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

 

5 June 2007

 

 

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 JUNE 2007 AT 6.30 P.M.

 

Committee Members:             The Mayor, Cr P. Tracey, Crs Andrews, Bastic, Belleli, Daley, Hughes, Kenny, Matson (Deputy Chairperson), Nash (Chairperson), Notley-Smith, Procopiadis, Seng, Sullivan, 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 MAY 2007.

 

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 - 17 SEARLE AVENUE, RANDWICK.

2

6.2                      

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REPORT - 2-4 GUBBUTEH ROAD, LITTLE BAY.

30

6.3                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 29/2007 - 58 DUKE STREET, KENSINGTON.

85

 

7           Miscellaneous

 

7.1                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 30/2007 - DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN - TELECOMMUNICATION AND RADIOCOMMUNICATION FACILITIES.

105

7.2                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 31/2007 - S94A DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN.

 

109

7.3                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 32/2007 - DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE LEP 2007 - PUBLIC EXHIBITION.

 

 

113

 

8           Confidential Items (Closed Session)

 

9           Notice of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

……………………………..

GENERAL MANAGER


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

10 May, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/207/2007 & PROP045570

 

PROPOSAL:

 Alterations and additions to existing dwelling, including new first floor with first floor terrace at rear and balcony at front, hard stand car park at front of dwelling

PROPERTY:

 17 Searle Avenue, Randwick

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 Mr E and Mrs Baker

OWNER:

 Mr E and Mrs Baker

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Anthony Andrews, Chris Bastic, Robert Belleli, John Procopiadis, Ted Seng, Dominic Sullivan and Alan White.

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions to the existing semi-detached dwelling and includes a front hard stand car parking space with associated driveway access to Searle Avenue, the demolition of dining and kitchen walls, and new bi-fold doors to the ground floor living room to face south and east. The first floor addition will include two bedrooms with a common room, a balcony to the front bedroom overlooking Searle Avenue and a balcony to the rear bedroom with 1.8m privacy wall to the adjoined semi-detached dwelling at 15 Searle Avenue to the north.

 

The owners of the adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development from 29 March to 17 April 2007 in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification.  As a result of this notification no submissions were received.

 

The proposed development has a floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.73:1 which exceeds the preferred solution FSR for the site of 0.65:1 by 8% or 20.23sqm although the proposal is consistent with the relevant preferred solutions for building height, setbacks and landscaped area. The proposal will reduce solar access to the northern facing windows of the adjoining property to the south, however this is considered acceptable given the context of development in the area and the scale of the proposal in relation to the other larger multi-unit buildings in the vicinity.

 

The proposed front car space is not supported as the Council footpath at the front of the site would have to be lowered by approximately a minimum 0.38m at the northern edge of the proposed car space entrance and approximately a minimum 0.15m at the southern edge of the proposed car space entrance. The lowering of the Council footpath is required to meet Councils’ design guidelines for gradients of driveways on Council’s road reserve which is a maximum grade up of 1 in 6 between the Council footpath and the layback.

 

There is insufficient room along the site frontage of 17 Searle Avenue to regrade the Council footpath down on either side of the car space entrance to meet the required lower footpath levels for vehicular access. The only other option is to construct steps on both the northern and southern edges of the car space entrance. Council’s Manager of Technical Services advised that the installation of Council steps at this location is not supported, as it results in physical impediment for pedestrians and does not allow for equitable access for a person with disability.

 

Therefore the recommendation is for approval subject to conditions including a condition requiring the deletion of the front hard stand car parking space.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposed development involves the following works:

 

Ground Floor

 

-   Front hard stand car parking space with associated driveway access to Searle Avenue

-   Demolish the existing rear ground floor addition

-   Internal modifications involving the demolition of dining and kitchen walls

-   New bi-fold doors to living room to face south and east.

 

First Floor

 

-   New first floor addition comprising of two (2) bedrooms with a common room

-   Balcony to front accessed via bedroom 2

-   Rear terrace to bedroom 3 with 1.8m privacy wall to common wall.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Searle Avenue and is presently occupied by an existing single storey semi-detached dwelling. The site has a frontage width of 6.145m, a side boundary depth of 41.81m and has an overall site area of 252.9 sqm. Neighbouring the property to the north is a single storey semi-detached dwelling, to the south is a two storey dwelling and to the rear is a single storey semi-detached dwelling. Opposite the site exists a number of heritage item dwellings that present to Kemmis Street with their rear private open spaces fronting to Searle Avenue. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of single dwellings and semi-detached dwellings, however includes two multi-unit residential flat buildings to the southern end of Searle Avenue.

 

Figure 1 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area. Figure 2 is a photograph of the subject site from Searle Avenue.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

4.1      Application History

 

The application was lodged on 21 March 2007 and notified to the surrounding properties from 29 March to 14 April 2007. No objections to the proposed development were received during this period.

 

A site investigation conducted by Council’s Development Engineer raised concerns regarding the proposed hard stand car parking space to the front of the site. The subject currently does not feature any on-site car parking facility. The Development Engineer contacted the architect of the proposal on 5 April 2007 and indicated that Council would not support vehicular access to the site due to the height difference between the existing Council footpath and the road level of Searle Avenue. Approval of the driveway would require a substantial lowering of the existing footpath and thus may require the construction of steps. The Development Engineer concluded that it would be prudent for the applicant to contact Council’s Manager of Technical Services to seek approval for steps to be installed into the footpath.

Figure 1: The subject site and surrounding area

A letter from the Joanna Lukaszewicz Architect received by Council on 5 April 2007 was addressed to Council’s Manager of Technical Services and sought consent to:

 

“Introduce 3 steps into the footpath, located approximately 3m North from the South boundary, with a handrail alongside for obvious safety reasons”.

 

Council’s Manager of Technical Services responded in an email to the Manager of Development Assessments that he would not support the construction of steps in the footpath “where steps do not exist”. The owner of the subject site was informed of this and was provided with one week commencing from 4 May 2007 to seek support from the Councillors to have the application referred to a Council meeting. The assessing officer advised the owner that due to the comments received from Council’s Development Engineer not supporting the proposed on-site parking, a condition would be included with the development consent that would require the deletion of the front hard stand car parking space.

 

4.2      History of Site Usage

Previous applications submitted for development on the site includes:

Development No.

Description

Determination

BA/412/1964

Additions

Approved in 1964

 

 

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The owners of the adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  As a result of this notification no submissions were received.

 

Figure 2: The subject site from Searle Avenue.

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 Engineers

 

The application has been referred to Development Engineering for comment, conditions that have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted.

 

An application has been received for alterations and additions including the addition of a first floor level and an open carport at the above site.

 

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

  Survey plan by VW Cochrane & Associates dated 26 September 2007;

  Architectural plans by Joanna Lukaszwicz dated January 2007;

  Statement of Environmental Effects by Joanna Lukaszwicz dated March 2007;

 

Car Space Comments

 

The applicant proposes to construct a hardstand car space within the front of the site. There is currently a high level Council footpath that runs along the above site frontage and for a car space to be constructed within the site the Council footpath would have to be lowered by approximately a minimum 0.38m at the northern edge of the proposed car space entrance and approximately a minimum 0.15m at the southern edge of the proposed car space entrance. The lowering of the Council footpath is required to meet Councils’ design guidelines for gradients of driveways on Council’s road reserve which is a maximum grade up of 1 in 6 between the Council footpath and the layback.

 

There is insufficient room along the site frontage of No 17 Searle Avenue to regrade the Council footpath down on either side of the car space entrance to meet the required lower footpath levels for vehicular access. The only other option is to construct steps on both the northern and southern edges of the car space entrance.

 

Note: The Council footpath in Searle Avenue at this location which runs between Frenchmans Road and Ravenswood Lane has no Council steps located along and a further inspection has revealed the existing footpaths in the surrounding area do not have Council steps constructed.

 

Council’s Manager of Technical Services or his staff have inspected the site and have advised that they do not support the installation of Council steps at this location

 

Council’s previous experience regarding the installation of Council steps in a Council footpath an area where no steps previously existed has seen surrounding residents successfully object on the grounds of the Disability Discrimination Act and for this reason the installation of Council steps and the proposed car space are not supported.

 

Landscape Comments

 

There is a Frangipanni Tree located on Council’s nature strip which would require removal for any proposed car space, there is no objection to the removal of the subject tree.

 

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.

 

8.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

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

 

-   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

-   Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

-   SEPP: BASIX

-   Development Control Plan Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

-   Draft Dwelling House and Attached Dual Occupancy Development Control Plan (Draft DCP)

-   Building Code of Australia.

 

8.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

The site is zoned 2B (Residential B Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the 2B zone and is permissible with Council's consent.

 

8.1.1   State Environment Planning Policy (Building sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

 

SEPP: BASIX requirements came into force for all new dwellings, dual occupancies and some transient residential accommodation where development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2004. SEPP: BASIX requirements for alterations and additions came into force on 1 October 2006 and apply to:

 

-   Renovation work valued at $100,000 or more, or

-   The installation of a swimming pool (or pool and spa) with a capacity greater than 40,000 litres.

 

A BASIX assessment is a mandatory component of the development approval process under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) Regulation 2004 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

 

As the proposed works exceed $100,000 a BASIX certificate has been submitted with the application. An appropriate condition has been included with the consent to ensure the commitments listed in the relevant BASIX Certificate for this development are fulfilled prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

8.2      Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

 

8.2.1   Draft Dwelling House and Attached Dual Occupancy Development Control Plan (Draft DCP)

 

The key changes in the Draft DCP include, and are not limited to:

 

-   Increasing the maximum FSR for sites less than 300sqm from 0.65:1 to 0.7:1.

-   Increasing the rear boundary setback from 4.5m to 9m.

-   Increasing the minimum landscaped area from 40% to 50% of the site.

-   Increasing the minimum soft landscaped area from 20% to 25% of the site.

 

The proposal would generally achieve compliance with the Draft DCP. The amount of landscaping provided would comply under the new control of 50% and adequate landscaped areas for private recreation and maintenance of the landscape character of the area are achieved by this proposal. 

 

Notwithstanding, compliance with the Draft DCP has been given minimal weight in this assessment as it is neither imminent nor certain at this point in the policy approval process.

 

8.3 Policy Controls

 

 

8.3.1   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.

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

60% 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 90 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 15m x 6m. 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.

38% of the site is permeable. Complies.

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 0.73:1. 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 proposal exceeds the preferred solution FSR for the site by 8% or 20.24 sqm. The degree of the non-compliance is not considered significant and will not result in the development becoming a distracting or prominent structure on the streetscape. The first floor addition maintains the setbacks of the existing ground floor footprint and is considered to integrate appropriately with the existing dwelling. The proposal incorporates a good level of articulation to the street frontage with details to the gable and the mix of materials complimenting the existing dwelling and adding visual interest.

The proposal minimises adverse impacts of bulk and scale to the surrounding properties by having a modest scale and utilising common elements such as gables to the street frontage. The bulk of the development is distributed away from the street with a significant setback ensuring the immediacy of the additional floor is not evident from the street or dominate the existing dwelling. The bulk of the development will not be immediately visible from the northern properties as the proposal to add a first floor the attached dwelling will be more prominent to the adjoining property to the north, 11A Searle Avenue, and will screen a majority of the development to the surrounding properties to the south.

A development application for a first floor addition to 15 Searle Avenue was lodged simultaneously with this development application. The application for 15 Searle Avenue maintains a similar appearance of the first floor addition proposed in this application and will integrate well, providing an appropriate sense of symmetry between the semi-detached dwellings. It should be noted that the proposal exceeded the FSR for the site by the same degree as this current application; however, it was considered that the bulk of the addition was well contained and did not have an overbearing presence on the street. The application was approved under delegated authority on 16 May 2007.

As such the proposed FSR is acceptable.

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 6.8 metres. Complies.

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.

The proposal has been submitted in tandem with an application for a first floor addition to the adjoining semi-detached dwelling. Complies.

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

The proposed first floor addition is set back approximately 10 metres from the front boundary and is generally consistent with the setbacks of adjoining dwellings. Complies.

S2

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

The proposed first floor addition is approximately 15 metres from the rear boundary. Complies.

S3

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

Southern Boundary

Not applicable.

Northern Boundary

Not applicable.

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Southern Boundary

The proposed development is set back 1.09m to 1.56 metres from the side boundary. The setback will not impact the amenity or solar access of the adjoining southern property. The design will integrate appropriately with the existing dwelling. Complies.

Northern Boundary

Not applicable.

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

Not applicable.

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

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

S1

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

The first floor rear deck will overlook the rear yard areas of the adjoining properties however is accessed solely via a bedroom and will not be used on a frequent basis or for large congregations of people.

S1

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

The proposal includes a bedroom and stair case window which will have sill heights below 1.5m, however overlooking from these windows is unlikely to result in a significant impact to the privacy of the adjoining southern neighbour.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Conditioned to comply with the BCA.

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 1 car. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

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

The dimensions of the parking spaces are 5m x 3.8m. Complies.

S1

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

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

S1

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

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

S1

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

The proposed driveway gradient is less than 1 in 8. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

The proposed garage is located behind the building line. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S2

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

The proposed garage occupies about 49% of the width of the site frontage. Does not comply – see assessment below.

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

As discussed earlier in this report, the proposal for the front hard stand car parking space is not supported by Council’s Development Engineer due to the excessive gradient required for the driveway and the subsequent alterations to Council’s footpath resulting in steps being constructed in an area where steps do not exist. Of the properties along the eastern side of Searle Avenue, which includes 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 11A, 15, 17 and 19, only 11 and 19 Searle Avenue currently have vehicular access to their properties. 11 Searle Avenue currently does not have a hard surfaced driveway while 19 Searle Avenue has a driveway however the gradient is sufficiently less than what exists at the subject site. Figure 3 below is a photograph of the driveway access for 11 Searle Avenue.

Figure 3: The existing unpaved  vehicular access to 11 Searle Avenue, approximately 20 metres to the north of the subject site.

Inclusion of the hard stand surface to the front of the site would be an improvement to the existing parking arrangement and reduce the pressure for on-street car parking space. Generally the proposed hard stand space is well integrated with the design of the dwelling and will not dominate the site or have an adverse impact on the existing streetscape. However the comments received from Council’s Development Engineer state that:

 

“There is insufficient room along the site frontage of No 17 Searle Avenue to regrade the Council footpath down on either side of the car space entrance to meet the required lower footpath levels for vehicular access. The only other option is to construct steps on both the northern and southern edges of the car space entrance.

 

Note: The Council footpath in Searle Avenue at this location which runs between Frenchmans Road and Ravenswood Lane has no Council steps located along and a further inspection has revealed the existing footpaths in the surrounding area do not have Council steps constructed.

 

Council’s Manager of Technical Services or his staff have inspected the site and have advised that they do not support the installation of Council steps at this location

 

Council’s previous experience regarding the installation of Council steps in a Council footpath an area where no steps previously existed has seen surrounding residents successfully object on the grounds of the Disability Discrimination Act and for this reason the installation of Council steps and the proposed car space are not supported”.

 

Therefore considering that there are no existing hard surface driveways in the street with a similar gradient to the proposal, an absence of steps in the Council footpath in the street and the advice presented by Council’s Development Engineer, a condition will be included with the development consent requiring the deletion of the front car parking space.

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.

Not applicable.

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. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S9

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

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 proposed development will reduce the solar access to some of the north facing windows of the adjoining property to the south, 19 Searle Avenue, to less than the minimum 3 hours prescribed in the DCP. Whilst the proposal is inconsistent with the DCP preferred solution, the impact is acceptable when considering the context of the proposal with existing development in the street and its consistency with the relevant preferred solutions in the DCP.

An assessment of the solar access impacts, in accordance with the Parsonage v Ku-ring-gai planning principal is included in section 8.4 of this report.

8.4 Impact on Adjoining Properties

8.4.1   Solar Access

Performance Requirement P9 under part 3 Ecologically Sustainable Development of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP requires that:

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

Notwithstanding this performance requirement an additional assessment of the impact on solar access to surrounding properties has been undertaken. The NSW Land and Environment Court judgment by Senior Commissioner Roseth in Parsonage v Ku-ring-gai [2004] sets down six steps (with four steps being relevant to this application) that should be undertaken to reach a decision whether a solar access impact is reasonable.

[Step 1] “The ease with which sunlight access can be protected is inversely proportional to the density of development. At low densities, there is a reasonable expectation that a dwelling and some of its open space will retain its existing sunlight. (However, even at low densities there are sites and buildings that are highly vulnerable to being overshadowed.) At higher densities sunlight is harder to protect and the claim to retain it is not as strong.”

 

The surrounding development comprises of single and two storey dwellings and semi-detached dwellings with some multi-unit residential flat buildings in the vicinity of the subject site. The properties on the opposite side of the street, which front Kemmis Street, are generally two storey residential dwellings while adjoining the subject site to the south, 19 Searle Avenue, is a two storey dwelling house and three storey residential flat buildings exist further to the south, at 21 and 23 Searle Avenue. Therefore the density of the surrounding area is a mix of relatively low densities to the northern section of Searle Avenue whilst the density to the south and west of the subject site is of a higher, medium density, particularly noting the residential flat buildings two properties to the south of the subject site.

 

As such, the expectation of the affected property to maintain solar access to the rear private open space is reasonable however the expectation to maintain solar access to all of the northern facing windows is considered to be less reasonable given the 2B residential zoning of the area which indicates that a desired future character for larger residential buildings and the mix of residential development in the street including the large multi-unit buildings at 21 and 23 Searle Avenue. The affected property at 19 Searle Avenue is considered to be particularly vulnerable to overshadowing given that the lots in the street have an east-west orientation and any increase in height to properties to the north will invariably impact upon solar access.

 

It should also be noted that the first floor setback of the affected property to the northern boundary is 0.5m less than the preferred solution and will influence the degree of the impact created by the proposal. The proposed development maintains a generally compliant first floor setback along the boundary.

 

As such, considering the desired future character of the street, the larger buildings to the south of the site, and the existing non-compliant setback of the affected property the expectation to maintain solar access is supported, however, does not warrant changes to the proposal given that sunlight to some of the north facing windows will be maintained.

 

[Step 2] “The amount of sunlight lost should be taken into account, as well as the amount of sunlight retained.”

 

The overshadowing diagrams provided with the application indicate that the proposal will provide 3 hours of sunlight over part of the front two windows of the affected dwelling, while solar access to the two rear north facing windows will be reduced to less than 3 hours of direct sunlight during the Winter solstice. As such the proposal is inconsistent with the preferred solution contained within Part 3 of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP which states:

 

“North facing windows to living areas of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours of sunlight over at least part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. If less than 3 hours if available under current conditions, access to sunlight is not reduced.”

          Source: Part 3, Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP, p25.

 

Currently each of the existing first floor north facing windows of 19 Searle Avenue receive greater than 3 hours of sunlight. Therefore the proposal will affect each window, however, the two rear first floor windows will be most affected as they will receive less than 3 hours of sunlight. The two windows to the front of the northern elevation will receive sunlight from 12pm until sunset, or whenever the path of the sun is currently obstructed after 3pm. The solar access impact to 19 Searle Avenue is considered acceptable with the amount of sunlight retained is considered. Solar access to the rear private open space of the affected property will generally not be affected by the proposal and will continue to receive greater than the minimum 3 hours stipulated under the DCP. Solar access to the rear of the building at ground and first floor level and the front of the dwelling at 19 Searle Avenue will be generally unaffected by the proposal.

 

As the control is a preferred solution, other factors of the development including the appearance on the streetscape, the bulk and scale of existing development in the area, the orientation of the site and the compliance with other relevant preferred solutions can be considered. Therefore the proposal is deemed to have some impacts to solar access however the degree of the impact is not significant or adverse and does not warrant changes to the proposal as the height and setbacks of the building are consistent with the DCP requirements.

 

[Step 3] “Overshadowing arising out of poor design is not acceptable, even if it satisfies numerical guidelines. The poor quality of a proposal’s design may be demonstrated by a more sensitive design that achieves the same amenity without substantial additional cost, while reducing the impact on neighbours.”

 

The proposed development embodies a symmetry that relates with the recently approved development at 15 Searle Avenue for a similar first floor addition. As noted earlier in this report, a similar first floor addition at 15 Searle Avenue was recently approved under delegated authority. The approved development essentially mirrored the external dimensions of this proposal and together with the proposed development will provide a positive contribution on the streetscape, with elements borrowed from the existing dwelling and a design that is well considered and responds appropriately to the prevailing character of the street. The design of the proposal is relatively modest and provides for additional sleeping areas to the first floor thus improving amenity for occupants of the dwelling without resulting in an excessive building form.

 

It is noted that the proposal exceeds the FSR for the site by 8% or 20.23sqm. This degree of non-compliance is not considered to result in a perceptible adverse bulk or visual impact that would affect the amenity of adjoining properties or the streetscape. The design is acceptable given the mix of residential buildings in the vicinity of the subject site includes developments of significantly greater scale and proportion. While the proposed additions to the front of the dwelling fail to meet the preferred solution first floor setback by 410mm, the rear of the first floor addition exceeds the setback requirements of the DCP by 60mm. Requiring strict compliance with the setback requirements at the front of the dwelling is considered onerous and would unbalance the design, a design that incorporates a high degree of symmetry resulting in a visually appealing addition to the Searle Avenue streetscape. Furthermore, it is deemed compliance with the setbacks at the first floor level would not result in a perceptible increase in solar access to the neighbouring dwelling to the south and would be unreasonable given that the setback of the first floor of 19 Searle Avenue is approximately 1m, 500mm less than the preferred solution, and exceeding the non-compliance of the proposal.

 

It is considered that the proposal is not excessive and although exceeds the preferred solution FSR for the site, it embodies a bulk and scale that is commensurate with other dwellings in the street and will not become a prominent visual element. The proposal is similar in scale to the recently approved first floor addition to the attached dwelling at 15 Searle Avenue. In this respect any modifications to the proposal to address the solar access to the adjoining property to the south are unnecessary and would unbalance the symmetry between the two dwellings to the detriment of the streetscape.

 

[Step 6] “In areas undergoing change, the impact on what is likely to be built on adjoining sites should be considered as well as the existing development.”

 

The surrounding area is undergoing gradual change and the proposed development is evidence that the single storey dwellings along the eastern side of Searle Avenue are being expanded and altered to improve the internal amenity and provide more useable internal spaces for occupants. It is noted that the subject site is located within a 2B (Residential B Zone) which generally indicates that the future desired character of the area may be with higher density built forms, akin to the multi-unit residential building to the south of the  subject site and other larger residential buildings that are present within 200m of the subject site. Whilst the adjoining sites may be insufficient to support a multi-unit residential building, amalgamation of several lots may result in a viable multi-storeyed residential building being constructed within the vicinity of the subject site.

 

Generally the proposal remains consistent with the objectives of the planning principal and the impact to solar access for the surrounding properties, specifically 19 Searle Avenue, is acceptable. Amendments to the proposal affecting its bulk are considered onerous, will adversely affect the symmetry with the attached dwelling and are an unnecessary measure as the proposal satisfies a number of performance and preferred solutions of the DCP and is commensurate with the scale of other residential dwellings in the street.

The proposal is therefore recommended for approval.

 

 

8.5 Council Policies

8.5.1   Asbestos Policy

 

An asbestos survey is not required to be submitted with the application.

 

8.5.2   Rainwater Tanks Policy

 

The SEPP: BASIX requirements for this proposal have been included in the development consent and address the issues raised in this policy. Further assessment against the requirements of this policy is not required.

 

9.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

9.1      Outcome 4: Excellence in urban design and development

 

The proposal has a good architectural quality that will have a positive contribution to the existing character and streetscape.

 

9.2      Direction 4a & associated key action: Improved design and sustainability across all development

 

The proposed development will improve the design and presentation of the dwelling to the street and will not adversely impact the sustainability of the surrounding properties.

 

10. FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

11. CONCLUSION

 

The proposal complies with the objectives of 2B (Residential B Zone) zone, 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 proposal presents a build form that will be compatible with the character of the street and will have a positive contribution to the surrounding area. The solar access impact of the proposal is not considered to be significant and will not adversely affect the property to the south, as such, alterations to the proposal are not required. For reasons stated in this report, the proposed front hard stand car parking space is recommended to be deleted, however the residential portion of the proposal remains acceptable and an example of a well considered design that responds to surrounding development and the dominant character of the street.

 

As such the proposal is recommended for approval.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.      THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/207/2007 for alterations and additions to existing dwelling, including new first floor with first floor terrace at rear and balcony at front at 17 Searle Avenue, Randwick subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 145/1, 145/2 and 145/3, dated January 2007 and received by Council on 21 March 2007, 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 Planning & Community Development, 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.       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.

 

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.

 

6.       The front hard stand car parking space and associated driveway shall be deleted from the plans. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

The following condition is imposed to satisfy relevant requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

7.       All building, plumbing and drainage work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

The approved Construction Certificate plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre prior to commencing any building or excavation works, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if any further requirements need to be met. 

 

If suitable, the plans will be appropriately stamped.  For Quick Check agent details please refer to Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au and go to the Building, Developing and Plumbing, then Quick Check or Building and Renovating or telephone 13 20 92.

 

The principal certifying authority is required to ensure that a Quick Check Agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before commencing works.

 

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

 

8.       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.

 

9.       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.

 

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

 

·       Stormwater management (i.e. rainwater tanks)

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

·       Landscaping provisions

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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:

 

12.     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.

 

13.     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:

 

14.     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.

 

15.     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.

 

16.     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.

 

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.

 

17.     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.

 

18.     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.

 

19.     A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site for the duration of the works, 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”.

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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:

 

25.     The demolition of buildings and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials (including asbestos) 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.

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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.

         

30.     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.

 

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.

 

31.     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.

 

32.     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.

 

33.     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.

 

34.     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:

 

35.     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/upper floor addition.

 

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

 

36.     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)       $2000.00       -        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 consideration for service authority assets:

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

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

 

39.     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.

 

40.     Permission is granted for the applicant to remove the Frangipani Tree located on Council’s nature strip opposite the proposed vehicle entrance to the site.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

A3      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

PATRICK LEBON

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT OFFICER



 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

30 May, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/1107/2006 & PROP051803

 

PROPOSAL:

 Erection of a 5 storey residential development comprising 28 apartments, basement carparking for 37 vehicles, landscaping and strata sub-division.

PROPERTY:

 2-4 Gubbuteh Road, Little Bay

WARD:

 South Ward

APPLICANT:

 Stockland Development (PHH) P/L

OWNER:

 Stockland Development (PHH) P/L

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

1.      EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The subject application is for the erection of a residential building over basement carparking comprising 28 dwellings, 37 carpark spaces, landscaping, strata subdivision being four storeys and a loft level in height. The subject site is irregular in shape and comprises vacant land in the Prince Henry site located to the north-western corner of the Prince Henry site. It is bounded by Anzac Parade (which is the primary street frontage), and Gubbuteh Road. The application is referred to the Health, Building and Planning Committee as the proposed development is valued at $8.7 million.

 

The proposal is permissible under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and complies with all the controls contained in the LEP with the exception of the maximum FSR, wall and building height control. The proposal has an FSR of 0.96:1 which exceeds the maximum FSR control of 0.9:1. The proposal also breaches the maximum wall height control by 500mm and the maximum building height control by 4.85 m to the top of a small localised feature roof element which is a void area and does not provide any habitable floor space. Objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) have been submitted in relation to the breach of these controls. The non-compliances have been assessed and found acceptable as the breach in the FSR and height controls are minor and/or localised; the proposed building affected by the breach will not be visually intrusive or bulky; and will not give rise to any detrimental impacts to surrounding uses in terms of solar access, ventilation, privacy and views. The application complies with all the relevant prescribed controls in the Prince Henry Development Control Plan with the exception of the FSR, and wall and building height.

 

The proposal is an “integrated development” as the subject site is located within the Prince Henry conservation area which has been gazetted in the State Heritage Register. Accordingly, the application was referred to the Heritage Council of NSW for approval, and notified and advertised for a period of 30 days in accordance with the EP&A Act 1979 (as amended). The Heritage Council has issued its General Terms of Approval for the proposed development which have been incorporated as conditions of consent.  No submissions were received in response to the advertising/notification process. 

 

The site that is the subject of the proposed development, forms part of a development precinct identified in the Master Plan for the Prince Henry site which was adopted in December 2001. Under the amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gazetted on 16 June 2005, the Master Plan is now made a Deemed Development Control Plan (Deemed DCP). The proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Deemed DCP with the exception of the number of one-bedroom dwelling units which exceeds the Master Plan projection by 5 units. This increase is off-set by the fact that the proposal will only have 1 three-and-above bedroom dwelling compared with the projected 11 in the Master Plan. Furthermore, the proposed development will not      create any adverse impact on the amenity or visual quality of the locality nor lead to any significant increase in traffic. A Section 94 contribution has been applied to account for the excess dwelling units.

 

The proposal does not comply with the DCP - Car Parking by 1 visitor carspace. A condition has been applied requiring the reallocation of one residential carspace into a visitor carspace as there is adequate residential carspaces to allow for this and so as to ensure all required visitor carparking spaces are met on-site.

 

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

 

 

2.      THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposal is for the erection of a residential building over basement carparking comprising 28 dwellings, 37 carpark spaces, landscaping, strata subdivision being four storeys and a loft level in height.

 

The proposed development will contain the following uses:

 

4 x 1         Bedroom

9 x 1         Bedroom + study

13 x 2       Bedroom

1 x 2         Bedroom + study

1 x 3         Bedroom

Total – 28  units

 

The buildings will have a common basement level containing the following uses:

 

·         resident and 6 visitor carparking spaces

·         bicycle storage area

·         storage space

·         Main switchboard room

·         Communications and services rooms

·         Plant rooms

·         Garbage/waste bin storage rooms

 

Access to the basement carpark will be via Gubbuteh Road

 

A main landscaped courtyard is proposed to the eastern side of the proposed building. A smaller semi-enclosed central north facing landscaped courtyard is also proposed.

 

On 23 March 2007, the applicant submitted amended building and landscape plans for the proposed developments containing changes to the apartment layout and minor changes to ground-level terraces and street trees. There were no changes to the envelope of the proposal as originally submitted. Accordingly, the changes were considered minor and not required to be readvertised/renotified.

 

3.      THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

 

The former Prince Henry Hospital site is located on the eastern side of Anzac Parade approximately 14km south of the Sydney GPO. The site, now referred to as the Prince Henry site, is bounded to the north by the University of New South Wales, to the north and east by the Coast Golf Course, to the east by Little Bay and to the south by the Coast and St Michaels Golf Courses and to the west by Anzac Parade.

 

The site that is the subject of the proposed development, forms part of a development precinct identified in the adopted Master Plan (now a Deemed DCP) for the Prince Henry site. The subject site is known as Lot 24 in DP 270427. The site is also referred to as Lot 1-2 in Council’s Prince Henry Site DCP (the DCP). The subject site is located on the northern side of Gubbuteh Road and eastern side of Anzac Parade and comprises vacant land with an area of 2711 sqm. 

 

The subject site is bounded to the north by Gubbuteh Road, and Lot 18 beyond which is the subject of a separate development application (DA No. 1108/2006 for a similar 4-storey plus loft multi-unit residential building) approved by Council on 8 May 2007; a future development lot (Lot 15) to the east; the University of NSW playing fields and research land to the north which is currently the subject of a Staged Development Application (DA No. 264/2007 for subdivision of land into 151 residential lots with associated building envelopes, carparking and open space); and Anzac Parade to the west.

 

4.      SITE HISTORY

 

The site forms part of the wider area known as the ‘Prince Henry site’ that was previously used as the Prince Henry (Coast) Hospital.

 

The site as a whole has been subject to a lengthy strategic planning process. On 27 May 2003 Council adopted a revised master plan for the former Prince Henry Hospital site effective for five years from that date. The Master Plan created a new residential and community precinct with a variety of land uses including retail, commercial, open space, recreation and community facilities. Under the amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gazetted on 16 June 2005, the Master Plan is now made a Deemed Development Control Plan (Deemed DCP). On the 18 October 2005, Council adopted amendments to the Deemed DCP subject to variations. Further amendments to the Deemed DCP/Master Plan were approved by Council in May 2006.  These latter two amendments do not affect the subject site.

 

Amendment 28 to Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 was gazetted on 26 November 2004 and had the effect of rezoning the Prince Henry site to a mix of 2D Residential (Comprehensive Development), 6 Special Uses and 7 Environmental Protection. The amendment also contains height, FSR and landscape area requirements for development within the 2D area of the site.

 

The Prince Henry Site Development Control Plan (the DCP) was approved by Council on 27 July 2004 and became effective after the gazettal of Amendment 28 to RLEP1998 on 8 December 2004.

 

A number of other development applications have been approved for proposals in the wider Prince Henry site ranging from the demolition of identified buildings and the decontamination and rehabilitation of land to the erection of buildings for specific social/community bodies and infrastructure, civil and streetscape works.

 

A prelodgement meeting was held on 12 December 2006 (PL 55/2006) to discuss development concepts for the proposed development.

 

5.      COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

 

5.1    Advertising/Notification

 

The proposal was notified as “integrated development” for a period of 30 days in accordance with the EP&A Act 1979 (as amended). A notice was placed in the local newspaper and on-site, and letters were sent to adjoining and adjacent landowners advising of the proposal and inviting comment and submissions. No submissions were received in response to the proposal.

 

6.      TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

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

 

6.1    Heritage Comments

 

Council’s Heritage Planner advises as follows:

 

“Background

 

The subject sites are located within the Prince Henry Hospital Heritage Conservation Area under Randwick Local Environmental Plan Amendment No.28.  The former hospital site and a number of the buildings are listed on the State Heritage Register, in recognition of its Aboriginal, natural, landscape and built heritage values. 

 

The site has been the subject of a Conservation Management Plan (CMP), Archaeological Management Plan (AMP) and Heritage Impact Assessment carried out by Godden Mackay Logan (GML) in conjunction with the preparation of a Master Plan for residential use of the former hospital site. 

 

The Subject Site

 

The sites are in the north western corner of the development area, within Precinct P1 as identified in the Prince Henry Site Development Control Plan- Nos.2-4 (Lot 24) to the north of Gubbetah Road and Nos.1-3 (Lot 18) to the south.  Lot 24 is bounded to the north by the UNSW playing fields, to the east by residential lot 15, to the south by Gubbetah Road and to the west by Anzac Parade.  Lot 18 is bounded to the north by Gubbetah Road, to the east by residential lot 19, to the south by the Northern Bushland Park and to the west by Anzac Parade. 

 

 

Heritage element

Applies

Built elements in the vicinity

1                    No

Landscape elements in the vicinity

Eastern suburbs banksia scrub

Aboriginal archaeological zone

Zone 2- High Sensitivity

Aboriginal identified site

No

Historical archaeological zone

No

Historical identified site

No

Little Bay Geological site

No

Remnant native vegetation in the vicinity

ESBS

 

 

The Proposal

 

The proposal is for the construction of two separate residential developments each comprising four levels, plus loft level over semi-basement carparking.  Vehicular entries are from Gubbetah Road, while pedestrian entries are from Anzac Parade. 

 

The proposal has been the subject of a formal pre-lodgement meeting at which submission and consent requirements were discussed.

 

Submission

 

The development application submission includes a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by Tanner Architects which refers to relevant conservation policies and to the policies for new development contained in the DCP for the site.  The submission notes that the proposal will provide a positive contribution to the Prince Henry site and will have no potential impact of the identified heritage values of the site, including the fairly distant Matron Dixon Nurses Home and Artisans’ Cottages.  In relation to landscape elements, the HIS notes that appropriate protective measures should be undertaken during the construction phase to ensure no impact on the neighbouring Northern Bushland Park.

 

 

 

Approvals

 

As Prince Henry is included on the State Heritage Register (SHR), any development generally needs to be the subject of an Integrated Development Application or a prior application under s60 of the NSW Heritage Act.  As the NSW Heritage Office is the consent authority for the application, Council cannot issue approval until the Heritage Office has provided conditions of consent. 

 

Site specific exemptions for the Prince Henry for new single residences and multi-unit residential buildings which comply with the Prince Henry site were gazetted in June 2005.  Under the Prince Henry Site Specific Exemptions, development which complies with identified sections of the Prince Henry DCP and the relevant heritage management plan does not need to be referred to the NSW Heritage Council for approval.  Exemptions apply to development outside the Historic Precinct, where the proposal complies with the Height and Setback requirements of the DCP, and where non-compliance with a number of identified sections of the DCP will not result in heritage impacts. 

 

2                    1         

DCP standard

Complies

Subject to

            Site Specific Exemptions

Height

No

No

Setback

NA

 

It appears, due to non-compliance with the DCP height control, that the proposal will require Heritage Office consent. 

 

Comments

The proposal appears to be generally consistent with the siting and envelope requirements of the Prince Henry Site Development Control Plan, although non-compliances have been identified relating to maximum building height and maximum wall height and floor space ratio.  Despite the non-compliance of the buildings with the height controls, it is noted that the walls of the loft levels are set back from the walls of the lower levels and do not significantly add to the bulk of the buildings.  The footprint of the buildings assists in defining the edge of Anzac Parade, and the northern and southern corners of Gubbetah Road and retains views and vistas north across the University of NSW site.  The materials and finishes boards submitted for each of the buildings indicates consistent materials and finishes, tying together the Anzac Parade and Gubbetah Road elevations of Lot 18 and Lot 24.  The boards indicates that metal surfaces including cladding, fascias, grilles, louvres, screens, shutters and framing to windows and clear glass balustrades, are neutral in colour, to ensure compatibility with adjacent development in Gubbetah Road. The materials and finishes boards indicate a paint finish for concrete fascias and precast concrete panels, but do not provide details of the proposed paint colours. Details of paint colours should be sought from the applicant.

 

 

 

(Comment: a condition has been applied requiring details of the paint colours to be provided to Council for approval prior to issue of a construction certificate).

 

As the site has been remediated, it is unlikely that further items of Aboriginal or Historical significance remain.  The proposal will impact on the identified strip along Anzac Parade which requires further assessment, including archaeological supervision in accordance with the processes set out in the AMP.

 

 

 

Recommendations

The following conditions should be included in any consent, in addition to any provided by the NSW Heritage Office:”

(Comment: The Heritage Planner’s recommended conditions will be applied in any consent for the application should approval be granted).

 

6.2    Development Engineering Comments

 

Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

An amended development application has been received for the construction of a residential flat building at the above site containing 28 units with basement carparking for 36 vehicles, together with strata subdivision of the development.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

  Statement of Environmental Effects received by Council on 19/12/2006;

  Plans SD01 – SD03, Issue A, dated 20/3/07 prepared by Stansic Associates;

  Plans DA00 – DA10, Issue A, dated 20/3/07 prepared by Stansic Associates;

  Plan MF03, Issue A, dated 20/3/07 prepared by Stansic Associates;

  Letter from Jennifer Cooper of Stockland dated 15 February, 2007 regarding waste management, parking and property identification.

 

Traffic Comments

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

 

The vehicular access and basement carpark (including, but not limited to, the ramp grades, carpark layout and height clearances) are to be in accordance with the requirements of AS2890.1:2004.

 

  Parking provisions

For a development of this size, a total of 38 car spaces are required to be provided in accordance with Council’s DCP Parking (13 spaces for the 13 x 1 bdrm units, 16.8 spaces for the 14 x 2 bdrm units, 1.5 spaces for the 1 x 3 bdrm unit, and 7 visitor spaces). It is noted that the submitted plans do not demonstrate compliance with this requirement being deficient by 1 visitor space. The Planning Officer is also advised that proposed spaces 15 and 16 are stacked spaces that need to be allocated to one tenancy/unit, (the Development Engineer assumes that this will be allocated to the 3 bedroom unit). The Planning Officer is requested to impose a suitable condition relating to allocation of spaces 15 and 16.

 

In addition, 12 secure bicycle spaces should be provided within the site however the plans only indicate 9 bicycle spaces.

 

Notwithstanding the above parking provision comments, the Development Engineer is of the opinion that in principle approval was given to the parking layout and parking provisions by the Planning Officer responsible for undertaking the initial assessment of this application.

 

Civil Works Comments

The applicant shall undertake (at a minimum) the following civil infrastructure works:

 

a)  Construction of a heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the proposed vehicular entrance to the site in Gubbuteh Road; and

 

b)  Removal of any redundant concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks and reinstatement of the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

The works are to be in accordance with Australian Standard specifications for driveways, and in general accordance with Randwick City Council's ‘Standard Kerb and Gutter and Vehicular Crossing Detail’ (Drawing SD4).

 

Alignment Level Comments

The design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundaries for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

Service Authority Comments

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.

 

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.

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 shall liaise directly with Energy Australia to determine whether a substation is required.

 

Drainage Comments

Stormwater runoff from the site shall be managed in accordance with the Prince Henry drainage strategy prepared by Connell Wagner. This shall involve stormwater runoff from Lot 24 being discharged through the underground drainage system into the on-site stormwater detention system within Lot 20.

 

Waste Management Comments

 

The Planning Officer is advised that in an issues paper dated 18/1/07 the following comments were made regarding waste management:

 

The proposed development is required to provide chute fed automatic compactors for residential garbage, with the compactor to operate at a compaction ratio of 2:1.

 

Accordingly, the residential waste storage area/s for Lot 24 shall be sized to contain the compactor (with safe working area) and a total of 21 x 240 litre bins (7 x garbage bins and 14 x recycling bins). The compactor shall be managed by a caretaker and shall be located in an area that is not accessible to residents. All of the recycling bins and at least two of the garbage bins shall be located outside of the compactor room and be readily accessible to residents. (It is noted that the submitted plans do not demonstrate compliance with this requirement as no compactor has been provided and only one waste storage area is shown that does not provide satisfactory access to all bins as required.)

 

General requirements - Waste management plans detailing the waste management arrangement for the site shall be submitted to Council in conjunction with the development application.

 

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

 

It is noted that the submitted prelodgement plans do not show the proposed ramp grades from the basement level. However, the applicant is advised that grades beyond 1 in 10 are considered too steep for the manual transportation of waste bins to the kerbside for collection and suitable alternative provisions would need to be made for movement of bins up to street level.

 

The applicant has not attempted to comply with Council’s requirements with respect to the provision of a chute fed system however the revised waste management plan received by Council on 16/2/2007 has been approved in principle by Council’s Waste Management Compliance Officer.

 

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

 

Geotechnical Comments

Suitable geotechnical investigation shall be undertaken to determine whether the subject development site will be affected by continual seepage flows. Should it be determined that significant continual seepage flows are present on the site, the basement carpark shall be suitable tanked and waterproofed with provision made for the seepage water to flow around/under the basement.

 

Landscape Comments

There are no trees, covered by Council’s tree Preservation Order, located within the development site that will be affected by the proposed development. Standard landscape conditions, (as modified to cover the subject area of the Prince Henry site), have been included within this report.

 

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

 

6.3    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

 

Vacant land at the Prince Henry Hospital site.

 

Key Issues

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

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.

 

Access for people with a disability:

Access and facilities for people with disabilities is not required under the Building Code of Australia , however, Council’s multi-unit housing policy requires 1 accessible unit per 14 units.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

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

 

6.4    Environmental Health Comments

 

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

 

Key Issues

 

Land contamination: SAS has been issued for this site by RES, Rod Harwood dated, 11/05/05. Unexpected finds protocol exists for this site. Appropriate conditions are to be imposed on any consent to address this issue.

 

Acoustics: An acoustic report has been submitted with the proposal. The noise from the surrounding environment and the proposed development has been addressed. Appropriate conditions should be included in any proposal.

 

Grey water treatment and reuse: The proposal includes the treatment and reuse of grey water. Appropriate conditions are to be imposed to address this matter.

 

Recommendation

 

Should the application be approved, the following conditions should be included:

 

6.5    Heritage Council of NSW Comments

 

The Heritage Council advised of its approval of the integrated development application in a letter dated 26 March 2007 with its accompanying general terms of approval. The general terms of approval have been included as conditions of consent.

 

6.6    NSW Police (Eastern Beaches Local Area Command)

 

The proposal was referred to the NSW Police (Eastern Beaches Local Area Command) for comment in relation to safety and security. The NSW Police comments were received on 19 April 2007 and have been considered in this DA assessment as described in Section 10.4.2.1 below.

 

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.

 

Following amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, gazetted on 16 June 2005, master plans are now designated as Deemed Development Control Plans. Accordingly, the master plan for the Prince Henry Site which was adopted on 27 May 2003, is now a Deemed DCP.

 

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 Prince Henry Hospital site is zoned Residential 2D, Open Space 6A, and Environmental Protection-Natural Heritage Areas Zone 7 under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The subject site is zoned Residential 2D. The proposal is permissible with development consent.

 

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

 

Clause 30A      Development of Certain Land in Zone No. 2D

Clause 40        Excavation and filling of land

Clause 40A     Master plans

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

 

Clause 30A of the Randwick LEP 1998 states that the controls applicable to land Zone 2D are identified in the supporting built form control maps applicable to the specific site (in this case the Prince Henry Site) which are as follows:

 

Control

Requirement

Proposal

Complies

Maximum number of storeys

4 storeys with loft

 

4 storeys with loft

Yes

Maximum FSR

 

Maximum 0.9:1

0.96:1

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

Maximum Wall Height

Maximum 14m

 

14.5m

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

Maximum Building Height

Maximum 16.65m (includes additional height of 1.65m allowable for lofts)

 

21.5m to top of feature roof.

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

 

Minimum Landscaped Area (% site area)

Minimum 40%

76%

Yes

 

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 2004 – Application of Development Standards

 

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

 

9.      POLICY CONTROLS

 

9.1    Prince Henry Development Control Plan

 

The Prince Henry DCP applies to the developable land within the Prince Henry Site and contains controls that are specifically precinct based. The subject site lies within Precinct P1 and, as such, is subject to the following specific precinct controls:

 

Control

Requirement

Proposal

Complies

Maximum number of storeys

4 storeys with loft

 

4 storeys with loft

Yes

Maximum FSR

 

Maximum 0.9:1

0.96:1

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

Maximum Wall Height

Maximum 14m

 

14.5m

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

Maximum Building Height

Maximum 16.65m (includes additional height of 1.65m allowable for lofts)

 

21.5m to top of feature roof. 

No (SEPP No1 Objection submitted)

Minimum Landscaped Area (% site area)

Minimum 40%

76%

Yes

 

 

 

Minimum Soft Landscaped Area (% site area)

 

Minimum 20%

62%

Yes

Setbacks

Front Setback to Anzac Parade – 7m (comprising 3m landscape and 4m general building)

 

Front Setback to Gubbuteh Road – 6m

 

Side setback from southern boundary – 2m

 

 

Front Setback to Anzac Parade –  7m (comprising 3m landscape and 4m general building)

 

Front Setback to Gubbuteh Road – 6m

 

Side setback from southern boundary – 4m

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

Articulation zone

Min. 30% and max 60% of building articulation area to be used for building articulation.

Building articulation area is within the required minimum and maximum range.  

Yes

 

The DCP also contains a range of performance criteria for five key elements of the DCP namely site context, sub-division and amalgamation, building and site design, sustainable design, and facilities and access. The relevant performance criteria relating to apartment buildings are assessed in Sections 10.3 and 10.4 below where any inconsistencies between the proposal and these performance criteria are discussed accordingly.

 

9.2    Development Control Plan - Carparking

 

The DCP – Parking requires carparking to be provided for the proposal as follows:

USE

REQUIREMENT (DCP – Parking)

PROPOSED NUMBER AND/OR FLOOR AREA

REQUIRED PROVISION

PROPOSED PROVISION

Residential

1 space per one bedroom dwelling

13 x one bedroom dwellings

13 spaces

 

 

31 residential carspaces

 

1.2 spaces per two bedroom dwelling

14 x two bedroom dwellings

16.8 spaces

 

1.5 spaces per three bedroom dwellings

1 x three bedroom dwellings proposed

1.5 spaces

 

Visitor:

1 space per 4 units

Total dwellings = 28

 7 spaces

6 spaces

TOTAL

 

 

38.3 spaces

37 spaces

 

The proposal does not comply with the DCP – Parking by 1 visitor carparking space and this is assessed in Section 10.3.2 below.

 

9.3    Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

Section 94 contributions are not payable for developments that meet the Deemed DCP standards as the open space and community facility provisions in the Deemed DCP were designed to meet the requirements of the projected number of residents established in the Deemed DCP. The proposal exceeds the projected number of dwellings established in the Master Plan/Deemed DCP by 5 one-bedroom units. In view of this a Section 94 contribution will be applied for the additional units.

 

9.4    Rainwater Tanks Policy, 2003

Council’s Rainwater Tanks Policy requires installation of rainwater tanks for all residential development. Council’s Strategic Planner has advised that the requirement for rainwater tanks does not apply in the subject site as the stormwater from the site will be harvested into designated storage ponds to contribute to the whole of Prince Henry site irrigation needs under the total water cycle strategy of the DCP. The Deemed DCP also recommends collection of roof water for irrigation as per the total water cycle strategy. Furthermore, the applicant has provided a Sustainability Report containing a BASIX assessment and detailing all ESD measures to be applied in the proposed development to achieve the BASIX criteria including the use of water conservation strategies detailing, amongst other things, the use of high efficiency fixtures and fittings, and water-saving landscape irrigation systems. Accordingly, the subject site is exempt from Council’s Rainwater Tank Policy.

 

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        Section 91 EP&A Act (Integrated Development)

 

Section 91 of the EP&A Act relates to development that requires development consent and one or more other approvals under relevant nominated Acts. The former Prince Henry Hospital site is located within a conservation area, which has been gazetted in the State Heritage Register, so that any development proposal requires the consent of the Heritage Council of NSW. Accordingly, the application was referred to the Council as integrated development. The Heritage Council advised of its approval of the integrated development application in a letter dated 26 March 2007 with its accompanying general terms of approval. The general terms of approval have been included as a condition of consent.

 

10.1.2        Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Clause 21 Sub-division

 

The draft strata plans provided are consistent with the architectural plans that will be the subject of approval if granted. The proposed sub-division is consistent with Part 3.0 of the relevant requirements of the Prince Henry DCP. Standard conditions relating to sub-division will be applied should approval be granted.

 

Clause 30A (2) Development of certain Land in Zone No 2D (maximum Floor

                            Space Ratio)

 

A floor space ratio of 0.9:1 is applicable to the subject site pursuant to Clause 30A (2) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal development has a FSR of 0.96:1.

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with Clause 30A (2) of Randwick LEP 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 proposed development will be consistent with planning objectives for the locality in that it will promote the redevelopment of the Prince Henry Site primarily for residential housing, and in the case of Lot 18, for high density residential development, as required in the Prince Henry Master Plan/Deemed DCP and Prince Henry DCP.

 

The proposed development will be consistent with planning objectives for the locality in that: 

1.     It fulfils the Masterplan principle contained in the Prince Henry Masterplan (Section 5.5 page 10) , namely to

 

 

2.     It will promote the redevelopment of the Prince Henry Site, in the case of Lot 24, for multi-storey residential development to form an appropriate built form and massing in this lot (together with Lots 6 and 18) which have been identified for higher densities and heights precisely to mark the urban character of the overall Prince Henry site as one drives south along Anzac Parade culminating in the townscape entry/gateway that is Lots 11 and 13.

3.     It will implement the Prince Henry DCP Precinct P1 Objectives (Section 7.1, page 49) namely “To achieve a distinct builtform and strong streetscape character along Anzac Parade with buildings framing the entrance road to the precinct” (ie., Gubbuteh Road), and Performance Criteria that requires that “New buildings are to be sited and designed to form a strong, predominantly continuous built edge to the primary street frontage and public parks and pathways, namely Anzac Parade … and connecting path to the corner of Anzac Parade and Pine Avenue.”

4.     The proposed development will also result in an improved urban environment, ensuring an orderly and economic use of land for urban consolidation in the Prince Henry site with minimal adverse environmental and amenity impacts on neighbouring uses and locating these in close proximity to public transport, regional centres and services.

 

The aims and objectives of SEPP No.1 are to :

 

“provide flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) of the Act.”

 

The objects of the Act under Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) are:

 

“to encourage:

 

(i)       The proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purposes of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and better environment;

 

(ii)      The promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land.”

 

The variation from the FSR control is not inconsistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section (a) (i) and (ii), specifically, in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and development of the subject land in line with the overall Prince Henry Master Plan/Deemed DCP and DCP – Prince Henry.

 

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 vis-à-vis the need to provide an appropriate mix of apartment sizes whilst maintaining adequate level of amenity for the proposed development especially in terms of solar access, ventilation and landscaping.

 

In contrast, the proposed development would allow for a reasonable redevelopment of the land but with a better urban outcome in terms of the following:

 

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 as the proposal meets with the purpose of Clause 30A(2).

 

 

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 that:

 

·            The proposed non-compliance do not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of either the 2D zone in which the site is located or the general objectives for the built and natural environment and amenity or the objectives of the FSR standard.

 

·            The extent of the non-compliance in both instances is relatively minor and does not result in any substantive adverse environmental impacts in terms of overshadowing or loss of amenity to adjoining development

 

·            The proposal will provide a high quality contemporary design that is sympathetic to the desired future character of the area.

 

·            The scale and nature of the non-compliances do not give rise to matters of state or regional significance, nor do the non-compliances adversely impact the public interest.

 

It is considered that the SEPP 1 objection is well founded and should be supported considering that the proposed building will not be visually intrusive in the existing coastal and bushland setting and is consistent with the desired future character of the Prince Henry Site as expressed in the Prince Henry Master Plan/Deemed DCP and the DCP – Prince Henry Site.

 

Clause 30A (4) Development of certain Land in Zone No 2D (maximum

                            building and wall height)

 

The proposal does not comply with the maximum building and wall height control of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 as follows:

 

Control

Requirement

Proposal

Complies

Maximum Wall Height

14m for 4 storey section

Max 14.5m (to top of parapet)

No

Maximum Building Height

Maximum 16.65m (includes additional height of 1.65m allowable for lofts).

 

Max 21.5m to top of pitched roof feature. In addition, the maximum building height is breached at the top of the parapet and roof of lift overrun with a maximum height of 17.15m.

 

No

 

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with clause 30A (4) 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: 

1.     It fulfils the Masterplan principle contained in the Prince Henry Masterplan (Section 5.5 page 10) , namely to

·         Create a new residential and community precinct within a site of natural beauty and heritage significance

·         Retain openness and well-being felt by people on the site which is so dominated by the natural elements of open sky, sea and coastal winds.

·         New building faces generally to be parallel to street alignments.

2.     It will promote the redevelopment of the Prince Henry Site, in the case of Lot 24, for multi-storey residential development to form an appropriate built form and massing in this lot (together with Lots 6 and 18) which have been identified for higher densities and heights precisely to mark the urban character of the overall Prince Henry site as one drives south along Anzac Parade culminating in the townscape entry/gateway that is Lots 11 and 13.

3.     It will implement the Prince Henry DCP Precinct P1 Objectives (Section 7.1, page 49) namely “To achieve a distinct builtform and strong streetscape character along Anzac Parade with buildings framing the entrance road to the precinct” (ie., Gubbuteh Road), and Performance Criteria that requires that “New buildings are to be sited and designed to form a strong, predominantly continuous built edge to the primary street frontage and public parks and pathways, namely Anzac Parade … and connecting path to the corner of Anzac Parade and Pine Avenue.”

4.     The proposed development will also result in an improved urban environment, ensuring an orderly and economic use of land for urban consolidation in the Prince Henry site with minimal adverse environmental and amenity impacts on neighbouring uses and locating these in close proximity to public transport, regional centres and services.

 

 

The aims and objectives of SEPP No.1 are to provide:

 

“provide flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) of the Act.”

 

The objects of the Act under Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) are:

 

“to encourage:

 

(iii)     The proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purposes of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and better environment;

 

(iv)     The promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land.”

 

The variation from the prescribed maximum building and wall height is not inconsistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section (a) (i) and (ii), specifically, in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and development of the subject land in line with the overall Prince Henry Master Plan/Deemed DCP and DCP – Prince Henry.

 

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 for the following reasons:

 

 

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 as the proposal meets with the purpose of Clause 30A(4).

 

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 that:

 

·            The proposed non-compliance do not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of either the 2D zone in which the site is located or the general objectives for the built and natural environment and amenity or the objectives of the FSR standard.

 

·            The extent of the non-compliance in both instances is relatively minor and does not result in any substantive adverse environmental impacts in terms of overshadowing or loss of amenity to adjoining development

 

·            The proposal will provide a high quality contemporary design that is sympathetic to the desired future character of the area.

 

·            The scale and nature of the non-compliances do not give rise to matters of state or regional significance, nor do the non-compliances adversely impact the public interest.

 

It is considered that the SEPP 1 objection is well founded and should be supported having regard to the minor breach in the maximum wall and localised breach in the building height. In addition, the proposed building will not be visually intrusive in the existing coastal setting nor detrimentally affect the amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

 

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 some earthworks to be undertaken to construct the building 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.

 

Clause 40A        Master plans

 

A Master Plan for the Prince Henry site, inclusive of the subject site, was adopted in December 2001 subject to a number of matters being addressed in a revised Master Plan and subsequent development applications for the subject site. A further revised Master Plan consistent with the required amendments was adopted by Council on 27 May 2003. The adopted Master Plan is now a Deemed DCP pursuant to amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gazetted on 16 June 2005. The Deemed DCP acknowledged the provision of residential apartments in the subject site. The proposal is consistent with the Deemed DCP with the exception of the number of apartments units which is in excess of 5 one-bedroom units. This increase in the number of dwellings is considered acceptable in view of the fact that the proposed building will not be visually intrusive (notwithstanding the exceedance of the FSR and height controls) as the building footprint will be significantly smaller than that allowable under the Prince Henry DCP thus allowing for more open spaces at ground level; and the proposed development will not create any adverse impact on the amenity or visual quality of the locality. In particular, the applicant’s traffic analysis indicates that the increase in number of dwellings in Lot 24 will not detrimentally affect the service levels of the surrounding roads and intersections because the traffic generation of Lot 24 will be a low traffic generation such that it would not have significant effects on the operation or amenity of the surrounding road network and its intersection (see Section 10.4.2.4 below).

 

Furthermore, a Section 94 contribution will be applied for the excess number of dwelling units.

 

On the 18 October 2005 and May 2006, Council adopted amendments to the Deemed DCP subject to variations. These amendments relate to land in the southern half of the Prince Henry site (ie., south of Pine Avenue) and, therefore, are not relevant to the subject proposal.

 

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

 

Clause 43 of RLEP98 relates to heritage items and heritage conservation areas. The subject site lies within the Prince Henry Site which is located within a conservation area that has been gazetted in the State Heritage Register. A Heritage Impact Assessment has been prepared and lodged with the application which has been assessed by Council’s Heritage Planner. In addition, as discussed earlier, the proposal has been referred to the Heritage Council of NSW as an integrated development and General terms of Approval have been received from the Heritage Council.

 

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. In relation to Lot 24, the subject site, a site audit statement (SAS) has been issued on 16 January 2006 indicating that the site has been remediated in accordance with the relevant standards for residential development contained in the Contaminated Lands Management Act 1997 and as per Council consent 1188/02 as amended (for the demolition of buildings and the remediation of the Prince Henry site was issued on 28 February 2003). Accordingly, the site will be suitable for the intended use.

 

SEPP 2004 – Application of Development Standards

 

The Draft SEPP 2004 seeks to replace the provisions of SEPP 1 and has been publicly exhibited (concluding on 18 June 2004). The new SEPP will introduce new provisions for assessing whether flexibility of a planning standard are acceptable or not.

 

Clause 7 of the Draft SEPP specifies that an application for departure from a development standard must demonstrate that the departure will result in a better environmental planning outcome than that which could have been achieved on the site had the standard been complied with and that the proposed development will be in the public interest by being consistent with any aims and objectives expressed or implied from the zone, the development standard, or any relevant environmental planning instrument. The additional tests include whether the proposal will result in a better environmental outcome than a complying development, design quality and whether the development meets the objectives of the controls.  Notwithstanding, that the SEPP is a draft document requiring consideration under section 79C of the EP&A Act, Clause 14 of the Draft document includes savings provisions that any development application made and not determined when the draft SEPP is gazetted is to be assessed against the existing provisions of SEPP No. 1.

 

Further, legal advice provided to Council considers that the draft SEPP should not be given any significant weight, as its final form is neither imminent nor certain and would not apply given that it contains a provision saving the subject application.  As such, further consideration of the Draft SEPP is therefore not required, however, it is considered that the proposal results in a better environmental outcome on the site than that which could have been achieved had the standards been complied with due to its design quality, in particular its scale and form within the streetscape.

 

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

 

10.3.1        Development Control Plan – Prince Henry Site

 

The proposal has been assessed in relation to the Prince Henry Development Control Plan.  The DCP provides a framework for the redevelopment of the Prince Henry site containing performance criteria and controls to guide builtform, provide environmental and amenity standards, and give appropriate heritage protection for the site both on a precinct-by-precinct basis as well as a general overview.

 

The site the subject of this development application is located within Precinct P1 of the DCP and complies with all the applicable precinct-specific controls with the exception of FSR and maximum building and wall height (which have been addressed in Sections 10.1.2 and 10.1.3 above under the SEPP 1 Objections). In addition, the proposal generally complies with the range of performance criteria for five key elements of the DCP namely site context, sub-division and amalgamation, building and site design, sustainable design, and facilities and access.

 

 

 

10.3.2        Development Control Plan - Parking

 

The Prince Henry DCP states that car parking is to be provided in accordance with the DCP - Car Parking. Applying the carparking rate for multi-unit development, the proposal will require 31 residential and 7 visitor carspaces. The proposal will not comply with carparking in that there will be a shortfall of 1 visitor carparking space.

 

The applicant’s Traffic Report advises that this shortfall is warranted for the following reasons:

 

 

The applicant’s advice is not considered reasonable nor adequate and does not justify appropriation of on-street public carparking spaces for the proposed development. Accordingly, a condition will be applied requiring the conversion of one residential carspace into a visitor carspace to ensure that no appropriation of public on-street carparking occurs. The consequent shortfall in residential carparking can be adequately absorbed and provided for in the remaining residential carparking spaces through appropriate redistribution between the proposed number of dwelling units.

 

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

 

10.4.1        Natural Environmental Impacts

 

There is no land containing Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub located in the vicinity of the subject site with the closest bushland located at a significant distance of more than 100 m to the south-east. In addition, the subject site being a vacant lot, contains no endangered flora or fauna that will be affected by the proposed development. Accordingly, the proposal will be acceptable in terms of natural environmental impacts which will be minimal, if not, nonexistent.

 

10.4.2        Built Environmental Impacts

 

10.4.2.1    Urban Design

 

The Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) advises that proposal overall will have predominantly soft white and grey painted precast concrete panels interspersed with accent colours of sandstone outcrops and flora with sliding aluminium plantation shutters to balconies and light-weight metal cladding on the loft, clear glass and powder coated metal handrails on balcony balustrades. A sample board of the materials to be used for the cladded elements, framed doors and windows, shutters and balustrades has been provided. However, colours are not indicated on the board (apart from the description in the SEE). Accordingly, a condition will be applied requiring the submission of appropriate colours to the rendered precast concrete walls consistent with the coastal setting as well as that of the adjacent approved development.

 

The elevation to Anzac Parade will use recessed balconies, metal-cladded planar surfaces, aluminium framed window/door powder coat finish and horizontal ribbon windows. This provides a strong articulation for the building to Anzac Parade to reinforce the edge to this main street. Overall, the proposal will have a modern and superior design and visual character that will enhance the streetscape in this part of the Prince Henry site.

 

The articulation of the building has been located within the building envelope set by the DCP and will not extend beyond the articulation zone indicated for the site as required by the DCP.

 

The apartment design reflects the character of coastal outdoor living with large deep balconies linked to appropriately planned dual orientation layouts. A strong sense of open space is created by the main landscaped courtyard proposed on the eastern side of the building as well as the smaller semi-enclosed north-east facing courtyard to the rear both  comprising communal lawn and generous plantings.

 

The proposal incorporates a loft level. The proposed loft levels are an integrated level of individual self-contained dwelling units rather than individual loft spaces associated with dwelling units below. Notwithstanding this, the loft levels have been setback adequately from the building line of the storeys below so as to reduce their visual impact from the Anzac Parade and Gubbuteh Road. Additionally, the loft level have been integrated into the flat roof-form of the proposed building such that the loft level will not become visually intrusive and bulky, and recede rather than project in the overall builtform of each building. Furthermore, the integration of the loft level into the roof-form has been competently designed such that visually the loft levels present as articulated roof-forms rather than bulky additions. Accordingly, the design of the loft level is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

In relation to safety and security, the proposal has been referred to the NSW Police for comments. The NSW Police have advised that a Safer By Design Crime Risk Evaluation of the proposed development has identified the crime risk rating as being moderate. Accordingly, the Police recommend that natural, low technical/mechanical and organised Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) treatment options should be applied in the proposal to reduce opportunities for crime. A condition will be applied accordingly. Notwithstanding this, an assessment of the proposal indicates that these treatment options have been incorporated into the design including the following: 

 

·         Bedrooms orientated to Anzac Parade and Gubbuteh Road to promote surveillance

·         Balconies to living areas and windows to kitchens and bedrooms overlook the pedestrian pathway along the Northern Bushland Park to the south

·         Controlled vehicular access to the development from Gubbuteh Road to the basement carpark

·         Direct and controlled access from the carpark to lift lobbies

·         An audio/video intercom at the Anzac Parade entry

·         Sentry/swipe card access in the lift

·         Visitor parking is partitioned from resident parking and visitors to the carpark can access the street by a separate visitor access stair.

 

The applicant was requested to investigate the provision of an access link to the proposed development in the adjoining northern UNSW site which is currently the subject of Stage Development Application (DA No. 264/2007) for subdivision of land into 151 residential lots with associated building envelopes, carparking and open space. The provision of a link was considered appropriate for the following reasons:

 

·         New public connections between the two development (ie., the Prince Henry Site and the UNSW proposal) would achieve significant public access benefits as well as demonstrate the tangible benefits of real integrated planning between the two sites

·         New public connections assists in breaking down super block patterns and avoids the creation of enclaves which limits permeability for pedestrians and cyclists.

·         New public connections promotes street legibility, good access and urban integration between adjoining development sites especially large ones like the UNSW site and Prince Henry.

 

The applicant has subsequently provided amended landscape plans indicating the provision of a pedestrian pathway along the eastern boundary of the subject site adjacent to the driveway into the basement carpark linking the proposed future development on the UNSW land to Gubbuteh Road. The applicant advises that whilst a pedestrian pathway is able to be accommodated in the proposal, vehicular access is not feasible given the configuration and size limitations of the subject site. The proposed pedestrian link is considered acceptable as it is considered that the provision of a road link (instead of the proposed pedestrian path) may not achieve significant access benefits given the proximity to Anzac Parade. Accordingly, a condition will be applied requiring submission of details for the proposed pedestrian path should approval be granted.

 

Under the provisions of SEPP 65, a Design Review Panel reviewed the subject proposal together with that on Lot 18 (given that the proposed buildings on the subject Lot 24 and the opposite Lot 18 have been designed as a pair flanking the Gubbuteh Road entry to the Prince Henry site) on 6 February 2006 and has found the proposal satisfactory on all the SEPP 65 assessment criteria as detailed below. The Panel’s comments (in italics) are listed as follows (with Council’s comments included where necessary):

 

1.      Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

 

The arrangements are considered appropriate to the context and site conditions. The scale to the Anzac Parade frontage is well considered.

 

2.      The Scale of the Proposal

 

The two buildings (Lot 18 and 24) are considered appropriate.

 

3.      The Built Form of the Proposal

 

The Panel considers that some treatment to reduce the impact of the driveways should be further considered. Currently they are wide and cut through the gardens (both in plan and section) in a way that decreases the space and landscape quality of the gardens. The driveways and alignments should be narrowed and reconfigured wherever possible, and opportunities for permeable paving investigated. Larger trees should also be considered that would overhang the driveways.

 

The materials and finishes information supplied to the Panel (09.02.07) displays appropriate quality of detail and finish however the metal cladding needs to be clarified with regard to type, detail and finish before an assessment can be made.  Anodised aluminium finish (of suitable quality for coastal conditions) is preferred to powder coat finishes for window joinery and louvre screens. 

 

Comment: The applicant advises as follows in response to the Panel’s comments:

 

“The ramp has been designed in accordance with AS2890.1-2004 for two way traffic circulation. If it were narrowed, the ramp would no longer comply with the Australian Standard (AS2890.1-2004) and would only be available for one-way traffic flow. Provision of one-way traffic flow on the ramp would require the incorporation of passing bays at the top and bottom of the ramp. This would result in the loss of parking spaces both on-street and within the basement car park itself. Furthermore, the car park access controls at the top of the ramp would have to be removed and carpark would then be unable to be secured with a roller shutter, posing a security issue for the residents.

 

It is considered that the current design provides a good level of accessibility and provides safe and convenient two-way traffic circulation both on the ramp and within the basement car park.

 

In response to Council's comment regarding the use of large trees to reduce the impact of the driveways, we have reviewed the species and location of trees each side of the driveways for Lots 18 & 24. For each lot we have amended the tree planting to provide tree species with a wide branching form on both sides of the driveway. 

 

The materials proposed for the exterior of the building will be as indicated on the materials and finishes board and coloured typical elevation supplied. Several external metal cladding systems are being assessed for durability, ongoing maintenance requirements and cost, and the final solution will be in accordance with the drawings provided.

 

It is noted that powdercoat aluminium has been approved for use on window and door suites for all other Stockland Prince Henry lots to date and is considered to be an appropriate finish in terms of appearance and durability.”

 

The applicant’s advice in relation to the driveway is considered reasonable and accordingly, the proposed driveway is considered acceptable given the review of species and location of trees each side of the driveway for the proposed Lot 18 development.

 

In relation to the metal cladding system, the applicant has submitted details of colour and texture of the metal cladding to the facade of the proposed development. These details are considered acceptable.

 

The Panel’s requirement for the installation of anodised aluminium finish (of suitable quality for coastal conditions) for all window joinery and louvre screens is supported and a condition will be applied accordingly. 

 

4. The Proposed Density

 

Satisfactory 

 

5.      Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

 

Cross ventilation should be optimized throughout.  Alternatives for operable ventilation over lobby spaces should be investigated for the single orientation apartments.

 

Air conditioning is not encouraged.  Ceiling fans to bedrooms should be provided. 

Clothes drying areas should be incorporated.

 

The wall sections provided (by email 09.02.07) indicate areas of concrete walls that have insulation at the interior walls only.  Protecting or shading on the outside of the mass concrete walls from the direct sun is the preferred method as it still enables the thermal mass on the internal face to be used for cooling in summer.  This will increase comfort levels and therefore decrease energy consumption.

There are a high proportion of internal bathrooms which is considered excessive, particularly given the narrow cross section and extent of perimeter walls.  Systems for borrowed light should be investigated to reduce the dependence on artificial light at all times.

 

Opportunities for more natural light and air to the basement and storerooms should also be investigated.

 

The relatively large numbers of photo voltaic cells and solar hot water units on the roof is commendable

 

Comment: The applicant advises as follows in response to the Panel’s comments:

 

“Ventilation

It is noted that 66% of the apartments in Lot 18 and 85% in Lot 24 are cross or corner ventilated. The design of Lot 24 with its open light court lends itself to the provision of operable louvres over apartment doors to provide ventilation for these apartments and this has been incorporated into the design as indicated on Lot 24 drawings DA09 & DA10. Louvres have also been incorporated into the Lot 18 lobbies, allowing for natural ventilation of the lobby areas, however the requirements under the BCA regarding bounding wall construction are different for Lot 18 due to the fact that the building does not incorporate an open light court arrangement, and therefore louvres over the doors are not able to be accommodated in this instance.

 

Air-conditioning

Air conditioning is only provided in the living area of the Lots 18 & 24 apartments. A ventilation window is incorporated into the window suite of all bedrooms and living rooms which can be left open at night to provide ventilation, whilst giving the resident an appropriate level of security as the windows are able to be locked in the open position. This has been adopted on the other apartment buildings at Prince Henry and is considered to be an environmentally friendly way of providing natural ventilation without the introduction of further energy-consuming fittings.

 

Clothes Drying

The standard Strata By-Laws for the Prince Henry development prevent residents from hanging washing on their balconies or terraces if it is visible from the outside of the building or is visible from any other Lot. The purpose of this regulation is to ensure that the overall appearance of the development is maintained at a high level. Retractable clothes drying lines will be provided on balconies where possible and not in contravention of the By-Law, or in laundries where these are provided as separate rooms, or in the ensuite or bathroom where there is insufficient room in the laundry.

 

Insulation

Wall sections have been updated to include the provision of insulation to the exterior walls as shown on drawing MF03 - Typical Wall Sections.

 

Apartment Planning

In the apartment planning, priority has been given to providing kitchens on external walls in favour of bathrooms. This is because typically, occupiers tend to spend more time in the kitchen area than the bathroom. This also allows the kitchen windows to be opened to allow natural airflow to ventilate the apartment during cooking.  Where possible, bathrooms have been placed on the external walls.

 

It is noted that skylights have been incorporated into the bathrooms of loft level apartments where possible.

It is noted that the basement carpark is naturally ventilated by way of louvres around the perimeter of the carpark and the store area, providing natural light and ventilation.”

 

The applicant’s advice in relation to resource and energy use and water efficiency is considered reasonable and acceptable. The proposal also complies with BASIX in terms of the energy efficiency and water conservation targets (see section 10.4.2.5 below).

 

6.      The Proposed Landscape

 

Increased areas of integrated planting should be investigated for the large areas of private terrace over the car park podium. Currently the large terraces are quite barren and empty. Integrated planters should be located between private terraces, with planting and frame structures to partially screen overlooking from above. Some changes to the section (26034 DA02 for Lot 18) could allow a better integration of levels to the car park and store areas.

Large trees to overhang the driveways could be investigated (see above).

 

Comment: The applicant advises as follows in response to the Panel’s comments:

 

“Feature borders of decorative pebbles have been introduced into the design in response to comments regarding the expanse of the tiled terrace areas when viewed from above. This is shown on drawings DA03 (Lot 24) and DA04 (Lot 18). The incorporation of landscaped planters on the private terraces has been considered, however it is considered that the ongoing appearance of the development that maintenance of these planters would be adversely impacted by this proposal, as the maintenance and upkeep of these planters would be the responsibility of the individual residents and it is therefore impossible to control the level of care and maintenance that individual residents will provide, which could ultimately be detrimental to the overall appearance of the project. It is not possible to have the building manager maintain these areas as they are located within an individual strata lot.

 

In relation to the Panel’s comment regarding the integration of levels to the car park and store level, we confirm that the level of the car park and store areas are the same and therefore there is full integration of these areas.

 

The incorporation of landscaping elements overhanging the driveway has been discussed under item above.”

 

The applicant’s advice in relation to landscaping is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

7.      The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

 

Thermal comfort and natural light concerns have been raised under item 5.  All other aspects of the design indicate that the project will provide quality living and high amenity.

 

8.      The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

Satisfactory

 

9.      Social issues 

 

Satisfactory. The provision of some smaller units is commendable.

 

10.         The Aesthetics of the Proposal 

 

The carefully composed proportions, scale and detail of the project are well considered and appropriate to the context. The architectural character is promising, provided that good quality and durable materials are employed throughout the facades.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 

The Panel commends this quality application and considers that if the applicant addresses all the issues as outlined above, in association with the assessing planner, there is no need to see the application again.

 

10.4.2.2    Heritage Impact

 

The Prince Henry site and a number of the buildings on it were listed on the State Heritage Register in May 2003. The site has been the subject of a Conservation Management Plan (CMP), Archaeological Management Plan (AMP) and Heritage Impact Assessment carried out by Godden Mackay Logan (GML) in conjunction with the preparation of a Master Plan for residential use of the former hospital site.  Specific Elements Conservation Policies (SECPs) are being prepared progressively for individual buildings and items. The site also encompasses Aboriginal, natural, landscape and built heritage values. The built heritage on the site includes many buildings which were part of the former Coast and Prince Henry Hospitals on the site.

 

The development application submission includes a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by Tanner Architects which refers to relevant conservation policies and to the policies for new development contained in the DCP for the site.  The submission notes that the proposal will provide a positive contribution to the Prince Henry site and will have no potential impact of the identified heritage values of the site, including the fairly distant Matron Dixon Nurses Home and Artisans’ Cottages.  In relation to landscape elements, the HIS notes that appropriate protective measures should be undertaken during the construction phase to ensure no impact on the neighbouring Northern Bushland Park.

 

Council’s Heritage Planner advises that the proposal is generally consistent with the siting and envelope requirements of the Prince Henry Site Development Control Plan, although non-compliances have been identified relating to maximum building height and maximum wall height and floor space ratio.  Despite the non-compliance of the buildings with the height controls, the walls of the loft levels will be set back from the walls of the lower levels so that the loft level will not significantly add to the bulk of the building.

 

Overall, the proposal is considered reasonable and acceptable in terms of its impact on the heritage significance of the Prince Henry site, and specifically, the nearby significant buildings and place primarily as the site has been cleared of built structures and landscape features.

 

The Heritage Council of NSW has provided appropriate conditions in its general Terms of Approval issued for the proposed development on 22 May 2007.

 

 

 

10.4.2.3    Sunlight, Privacy and Views

 

The subject site is bounded by roads on the southern and western sides, private open space to the east and the UNSW playing fields to the north. Shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that at 9am, 12 noon and 3pm in the winter solstice, overshadowing will be confined predominantly to Anzac Parade, Gubbuteh Road and the private open space to the west (between lots 24 and 15). Some overshadowing will occur on the proposed development approved on Lot 18 in the winter afternoon. However, this overshadowing will fall on the end wall of the Lot 18 development with minimal impact confined only to the afternoon. Accordingly, the overall overshadowing impact of the proposal will be acceptable and reasonable. 

 

The DCP requires that new dwellings must achieve 3 hours of solar access 9am to 3pm midwinter. The DCP also requires that development maximise north facing roofs for installation of solar collectors. All living rooms of apartments are orientated to the east and north and achieve 3 hours of solar access between 9:00 am and 3:00 pm in the winter solstice. South facing apartments have been eliminated in the proposal. North facing solar panels have been located on the roof of the development in accordance with the DCP.

 

The elevations have been treated to modulate solar access by the use of sunshading devices, articulation and overhangs to the western facade with greater areas of glazing on the northern, southern and eastern elevations. The central courtyard will have a major portion that will be directly north-facing thus achieving good solar access especially throughout midwinter.

 

In terms of privacy, the proposal will perform well in that:

 

·    The proposal complies fully with the setback requirements of the Prince Henry DCP.

 

·    All apartments will all face relevant street-frontages to Anzac Parade and Gubbuteh Road.

 

·    The proposal will have generous separation distances of between (max) 30m and (min) 12 m to the approved future residential uses across Gubbuteh Road to the south (Lot 18) and south-east (Lot 19).

 

In terms of views, the proposal will maintain the view-sharing principles of the Prince Henry DCP as the proposal is located on the ridge line at the western-most end of the Prince Henry site on Anzac Parade and, as such overlooks the wider Prince Henry site and the coast to the east. Furthermore the proposal, in general, is not considered excessive in height bulk and scale.

 

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

 

10.4.2.4    Traffic and access

 

The applicant’s traffic report indicates that the proposal is expected to generate approximately 12 to 15 vehicles per hour two-way during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Whilst the proposal will have a minor increase of 4 one-bedroom dwellings over that projected in the Master Plan/Deemed DCP, this increase is off-set by the fact that the proposal will only have 1 three-and-above bedroom dwelling compared with the projected 11. Accordingly, in traffic terms, the proposal will not generate any significant increase in traffic over that assessed under the Master Plan. In any event, the applicant’s traffic report advises that the expected traffic generation will be low (equivalent to on average only one vehicle every 4 to 5 minutes) which would not have a significant effect on the operation or amenity of the surrounding road network and its intersection.

 

10.4.2.5    Ecologically Sustainable Development

 

The Prince Henry DCP requires the preparation of a Sustainability Building Report by an appropriately qualified professional to improve the energy efficiency of the proposed building. The applicant has provided a Sustainability Report prepared by a consultant engineer, incorporating a BASIX assessment of the proposal in accordance with BASIX modelling requirements for multi-unit housing. The assessment shows that the proposed development will achieve a 41% energy saving target which would comply with the 30% saving target under BASIX, and a 58% water saving target which would comply with the 40% water saving requirement under BASIX. Accordingly, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of energy and water conservation.

 

The SEE states that the proposal will also incorporate the following sustainability measures:

 

·      Building orientation to provide future occupant with optimum sun-control.

·      Building materials that provide a balance of external insulation for thermal protection and internal thermal mass for heat absorption.  

·      Use passive design measures including natural ventilation and external shading to achieve maximum thermal comfort.

·      Use sun control elements comprising a combination of vertical and horizontal external shading devices, internal blinds and glare control.

·      Use of photo-voltaic cells on the roofs to generate green power and conserve energy.

·      Use of high efficiency lighting such as compact fluorescent with movement sensor control in common areas.

·      Use of greywater re-use system

·      Use of water efficient fixtures and fittings.

 

These measures are considered appropriate in achieving ESD objectives.

 

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

 

10.4.2.6    Facilities and Access

 

The performance criteria for facilities and access generally apply to multi-unit housing developments. The development provides for pedestrian access from all street fronts as per the Master Plan/Deemed DCP and Prince Henry DCP requirements.

 

The applicant provided an access report prepared by an access consultant who considers the proposal against the relevant Australian Standard, BCA and Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). The report indicates the proposal complies with the accessibility and adaptability requirements of the Australian Standard 4299 – Adaptable Housing and AS1428 – Design for Access and Mobility. In addition, the consultant advises that the proposed development will provide the necessary visitability and adaptability design requirements to satisfy the Prince Henry DCP and  SEPP 65. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to wheel-chair and barrier free access.

 

 

 

 

10.4.2.7    Site Remediation

 

A site audit statement (SAS) has been issued for the subject lot, Lot 24, on 16 January 2006, indicating that the site has been remediated in accordance with the relevant standards for residential development contained in the Contaminated Lands Management Act 1997 and as per Council development consent No. 1188/02 as amended (for the demolition of buildings and the remediation of the Prince Henry site was issued on 28 February 2003). Accordingly, the site will be suitable for the intended use.

 

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

 

The proposal will increase the availability of housing and promote the objectives of the zone.  The effect of the proposal would be to bring more people to the site resulting in a new community likely to include young families, and “empty nester” household which will in turn encourage the location of services and facilities into the area. Overall the proposal presents a positive impact within the site and locality.

 

The proposal also has been made fully adaptable for wheel-chair access and will provide for the required 2 adaptable units under the DCP – Prince Henry Site.

 

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

 

The subject site is part of the developable land within the Prince Henry Site which is identified in the revised Master Plan adopted by Council on 27 May 2003 (now referred to as a Deemed DCP). In doing so, Council considered the suitability of a range of proposed landuses and their location within the Prince Henry site. The subject site is specifically identified in the Deemed DCP as a location for a multi-unit housing development. The proposal generally is consistent with the terms of the master plan and as demonstrated above the development will not have an adverse impact on any item of environmental, archaeological, heritage or cultural significance.

 

The site has been remediated in accordance with the relevant standards for residential development contained in the Contaminated Lands Management Act 1997 and as per Council consent 1188/02 as amended. A site audit statement (SAS) has been issued for the subject Lot 24.

 

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

 

The proposal being integrated development was notified and advertised for a period of 30 days between 16 January 2007 and 15 February 2007. No submission was received by Council during this notification/advertising period.

 

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

 

The proposed development is consistent with the deemed DCP and the Prince Henry DCP and will provide the local community with a form of high quality housing and takes advantage of its proximity to the full range of urban facilities and services available to the site. As a consequence, the proposal will have a positive social benefit for the local community and is considered to be in the wider public interest.

 

11        RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

 

 

 

11.1    Outcomes 

 

Outcome 5 : Excellence in urban design – The proposal has a good architectural quality in that it has competently produced a modern and superior design and visual character that will enhance the streetscape in this part of Anzac Parade and the overall Prince Henry Site thus contributing to the identified outcome for this thoroughfare

 

Outcome 11 : A healthy environment – The proposal will promote the principles of environmental sustainable development (including solar access, cross ventilation and energy efficiency), comply with BASIX and occur on land that will be suitable for its intended use as required under SEPP No. 55 - Remediation of Contaminated Land.

 

11.2    Directions and Actions

Direction 5a & associated key action : Improved design and sustainability across all development –The proposal create a good contemporary architectural design for the subject site whilst maintaining the quality of the adjoining bushland and overall coastal setting. The proposal will therefore contribute to the overall pool of well-designed buildings in Randwick City that can be used as references for the development of design guidelines and programmes. 

 

Direction 11a & associated key action: Council is a leader in fostering sustainable practices  -  The proposed development will be designed in accordance with ESD principles (including solar access, cross ventilation and energy efficiency) and will incorporate a number of sustainability measures to achieve ventilation, thermal comfort, water conservation and energy efficiency.

 

12.    FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

13.    CONCLUSION

 

The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site and generally complies with the aims and objectives contained in the RLEP. The proposal does not comply with the maximum FSR and wall and building height controls. SEPP No.1 objections to these standards have been submitted with the application and considered to be well founded in the circumstances.

 

The proposal complies with all the requirements of the Prince Henry DCP with the exception of maximum FSR and wall and building height controls. These non-compliances have been assessed in the relevant sections of this report and found to be reasonable and acceptable.

 

The proposal does not comply with the DCP - Car Parking by 1 visitor carspace. A condition has been applied requiring the reallocation of one residential carspace into a visitor carspace as there is adequate residential carspaces to allow for this and so as to ensure all required visitor carparking spaces are met on-site.

 

The proposed development has been assessed by the Heritage Council of NSW and General Terms of Approval have been issued for the subject site which will be included as conditions of consent.

 

The proposal will not have a significant impact on surrounding properties and heritage items. The non-compliances with statutory/policy controls will not exacerbate impacts, subject to compliance with conditions of consent.

 

The application is recommended for approval 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 30A(2) and 30A(4) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended), relating to maximum floor space ratio and maximum wall 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 under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No D/1107/2006 for the erection of a residential building over basement carparking comprising 28 dwellings, 37 carpark spaces, landscaping, strata subdivision being four storeys and a loft level in height, at 2-4 Gubbuteh Road, Little Bay, subject to the following conditions:-

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA 03 to DA 10, Issue A, all dated 20 March 2007 and stamped received by Council on 23 March 2007, the draft strata plans in 8 sheets prepared by Whelans, Surveyor’s Reference D007-002.dwg dated/printed 4 December 2006 and stamped received by Council 19 December 2006, the Sustainability Report No S4053, Lot 24, Revision C, dated 13 December 2006 and received by Council on 19 December 2006, the application form, and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and the details approved pursuant to the deferred commencement 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 finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be compatible with the coastal and bushland setting of the Prince Henry Site to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

Details of the proposed colours 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.       All window joinery and louvre screens shall have anodised aluminium finish (of suitable quality for coastal conditions). Details of these finishes 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.

 

4.       Details of bicycle storage in the basement indicating compliance with the Development Control Plan – Parking shall 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 development.

 

5.       Details of all fencing on site including all entrances and associated structures indicating compliance with Part 4.16 Fences of the Development Control Plan for Prince Henry Site shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development. 

 

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.       The proposal shall incorporate the natural, low technical/mechanical and organised Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) treatment options recommended by the NSW Police in its letter dated 11 April 2007.

 

10.     Public access to the visitor’s carparking spaces is to be maintained at all times and, if required, an intercom system is to be provided adjacent to the vehicular entrance to the carpark, together with appropriate signage providing instructions for use. This approval does not include the installation of any roller doors or gates or the like to the carpark, without the prior development consent of Council.

 

11.     A single common television aerial, and/or satellite dish (having a maximum diameter of 700mm and not located on the front or street elevation of the building) is to be installed to serve the development.

 

12.     A pedestrian link between Gubbuteh Road and the adjoining northern land (currently owned by the UNSW and subject to DA No. 264/2007) shall be provided as shown on the amended landscape plan drawing no. 26035_DA01 dated 11/05/2007 received by Council on 14/05/2007. Details of the pedestrian link shall 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 development.

 

13.     One residential carparking space will be deleted and reassigned as a visitor carparking space. Details 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.

 

14.     The stacked carparking spaces 15R and 16R in the basement carpark shall both be allocated to one/single dwelling unit. Details 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.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works:

 

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

 

16.     The registered proprietor of the land the subject of this consent shall enter into a positive covenant that no right of exclusive use and enjoyment of the whole or any specified part of the area or areas designated as common area or similar in the approved plans will be conferred on any person or persons without the prior approval of Randwick City Council.

 

17.     Where the plans which are the subject of this consent reserves parking spaces and/or courtyards for the exclusive use and enjoyment to an occupier of the land, the registered proprietor shall enter into a positive covenant that no change will be made to such reservations without the prior approval of Randwick City Council.

 

18.     A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney water Act 1994 must be obtained. Application must be made through an authorized 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.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to release of the plan of subdivision.

 

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

 

19.     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    $9519.34

  b)    for the provision or improvement of community facilities   $4208.93

  c)    Administration fee $425.00  

 

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

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure the protection of heritage and archaeological significance of the site:

 

20.     Should Aboriginal objects be found, the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) is to be informed (as required by the provisions of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974).  Subject to an assessment of the extent, integrity and significance of any exposed objects, applications under either Section 87 or Section 90 of the National parks and Wildlife Act may be required before work resumes.

 

21.     Prior to the commencement of the proposed works, all contractors and relevant personnel involved are to be made aware of the existence of Aboriginal archaeological remains at the Prince Henry site by way of an induction process and of the possibility that more as yet undiscovered Aboriginal cultural material may exist there.

 

22.     Site contractors are to be advised of their obligations under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW) and notification procedures in the event that any Aboriginal cultural material is disturbed or exposed during site works.

 

23.     Prior to commencement of any subsurface disturbance (excavation), all those involved are to be made aware of the potential for historical archaeological relics to survive within the area.  This is to be done through a site induction, which also notifies all involved of their obligations under the Heritage Act 1977 (NSW); and.

 

24.     In the event that historical archaeological remains or deposits are exposed during the works, the excavation work shall cease immediately and an evaluation of their potential extent and significance should be undertaken and the Heritage Council of NSW notified under the requirements of the Heritage Act.

 

The following conditions are applied to meet the requirements of the Heritage Council of NSW:

 

25.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the General Terms of Approval issued by the Heritage Council of NSW as detailed in the letter from the Council dated 26 March 2007.

 

The following conditions have been applied to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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:

 

29.     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.

 

30.     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.

 

31.     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.

 

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.

 

32.     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.

 

33.     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.

 

34.     A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site for the duration of the works, 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”.

 

35.     An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any occupation of the building 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 relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

36.     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.

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

39.     A single and complete Fire Safety Certificate, which encompasses all of the essential fire safety measures contained in the fire safety schedule, must be obtained prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate and be submitted to Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be displayed in the building entrance/foyer and a copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must also be forwarded to the NSW Fire Brigades.

 

40.     As a minimum, 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:

 

41.     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.

 

42.     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.

 

43.     A Certificate 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, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural design requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

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

 

44.     All 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.

 

45.     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.

 

46.     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.

 

47.     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.

 

48.     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.

 

49.     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.

 

50.     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.

 

51.     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.

 

52.     A Construction Site Management Plan is to be developed and implemented 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 and 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;

·                  construction traffic management provisions.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and convenience to the satisfaction of Council.  A copy of the approved Construction Site Management Plan must be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

53.     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.

 

54.     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.

 

55.     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.

 

56.     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.

 

57.     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 or any other container or article on the road, nature strip or footpath.

 

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

 

58.     Access and provisions for people with a disability are to be provided to the development generally in accordance with the relevant requirements of Part 5.4 of Council’s Development Control Plan for Multi-Unit Housing, AS 1428.1 – Design for Access and Mobility and AS 4299 – Adaptable Housing. Details are to be included in the Construction Certificate to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

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

 

59.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

a.  Construct a full width concrete heavy duty vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

b.  Remove any redundant concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks and reinstatement of the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

The works are to be in accordance with Australian Standard specifications for driveways, and in general accordance with Randwick City Council's ‘Standard Kerb and Gutter and Vehicular Crossing Detail’ (Drawing SD4) and the relevant sections of the approved civil works specification for the Prince Henry development site.

 

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

 

61.     The vehicular access, ground level carparking and the basement carpark (including, but not limited to, the ramp grades, carpark layout and height clearances) are to be in accordance with the requirements of AS2890.1:2004. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement, particular attention should be given to the design gradients along the inside edge of the proposed internal driveway.

 

62.     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.

 

All traffic associated with the subject development shall comply with the terms of the approved construction traffic management plan.

 

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

 

63.     The design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the Gubbuteh Road property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the footpath levels along the full site frontage.

 

64.     The design alignment level at the Anzac Parade property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the footpath levels along the full site frontage.

 

65.     The design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the Anzac Parade property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the footpath levels along the full site frontage.

 

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

 

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

 

67.     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.

 

68.     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.

 

69.     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.

 

70.     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.

 

71.     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.

 

72.     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 Certifying Authority prior to the construction certificate being issued.

 

73.     The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to release of the plan of strata subdivision.

 

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

 

74.     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 (ie. above the 1 in 20 year storm) to the proposed drainage system.

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

75.     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.

 

76.     Stormwater runoff from the site shall be managed in accordance with the Prince Henry drainage strategy prepared by Connell Wagner. This shall involve stormwater runoff from Lot 24 being discharged through the underground drainage system into the on-site stormwater detention system within Lot 20.

 

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

 

78.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

“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.

 

80.     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 an occupation certificate being issued for the proposed development.

 

b)       The car washing bay/s 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’

 

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

 

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

 

81.     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.       Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

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

c.       Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

82.     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.

 

83.     As the above site may encounter seepage water within the depth of the basement excavation the basement carpark or similar structures are to be suitably tanked and waterproofed. A Structural Engineer\Geotechnical Engineer shall certify that the tanking & waterproofing has been carried out to an acceptable standard, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority. 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 seepage water to drain around the basement carpark (to ensure that the basement will not dam or slow the movement of the seepage water through the development site). Seepage water is not to be collected and discharged from the site

 

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

 

84.     The waste storage areas shall be sized to contain a total of 28 bins (14 x 240 litre garbage bins and 14 x 240 litre recycling bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins.

 

85.     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.

 

86.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

87.     Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to submit to Council and have approved by Council’s Manager of Waste Services, a Waste Management Plan detailing waste and recycling storage and disposal for the development site. The Waste Management plan shall be in general accordance with the relevant section of Stockland’s letter to Council dated 15/2/2007, responding to Council’s letter of 1/2/2007.

 

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

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works:

 

88.     The applicant shall create suitable right of carriageway, easements for access, services and internal stormwater lines, as required. The applicant shall be advised that the minimum easement width for any internal stormwater line is 0.9 metres.

 

89.     All conditions of development consent must be satisfied and all public roads and reserves must be satisfactorily restored prior to endorsement of the subdivision plans.

 

90.     The applicant shall provide Council with a survey plan of the property prior to endorsement of the subdivision plans.

 

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

 

91.     Detailed landscape drawings and specifications which have been prepared in accordance with the landscaping performance criteria and controls for Precinct P1, as set out in the Prince Henry Site Development Control Plan dated 8 December 2004, shall be submitted to, and be approved by the certifying authority, prior to a construction certificate being issued.  A copy of the approved plan shall be forwarded to Council if Council is not the certifier for the site.

         

The landscape drawings and specifications are to be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect who is eligible for membership with the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA). The documentation is to include:

 

a.       A site plan at an appropriate scale showing existing site boundaries, existing trees within the property (clearly identified as being retained or removed), existing street trees (clearly identified as being retained or removed), features on adjoining sites within 6 metres of the common property boundary (buildings, trees, other structures etc), council’s footway, existing and proposed ground levels shown as spot heights and/or contours over the site, at site boundaries, and at the base of the tree/s to be retained, proposed building envelope, proposed areas of pavement, and proposed landscaped areas.

 

The plan shall clearly show the position, canopy spread (location of dripline), trunk diameter, height and names of all existing trees upon the site and adjoining sites within 6 metres of the common property boundary which are likely to be affected by the development.

 

b.       A planting plan at a scale of 1:100 or 1:200 indicating the location of all proposed planting and existing trees to be retained. All plants are to be drawn at their mature size with a dense planting of shrubs, accent plants and ground covers within all garden beds so that a continuous planted cover is achieved. Plant spacings are to be clearly indicated for all accent and groundcovers.

 

c.       A planting schedule listing all plants by botanic & common names, plant numbers, plant spacings for groundcovers and accent planting, pot sizes, the estimated size of the plant at maturity (height & spread) and proposed staking methods when applicable.

                  

Note: All species proposed for the landscaped areas shall be selected from the list of suitable native species provided in Appendix A of the Prince Henry Site Development Control Plan, dated 8 December 2004.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

h.       The plan shall respect the prevailing coastal influences and the coast's special design considerations and requirements, and shall be designed accordingly. Generally, species selection shall be restricted to local indigenous coastal species that require minimal watering once established or species with water needs that match rainfall and drainage conditions.

 

i.        Porous paving shall be used in all pathways. Details are to be provided with the construction certificate application.

 

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

 

92.     The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved documentation prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate and shall be maintained in accordance with those plans.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

94.     A Site Audit Statement (SAS) and Summary Site Audit Report (SSAR) have been issued for this site. An “Unexpected Finds Protocol” forms part of these documents and shall be complied with as part of this consent. These documents shall be included in all leases and sales contracts.

 

95.     The builders, site workers and the Principal Certifying Authority for this development are to be made aware of this unexpected finds protocol and it requirements prior to any works commencing.

 

96.     Details of and unexpected finds, including the details of any investigation procedures, remedial actions and validation undertaken shall be forwarded to the Council accordingly.

 

97.     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’.

 

98.     Any new information which comes to light during construction works which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination shall be notified to the Council and the Principal Certifying Authority immediately.

 

99.     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).

 

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:

 

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

 

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

 

101.    The acoustic report titled “Super lot 24 Prince Henry at Little Bay – Acoustic Report for DA Submission” report number 20C-06-0173-TRP-204666-1, prepared by Vipac Engineers and Scientists Ltd dated 28 November 2006, and the recommendations contained within, form part of this consent.

 

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

 

103.    A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to a 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 Environmental Health & Building Services.

 

104.    The applicant is to engage the services of a suitably qualified environmental consultant (or similar) to respond to enquiries and complaints made by the community, the general public or Council in relation to Contamination, remediation, excavation and construction site management matters.

 

A specific contact number is to be made available for such enquiries and complaints (including an after hours emergency contact number). A complaints register is to be maintained to record all such enquiries, complaints and actions taken in response to these enquiries and complaints. This register shall be made available to council officers upon a reasonable request.

 

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:

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

The applicant/developer is also 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.

 

Further, 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.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil.

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID ONGKILI

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER


  

Director, City Planning Report 29/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

58 DUKE STREET, KENSINGTON

 

DATE:

30 May, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/718/2006 & PROP021885

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Development application 718/2006 for internal alterations and a new rear ground floor extension was referred to the 12 December 2006 Ordinary Council meeting. Council resolved:

 

“(Matson/Hughes) that this matter be deferred until the finalisation of the Council’s flood study and for further consultation between the applicant and objector.”

 

The issue relating to flooding of the site has been resolved and conditions of consent have been provided by Council’s Development Engineer. The proposed modifications as outlined by the applicant relating to the louvred balustrade to the rear first floor balcony and the amended rear outbuilding are acceptable and satisfy the requirements of Council’s resolution.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The original development application was referred to the Ordinary Council Meeting at the request of Councillors Anthony Andrews, Chris Bastic and Dominic Sullivan.

 

The proposal involves internal alterations and a new rear ground floor extension and a first floor rear addition to the existing single storey dwelling. The proposal also includes a new front car space, a side timber deck attached to the dwelling, a new plunge pool and rumpus room/studio at the rear. The subject site is located within a flood prone area and it was a requirement by Council’s Development Engineer that a flood study be undertaken by the applicant to verify the impact of a flooding event and amend the proposal to address any potential damage resulting from flooding. The applicant declined to undertake a flood study citing the cost of such a study was excessive and a recently approved development of similar scale, within close proximity of the subject site, was not required to provide a flood study.

 

The assessing officer informed the applicant that the determination of the development application could not proceed without the submission of a flood study. As such the applicant was provided with the opportunity to seek a Councillor call-up. The application was subsequently referred to the 12 December 2006 Ordinary Council meeting where the development application was deferred to allow for the “finalisation of the Council’s flood study and for further consultation between the applicant and objector.”

 

Council’s Co-ordinator Assets and the Hydraulic Consultant preparing Council’s Flood Study subsequently met the applicant on site and determined an appropriate flood level.  The applicant was also requested by Council to provide a survey of the property so that the protected floor levels could be established. On 10 February 2007, the assessing officer met with the applicant, where diagrams of the proposed outbuilding, signed by the owner of 58 Todman Avenue (objector), and of the proposed rear first floor balcony were produced. The applicant agreed to a 1.5m high privacy screen and the reduction of the depth of the balcony to 1m as recommended in the original assessment report. The applicant stated on the diagram received by Council on 10 February 2007 that he was “prepared to reduce to [a] 1000mm balcony”.

 

A meeting was subsequently held with the owner of 58 Todman Avenue and the assessing officer on 28 February 2007 who reiterated his concerns relating to the visual privacy impacts and overshadowing of the proposed development. The assessing officer informed the objector that the overshadowing impact of the proposal was reasonable and solar access to the rear private open space of 58 Todman Avenue would satisfy the requirements of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP after consideration of the reduced height of the studio outbuilding. However it was agreed that the proposed rear first floor balcony would have an adverse visual privacy impact and as such conditions would be included with the consent to reduce the depth and include a 1.5m high privacy screen. A submission was received by Council on 12 March 2007 from Sarkis Hill Architects and raised the issues of solar access and privacy stating that a 1.5m high privacy screen along the southern side of the proposed rear first floor balcony would be “very ineffective in terms of providing privacy to the outdoor living space at 58 Todman Avenue.”

 

A survey plan prepared by a registered surveyor was received by Council on 14 May 2007. On 30 May 2007, Council’s Development Engineer provided the final flood levels and the conditions of consent.

 

ISSUES:

 

Visual Privacy

The objections received from the owner of 58 Todman Avenue relating to visual privacy impacts have been addressed in the original assessment report. It was stated in the report for the 12 December 2006 Ordinary Council meeting that:

“The proposed rear first floor balcony will provide direct overlooking opportunity into the rear private open spaces of the rear private open spaces of adjoining properties. This impact to the visual privacy is not consistent with the performance requirements of the DCP and will have a significant impact to the privacy of the adjoining properties.

A site inspection conducted on 28 November 2006 to the adjoining rear property at 58 Todman Avenue, Kensington revealed the potential impact of the rear first floor deck would result in some impact to visual privacy. If approved, a suitable condition should be included in the development consent requiring an increase in the height of the south facing balustrade to 1.5m to ensure casual overlooking is decreased. An additional condition should also be included in the consent that will reduce the width of the balcony to 1m which will result in the balcony becoming a more ancillary structure for the first floor bedroom.”

Appropriate conditions have been included that will not permit the balcony to project beyond 1m from the rear wall of the first floor addition and for a 1.5m high privacy screen to be erected along the southern side of the proposed balcony. The objection received from Sarkis Hill Architects on behalf of the owner of 58 Todman Avenue seeking a 1.8m high screen to be erected is considered excessive and would adversely impact upon the amenity of the bedroom to which the balcony is attached. It is considered the conditions requiring a 1.5m screen and a reduction in the depth of the balcony would have a combined effect in reducing the potential of the balcony to be used for large gatherings and prevent casual or intermittent overlooking.

 

As such the proposal in this respect is acceptable.

 

Flooding

In accordance with Council’s resolution the following comments have been received from Council’s Development Engineer regarding the flooding issue:

 

An application has been received for alterations and additions to the existing residence including the construction of a hardstand car space at the front of the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

  Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with application;

  Plans DWG.A1 – A11, dated 4/8/06 prepared by V Myson Architect;

  Levels Plan prepared by Michael Stynes dated 11/5/07.

 

Landscape Comments

 

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

 

Drainage Comments

Following an investigation of the site, the Development Engineer advised the Planning Officer that the subject development site may be subject to stormwater inundation during major storm events.

 

Council has commissioned a flood study to be undertaken in the area. At the time Council’s Development Engineer originally considered this application the study was not complete and no detailed information regarding flooding of subject site was available. Consequently, the applicant was requested to either submit a privately commissioned flood study which determines the 1 in 100 year flood level for the site or withdraw the application until such time as the Council commissioned flood study was complete.

 

The applicant objected to both the completion of an independent flood study for the subject site and to delaying the proposed works until such time as the Council commissioned flood study was complete. To resolve this issue Council’s Assets Coordinator held discussions with the hydraulic consultants engaged by Council to undertake the West Kensington flood study and the following levels were agreed:

 

  All new habitable floor levels and openings must be a minimum of 600mm above the existing driveway level adjacent to the northwest corner of the existing dwelling.

 

  The proposed carspace must be a minimum of 450mm above the existing driveway level adjacent to the northwest corner of the existing dwelling.

 

The applicant was then advised that a survey plotting the proposed floor and carspace levels relative to the datum level, (i.e. relative to the level at the existing driveway level adjacent to the northwest corner of the existing dwelling), must be provided. A survey prepared by a registered surveyor and dated 11/5/2007 was provided to Council on 14/5/2007. This survey used the above reference point as RL 100.00 (assumed datum) and plotted the existing floor levels and front porch/verandah.

 

The applicant has requested that the proposed extension match the existing floor levels of the current house and that the proposed carspace be 50mm mm below the level of the existing porch/verandah. The levels based on this request are as follows:

 

  New habitable floor levels are at RL 100.49 (assumed datum).

  New carspace is at RL 100.27 (assumed datum). 

 

The proposed levels are below the required levels issued Council’s Assets Coordinator. The Planning Officer is advised that the proposed levels have been referred back to the Assets Coordinator and he has advised that the levels are acceptable, (advice given by John Earls).

 

Construction of a carspace at 100.27 will require a redesign/relocation of the carspace as proposed on the plans submitted. The uncovered carspace will need to be relocated such that it is positioned against the existing front porch, (the proposed porch extension will need to be deleted from the application). The internal driveway will ramp up from the existing back of path to match the relocated carspace. The maximum gradient on the internal driveway will be approximately 1 in 8 along the western edge of the internal driveway.

 

Should the application be approved by Council the conditions attached to this memo should be included in the consent.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcomes 

Outcome 4: Excellence in urban design and development

The proposal has a good architectural quality that utilises an architectural style that will add visual interest and architectural diversity in the surrounding area. The proposal adds a first floor to the dwelling without a significant increase in height.

 

Directions and Key Actions

Direction 4a & associated key action: Improved design and sustainability across all development

The proposed modifications will improve the design and presentation of the dwelling to the street and will not adversely impact the sustainability of the dwelling or adjoining dwellings.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

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 issue relating to flooding of the site has been resolved and conditions of consent have been provided by Council’s Development Engineer. The proposed modifications as outlined by the applicant relating to the louvred balustrade to the rear first floor balcony and the amended rear outbuilding are acceptable and satisfy the requirements of Council’s resolution.

 

As such the proposal is recommended for approval.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.     That Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No DA/718/2006 for internal alterations, new rear ground floor extension and first floor rear addition including new front car space, side timber deck, new plunge pool and rumpus room/studio at the rear at 58 Duke Street, Kensington, 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 prefixed with DWG. and numbered A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A10 and A11, all dated 4 August 2006 and received by Council on 4 September 2006 the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, including the diagram indicating the rear outbuilding dated 10 February 2007 and the diagram showing the amended balcony width both received by Council on 10 February 2007, 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 Planning & Community Development, 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.       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.

 

5.       A solid, louvred or opaque privacy screen having a height of 1.5m is to be provided to southern side of the rear first floor balcony.

 

Details of the proposed privacy screen is to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of Planning & Community Development, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the relevant building works.

 

6.       The rear first floor balcony shall be reduced in depth by 800mm from the southern side of the structure so that it does not protrude further than 1m from the outside face of the rear first floor wall. Details of compliance are to be noted in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

The following condition is imposed to satisfy relevant requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

7.       All building, plumbing and drainage work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

The approved Construction Certificate plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre prior to commencing any building or excavation works, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if any further requirements need to be met. 

 

If suitable, the plans will be appropriately stamped.  For Quick Check agent details please refer to Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au and go to the Building, Developing and Plumbing, then Quick Check or Building and Renovating or telephone 13 20 92.

 

The principal certifying authority is required to ensure that a Quick Check Agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before commencing works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

10.     Hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation 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:

 

11.     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.

 

12.     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:

 

13.     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.

 

14.     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.

 

 

 

15.     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.

 

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.

 

16.     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.

 

17.     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.

 

18.     A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site for the duration of the works, 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”.

 

19.     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.

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     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:

 

24.     The demolition of buildings and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials (including asbestos) 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.

 

25.     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.

 

26.     An Asbestos Survey prepared by a suitably qualified person (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor or building consultant), must be submitted prior to the commencement of works.  The asbestos survey shall include details for managing the removal of asbestos from the site.  The demolition, removal and disposal of any asbestos materials must be carried out in accordance with Council’s Asbestos Policy and relevant workcare requirements.

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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.

 

30.     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.

 

31.     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.

 

32.     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.

 

33.     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.

         

34.     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.

 

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.

 

35.     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.

 

36.     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.

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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 (greater 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:

 

39.     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/upper floor addition.

 

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; and

     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; and

     The pool plant and equipment shall not be operated during the following hours if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises, 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 noise emissions from the development satisfy legislative requirements and maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

 

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

 

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

(Noise from domestic air conditioners)

 

44.     The air conditioning plant and equipment shall not be operated during the following hours if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises, or, as otherwise specified in relevant Noise Control Regulations:

 

·       before 8.00am or after 10.00pm on any Saturday, Sunday or public holiday; or

·       before 7.00am or after 10.00pm on any other day.

 

45.     The installation of rainwater tanks shall comply with the following noise control requirements:-

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

        ●          before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

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:

 

46.     The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

 

47.     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 are applied to provide adequate provisions for access, transport and infrastructure:

 

48.     The proposed hardstand carspace shall be relocated such that the southern edge of the carspace is located abutting the northern edge of the existing porch. The proposed porch extension must be deleted from the application. The carspace must be located a minimum of 0.6 metres from the eastern site boundary and shall be a minimum of 2.5 metres in width and 5.4 metres in length. The applicant must liaise with Council’s Development Engineer to discuss the required location of the carspace prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate Application.

 

49.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

a.  Construct a concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the proposed vehicular entrance to the site. The new vehicular crossing will cross the naturestrip at right angles to the Duke Street property boundary. The applicant must contact Council’s Development Engineer to obtain Council’s design fro the vehicular crossing prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate Application.

 

50.     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.

 

51.     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.

 

52.     The driveway opening onto Duke Street shall be a minimum of 3.00 metres wide as per AS/NZS 2890.1:2004. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

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

 

53.     The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

54.     The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) issued by Council and their relationship to the footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

55.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $121.00 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid to Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

56.     The proposed carspace must be a minimum level of RL 100.27 assumed datum, (see plan prepared by Michael Stynes dated 11/5/07 for origin of datum). The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

57.     The coping course of the proposed pool must be a minimum level of RL 100.27 assumed datum, (see plan prepared by Michael Stynes dated 11/5/07 for origin of datum), or suitably protected from stormwater inundation up to this level. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

58.     All new habitable floor levels, openings or storage areas must be a minimum of RL 100.49 assumed datum, (see plan prepared by Michael Stynes dated 11/5/07 for origin of datum), or suitably protected from stormwater inundation up to this level. In relation to the rear studio outbuilding and the abovestated RL for new habitable floor levels, the building height of the studio out building shall not be increased beyond the height indicated on the diagram of the studio received by Council on 10 February 2007 in order to achieve the required flood level.

 

The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement. Compliance with this requirement must not raise the overall height above existing ground level of any part of the proposed development above that indicated on the Development Application plans, (in particular there must be no increase in height above ground level of the high point of the roof of the proposed rumpus/studio).

 

59.     Detailed drainage plans shall be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority prior to the issue of a construction certificate. The drainage plans shall demonstrate compliance with the conditions of this development approval.

 

60.     Stormwater runoff from the site shall be discharged either:

a.       To the kerb and gutter along the site frontage by gravity (without the use of a charged system); OR

 

b.       Through a private drainage easement(s) to Council’s kerb and gutter (or underground drainage system); OR

 

c.       To a suitably sized infiltration area. As a guide the infiltration area shall be sized based on a minimum requirement of 1 m2 of infiltration area (together with 1 m3 of storage volume) for every 20 m2 of roof/impervious area on the site.

 

Prior to the use of infiltration in rear draining lots (where there is no formal overland escape route to Council’s kerb and gutter/street drainage system),  a geotechnical investigation will be required to determine whether the ground is suitable for infiltration. Should rock and/or a water table be encountered within two metres of the proposed base of the infiltration pit, or the ground conditions comprise low permeability soils such as clay, infiltration may not be appropriate.

 

NOTE: Should the applicant be unable to obtain a private drainage easement over properties to the rear of the development site (to facilitate stormwater discharge in accordance with option b)); and ground conditions preclude the use of infiltration (Option c), consideration may be given to the use of a charged system or a pump out system to drain that portion of the site that cannot be drained by gravity to the kerb and gutter at the front of the property.

 

61.     Should a charged system be required to drain any portion of the site, the charged system must be designed with suitable clear-outs/inspection points at pipe bends and junctions.

 

62.     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 required 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 Randwick City Council's Stormwater Code.

 

63.     All pump out water must pass through a stilling pit prior to being discharged by gravity to the kerb and gutter.

 

64.     All new floor areas shall be suspended on piles/piers with the area beneath left open to allow infiltration of stormwater into the ground. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

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

 

65.     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.

 

66.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

A3      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

PATRICK LEBON

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 30/2007

 

SUBJECT:

DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN - TELECOMMUNICATION AND RADIOCOMMUNICATION FACILITIES  

 

 

DATE:

28 May, 2007

FILE NO:

F2006/06447

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING     

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 24 October 2006, based on a Notice of Motion (Cr Matson, Cr Woodsmith), Council resolved to initiate steps towards a new development control plan to incorporate controls for telecommunication and radiocommunication facilities in Randwick City.  A report was considered by Council at its 12 December 2006 meeting which outlined the Commonwealth and State Government legislation applying to the telecommunication and radiocommunication facilities and the types of facilities that a draft DCP could cover. At that meeting, Council formally resolved to prepare the DCP.

 

A draft Development Control Plan – Telecommunication and Radiocommunication Facilities has now been prepared. The draft DCP is based on the relevant Federal legislation and a guideline document from the Department of Planning. It explains the various telecommunications legislation and provides controls and guidelines for those facilities that require a development application, being ‘not low impact facilities’. The DCP explains that ‘low impact facilities’ do not require development consent under the legislation and while the DCP does not apply to these facilities, carriers of low impact facilities may nevertheless use the DCP to assist them in considering any new low impact facility location and siting.

 

This report details the contents of the draft DCP and recommends that the draft DCP be placed on public exhibition.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

There are two types of telecommunication facilities identified under Commonwealth legislation (Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Telecommunications (Low Impact Facility) Determination 1997):

 

·    Low impact telecommunication facilities

·    Not low impact telecommunication facilities.

 

The definition of low impact telecommunication facilities is included in the Commonwealth of Australia Telecommunications (Low-impact Facilities) Determination 1997 (as amended), a copy of which is included in Appendix 1 of the draft DCP (refer Attachment 1).

 

Most telecommunication and radiocommunication developments proposed in Randwick City are ‘low impact telecommunication facilities’.  Under Commonwealth legislation registered telecommunication carriers do not need to obtain Council consent to install a low impact telecommunication facility provided that they meet certain criteria and notify Council and the community in accordance with the Act and Determination.

 

A carrier authorised under the Telecommunications Act 1997 to install a ‘low impact telecommunication facility’ is exempt from local planning controls.  This exemption applies during the inspection of land, the installation of low impact facilities and the maintenance of telecommunication facilities.  The carrier must however comply with the requirements of the Telecommunications Act and Code of Practice 1997, including consultation with Council and the community.  This is reflected in Council’s Exempt and Complying DCP. 

 

The draft DCP Telecommunication and Radiocommunication thus cannot apply to ‘low impact facilities’ as a development application is not required.

 

The draft DCP provides controls and guidelines for the siting, design and installation of telecommunications and radiocommunications facilities that require development consent from Council (“not low impact facilities”). The report to Council on 12 December 2006 noted that there are few applications of this type and in the past two years, only three applications have been submitted for ‘not low impact facilities’. 

Whilst not applying to ‘low impact facilities’, the draft DCP may nevertheless assist telecommunications carriers also in their siting, design and installation of “low impact” facilities and consultation requirements.

 

CONTENTS OF DRAFT DCP:

 

The draft DCP has been prepared based on NSW State Government guidelines and a review of DCPs from other local government areas.  Research into Commonwealth Legislation and telecommunication and radiocommunication industry codes of practice was also undertaken. 

 

The draft DCP contains the standard introductory Section 1, including the area and type of telecommunication facilities to which the draft DCP applies, purpose of the draft DCP and definitions.  Section 2 provides detailed social, environmental, economic and administrative objectives of the draft DCP.  The draft DCP’s relationship to other plans and legislation (Commonwealth, State and Local Government), including the Commonwealth Telecommunications Act, 1997, Radiocommunications Act 1992, Determinations and Codes of Practice is detailed in Section 3. 

 

Section 4 identifies the type of development the draft DCP will apply to. By law, new infrastructure requires Council approval unless it is exempted by other legislation such as the Commonwealth of Australia Telecommunications (Low-impact Facilities) Determination 1997 (as amended) or is classified as exempt or complying development in Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the Exempt and Complying DCP.  As noted previously, development consent is not required for low-impact facilities. However, the draft DCP identifies information required as part of all carriers’ consultation obligations, including demonstrating compliance with the relevant sections of the ACIF Industry Code for Deployment of Mobile Phone Infrastructure and provision of the information listed in the checklist at Appendix 3. 

 

Section 5 provides information to be included with a development application including information normally required (site and locality analysis and statement of environmental effects) and specific information related to telecommunication and radiocommunication facilities.  Section 5 also identifies public notification requirements in line with Council’s policy.  Detailed design controls including visual amenity, co-location, location, heritage and environment and precautions to minimise any EMR exposures to the public are contained in Section 6.  The types of conditions that may be placed on any development consent are identified in Section 7, including maintenance and upgrading requirements, strategy for any emissions, removal of infrastructure no longer in use and clear site signage.

 

Three appendices are included in the draft DCP:

 

   Appendix 1:  Low impact Determination Commonwealth of Australia Telecommunications (Low-impact Facilities) Determination 1997 (as amended) which defines and details low impact facilities

   Appendix 2:  ACIF Industry Code Deployment Of Mobile Phone Infrastructure C564:2005 which provide guidance on site selection, consultation, design and EMR research.

   Appendix 3:  Compliance Checklist for Low Impact Facilities to assist applicants to address all DCP requirements.

 

ISSUES

 

The draft DCP Telecommunication and Radiocommunication has been prepared based on Commonwealth Legislation, guidelines and codes of practice, Department of Planning guidelines and a review of other local government controls.  The draft DCP includes provisions which reflect the planning environment in Randwick and which are consistent with Council’s existing DCP format.

 

A review of development applications over the last two years has identified three applications which are not low impact facilities.  While the draft DCP provides detailed guidelines for the siting, design and consultation for ‘not-low impact telecommunication facilities’ it is anticipated (based on the previous low number of not low impact facility development applications) that the majority of telecommunication facilities within Randwick City will continue to fall under the category of ‘low impact facilities’, hence they will not be subject to the draft DCP requirements.

 

Council’s public exhibition procedure and legislative requirements for DCPs will be followed, including exhibition at Council’s Customer Service Centre and libraries, advertising in local newspapers and on Council’s website.  In addition, copies of the draft DCP will be forwarded to all relevant telecommunication carriers for comment during the public exhibition.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4b:  New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

Direction:      Develop and implement effective processes and strategies to manage the impact of new and existing development.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Council agreed to the allocation of $12,000 to prepare, exhibit and finalise the draft DCP at the 12 December 2006 meeting. 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The draft DCP Telecommunication and Radiocommunication has been prepared based on State Government Legislation, guidelines and a review of other Local Government controls and Commonwealth Legislation, guidelines and codes of practice.  The draft DCP is recommended for public exhibition.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council:

 

(a)      endorse the draft DCP – Telecommunication and Radiocommunication Facilities for public exhibition in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and Regulation 2000; and

 

(b)      agree that the Director, City Planning, may make minor modifications to any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors, if required, in preparation for public exhibition of the draft plan.

 

ATTACHMENT:

 

UNDER SEPARATE COVER - Draft Development Control Plan - Telecommunication and Radiocommunication Facilities

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

KERRY LONGFORD

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

SENIOR PLANNER/CONSULTANT

 


 

Director, City Planning Report

31/2007 

 

 

SUBJECT:

S94A DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN

 

DATE:

30 May, 2007

FILE NO:

F2006/00093

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING   

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

At its meeting on 13 February 2007 Council considered and endorsed the public exhibition of the Draft Section 94A Development Contributions Plan.

 

The Draft Section 94A Plan was prepared, applying a percentage levy to new development, consistent with the recent State planning legislative changes. The Draft Section 94A Plan was placed on exhibition between Wednesday 7 March 2007 and Wednesday 4 April 2007. A total of three submissions were received. The issues covered by the submissions are detailed in this report. These were not considered to warrant changes to the Draft Plan

 

Accordingly the Draft Section 94A Plan is submitted in this report, seeking Council’s endorsement for its finalisation.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

Changes to the application of Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (the Act) commenced on 6 May 2005, allowing a new percentage levy to be applied as an alternative to the traditional Section 94 nexus approach, and enabling Council to review and update the current Section 94 Development Contributions Plan based on the template and guidelines set by the Department of Planning.

 

A previous report to Council on 25 August 2006 had noted the financial impact breakdown comparing the existing s94 (nexus based) Contributions Plan with contributions likely to be achieved under a s94A (levy based) Plan.

 

The Minister of Planning, on the 13 November 2006, introduced a Ministerial Direction making a number of changes to the types of development for which NSW Councils can apply the percentage levy under s94A of the Act. The changes were incorporated into the Draft s94A Plan to comply with the Ministers Directions.

 

In reporting the draft s94A Plan to Council on 13 February 2007 the financial breakdown was updated to take into consideration the recent changes made under the Minister’s Direction, and figures show that the anticipated contributions remain significantly higher than the s94 contributions being received under the current s94 Plan, while continuing to have a number of exemptions that will benefit homeowners renovating or undertaking minor works on the family home.

 

The draft s94A Plan was prepared consistent with the Department of Planning’s guidelines. The Department also recommends that a policy and guidelines be prepared for planning agreements, which are now an alternative to Section 94A contributions. The Draft Plan outlines the process for considering Planning Agreements, consistent with the Department’s Section 94A Plan template. A Draft Policy is thus being prepared to provide further information on this matter and will be reported to Council shortly. Attachment 2 contains a copy of the Department’s Practice Notes on Planning Agreements.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

The Draft Plan was placed on public exhibition at Council’s Customer Service Centre, with copies placed in all the libraries and an information sheet produced with an overview of the Draft Plan. The information sheet and the Draft Plan were sent to all Precinct Committees and Chambers and the proposals were also presented to the combined Precincts and Chambers committees.

 

SUBMISSIONS:

 

During the exhibition period a total of three written submissions were received. These submissions, while not objecting, outlined some concerns by the community and are summarised below. These submissions were not considered to warrant changes to the Draft Plan.

 

Name

Comments

Planning Response

Dr Emoke Tork

Had concerns relating to the ratepayers within the City being charged s94A contributions on minor works and renovations.

Dr Tork feels that the larger developments should be paying the bulk of s94A contributions

There are a number of exemptions in the Draft Plan that are considered sufficient in protecting the home renovator undertaking minor works. All Class 10 buildings and structures, which include non habitable buildings such as private garages, carports, sheds or the like and structures such as fences, antennas,  retaining or freestanding walls and swimming pools are exempt from s94A under the Draft Plan. All Complying Developments are also excluded. In addition all renovations that do not enlarge or increase the intensity of use of the property are exempt. Further, all development below $100,000 is exempt from the levy and all development up to $200,000 pays a reduced 0.5% levy.

Andrew  Tosti

The Spot Precinct Committee

Commented on the no nexus approach relating to contributions received under a new s94A Plan. The Precinct Group feel that the money raised from certain development should be spent and applied to that area solely.

While development occurs in certain areas, the community as a whole is considered to be affected by increased population arising, and thus the demands for improved services and facilities are considered better addressed throughout all locations within the community. Many facilities in the Plan provide City wide type facilities for the whole community while located in specific areas (eg coastal walkway).Nevertheless, the schedule of works has been drafted to include new and/or upgraded facilities that are spread throughout the local area as is suitable for the types of facilities needed and their users, ensuring benefits to the entire community.

 

The draft S94A Plan also overcomes the difficulty of the current nexus based S94 Plan in that the provision/upgrade of facilities located in a specific area was limited by the rate of development (and thus S94 contributions received) in that specific area. Many of the current S94 accounts have not gained sufficient funds to construct a location specific proposal (eg parking improvements in Randwick, Coogee, etc) and the legislative restrictions on nexus S94 plans do not allow pooling of the various accounts to enable at least one project to proceed. The S94A plan will overcome these limitations The draft Plan’s schedule of works has identified a 10 year plan for funding and each year the specific funding will be allocated via the draft Annual Management Plan and Budget, which are exhibited and will enable public input to the priorities for the S94A funding, to best meet the community needs and demands.

Moverly Precinct Committee

Expressed concerns about seniors housing being exempt from the s94A Levy. The precinct sees that seniors housing is being used as a play to breach zoning requirements

Seniors housing, as defined in the State Environmental Planning Policy (Seniors Living) 2004 will be required to pay the S94A levy under the Draft S94A Plan. The draft Plan does, however provide for applicants to seek an exemption, subject to the criteria set out in Clause 12.4 of the Draft S94A Plan in relation to any public benefits that may be arising from the development. All development applications must be determined in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plans adopted by Council. The Section 94A Plan does not in any way enable a breach of the zoning requirements of these Plans.

 

COMMENCEMENT:

 

The commencement date for the draft S94A Plan is recommended for 2 July 2007, as this will enable the administration of the new plan to commence with the financial year.

The Draft Plan will supersede the current Section 94 Plan and all development applications lodged after this date will be subject to the new Section 94A Plan.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:    A Vibrant and diverse Community.

Direction 2b:  Enrich our range of community service that meet our community’s needs.

Direction 2d:  New and upgraded community facilities that are multi purpose and in accessible locations.

 

Outcome 6:    A Liveable City.

Direction 6a:  Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Preparation of the draft s94A Plan has been largely in-house, based on 3 days per week for a s94 planner over 12 months and approximately $25,000 for an expert peer review, charged from the s94 budget.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Draft Plan has been peer reviewed by a s94A expert and is considered to meet all legislative requirements.

 

The s94A Plan will provide a clear, simple, efficient and equitable means of levying development contributions, and offers greater flexibility for use of the revenue and prompt application to a range of public facilities.

 

A policy is being prepared to assist in the application of any Planning Agreements that may now be considered by the applicant under Section 94 legislation as an alternative to Section 94 contributions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council:

 

(a)  approve the Draft Section 94A Development Contributions Plan in accordance with Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations 2000 for commencement on 2 July 2007; and

 

(b)  agree that the Director, City Planning, may make minor modifications to any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors, if required, in the finalisation and printing of the draft plan.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.   Section 94 Plan (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

2.   Practice Notes from Department of Planning on Planning Agreements (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)  

 

 

 

………………………………

 

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

TARA MULHOLLAND

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

SECTION 94/STUDENT PLANNER


Director, City Planning Report

32/2007  

 

SUBJECT:

DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE LEP 2007 - PUBLIC EXHIBITION 2007

 

DATE:

11 April, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/08093

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

A draft administrative Local Environmental Plan (LEP) has been prepared. The plan consolidates the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and all previous amendments, updates mapping, makes various minor amendments and corrections, partially incorporates the State Government’s Standard template and adds new State Environmental Planning Policies.

 

Council has previously obtained the required written authorisation from the Department of Planning to prepare the administrative draft plan. Council now requires written authorisation from the Department to exhibit the draft plan.

 

This report recommends that Council seek the necessary authorisation and proceed to exhibit the draft plan for public comment.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

At the Health Building and Planning Committee of 12 September 2006, Council resolved under section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act)

 

“…to prepare an Administrative Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to make minor clarifications, corrections, update definitions, clauses, provisions, wording and mapping into one consolidated LEP.

 

This draft plan draws on the format of the State Government’s Standard Template and will simplify Council’s preparation of the comprehensive Local Environmental Plan.

 

ISSUES:

 

DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE LEP CONTENT:

 

The draft plan is called Randwick (Administrative) Local Environmental Plan 2007 and, once gazetted, will become the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2007.

 

The draft plan will consolidate all previous plan amendments and include reference to new State Environmental Planning Policies. Certain provisions and formatting of the Standard template are included in-line with the Director General’s requirements. There are occasional changes to words and phrases and these are intended to clear up grey areas within the current plan.

 

The draft plan would not change the zone of any property. However, there are new land-use definitions and minor changes to some zone and development standard objectives.

A comparison table showing the changes to the plan (Attachment 5) is provided under separate cover. A discussion on the main changes follows.

 

PROPOSED LEP CHANGES

 

General revisions

The main body of the document has been screened for obvious wordiness. For instance, the current plan appears to make a distinction between ‘enhance’ and ‘improve’. The plan uses one or the other and in the case of a 4B zone a development must ‘enhance and improve’ the natural environment. The Australian Oxford defines ‘enhance’ as improve or intensify and ‘improve’ as make better. It may not always be appropriate to intensify and so ‘improve’ has been used throughout the draft plan.

 

In addition, the clauses have been listed in numerical order. New State Environmental Planning Policies have been added and repealed ones deleted. Mapping and address references have also been updated.

 

In–line with the standard template, the phrase ‘consent authority’ has been used instead of ‘Council’ as the Council is not always the consent authority. Finally, the purpose statement for each clause has either been deleted (if the purpose of the clause was already clear), or rephrased as an objective and given its own clause number. This would give the objective greater weight.

 

Savings

The draft plan includes a provision that saves any application that is lodged before gazettal. This means that any application lodged before, but determined after the gazettal of the draft plan can be assessed as though the current plan remained in force. There is also a new sub-clause that saves a ‘staged’ development application. The Department of Planning noted that this would be a requirement of the LEP.

 

Land Use Table

The land use tables and dictionary now include extra definitions from the standard template. Those definitions and the effect of their inclusion in the draft plan are described in table 1 below:

 


Table 1 - New definitions and their effect on the plan

 

Definition

Effect

Bulky goods premises

Clarifies the acceptable locations for this kind of retail use by permitting it in the 3A and 3B zones and prohibiting it in the industrial zones. This inclusion overcomes confusion in the current plan as to whether this kind of use is permissible in the industrial zone.

Landscape and garden supplies

Clarifies acceptable locations for this kind of retail use by permitting it only in the 3A, 3B and 4A zones.

Timber and building supplies

Clarifies acceptable locations for this kind of retail use by permitting it only in the 3A, 3B and 4A zones.

Subdivision

Added to the land-use table confirming permissibility in all zones. Note that subdivision does not have an entry in the dictionary as it is defined in the Act.

Excavation and filling of land

Added to the land-use table confirming permissibility in all zones. Also allow an entry to be created in the exempt development schedule for minor work associated with landscaping.

Neighbourhood shop

Replaces the definition for local shop and further qualifies the intention for a small scale premises. Also now permitted in the 4A zone.

Group homes

Makes this use permissible in all residential zones with consent. Certain matters for consideration are also included in the Miscellaneous provisions in Part 5 of the draft plan.

Waste Management Facility

Replaces the definition for waste transfer station and has been included as a permissible use in the 4A (only up to 30,000 tonnes/year) and 4B zones (unlimited).

Brigidine College, St Pauls Street

 

The draft Administrative LEP provides for 215 square metres of business premises at ground level and fronting St Pauls Street on the Brigidine College site, Randwick.

 

By way of background, Council considered a Masterplan for the Brigidine College at its meeting 17 February 2004. Covering the whole site including the school and convent, the Masterplan was intended to facilitate improvements to the existing ground-level car-park and the development of a three-storey assembly-hall fronting St Pauls Street. The master plan included three ground-level retail units within the assembly hall. However, the units were (and remain) prohibited by the LEP. The Masterplan was adopted by Council and the resolution included a provision supporting the preparation of a draft LEP to allow the retail units, subject to a economic analysis.

 

That Council resolution of 17 February is partially reproduced here:

 

Council in principle prepare a draft local environmental plan to amend Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 to allow the development of retail/commercial suites at ground level within the portion of the site fronting St Paul’s Street, subject to an appropriate economic analysis being submitted by the proponent demonstrating the suitability of the site for a retail/commercial use and its impact on The Spot Town Centre.

 

The land-owner submitted an economic analysis in accordance with the resolution and it is considered to be acceptable. A summary of the findings of the analysis is reproduced here:

 

·         The additional retail development proposed is 215 sqm in total. If all occupied as retail, it would be roughly a 14% increase of the total 1,551 sqm of retail space in The Spot. However, as an increment to the total shop front floor space in the area – that is, excluding the theatre – it represents only a 2.4% increase in floor area.

·         The overall low vacancy rate suggests demand for shop front space in this precinct.

·         The convenience retail accounts for a modest proportion of all shop front floor space in the precinct and that has declined slightly in recent years.

·         Performance of the precinct may be limited to some extent by current limited parking, a situation that the proposed car park will improve.

·         There is likely to be some modest growth in retail demand in the precinct from a combination of overall demand growth (population and spending) and improved parking in the area.

·         Having active shop front spaces on the site is far preferable to having a blank wall.

·         The shop front spaces are as likely to be occupied by restaurants and offices/services as by retail in the short term, but may attract some specialist retailers (eg florist) given the expected significant passing trade generated by those accessing the parking lot.

·         There are no apparent negative impacts of the new retail development in the area.

 

Industrial land

The draft plan clarifies the limited range of business uses that are appropriate in the industrial zones.

The intention of the existing plan is to permit only retail and commercial uses that are ancillary and/or for the convenience of workers in industrial estates. However, the enabling clause is ambiguous and at least one interpretation would permit retail or commercial uses on a large scale. The draft plan rephrases the industrial zone objectives so that the intended scale of retail and commercial uses is clear. Child care centres have been prohibited to maximise the availability of this limited industrial land for industrial uses. This is consistent with the template.

 

There are new land-use definitions for bulky goods premises, landscape and garden supplies, timber and building supplies, and neighbourhood shop. These are taken from the Standard template and their inclusion in the plan is intended to refine the range of business types that are permitted in the industrial 4A zone.

 

The draft plan thus omits the provision for retail and commercial premises in the clause for additional development in industrial zones.  The draft plan does retain the allowance for a neighbourhood shop in the industrial zone so that the daily needs of workers is catered for.

 

These changes will protect and strengthen the viability of Randwick’s industrial (and business) land and is in-line with the Greater Metropolitan Strategy and the Randwick City Plan.

 

Aircraft Noise

The draft plan reflects the Minister’s S117 direction (No. 12) for development near licensed aerodromes. The amended clause requires new development within an Australian Noise Exposure Forecast of greater than 20 to comply with AS 2021 Acoustics – Aircraft Noise Intrusion – Building siting and construction guidelines.

 

Tree Preservation Orders

The draft plan omits redundant sub-clauses. These sub-clauses are un-necessary because the EP&A Act now provides a mechanism for the preparation of a Tree Preservation Order.

 

Exempt and Complying Development

The draft plan includes the Standard template provisions for exempt development and complying development. The new arrangements essentially incorporate all of Council’s current exempt and complying provisions into the new LEP. The schedules include some minor changes to clear-up grey areas with the existing document in relation to parking, stormwater and fire requirements.

 

There are no changes to the parking requirements. There is presently a discrepancy between the exempt and complying schedule, which allows an open car parking space to be 5 metres long, and the Dwelling House and Dual Occupancy DCP that requires all parking to 5.5 metres long. The Dwelling House and Dual Occupancy DCP is under review for the comprehensive LEP/DCP and the discrepancy will be resolved in favour of the shorter length during that review. The recommendation includes a provision to endorse the reduced length.

 

New to the schedules are categories for excavation and filling of land and a range of development categories for Sydney Ports and the University of New South Wales.

The University grounds are split into an ‘inner area’ and an ‘outer area’. The outer area is all land within 60 metres of a street boundary. The exemptions are more restrictive in the outer area. Land in the inner area is not likely to be visible from a public place outside the campus. The Sydney Ports schedule is similar to those already in place with Botany Bay City Council and is supplemented by a ‘guideline’, which is included as Attachment 5 to this report.

 

The new range of exempt and complying categories for Part Botany and the University are shown in the matrix below:

 

 

Matrix 1 - New exempt and complying categories for the University and Port Botany

 

 

Exempt Development

Complying Development

University NSW

·        Awnings and canopies.

·        Change of use other than for residential premises, food premises, or increase in student numbers.

·        Demolition of a building.

·        Stairs, walls, paving and driveways up to 150 square metres.

·        Non-structural internal alterations on the main Kensington campus.

·        All manner of landscaping and beautification work.

·        Re-cladding, but only with similar materials.

·        Roof mounted equipment for the purposes of research.

·        Signage for information, direction or identification purposes.

·        Sheds and ancillary buildings.

·        Temporary and event parking for up to 100 vehicles.

·        Temporary uses for up to 1000 people.

·     Change of use between class 5 and 6 buildings.

·     External alterations.

·     Internal alterations.

·     Additions of up to 5% of the area of a building.

·     Demolition of buildings up to 3 storeys in height.

·     New buildings up to 4 storeys high, including a place of shared accommodation, only when more than 60 metres from a street boundary.

Port Botany

·      Access for people with a disability.

·      Landscaping, car parking or paving.

·      Boundary adjustments

·      Non-structural building-alterations.

·      Demolitions up to 500 square metres.

·      Flagpoles to 30 metres.

·      Fences.

·      Internal private roads.

·      Light poles to 35 metres.

·      Various types of signs.

·      New structures to 100 square metres.

·      Hail-netting to 12 metres.

·      Building alterations

·      Building additions up to 500 square metres.

·      New amenities buildings up to 500 square metres and 12 metres high.

·      Demolition of buildings up to 2000 square metres.

·      Fences

·      Paving of new areas up to 5000 square metres.

·      Signage.

·      Retaining walls to 3 metres

·      Fuel and waste-water storage.

·      Subdivision.

·      Satellite dishes to 3 metres

·      Cranes.

 

Development in Open space zones

The draft plan omits the open-space acquisition-processes as these are now covered by the Just Terms Compensation Act.  The draft plan also omits the zone interface sub-clause, which allows (with consent) any use within the public open space zone that is a permissible use in an adjoining zone. One interpretation of this interface clause gives a sense of entitlement to develop open space land that is in private ownership. This is not the intention of the interface clause.

 

The Department of Planning have requested a savings provision be included to cover any development application lodged but not yet determined that may be affected by this amendment.  This would apply to the DA for 66A Doncaster Avenue, Kensington (formerly part of the Racecourse site).  As described earlier, the draft plan includes a savings clause that satisfies this requirement.

 

Residential land

The draft plan rephrases and clarifies the residential zone objectives. There is now an objective each for density, character and amenity. There is also now a clear hierarchy of density objectives for the three primary residential zones. A new clause for ‘group homes’ is included in the miscellaneous provisions, replicating State Environmental Planning Policy 9 – Group Homes. This is in-line with the Standard template. Finally, the provision that allows business premises in a residential zone increases the allowance from 50 to 100 m2 for a more viable small business.

 

The draft Administrative LEP includes the provisions proposed by the previously exhibited draft LEP Amendment No 36, which reviews lot sizes and landscaped area for dwelling house and dual occupancies. Draft LEP 36 is included as Attachment 6.

 

Master planning (Clause 40A)

Following the legislative changes to the Act in September 2005, master plans made under a local environmental plan now become a deemed DCP or a DCP and LEPs should no longer include provisions for masterplans. The previous Council report of September 2006 suggested the master plan clause be deleted, given there is no longer master planning provisions in planning law. 

 

An existing masterplan made prior to the legislative changes in September 2005 (called deemed DCP), may only be amended, replaced or revoked through the environmental planning instrument under which it was made, until such time as a  Comprehensive LEP is gazetted.  The current LEP (clause 40A) provides for a master plan to be amended or replaced but not to be repealed or revoked.

 

Deleting the master planning clause would have the effect of removing any mechanism for amending or replacing existing DCPs prepare under this clause until such time as the comprehensive LEP is gazetted.  Additionally, the clause as currently worded does not provide for a deemed DCP to be repealed or revoked as provided for DCPs through s74(c) of the EP&A Act. This also applies to masterplans being prepared now and in the future.

For these reasons the master plan clause is to be retained and renamed Site Specific Development Control Plans.  In addition a number of changes have been made to the clause, as follows:

 

 

Heritage conservation

The heritage clause from the Standard template is proposed to be included into the draft plan. The clause has a similar effect to the heritage provisions of the RLEP 1998. Changes arising from the amendment include:

 

·         Exempt and complying development does not apply to Heritage Items. Items within a conservation area may still undertake appropriate exempt and complying development.  This is the approach of the standard LEP template and is supported by the Heritage Office and required for this draft plan by the Department of Planning.

·         Heritage subclauses (4) and (10) in the draft LEP are not from the standard LEP template and have been retained from the RLEP 1998.  In the absence of a specific heritage DCP these clauses have been retained to ensure sufficient planning parameters and matters for consideration for the assessment of heritage impacts.

·         The revised heritage schedule will distinguish between items of local or state significance by identifying those listed on the State Heritage Register as required by the Heritage Office and the Department of Planning.

 

LEP STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO AND FOR PUBLIC EXHIBITION:

 

Section 54 notification and LEP review panel:

Council’s decision to prepare the draft plan was referred to the Department of Planning’s new LEP Review Panel on 12 December 2006. A draft had not been prepared at that stage.

 

Council were advised by the Department on 8 February 2007 that the proposals for consolidating and updating the current LEP were supported.  In addition, it was confirmed that Council may continue with preparation of the draft administrative LEP without the need for an environmental study (under s57).  Therefore, sections 57 and 61 of the Act do not apply.  A copy of the Department’s notification is provided in Attachment 1.

 

Following a Council resolution from this report to exhibit the draft LEP, a report under Section 64 of the Act to the Department of Planning, accompanied by the proposed draft LEP, will seek authorisation to publicly exhibit the new LEP. Departmental officers have supported the proposed changes, however, it must be considered again by the LEP Panel. The recommendation includes a provision that allows Council staff to make any minor changes that are required by the review panel before the draft is exhibited. Any major changes would be referred back to Council.

 

Consultation under section 62 of the Act:

Council consulted with the relevant public authorities as required under section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 during preparation of the draft plan.  In summary, the agencies consulted and their comments received follow:

 

Botany Bay City Council:  No comments received.

Waverley City Council:  No comments received.

City of Sydney:  No comments received.

Heritage Office:  Noted that, under section 84(1) of the NSW Heritage Act, a local environmental plan which applies to an item of heritage must contain provisions to facilitate the conservation of the building, work, relic, place or precinct. It was noted that the draft plan includes the Standard LEP template provisions for heritage and meets this objective.  It was also requested that the full draft plan be referred to the Heritage Office during the exhibition period for further review.

Sydney Water:  No comments received.

Energy Australia:  Advised that it had no comments to make on the draft Administrative LEP though it did request to be consulted during the preparation of the Comprehensive LEP/DCP.

 

Other consultation:

Ongoing consultation has been undertaken with Sydney Ports Corporation and the University of New South Wales in the preparation of the exempt & complying development schedules relating to their sites and they have agreed with the proposals.

 

Consultation Strategy update:

The consultation strategy and timeframe reported to Council at the Health Building and Planning Committee of 12 September 2006 is updated and provided in Attachment 2.  The exhibition timeframe has been delayed to that previously reported due to the need for clarification from the Department on some issues; mainly the master plan provisions.  It is proposed the final draft plan will be reported to Council by the fourth quarter 2007. 

 

Consultation under s64 of the EP&A Act:

Council has liaised with the Department of Planning – Sydney Region East, in the development of the draft instrument, as required by Section 64 of the Act.  The draft Administrative LEP and supporting documentation will be reported to the Department of Planning for final review and section 65 certification following the resolution of Council to exhibit the draft LEP.

 

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

 

SEPPS, REPS and MINISTERIAL DIRECTIONS:

 

The draft Administrative LEP consolidates the current Randwick LEP and amendments. The plan does not propose any changes to zoning and thus many of the policies, and directions do not require consideration. The table in Attachment 3 provides comments on the relevant policies and directions.

 

COUNCIL OWNED LAND:

 

The draft Administrative LEP applies to the whole of the Randwick local government area, including all land owned by Council.  The draft LEP does not alter the zoning or classification of any Council land. 

 

The exhibition of the draft Administrative LEP will thus be undertaken in accordance with the State Government’s ‘Best Practice Guidelines for LEPs Involving Council Owned Land

 

RELATIONSHIP OF THE DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE LEP TO THE STANDARD LEP TEMPLATE AND METROPOLITAN STRATEGY:

 

All Councils are to prepare a comprehensive LEP meeting the format of the Standard LEP template and the objectives of the Greater Sydney Metropolitan Strategy and any sub-regional strategy. The East sub-regional strategy is to be released for public exhibition in the coming months.  Randwick City has five years, until March 2011, in which to complete its Comprehensive LEP.

 

The draft administrative LEP works towards the implementation of the Comprehensive LEP by consolidating the current RLEP 1998 and its amendments.  In addition the draft administrative LEP has been restructured to more closely align with the structure of the Standard LEP template.  The administrative LEP, where not affecting the intent of the planning policy, also introduces many of the Standard LEP Template clauses.

 

The draft Administrative LEP is prepared under many aspects of the Standard template Order and will facilitate easier translation of the current environmental planning instrument into the required standard LEP Template format.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO THE DRAFT LEP AMENDMENT NO 40 – FORMER MATAVILLE INCINERATOR SITE

 

At the ordinary Council meeting of December 2006, Council resolved to prepare an LEP amendment No 40 to address the land contamination issues arising from the former Matraville Incinerator site.

 

Draft LEP amendment No 40 is proceeding separately, with the approval of the Department of Planning, in order to be completed as soon as possible.  Given the range of proposed amendments, the draft administrative LEP is likely to proceed slower.  It does, however, incorporate the amendments proposed in the draft Matraville Incinerator Site LEP.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:   Excellence in urban design and development

Direction 4b:  New and existing development is managed in a robust framework

Outcome 6:   A Liveable City

Direction 6d:  A strategic land use framework provides for our lifestyle changes and for a continuing, yet low rate of growth across our City

Outcome 8:   A strong local economy

Direction8a:   Vibrant business, commercial and industrial sectors that provide ongoing and diverse employment opportunities

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

A total of $22,000 has been allocated in the Strategic Planning budget 2006/07 for consultation, advertising, notification and printing of the plan.  The work will involve approximately 6 months of staff time at 2 days a week, to reach referral to the Department for gazettal.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

This report presents a draft administrative Local Environmental Plan.

The plan consolidates the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and all previous amendments, updates mapping, mends various minor issues, incorporates the State Government’s Standard template where suitable and adds new State Environmental Planning Policies.

Council have previously obtained written authorisation from the Department of Planning to proceed with the administrative draft plan. Council now require written authorisation from the Department to exhibit the draft plan.

This report recommends that Council seek the necessary authorisation and proceed to exhibit the draft plan.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

(a)    Council endorse the draft Randwick (Administrative) Local Environmental Plan 2007 to be placed on public exhibition in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and Regulation 2000;

 

(b)    Council seek written authorisation from the Department of Planning to exhibit the draft Randwick (Administrative) Local Environmental Plan 2007;

 

(c)    Council exhibit the draft plan and associated documents in accordance with the Best Practice Guidelines published by the (then) Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (January 1997) titled “LEPs and Council Owned Land Guideline for Councils using delegated powers to prepare LEPs involving land that is or was previously  controlled by Council”;

 

(d)    Council agree that the Director, City Planning may make minor modifications to the draft plan if required by the LEP review panel, or to any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors if required, in preparation for public exhibition of the draft plan; and

 

(e)    Council endorse the reduced length of 5 meters for car parking spaces for dwelling houses and semi-detached houses in the Comprehensive LEP/DCP.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.  Department of Planning Section 54(4) notification

2.  Proposed consultation strategy and timeframe - update

3.  Table of related planning instruments

4.  Exempt and complying development guidelines for Port Botany (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

5.  Comparison table showing current and proposed plans side by side (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

6.  Draft Local Environmental Plan No. 36 (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

DAVID MOONEY

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING OFFICER

 

Attachment 1

Department of Planning Section 54(4) notification

Attachment 2

Proposed consultation strategy and timeframe - update

*Completed items are in bold

Action

Timeframe

Report to HBP (s54)

Sept 06

Update website information

Sept 06

Internal consultation

Aug / Sept / Oct 06

Preparation of the draft administrative LEP

Sept - Dec 06

Referral to the LEP review Panel (s54 (4))

Jan 07

Department and Agency Consultation (s62)

Mar 07

Report draft plan to HBP (seeking public exhibition)

May 07

Statutory advice to the Department of Planning & Parliamentary Counsel (s64)

June 07

Certification for public exhibition (s65)

June 07

Advertising of public exhibition  (depending on DoP issue of s65 certificate)

June – July 2007

Update website

June – July 2007

Consultation with Precinct groups / Chambers of Commerce

June – July 2007

Staff briefings

June – July 2007

Public exhibition of draft plan – avoiding holiday period

July – Aug 2007

Assessment of submissions / revise final draft LEP

July – Aug 2007

Report final draft to HBP (for finalising or further exhibition if required)

Nov 2007

Report to the Minister (s69)

Once LEP gazetted

Notification to newspapers

Once LEP gazetted

Update website information / Staff / Councillors

Once LEP gazetted

Attachment 3

Consideration of State Environmental Planning Policies, Regional Environmental Plans and Ministerial Directions.

Instrument

Application

Standard Instrument

(Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006

 

Standard Instrument—Principal

Local Environmental Plan

The draft Administrative LEP consolidates the existing Randwick LEP, its amendments and updates provisions no longer appropriate consistent with State policy.

 

Whilst this draft LEP is not the comprehensive LEP required under the Standard LEP Order, this consolidating LEP will simplify translating the Randwick LEP into the required Standard LEP format.  Where clauses, provisions and definitions have been amended, the Standard LEP template provisions have been used, including exempt & complying development and heritage provisions.

SEPP No 1— Development Standards

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 4—Development Without Consent and Miscellaneous Exempt and Complying Development

SEPP 4 provisions are included in the instrument.

SEPP No 8—Surplus Public Land

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 9—Group Homes

Standard template provisions for group homes included in Draft Plan (at Cl37).

SEPP No 10—Retention of Low-Cost Rental Accommodation

Continues to apply under Clause 5 and operates concurrently with the Boarding Houses clause.

SEPP No 11—Traffic Generating Developments

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 19—Bushland in Urban Areas

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 27—Prison Sites

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 32—Urban Consolidation (Redevelopment of Urban Land)

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 33—Hazardous and Offensive Development

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 48—Major Putrescible Landfill Sites

The Draft LEP carries over existing provisions that adequately address the requirements of this SEPP.

SEPP No 51—Eastern Distributor

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 55—Remediation of Land

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 62—Sustainable Aquaculture

Not applicable to Randwick LGA

SEPP No 64—Advertising and Signage

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 65—Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 70—Affordable Housing (Revised Schemes)

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP No 71—Coastal Protection

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP (ARTC Rail Infrastructure) 2004

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP (Major Projects) 2005

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP (Seniors Living) 2004

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

SEPP (Sydney Metropolitan Water Supply) 2004

Continues to apply under Clause 5.

Draft SEPP (Infrastructure) 2006

In October/November 2006 the draft SEPP Infrastructure was exhibited.  This draft SEPP consolidates and updates provisions related to infrastructure and includes provision for a range of exempt development for infrastructure.  The provisions of the draft SEPP have been considered and, where possible, the draft schedule of exempt & complying development has been made consistent with the draft SEPP.

Direction 1 – Acid sulfate soils

There is no change of zoning proposed in the draft Administrative LEP, thus no alteration to the current acid sulphate soils affectation. Council has not previously prepared an acid sulfate soils LEP, as it is recognised that greater accuracy of the Departmental of Lands mapping is required.

The Standard LEP instrument does not include any standard clauses for acid sulfate soils, nevertheless any future provisions will be considered for the comprehensive LEP.

Direction 2 – Approval, concurrence and consultation

 

The draft Administrative LEP makes no provisions requiring concurrence, consultation or referral with a Minister or public authority and thus is consistent with this direction.

Direction 6 – Coastal protection

 

Applies only to a draft plan that creates, removes or alters a provision relating to land in the Coastal Zone. The Administrative LEP does none of these things.

Direction 9 – Conservation and management of environmental and indigenous heritage

The draft Administrative LEP incorporates the standard LEP template provisions for heritage.  In addition, the clause retains 2 sub-clauses from the RLEP 1998 relating to matters for consideration of heritage impacts in the absence of specific heritage development controls.  The draft Administrative LEP makes minor corrections to the heritage schedule, however, does not remove or insert any additional items.  An additional column identifying an item as of local or state significance has been added to the Heritage schedule 2 as required by the standard template.  The draft LEP is consistent with this direction.

Direction 10 – Designated development

The draft Administrative LEP does not identify any development as designated and thus is consistent with this direction.

Direction 12 – Development near licensed aerodromes

The draft LEP does not create, remove or alter a zone relating to aircraft noise.  It does, however, alter a provision.  The existing Randwick LEP 1998 clause 27 - Aircraft Noise, has been replaced with a new clause to reflect the requirements of this direction.   The clause requires any development subject to Australia Noise Exposure Forecasts greater than 20 to follow the AS 2021 Acoustics – Aircraft Noise Intrusion – Building siting and construction guidelines, thus being consistent with the direction.

Direction 15 – Flood prone land

Applies only to a draft plan that creates, removes or alters a provision that affects flood prone land.

There are new provisions in the exempt and complying schedules that exclude certain buildings on flood-prone land. These new provisions are in-line with the requirements of direction 15.

Direction 16 – Industrial zones & Direction 17 – Integrating land use and transport

The draft Administrative LEP does not affect the extent of existing industrial zones. However, it does alter an industrial zone provision.  A number of new standard LEP template land use definitions have been incorporate.  In addition, the RLEP 1998 clause 36 - Additional development in industrial zones (new draft LEP clause 39) has been amended to clarify the minor extent of retail/commercial uses, based on those of the Standard LEP Template, and to strengthen the industrial objectives and use.  This approach is consistent with the Metropolitan Strategy and s117 Directions 16 and 17 - Integrating Land use and Transport.

Direction 26 – Special area zones and recreation zones

 

This direction applies as Council proposes to alter a provision relating to a public purpose, being the open space zones.  The draft Administrative LEP proposes to remove clauses 5 and 6 of the RLEP 1998 Clause 38 – Development in open space zones (new draft LEP clause 42) permitting open space to be developed for the purpose of land uses adjoining.

The purpose of this amendment is to retain the open space use, thus is consistent with the objective of the Direction to ensure land for public purposes.



 

Confidential Items (Closed Session)

 

Notice of Rescission Motions