace to Campbell Lane at the rear. A new front picket fence and masonry wall is also proposed including minor alterations to the street facade of the existing dwelling.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Park Street, Clovelly and is presently occupied by a single storey dwelling.  The site is regular in shape, has a frontage width of 9.1m, a side boundary depth of 36.25m and has an overall site area of 331.6m².  The site slopes steeply to the rear with the Park Street frontage being approximately 5 metres higher than the rear of the site at Campbell Lane. Neighbouring the property to the north is a two storey dwelling, to the south is a three storey multi-unit residential building and to the rear is Campbell Lane. Campbell Lane provides vehicular access for the dwellings along this section of Park Street and the adjacent Campbell Street.

 

The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of detached residential dwellings, however there are a number of multi-unit residential buildings located relatively close to the east and south of the subject site. Figure 2 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area.

 

 

Figure 1: The existing dwelling located on the subject site as seen from across the road at Park Street.

 

      Figure 2: The subject site and surrounding area

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

 

The development application was lodged on 29 December 2005 and was notified to the surrounding residents from 16 January to 30 January 2006. Six objections were received regarding the proposal and concerns included view loss, excessive bulk and height, significant loss of solar access and acoustic and visual privacy impacts.

 

A letter was sent on 20 February 2006 to the applicant requesting amended plans to address the main concerns of the surrounding residents. Amended plans were received on 8 March 2006 and deleted the front deck area and made relatively minor reductions to the height of the rear addition. On 15 March 2006, Council received a memo from Councillor Woodsmith requesting that the application be referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee for resolution. The surrounding neighbours were notified of the amended plans from 16 March to 30 March 2006.

 

Council received five objections regarding the amended plans. The objections related to the view loss, excessive bulk and height, significant loss of solar access and acoustic and visual privacy impacts.

 

The owner of the site was instructed, on 21 April 2006, to install a height pole to indicate the height of the proposed development at the north-easternmost corner of the proposed rear addition. Subsequently, a site visit to the subject site and to No.31, No.33 and No.35 was undertaken on 3 May 2006 to ascertain the potential impact of the proposal to ocean and coastal views enjoyed by the northern neighbours.

 

The applicant was requested on 24 May 2006 to provide further amended plans that reduce the total height and bulk of the rear addition to ensure the solar access to the southern neighbour and ocean and coastal views of the northern neighbours were not significantly affected.

 

Amended plans were received on 26 June 2006 and showed a significant reduction in the height and bulk of the proposed rear addition and an increase in the rear boundary setback of the proposed rear addition.

 

The surrounding residents were notified of the amended plans from 4 July to 18 July 2006. The two objections that were received during this period reaffirmed concerns regarding acoustic and visual privacy impacts and concerns relating to solar access and the lack of consistency of the proposal with the established rear boundary setback of other dwellings in the street.

 

b.    HISTORY OF SITE USEAGE

 

Previous development applications for this site include:

 

Application No.

Description

Determination

BA/410/1995

Retaining walls to dwelling from W Gooley

Approved, 04-May-1995

BA/1281/1995

New deck to dwelling from W and H Gooley

Approved, 11-Dec-1995

BC/222/1998

Single storey semi-detached brick dwelling with tile roof

Approved, 12-Oct-1998

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.

 

5.1  Objections

 

The following submissions were received in response to the original proposal:

 

Jeremy Raiz – 1/20 Campbell Street

 

·    The proposed development shall not hinder 24 hour access to Campbell Lane.

 

Comment – The proposed development to the rear includes the construction of a double garage only and will not restrict access to Campbell Lane.

 

·    Vehicles and building waste bins associated with the development during construction shall not obstruct access in Campbell Lane.

 

Comment – Standard conditions of consent will restrict the placement of construction garbage bins and ensure public access to the roadway.

 

·    Concerned that construction trucks will further damage Campbell Lane.

 

Comment – Standard conditions of consent will ensure any damage to Council’s property is repaired at the cost of the applicant.

 

JM Banks and RJ Gamma – 31 Park Street

 

·    The development is not keeping with neighbouring properties, particularly it is not consistent with the rear boundary setback of the northern neighbours.

 

Comment – The proposed single storey rear addition is suitable for the site and will have the least impact to solar access to the southern residents. The amended plans have reduced the total height of the addition to ensure view loss is minimal and therefore the reduced rear boundary setback is considered acceptable.

 

·    The proposal has excessive roof height, and building bulk.

 

Comment – The amended plans are considered more acceptable in terms of building bulk and roof height and will not have an adverse impact to adjoining properties.

 

·    There will be significant view loss of shared views from northern dwellings.

 

Comment – The view loss experienced by northern neighbours has been reduced significantly by the amended plans. The rear proposed addition has been reduced by 1.44 metres at its eastern end and 1.2 metres at its junction with the existing dwelling.

 

·    Unsuitable use of land at front of dwelling.

 

Comment – Due to its adverse impact to the streetscape, the proposed deck at the front of the subject site was deleted from the plans.

 

·    The plans incorrectly state the masonry dividing wall on the objector’s property is a retaining wall and is concerned proposed plantings along the northern boundary will affect the structural integrity of the wall.

 

Comment – A condition has been included requiring the submission of a dilapidation report prior to the construction certificate being issued that includes a detailed investigation of the condition of the wall. A detailed landscape plan will be required to be submitted prior to the construction certificate being issued that includes details of the species and heights of plants.

 

Andrew Schultz – SDP Architects on behalf of John Smilovic of 33 Park Street

 

·    The objector’s existing views will be obscured by excessive bulk and height of proposal.

 

Comment – The view loss experienced by northern neighbours has been reduced significantly by the amended plans. The rear proposed addition has been reduced by 1.44 metres at its eastern end and 1.2 metres at its junction with the existing dwelling.

 

·    The proposed rear boundary setback is inconsistent with the other dwellings in Park Street and will severely impact views to the ocean.

 

Comment – The proposed single storey rear addition is suitable for the site and will have the least impact to solar access to the southern residents. The amended plans have reduced the total height of the addition to ensure view loss is minimal and therefore the reduced rear boundary setback is considered acceptable.

 

·    Use of timber deck to achieve 20% soft landscaped area is not appropriate.

 

Comment – The timber deck is elevated above ground level and is not included in the assessing officer’s calculation for permeable landscaped area. The proposal includes 19% permeable landscaped area which is considered satisfactory and is discussed in greater detail in section 8.1 of this report.

 

·    The proposed front deck is not consistent with the local context and will impact on the acoustic privacy of the neighbours.

 

Comment – Due to its adverse impact to the streetscape, the proposed deck at the front of the subject site was deleted from the plans.

 

Ian Simpson, Lisa McMahon and Ian Harrison – 27 Park Street

 

·    The proposed terrace area above the garage will provide significant overlooking potential into the objector’s private open space.

 

Comment – The overlooking potential created by the proposed terrace area will not be inconsistent with the degree of overlooking prevalent in the rear yards of this area of Park Street. The raising of the rear yard of the subject site is considered consistent with the other rear yards in the area.

 

·    The proposed terrace area will have a significant acoustic privacy impact.

 

Comment – The proposed balustrade along the terrace area will ensure the view of the ocean and coastline is maintained to the adjacent northern properties. Tall or opaque acoustic barriers are no suitable for this site for this reason. The use of the rear private open space of No.29 is unlikely to be inconsistent with the northern neighbours and the objection regarding acoustic disturbance cannot be sustained.

 

·    The ground floor unit within the adjoining multi-unit will have a significant amount of overshadowing as a result of the proposed development.

 

Comment – The amended plans reduce the height of the proposed addition and satisfy the DCP preferred solution for minimum access to sunlight.

 

·    Concerned that the proposed metal roofing will be reflective.

 

Comment – A condition has been included in the consent to ensure the roof material is a dull, non-reflective colour.

 

·    Concerned that there will be smoke emissions from the proposed rear chimney flue.

 

Comment – The applicant has clarified that the proposed flue is for a gas heater only.

 

Elizabeth Misfud and Amy Grodzicki – 3/27 Park Street

 

·    There will be a significant increase in overshadowing of several habitable rooms resulting in all day shadow across all north faced windows.

 

Comment – The amended plans reduce the height of the proposed addition and satisfy the DCP preferred solution for minimum access to sunlight.

 

·    Loss of visual amenity due to significant bulk of the proposal.

 

Comment – The amended plans are considered more acceptable in terms of building bulk and roof height and will not have an adverse impact to adjoining properties.

 

·    Loss of visual privacy to bedroom due to location of laundry.

 

Comment – A condition will be included to ensure the proposed laundry window is fitted with obscure glass.

 

·    Decreased acoustic privacy to bedroom due to location of laundry and kitchen.

 

Comment – The proposed development is setback 900mm from the side boundary. As the laundry and kitchen are located internally and feature one window for each room, the acoustic impact is likely to be minimal.

 

Mr and Mrs J Sobral – 35 Park Street

 

·    The proposed rear setback is not consistent with the rear boundary setbacks of other dwellings in the street.

 

Comment – The proposed single storey rear addition is suitable for the site and will have the least impact to solar access to the southern residents. The amended plans have reduced the total height of the addition to ensure view loss is minimal and therefore the reduced rear boundary setback is considered acceptable.

 

·    The proposal exceeds the preferred solution maximum height under the DCP.

 

Comment – The rear 6 metres of the 12 metre proposed addition is consistent with the DCP preferred solution for maximum wall height. The remaining section is significantly lower than the existing bullnose verandah and will not have an adverse impact to the adjoining property.

 

·    The deck at the front of the site is inappropriate.

 

Comment – Due to its adverse impact to the streetscape, the proposed deck at the front of the subject site was deleted from the plans.

 

·    The proposal has excessive height which has a detrimental impact to the enjoyment of adjacent neighbours’ rear private open space.

 

Comment – The amended plans have reduced the total height and rear bulk of the addition to ensure view loss is minimal and visual impact is reduced.

 

The following submissions were received in response to the first set of amended plans received on 8 March 2006 proposal:

 

Andrew Schultz from SDP Architects on behalf of Ivica Smilovic 33 Park St

 

·    The proposed development does not adhere to dominant existing rear boundary setback of the street and therefore adversely affect ocean and coastal views.

 

Comment – The amended design significantly reduces the height of the rear addition to be consistent with the boundary fence height of No.31 Park Street. Therefore, impact to views will be minimal.

 

·    The proposed 2m high fence on the northern boundary will have an impact to the views enjoyed by northern neighbours.

 

Comment – The proposed 2m fence is located behind No.31 Park Street and will not be visible from the objector’s property at No.33. Therefore there will not be any impact to the existing views.

 

JM Banks and RJ Gamma – 31 Park Street

 

·    The roof height and bulk of the amended design is still excessive and has a significant negative impact to ocean and coastal views and general visual amenity from inside the objector’s dwelling and rear private open space.

 

Comment – The current amended design makes significant reductions in the height and bulk of the rear addition which results in less negative impact to the adjoining properties.

 

·    The development is not keeping with neighbouring properties, particularly it is not consistent with the rear boundary setback of the northern neighbours.

 

Comment – The rear boundary setback of the proposal is not consistent with the northern neighbours, however is similar to the setback of the southern multi-unit residential building. The reduced height of the amended design will mitigate the reduced rear boundary setback the proposal adopts.

 

Mr and Mrs J Sobral – 35 Park Street

 

·    The proposed rear setback is not consistent with the rear boundary setbacks of other dwellings in the street.

 

Comment – The proposed single storey rear addition is suitable for the site and will have the least impact to solar access to the southern residents. The amended plans have reduced the total height of the addition to ensure view loss is minimal and therefore the reduced rear boundary setback is considered acceptable.

 

·    The proposal exceeds the preferred solution maximum height under the DCP.

 

Comment – The rear 6 metres of the 12 metre proposed addition is consistent with the DCP preferred solution for maximum wall height. The remaining section is significantly lower than the existing bullnose verandah and will not have an adverse impact to the adjoining property.

 

·    The proposal has excessive height which has a detrimental impact to the enjoyment of adjacent neighbours’ rear private open space.

 

Comment – The amended plans have reduced the total height and rear bulk of the addition to ensure view loss is minimal and visual impact is reduced.

 

Ian Simpson, Lisa McMahon and Ian Harrison – 27 Park Street

 

·    The proposed terrace area above the garage will provide significant overlooking potential into the objector’s private open space.

 

Comment – The proposed balustrade along the terrace area will ensure the view of the ocean and coastline is maintained to the adjacent northern properties. Tall or opaque acoustic barriers are no suitable for this site for this reason. The use of the rear private open space of No.29 is unlikely to be inconsistent with the northern neighbours and the objection regarding acoustic disturbance cannot be sustained.

 

·    The ground floor unit within the adjoining multi-unit will have a significant amount of overshadowing as a result of the proposed development.

 

Comment – The amended plans reduce the height of the proposed addition and satisfy the DCP preferred solution for minimum access to sunlight.

 

Elizabeth Misfud and Amy Grodzicki – 3/27 Park Street

 

·    There will be a significant increase in overshadowing of several habitable rooms resulting in all day shadow across all north faced windows.

 

Comment – The amended plans reduce the height of the proposed addition and satisfy the DCP preferred solution for minimum access to sunlight.

 

·    Loss of visual amenity due to significant bulk of the proposal.

 

Comment – The amended plans are considered more acceptable in terms of building bulk and roof height and will not have an adverse impact to adjoining properties.

 

The following submissions were received in response to the second set of amended plans received on 26 June 2006 proposal:

 

JM Banks and RJ Gamma – 31 Park Street

 

·    The development is not keeping with neighbouring properties, particularly it is not consistent with the rear boundary setback of the northern neighbours.

 

Comment – The rear boundary setback of the proposal is not consistent with the northern neighbours, however is similar to the setback of the southern multi-unit residential building. The reduced height of the amended design will mitigate the reduced rear setback the proposal adopts.

 

·    Concerned that landscaping to the rear of the subject site may obstruct ocean and coastal views.

 

Comment – A detailed landscape plan will be required to be submitted prior to the construction certificate being issued that includes details of the species and heights of plants.

 

Ian Simpson – 27 Park Street

 

·    The proposed terrace area above the garage will provide significant overlooking potential into the objector’s private open space.

 

Comment – The overlooking potential created by the proposed terrace area will not be inconsistent with the degree of overlooking prevalent in the rear yards of this area of Park Street. The raising of the rear yard of the subject site is considered consistent with the other rear yards in the area.

 

·    The proposed terrace area will have a significant acoustic privacy impact.

 

Comment – The proposed balustrade along the terrace area will ensure the view of the ocean and coastline is maintained to the adjacent northern properties. Tall or opaque acoustic barriers are no suitable for this site for this reason. The use of the rear private open space of No.29 is unlikely to be inconsistent with the northern neighbours and the objection regarding acoustic disturbance cannot be sustained.

 

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

 

The application has been referred to the Development Engineer for comment, conditions have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted.

 

Landscape Comments

 

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

 

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 is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 29 – Foreshore scenic protection area

 

The subject site is located within the Foreshore Scenic Protection area. The purpose of this clause is to identify visually prominent residential areas along the coast and establish consent requirements for development in these areas to protect and enhance their visual qualities.

The proposal comprises of a single storey addition to the rear of the existing single storey dwelling. The proposal has a total height of 4.65m located where the proposal adjoins the existing dwelling, to a minimum height of 3m at the easternmost section of the proposal. The proposal is considered to have a modest form and scale and is not excessive in height or bulk. The proposal will not detract from the visual prominence of Clovelly to the foreshore area.

 

The probable aesthetic appearance of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore will be minimal.

 

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  Policy Controls

a.    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.

52% of the site is landscaped area. Complies.

S1

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

The rear yard has an area of 53.55 sqm. Complies.

S1

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

The above area has dimensions of 8.5 x 6.3 metres. Complies.

S1

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

The above area is located in the rear yard. Complies.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

19% of the site is permeable. Does not comply – see assessment below.

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 proposal will involve the excavation of the existing rear yard to accommodate the double car garage with a paved terrace area above. As such, the total permeable area of the site has been reduced to 19% which is slightly below the preferred solution in the DCP.  The inconsistency has a minimal impact to the amenity of the neighbouring properties and the landscaped area successfully addresses the landscaping and open space performance requirements of the DCP, specifically to provide suitable space for outdoor recreation whilst minimising adverse impacts to solar access and access to views.

It is noted that views to the ocean and coastline are achieved from the rear windows and private open spaces of the dwellings on the eastern side of Park Street. To preserve existing views and to prevent view loss from landscaping, a detailed landscaping plan including plant species used will be required to be submitted and approved by Council prior to any landscaping works being undertaken.

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6:1 applies. 

The proposed FSR is 0.46:1. Complies.

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.

Several objections have raised the issue of the proposal’s excessive bulk and scale resulting in the significant loss of visual amenity and coastal views and the incompatibility of the proposal to the surrounding area.

It is considered the amendments to the original proposal have satisfactorily addressed the issue of bulk and scale and the siting of the rear addition is sensitive to the surrounding properties. The structure is single storey and features a skillion roof which minimises the visual prominence of the proposal to the surrounding area. While the northern neighbouring dwellings are two storey, the proposed single storey addition adds minimal bulk to the site and will be compatible with the dominant residential character of the area.

 

 

 

 

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The proposed dwelling has a maximum external wall height of 4.1 metres. 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.

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.

Not applicable.

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 proposed addition to the rear has an external wall height that exceeds the preferred solution under the DCP by 600mm. The inconsistency is minor and will not result in a significant impact to the adjoining properties since the existing dwelling at this location has a height of 5.6 metres. As such the proposal will reduce building bulk to the rear of the site and provide increase solar access to the southern property and have minor improvement to the amenity of the northern adjacent neighbours.

Therefore the proposed inconsistency with the preferred solution is supported.

It should be noted a condition has been included in the consent that requires a sample of the proposed roofing material to be submitted to Council prior to the construction certificate being issued. This is to ensure the roofing material will not have high reflectively and will be compatible with the character of the area.

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

Not applicable.

S2

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

The proposed dwelling is 9.5 metres from the rear boundary. Complies.

S3

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

The proposed development is set back 0.98 metres from the side boundaries. Complies.

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Not applicable.

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.

A number of objections of the surrounding properties raised the issue of the proposed rear boundary setback of the rear addition. The objections particularly raised the inconsistency of the proposal with the existing rear boundary setbacks of the northern dwellings and the adverse impact this would have to the visual amenity of the immediate area. The performance requirement for rear setbacks in the DCP states that “building forms and setbacks allow neighbours adequate access to natural light and share views” and “be generally consistent with the setback of adjoining properties”.

It is accepted that the proposal is inconsistent with the rear boundary setbacks of the other dwellings to the north of the subject site, however the amended design has reduced the height substantially and thus ameliorates the view loss issue. Solar access to the southern neighbour has been substantially improved from the original proposal as a result of the height reduction and rear boundary setback increase in the amended design.

It should be noted that the proposed rear boundary setback of 9.5 metres is matches the rear boundary setback of the adjoining multi-unit residential building to the south of the site at No.27 Park Street. The bulk and scale of No.27 is incongruent with the other buildings on the eastern side of Park Street and significantly restricts coastal views for the dwellings to the north. While the rear boundary setback of the proposal is not consistent with the other dwellings in the street, it is consistent with the multi-unit building at No.27 and will not add significant bulk to the southern side of the street. As such, the proposed rear boundary setback is considered acceptable.

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 ground floor rear deck will overlook the rear yard areas of the adjoining properties. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

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

The proposal features windows that have sill heights at ground level, however their location is unlikely to impact the privacy of adjoining neighbours. Complies.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Conditioned to comply with the BCA.

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 proposal includes a deck to the northern side of the site and a paved terrace area above the proposed rear garage. The northern deck will not overlook the adjoining northern neighbour as the ground level of the subject site is approximately 2.1 metres lower than the adjoining northern property. There will be some overlooking of the private open space of the southern neighbouring property at No.27 however this degree of overlooking is not considered particularly uncharacteristic of the surrounding residential neighbourhood. It should be noted the private open space of No.27 is not enclosed and currently experiences a high degree of overlooking.

The use of screening vegetation, such as dense shrubs and trees, is not suitable given the potential adverse impact such plantings may have to the view enjoyed by the properties to the north of the subject site. The installation of a solid or opaque 1.8 metre privacy screen along the southern boundary is also not a suitable solution to reduce overlooking as such a device will result in similar levels of view loss for the northern properties. It is therefore considered that the paling fence along the southern boundary should have a maximum height of to 1.5 metres to reduce overlooking from the rear terrace to the private open space of the southern adjoining property. A 1.5 metre high fence will have minimal impact to the view enjoyed by the northern properties of Park Street and will not substantially impact solar access to the southern adjoining property.

Figure 3 below shows the relatively minimal impact the 1.5 metre high fence will have to views for the northern neighbours in the street.

Figure 3: The rear yard of No.29 Park Street and the rear private open space of the residential multi-unit building at No.27 Park Street as seen from No.31 Park Street.

The overlooking from the proposed terrace area as a result of this development application is not considered uncharacteristic for the immediate area of Park Street and is acceptable.

Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

The proposed dwelling has parking for 2 cars. Complies.

S1

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

The dimensions of the parking spaces are 6.9m x 2.95m. Complies.

S1

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

The garage is to the rear of the site and is setback 1m from the rear boundary. Not applicable.

S1

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

The garage is to the rear of the site and is setback 1m from the rear boundary. Not applicable.

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.

S1

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

The garage is to the rear of the site and is setback 1m from the rear boundary. Complies.

S2

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

The proposed double car garage provides access to Campbell Lane. Complies.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

The proposed garage occupies about 65% of the width of the site; however it is consistent in bulk and scale to the other garages in Campbell Lane. Complies.

Fences

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S1

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

The proposed front picket fence has a height that ranges from 1.25m to 1.6 metres and incorporates infill panels that are at least 50% open. The front masonry fence has a maximum height of 1.2m and is considered to have minimal visual impact to the streetscape and is compatible with the residential area. Complies.

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

The proposed rear concrete fence has a height of 1m and will have minimal impact to amenity of the surrounding area and will not add significant bulk to Campbell Lane. The concrete fence will be consistent with the concrete and Colorbond fence located at the rear of No.31 Park Street.

The proposed height increase of the southern boundary fence from 1m to 1.5m will have a minimal impact to the view impact of the adjoining properties and will not result in a significant impact to the solar access of the southern adjoining property. Therefore the proposed fences are considered acceptable.

Foreshore Development

 

Performance Requirements

Assessment

P1

No encroachments on Foreshore Building Line at identified properties.

Not applicable.

P2

Building form, colour, materials and finishes are sympathetic.

Several conditions have been included in the consent requiring the submission and approval of the external colours and finishes. Complies.

P3

Stepped buildings on sloping sites are articulated.

Not applicable.

P4

Buildings incorporate sufficient setbacks to allow fair sharing of views.

The proposal has a reduced setback than other adjacent dwellings; however the reduced height of the rear single storey addition mitigates the view loss issue. Complies.

P5

Ancillary structures do not detract from the appearance of developments.

The proposed rear garage and decks are consistent with the bulk and scale of other similar structures in the immediate area. They are not considered to detract from the appearance of the development to the foreshore area. Complies.

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Not applicable.

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.

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

S9

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

The proposal will 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.

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

Figure 4: The view of the multi-unit residential building at No.27 Park Street and the rear balcony of No.29 Park Street as seen from the rear balcony of No.31 Park Street. The rear balcony structure will be demolished as part of the proposal. Note the three northern habitable room windows on the lowest level of the multi-unit building.

In terms of Performance Requirements, as a general guide new dwelling houses and attached dual occupancies must demonstrate that they have been designed to achieve energy efficiency; achieve a NatHERS, rating of 3.5 stars; and buildings are orientated and internally configured to take advantage of and maximise solar access.

Due to the height and bulk of the original proposal solar access to the southern neighbour located on the ground floor of the adjoining multi-unit residential building would have been significantly compromised. The final set of amended plans received on 26 June 2006 has satisfactorily addressed the issue of solar access for the southern adjoining neighbour. Solar access has been preserved in accordance with the DCP requirement of a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight to northern facing windows by reducing the height and bulk of the proposal.

It should be noted that solar access will be improved over the current conditions as the rear balcony structure on the existing dwelling on the subject site will be removed. The balcony structure can be seen in the above figure 4.

Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the preferred solutions of the DCP and is considered acceptable.

 

8.2     Impact on adjoining development

 

8.2.1         View sharing

 

Performance Requirement P6 under section 4.3 Height, Form and Materials of the DCP requires that “Buildings are designed to allow a sharing of views”. It should be noted that there are no preferred solutions regarding view sharing. Therefore to assess the potential impact of the development to existing views, the judgment by Senior Commissioner Roseth in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) sets down four steps that should be undertaken to reach a decision whether a view impact is reasonable. 

 

“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.”

 

While several northern neighbours objected to the proposal on the grounds that it would result in a significant reduction in views of the ocean and coastline, it is considered the amended proposal received by Council on 26 June 2006 considerably reduces the height and building bulk of the proposal and thus view loss. The site visit conducted on 3 May 2006 resolved that the view loss to No.35 and 33 Park Street would be negligible and the proposal would not be immediately noticeable from the northern neighbours.

 

 

 

Figure 5 and 6 – The left photo shows the existing view of the ocean and coastline from the rear private open space of No.29 Park Street. The right photo shows the existing ocean view from the rear balcony of No.29.

 

Therefore as a result of the amended plans the issue of view loss will be focussed on No.31 Park Street which is immediately adjoining the subject property to the north.

 

The views enjoyed from the rear balcony and lower level floor of No.31 Park Street are primarily of the ocean. The coastline is not immediately noticeable as it is obscured heavily by the roofs and walls of other dwellings further to the east. The view of the coastline is also obscured by the multi-unit residential building which is a very prominent visual element in the surrounding area.

 

The view is not considered to contain any iconic elements however its value to the surrounding residential area of Park Street is high.

 

“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 views enjoyed from No.31 Park Street are from the rear balcony and rear windows of the dwelling as seen in photo 6, 7 and 8 above. There are no significant views obtained from windows or other openings located on the side boundaries of No.31 Park Street. It is noted that the top section of the rear addition will be 200 to 300mm higher than the existing stepped masonry wall which is wholly located on No.31 Park Street (see figure 7 and 8).  The roof of the proposal will be visible from rear private open space of No.31 however the visual impact of the proposal will be mitigated by the proposed northern side boundary setback of 2.6 metres.

 

A small portion of ocean view will be lost when standing under the rear balcony of No.31 however it is not considered to be a significant loss considering the views enjoyed from the balcony and the eastern section of the private open space are considerable.

 

 

Figure 7 and 8 – The left photo is the view of the ocean from within the rear rumpus/living room 29 Park Street. The right photo is taken from under the rear balcony of No.29 Park Street and shows the existing ocean view.

 

“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 roof above the proposed kitchen and dining rooms will have a height that ranges from a minimum RL of 34.7 to a maximum RL of 35.7. The height of the masonry wall on No.31 Park Street parallel to the proposal has an RL ranging from 34.49 to 34.90. It should be noted that the existing verandah on the subject site has a gutter height of RL 36.18, which is 0.48 metres higher than the proposal. However the views experienced from No.31 are not affected by the development in this area of the site.

 

The proposal will not significantly affect views from the rear balcony or the rear living rooms of No.31. The extent of the impact is considered negligible as the proposal will reduce only a small portion of the ocean view to the residents at No.31 Park Street when standing below the rear balcony (see figures 7 and 8). The view lost is not considered highly valued as it is obscured by other dwellings and higher value views are obtained from the first floor and the rear private open space of No.29. More significant views of the coastline and ocean to the south are available from the eastern section of the rear private open space of No.31. These views are highly valued and add a positive amenity to the rear yard. The most valuable views from No.31 will not be affected by the proposal.

 

Given the degree of views enjoyed from the entire property of No.31, it is unreasonable to preserve the views obtained from the lower level area of the dwelling adjacent to the rear of the dwelling. Therefore the extent of the impact of the proposal is considered to be negligible.

 

“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 proposal adds floorspace to the site without adopting a similar built form as other dwellings along the eastern side of Park Street which comprises primarily of two storey buildings. While the proposal does not remain consistent with the rear boundary setbacks of other dwellings to the north of the subject site it is considered the design has skilfully reduced the height and bulk to a degree where the impact to views is negligible or minor.

 

The proposed single storey addition to the rear of the existing dwelling generally complies with the planning controls relating to the floor space ratio and height, form and materials. It should be noted that the view loss does not occur as a result of significant inconsistencies with the performance requirements or preferred solutions within the DCP.

 

It is therefore considered that the proposal achieves the performance requirements of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP in relation to view sharing.

 

9.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:

 

Better design and sustainability across all development: The proposal improves the design of the existing dwelling by increasing north facing windows to improve solar access into living areas during the winter months and external louvres to minimise strong summer sunlight which will reduce energy required for cooling.

 

Development opportunities and challenges: The proposal provides additional floor area to the site with a relatively modest building form. The additional floorspace could potentially be added to a first floor addition, however the overshadowing to the southern neighbouring properties would be significant. The proposed single storey addition reduces overshadowing, preserves significant views and provides significant usable space for the future occupants.

 

Direction:

 

4a. Improved design and sustainability across all development – The proposal, by incorporating a single storey addition, is a sensitive design that protects the solar access of the adjoining properties rather than a first floor addition that will overshadow neighbouring properties and improve solar access.

6e. Housing diversity, accessibility and adaptability to support our diverse community is enhanced – The proposal adds variety to the housing in the area by incorporating a different built form to the other dwellings in the street. Variety in design promotes housing diversity in the surrounding area.

 

10.  FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

11.  CONCLUSION

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality. The proposed addition to the rear of the existing dwelling will not have an adverse visual impact or reduce solar access to the surrounding dwellings. Therefore the proposed development is recommended for approval.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under the provisions of Section 80 (3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), “Deferred Commencement” to DA/1082/2006 for alterations to the existing dwelling including a rear split level addition with skillion roof, a new double garage at the rear (off Campbell Lane) with paved terrace above, new front fence and additional detail to the street facade at 29 Park Street, Clovelly subject to the following conditions:-

 

Deferred Commencement Conditions

 

The consent shall not operate until the applicant satisfies Council as to the following matters, to the satisfaction of the Director of City Planning:-

 

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

 

Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of  City Planning.

 

2.         A landscape plan for the site shall be submitted including details of plant species, paving and decking to the rear of the site. The landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning. Landscaping is to be maintained in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and shall include the following:

 

a.          A detailed landscape plan of the rear private open space which promotes the use of the space for recreation and minimises impermeable surfaces.

 

b.         Landscaping shall preserve the existing view corridors of the surrounding properties.

 

c.          Landscaping shall not significantly reduce solar access for the adjoining properties as per the preferred solutions in Part 3.1 of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP.

 

Subject to compliance with the deferred commencement conditions, to the satisfaction of the Director of City Planning, development consent is granted under Section 80 & 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 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 DRG.2511 DA1 B, dated 23 December 2005 and received by Council on 26 June 2006, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the details approved pursuant to the deferred commencement conditions and the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.         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.

 

3.         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.

 

4.         To ensure the privacy and amenity of the southern adjoining neighbour at No.27 Park Street is maintained, the south-facing laundry window is to be provided with obscured or frosted glazing.

 

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

 

5.         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, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, boundary fences swimming pools and driveways etc.) located upon No.31 Park Street.

           

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.

 

6.         A report shall be prepared by a professional engineer and submitted to the certifying authority and owners of No.31 Park Street, Clovelly 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 of the rear garage and associated works to overcome any potential damage to nearby land/premises. The report shall specifically address the existing southern boundary masonry wall located on No.31 Park Street and its adequacy, or otherwise, to support the proposed works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

33.       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 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.

 

35.       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.

 

36.       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.

 

37.       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.

 

38.       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.

 

39.       A Certi