Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 24 June 2008

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 June 2008

 

 

 

 

17 June 2008

 

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

 

 

Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 24 June 2008 at 6:00 p.m.

 

 

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

We humbly beseech you to bestow your blessings upon this Council and to direct and prosper our deliberations to the advancement of your glory and the true welfare of the people of Randwick and Australia.

Amen”

 

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

I would like to acknowledge that we are here today on the land of the Bidjigal people of the Dharwahal Nation.  The Bidjigal people are the traditional owners and custodians of this land and form part of the wider aboriginal nations of the Sydney area.  On behalf of Randwick City Council I would also like to acknowledge and pay my respects to the Elders both past and present.”

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 May 2008

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council by Members of the Public

Mayoral Minutes

Mayoral minutes (if any) will be issued and listed in a supplementary agenda.

 

Urgent Business

 

 

 

 

Director City Planning Reports

 

CP23/08    7 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

CP24/08    173-177 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

CP25/08    66a Doncaster Avenue, Randwick

CP26/08    Draft NSW Housing Code & Commercial Building Code

CP27/08    S54 Report - Draft Comprehensive Randwick Local Environmental Plan

CP28/08    Three Ports - State Significant Site Proposal

CP29/08    Cultural Plan - Adoption following Public Exhibition

 

General Manager's Reports

 

GM16/08    Affixing of the Council Seal

GM17/08    Community Consultation Principles and Planning Guide

GM18/08    Randwick City Council Management Plan 2008-12 and Budget 2008-09

GM19/08    Heffron Park - Update on Negotiations with University of NSW for Use of Sporting Fields and Plan of Management

GM20/08    Shared Service Partnerships

GM21/08    Our People Our Outcomes - A Strategic Plan for Human Resources 2008-2012

Director City Services Reports

CS19/08    Beach Volleyball Event - Maroubra Beach

CS20/08    Mayor's Water Saving Initiatives

CS21/08    Moverly Children's Centre and Randwick Care for Kids (ROCK)

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF26/08    Investment Report - May 2008

GF27/08    Notice of Acquisition of Land - Norbar Lane, Kingsford

GF28/08    Outdoor Dining Licence Agreement Renewal - The Beach Palace Hotel

GF29/08    Burnie Park Community Centre - Hours of Operation

GF30/08    Economic Development Strategy

GF31/08    Local Government Remuneration Tribunal - 2008 Annual Review  

 

Petitions

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice

 

NM20/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Matson - Concern over Infill of Ornamental Ponds on Race Course

NM21/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Matson - Impact on Local Community of Japanese Whaling Industry  

Confidential

 

GM22/08    Randwick City Council Management Plan 2008-12: Confidential Fees and Charges

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (c) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business. (In accordance with s404(5) of the Local Government Act 1993, fees and charges for the services provided by this program have not been published as they could confer a commercial advantage to a competitor of Council).

 

GM23/08    Legal Proceedings - Maroubra Garden Village - 13 Tyrwhitt Street, Maroubra

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (g) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

 

GM24/08    Tender T06/2008 - Lease of Bumborah Point Road Recycling Facility

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (d) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

GF32/08    Financial Services Section - Organisational Structure

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (a) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

  

Notice of Rescission Motion

 

NR7/08      Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Sullivan, Bastic & White - Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 May, 2008 - Item GF24/08 - Director, Governance & Financial Services Report - Unlawful Erection and Removal of Posters - Affirmation of Policy  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council

24 June 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP23/08

 

 

Subject:                  7 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

Folder No:                   DA/950/2007

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to an existing detached dwelling house, including construction of a new first floor level, minor amendments to the ground level layout and provision of an upper level rear terrace. 

 

Ward:                      North Ward

 

Applicant:                Archicorp Architects

 

Owner:                         Mr D H Callaghan

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.      Executive Summary

 

The subject application is for alterations and additions to an existing detached dwelling house, including construction of a new first floor level, minor amendments to the ground level layout and provision of an upper level rear terrace. The application has been referred to Council at the request of Councillors Tracey, Andrews and Sullivan.

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Northumberland Street, between Boundary Street and Warner Avenue. The site has rear lane access from Ocean Lane. The site is rectangular in shape and has a frontage width of 10.06m, side boundary depth of 35.42m and overall land area of 356.3m2. The site is adjoined by detached dwelling houses to the north and south. The locality is predominantly characterised by detached style residences.

 

The application was first notified in late November 2007, and was subsequently renotified in early April following receipt of amended drawings and additional information. A total of four (4) submissions, of which three (3) were objections, were received at the conclusion of the public notification periods. The issues raised are in relation to development density, height, setback, bulk and scale, landscaped area provision, streetscape amenity, view loss, overshadowing, privacy, noise, glare and property value. The submission issues have been satisfactorily addressed within the body of this report.

 

Specifically in relation to view loss issues, the proposal will obscure a portion of the iconic headland and land-water interface views currently enjoyed by the rooftop terrace areas of No. 5 Northumberland Street. However, it has been established by the assessment that the proposed design is of a suitable form, bulk and scale, and represents a reasonable attempt to realise the development potential of the site. The proposal will increase the extent of sea views available to the rear balcony on the first floor level of No. 5. The anticipated obstruction of the views is justified when considering the compliance of the proposal with the objectives and performance requirements of Council’s planning controls.

 

The site is identified as being within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) and a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area under Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998. The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will improve the amenity and functionality of an existing detached style dwelling, which is compatible with the predominant and desired character of the locality. The proposed development incorporates suitable design measures that minimise the visual scale and bulk of the structures, and is considered to carry positive planning merits having regard to the site’s foreshore location.

 

The Randwick Development Control Plan (DCP) – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies specifies detailed built form and setback controls for dwelling house developments.

 

The proposal has a floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.87:1, which equates to 310.7m2 gross floor area. The proposed density does not comply with the maximum preferred FSR of the DCP. However, it is considered that the breach will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. Further, the building height, setbacks and façade treatment of the development comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP and are considered to be satisfactory.

 

The proposed development satisfies the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

The proposed development satisfies the relevant legislation, State policies and local planing controls, and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is described as Lot 26 in DP 2598, No. 7 Northumberland Street, Clovelly. The site is located on the eastern side of Northumberland Street, between Boundary Street and Warner Avenue. The site has rear lane access from Ocean Lane. The dimension and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, side boundary

35.42m

 

Southern, side boundary

35.42m

 

Eastern, Ocean Lane boundary

10.06m

 

Western, Northumberland Street boundary

10.06m

 

Land area

 

356.3m2

 

The site slopes from the north-west to the south-east with a cross fall of 1.11m (from RL 38.40m to RL 37.29m).

 

At present, the site is occupied by a part one- and part two-storey detached residence of brick and tiled roof construction, with a basement double garage accessible from Ocean Lane. There is a timber deck attached to the rear elevation adjacent to the ground floor living areas.

 

Immediately adjoining the site to the north (No. 5 Northumberland Street) is a part three- and part four-storey detached dwelling house, which has a roof top terrace accessible from the fourth floor level. The site is adjoined to the south (No. 9 Northumberland Street) by a single-storey dwelling house with a detached garage to the rear. The surrounding area is predominantly characterised by detached style houses. The locality is currently experiencing gradual transition where the older housing stock is being renovated or redeveloped into modern residences.

 

Photos 1-4 show the existing buildings on the subject and adjoining sites.

 

Photo 1 Front elevation of the existing dwelling house on site

Photo 2 Front elevation of the adjoining dwelling at No. 5 Northumberland Street (left)

 

Photo 3 Rear elevation of the existing dwelling house on site as viewed from the backyard of No. 5 Northumberland Street

Photo 4 Rear elevation of the adjoining dwelling at No. 5 Northumberland Street

3.      The Proposal

 

The development proposal includes the following components:

 

·      Alterations to the ground floor level of the existing dwelling to relocate the bathroom facilities and install an internal staircase.

·      Construction of an upper level addition to provide a family room, 1 x ensuite bedroom, 1 x bedroom and rear terrace area.

 

Estimated total construction cost (before GST) $227,500

 

4.      Site History

 

4.1    Plan amendments

A request was made by letter dated 14 December 2007 for the submission of amended plans addressing the following issues:

 

·      The proposed floor space ratio (FSR) is considered to be excessive and does not comply with the provisions of Part 4.2 of the Development Control Plan (DCP) – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. The additional bulk is considered to be incompatible with the surrounding built forms and will adversely impact on the adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy, views and visual amenity.

 

·      The length of the southern elevation of the proposed first floor addition is 20.54m, which is considered to be excessive and does not comply with the preferred solutions of the DCP. Additionally, the height of the proposed southern wall is considered to be unacceptable.

 

·      The proposed rear-facing balcony is to be reduced in size and where necessary, screening devices are to be provided.

 

·      The proposal is likely to affect the views currently enjoyed by the adjoining and nearby properties.

 

·      The submitted shadow diagrams indicate that the proposal will result in significant overshadowing of the rear open space of the adjoining property to the south from noon onwards in midwinter.

 

Additional information was submitted to Council on 7 March 2008. However, the revised documentation does not include any significant changes to the previous design. The submitted information was not considered to have addressed Council’s concerns and a meeting between the applicant and the assessment officer was held on 17 March 2008. The applicant agreed to convert the proposed upper level terrace to an open area, with the hipped roofing setback from the rear wall alignment. Amended plans were submitted on 1 April 2008 and were subsequently renotified to the adjoining and nearby properties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.2    Previous development application relating to the site

 

DA/65/1995       

 

Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, including construction of a double garage and extension of living areas.

Approved 14 March 1995.

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

5.1    First notification

The subject application was notified by letter dated 13 November 2007 to 25 adjoining and nearby properties in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The notification period ended on 27 November 2007.

 

The following submissions were received at the conclusion of the public notification period:

·      Owner of No. 3 Northumberland Street, Clovelly (Objector. This objection was later withdrawn by email correspondence dated 18 April 2008. The objector has viewed the revised design and raised no objections to the amended proposal.)

·      Owners of No. 5 Northumberland Street, Clovelly (Objector)

·      Owner of No. 9 Northumberland Street, Clovelly (Supporter)

·      Owner of No. 15 Northumberland Street, Clovelly (Objector)

 

5.2    Second notification

The application was renotified by letter dated 7 April 2008 to 25 adjoining and nearby properties following receipt of amended drawings. The re-notification period ended on 21 April 2008.

 

The following submission was received at the conclusion of the public notification period:

·      Owners of No. 5 Northumberland Street, Clovelly (Objector)

 

5.3    Submission Issues

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The development proposes an excessive FSR and does not comply with Council’s controls.

 

The proposed FSR is 0.87:1 and exceeds the maximum permissible FSR specified in the DCP by 0.27:1. However, the proposed development is considered satisfactory and will not result in unreasonable amenity and visual impacts on the area. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

 

The existing building has been subject to unlawful excavation to create additional floor space in the sub-floor areas behind the garage.

 

The assessment officer has inspected the sub-floor areas behind the garage. There is no clear evidence of any significant excavation or conversion into living rooms. The sub-floor has a ceiling height of less than 2.2m and cannot function as habitable space. It is being used for storage purposes only (refer to photo 5 below).

 

 

 

The development has an excessive scale. The side elevations have a length of over 12m and do not incorporate suitable articulations.

 

The revised design scheme has reduced the side wall lengths of the upper level addition to 13m (southern side wall) to 14.5m (northern side wall). The rear portion of the addition is reserved as an unroofed, open terrace area, which will not contribute significantly to the building bulk. The development will follow the contours of the site by incorporating adequate stepping in the building mass.

 

The development does not include suitable side setback to the proposed upper level.

 

The proposal will adversely impact on the amenity of the south-facing windows of No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

The strict compliance with the numerical side setback control will adversely impact on the bedroom dimensions of the addition, and create a new storey that is unsympathetic to the overall form and character of the building. The proposed side setbacks of the addition are considered satisfactory. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

 

The existing south-facing windows of No. 5 Northumberland Street are constructed of obscured glazing or are configured as high sill height windows, and do not enjoy direct solar access due to their orientation. The proposed development is not considered to result in any material amenity impacts on the above windows.

 

The proposal has an excessive building height and does not comply with Council’s controls.

 

The proposal will result in a breach against the DCP external wall height limit of 0.2m (northern elevation) and 0.7m (southern elevation). The extent of the non-compliance is minor in nature and will not contribute to significant overshadowing or view loss impacts. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

 

The proposal will result in adverse streetscape impacts.

 

The proposal will present as a two-storey dwelling house to Northumberland Street, which is consistent with the predominant development pattern in the immediate locality. The front façade of the proposal is suitably modulated and will not adversely impact on the streetscape amenity.

 

The development does not provide sufficient landscaped area and permeable surfaces to support the additional floor space.

 

The proposal does not reduce the existing landscaped area and permeable surfaces provided on the site. The existing landscaped area provision complies with the current controls specified in the DCP.

 

The proposed upper level balcony is of an excessive size and is attached to the main living areas. The above balcony will result in adverse acoustic and visual privacy impacts.

 

The proposed balcony will overlook the rear courtyard and bathroom areas of No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

The proposed rear terrace on the upper level will be provided with planter boxes and screening devices, which will minimise privacy impacts on the adjoining properties. This element of the proposal is considered satisfactory. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed location for the air-conditioning unit will generate noise impacts on No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

Standard conditions of consent are recommended to ensure any sound emission generated by the air conditioning units is within relevant industry noise standard, and will not result in any offensive noise.

 

The proposed development will result in significant overshadowing on the adjoining property to the south at No. 9 Northumberland Street.

 

The proposal will not unreasonably overshadow the adjoining dwelling to the south. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed development will obstruct daylight access to the side windows of No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

The existing south-facing windows of No. 5 Northumberland Street are consisted of obscured glazing and do not enjoy direct solar access due to their orientation. The proposed development is not considered to result in any material amenity impacts on the above windows.

 

The proposed additions will obstruct views from the south-facing balcony of No. 3 Northumberland Street.

 

The proposal will not obstruct any significant views currently enjoyed by the south-facing balcony of No. 3 Northumberland Street. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

 

The proposed additions will obstruct iconic ocean and headland views from the living areas of No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

This matter is discussed in detail in the “DCP” section of this report. The proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

The proposed solar panels will result in light reflection and glare.

 

The applicant has submitted a manufacturer’s brochure for the proposed solar panels. It is noted that the panels will be coated with anti-glare layers, which will minimise light reflection to the surrounding premises. The use of solar energy is considered to contribute to environmental sustainability and is supported.

 

The submitted drawings do not show the building footprints and window locations of the adjoining properties.

 

The amended plans have included analysis drawings that include the accurate window locations and footprints of the adjoining properties.

 

The proposal will reduce property value of the adjoining dwelling at No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

The protection of property values does not constitute a valid objection on urban planning grounds.

 

6.      Technical Officers Comments

 

The subject application does not require referral to other sections within Council.

 

7.      Master Planning Requirements

 

Clause 40A(1) of RLEP 1998 provides that consent may be granted to a development application made in respect of a site consisting of more than 4,000m2 only if: (a) a master plan has been adopted, and (b) the consent authority is satisfied that the development is not inconsistent with the provisions of that master plan. The site has a land area of 356.3m2 and a master plan is not required.

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is identified as being within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will improve the amenity and functionality of an existing detached style dwelling, which is compatible with the predominant and desired character of the locality.

 

The following clauses of the LEP are relevant to the proposed development:

 

Clause

Required

Proposed

Compliance

22 Services

Adequate facilities for supply of water, disposal of sewage and drainage are required to support a proposed development

 

The provision of utility services will be required by appropriate conditions of consent.

Complies, subject to conditions

29 Foreshore scenic protection area

Council to consider the probable aesthetic appearance of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore

The proposed development is considered to be of a form, scale and setback that respect the character of the surrounding residential properties along Northumberland Street.

 

The proposal adopts a low-profile hipped roof design with a neutral colour scheme, which will ensure compatibility with the residential streetscape. The facades of the building will be articulated with suitable fenestration pattern to minimise the visual bulk as viewed from the surrounding public and private domain.

 

The proposed upper level front balcony on the western elevation will enable casual surveillance of Northumberland Street.  

 

The development will improve an existing aged dwelling house and upgrade the streetscape amenity of Northumberland Street.

 

The subject site is located one street block away from the foreshore open space areas. The proposed building work is not considered to be prominently visible from the foreshore parkland and the Bondi to Coogee foreshore walkway.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory having regard to the provisions of Clause 29.

 

Satisfactory

40 Excavation and filling of land

Council to consider the likely impact on existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality, and the effects of the proposed works on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land.

 

The proposal will retain the existing basement garage and do not require further excavation and filling of the site.

Satisfactory

 

 

 

8.2    Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008

The Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008 had been placed on public exhibition. The relevant provisions of the Draft LEP are addressed as follows:

 

Clause

Provision

Proposal

Compliance

15

Zone No. 2A Detached style housing requires consent

The proposed land use and building work are permissible with Council’s consent.

Yes

 

8.3    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land

SEPP No. 55 aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land for the purposes of reducing risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment. The subject site has been continuously used for residential purposes for a prolonged period. There is no known previous industrial usage on the site, which would potentially contribute to land contamination. Accordingly, no contamination report is required in this instance.

 

8.4    State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by a BASIX Certificate numbered A21755. The requirements specified in the above certificate will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions prescribed by Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

9.1    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. 

 

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

40% of the total site area (or 142.5m2) is provided as landscaped area.

As existing, 175.4m2 or 49.2% of the site is reserved as landscaped area. Complies.  

 

S1

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

As existing, the rear courtyard has a total area of 101.1m2. 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 rear courtyard has a flat terrain and is capable of accommodating a rectangle of approximately 10m x 8m in dimension. Complies.

S1

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

The above-mentioned private open space is located in the rear portion of the site. Complies.

 

S6

20% of the total site area (or 71.3m2)

has permeable treatment.

A total of 21.3% of the site area (or 75.9m2) is soft landscaped and permeable. 

 

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this size is a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6:1 (or 213.8m2 floor area). 

The proposed FSR is 0.87:1 (or 310.7m2 floor area). Does not comply. Refer to assessment comments below.

 

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP in relation to floor space ratio aim to ensure that developments are not excessive in bulk or scale, are compatible with the existing character of the locality, and will minimise adverse amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties.

 

The proposed development will result in a breach of the maximum FSR by 0.27:1, which equates to 96.9m2 floor area (including those balcony / terrace areas that are over 40m2).

 

The proposal has included a total of 64.2m2 of terrace and balcony areas. Pursuant to the Dictionary section of the DCP, decks and terraces positioned more than 1m above the ground level and exceeding a total of 40m2 are included in gross floor area calculations. If all of the terrace and balcony areas are excluded, the development will result in an FSR of 0.80:1, which equates to 286.4m2 gross floor area. There would be a non-compliance of only 0.20:1 or 72.6m2.

 

The above calculations are summarized in the table below:

 

Total proposed GFA (including excess terrace / balcony areas)

310.7m2

Total proposed GFA (excluding all terrace / balcony areas)

286.4m2

Maximum permissible GFA

213.8m2

 

 

Total FSR (including excess terrace / balcony areas)

0.87:1

Total FSR (excluding all terrace / balcony areas)

0.80:1

Maximum permissible FSR

0.60:1

 

Notwithstanding the proposal’s breach against the maximum permissible FSR control, the development is considered satisfactory based on the following reasons:

 

·      The proposed upper level addition will be aligned with the existing external walls of the ground floor below. The proposal will present as a two-storey dwelling house to Northumberland Street, which is consistent with the predominant development pattern in the immediate locality.

 

The application has included an accurately scaled street elevation, which demonstrates that the proposal will be sympathetic to the scale of the adjoining developments and the topography of the area.

 

·      The rear elevation of the building will present as three-storey dwelling house incorporating a basement garage, which is similar to the adjoining dwelling at No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

·      The ridge height of the existing building on site is RL 44.81m. The proposal incorporates a low profile hipped roof, which will bring the ridge height of the building to RL 47.04m. The roof angle is approximately 22 degrees with a resultant roof height of 1.6m (measured from the gutter level to the ridge level). Any further reduction of the roof angle is likely to create water proofing problems due to the decreased speed of stormwater flow to the gutters. In this respect, the proposal is considered to have minimised the overall height of the structures.

 

·      The revised design scheme has reduced the side wall lengths of the upper level addition to 13m (southern side wall) to 14.5m (northern side wall). The rear portion of the addition is reserved as an unroofed, open terrace area, which will not contribute significantly to the building bulk.

 

·      The side elevations of the proposal will be articulated with brick banding and window openings, which will minimise the visual bulk and scale of the overall structure.

 

·      The proposal will not increase the existing footprint of the building on site. The additional storey will be aligned with the existing external walls of the level below. It is noted that the existing footprint of the subject building is only marginally larger than those of Nos. 5 and 9 Northumberland Street.

 

·      The dimensions of the living and bedroom areas are not excessive and will provide suitable amenity for the occupants.

 

·      As will be discussed in the following sections, the proposal will not result in unreasonable overshadowing or privacy impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

·      The proposal fully complies with the landscaped area and permeable surfaces controls stipulated in the DCP.

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceeding 7m

Maximum wall height (northern elevation): 7.2m

Maximum wall height (southern elevation): 7.7m

Does not comply, refer to assessment comments below.  

 

S1

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

Not applicable. 

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

Not applicable.

 

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

Not applicable.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Not applicable.

S4

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

13m

The proposal will result in a breach of the preferred solution by 1m. The proposed southern elevation is suitably articulated with window openings and brick bandings, which will minimise the visual scale of the façade. The above non-compliance is minor in nature and is not considered to result in significant or perceivable additional overshadowing to the adjoining properties. Satisfactory.

 

S5

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

Not applicable.

 

 

External wall height

The Objectives of the DCP in relation to external wall height are to ensure developments are not excessive in height and scale, but are compatible with the existing character of the locality. The DCP aims to ensure buildings preserve privacy and natural light access for neighbouring residents and allow sharing of views.

 

The proposed northern and southern elevations have a maximum wall height of 7.2m and 7.7m respectively. Notwithstanding, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory based on the following reasons:

 

·      The revised design scheme has reduced the side wall lengths of the upper level addition to 13m (southern side wall) to 14.5m (northern side wall). The rear portion of the addition is reserved as an unroofed, open terrace area, which will not contribute significantly to the building bulk. The development will follow the contours of the site by incorporating adequate stepping in the building mass.

 

·      The proposal has incorporated a low profile hipped roof, which will minimise the overall height of the building.

 

·      The proposed upper storey addition has a floor to ceiling height of 2.75m (ceiling level RL 45.24m minus finished floor level RL 42.49m). The proposed floor to ceiling height is considered reasonable when compared to other detached dwelling developments and is not excessive.

 

·      The extent of the non-compliance of 0.2m (northern elevation) and 0.7m (southern elevation) is minor in nature and will not contribute to a significant building bulk.

 

·      As will be discussed in the following sections, the proposal will not result in unreasonable overshadowing or privacy impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

 

 

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

The proposed upper level is setback 2.9m to 3.5m from the front property boundary.

 

The front setbacks of the adjoining developments are as follows:

No. 5 Northumberland Street:

3m – 5m

No. 9 Northumberland Street:

3.7m

 

The proposed upper level has incorporated a balcony, which will retain a sense of openness on the front façade. The proposal is consistent with the front setbacks of the adjoining properties along Northumberland Street. Satisfactory.

 

S2

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

Complies.

S3

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

Northern setback: 1100mm

Southern setback: 900mm

Complies.

 

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Northern setback: 1100mm

Southern setback: 900mm

Does not comply, refer to assessment comments below.  

 

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

This control applies as the rear portion of the proposed addition represents the third storey of the building.

 

Northern setback: 1100mm

Southern setback: 900mm

Does not comply, refer to assessment comments below.  

 

 

The side setback controls aim to allow occupants and neighbours adequate natural lighting and ventilation.

 

The proposed upper level addition is setback 1100mm and 900mm from the northern and southern boundaries respectively, and does comply with the preferred solutions for side setbacks. Given the sloping terrain of the site, the proposed addition partially represents the second storey and partially the third storey of the building.

 

The strict compliance with the numerical controls will adversely impact on the bedroom dimensions and create a new storey that incorporates multiple indentations, which is unsympathetic to the overall form and character of the building.

 

The proposed design will allow satisfactory direct solar access to the private open space areas of the adjoining properties at Nos. 5 and 9 Northumberland Street on the winter solstice. Furthermore, the proposal has already incorporated adequate measures (including private screens and high sill height windows) to protect the privacy of the neighbouring properties.

 

The proposed addition will rely on the lower level external walls for structural support. The required setbacks of the external walls will result in unnecessary complications for the structural design, without achieving a suitable built form or significant improvements to the amenity of the adjoining properties.

 

Therefore, the proposal in its current form is considered satisfactory.

 


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.

Northern elevation

The proposed window openings on the upper level, which are attached to the bedroom and family room areas, have sill heights set at 1.5m above the finished floor level. Additionally, external timber louvres will be installed over the windows to provide solar protection and additional screening. The above measures will effectively minimise any overlooking into No. 5 Northumberland Street.

 

The proposed window to the stairwell is provided with external timber screens, which will effectively minimise overlooking into No. 5.

 

It is noted that minimal new window openings are proposed on the ground floor level.

 

Southern elevation

The side elevation of the proposed front balcony on the upper level is oriented towards a blank wall of No. 9 Northumberland Street. It is considered that no significant privacy impacts will result.

 

The proposal includes a casement window (2.0m L x 1.1m H) attached to the ground floor bedroom, which is oriented towards a habitable room window of No. 9 Northumberland Street. Given that this window is attached to the bedroom, which is a low intensity use area within the dwelling, no significant privacy impacts would result.

 

The proposed window openings on the upper floor level, which are attached to the bedroom and family room areas, have sill heights set at 1.5m from the finished floor level. It is considered that the proposed sill heights will effectively minimise any unreasonable overlooking into No. 9.

 

S1

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

The proposed upper level rear terrace is capable of oblique overlooking into the adjoining properties. Does not comply, refer to comments below.

S1

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

See comments above.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

The proposed alterations and additions are considered to have incorporated appropriate materials to minimise adverse acoustic impacts on adjoining properties. 

 

 

The objective of the DCP is to ensure that new buildings and additions will retain visual and acoustic privacy for the occupants and neighbours. Specifically, the performance criteria of the DCP state that overlooking of the private open space of residential development is to be minimised through appropriate location of balconies, separation, screening and landscaping.

 

The proposed rear-facing terrace on the first floor level has a dimension of 5.3m (depth) x 7.8m (length). The terrace is attached to the family room area and is anticipated to effectively function as a passive recreational space for the occupants on a daily basis. The balcony is capable of oblique overlooking into the private open space of the adjoining properties at Nos. 5 and 9 Northumberland Street. It will enable overlooking into the first floor rear balcony of No. 9.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the proposed design is considered acceptable based on the following reasons:

 

·      The revised design has included 900mm wide (including width of walling) fixed planter boxes along the edge of the terrace. In addition, a fixed privacy screen reaching a height of 1.5m above the finished floor level will be installed on both side elevations of the terrace. The privacy screens will extend for a length of 2.5m from the rear wall of the first floor level. The above features will effectively prevent a person from standing immediately adjacent to the edge of the terrace and limit the angle of views.

 

·      It is not desirable to require privacy screens that extend along the full length of the side elevations, as this will create a significant building bulk and obstruct ocean and headland views for the adjoining neighbour at No. 5 Northumberland Street, which are currently available across the shared side boundary. 

 

·      The provision of rear-facing balconies / terraces is an expected built element in the immediate locality, given the availability of ocean and iconic views towards the east and south-east. The adjoining building at No. 5 Northumberland Street has provided rear-facing terraces on both the ground and first floor levels, which are similar in configuration to the subject terrace. Whilst it is acknowledged that the total width of the proposed first floor terrace (being 5.3m) exceeds that of the adjoining building at No. 5 (being 3.8m), the planter boxes will reduce the useable width to 4.4m. It is considered that the proposed terrace is consistent with the supported development trend in the area.

 

·      The proposed first storey addition will be erected above the existing ground floor level. The footprint of the addition is considerably less than those of the storeys below in order to maintain a suitable level of floor space and minimise building bulk. The elimination of the rear terrace will necessitate extension of the side walls, and as a result increase the amount of floor space and exacerbate non-compliance with the FSR control. The reservation of the rear portion of the first floor level as a terrace area is a reasonable design response.

 

Given the existing development pattern and dimension of the site, complete obstruction of views is highly difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. The proposal is considered to have minimised visual or acoustic privacy impacts on the adjoining properties and is supported.

 

Safety & Security

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

As existing, the main entry to the building is provided on the side elevation. Given the constraints of the existing building, this access solution is considered acceptable.

 

S1,3

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

Complies. 

 

 

S2

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

To be required as a condition of consent.  

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 proposal will create a 4-bedroom plus study dwelling and is required to provide 2 off-street parking spaces. The existing double garage on the lower ground floor will be retained. Satisfactory.

 

S1

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

As existing.

S1

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

As existing.

S1

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

As existing.

S1

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

As existing.

S1

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

As existing.

S2

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

As existing.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

As existing.

Fences

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

Not applicable.

S1

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

The existing front fencing will be retained. The existing front fencing has a solid masonry base with cast iron pickets above, which currently enable casual surveillance of the street. Satisfactory.

S1

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

See comments above.

Foreshore Development

 

Performance Requirements

Assessment

P1

No encroachments on Foreshore Building Line at identified properties.

Not applicable.

P2

Building form, colour, materials and finishes are sympathetic.

The proposed development is considered to be of a form, scale and setback that respect the character of the surrounding residential properties along Northumberland Street.

 

The proposal adopts a low-profile hipped roof design with a neutral colour scheme, which will ensure compatibility with the residential streetscape. The facades of the building will be articulated with suitable fenestration pattern to minimise the visual bulk as viewed from the surrounding public and private domain.

P3

Stepped buildings on sloping sites are articulated.

The revised design scheme has reduced the side wall lengths of the upper level addition to 13m (southern side wall) to 14.5m (northern side wall). The rear portion of the addition is reserved as an unroofed, open terrace area, which will not contribute significantly to the building bulk. The development will follow the contours of the site by incorporating adequate stepping in the building mass.

 

P4

Buildings incorporate sufficient setbacks to allow fair sharing of views.

The proposed roof form, footprint and setback of the first floor addition are considered to have minimised view loss from the adjoining properties. Also refer to assessment comments at the end of this section.

P5

Ancillary structures do not detract from the appearance of developments.

Not applicable.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Superseded by SEPP: BASIX.

S2

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

The majority of the rear courtyard areas will receive 3 hours of direct solar access in the morning period on the winter solstice. 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.

Due to the east-west orientation of the site, the north facing windows of the subject building will be mostly overshadowed throughout the day on the winter solstice. Given the constraints of the site, the proposal is considered acceptable in this regard.

 

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 unreasonably overshadow potential solar collectors on the 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 adjoining building to the south at No. 9 Northumberland Street currently has its north-facing windows completely overshadowed throughout the day on the winter solstice.

 

The proposed development will not result in any additional perceivable impacts on the north facing windows in mid winter. The proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

 

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 allow 3 hours of direct solar access to the majority of the private open space of No. 9 Northumberland Street on the winter solstice.

 

View Loss

The potential view loss impact of the first floor addition on the adjoining dwellings has been considered. Based on desktop assessment and site inspections, it is noted that ocean and headland views are currently available to the east and south-east of the subject and adjoining sites. Therefore, the properties that are likely to be affected by view loss are Nos. 3 and 5 Northumberland Street, which are located to the north of the site. A four-step test of view loss as adopted by Commissioner Roseth of the NSW Land and Environment Court is provided below:

 

Affected Property:     No. 5 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

 

(a)    Type of views / extent of view loss

No. 5 Northumberland Street currently enjoys the following views:

 

(i) Rooftop terrace – eastern section

 

Looks towards south

Looks towards south-east

Looks towards east

 

Current views

The eastern roof top terrace currently enjoys the following views:

 

·      The iconic headland of Lurline Bay, Wedding Cake Island and the sea / coastline interface.

·      Unobstructed ocean / sky horizon views to the south-east.

·      Broken sea views to the east across the rear boundaries of properties fronting Ocean Street.

 

The views are available generally with a person standing.

 

Anticipated view loss

The ridge height of the subject building will be increased from RL 44.81m to RL 47.04m. However, the rear edge of the roof gutter will be setback from the eastern (rear) wall alignment by approximately 4.1m. It is anticipated that the following view loss will be experienced:

 

·      The view to sea / headland interface of Lurline Bay and Wedding Cake Island will be obscured following the development.

·      No other view loss is anticipated.

 

(ii) Rooftop terrace – western section

 

Looks towards south

 

Looks towards south-south-east

 

Looks towards south-east

 

Current views

The western roof top terrace currently enjoys the following views:

 

·      The iconic headland of Lurline Bay, Wedding Cake Island and the sea / coast interface.

·      Broken ocean view across the rear and side boundaries of the properties fronting Ocean Street.

 

The majority of the views are available with a person standing.

 

Anticipated view loss

·      The eastern extremity of the Lurline Bay headland and Wedding Cake Island will be obscured by the proposed development.

·      However, more than half of the sea / coast interface views will be maintained.

·      The broken ocean views to the south-east will not be affected.

(iii) First floor rear balcony

 

Looks towards south

 

Looks towards south-east

 

Looks towards east

 

Current views

The first floor rear balcony currently enjoys the following views:

·      The tip of the Lurline Bay headland.

·      Broken ocean views across the side and rear boundaries of the properties fronting Ocean Street.

 

The majority of the views are available with a person standing.

 

Anticipated view loss

·      Nil.

The proposed development will setback the new roofing from the rear (eastern) wall of the ground floor level by approximately 4.1m. The proposal will increase the extent of the views towards the Lurline Bay headland / ocean interface.

 

 

 

 

 

(iv) First floor front balcony

 

Looks towards south

Current views

The first floor front balcony currently enjoys the following views:

·      Coast / ocean interface of Lurline Bay.

 

The views are available generally with a person standing close to the balcony balustrades.

 

Anticipated view loss

·      Nil

 

 

At present, there are no significant views readily available from within the building or the ground floor rear balcony.

 

(b)    Side views / sitting views

The views that are anticipated to be obscured by the proposed development, as outlined above, are obtained across the shared side boundary between Nos. 5 and 7 Northumberland Street, and generally with a person standing.

 

(c)    Extent of impact

In summary, the following views will be lost:

 

Location

Lost views

Rooftop terrace (eastern section)

Views to sea / headland interface of Lurline Bay and Wedding Cake Island

 

Rooftop terrace (western section)

Eastern extremity of Lurline Bay headland and Wedding Cake Island

 

 


(d)    Reasonableness

Whilst loss of iconic sea / headland views will be experienced by the rooftop terraces of No. 5 Northumberland Street, the proposed development is considered to be reasonable and is supported based on the following reasons:

 

·      The views in question are currently obtained due to the under-developed nature of the subject site, being below the currently permissible height limit and floor space ratio.

 

·      It is acknowledged that the proposal does not comply with the FSR and side setback standards and entails a minor breach of the external wall height provisions contained in the DCP. Notwithstanding, as is discussed in the above paragraphs, the proposal is considered to be of a suitable scale and bulk. The building follows the contours of the site by incorporating adequate stepping in the building mass. The proposal will not result in unreasonable impacts on the adjoining properties in terms of solar access, privacy and visual amenity.

 

·      The revised design scheme has reduced the side wall lengths of the upper level addition to 13m (southern side wall) to 14.5m (northern side wall). The rear portion of the addition is reserved as an unroofed, open terrace area, which will not contribute significantly to the building bulk.

 

Due to the proposed rear setback of the roofing structure, the altered building will increase the amount of views of the land-water interface from the first floor rear balcony of No. 5.

 

·      Distant ocean and land-water interface views will still be available to the rooftop terraces and balconies of No. 5 after the proposed development. A reasonable level of living amenity will be maintained for the occupant of No. 5.

 

·      The views in question are obtained from the rooftop terrace areas of No. 5 Northumberland Street. It is noted that No. 5 currently is the only property on Northumberland Street, which has been developed with rooftop terraces and a part fourth storey. The above rooftop terraces offer panoramic views that would not be achieved by a traditional built form.

 

The locality is currently experiencing transition where the traditional housing stock is being renovated or redeveloped. It is anticipated that when the other dwelling houses located to the south or south-east of No. 5 are redeveloped and fully realise the permissible development potential in the future, the views available will be further reduced.

 

The proposed development will provide an upper storey addition presenting as a traditional two-storey dwelling house, which is consistent with the built form, height and scale of the existing detached residences in the area. The proposal is compatible with the character and streetscape of the locality. The proposed works represent a reasonable attempt to realise the permissible development potential of the land and is not considered to be an over-development.

 

Therefore, the anticipated obstruction of the views is justified when considering the compliance of the proposal with the objectives and performance requirements of Council’s planning controls, and is reasonable in this instance.

 

Affected Property: No. 3 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

 

(a)    Type of views / extent of view loss

No. 3 Northumberland Street currently enjoys the following views:

 

South-facing upper level balcony and windows

 

Current views

Iconic Lurline Bay headlands, Wedding Cake Island, land-water interface and wider ocean views

 

Anticipated view loss

Nil

 

 

(b)    Side views / sitting views

The views are obtained across the side boundary of the property and are captured with a person sitting or standing.

 

(c)    Extent of impact

Given that the proposal will reserve an open, unroofed terrace area in the rear portion of the first floor addition, the development will not obstruct any existing views currently enjoyed by the property.

 

(d)    Reasonableness

The proposal is reasonable in terms of maintaining existing significant views currently enjoyed by the property in question.

 

Note: The owner of No. 3 Northumberland Street has withdrawn his objection, following inspection of the amended drawings prepared by the applicant.

 

9.2    Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 2 July 2007, is applicable to the proposed development. In accordance with the plan, the following monetary levy is required:

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost $100,001 - $200,000

------

0.5%

------

Development cost more than $200,000

$227,500

 

1.0%

$2,275

 

10.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – Provisions of any environmental planning instrument

Refer to the “Environmental Planning Instruments” section of this report for details.

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Provisions of any draft environmental planning instrument

The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of the draft Randwick LEP 2008 and the draft SEPP: Application of Development Standards 2004.

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Provisions of any development control plan

Refer to the “Policy Control” section of this report.

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(iiia) – Provisions of any Planning Agreement or draft Planning Agreement

 

Not applicable.

Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – Provisions of the regulations

Clause 7 of the EP&A Regulation 2000 requires the consent authority to consider the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. Accordingly, appropriate conditions of consent are recommended for imposition should this application be considered suitable for approval.

 

Clause 92 of the Regulation requires the consent authority to consider relevant Australian Standards relating to the demolition of structures. Accordingly, a specific condition is recommended for imposition to require compliance with Australian Standard 2601.

 

Clause 93 of the Regulation requires the consent authority to consider the structural capacity and fire safety aspect of a building. Accordingly, appropriate conditions are recommended to address the above matters.

 

Section 79C(1)(b) – The likely impacts of the development, including environmental impacts on the natural and built environment and social and economic impacts in the locality

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment have been assessed within the body of this report.

 

The proposed development is consistent with the predominant residential land uses in the locality. The proposal is not considered to result in detrimental social or economic impacts on the locality.

 

Section 79C(1)(c) – The suitability of the site for the development

The site is located within an area, which is predominantly characterised by lower density residential developments. The site has sufficient dimension to accommodate the proposed structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

 

Section 79C(1)(d) – Any submissions made in accordance with the EP&A Act or EP&A Regulation

The issues raised in the submissions have been addressed in this report.

 

 

Section 79C(1)(e) – The public interest

The proposal is not considered to result in significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered satisfactory in public interest terms.

 

 

 

11.    Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Leadership in sustainability, excellence in urban design and development, integrated transport and land use

Direction:  Improved design and sustainability across all development, integrating transport and pedestrian links between town centres and key locations

 

12.    Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

13.    Conclusion

 

The amended proposal complies with the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. The proposed development will not result in significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, view loss, solar access and privacy.

 

The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes proposed are considered to be satisfactory. The design is sympathetic to the character of the existing streetscape and will not detract from the visual setting of the Clovelly foreshore areas.

 

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

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/950/2007 for alterations and additions to an existing detached dwelling house, including construction of a new first floor level, minor amendments to the ground level layout and provision of an upper level rear terrace, at No. 7 Northumberland Street, Clovelly, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the following plans:

 

Plan Number / Title

Dated

Received On

0611 – A02 “Proposed Ground Floor Plan” & “Proposed First Floor Plan”

Oct 07

1 April 2008

0611 – A03 “North, South, East, West Elevations”

Oct 07

1 April 2008

0611 – A04 “Section AA”

Oct 07

1 April 2008

 

prepared by Archicorp Architects + Project Managers, the application form and 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 consistent with the “Colour & Finishes Schedule – Proposed Alterations & Additions – 7 Northumberland Street, Clovelly”, prepared by Archicorp Architects + Project Managers and received by Council on 7 March 2008.

 

3.       The external walls of the dwelling must be located not less than 900mm from any boundary of the subject site.

 

4.       Eaves, gutters, hoods and similar structures or attachments are required to be setback from the side boundaries of the allotment a minimum distance of 500mm and details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate details.

 

5.       There must be no encroachment of the structure/s onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place, unless written permission has been obtained from the Council beforehand.

 

6.       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.

 

7.       Street numbering must be provided to the premises in a prominent position, in accordance with the Australia Post guidelines and AS / NZS 4819: 2003 to the satisfaction of Council, prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development.

 

8.       Any proposed fences located on the side or rear boundaries of the premises shall not exceed a maximum height of 1,800mm, measured above the existing ground levels.

 

On sloping sites or at changes in ground levels, the maximum height of the fence may exceed the abovementioned specified height by up to 150mm maximum adjacent to any required ‘step-downs’ or changes in ground level.

 

The applicant and owner are advised that the relevant provisions of the Dividing Fences Act 1991 are to be satisfied accordingly and any necessary approvals or agreements should be obtained from the owner/s of the adjoining land beforehand.

 

9.       A privacy screen reaching not less than 1.6m in height as measured from the finished floor level, shall be installed on both side elevations of the proposed first floor rear terrace.

 

The privacy screens shall extend for a distance of 2.5m from the rear (eastern) wall of the first floor addition. The privacy screens shall be constructed of 35mm wide timber slats, horizontally or vertically positioned, and spaced at a maximum of 35mm, or other appropriate screening devices that achieve the same level of privacy for the adjoining dwellings at Nos. 5 and 9 Northumberland Street, Clovelly.

 

Details demonstrating compliance with the above requirements are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

10.     A 1.8m high privacy screen shall be installed on both side elevations of the existing ground floor rear balcony.

 

The privacy screens shall be constructed of 35mm wide timber slats, horizontally or vertically positioned, and spaced at a maximum of 35mm, or other appropriate screening devices that achieve the same level of privacy for the adjoining dwellings at Nos. 5 and 9 Northumberland Street, Clovelly.

 

Details demonstrating compliance with the above requirements are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

11.     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 must ensure that a Quick Check Agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before commencing any works.

 

The following condition is applied to meet additional demands for public facilities:

 

12.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council.

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost $100,001 - $200,000

------

0.5%

------

Development cost more than $200,000

$227,500

 

1.0%

$2,275

                      

The levy must be paid in cash, bank cheque or by credit card prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development. The development is subject to an index to reflect quarterly variations in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the date of Council’s determination to the date of payment.

 

Council’s Section 94A Development Contribution Plans may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick or at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au.

 

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

 

13.     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.

 

14.     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.

 

15.     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)

 

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

 

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

 

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:

 

17.     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.

 

18.     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:

 

19.     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.

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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”.

 

25.     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.

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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:

 

30.       The demolition of buildings and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials must be carried out in accordance with the following regulations:

      The requirements and Guidelines of WorkCover NSW

·      Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·          The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

·          Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

31.     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 any asbestos materials 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.

 

32.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer, accredited building surveyor or other suitably qualified person must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works, in the following cases:

 

·           new dwellings or additions to dwellings sited up to the property boundaries (including additions to a semi-detached dwelling),

·           excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·           excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·           as otherwise required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

 

The report (including photographs) is to detail the current condition and status of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon the adjoining premises, which may be affected by the subject works.

 

33.     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.

 

34.     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.

 

Noise and vibration from any rock excavation machinery and pile drivers (or the like) must be minimised by using appropriate plant and equipment and silencers and a construction noise and vibration minimisation strategy, prepared by a suitably qualified person is to be implemented during the works, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

35.     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.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip 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.

 

36.     A Construction Site Management Plan is to be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works. The site management plan must include the following measures, as applicable to the type of development:

 

·       location and construction of protective fencing / hoardings to the perimeter of the site;

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·           construction noise and vibration management;

·           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 adequate levels of public health and safety.  A copy of the approved Construction Site Management Plan must be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

37.     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 the Construction Site Management Plan which must be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority prior to the commencement of any site works. 

 

38.     Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works and the following requirements must be complied with:

 

a.       Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials, construction equipment or other activities 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.

 

b.       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.

 

c.       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.  Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Health Building and Regulatory Services section.

 

d.       Any part of Council’s road, footway or nature strip which is damaged as a result of the work must be repaired or replaced to Council’s satisfaction prior to occupation or finalisation of the development.

 

The following condition has been applied to ensure the structural adequacy and integrity of the proposed building and adjacent premises:

 

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

 

40.     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.

 

41.     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.

 

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

 

42.     The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to install vehicular crossings and to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway. 

 

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      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.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 June 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP24/08

 

 

Subject:                  173-177 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/300/2008

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Fit out and use of existing commercial tenancy for Thai Therapeutic massage

 

Ward:                      East Ward

 

Applicant:                S Inseesangworn

 

Owner:                         G & H Zavras

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application details the fit out and use of the existing commercial tenancy as a Thai Therapeutic massage.

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the proposed use involves therapeutic massage.

 

It is considered that the proposed use is legitimate and the premises is not intended to be used for the purposes of providing sexual services.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details the fit out and use of the existing commercial tenancy use for a Thai Therapeutic service with hours of 10.00am to 10.00pm, seven days a week, with associated signage.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Coogee Bay Road between Brook and Mount Streets and is presently occupied by an existing mixed commercial residential building which contains a single storey pair of commercial uses at street level with a four storey residential flat building behind, the commercial uses are both currently vacant. The site is within the Coogee General Business area which contains a number of local business uses mostly take away and eat in food premises.

 

4.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP- Notification. No submissions have been received.

 

5.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

The site is zoned 3A General Business under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

6.    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.

 

6.1      Nature of the Use

 

The proposed use is consistent with the general aims of RLEP 1998 and the proposed activity does not conflict with the objectives of the 3A zone in that the use will; 

·           Maintain the viability of business centres and employment opportunities within economically viable commercial precincts in the City of Randwick; and

·           Contribute to the mixture of uses within the retail centre while minimising adverse impacts on the nearby development.

The details provided with the application adequately describe a development for the purpose for which approval is sought, ie as a legitimate premises providing therapeutic massage. A good indication of the legitimacy of the proposal is the type of signage provided and the direct access to the premises. In this regard the proposed advertising sign specifically alerts potential clients to the exact naturally of the services to be provided and the entrance to the premises is at grade and directly from Coogee Bay Road.

 

Notwithstanding the above, suitable conditions are included in the recommendation limiting the hours of operation and requiring the details of qualification of staff to be provided to Council prior to the commencement of the use.

 

6.2      Advertising

 

The proposed under awning and shop front signs to the premises satisfy the objectives of Section 2.2 of this DCP in that the scale and type of the advertising is consistent with the adjoining properties, will not dominate the building and a condition of consent is recommended to ensure that the under awning sign is a minimum of 2.6m above footpath level.

 

6.3      Parking

 

The proposed use does not provide for any additional floor area to the building and therefore no additional parking demand is generated.

 

7.      Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:          A strong local economy.

Direction:          The proposal, in providing for a commercial use will facilitate the provision of services to the community as well as the growth of local businesses.

 

8.      Conclusion

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and subject to conditions to restrict the hours of trading to 7.00pm, and the type of massage service provided, will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/300/2008 for permission to fit out and use the existing vacant commercial tenancy for the purposes of Thai Therapeutic massage at 173-177 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the floor plan and sign detail received by Council on the 30th April 2008, 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 operation of the premises is restricted to therapeutic massage only. The premises must not to be used for the purpose of offering any sexual services, including “body to body” massage.

 

3      The maximum number of employees operating from the subject premises is restricted to 2, and their relevant remedial and therapeutic massage qualifications are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to the commencement of the use. Council will keep a record of the employees and their relevant qualifications, and at no time are the employees to vary without the approval of Council’s Director City Planning.

 

4      The hours of operation of the business are restricted to 10.00am to 9.00pm seven days a week.

 

5      The under awning sign is to be a minimum of 2.6m above footpath level.

 

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

 

6      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 must ensure that a Quick Check Agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before commencing any works.

 

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

 

7      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.

 

8      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.

 

9       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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

                                        

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

 

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

 

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

 

11      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.

 

12      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”.

 

13    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.

 

14      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.

 

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:

 

15        The demolition of buildings and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials must be carried out in accordance with the following regulations:

      The requirements and Guidelines of WorkCover NSW

·      Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·          The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

·          Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

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

 

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

 

17      Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents and the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 must be satisfied at all times.

 

18      Public safety 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.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip 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.

 

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      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.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 June 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No.

CP 25/08

 

 

Subject:                  66a Doncaster Avenue, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/1097/2006/1

Author:                   Stuart Harding, Planning Consultant     

 

Proposal:                     A staged development application including 82 dwellings in ten buildings, car parking, landscaping, construction and dedication to Council of internal roads, parks and a community centre.

 

Ward:                      West Ward

 

Applicant:                JBA Urban Planning Consultants Pty Ltd

 

Owner:                         Anson City Developments

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to Council as it is valued at $39 million. The site is within the Royal Randwick heritage conservation area, as defined by the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (RLEP 98), and in proximity to heritage items that are situated both on the land and adjacent to it.

 

The subject site was previously owned by the NSW state government. It was sold at open auction and purchased by the current owners, Anson City Developments Pty Ltd.  The land is in private ownership despite being zoned 6(a) Open Space.

 

The application is for concept approval as part of a staged development, pursuant to Section 83B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) (‘The Act’). The proposal is for a townhouse/apartment development comprising a total of 82 dwellings. The application includes building envelopes, open space, internal circulation roads, landscaping, car parking and the retention of trees and structures. More detailed designs of individual buildings or dwellings will be the subject of subsequent applications. 

 

The subject site is surrounded by other parcels of land zoned Open Space, with the exception of a small area along the western boundary which is a common boundary with residentially zoned land. The development has been assessed for its suitability in the context of the 6(a) Open Space zoning and its relationship with surrounding properties. This assessment concludes that the application satisfactorily addresses the matters prescribed in Section 38 (2) and (2A) of the RLEP 98 and is suited to the land. It recognises the open space/recreational nature of the site and the associated zone objectives.

 

Council has adopted a resolution to amend the RLEP 98. This amendment includes removing Clauses 38(3) 38(4) 38(5) and 38(6) which contain provisions relating to the land uses permissible on open space zoned land. The NSW Department of Planning has advised Council that Clause 38(3) (that provided for the owner of land within Zone 6A not being either the Crown or Council, to require Council to acquire the land), must remain in RLEP 1998. The deletion of the other clauses has been agreed to by the NSW Department of Planning and the amendment to the RLEP 1998 is currently with the Minister. However, the amendments to the RLEP 1998 will contain a savings provision that any development application made and not determined when the draft amendment is gazetted is to be assessed against the existing provisions of the RLEP 1998.

 

The original application was lodged on 15 December 2006 and referred to Randwick Waverley Urban Design Review Panel on several occasions. Concerns raised by the panel centred on the proposals response to surrounding context, excessive scale, a lack of permeability and a lack of diversity in dwelling type.   These issues were further considered by the applicant prior to submission of an amended scheme.  In the latest review by the panel on 3 March 2008, the proposal was generally endorsed subject to various amendments and provision of further details.

 

An assessment of the amended scheme concludes that it satisfactorily addresses the Design Review Panel’s concerns and adequately responds to the site’s physical and social context. The siting of proposed building envelopes and open space incorporate built features that add heritage and cultural value to the public domain.

 

The proposal constitutes ‘Integrated Development’, due to the basement car parking which may require removal of groundwater. Referral to the NSW Department of Water & Energy (DWE) has occurred in accordance with the requirements for Integrated Development. The DWE has endorsed the proposal and provided its General Terms of Approval.

 

The amended application was notified and advertised for 30 days in accordance with Integrated Development provisions during which 12 submissions were received. The submissions, which are addressed in detail in the body of this report, generally raised concerns relating to:

 

§  The proposal is inconsistent with the intentions to provide open space in the subject 6(A) Open Space zone;

§  The proposal is inconsistent with the height and floor space ratio development standards contained within the RLEP 98 for the subject 6(A) Open Space zone;

§  The proposed FSR and building heights represent an overdevelopment of the site generating traffic demands which the locality cannot accommodate.

§  The limited setbacks between development sites and deep soil planting areas will provide poor amenity for likely occupants;

§  The proposal is inconsistent with various aspects of recently consented development on the adjoining Randwick Racecourse land.

§  The proximity of the development to the Randwick Racecourse lands and its residential nature will be incompatible with the often intense activities on the Randwick Racecourse lands;

§  The proposal will adversely affect the significance of the various heritage items on the subject site and adjoining Randwick Racecourse lands;

§  The flood prone nature of the locality is not properly considered;

§  The proposal represents a gated community which are recognised as generating adverse social implications;

§  The proposed community facility will not be publicly accessible due to its location on minor local road;

§  Bicyclists are inadequately catered for;

§  The amenity of existing dwellings along Doncaster Avenue, in terms of privacy and access to sunlight will be adversely affected by the proposed residential flat buildings; and

§  Proposed bulk and scale is inconsistent with the established built form of the locality.

 

The site has legal access from Ascot Street and the application proposes that this access be used by the development. The proposal also allows for an extension of Carlton Street, as adjacent allotments are developed in future. The extension would provide a second vehicular and pedestrian access to the site that would result in a satisfactory degree of permeability and legibility of the public domain. Negotiations are understood to be taking place between Anson City Developments and the Australian Jockey Club (AJC) regarding a shared access for the racecourse and the proposed development from Ascot Street. 

 

Also proposed is the development of public open space, roads and footpaths, and a community centre. These assets would be dedicated to Council, thereby appropriately considering demand for and public access to community services.

 

The amended application includes three (3) bedroom townhouses with courtyards and a number of apartments with one (1), two (2) and three (3) bedrooms. This range of dwellings allows for some social diversity and sustainability in the dwelling mix.

 

Considering the conclusions of the assessment, as discussed above, the application is recommended for approval.

 

1.      The Proposal

 

The application for concept approval proposes the demolition of minor structures, removal of trees and construction of a residential development on the site. The development would comprise of townhouses and an apartment building with 82 strata titled dwellings and basement car parking. The subject site is elongated and oriented north to south, parallel to the alignment of Doncaster Avenue. The townhouse buildings would occupy the southern portion of the site, with the taller apartment building located to the north.

 

The applicant has requested that the subject application be considered as an application for concept approval for a Staged Development, pursuant to Section 83B of the Act. Design details such as gross floor areas and the number of bedrooms contained in each dwelling will be confirmed by subsequent applications. However, the application provides the following indicative specifications for the proposed buildings:

 

§  A total of nine (9) building envelopes of (4) storeys (approximately 12m) in height.  These buildings would contain a total of 53 townhouses, predominantly with three (3) bedrooms and ground floor courtyards.  Fourth storeys would be setback from the rest of the building façade on all sides. 

§  One apartment building envelope of 7 storeys (20m).  This building would contain 30 apartments, with a top storey setback from the rest of the facade. Of the total number of apartments, six (6) 6 would have three (3) bedrooms, 22 would have two (2) bedrooms and two (2) would have one (1) bedroom.

§  The proposed gross floor area of the development as a whole is 18,680m².  

§  Basement and on street car parking areas with a total of 145 spaces.

 

Approximately 50% (8,649m²) of the site will be landscaped area. Included in the landscaped area would be 2 parks, totalling 1,759m², which would be developed at the proponent’s expense and dedicated to Council by a voluntary planning agreement, pursuant to Section 93F of the Act. It is also proposed to dedicate 1,013m² of land to Council for the provision of a community centre and associated open space. The community centre will also be developed at the proponent’s expense and dedicated to Council.

 

Design details for the centre are not subject to the concept approval application. However, performance specifications provided by the applicant indicate that the centre would have a gross floor area of 530m² and shall include a multifunctional space of 103m² in area, studios, offices, kitchens and toilets.  

 

Internal circulation shall be provided in the form of a road within the development site. This road, along with on street parking spaces, shall also be dedicated to Council. The road would connect with the surrounding network via Ascot Street to the south. Proposed building separation allows for a connection to be made in future between internal roads and Doncaster Avenue, via an extension of Carlton Street. The road extension is not part of the subject application, but may take place as part of the future development of surrounding land. The possible extension passes through an adjacent allotment operated by the AJC and also through the undeveloped allotment at 18 Doncaster Avenue to form a “loop road” through the subject site.

 

A heritage item in the form of a pedestrian access ramp that once allowed passengers to board and alight trams will be retained and incorporated into one of the proposed parks.  Some of the trees on the site will be retained and new trees planted along road alignments and within private and public open space.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is irregularly shaped being 1.73ha in area with a fall of up to 1.02 metres to the north. Vehicular access is provided from Ascot Street.  The site has few built elements other than the pedestrian access ramp (which is heritage listed), footings associated with a pedestrian bridge which has been demolished and a timber observation tower. The northern extent of the site includes a road that follows the curved alignment of the original tramway that once traversed the site.  Vegetation on the site includes a row of established brush box trees aligning the former tramway, as well as several Morton Bay Figs. The road passes through the site and curves around to connect with Doncaster Avenue to the west.

 

The site directly adjoins the Royal Randwick Racecourse to the east. It partially adjoins an open space area to the northwest, which contains buildings and facilities used in conjunction with the racecourse. To the north is another area of open space adjacent to Anzac Parade, on the opposite side of which is Centennial Park.  Immediately to the west is the residential street of Doncaster Avenue, which predominantly contains single dwelling houses, with smaller residential flat buildings (up to around 4 storeys in height). 

 

The east side of Doncaster Avenue, adjacent to the subject site is a heritage conservation area.  The semi-detached building comprising of numbers 10 and 12 Doncaster Avenue (to the north of the site) is listed as a heritage item in Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.  A row of single dwelling houses to the south of Ascot Street are also listed as heritage items.  Further west is the residential area of Kensington, which comprises of a mix of single dwelling house and residential flat buildings up to 7 storeys in height.  Kensington town centre lies approximately 700m to the south west.

 

Alison Road is within close proximity to the site, along which are bus routes that provide links to central Sydney, Randwick Junction and various other locations in eastern Sydney. In terms of built form, the locality comprises predominantly of residential developments ranging from single storey detached dwellings to 3 storey flat buildings. Substantial public open space exists within Centennial Park which is in close proximity to the subject site.

 

3.      History

 

3.1    Application History

 

The original development application was lodged on 15 December 2006, no formal prelodgement discussions having taken place. In response to notification of the application, Council received 23 objections from the community. Issues raised in objections included those relating to permissibility; residential density; heritage impacts, loss of open space and inconsistency with zoning objectives; rear setbacks; height; insufficient landscaping; safety and the function of roads; lack of affordable housing and a lack of connectivity that would result in an “exclusive” street.

 

The proposal was referred to the Joint Randwick / Waverley Design Review Panel, pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy 65 (SEPP 65). The panel had concerns relating to:-

 

§  A lack of permeability and connectivity resulting from the provision of a single access from Ascot Street. This would lead to the formation of an inward looking “enclave”. The panel recommended an additional access and greater permeability along boundaries.

§  The lack of clarity in the relationship between retained fragments of the tramway infrastructure located on and adjacent to the subject site.

§  A lack of continuity of the former alignment of the tram tracks reflected in the internal road. 

§  The under-utilisation of the site due to insufficient residential density and a lack of variety in housing types. The panel noted and result in greater building heights, but that taller buildings may relate to the height of the buildings of the racecourse.

§  The apparent “cramped” nature of private open spaces.

§  The relationship of the development with heritage items and conservation areas adjacent to the site.

§  Lack of consideration of solar orientation.

§  Insufficient rear setback of proposed dwellings to existing dwellings along Doncaster Avenue.

§  Security and safety.

§  Noise attenuation.

§  The impact of the proposal on the ability of the Randwick Racecourse to operate as a significant cultural events venue.

 

The applicant subsequently requested deferral of the application in order to make further changes to address the above issues. The applicant entered into various discussions with Council regarding the issues raised, culminating in the amended application which is the subject of this assessment report.

 

Due to the depth of basement excavation proposed and possible requirements for dewatering, the application was forwarded the Department of Water & Energy (DWE) for comment as Integrated Development. The DWE raised no objection to the proposal and provided General Terms of Approval to be included on any consent.

 

4.      History of Site Usage

 

The initial use of the site was as a tram loop and station and other associated infrastructure constructed in 1900 to provide access to and from the Randwick Race Course. Tram services ceased in 1960, to be replaced by buses. The applicant’s heritage report indicates that bus operations ceased in 1986 after which the majority of the structures at the site were demolished, with only the pedestrian access ramp, established vegetation and bridge footings being retained. Recent use of the site consists of occasional use as a taxi zone during events at the Royal Randwick Racecourse however, the site remains largely underutilised.

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

The original scheme was notified and advertised for 30 days. Twenty three submissions were lodged with Council and are summarised below:

 

·           The permissibility of the development and the manner in which it satisfies the open space/recreation objectives of the zone considering the proposal aims to occupy a significant portion of the site.

·           The site partially adjoins a residential zone and this is insufficient to trigger clause 38 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

·           The likely density is inconsistent with that which surrounds.

·           The identical appearance of each of the buildings is inconsistent with existing surrounding streetscape.

·           The Multi unit Housing Development Control Plan permits a maximum height of 3-4 storeys while the proposal includes heights up to 12m.

·           The proposed rear building setbacks do not comply with the Multi Unit Housing Development Control Plan.

·           The proposal includes insufficient landscaping.

·           Increase in traffic throughout the locality and resultant traffic accidents, particularly in relation to the school in vicinity of the site.

·           Insufficient private and visitor car parking provided.

·           One vehicular entry to the site is insufficient.

·           The public transport system cannot accommodate increasing densities.

·           The potential for individual applications for the construction of dwellings to yield greater floor space compared to the submitted master plan.

·           The scale of the development and its impact on the heritage character of the locality.

·           The proposed streetscape is inconsistent with the existing Doncaster Avenue setting.

·           The recreation/open space nature of the site is lost.

·           The proposal does not provide for affordable housing

·           The proposal does not integrate well with the broader road / street network and will appear as an exclusive street.

·           The proposal will adversely impact upon the existing established vegetation on the site.

·           The potential contamination of the site.

·           The impact of the development on the flood prone nature of the site

 

The amended application was notified and advertised for 30 days in accordance with Integrated Development provisions of the Act during which 12 submissions were received and are summarised and addressed below:

 

§   The proposal is inconsistent with the recreation orientated objectives of the applicable 6(A) Open Space zone.

 

The objectives of the zone are:

 

(a)    to identify publicly owned land used or capable of being used for public recreational purposes, and

(b)    to allow development that promotes, or is related to, the use and enjoyment of open space, and

(c)    to identify and protect land intended to be acquired for public open space, and

(d)    to identify and protect natural features that contribute to the character of the land, and

(e)    to enable the sustainable management of the land.

 

Objective A of the zone does not apply as the site is privately owned.

 

Objective B is satisfied given the intended use of the site. The private ownership of the site and physical access limitations has limited the use of the site by the public for recreation purposes. The use of the site is currently limited to a car park. The proposal, with the inclusion of public parks, roads and a building for community activities will increase the use of the open space and recreational purposes. The improved accessibility will also improve public accessibility to the heritage value of the site.

 

Objective C does not apply as the site is not identified for acquisition.  Despite this, various portions of the land will be dedicated to Council and therefore protected for future recreation and open space.

 

Consistency with Objective D has been achieved through the retention of significant vegetation on the site.  This includes the avenue of trees that aligns the old tramway route at the northern end of the site.

 

The proposal provides for the sustainable management of land, as required by objective E, by providing a balance between accommodating urban growth and providing ongoing facilities for the community.  The balance between open space and built form also provides a sustainable living environment for future residents.

 

§  The proposal is inconsistent with the height and floor space ratio development standards contained within the RLEP 98 for the 2(c) Residential Zoning.

 

While RLEP 98 permits development on the subject site which is permissible in an adjoining zone, in this the adjoining land is zoned 2(c) Residential within which multi unit housing is permissible, no provisions exist requiring the application of development standards applicable to zone 2(c) to the subject site.

 

Despite this, the applicant provided a comparison of the proposal against the standards applicable to the 2(c) Residential zone.  This comparison is provided in Section 8 of this report.

 

The table indicates the proposal is consistent with various development standards applicable to zone 2(c). The proposed built form is consistent with the surrounding contextual characteristics, particularly the large site area, the substantial height of development on the adjoining Randwick Racecourse site, the expectation to maintain sizeable portions of open space and the heritage features of the site. On this basis, the proposed floor space and height outcomes are considered satisfactory.

 

§   The proposal will generate traffic and parking congestion.

 

The proposal is accompanied by a traffic report by ARUP endorsing the proposal. It notes that the existing major and local traffic capacity, including existing signalisation and public transport facilities are adequate to accommodate the demand generated by the proposed development.

 

§  The limited setbacks between development sites and deep soil planting areas will provide poor amenity for likely occupants;

 

The separation between proposed building envelopes ranges from 7m to 12m which is a substantial distance to create necessary privacy and amenity buffers. The lesser setbacks are provided where there are walls with no privacy issues.  Greater separation of 12 metres is provided where there may have otherwise been a privacy and solar access issue.

 

§  The proposal is inconsistent with various aspects of recently consented development on the adjoining Randwick Racecourse land.

 

The submission from the racecourse acknowledges that residential uses are not incompatible with the racecourse operations.  The proposed development takes into account appropriate setbacks and operations relating to the racecourse through the provision of fencing and spatial separation.  The lesser setback of 7 metres to Block A1 is offset by the presence of a high masonry wall.  Other buildings are setback over 12 metres from the common boundary along the eastern edge of the site.

 

In relation to the proposed access from Ascot Street, Council cannot require the dedication of land from the owner to be subject site for a shared access with the Racecourse without their agreement. However, the applicant has advised Council that they are willing to discuss a shared access with the Racecourse as part of their Stage 2 application.

 

§  The proximity of the development to the Randwick Racecourse lands and its residential nature will be incompatible with the often intense activities on the Randwick Racecourse lands;

 

Other than proposed block A2 in the north eastern corner of the site, the proposal is setback 12m from Randwick Racecourse lands. Such a distance is sufficient to alleviate any impacts generated by either land use.

 

The acoustic characteristics of the site were as assessed by Acoustic Logic Consultancy to determine the suitability of the site in terms of existing noise generators. The assessment acknowledged that accommodating residential development as proposed is feasible subject to a satisfactory assessment of the detailed design of each building. The Racecourse has requested that Council impose covenants on the subject site to prevent future owners and tenants from objecting to racing and entertainment activities. Such a restriction cannot be included in the consent without the agreement of the owner of the subject site. In any case it is doubtful that such a restriction would be effective as the Racecourse would still need to meet its statutory obligations to comply with any necessary legislative requirements in terms of environmental amenity.

 

In relation to the details of fencing and landscaping at the interface with the Racecourse this will be the subject a future application as the stage 1 application is limited to a concept approval.

 

§  The proposal will adversely affect the significance of the various heritage items on the subject site and adjoining Randwick Racecourse lands.

 

The proposal will be a benefit to the existing heritage value of the site as the increased level of public accessibility it provides will allow for further interpretation of the items by the public. This is in comparison to the current circumstances where the site is privately owned and generally not accessible by the public. The built form will also be of benefit to the heritage items on site as it frames and draws attention

to the items.

 

§  The flood prone nature of the locality is not properly considered;

 

See Drainage Comments under Section 7.

 

§  The proposal represents a gated community which are recognised as generating adverse social implications.

 

The proposal will present as an extension of adjoining established neighbourhoods and achieve suitable public accessibility with the dedication of all roads, parks and community buildings to council for use by the public. The development will be serviced by public roads and therefore “gates” will not be possible. The plan allows for a future road extension through the racecourse land to increase permeability through the site.

 

§  The proposed community facility will not be publicly accessible due to its location on minor local road;

 

The proposal generates a suitable perception of public accessibility with the its street entry is just beyond a major intersection on Doncaster Avenue and dedication to Council of all proposed streets and parks. Given the site will generate an appropriate perception of public accessibility; the community facility will also achieve patronage from the public. The size of the site and proposed density does not warrant a larger road.

 

§   Bicyclists are inadequately catered for.

 

Given the site currently does not provide a thoroughfare to Doncaster Avenue or Alison Road due to different ownership of adjoining properties, extending bicyclists facilities is not possible. However, once the roads and parks are dedicated to Council, discussions could be commenced with the Racecourse in relation to the provision of access for bicycles and pedestrians.

 

§  The amenity of existing dwellings along Doncaster Avenue, in terms of privacy and access to sunlight will be adversely affected by the proposed residential flat buildings.

 

The accompanying architectural plans indicate the living areas of adjoining dwellings will have access to sunlight for greater than 3 hours and more than 50% of their principle landscaped areas will also have greater than 3 hours access to sunlight. This satisfies the minimum requirements prescribed by Council’s Development Control Plan for Multi-unit Housing.

 

§  Proposed bulk and scale is inconsistent with the established built form of the locality.

 

The proposed built form is relative to the substantial size of the subject site and the opportunities it presents to contribute to urban consolidation. Built form in the locality is varied with single and double storey detached dwellings and residential flat buildings along Doncaster Avenue and Alison Road up to 4 storeys in height.

 

The adjoining Randwick Racecourse includes buildings up to seven stories in height, the Paddock Stand being approximately 23 metres high and the QEII stand even higher.  The racecourse site could also propose buildings of similar height, and could have proposed the same scale of development were they the owner of the subject site.

 

The proposed six storey building and the 3 storey townhouse buildings are not incompatible with this established and permissible built form.

 

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      Manager, Environmental Health and Building

 

The proposal

 

Proposed residential redevelopment including residential units and town houses open space car parking and community centre.

 

Key Issues

 

Noise

An Environmental Noise Assessment prepared by Acoustic Logic has been carried out and submitted with the application.

 

The report assesses noise sources from traffic within the development and surrounding streets.

 

Further advice is received with respect to noise associated with future traffic generated by the development. The noise from racecourse events was also considered including assessment of race days public address systems and plant and equipment.

 

As a result appropriate conditions have been included in this report with criteria for the Kensington internal town centre DCP for internal noise levels. It is considered future noise assessment based on internal noise criteria will provide reasonable amenity within the proposed occupancies.

 

Energy Conservation

Detailed water and other energy saving proposals is advised as being discussed in more detail with future development proposal as such further comment in relation to site specific proposal will be incorporated in future development assessment reports. 

 

Recommendation:

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

 

Conditions reflecting the above comments are provided in the recommendations to this report.

 

6.2      Groundwater Comments (NSW Department of Water & Energy)

 

The Department recommends that Council give a staged consent to enable the issues identified in the GTAs to be fully investigated and assessed by independent, suitable qualified people in the required specialist fields.  It is suggested that consent be structured as two stages:

 

Stage 1, corresponding to the demolition of existing buildings and clearing of the surface of the site.  The Department does not have a role in licensing these activities where they do not impact on groundwater.  However, clearing of the site may be the only means by which access can be gained to install groundwater monitoring bores to address the Department’s GTAs.  The technical documentation required by the GTAs must be provided to the Department prior to the commencement of Stage 2, at the time of application for a Water Licence for temporary groundwater dewatering.

 

Stage 2, comprising excavation at the site and construction of the proposed development.  The Department recommends that any consent has a condition that requires the proponent to present proof of receiving the Water Licence to the Private Certifying Authority, before any Construction Certificate is issued at the commencement of Stage 2.  The reason for this is that no works that can impact upon groundwater can commence before a licence is obtained.

 

6.3      Heritage Planner

 

Council’s Heritage Planner raises the following issues in assessing the application:

 

§  The importance of the tramway turnstile building on the race course site will be diminished due to the insufficient dimensions of its western forecourt.

§  The setback between proposed buildings D, E and F and the pedestrian ramp is insufficient to maintain its significance or create a legible public space setting for the ramp.

§  The change in ground levels between the former tram way and the turnstiles enhances the significance of the turnstiles as a historical main entry to the race course. Any change in levels to the subject site will diminish this significance.

 

A Heritage Impact Statement prepared by NBRS & Partners accompanies the application. In summary, it states that the proposal is acceptable given:

 

§  The majority of proposed buildings being a maximum of three storeys in height;

§  Sufficient distance between the items of historical importance on site (the turnstiles and pedestrian ramp) and proposed building footprints to maintain their significance;

§  Retention of views to the turnstiles and race course from the former tram route;

§  Retention of the established brush box trees to delineate the former tram route;

§  Substantial separation between the proposed development and the historically important Doncaster Street streetscape; and

§  Improved public accessibility to the items of historical importance on the subject site given its recent private ownership.

 

The application has also been recently amended to include increased angles on proposed buildings A1, A2 and C1 to increase the angle of the line of sight from the former tram route to the turnstile building and race course in the background. The road in front of the turnstile represents a forecourt with sufficient dimensions to consolidate its significance.

 

It is possible that greater space may be available in front of the turnstiles if the setback to the fig tree at the opposite side of the site can be reduced.  A condition has been suggested in the deferred commencement consent which seeks to minimise the setback to the fig tree (but still maintain appropriate distances for growth) so that the space in front of the turnstile buildings is maximised.

 

A further amendment to Block C2 would further improve the sight lines between the various heritage items and the proposed park.  This can be achieved by “angling” the south eastern corner of Block C2 (in the same manner as Block C1).

 

The significance of the pedestrian ramp is consolidated with the inclusion of a park for the majority of its length and 3m setback from an adjoining proposed building for the remainder of its length. The proposal does not involve substantial changes to ground levels which would affect the relationship between the race course and the former tramway route land.

 

Overall, the proposal represents a reasonable balance between consolidating the significance of historical items on site and the permissibility of multi-unit housing.

 

6.4     Landscape Comments

Council’s Landscape Development Officer is generally supportive of this concept stage of the proposal, as those existing site features which are deemed worthy of retention have been identified, and suitable allowances made for their incorporation, including:

 

§ A curved row of mature Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box’s) lining the existing roadway, planted in the 1960’s, at the northern edge of the site;

§ One large, mature and highly significant Ficus macrophylla (Moreton Bay Fig) adjacent the southern site entry;

§ The remnant brick bridge ramp along the western boundary, and Turnstiles building associated with the former tram station.

 

In recognition of the contribution these trees make to the site and environment, as well as the requirement to consider their needs during site planning processes, the Arboricultural Assessment has been revised to reflect the changes made to the building designs, and identifies a total of 54 trees which may be affected by this application; comprising 29 within the boundaries of the subject site, and a further 25 located adjacent the site/proposed works.

 

Council concurs with the recommendations contained in this Arborist report, in that healthy, significant trees will be protected and retained, with there seen to be justification for the removal of those other nominated trees based on the grounds of poor health, condition or invasive qualities.

 

While a further six Brush Box’s at the southern edge of the highly recognisable and desirable avenue/entry planting are shown for removal in order to accommodate the A2 Building, the impact of this will be minimised, and short-term only, through the provision of advanced replacements of the same species in almost the same location.

 

The vast expanses of bitumen paving which currently dominate the site and go largely unused will be completely transformed by construction of the proposed buildings, which will have an undeniable impact on the adjoining residents in Doncaster Avenue; however, it will be possible to offset this effect through the creation of five different landscape precincts, for both public and private use, which will include extensive tree plantings and landscape works for the purposes of screening, privacy, amenity and function.

 

The creation of three public reserves to be dedicated to Council as public space will obviously be of benefit to the occupants given that it is so readily accessible, and should also assist in reducing increased patronage to other surrounding facilities such as Kokoda Park, which serve the broader community.

 

6.5      Drainage Comments

The subject development site is predominantly impervious and gently grading down from south to north. The site has minimal flood storage capabilities and, in fact, the north-west portion of the site is part of an overland flowpath during major storm events. Conditions requiring the applicant to undertake detailed analysis of overland flowpaths and flood levels have been included in this report together with conditions aimed at minimising any potential adverse impact of the development on properties / infrastructure downstream of, and adjacent to the development site.

 

The subject development site is located in an area that is covered by Council’s onsite stormwater detention policy. Stormwater discharge from the development site must not exceed that which would occur from a 1 in 10 year storm of 1 hour duration for the existing site conditions. This site is one of the few development sites where the percentage of impervious area of the pre-developed site is in excess of the percentage of impervious area post development.

 

Given the scale of the development and the extended period of time spent in developing the concept it could reasonably have been expected that a far more detailed drainage concept plan would have been submitted with the development application. The stormwater drainage concept strategy and plans rely on overland flow draining through racecourse land and to a new stormwater drainage pipeline being constructed within racecourse owned land. The development application makes no reference to any consultation between the applicant and the body given care and control of the racecourse land. The stormwater drainage conditions within this report have been formulated with the specific intent of minimising any potential adverse impacts on the stormwater drainage system and properties downstream of the development site. The conditions have also included options for dealing with stormwater discharge from the site over racecourse land.

 

The “Water Management and Servicing Report” provides very little detail on the existing site’s stormwater drainage system, (piped and overland flow). Conditions within this report will require the applicant to fully document the existing drainage system and to ensure that the stormwater drainage details submitted with any Stage 2 Development Application demonstrate that no adverse impact will occur to prperties or infrastructure downstream or adjacent to the development site.

 

In a letter dated 10/4/08 the applicant’s hydraulic consultant makes reference to the Council commissioned flood study being undertaken by WMAwater and the preliminary findings of this study. The flood study lodged with the application, however, appears to be the earlier study undertaken by Worley Parsons. Given the date of lodgement of this application Council is of the opinion that a more up to date analysis for the site could have been produced. Conditions within this report require the applicant to undertake a very detailed flood study and to submit the study for approval prior to lodgement of any Stage 2 Application. Conditions relating to protection of openings / habitable floor levels have been included within this report and the adequacy of these measures will be assessed against the findings of the more detailed flood study.

 

 

 

6.6      Groundwater / Geotechnical Report Comments

The applicant has provided a geotechnical report with the submission and the report indicates that excavation below the water table. The application was referred to the Department of Water and Energy as integrated development and the requirements of the DWE, (as provided to Council by letter dated 9/5/08) have been included within this report.

 

Conditions relating to the basement carpark areas being tanked/waterproofed have also been included within this report.

 

6.7      Traffic/Civil Works Comments

The proposed development is supportable on traffic related grounds. The development application makes reference to the fact that traffic flows associated with the development will have little adverse impact on the level of service of intersections in the vicinity of the development site. The Traffic and Parking Report can be summarised as finding that “the existing major and local road traffic capacity in the local area are adequate to accommodate the proposed development” and that “ no significant changes to the peak hour levels of service are predicted at the major road intersections in the area”.

 

Much of the infrastructure within the development site is to be dedicated to Council, (as agreed between Council and the applicant over a series of meetings dating back to the original lodgement of the application). Conditions relating to construction standards have been included within this report. The provision of additional on-street parking areas have been conditioned within this report.

 

6.8      Service Authority Comments

Standard Service Authority conditions have been included within this report.

 

6.9      Design Review Panel

 

Panel Comments:

The Panel has reviewed this major proposal previously, and supplied both comments and sketch layouts. The applicant has made a number of changes in response to the issues raised.

 

1)    Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

 

Both the site and its planning circumstances are highly unusual. 

 

The applicant has responded to some extent to a number of the issues previously raised;

 

-              There is now some contextual information shown, and a genuine attempt to integrate with the Racecourse planning. The Panel was informed (this is not yet shown on the plans) that Ascot Street will have a roundabout, and provide access to both this site and the Racecourse more generally. There is also future provision for Carlton Street to be extended eastward to connect to the proposed street system.

-              The applicant has shown an edge street facing the Racecourse boundary. The Panel considers that this is the best urban solution, and in the best interests of both the Racecourse and future residents. The proposed tree planting on both sides of the street is endorsed.

-              Two areas of public parkland have been included, in generally good positions to retain trees and retain the relationship between heritage elements.

-              The applicant has negotiated with Council to provide a site for a future public building, to accommodate community uses. This site is very well located at the north east corner of the applicant’s site, at the fulcrum between this property and the envisaged changes to the Racecourse.

-              All new streets and parks created should be dedicated to Council as extensions to the public domain (they are however not noted as such sufficiently clearly on the DA plans). This helps alleviate the Panel’s concerns about the creation of enclaves or gated communities, which are highly undesirable.

-              The Panel welcomes the introduction of both apartments and some taller elements (Building A1 only). Higher buildings in this corner are an acceptable design solution, as higher buildings would relate to the taller buildings found within the Racecourse and nearby along Anzac Parade and would have no adverse effects.

-              The relation between the tramway turnstile and bridge ramp is much improved. Locating an orthogonal public park between the two heritage elements creates a good curtilage.

While all of the above comments are positive, nonetheless the Panel has the following concerns;

-        More thorough contextual information about how the development of this site can form part of a more comprehensive reorganization of this part of the Randwick Racecourse and greater Kensington remains essential. In the Panel’s view, this is a pre-condition to any informed assessment of a Development Application.

-        A DA that produces an enclave is an unacceptable outcome and dangerous precedent. It is highly undesirable to have a single (private) street access for such a large site, and the status of dedicated public domain needs to be unequivocal in all aspects of the DA.

-        The Panel remains firmly of the view that, at the northern end, the alignment of the proposed park and new street should accord with the former geometry of the tram tracks and the curve of the existing trees. In this regard Block A1 should be reconfigured, and Block A2 should be deleted altogether.

-        The public streets need to include adequate footpaths, street tree planting and associated traffic control measures. Continuity of width and alignment are very important considerations, for legibility, good access and urban integration. The possibility of additional walkway connections (opposite Goodwood Street for example) should also be investigated.

-        The proposed internal streets should have more visitor car parking distributed along them, integrated with the landscape design. Only a very small allocation is made in the latest plans, which may lead to increased visitor parking in existing streets.

-        The possibility for new streets to be extended in the future should be left open in all cases. Any new street’s landscape should include existing elements and alignments to the maximum extent possible, and make a positive contribution to the character, amenity and functionality of Racecourse edge, which is a major sporting and recreational asset for the community.

-              Much recent urban design, health and social research has highlighted the problems of inward looking residential enclaves. Given the size and location of this site, any development must consider the street / block structure and the need for improved public access. The most walkable, safest, most permanent and durable connections are public streets. (A ‘gated’ estate, such as Moverley Green or Raleigh Park, is not considered by the Panel to be a good model for residential development or site subdivision. Such schemes do not provide any clear definition of public and private domains, nor do they sufficiently connect into the surrounding streets or land use patterns. Instead they create a considerable blockage in the urban context, limit future adaptability, and discourage a walkable neighbourhood structure).

-              The Panel strongly advises that Block A2 be deleted, and the floor area redistributed to other parts of the site (for example the addition of attics, or the conversion of C1, C2 or D to apartments). However, should this not be acceptable to council,  A2 should have its form altered to allow Brushbox Park to establish a wide and direct view line to the Tramway Turnstile. A closer relationship  of A2 to the proposed community centre (block B) with a common wall may assist in consolidating the urban form.

-              The four mature Brushbox trees shown as cut down to allow the construction of  Building A2 should be retained and incorporated in the public park (see also submitted arborist’s report, classifying 3 of these trees as of reasonable value). This sweeping avenue of trees is a major element in the urban scene, and directly connects and makes legible the former tram use and geometry. The Panel does not accept that the montage, showing a glimpsed view along the curve of trees to the Tramway Turnstile building, accurately represents the loss of relationship and views. This view is highly selective and not to be relied upon.

 

2)    The Scale of the Proposal

 

The Panel supports the mix of three and six storey residential heights proposed, although a better integrated urban solution could give rise to some greater height and density.  Given the scale of the Racecourse and its buildings the upper levels would not necessarily need to step back. It would be desirable to create a strong edge to the new public streets. However the proposed building A1 is a little bulky in footprint. It should follow the elegant curve of the eastern alignment, however the western face should be less monolithic and more articulated.

 

The detail, scale and proportion of walls to the boundaries need to be well considered in the second stage of the DA process. Indicative plans of the townhouses were presented at the meeting that was useful in seeing the direction. The plans of the units were uncertain and poor by comparison. More work in this area may produce a more reassuring form at this part of the staged DA process.

 

The carparking footprint remains too large and should be reduced to allow further deep soil planting to create an appropriate environment for residential use.  There should be no private basements under the public streets footpaths or parks. Given the highly accessible location, a lesser parking requirement should be investigated. Otherwise A2 and C1 & C2 should have two storey basements strictly limited to their site area.

 

3)    The Built Form of the Proposal

 

The built form requires much further development before it would be considered acceptable by the Panel.  A rationalization of the layout of the building envelopes needs to be undertaken.

 

The Panel suggests that the roof zone indicated on the elevations become an attic zone. This could be expressed as allowing, say 40% of the footprint below as floor space. This would have very few impacts on bulk, overshadowing or privacy, and is a type of control that has been very effective recently in other areas in Sydney.

 

The apartment plans submitted are cursory only, and would need to be reviewed in detail in subsequent applications.

 

4)    The Proposed Density

 

In the Panel’s view it would be regrettable if this entire block was developed at low/ medium density, as this could be under-utilising a valuable site. 

 

The Panel considers that there are further options for a proportion of apartment buildings / duplexes / shop-top housing that usefully could be investigated.  Currently the proposal has a predominance of three storey townhouses, which limits housing choices and does not adequately consider accessibility issues. The Panel would prefer more types be investigated to create a desirable social mix.

 

5)    Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

 

The spacing and orientation of buildings could better consider solar access. Opportunities for sunlight and natural ventilation need to be fully incorporated into the design. This may alter the arrangement of the units, but given the simple block nature of the development these further investigations should not be resisted.

 

Water retention for u ses such as garden watering and car washing should be provided.

 

6)    The Proposed Landscape

 

The Panel appreciates that a concept landscape design by a reputable landscape architect has been included with the application. The proposals are reasonably comprehensive (particularly good are the perimeter elevations), given the size of the site. However the landscape design of the streets, with full dimensions, should be shown in the Application, rather than generic image boards. For example the retaining wall indicated to the Racecourse frontage should be shown in the context of a street section, not an abstract sketch (LFD #2). Any changes from  the existing ground levels also need to be clearly shown.

 

The proposed Brushbox Park should be enlarged to include all the Brushbox trees within its boundaries. This would ensure the future preservation of this fine avenue of trees. The Panel does not agree that this narrow park should be regraded to accommodate a swale, as the change of ground plane would be awkward. An alternative stormwater solution should be put forward, perhaps extending the linear swale.

 

At its southern end, the proposal impacts on adjoining dwellings (proposed Block F2, perhaps also the corner of F1). Given that those residents of Doncaster Avenue had a reasonable expectation that their properties would continue to back onto open space, a large rear garden setback is required. The Panel considers that the proposed solution of a 9 metre rear setback (as shown for E1), is reasonable. This setback zone must contain deep soil planting, with space for larger trees. As such the deep soil landscape zone adjoining the rear fences of neighbouring properties should be dimensioned as a minimum of 3 metres in width.

 

The proposed courtyard spaces seem to be quite cramped, and lacking in variety (eg between E1 and F1 and their neighbours).

 

7)    The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

 

The applicant will need to demonstrate that satisfactory levels of amenity and privacy can be achieved by the design.  This would be considered in future applications, however the Panel is concerned that this application may inhibit the future resolution of these issues.

 

8)    The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

There are many safety and security issues that need to be addressed by the proposal. These include;

i.          impact on Racecourse security

ii.         relation to transport for major events

iii.         local traffic

iv.        passive surveillance of adjoining open areas

v.         effect of and on neighbouring houses on Doncaster Avenue.

 

9)    Social issues

 

It is important that this development does not compromise the continuing operation of the Randwick Racecourse for major events. Such events include not only horse racing, which has a rich history here over a one hundred and fifty year period, but also major celebrations such as the papal visit and the like. These are vitally important social and cultural events  for all the people of NSW, and the racecourse offers one of the best venues in Australia for such exceptional occasions. The social value includes both the event itself and the transport logistics involved. Therefore any housing or other uses proposed should be designed and titled (preferably by covenant) so as not to impact on the major social functions of the Racecourse. Noise attenuation needs to be integral with the design.

 

The Panel commends the inclusion of community uses as part of the site planning.

 

10)  The Aesthetics of the Proposal

 

At this stage there is little to comment on in terms of design qualities and  aesthetics.

 

Summary and Recommendations

 

The Panel appreciates the work undertaken by the applicant’s consultant team since the last Panel meeting.

 

The Panel notes that this is a large and extremely important site in the context of Randwick LGA, and its redevelopment should offer considerable public benefits. Given The Racecourse’s extraordinary history and defined perimeter, the project needs to be a far-sighted urban design proposal that considers the future integration of the Racecourse with surrounding areas. The Panel reiterates that this parcel of land cannot simply be considered in isolation, and presents once in a generation urban opportunities.

 

Therefore the Panel would like to see the proposal again, when the above issues have been further considered.

 

The key issues raised by the panel related to the impact of the proposed Brush box park and proposed adjoining building footprints on the historical significance of the former tram route and the vistas it provided to the turnstile building and racecourse beyond. The proposal has since been amended satisfactorily addressing this issue by adjusting the footprints of the proposed buildings closest to the former tram route to better reflect its previous alignment. These adjustments further protect the views to the turnstiles building and race course beyond.

 

 

 

 

7.      Master Planning Requirements

 

As the site is greater than 4,000m2, a master plan in accordance with clause 40A of RLEP98 is required for the site. As Council will be aware, recent changes to the Act mean that adopted master plans are now “deemed DCPs”. Where a provision in an LEP requires a master plan for a site, this provision can be satisfied by the lodging of a staged development application.

 

The subject application deals with a number of matters required by 40A(5) of the RLEP98, including site constraints, site history, design principles, ecologically sustainable development, services provisions and open space. 

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Controls

 

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

 

§  Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

§  State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of