Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 16 December 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

16 December 2008

 

 

 

 

9 December 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, 16 December 2008 at 6:00pm

 

 

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 - 25 November 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

CP86/08    44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar (Deferred)

CP87/08    1 Holmes Street, Maroubra - Review of Council report  (Deferred)

CP88/08    10 Mitchell Street, Chifley

CP89/08    98-100 Garden Street, Maroubra

CP90/08    44-46 Borrodale Road, Kingsford

CP91/08    92 Alison Road, Randwick

CP92/08    Update on draft Administrative LEP 2008 and the Comprehensive LEP

CP93/08    Draft crime prevention and community safety plan: A Safer Randwick City 2008-2018

CP94/08    Sydney Airport Draft Preliminary  Master Plan 2009

CP95/08    Australia Day Actvities

CP96/08    Let's Celebrate - 150th year launch event

CP97/08    Coogee Carols - 21 December 2008, Goldstein Reserve

CP98/08    New Years Eve Fireworks Display - Coogee Sparkles

CP99/08    The Spot Food & Film Festival 2009

 

General Manager's Reports

GM49/08    Affixing of the Council Seal

GM50/08    Councillors Workshop November 2008 - Summary of Outcomes

GM51/08    Community Satisfaction Survey 2008

 

Director City Services Reports

CS32/08    Seeking Council approval for Randwick's Updated Bicycle Plan

CS33/08    Coogee Beach Volleyball Association

CS34/08    150th Anniversary Celebrations 2009

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF65/08    Draft Randwick Economic Development Strategy

GF66/08    Lease Agreement with Anglicare for property at 23 Adina Avenue, Phillip Bay  

 

Petitions

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice

 

NM59/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Andrews - Convenience Store at 250 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

NM60/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Andrews - Alcohol Free Zones - Coogee Basin Area

NM61/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Andrews - Fencing Around Swimming Pools in Randwick City

NM62/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Andrews - Anti Social Behaviour - Coogee Basin Area

NM63/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Matson - Signage Around Defence Force Land at Bundock Street

NM64/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Matson - Murray River Red Gums

NM65/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Bowen - Anti Social Behaviour - Coogee

NM66/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Bowen - Childcare Centres - Randwick City

NM67/08    Motion Pursuant to Notice by Cr Belleli - Growers Market - Matraville or South Ward  

 

Confidential

GF67/08    Tender for Building Cleaning Services (T09/08)

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.

 

CS35/08    Processing of Organics

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.

 

CS36/08    Remediation of Frenchman's Bay Landfill - Tender Number T16/08

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.

 

CP100/08   Mirvac Projects Pty Ltd - Land & Environmnet Court Proceedings 1071 of 2008 Staged Development Application 88 - 102 Moverly Road, South Coogee

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.

  

Notices of Rescission Motions

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council

16 December 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP86/08

 

 

Subject:                  44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar

Folder No:                   DA/558/2008

Author:                   Lauren Hendriks, Planning Officer

Previous Items:       CP61/08 - 44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar - Ordinary Council - 21 October 2008    

 

Introduction

 

Development Application Report No. CP61/08 recommending approval of the subject application for the construction of a new concrete part in-ground swimming pool to the rear yard of the premises and new boundary fencing along the western and part of the northern property boundaries was considered at the Ordinary Council meeting of 21 October 2008. Council resolved, at that meeting:

 

(Belleli/Nash) that the application be deferred to the next Planning Committee meeting to allow for further consideration of the application by all Councillors.

 

Issues:

 

Amended plans have been received by Council on 4 November 2008, which show a further reduction of the level of the pool and surrounding area by 150mm to RL 21.25 and relocation of the eastern staircase so that the top of the stairs is 6.8m from the eastern side boundary. The surrounding neighbours were notified of the amended proposal on 6 November 2008 and the following submissions were received:

 

Owner/resident – 58A Victoria Street, Malabar

Issue

Comment

The proposed pool is right on the boundary between 44-46 Raglan Street and 58A Victoria Street, and overlooks into the living areas and balcony of No. 58A Victoria Street.

The living room windows and balcony are located on the first floor of No. 58A Victoria Street, and are well above the proposed level of the pool and it is therefore unlikely that the pool will result in any potential for direct overlooking into the neighbour’s living room, windows and balcony.  In addition, the proposal also includes the construction of new 1.8m high fencing along the north-western (rear) boundary to maintain the privacy of the subject and adjoining properties.

The pool is too close to No. 58A Victoria Street, Malabar. 

Appropriate conditions of consent have been included within the recommendation to ensure that a dilapidation report be carried out (if necessary) and that adjoining properties and any structures located upon them are adequately supported at all times.  The pool is adjacent to the ground floor garage on the adjoining property, which is not a habitable room.

The pool is so close to the northern boundary that water from the pool will flood into the property and garden at the No. 58A Victoria Street. 

An appropriate condition is to be included to ensure that all pool overflow water is drained away from the adjoining premises, so as not to result in a nuisance or damage to premises and any backwash of the pool filter and other discharge of water is to be drained to the sewer.

 

No. 58A Victoria Street will suffer from noise coming from the pool.

The use of a pool is associated with a residential use, and any noise from residents would be consistent with a residential environment and is not considered to create an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations. 

There is no mention on the plan where the pool pump will be.

A condition relating to limiting any potential noise from swimming pool plant and equipment has been included in the recommendation. It requires that pool plant and equipment be operated in accordance with Protection of the Environment Operations noise control regulations.  

The western fence was discussed with the owner of 44-46 Raglan Street and it was agreed that the fence would be paling not a composite fibre cement panel fence. This is not shown on the plan.

An appropriate condition is to be included to ensure that the proposed fence is to be constructed of timber paling.

The owner intends to build a retaining wall on the western boundary and this is also not shown on the plan

The amended proposal will require the construction of a new retaining wall along the north-western side of the pool.  An appropriate condition has been included in the recommendation that requires the details of any retaining walls to be provided in the CC plans (see Condition 17).  Further, the overall height of the fencing is not to be higher than 1.8m, measured from the finished pool level.

 

Owner/resident – 60 Victoria Street, Malabar

Issue

Comment

The application is inappropriate as the pool is located too close to No. 60 Victoria Street’s dwelling house and backyard.

The pool is located approximately 2.7 metres from the eastern side boundary fence, which is consistent with the preferred solutions in terms of the minimum side setback at ground level of the Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies DCP.

 

The initial DA/558/2008 07/08/08 proposed the pool be above ground 1760mm, the second DA/558/2008 05/09/08 “proposed that it be lowered 600mm to 1160mm and now this amended DA/558/2008 04/11/08  proposes to lower the pool to 1010mm above ground, which is a mere 5 inches of reduction. The reduction will not improve the fact that users of the pool and people walking around the pool will look directly into No. 60 Victoria Street’s backyard and home, providing no

The pool is entirely within the ground at the south-western side, but is above natural ground level at the north-eastern side due to the sloping nature of the site. However, the pool is not considered to have a significant impact on the privacy of No. 60 Victoria Street at its amended height.  A combination of lowering the overall height of the pool and locating the eastern staircase further from the eastern boundary wall ensure that no direct overlooking could be achieved from the top of the eastern staircase or the pool surrounds. Refer to Photograph 1.

 

privacy at all. The pool should be placed entirely within the ground to alleviate privacy issues”.

It is noted that there may be potential for overlooking from the coping around the eastern edge of the pool; however the coping is to service the pool and is narrow being 200-300mm. The narrow coping greatly limits the ability for people to walk around the pool or stand and overlook into the neighbouring properties.   In addition, screening trees to achieve a height of 3.5-4m are proposed to reduce this potential in the longer term.

Also, people in the pool or “users of the pool” would have a significantly lower eye level and thus would not have the potential to overlook into the neighbouring properties.

The stairs leading to the pool gate will enable all the users of the pool to look again directly into No. 60 Victoria Street’s backyard, living room, kitchen and bedroom. The stairs are only 6.8 metres away from the eastern boundary where the council report CP 61/08 specified that this should be a minimum of 9 metres away from the boundary. There is access to the pool via a gate at the western boundary, this would allow for the stairs and gate at the eastern boundary to be deleted. Two pool entrances are not necessary.

The amended plans ensure there will be no potential for direct overlooking from the top of the eastern staircase into No. 60 Victoria Street’s backyard, living room, kitchen or bedroom. The pool has been lowered by an additional 150mm to RL 21.250 and the top of the eastern staircase to be located 6.8m from the eastern boundary to address this issue. Refer to the photo below taken at eye level from the proposed top of the staircase.  As there is no potential for direct overlooking, it was not considered necessary to delete the stairs and the gate.

To accommodate the replacement of the umbrella tree which council gave approval to remove subject to condition item 47 of DA/1194/01, the pool will need to be shortened in length on the eastern boundary by at least 2.5 metres. This will ensure the tree is planted wholly within the subject’s property and thus avoid encroachment by overhanging branches and root invasion into the objector’s small backyard. Condition 47 states “Approval is granted for the removal of the following trees subject to planting of 1x45 litre broad canopied replacement tree (not palm) within the site.  The species selected shall be one that will attain a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity”.  The 2.5m reduction will allow room for the replacement tree to be planted as it is to attain a minimum height of 6 metres at maturity and ensure compliance with

Condition 47 of the consent for DA/1194/2001 requires the planting of a 1x45 litre broad canopied replacement tree (not palm) within the site; however it does not specify where the tree is to be located.  As such, it would be unreasonable to restrict the length of the pool in the event that the tree could possibly be located on the northern corner of the site and encroach on the neighbouring property. 

In addition, it is not considered unusual for trees to grow over adjoining properties in residential areas.

 

the tree planting conditions of DA/1194/01.

 

The plans show screen planting to be planted right on the eastern boundary.  It is necessary that the screening trees as per the plan are also planted at least 3 metres from the eastern boundary and the canopy upon maturity will therefore be wholly within the subject’s property. This will ensure that no part of the screen planting overhangs the objector’s small courtyard at No. 60 Victoria Street.

The amended plans show the proposed screening trees’ canopies to be located within the subject site. However, it is not considered unusual for trees to grow over adjoining properties in residential areas. 

 

The pool being another 5.2 metres away from the eastern boundary would ensure there would be no overspray of water from the pool into the backyard of No. 60 Victoria Street. 

It is considered highly unlikely that overspray of water from the ordinary use of a swimming pool would reach the adjoining property at No. 60 Victoria Street as the pool is to be located 2.7 metres from the eastern adjoining boundary and there is an existing boundary wall that is significantly higher than the top of the pool.

The issue of privacy to No. 60 Victoria Street whilst these trees attain maturity can be remedied by placing a 1.8 metre fence on the pool coping on the eastern boundary side, as they have done on the western and northern boundaries.

The pool is not considered to have a significant impact on the privacy of No. 60 Victoria Street at its current height until the proposed trees reach maturity. A combination of lowering the overall height of the pool and locating the eastern staircase further from the eastern boundary was implemented in the amended plans to ensure that no direct overlooking could be achieved from the top of the eastern staircase or the pool surrounds. Refer to Photograph 1. 

It is noted that there may be potential for overlooking from the coping around the eastern edge of the pool; however the coping is to service the pool and is narrow being 200-300mm. The narrow coping greatly limits the ability for people to walk around the pool or stand and overlook into the neighbouring properties.

Also, people in the pool would have a significantly lower eye level and thus would not have the potential to overlook into the neighbouring properties.

The previous amended plan suggests extra screening upon the boundary fence, which was considered in the previous Council report to be a height which was unacceptable.

There is no proposed privacy screening above the boundary fence in the current proposal. However, screening trees are proposed along the eastern side of the pool.

The illumination of the pool has not been noted upon this amended plan or previous plans. It is evident that wiring for lighting of the pool area and also wiring along the eastern boundary has been placed on the outdoor walls of the house to a height of approximately 6-7 metres above ground level. This would mean that these lights will shine directly into the living, bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and backyard/courtyard of No. 60 Victoria Street.

A condition has been included in the recommendation to ensure that if any lighting is to be installed to the pool or its surrounds that it does not cause a nuisance to nearby residents or create an overspill that will affect the amenity of the area.

 

Condition item 6 of DA/1194/01 states “lighting shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents”.  These 4 lights will overspill and be a nuisance.

This matter is not relevant to the current application. 

“Most swimming pools are illuminated at night, by the pool being built into the ground there will be less chance of light overspill” affecting No. 60 Victoria Street.

It is not considered necessary for the proposed pool to be located entirely in-ground for visual or acoustic privacy reasons. See above. In addition, the proposal does not involve any lighting associated with the pool. A condition has been included in the recommendation to ensure that if any lighting is to be installed to the pool or its surrounds that it does not cause a nuisance to nearby residents or create an overspill that will affect the amenity of the area.

The applicant has neglected to include the exact position of the pump.  This is the third plan that has been submitted, but each time the location has not been marked on the plan. The exact position should be noted on the plan before any approval is given and Council should ensure that the pump is not placed on any boundaries as this would be too close to neighbouring residents.

A condition relating to limiting any potential noise from swimming pool plant and equipment has been included in the recommendation. It requires that pool plant and equipment be operated in accordance with Protection of the Environment Operations noise control regulations.

All the proposed plans lodged with council do not comply with Randwick City Council’s Exempt and Complying DCP Item 17 Swimming Pools and Spas.

The proposal does not comply with the exempt or complying development requirements and is therefore lodged as a development application. 

In CP 61/08 page 209, the photograph taken by council looking east was taken at the western boundary approximately 13 metres from the eastern boundary and does not accurately depict potential for overlooking into No 60 Victoria Street

A site inspection has been conducted by the assessing officer and relevant photographic evidence collated to substantiate the detailed assessment in this report.

If the photo were taken at 2.7 meters from the eastern boundary, where the pool would be as per the plan, the proper perspective would be given. This would show a total loss of privacy in No 60 Victoria Street’s dwelling house and backyard.

 

 

There is an anomaly illustrated on the plan.  Land level is not drawn accurately on plan and is a distortion.

 

The ground level on the plan is consistent with the survey plan by the consultant surveyors S. J. Dixon and Associates.

The kitchen to the rear of No. 60 Victoria Street is not drawn on the plan and gives distorted view making the backyard look larger.

Acknowledged.  However, the site has been inspected and there is no potential for direct overlooking into the kitchen from the proposed location of the pool. Refer to Photograph 1.

The plan amended 04/11/08 shows the balcony balustrades to be 1200mm high and be obscure type glazing.  The plan does not mention that louvre metal screens are to be added to supply some sort of privacy to the neighbouring residents.

The previously approved louvre metal screens were not required to be shown on the plans. The obscure glazing balcony balustrade was included in the plans to illustrate that it would obstruct the potential for direct overlooking from the top of the eastern staircase into the bedroom window of No. 60 Victoria Street. 

 

The noise coming from the pool users will be too close to the dwelling house at No. 60 Victoria Street.

The noise generated by the use of swimming pools is common to a residential environment and as such it is not envisaged that noise impacts will be significant if the pool is used in a responsible manner.

 

The main issue relating to the proposed development is ensuring that the pool meets the performance requirements for visual privacy as outlined in the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP. The amended plan shows a further reduction of the pool level by 150mm to RL21.25 to reduce the potential for overlooking into neighbouring properties.  The coping around the pool is to service the pool and is narrow being 200-300mm, which greatly limits the ability for people to walk around the pool, and overlook into neighbouring properties.   The amended plan also shows the eastern staircase to be relocated so that the top of the staircase is 6.8m from the eastern side boundary to minimise the potential for overlooking into the neighbouring property at No. 60 Victoria Street. In addition, the previously approved opaque glass balustrade to the first floor level balcony on the eastern side of the dwelling will block any view of No. 60 Victoria Street’s bedroom window from the top of the staircase.

 

Photograph 1: Eye level view at 1.5m high from the top of the proposed staircase, as amended, looking east to No. 60 Victoria Street. Note there is to be 1200mm obscure glazed balcony balustrade over the existing first floor level balcony, which will obstruct the view of the bedroom window at No. 60 Victoria Street. 

 

Photograph 2: View of the backyard of the subject site looking west and showing No. 58A Victoria Street.

 

Conclusion

 

The amended proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority approve development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/558/2008 for permission to construct a new concrete part in-ground swimming pool within the rear yard of the existing premises and new boundary fencing along the northern property  boundary and a section of the western property boundary for 44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the amended plans numbered 083/08 issue C sheets 1-2, dated 31/10/08 and received by Council on the 4th November 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:

 

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

 

2.       Details are to be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the proposed works will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

 

3.       Lighting to the swimming pool and its surrounds shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

4.       The fencing to the part of the western and northern property boundaries above the retaining walls is to be constructed of timber and the overall height is to be 1800mm measured above the finished pool level (i.e. RL. 21.25).

 

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

 

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

 

6.       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:

 

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 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.

 

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.

 

15.     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.

 

16.     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.

 

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:

 

17.     All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely in accordance with appropriate professional standards and excavations are to be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

Retaining walls, shoring or piling must be provided to support land which is excavated in association with the erection or demolition of a building, to prevent the movement of soil and to support the adjacent land and buildings, if the soil conditions require it.  Adequate provisions are also to be made for drainage.

 

Retaining walls, shoring, or piling must be designed and installed in accordance with appropriate professional standards and the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standards.  Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring or piling are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority for the development prior to commencing such excavations or works.

 

18.     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.

 

19.     The adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be     adequately supported at all times. If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of any building located on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must:

 

·       preserve and protect the building /s on the adjoining land from damage; and

·       effectively support  the excavation and building; and

·       at least seven (7) days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land (including a public road or public place), give notice of the intention and particulars of the works to the owner of the adjoining land.

 

Notes

 

·       This consent and condition does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the principal contractor or owner-builder must obtain:

 

a)     the consent of the owners of such adjoining or supported land to trespass or encroach, or

b)     an access order under the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000, or

c)     an easement under section 88K of the Conveyancing Act 1919, or

d)     an easement under section 40 of the Land & Environment Court Act 1979, as appropriate.

 

·       Section 177 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 creates a statutory duty of care in relation to support of land.  Accordingly, a person has a duty of care not to do anything on or in relation to land being developed (the supporting land) that removes the support provided by the supporting land to any other adjoining land (the supported land).

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

c.     Water recirculation and filtrations systems are required to comply with AS 1926.3 – 2003:  Swimming Pool Safety – Water Recirculation and Filtration Systems; and

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

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

 

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

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

 

26.     Written notification must be provided to Council advising of the installation and completion of the Swimming Pool (or Spa Pool), to satisfy the requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992, prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Council’s “Notification & Registration of a Swimming Pool” form must be completed and forwarded to Council prior to any Occupation Certificate being issued for the pool.

 

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:

 

27.     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.

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:

 

1.View

REPORT 44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar

 

 

 

 

 


REPORT 44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP61/08

 

 

Subject:                  44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar

Folder No:                   DA/558/2008

Author:                   Lauren Hendriks, Planning Officer     

 


Proposal:                     Construct a new concrete in-ground swimming pool to the rear yard of the premises and new boundary fencing along the western and northern property boundaries.

 

Ward:                      South Ward

 

Applicant:                Peter Karlis

 

Owner:                         Peter Karlis and Ann Karlis

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application has been referred to Council for determination at the request of Councillors Daley, Sullivan and White.

 

The application is for the construction of a new part in-ground swimming pool along the northern boundary of the site and new fencing along the northern property boundary and part of the western boundary.

 

One objection was received during the notification period.  The objection raised issues regarding the potential loss of privacy and amenity, particularly to the dwelling’s living room.

 

The issues raised by the objector were discussed with the applicant, which included the potential loss of privacy and amenity to neighbouring properties.  In particular, there is the potential to overlook into the living room of the neighbouring property to the east, No. 60 Victoria Street, from the pool and surrounding area.

 

Draft amended plans were received which shows the reduction of the finished level of the pool and surrounding area by 600mm to RL 21.40 in order to reduce the potential for overlooking into neighbouring properties and relocation of the staircase on the eastern side of the pool further away from the eastern side boundary and the installation of a 510mm high slatted timber privacy screen above the existing masonry fence on the eastern boundary. These amendments were made to reduce the potential for overlooking from the top of the staircase into No. 60 Victoria Street’s living room to the east.

 

The lowering of the pool level by 600mm to RL 21.40 is considered to be acceptable as it would be effective in reducing the potential for overlooking into neighbouring properties. The use of a 510mm high privacy screen above the existing masonry fence is not considered to be acceptable because it would create a significant sense of enclosure to the neighbouring property’s small backyard and in turn would result in a significant loss of amenity to the neighbouring property.  Instead, it is considered necessary to have the top of the staircase located at least 9m from the eastern boundary, which would reduce the potential for overlooking from the top of the staircase on the eastern side of the pool without having a significant impact on the amenity of the neighbouring property.

 

The proposed development satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP, subject to further changes to the location of the staircase on the eastern side of the pool, and is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal seeks to construct a new concrete part in-ground swimming pool (12.5m x 1.5m) located within the rear yard of the existing premises. The pool will be setback 1500mm from the east, 2700mm from the west, 1500mm and 20mm from the rear.  The coping around the pool is proposed to be 200-300mm wide, with a small paved area between the stairs and the pool to the southern and south-western corner. A 1200mm high child-proof safety gate is to be erected between the dwelling and the pool.  New boundary fencing is also proposed along the northern boundary and a section of the western property boundary.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Raglan Street between Prince Edward Street and Victoria Street in Malabar and is presently occupied by a two storey dwelling which is nearing completion and currently being rendered. The allotment is regular in shape with a width of 16.765m, a depth of 20.065m and an overall site area of 336.9m2. 

 

Currently at the rear of the site, where the pool is proposed, there is a short steep fall from the north-west corner in two directions west to east and north to south.  It appears to be the result of excavation for the new dwelling currently under construction on the site. The natural slope of the land appears to be a slight downward crossfall from west to east.

 

Neighbouring the property to the east is a two storey dwelling, to the west is a single storey dwelling and to the rear is a two storey dwelling fronting Victoria Street.   The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of one and two storey residential dwellings.

 

View of the backyard of the subject site looking east.

 

View of the backyard of the subject site looking west.

4.    Site History

 

DA/1194/2001 – Approved on 16 April 2002 for the erection of a two storey dwelling on the vacant site.

 

DA/1194/2001/A – Approved on 1 November 2005 to modify the existing consent to alter the floor to ceiling heights, mainly being reduced to enable a slight increase in floor to ceiling height in the garage, minor internal changes and the slope of the roof to be decreased.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

5.1 Objections

 

Owner/resident – 60 Victoria Street, Malabar

Issue

Comment

The proposed pool is to be 1.760 metres above ground level at the eastern elevation, which adjoins the backyard at 60 Victoria Street Malabar.  The proposed height of 1.760 metres would mean that the top of the pool would be almost level with the top of No. 60 Victoria Street’s backyard fence. This in turn would mean that people walking around the pool would look directly into my backyard and into my living room giving occupants of No. 60 Victoria Street no privacy at all.

The proposed height of the part-in-ground pool is considered to be inappropriate and will create loss of privacy and amenity for the adjoining dwellings.

As such, appropriate conditions have been included to ensure the pool and surrounds are lowered by 600mm to RL21.40 to reduce the potential for overlooking into neighbouring properties. In addition, the coping around the pool is narrow being 200-300mm, which greatly limits the ability for people to walk around the pool and overlook into the neighbouring properties.

The eastern elevation has stairs leading to a pool gate which would mean that people walking up and down the stairs to the pool gate and pool would look directly into No. 60 Victoria Street’s backyard and home.

The proposed location of the stairs is considered to be too close to the eastern boundary and will create loss of privacy and amenity for the adjoining dwelling.

As such, the staircase on the eastern side of the pool is conditioned to be set back at least 9m from the eastern boundary, measured from the top of the staircase, to minimise the potential for overlooking into the neighbouring property when people are walking up and down the stairs, as well as from the landing at the top.  

The pool will only be 2.70 metres away from the boundary and the noise from people going up and down the stairs and opening and closing the gate would create excessive noise due to its proximity to the dwelling at No. 60 Victoria Street. A living room and bedroom is only approximately 3 metres away from the eastern elevation boundary.

Use of a pool and walking up and down the stairs are considered to be ordinary residential uses and are not considered to create an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.  In addition, appropriate conditions have been included within the consent to require the stairs to be located at least 9m from the eastern boundary.

Loss of privacy has already been suffered to No. 60 Victoria Street’s living room, bedroom and backyard from the house currently being built at 44-46 Raglan Street, which has large windows overlooking No. 60 Victoria Street’s backyard and directly facing the living room and bedroom windows.

This matter is not relevant to the assessment of the current application.

The approval of the DA will further erode the enjoyment of the objector’s home and give the occupants of No. 60 Victoria Street no privacy whatsoever.

See above. Appropriate conditions have been included in the recommendation of this report to minimise the impact of the proposal on the objector’s property. 

The proposed screening of trees would not give any privacy nor would it alleviate the potential noise.

It is noted that the proposed screening of trees may not provide adequate privacy and is unlikely to alleviate potential noise. Appropriate conditions have been included within the consent to minimise the impact of the proposal on the objector’s property.  See above.

 

The pool already has access via a gate at the western elevation which would allow for the deletion of the gate and stairs at the eastern elevation.

The proposed location of the stairs is considered to be too close to the eastern boundary and will create loss of privacy and amenity for the adjoining dwellings and their associated private open space.

The stairs on the eastern elevation are conditioned to be set back at least 9m from the eastern boundary, to minimise potential for overlooking into the neighbouring property when people are walking up and down the stairs. 

 

To reduce the noise, a solid fence/wall at the end of the pool should be built to redirect the noise away from the house at No. 60 Victoria Street.

Use of a pool and walking up and down stairs are considered to be ordinary residential uses and are not considered to create an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

6.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

6.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

 

 

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

SEPP: BASIX requirements came into force for development applications lodged on or after 1 July 2007, involving:

 

        installation of a swimming pool with a capacity greater than 40,000 litres

 

The proposal is for a swimming pool with a capacity less than 40,000 litres, and therefore does not require a BASIX certificate.

 

6.3      Section 94A Development Contributions:

This application is EXEMPT from a levy under Council’s s94A Development Contributions Plan as it falls into the category of Class 10 building or structure.

 

6.4      Policy Controls

6.4.1   Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies

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

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

The landscaped area of the site remains unchanged. Complies.

S1

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

The rear yard has an area greater than 50m². 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 yard has a rectangle of dimensions of 3m x 16.765m, with some changes in level associated with the pool. Despite the changes in level, the space is still a useable and functional area.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

20% of site has permeable treatment. Complies.

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

Proposed cut to a maximum of 1m below natural ground level. Complies.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

No excavation within 900mm of either side boundary. Complies.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Excavation is proposed to the site boundary. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S4

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

Not applicable.

S5

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

Not applicable.

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

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

Given the rear yard area is restricted; excavation will need to occur within 4m of the rear boundary for it to be possible to construct a pool.  As such, appropriate conditions have been included within the consent to ensure adjoining land and buildings located upon adjoining land are adequately supported at all times and also to require a dilapidation report to be carried out prior to works if necessary. 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

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

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

The proposed pool and paved area level (i.e. RL 22) is considered to be inappropriate and is likely to create loss of privacy and amenity for the adjoining dwelling.  As such, appropriate conditions have been included to lower the pool by 600mm to RL21.40 to reduce the potential for overlooking into neighbouring properties. The coping around the pool is narrow being 200-300mm, which greatly limits the ability for people to walk around the pool, and gather and overlook into the neighbouring properties.

The proposed location of the stairs on the eastern side is considered to be too close to the eastern boundary and will create loss of privacy and amenity for the adjoining dwelling. As such, the stairs on the eastern elevation are conditioned to be set back at least 9m from the eastern boundary, measured from the top of the staircase, to minimise potential for overlooking into the neighbouring property when people are walking up and down the stairs.    

 

Fences

The proposal is to have the fencing 1.8m above the pool coping level on the northern side boundary and part of the western side boundary, which is considered to be acceptable and will provide adequate screening to the adjoining properties.

 

7    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

The application satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP in that the proposal will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining dwellings and the character of the surrounding area.  The proposal is suitable for the site subject to the conditions of consent to be imposed and therefore is recommended for approval. 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellent in urban design.

Direction 4c:      Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP, subject to further changes to the location of the staircase on the eastern side of the pool. Therefore, the proposal is recommended for approval subject to the special conditions of consent recommended to be imposed.

 


REPORT 44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar

Attachment 1

 

 

 

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/558/2008 for permission to construct a new swimming pool along the boundary of the site and new fencing along the western and northern property boundaries for 44-46 Raglan Street, Malabar, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 083/08, dated 1 August 2008 and received by Council on the 7 August 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 finished level of the pool and surrounding areas must not exceed RL 21.40. Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans.

 

3.       The proposed staircase towards the eastern end of the pool must be relocated so that the top of the stairs is at least 9 metres from the eastern side boundary. Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans.

 

4.       Details are to be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the proposed works will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

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

 

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

 

6.       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:

 

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 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.

 

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.

 

15.     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.

 

16.     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.

 

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:

 

17.     All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely in accordance with appropriate professional standards and excavations are to be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

Retaining walls, shoring or piling must be provided to support land which is excavated in association with the erection or demolition of a building, to prevent the movement of soil and to support the adjacent land and buildings, if the soil conditions require it.  Adequate provisions are also to be made for drainage.

 

Retaining walls, shoring, or piling must be designed and installed in accordance with appropriate professional standards and the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standards.  Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring or piling are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority for the development prior to commencing such excavations or works.

 

18.     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.

 

19.     The adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be     adequately supported at all times. If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of any building located on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must:

·       preserve and protect the building /s on the adjoining land from damage; and

·       effectively support  the excavation and building; and

·       at least seven (7) days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land (including a public road or public place), give notice of the intention and particulars of the works to the owner of the adjoining land.

 

Notes

 

·       This consent and condition does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the principal contractor or owner-builder must obtain:

 

a)     the consent of the owners of such adjoining or supported land to trespass or encroach, or

b)     an access order under the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000, or

c)     an easement under section 88K of the Conveyancing Act 1919, or

d)     an easement under section 40 of the Land & Environment Court Act 1979, as appropriate.

 

·       Section 177 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 creates a statutory duty of care in relation to support of land.  Accordingly, a person has a duty of care not to do anything on or in relation to land being developed (the supporting land) that removes the support provided by the supporting land to any other adjoining land (the supported land).

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

c.    Water recirculation and filtrations systems are required to comply with AS 1926.3 – 2003:  Swimming Pool Safety – Water Recirculation and Filtration Systems; and

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

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

 

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

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

 

26.     Written notification must be provided to Council advising of the installation and completion of the Swimming Pool (or Spa Pool), to satisfy the requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992, prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Council’s “Notification & Registration of a Swimming Pool” form must be completed and forwarded to Council prior to any Occupation Certificate being issued for the pool.

 

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:

 

27.     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.

 

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

16 December 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP87/08

 

 

Subject:                  1 Holmes Street, Maroubra - Review of Council report

Folder No:                   DA/726/2008

Author:                   Adrian McKeown, Environmental Planning Assessment Officer     

 

Introduction

 

The application was referred to the Planning Committee meeting for determination on 2 December 2008 at the request of Councillors Seng, Andrews and Matthews.

 

The proposal is for the construction of a new garage to the front of an existing dwelling. The garage was originally proposed to be painted and rendered and to present a square parapet façade and panel lift door to the street.   The application was recommended for refusal by the planning officer.  It was considered that the proposal was wholly inconsistent with the character of the residential area in which it is situated and incompatible with the dominant character of existing development due to its reduced setback, perceived bulk and visual dominance over the previously approved dwelling.  Council resolved to defer the application for amended plans requiring a pitched roof to the proposed garage.

 

The applicant has now submitted amended plans and a photo montage of the proposed development for the consideration of Council.  

 

Issues

The main issues identified within the originally proposed development are that the reduced front setback, visual dominance of the proposed garage and substantial modification of the existing façade of the dwelling will impose negative impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and the established character of the locality.

 

The current issue is whether the amended elevations submitted by the applicant for the consideration of the Committee satisfy Council’s preferred solutions for dwelling houses with regard to the amenity of the adjoining properties and the established character of the locality.  

 

Setbacks

The proposed garage includes a front setback of 3.1m which is a reduction from the existing front setback of 6m. The dwelling currently conforms to Council’s objectives regarding setbacks to street frontages which include a front setback that is either 6m or an average of the adjoining residential development. It is considered that the effective halving of the preferred solution to 3.1m is inconsistent with Council’s policies regarding front setbacks.

 

Amended plans show that some attempt has been made to integrate the proposed garage into the architectural features of the dwelling. A hipped roof has been included to the garage, the panel lift door to the street includes neutral and appropriate paint colours and landscaping has been are shown to the front setback. The proposed garage is therefore less visually dominant over the dwelling than was previously proposed and will therefore have a more positive impact on the streetscape.

 

Built Form

The current streetscape is characterised by various dwelling forms. Dwellings include garages level with or behind the front building line and examples exist elsewhere to the streetscape of lightweight carports forward of the building line. The amended plans go some way in mitigating the perceived bulk and visual dominance of the proposed garage over the previously approved dwelling. 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial impact statement

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal is inconsistent with Council’s preferred solutions regarding front setbacks and garages, carports and driveways.  Amended plans do show an integration of the proposed garage into the existing dwelling with the inclusion of a hipped roof to the garage extension forward of the building line.  However, the proposed garage will still dominate in the streetscape and is recommended for refusal.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/726/2008 for the construction of a new garage to the front of an existing dwelling at 1 Holmes Street, Maroubra for the following reasons;

 

1.       The proposal does not meet objective 10(1)(a) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 as it does not allow for the maintenance of the character of the established residential area.

 

2.       The proposed garage does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies in that siting of the garage to the front of the dwelling and modification to the existing façade of the dwelling to accommodate the garage will detract from the appearance of the dwelling and the local streetscape.

 

3.       The proposed garage does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies in relation to building setbacks as it does not conform to the dominant setback along the street.

 

4.       Approval of the proposed garage will set an undesirable precedent within the immediate locality in that the proposed bulk and scale of the structure and the proximity of the front alignment to the property boundary will decrease the amenity of the streetscape.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

16 December 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP88/08

 

 

Subject:                  10 Mitchell Street, Chifley

Folder No:                   DA/744/2008

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Enclosure of front balconies to existing attached dual occupancy

 

Ward:                      South

 

Applicant:                Ms E Lloyd

 

Owner:                         Amborex Pty Ltd

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application details the enclosure of two balconies to the front of an existing dual occupancy development.

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the application includes a SEPP 1 Objection which seeks to vary the development standard by more than 10%. The NSW Department of Planning has recently advised Councils that all development applications where this is a variation greater than 10% in the standard must be determined by full Council rather than under delegated authority. The proposal has an FSR of 0.59:1 which exceed the maximum permissible FSR of 0.5:1 by 16m2. The SEPP 1 objection submitted with the application is considered to be well founded in that the resultant bulk and scale of the building will be compatible with that of neighbouring building in the vicinity of the site and does not result in any adverse amenity impacts on adjoining properties.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details the enclosure of the existing upper level balconies to the front of the dual occupancy development. The enclosure of the balconies will provide for an additional 16m² of floor area to the building.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the southern side of Mitchell Street and has a frontage of 13.73m, depth of 37.885m and an area of 520m². The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of dwellings and dual occupancies.

 

4.    Site History

 

Approval was originally granted for the demolition of the existing buildings and erection of a new two storey attached dual occupancy under Development Consent, DA/556/2001.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Notification, no response has been received.

 

6.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Randwick LEP

Clause 32 of the LEP stipulates that for buildings other than dwellings in 2A zones that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 applies. The proposed alterations to the existing building will result in a floor space ratio of 0.59:1 in excess of this control and a SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged and is discussed below.

 

SEPP Assessment Section

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, in relation to non-compliance of the scheme, prior to amendments reducing the floor area of the development and has argued that strict compliance with clause 32 of Randwick LEP 1998 is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances for the following reasons:

 

a)     The existing residence already exceeds the Floor Space Ratio control (0.56:1), and the proposed balconies are only a minor increase.

b)     The proposal maintains the existing roof, floor and walls and merely encloses the existing envelope with no additional bulk.

c)     Clear windows will be installed to the front and side reducing the mass of the enclosure.

 

Clause 8 of SEPP No. 1 sets out the matters, which shall be considered in deciding whether concurrence should be granted, stating that:

 

“The matters that shall be taken into consideration in deciding whether concurrence should be granted are –

 

a.     Whether non-compliance with the development application raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning; and

 

b.     the public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument.”

 

The variation on balance is relatively small and will not impact on any matters of significance in either state or regional planning. Allowing the variation will not affect the public benefit sought as part of the objectives for this development standard within Clause 32 Floor Space Ratio of RLEP 1998.

 

Justice Lloyd in Winten Property Group Limited v North Sydney Council [2001] NSWLEC 46 in assessing a SEPP 1 objection asked the following questions:

 

First, is the planning control in question a development standard?

 

Yes, Clause 32 is contained within an LEP and is expressed as a development standard not a prohibition.

 

Second, what is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

 

The purpose of the standard is to achieve reasonable upper limits of floor area for redevelopments without compromising the amenity of adjoining developments. The resultant bulk is consistent with the character and density of the nearby and adjoining dwellings and attached dual occupancies. The minor variation has no bearing on the amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring properties particularly as the additional floor area is to enclosed balconies only. 

 

Third, is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in particular does compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act?

 

Varying the development standard is consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 and will not hinder the attainment of the objectives of the LEP, and sections 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act, in that the proposal is an orderly and economic development of the land.

 

Fourth, is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

Within the context of the existing streetscape character and immediate locality the minor extent of variation the objection can be supported. The development achieves the performance requirements of the objective and strict compliance with the standard is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary. The variation represents some 16m² which within the overall density of the development is a minor variation.

 

Fifth, is the objection well founded? In relation to the fourth question, it seems to me that one must also look to see whether a development which complies with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary, as noted by Cripps J in the Hooker Corporation case.

 

To require the proposed development to comply with the maximum permissible floor area would be unreasonable and unnecessary given there is an established density within the locality which is consistent with this development.

 

Therefore, given the comparable scale of the development and adjoining properties and the lack of impact to the amenity of these properties and the streetscape, strict compliance with the development standard is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary.

 

Pursuant to Clause 7 of SEPP No. 1, the objection is well founded and the granting of consent is consistent with the aims of the Policy. It is recommended that the SEPP 1 objection in relation to floor space ratio be supported.

 


Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

Clause

Standard

Check

y/n

Floor area

(Site area 520m2) maximum FSR 0.55:1 

0.59:1

No, see below

 

The floor space ratio does not comply with the preferred solution of the DCP, there are however no major objections as the resultant floor area is not out of character with the established bulk and scale of the surrounding development which satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

 

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

No change to front setback

Yes

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

No change to existing side setback

Yes

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development will not result in any additional impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and is recommended for approval.

 

Recommendation

 

A.       That the Council support the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause 32 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio, on the grounds that the proposed use complies with the objective of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly, and

 

B.       That Council as the 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/744/2008 for the enclosure of front balconies to the existing dual occupancy at 10 Mitchell Street, Chifley subject to the schedule of conditions outlined in this report:

 

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

 

1.      The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered WD1 to WD6, inclusive, dated August 2008 and received by Council on the 15th October 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 external materials, colours and finishes of the building are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building.

 

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

 

3.      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.

 

4.      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.

 

5.      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.

 

6.      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.

 

7.      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.

 

8.      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”.

 

9.      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.

 

10.     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:

 

11.     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.

 

12.     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.

 

13.     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.

 

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

16 December 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP89/08

 

 

Subject:                  98-100 Garden Street, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/673/2008

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Enclosure of existing terrace areas above the garages of townhouses 2, 3 & 4

 

Ward:                      Central

 

Applicant:                G Brandenburger

 

Owner:                         Airam Developments Pty Ltd and A Kant

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application details the enclosure of the existing terrace areas above the garages of dwellings 2, 3 & 4.

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the application includes a SEPP 1 Objection which seeks to vary the development standard by more than 10%. The NSW Department of Planning has recently advised Councils that all development applications where there is a variation greater than 10% in the standard must be determined by full Council rather than under delegated authority. The proposal exceeds the maximum FSR standard by 0.07:1 or 48m2. The SEPP 1 objection is considered well founded, as the resultant build and scale of the development will not be out of character with the dominant built form in the locality and does not result in any adverse amenity impacts.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details the enclosure of an upper level terrace to units 2, 3 & 4 to provide for an enclosed terrace/sunroom to units 2 & 3 and an additional bedroom and study to unit 4.The enclosed areas will provide for 48m of additional floor area to the building.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Garden Street on the corner of Alma Road and is presently occupied by an existing two storey townhouse style multi unit housing development containing four dwellings.  The site has a frontage width of 7.91m to Garden Street a side boundary depth of 52m and has an overall site area of 659m². The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings and low scale multi unit housing development. Below are photographs of the existing building as viewed in Garden Street and Alma Road.

 

4.    Site History

 

Approval was granted under development consent, DA/645/2001, for the demolition of the existing dwellings and erection of a multi unit housing development comprising four dwellings with garages and landscaping.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Notification, no response has been received.

 

6.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

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


Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The proposal is consistent with the general aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will enhance and compliment the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

The following clauses of LEP 1998 are relevant to the proposed development:

 

a)    FSR

Clause 32 of LEP 1998 states that a maximum floor space ratio for land zoned 2B is 0.65:1 and land zoned 2C is 0.9:1.  However, if the site is located on land zoned 2C and has less than a total site area of 700 m2, the floor space ratio is 0.65:1.

The alterations and additions to the building will result in a floor space ratio of 0.72:1 which does not comply with the LEP controls. A SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged arguing that strict compliance is not necessary and is discussed below.

b)    Height

Clause 33 of LEP 1998 imposes a maximum overall building height of 9.5 metres for buildings on land zoned 2B and 12 metres for buildings on land zoned 2C.  It also imposes a maximum external wall height of 7 metres for buildings on land zoned 2B and 10 metres for buildings on land zoned 2C.

 

The proposed alterations and additions to the existing building will not result in the existing height of the building being increased.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX requirements came into force for multi-unit housing where development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2005. A BASIX assessment is a mandatory component of the development approval process under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) Regulation 2004 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

The proposal is for a new multi-unit housing development and the applicant has provided a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP. The provision of a certificate indicates that compliance with the current targets set for energy and water conservation have been met by the development. The certificate also identifies the measures to be shown on Development Application plans to ensure these targets are maintained through to construction.

The plans have been checked and they are consistent with the requirements indicated on the submitted BASIX certificate for DA stage. Standard conditions of consent requiring the continued compliance of the development with the SEPP:BASIX have been included in the recommendation section of this report.

Development Control Plan – Multi-Unit Housing

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


 



Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Building Setbacks

P2  Side boundary setbacks

Side setbacks to ensure:

§ Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

S2  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 4 metres.

No part closer than 2.5 metres.

The proposal does not alter the existing side boundary setbacks of the building.

§ Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

§ Landscaping and private open space provided.

§ Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

S2  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 5 metres.

No part closer than 3.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

 

Density

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

 

The resultant bulk of the building is compatible with the surrounding development and as the external envelope of the building remains unaltered there will not be any impact upon the nearby buildings.

Privacy

P1  Visual Privacy

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

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

The proposed alterations and additions to the building will not result in any significant additional loss of privacy to the adjoining properties as the alterations enclose existing upper level terraces, and in addition to separation from the properties to the south by Alma Road and those to the north by the existing side boundary setbacks will maintain a reasonable level of privacy between the properties.

 

Parking

 

 

The Parking DCP requires that for multi unit housing those dwellings with 3 or more bedrooms require 1.5 spaces per dwelling.

 

The enclosure of the upper level terrace to unit 4 provides an additional bedroom to that dwelling resulting in a total of 4 bedrooms. At present each dwelling has one garage with direct access off Alma Road and the constraints of the site do not allow for the provision of any additional off street parking. Whilst the proposal will provide for an additional bedroom and could potentially generate further parking demand. In this instance an argument that additional parking demand will result cannot be sustained as the new bedroom is very small in area, 8m², and would in all probability be used for a child.

 State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards

       The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, in relation to non-compliance of the scheme, prior to amendments reducing the floor area of the development and has argued that strict compliance with clause 32 of Randwick LEP 1998 is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances for the following reasons:

 

a)     The areas to be enclosed are already terrace areas that are utilised for the use proposed and therefore there is to be no changes to the use of the terrace areas,

b)     The terrace areas are already partly enclosed by two walls being the longest walls required and balustrades, so really only new windows to be added to create these all weather use rooms and additional bedroom and study.

c)     There is no change to privacy from these areas for the adjoining properties under this application.

d)     The roof beams already exist for the installation of the roof over these terraces,

e)     The real increase in visual bulk of the solid element is approximately 39% from the existing balustrade to the roof height,

f)      This proposal will allow better use of this area in winter and wet weather days,

g)     The actual floor area already exists with 2 enclosing walls so actually there is a physical increase in the floor area only from a numerical viewpoint.

 

Clause 8 of SEPP No. 1 sets out the matters, which shall be considered in deciding whether concurrence should be granted, stating that:

 

“The matters that shall be taken into consideration in deciding whether concurrence should be granted are –

 

a.    Whether non-compliance with the development application raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning; and

 

b.    the public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument.”

 

The variation on balance is relatively small and is unlikely to impact on any matters of significance in either state or regional planning. Allowing the variation will not affect the public benefit sought as part of the objectives for this development standard within Clause 32 Floor Space Ratio of RLEP 1998.

 

Justice Lloyd in Winten Property Group Limited v North Sydney Council [2001] NSWLEC 46 in assessing a SEPP 1 objection asked the following questions:

 

First, is the planning control in question a development standard?

 

Yes, Clause 32 is contained within an LEP and is expressed as a development standard not a prohibition.

 

Second, what is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

 

The purpose of the standard is to achieve reasonable upper limits of floor area for redevelopments without compromising the amenity of adjoining developments. The resultant bulk is consistent with the character and density of the streetscape and its relationship to the surrounding locality. The variation has no significant bearing on the amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring properties where the additional floor area above the permissible will not have an unreasonable impact.

 

Third, is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in particular does compliance with the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act?

 

Varying the development standard is consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 and will not hinder the attainment of the objectives of the LEP, and sections 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act, in that the development is an economic and orderly development of the land.

 

Fourth, is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

Within the context of the existing local streetscape and the characteristics of the immediate locality the variation to the standard can be supported. The development still achieves the performance requirements of the objective and strict compliance with the standard is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary.

 

Fifth, is the objection well founded? In relation to the fourth question, it seems to me that one must also look to see whether a development which complies with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary, as noted by Cripps J in the Hooker Corporation case.

 

It is considered that to require the proposed development to comply with the maximum permissible floor area would be unreasonable and unnecessary given there is an established density in relation to much larger multi unit housing development within the locality that are well above that proposed by the development.

 

Pursuant to Clause 7 of SEPP No. 1, it is considered that the objection is well founded and the granting of consent is consistent with the aims of the Policy. It is recommended that the SEPP 1 objection be supported.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction:  Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Multi Unit Housing and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

Recommendation

 

A.        That Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning No. 1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause 32 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1988, relating to maximum floor space ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the objective of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly, and

 

B.        That Council, as the 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/673/2008 for permission to enclose the existing terrace areas above the garages of town houses 2, 3 & 4 subject to the following conditions:-

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 08/028-1 to 08/028-10 inclusive, dated July 2008 and received by Council on the 23rd September 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:

 

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

 

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

 

Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the relevant building works.

 

 

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

 

3.       In accordance with Section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning & 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.

 

4.       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.

 

5.       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)

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

7.       Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter to the satisfaction of the certifying authority and details of the proposed stormwater drainage system are to be included in the construction certificate details for the development.

 

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.

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

10.     Prior to the commencement of any building works, a construction certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans 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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

iv)     give at least two days notice to the Council, in writing, of the 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.

 

12.     In accordance with provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, prior to commencement of the change in building use, the following requirements must be complied with:

 

a)     A Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) must be appointed, to determine the suitability of the building for the new use, which involves a change of building classification under the Building Code of Australia.

 

b)     An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the appointed Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) in accordance with section 109N of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

c)     The building or part may require fire safety upgrading works to be carried out (including the provision of category 1 fire safety measures), to enable an occupation certificate to be obtained for the new use, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

d)     A single and complete Fire Safety Certificate, certifying the installation and operation of all of the fire safety measures within the building must be submitted to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

e)     A Construction Certificate must be obtained from either Council or an Accredited Certifier prior to the carrying out of any building works forming part of this consent or that are required to be carried out to satisfy relevant building and fire safety requirements.

 

13.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

15.     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.

16.     16  Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, a statement is required to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority (or other suitably qualified person), 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.

 

17.     In accordance with clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Details of the Licensed Building Contractor or Owner-Builder Permit (as applicable) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council, in writing, prior to commencement of works.

 

18.     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.

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

 

19.     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.

 

20.     Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials, construction equipment or other materials or articles 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.

 

21.     Bulk bins, waste containers or other articles 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 or other articles in a public place can be made to Council’s Building Certification Services section.

 

22.     A Construction Site Management Plan is to be developed and implemented prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works. The site management plan must include the following measures, as applicable to the type of development:

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details 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 details.

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1      The Construction Certificate plans and associated specifications must comply with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and the building work must be carried out in accordance with development consent and Construction Certificate.

 

Details of compliance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and conditions of development consent are to be provided in the plans, specifications and documentation for the Construction Certificate.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

16 December 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP90/08

 

 

Subject:                  44-46 Borrodale Road, Kingsford

Folder No:                   DA/370/2002/B

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(2) modification to an approved mixed commercial and residential development: Deletion of the external temporary garbage storage areas, deletion of car wash bays, reconfiguration of the internal floor layouts, amalgamation of the ground floor suites into 2 retail units and amendments to external colour scheme.

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Halemist Pty. Ltd.

Owner:                         Halemist Pty. Ltd.

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


 1.     Executive Summary

 

The subject Section 96 modification application is referred to the Ordinary Council Meeting as the original development proposal was determined by Council’s Health, Building and Planning Committee in February 2003.

 

The current proposal is made pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No. 370/2002. The proposal is for deletion of the external temporary garbage storage areas, deletion of car wash bays, reconfiguration of the internal floor layouts, amalgamation of the ground floor suites into 2 retail units and amendments to external colour scheme.

 

The original Development Consent No. 370/2002 is for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 5-storey mixed residential and commercial building comprising 20 x dwellings, 6 x office suites, 3 x shops and car parking for 34 vehicles. The application was approved by deferred commencement in 2003. 

 

A subsequent Development Consent No. 924/2007 was granted in 2008. The proposal is for alterations and additions to the above-mentioned approved development, including the provision of 3 additional apartments, reduction of 1 retail suite, amendments to car parking design and reconfiguration of unit layouts and decking.

 

The site is located within the Kingsford Commercial Centre at the north-eastern corner of the intersection between Borrodale Road and Houston Lane. At present, the site is being redeveloped pursuant to the above approvals with construction work progressing to the superstructures. The locality is characterised by a mixture of retail, commercial and residential developments.

 

The application was advertised and notified from 24 September to 8 October 2008 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process.

 

The site is identified as being within Zone No. 3A (General Business Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998. The proposed land uses are consistent with the zoning objectives in that the development will reinforce the vibrancy of the Kingsford Commercial Centre by introducing retail, commercial and residential uses in close proximity to public transport services.

 

The proposed modifications will result in a reduction of 31.4m2 of residential floor space, due to the increased setbacks to levels 4, 5 and 6. The modified development will result in a total floor space ratio and residential floor space ratio of 2.82:1 and 1.93:1 respectively, which complies with the LEP development standards.

 

It should be noted that Development Consent No. 924/2007 and a subsequent Section 96 modification have resulted in a total floor space ratio and residential floor space ratio of 2.93:1 and 2.34:1 respectively. The above approvals will allow additional floor space to be provided and are considered to represent the true scale of the development when completed. Notwithstanding, given that the subject application will reduce residential floor space by 31.4m2, the modified development is not considered to result in additional adverse visual or amenity impacts on the adjoining premises or the character of the locality as a whole.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 65 Design Quality of Residential Flat Development is applicable to the proposal. The original proposal was considered to be satisfactory having regard to the design quality principles of the SEPP. The subject modifications are minor in nature and will not alter the conclusion of the previous assessment.

 

The Kingsford Commercial Centre Development Control Plan (DCP) specifies detailed built form and setback controls for developments within the Kingsford town centre precinct, and is applicable to the subject proposal. The proposed modifications will not alter the approved building height and private open space provision of the development. The proposal will increase side setbacks in the south-eastern portion of the building and amend the external colour scheme. The modified development is considered to enhance the articulations and modulations of the building facades and is satisfactory having regard to the DCP provisions.

 

The Parking Development Control Plan is applicable to the current application. The modifications to the parking design have been assessed and are considered to be capable of proper functioning without significant restrictions to efficient vehicular movements. The proposal involves the deletion of 2 x car wash bays required by Condition 93 of the consent. It is recommended that 1 car wash bay be retained in order to cater for the needs of the residents.

 

The proposal will delete the external garbage storage areas fronting Houston Lane due to constraints in the structural design. The above areas were originally intended to facilitate the collection of bins by Council’s garbage truck. The kerb and footpath along the Houston Lane frontage do not have sufficient width for the presentation of bins. Specific conditions are recommended to extend the kerb return at the corner of Houston Lane and Borrodale Road immediately adjacent to the site. The kerb return will be concreted into a hard surface to facilitate the presentation of bins during the collection day. Therefore, a suitable waste management arrangement will still be achieved by the development.

 

The proposed modifications satisfy the matters for consideration under Sections 79C and 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

The proposed modifications satisfy the relevant legislation, State policies and local planning controls, and are recommended for approval subject to additional and amended conditions to the original consent.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot 1 in DP 942174 and Lot 1 in DP 942664, No. 44-46 Borrodale Road, Kingsford. The site is located within the Kingsford Commercial Centre at the north-eastern corner of the intersection between Borrodale Road and Houston Lane. The dimension and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, rear boundary

16.765m

 

Southern, Borrodale Road boundary

18.49m

 

Eastern, side boundary

38.672m

 

Western, Houston Lane boundary

40.17m

 

Land area

 

680.7m2

 

At present, the site is being redeveloped for mixed residential and commercial purposes with construction work progressing to the superstructures.

 

The site is adjoined to the north by a two-storey commercial building with frontage to Anzac Parade (No. 315 Anzac Parade). The eastern boundary of the site adjoins a right of way and rear service areas to a number of two-storey commercial premises fronting onto Anzac Parade (Nos. 317-329 Anzac Parade). To the south on the opposite side of Borrodale Road is a multi-storey mixed residential and commercial building (No. 331-335 Anzac Parade). To the west on the opposite side of Houston Lane is a 4-storey residential flat building (No. 42 Borrodale Road). The locality is characterised by a mixture of retail, commercial and residential developments.

 

Photos 1-4 show the existing developments on the subject and adjoining sites:

 

 

Photo 1 Houston Lane elevation of the subject development

Photo 2 Borrodale Road and Houston Lane elevations of the subject development

 

Photo 3 Existing residential flat building on the opposite side of Houston Lane

Photo 4 Existing mixed use building on the opposite side of Borrodale Road

 

3.      The Proposal

 

The subject application is made pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify Development Consent No. 370/2002. The proposal includes the following amendments to the approved development:

 

·      Deletion of the external temporary garbage bin storage areas on the Houston Lane elevation of the building.

 

·      Installation of ventilation grilles on the Houston Lane external wall for the basement car park.

 

·      Deletion of 2 car wash bays required by Condition 93 of the consent and their replacement with standard parking spaces. Condition 93 currently reads as follows:

 

93.     Two covered car washing bays shall be provided for this development.

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

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

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

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

 

·      Minor realignments of the driveway walls to the level 1 car park.

 

·      Adjustments to the column positions on the car park levels.

 

·      Relocation of garbage and bicycle storage areas on the car park levels.

 

·      Minor realignments of the internal partition walls on all levels.

 

·      Reduction of floor plates and increase in setbacks in the south-eastern portions of levels 4, 5 and 6.

 

·      Deletion of the emergency fire egress at the north-eastern corner of the level 1 car park.

 

·      Relocation of the on-site stormwater detention tank to the north-eastern corner of the level 1 car park.

 

·      Provision of a pump room within the level 1 car park.

 

·      Amalgamation of the 3 ground floor retail units into 2 with associated adjustments to the front façade of the building.

 

·      Changes to the external colour scheme.

 

4.      Site History

 

4.1    Previous development consents relevant to the site

DA/370/2002

Demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a 5-storey mixed residential and commercial building comprising 20 x dwellings, 6 x office suites, 3 x shops and car parking for 34 vehicles.

The application was approved by deferred commencement at Council’s Health, Building and Planning Committee Meeting on 11 February 2003.

 

DA/370/2002/A

Section 96(1A) modification to amend the time limit within which the deferred commencement conditions are to be satisfied.

The application was approved by Council under delegated authority on 4 February 2008.

 

DA/924/2007

Alterations and additions to an approved mixed residential and commercial development, including provision of 3 additional apartments, reduction of 1 retail suite, amendments to car parking design, enlargement of lifts, reconfiguration of unit layouts and alterations to decks, fire stairs and setbacks.

The application was approved by Council under delegated authority on 21 May 2008.

DA/924/2007/A

Section 96(1A) modification for conversion of Unit 23 from a studio to a 2-bedroom dwelling and provision of electrical switch cupboards within the lift lobbies of level 6.

The application was approved by Council under delegated authority on 15 October 2008.

4.2    Plan amendments

Following preliminary assessment of the application, the following requests were made for the submission of amended plans and additional information:

18 September 2008

Scaled floor plans showing the widths of the entry / exit ramps to the car parking levels and superimposed with standard vehicle turning paths (2890.1: 2004 – B85 Template) are to be submitted.

 

16 October 2008

The application proposes the deletion of the temporary garbage storage areas fronting Houston Lane. Additional information is to be submitted to explain the proposed waste collection arrangement.

 

Car space 10, being the last space in the access aisle, does not appear to comply with the dimensional requirements of Australian Standard 2890.1.

 

The garbage area adjacent to car space 3 does not appear to be accessible once a vehicle is parked in the bay.

 

Amended plans addressing the above issues were submitted to Council on 20 November 2008.

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

The subject application has been advertised and notified to 56 adjoining and nearby properties in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The notification period ended on 8 October 2008. No submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process.

 

6.      Technical Officers Comments

 

Development Engineers

The subject application has been referred to Council’s Development Engineers for assessment. The comments provided are extracted as follows:

 

Waste Management Comments

The request to delete the temporary external garbage bin storage area along the Houston Lane frontage has created issues regarding location of bin presentation for collection along the site frontage. Discussions with Council’s Manager of Development Waste (T Islam) have resulted in recommending that the 240 litre garbage bins be replaced with 4 x 660 litre garbage bins.

 

To provide suitable presentation area for the garbage bins and recycling bins Council’s kerb return in Borrodale Rd will have to be extended by 1.10m and that the 2 on-street car spaces in front of the site will have to be linemarked. All costs associated with the kerb reconstruction and line marking is to be at the applicant’s expense.

 

Carwash Bay Comments

The applicant seeks to delete Condition No 93 which requires the development to provide 2 carwash bays.

 

Development Engineering will allow the deletion of 1 carwash bay provided it is maintained as a visitor car space.

 


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 680.7m2 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. 3A (General Business Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposed development is permissible with Council’s consent. The subject proposal is consistent with the zoning objectives in that:

 

·      The modifications will maintain the same number of apartment units as the approved scheme.

·      The modified development will continue to provide activation and casual surveillance of Borrodale Road, Houston Lane and the surrounding public domain.

·      The modifications will improve the streetscape character of Borrodale Road by introducing a suitably proportioned built form with appropriate external colouring.

 

The following clauses in the LEP are applicable to the current proposal:

 

Clause 32 Floor space ratios

Clause 32(3) specifies the maximum floor space ratio for buildings within Zone No. 3A to be 3:1, with a residential component not exceeding 2:1.

 

The proposed modifications will result in a reduction of 31.4m2 of residential floor space, due to the increased setbacks to levels 4, 5 and 6. The compliance of the proposal is assessed as follows:

 

Permissible gross floor area

2042.1m2

Permissible FSR

3:1

Permissible residential FSR

2:1 (or 1361.4m2)

 

Approved gross floor area

Approx. 1953.6m2

Approved FSR

2.87:1

Approved residential FSR

1.98:1 (or approx. 1347.8m2)

 

Modified gross floor area

1922.2m2

Modified FSR

2.82:1

Modified residential FSR

1.93:1 (or 1316.4m2)

 

Therefore, the proposed modifications to Development Consent 370/2002 will comply with the FSR development standards.

 

It should be noted that Development Consent No. 924/2007 and a subsequent Section 96 modification have resulted in the following floor space elements:

 

Approved gross floor area

1997.8m2

Approved FSR

2.93:1

Approved residential gross floor area

1593.4m2

Approved residential FSR

2.34:1

 

The approval under Development Consent 924/2007, as modified, will allow additional residential floor space and is considered to represent the true scale of the development when completed. However, given the subject application will reduce residential floor space by 31.4m2, the modified development is not considered to result in additional adverse visual or amenity impacts on the adjoining premises or the character of the locality as a whole. Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

 

Clause 33 Building heights

Clause 33(5) of the LEP specifies a maximum height limit for buildings within Zone No. 3A to be 24m.

 

The subject proposal will not alter the approved building height under Development Consent No. 370/2002.

 

8.2    Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008

The Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008 had been placed on public exhibition. The proposed modifications are consistent with the general aims and objectives of the above draft LEP.

 

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 is applicable to the proposed modifications. The original proposal was considered to be satisfactory having regard to the design quality principles of the SEPP. The subject modifications will not alter the conclusion of the previous assessment for the following reasons:

 

·      The proposal will not significantly alter the envelope and footprint of the approved development. Rather, it will increase the setbacks in the south-eastern portions of the upper levels and will slightly reduce visual bulk as viewed from the surrounding public and private domain.

 

·      The amenity of the apartment units, in terms of solar access, ventilation, private open space and layout will not be significantly altered as a result of the proposal.

 

·      The reconfiguration of the car parking levels is a result of the detailed structural design and will not adversely impact on vehicle movements or pedestrian safety.

 

·      The modified proposal will incorporate a suitable waste management arrangement and will not unreasonably impact on the amenity of the surrounding areas.

 

·      The currently approved colour scheme is predominantly characterised by a saturated brown hue in dark tone. The proposed colour scheme comprises neutral grey hues ranging from light to medium-dark tones. The modification is considered to deliver a more contemporary character to the building, which is compatible and in harmony with the surrounding developments. The amended scheme will also enhance the articulations of the building facades.

 

Due to the minor nature of the proposed modifications, it is considered not necessary to refer the application to the Design Review Panel.

 

 

 

 

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

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) came into force for all new dwellings, dual occupancies and residential flat developments where the development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2004. The original development application was not subject to the BASIX requirements and therefore the SEPP is not applicable to the current Section 96 proposal.

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

9.1    Development Control Plan – Kingsford Commercial Centre

The Kingsford Commercial Centre Development Control Plan, effective from 7 May 1996, is applicable to the subject proposal. The relevant provisions of the DCP are addressed as follows:

 

Control

Comments

Section 2 Building Design

 

A side boundary setback of 6m for that part of a wall exceeding 12m in height.

The approved development does not comply with the DCP side setback requirements due to the restricted site width.

 

The modification proposal will increase the side setback to the south-eastern portions of the building on levels 4, 5 and 6 by up to approximately 1.6m. This is achieved mainly by reorientating the balcony areas towards the Borrodale Road frontage. The modification is considered to improve visual privacy for any future redevelopment of the adjoining commercial premises to the east.

 

The site is subject to a building height plane defined by a 45-degree sloping plane from a point at 8m above the ground level along the Houston Lane Boundary.

The approved development does not comply with the building height plane requirements of the DCP. The current modification will not significantly alter the approved building envelope and footprints.

 

Section 3 Urban Design Parameters

 

The colour of exterior work should be consistent with the colour palette contained in the DCP.

 

The proposed colour scheme comprises neutral grey hues ranging from light to medium-dark tones. The modification is considered to deliver a more contemporary character to the building, which is compatible and in harmony with the surrounding developments.

 

New buildings should incorporate a vertical emphasis in the composition of their building facades and architectural detailing.

The amended colour scheme is considered to enhance the articulations and modulations of the building facades and will improve the character of the immediate surroundings.

 

 


9.2    Development Control Plan - Parking

The Parking Development Control Plan, effective from 24 December 1998, is applicable to the modification proposal.

 

9.2.1          Parking provision

The modifications do not alter the number of apartment units or dwelling mix within the approved development under Consent 370/2002. Therefore, the proposal will not increase the traffic generation and hence the parking requirements of the development. The modified development will maintain the provision of 34 parking spaces, including 1 visitor / loading bay (car space 27) as approved.

 

The Development Consent 924/2007 and a subsequent modification approved the provision of 3 additional dwellings within the development, which entail a shortfall of 4 parking spaces according to the DCP. Notwithstanding, the parking shortfall has been considered to be acceptable and will not result in adverse impacts on the surrounding road network.

 

9.2.2          Car park configuration

It is noted that the approved car parking design does not strictly comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 in terms of the dimensions of a number of parking bays and certain sections of the access aisles. This is mainly attributed to the dimensional constraints of the site.

 

The modified parking design has been assessed and is considered to be capable of proper functioning without significant restrictions to efficient vehicular movements.

 

It is noted that the modified basement level will create a small car space (car space 9) and an end-of-aisle car space (car space 10). There is no blind aisle extension of 1000mm on the southern end of the basement level, which is typically required under the Australian Standard.

 

Notwithstanding, the aisle widths in front of car spaces 9 and 10 are 6500mm and 7000mm respectively, which are sufficient for a vehicle to manoeuvre into and out of the bays efficiently.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the modified parking design and raised no objections. Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

 

9.2.3          Car wash bays

Condition 93 requires the provision of 2 car wash bays within the development. The proposed modifications will delete the car wash bays and replace them with standard parking bays.

 

It is considered that the elimination of all car wash bays may encourage residents to undertake cleaning within the standard parking spaces and lead to pollution problems. It is therefore recommended that 1 car wash bay be retained within the development to cater for the needs of the residents.

 

9.2.4          Bicycle parking

The DCP specifies the following bicycle parking requirements: 

1 space per 3 units, plus 1 visitor space per 10 units

 

The original consent approves a total of 20 dwellings within the development. Development Consent 924/2007 approves the provision of 3 additional dwellings. Therefore, a total of 10 bicycle spaces are required under the DCP.

 

The original consent drawings and conditions do not specify the minimum number of on-site bicycle parking spaces. The current Section 96 drawings indicate the provision of 8 bicycle storage spaces. A new condition is recommended to ensure that the proposed bicycle storage facilities are adequately installed within the development.

 

9.3    Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The subject application is to modify a development consent previously granted by Council pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Section 94A levies are therefore not applicable to the proposal.

 

10.    Environmental Assessment

 

10.1  Section 96 assessment

Under the provisions of Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the following criteria are complied with:-

 

·      Substantially the same development

The proposal does not involve any significant changes to the approved built form, floor space or private open space provision on site. Therefore, the modifications are considered to be substantially the same development for which the consent was originally granted.

 

·      Notification and consideration of submissions

The application has been advertised and notified in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process.

 

·      Consultation with relevant public authorities

The proposal does not require referral to any external bodies.

 

10.2  Section 79C 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.

 

 

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. A standard condition has already been imposed in the original consent to address the above matter.

 

Clause 92 of the Regulation requires the consent authority to consider relevant Australian Standards relating to the demolition of structures. A condition has already been included in the consent 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. Appropriate conditions have already been imposed in the consent 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, which are otherwise not addressed in the previous sections of this report, are assessed in the paragraphs below.

 

The proposed development is consistent with the types of land uses envisaged for the Kingsford Commercial Centre, and is considered to reinforce the vibrancy of the commercial / retail precincts in the locality. The proposal is not considered to result in detrimental social impacts on the locality.

 

The proposal is not considered to result in detrimental economic impacts on the locality considering the mixed use nature of the development.

 

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

The site has previously been assessed as being suitable for mixed commercial and residential development in the original consent granted by Council. The current proposal does not involve any significant changes to the floor space, built form or private open space provision of the approved development. The modifications are not considered to result in any significant impact on the streetscape or amenity of the surrounding residences. Therefore, the site is considered to be suitable for the modified development.

 

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

No submissions were received.

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 


Waste management

The approved development includes two external garbage storage areas along the Houston Lane frontage. The above areas are capable of accommodating a total of 25 standard 240-litre bins, and are intended to facilitate the weekly collection of bins by Council’s garbage truck. The facility is expected to be used during the collection day only.

 

The approved proposal has included on-site storage facilities on both parking levels. Specifically, Conditions 97 and 98 provide for the following:

 

·      The residential garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a total of 20 x 240 litre bins (10 garbage bins & 10 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins.

 

·      A separate garbage area is to be provided for the proposed 3 shops and 6 offices, which is able to contain a total of 6 x 240 litre bins.

 

The subject proposal will delete the aforementioned external bin storage areas due to complications in the structural design. The kerb and footpath immediately adjacent to the development site along Houston Lane do not have sufficient width for presentation of the bins.

 

In order to rectify the above constraints, specific conditions are recommended to extend the kerb return at the corner of Houston Lane and Borrodale Road immediately adjacent to the site. The kerb return will be concreted into a hard surface to facilitate the presentation of bins during the collection day. The above arrangement has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineering and Waste Management staff, and is considered to be satisfactory subject to conditions.

 

 

 

Photo 5 Existing kerb return (middle ground of the photograph) at the corner of Houston Lane and Borrodale Road

 

It is noted that there are 2 parallel kerb side parking spaces (1 hour restriction: 8:30am to 6:00pm, Monday to Friday; 8:30am to 12:30pm, Saturday) immediately to the south of the site on Borrodale Road. The aforementioned special conditions will ensure that sufficient length clearance is maintained for the above public parking spaces.

 

The kerb extension will only be utilised for garbage collection purposes once a week. During normal days, the extension can effectively function as footpath areas. This feature is not considered to result in detrimental streetscape impacts.

 

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.

Key Action:       Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the original development consent satisfies Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and approval of the modification will not result in any significant additional impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable and within public interest.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify Development Consent No. 370/2002 for deletion of the external temporary garbage storage areas, deletion of car wash bays, reconfiguration of the internal floor layouts, amalgamation of the ground floor suites into 2 retail units and amendments to external colour scheme, at No. 44-46 Borrodale Road, Kingsford, in the following manner:

 

·      Amendment of Condition 1 to make reference to the Section 96 Modification plans as follows:

 

1.  The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA 02 to DA 06 – Issue C and A07 – Issue C stamped received by Council on 16 October 2002, the application form, and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the following Section 96 plans:

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared by

DA02(F)

23.10.08

20 November 2008

The Architecture Company

DA03(D)

04.09.08

12 September 2008

 

DA04(E)

04.09.08

12 September 2008

 

DA05(D)

04.09.08

12 September 2008

 

DA06(E)

04.09.08

12 September 2008

 

DA07(E)

04.09.08

12 September 2008

 

 

, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application; except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

·      Imposition of Condition 1A to read as follows:

 

1A. The colours of the external surfaces to the building are to be consistent with the submitted Proposed Colour Scheme – 44/46 Borrodale Road, Kingsford NSW, which was stamp-received by Council on 12 September 2008.

 

 

·      Amendment of Condition 65 to read as follows:

 

65.  Prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

a. Construct new concrete heavy duty vehicular crossings and laybacks at kerb opposite the vehicular entrances to the site in Houston Lane.

 

b. Remove the existing concrete vehicular crossing and layback and to reinstate the area with integral kerb and gutter, where required, to Council's specification.

 

c. Reconstruct the Council’s footpath/nature strip along the Borrodale Road site frontage in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines.

 

d. Extend Council’s kerb return from Houston Lane into Borrodale Road by 1.10m to the east including associated works.

 

e. Linemark the 2 on-street parking spaces in Borrodale Road immediately to the south of the subject site, to the satisfaction of Council, with lengths of 6.20m (western space) and 5.40m (eastern space).

 

f.  Concrete pave the area adjacent to the kerb return in Borrodale Road in accordance with the requirements of Council’s Landscape Architect. 

 

Note: Prior to the issuing of the construction certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to have approved by Council’s Landscape Architect a Landscape Design that is in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines. Council’s Landscape Architect can be contacted on 9399 0786.

 

Enquiries regarding compliance with Conditions d., e. & f. can be made to Council’s Development Engineer Mr. P O’Sullivan on 9399 0923.

 

·      Amendment of Condition 93 to read as follows:

 

93. Only one (1) covered car washing bay shall be provided for this development:

 

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

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

 

c) The car washing bay may be used for visitor parking purposes provided it is signposted with ‘Exclusive Carwash Bay Use Sat 2:00pm – 5:00pm and Sunday 10:00am – 2:00pm, Visitor parking at other times’.

 

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

 

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

 

Note: The 2nd carwash bay which has been deleted from the original consent shall be maintained as a visitor car space and be clearly signposted.

 

·      Amendment of Condition 97 to read as follows:

 

97.  The residential garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a total of 12 x 240 litre recycle bins and 4 x 660 litre garbage bins whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins. Details showing compliance with this requirement are to be shown on the plans submitted to the certifying authority for the construction certificate.

 

Dimensions for garbage bins can be obtained from the booklet – Better Practice Guide for Waste Management in Multi-Unit Dwellings.

 

·      Imposition of Condition 115 to read as follows:

 

115.    A minimum of eight (8) bicycle parking spaces and associated storage facilities are to be provided within the development. The design and construction of the above facilities are to be generally consistent with Australian Standard 2890.3 Bicycle parking facilities.

 

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

 

·      Imposition of Condition 116 to read as follows:

 

116.  Prior to issuing an occupation certificate for the development the applicant is to contact Council’s Manager of Waste (Mr. T Islam – 9399 0969) to arrange a site meeting to determine residential waste and recycling bins presentation to the Borrodale Road frontage for collection, and after the site meeting the applicant shall submit for approval, and have approved, by Council’s Manager of Waste a Waste Management Plan in relation to presentation of the residential waste and recycling bins.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

16 December 2008

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP91/08

 

 

Subject:                  92 Alison Road, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/393/2008

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 5 storey multi unit housing building containing 17 units and part basement level car parking for 24 vehicles & retention of heritage stone wall on boundary.

 

Ward:                      North Ward

 

Applicant:                Dr M G Scarf, Mr C M Scarf & Mrs P A Woods

 

Owner:                         Dr M G Scarf, Mr C M Scarf & Mrs P A Woods

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to Council as the proposed development is valued at $7,408,725.

 

The subject application is for demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 5 storey multi unit housing building containing 17 units and part basement level car parking for 24 vehicles and retention of heritage stone wall on boundary.

 

The proposal has a maximum FSR of 0.94:1 which varies from the maximum FSR control of 0.9:1 under the Randwick LEP 1998. The proposal also has a maximum building height of 17.73m and maximum wall height of 15.43m which varies from the maximum building height standard (12m) and maximum wall height standard (10m) by 5.73m and 5.43m respectively. The non-compliances have been assessed and an assessment of the SEPP No. 1 objections made in relation to the non-compliances indicates that the applicant has not made a valid case to indicate why compliance with the development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary. Specifically, the proposal will:

 

·      be an overdevelopment of the subject site and will be excessive, intrusive and overwhelming in height, bulk and scale such as to detract from the existing predominant 3 storey character of the immediate vicinity; the Alison Road streetscape and the heritage significance of the Royal Randwick Racecourse Conservation Area.

 

·      be inconsistent with the planning objectives for the locality as expressed in the Randwick LEP 1998 and the DCP - Multi-unit Housing.

 

·      generate additional height, bulk and density in breach of the relevant FSR and height standards resulting in detrimental impacts to surrounding uses in terms of  loss of views and privacy, overbearing bulk and scale; and

 

The proposal does not comply with the preferred solutions/performance requirements of the DCP – Multi unit housing relating to:

 

·      Site Planning - Inadequate Site analysis plan

·      Height - non-compliance with max building and wall height controls

·      Building Setback – non-compliances with side boundary setbacks requirements

·      Density – non-compliance with maximum FSR standard

·      Privacy – overlooking of rear yard and south facing windows of No 90 Alison Road

·      View Sharing – loss of major iconic views of the CBD/City skyline to No 94 Alison Road and valuable views of the Randwick Racecourse to No 8 Holkham Avenue

·      Solar Access – Deficient shadow diagrams.

·      Safety and Security – No surveillance of Alison Road provided due to blank western wall.

·      Parking – Deficiency of 1 carparking space

 

The DA is found to be deficient in the following areas:

 

·      The DA has an inadequate heritage impact assessment that fails to assess the effects of the non-compliant building and its proposed architectural design and treatment on the heritage listed wall along the northern side and north-

 

eastern rear boundary and the Royal Randwick Racecourse  Heritage Conservation Area.

 

·      It is not possible to verify the accuracy of the overshadowing impacts and the details shown in the submitted shadow diagrams, including the position and level of buildings relative to the proposed building and level of adjoining lands relative to the subject site. The shadow diagrams also fail to show the impact of existing overshadowing which is necessary for determining the duration of solar access available to adjoining properties.

 

·      The site analysis fails to assess a range of internal and external site factors affecting the design and siting of development on the subject site. The site analysis primarily is inadequate in that it has failed to recognize the existence of views that are currently enjoyed by adjoining properties; critical interfaces to heritage items and heritage conservation areas; and critical interface with the Alison Road streetscape.

 

The recommendation is for refusal of the development application.

 

2.      The Proposal

 

The subject application is for demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 5 storey multi unit housing building containing 17 units and part basement level car parking for 24 vehicles and retention of heritage stone wall on boundary.

 

The proposed development will contain the following uses:

 

Ground Level/Sub-basement

24 carparking spaces

Storage areas

Lift & stairs

Plant/Services Area

WC

Garbage room

Bicycle parking area

 

Level 1

Lift/Lobby area

Gallery for access

1 x 1 Bedroom + study dwelling

1 x 1 Bedroom dwelling

1 x 2 Bedroom dwelling

Lower floor of 2 x 2 Bedroom dwelling (containing living/dining and kitchen areas)

 

Level 2

Lift/Lobby area

1 x 1 Bedroom + study dwelling

2 x 2 Bedroom dwelling

Upper floor of 2 x 2 Bedroom dwelling 

 

Level 3

Lift/Lobby area

2 x 1 Bedroom dwelling + study

1 x 2 Bedroom dwelling

Lower floor of 2 x 2 Bedroom dwelling (containing living/dining and kitchen areas)

 

Level 4

Lift/Lobby area

1 x 1 Bedroom + study dwelling

2 x 2 Bedroom dwelling

Upper floor of 2 x 2 Bedroom dwelling 

 

Level 5

1 x 3 Bedroom dwelling (in the rear section)

Roof top terrace

 

Access to the basement carpark is provided via a new driveway from Alison Road. Pedestrian access will also be provided on Alison Road.

 

3.      The subject site and surrounding area

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Alison Road, north of the intersection of Alison Road and Prince Street. The subject site has an irregular shape with a 22.8m frontage to Alison Road. The northern side boundary is 54.23m which splays into a north-eastern rear boundary of 35.5m and a southern side boundary of 83.55m). The site area is 1522 sqm. The site falls significantly from the north-east to the south-west by 9.1m.

 

Existing on-site is a rendered brick and tile dwelling house with detached brick garage and granny flat above. 

 

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

 

To the north:

A single storey rendered brick and tile dwelling house at No. 90 Alison Road and beyond that a two storey rendered brick and tile dwelling house and Interwar residential flat buildings further to the north.

 

To the north-east :

 

A three-storey rendered residential flat building at No. 4-6 Cowper Street

 

To the south :

 

A nine-storey residential flat building at No. 94 Alison Road and a five storey residential flat building at No. 8 Holkham Avenue.

 

To the west :

On the opposite side of Alison Road, is the Royal Randwick Racecourse.

 

4.      Site History

 

A Prelodgement Application (PL/36/2007) was lodged with Council on 9 August 2007 and meeting was held with the applicant on 6 December 2007. Apart from this Prelodgement Application, there is no recent relevant history applicable to the subject site and development proposal.

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

The DA was notified and advertised from 18 June 2008 to 2 July 2008 in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. In response, 30 objections were received with concerns raised as listed below.

 

·      Loss of iconic views of Sydney CBD and valuable views of Randwick Racecourse

·      Loss of views to Randwick Racecourse and inconsistency with planning principles

·      Non-compliance with View Sharing control of DCP – Multi-unit Housing

 

This issue is assessed in Section 10 in terms of the four-step planning principle established by Senior Commissioner Roseth in the case of Tenacity Consulting vs Warringah Council. Essentially, the proposal in its non-compliant, excessively high and bulky form will have a severe and devastating impact upon:

 

·      existing iconic views of the Sydney CBD skyline enjoyed by dwelling units type A, C and E in No 94 Alison Road. 

 

·      Existing valuable views of the Randwick Racecourse enjoyed by

 

Also significant is that the application fails to recognise that these significant views exist for the affected adjoining properties in the applicant’s site analysis and fails to assess the impact of  the non-complying proposal on these views. For these reasons, the application must be refused.

 

·      Loss of sunlight

 

Whilst the applicant has provided shadow diagrams and shadow analysis that argues that neighbouring properties will receive the minimum standard amount of sunlight required for living areas and open space, the shadow diagrams are considered deficient in that is not possible to verify the accuracy of the details shown in the diagrams as discussed in Section 10 below.

 

·      Acoustic impact of roof top terrace

 

The acoustic impact of the rooftop terrace given its size and location relative to living areas of adjoining and neighbouring properties raises concern. In this regard no acoustic report and management plan for the use of the roof top terrace has been provided with the application to address this matter.

 

·      Proposal does not enhance streetscape

 

The proposed building does not provide a suitable interface between the existing 9 storey residential flat building on the adjoining southern property and the existing 2 storey dwelling houses on the adjoining northern lots nor does it fit in with the predominant 3 storey residential flat building character in the vicinity of the subject site, particularly to the north and north-east. Additionally, the excessive visual bulk and scale of the 5 storey presentation to Alison Road will be exacerbated by its blank wall façade with no articulation except for perforated metal shutters enclosing a staircase. The SEPP 65 Design Review Panel has raised concerns regarding the treatment of this end wall to Alison Road. The proposed development therefore should be refused.

 

·      Substantial breaches of height, floor space ratio and other regulatory requirements

·      Non-compliance with planning controls effectively disrespects the amenity of neighbours.

·      Proposal is an overdevelopment.

 

Non-compliance with Council’s statutory and policy controls are discussed in Sections 10.1.1 and 10.3 below. The SEPP No.1 Objections submitted for the breach in the FSR and height controls have been assessed and no valid case has been made by the applicant to indicate why compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary. The non-compliance with the DCP – Carparking and DCP – Multi-unit housing is unacceptable. Accordingly the DA is recommended for refusal.

 

·      Proposal is inconsistent with the L&E Court Planning Principle for Height, Bulk and Scale

 

The proposal has been assessed against the Planning Principle for Height, Bulk and Scale established in Veloshin v Randwick Council in Section 10 below. The proposal essentially has impacts that are inconsistent with the impacts that may be reasonably expected under the controls in that the proposal results in visual impacts that are inconsistent with the existing predominant character of the locality which the controls seek to preserve; the proposal also has impacts that are detrimental to the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of loss of views and the privacy and overbearing bulk and scale. The proposed development therefore should be refused.

 

·      Inaccurate description of the prevailing existing building heights in the surrounding area.

 

The applicant’s description of the locality’s existing predominant character as predominantly 5 storey residential flat development is inaccurate as discussed in Section 10. The area surrounding the proposed development has a mixed building type environment ranging from two storey dwelling houses to three storey walk-ups and isolated cases of 5 storey and higher residential flat buildings. However, the predominant existing character in the immediate vicinity of the subject site is that of 3 storey residential flat buildings which the application of relevant Residential 2C planning controls is likely to maintain. In this context, the proposed development with its 5 storey builtform does not fit into this existing character and therefore should be refused.

 

·      Traffic congestion

 

The applicant’s traffic report indicates that traffic generation from the proposed development will be significantly low - in the order of approximately 8 vehicle movements per hour during peak periods. Accordingly, the traffic effect on existing road capacity will be negligible.

 

·      Increase demand for car parking in surrounding streets.

 

Whilst the shortfall in carparking amounts to one carspace, it is considered inappropriate that the proposal should have a non-complying carparking provision given the proposals significant departure from the planning controls applicable to the site. The non-compliance, no matter small, serves to show that the proposal is an overdevelopment of the subject site and accordingly should be refused.

 

·      Inadequate site analysis plan

 

The proposal has a deficient site analysis which fails to assess a range of internal and external site factors affecting the design and siting of development including the existence of views that are currently enjoyed by adjoining properties; critical interfaces to heritage items and heritage conservation areas; and critical interface with the Alison Road streetscape. This concern is a valid reason for refusal of the DA

 

·      Inadequate landscaped area at the rear and loss of existing trees

 

Council’s Landscape Development Officer has noted deficiencies in the proposal’s landscape treatment including the lack of any substantial landscaping/screen planting along the southern boundary, the lack of  alternative tree species within the front garden area which is more in keeping with the scale of the proposal, poor landscaping treatment to the rear yard to provide for screening and privacy between this rear landscaped area and adjoining high rise unit blocks and poor planting plan and plant schedule for r the landscaped area.

 

6.      Technical Officers Comments

 

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