Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 10 February 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee

10 February 2009

 

 

 

 

3 February 2009

 

 

Planning Committee Meeting

 

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 10 February 2009 at 6:00 p.m.

 

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor, B Notley-Smith, Andrews, Belleli, Bowen, Hughes, Matson (Deputy Chairperson), Matthews, Nash (Chairperson), Procopiadis, Seng, Smith, Stevenson, Tracey, White & Woodsmith.

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members.

 

NOTE:    At the Extraordinary Meeting held on 28 September 2004, the Council resolved that the Planning Committee whose membership consists of all members of the Council be constituted as a committee with full delegation to determine matters on the agenda.

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 2 December 2008

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Urgent Business

Development Application Reports

D1/09       112-124 Anzac Parade, Kensington

D2/09       201-203 Beach Street, Coogee

D3/09       58 Beach Street, Coogee

D4/09       23 McKeon Street, Maroubra

D5/09       15 Moira Crescent, Coogee

D6/09       23 Division Street, Coogee

D7/09       6-28 Harvey Street, Little Bay

D8/09       5 Caley Street, Chifley

D9/09       54 Coogee Bay Road, Randwick

D10/09      80 Middle Street and 133 Botany Street, Randwick

D11/09      36-38 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse

D12/09      Section 96 - 36-38 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse

D13/09      Section 96 Modification - Proposed Music Festival at Randwick Racecourse - 77-97 Alison Road, Randwick - Report to be separately circularised prior to Meeting.

 

Miscellaneous Report

M1/09       Local Government Chief Officers Group - Attendance of General Manager at February 2009 Meeting    

 

Closed Session

Nil

Notices of Rescission Motions

Nil

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee

10 February 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D1/09

 

 

Subject:                  112-124 Anzac Parade, Kensington

Folder No:                   DA/736/2008

Author:                   David Mooney, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing structures and construction of mixed use development up to 7 storeys with ground floor retail, 59 residential units and basement parking for 76 vehicles.

 

Ward:                      West Ward

 

Applicant:                Fox Johnston

 

Owner:                         Kenthill Pty Ltd

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to the Planning Committee because the estimated cost of work exceeds $2M and there are encroachments on the maximum building height that exceed 10%.

 

Originally for a building up to 8-storeys with 65 apartments, the proposal was amended so that there are now 7-storeys facing Anzac Parade, up-to 6 facing Ascot Street and a 4-storey pavilion building flanking the northern side of a publicly accessibly, internal courtyard. There is 410m2 of commercial floor space on the ground floor, 59 apartments and 2 levels of basement parking for 76 cars.

 

Made-up of 2 Torrens lots, the site has a 40m frontage to Anzac Parade and a 39m frontage to Ascot Street in Kensington.

 

There were 2 objections to the original proposal, raising issues with height, overshadowing, visual and acoustic privacy, traffic generation and parking. The amended proposal reduced the impact of the development and was not re-notified. The objector’s issues are addressed in the report.

 

The proposal is the subject of a SEPP 1 objection because of height encroachments. The design responds to the height objectives by offering a more refined height transition from Anzac Parade to lower buildings to the east.

 

There are several encroachments on the DCP building envelope. These are a result of a slimmer building design intended to achieve superior solar access and natural ventilation. The overall floor area of the proposed building is 80% of the envelope, which is less than the maximum of 85% prescribed in the DCP.

 

Overshadowing is comparable to a complying building and privacy is adequately protected by buffer distances or, where necessary, privacy screens.

 

The proposal satisfies the requirements of the relevant assessment criteria and approval subject to conditions is recommended.

 

2.      The Proposal

 

The proposal is for a mixed-use building up to 7 storeys with 410m2 of commercial floor space on the ground floor and up to 6 levels of residential apartments above. There are 59 apartments, with 15 studios, 18 x 1-bed units, 25 x 2-bed units and 1 x 3-bedroom unit. There are 2 levels of basement car-parking for 76 cars.

 

A lot-perimeter building, there are 7 storeys facing Anzac Pde, up to 6 storeys facing Ascot St and a 4 storey pavilion building flanking the northern side of a publicly accessible, internal courtyard. Figure 1 shows a photomontage of the proposed building from Anzac Pde.

 

3.      Subject Site

 

Made-up of 2 Torrens lots, the site has a 40m frontage to Anzac Pde and a 39m frontage to Ascot St. The site is slightly flood-prone and approximately level with a very slight fall to the south-west. Presently on the site there is an assortment of 2 storey buildings, generally with ground level retail stores below residential accommodation.

 

There is a Mobil service station to the north and there are 4 storey walk-up apartments to the north and east. There is a pair of semis to the north-east. The site is within the Kensington town centre. Figure 2 shows an aerial photograph.

 

Figure 1 – A photomontage of the proposed building from Anzac Pde.

 

Figure 2 – An aerial photograph of the site

 

4.      History

 

The present development proposal was the subject of Council’s pre-lodgement service. Submitted with 65 apartments up to 8 storeys and inadequate setbacks, Council’s formal pre-lodgement advice was:

 

“Overall height, setback at upper levels and the courtyard are significant elements of the envelope and are likely to carry determinative weight in Council’s assessment of your development application. While we acknowledge your supporting case, non-compliance is substantial and could be regarded as over-development. Significantly, the gross floor area of the revised scheme is in the order of 110% of the gross floor area of the envelope, while the DCP describes a maximum yield of 85%. Impacts on the desired future character of Kensington and the amenity of private and public spaces are much harder to justify when created by those parts of the building that are wholly non-complying.

 

The development application should explore opportunities to reduce the number of storeys along the Anzac Parade and Ascot Street frontages and possibly align the pavilion building more with the prescribed building envelope.”

 

The development application was amended during assessment to improve compliance with the Kensington Town Centre DCP:

 

·      The western building (facing Anzac Pde) was lowered from 8 to 7 storeys. The 7th storey is contained within a roof-profile as required by the DCP.

 

·      Part of the southern building (facing Ascot St) was lowered from 6 to 5 storeys to achieve a more appropriate height transition to lower buildings to the east.

 

·      The upper levels were setback further from Anzac Pde.

 

·      A unit was deleted from the pavilion building to improve solar access to the internal courtyard.

 

·      The floor area was reduced to 80% of the envelope, in-line with the DCP maximum of 85%.

 

The scope and extent of the changes reduce the size and scale of the proposed development. For this reason they were not re-exhibited.

 

The site also has a 2007 approval for a 6 storey building with commercial floor space, 40 apartments and 68 parking spaces in 2 basement levels. The approved building occupies about 79% of the building envelope. The 2007 approval is in force and could be enacted.

 

5. Community Consultation

 

The original 8 storey proposal was exhibited in accordance with Council policy. The revised proposal reduced the impact of the development and improved compliance with the DCP. For these reasons, it was not re-exhibited. Two objections were received from:

 

·      5-7 Ascot Street, Kensington

·      3/8-12 Ascot Street, Kensington.

 

The issues raised in the submission are outlined below. Comments from the Assessing Officer are provided:

 

Issue; the proposed height exceeds the LEP/DCP controls

 

Assessing Officer; height is considered under the SEPP 1 section of this report and found to be acceptable.

 

Issue; East facing units will be able to look into the west facing bedroom windows in the apartments at 5-7 Ascot St

 

Assessing Officer; the plan shows privacy screens for all windows and living areas that are within 12 metres of the apartments at 5-7 Ascott Street. There is a condition in the recommendation that requires the screens to be fixed. These measures comply with the DCP.

 

Issue; the extra (non-complying) height will create overshadowing earlier in the afternoon, especially during the winter months for the apartments at 5-7 Ascot St

 

Issue; overshadowing will increase impacting on residential buildings in the area

 

Assessing Officer; the building was lowered to improve compliance with the Kensington Town Centre DCP. Overshadowing is generally consistent with the building envelope prescribed for the site in the Kensington Town Centre DCP. Solar access is addressed in the Compliance Table section of this report and found to be acceptable.

 

Issue; there is a shortage of 12 car spaces adversely affecting on-street parking.

 

Assessing Officer; the parking shortage is 3.5 spaces and this issue has been addressed by the Development Engineer in the Technical Officers section of this report.

 

Issue; increased traffic will make the Anzac Pde and Ascot St intersection more dangerous.

 

Issue; increased traffic will increase traffic noise at 3/8-12 Ascot St.

 

Issue; increased traffic may potentially endanger the lives of children who frequent the nearby Kokoda Park.

 

Assessing Officer; there are now six fewer apartments than were shown in the exhibited plans and the overall floor area is now less than the maximum floor area limit. Traffic generation is in-line with the development potential of the land as set-out in the envelope controls in the Town Centre DCP.

 

Issue; there is insufficient demand for more residential and commercial development in Kensington.

 

Assessing Officer; there will be sufficient demand over the life of the building to warrant its construction. In any case, short term fluctuations in the market are not sufficient grounds to withhold approval.

 

Issue; level of noise from balconies will impact on 3/8-12 Ascot St

 

Assessing Officer; the 2 buildings would be 50m apart. There are no proposed balconies that face the objector’s home. The roof terrace is modest in size (25m2), set in from the perimeter of the building and not likely to cause a noise nuisance.

 

7.      Technical Officers

 

The application has been referred to Council’s internal technical officers:

 

Landscape Officer

 

The Officer’s recommended conditions are included in the recommendation. Comments are reproduced below.

 

There is no vegetation of any significance within the site or on adjoining properties which will be affected by the proposed works.

 

As this property falls within the Kensington Commercial Centre, Council requires that upgrading of the footpaths along the length of both frontages be undertaken in accordance with the Urban Design Guidelines which have been developed for this precinct.

 

While an in-house preliminary design has been prepared for the upgrading all footpath areas in the Kensington suburb, the applicant will still be required to develop a more site specific design to ensure that existing street furniture in the form of bins and bin enclosures, seats, planter boxes and the bus stop, as well as any other particulars such as doors/entranceways and awnings are incorporated into the overall, final design.

 

Standard landscape conditions have been included within this report.

 

Development Engineer

 

The Officer’s recommended conditions are included in the recommendation. Comments are reproduced below.

 

The proposal

 

A further amended application has been received to demolish the existing structures and construct a new mixed use development now comprising 59 dwellings and 410m2 retail / commercial tenancies, with 2 levels of basement carparking for 76 vehicles. The Assessment Planner is advised that there is no mention of this application seeking strata subdivision.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

 

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by dated October 2008;

·      Traffic Impact Assessment by Traffix dated October 2008;

·      Amended Waste Management Plan

·      Geotechnical Report by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd

·      Site Flood Assessment by Worley Parsons (previously Patterson Britton & Partners Pty Ltd) dated 7th October 2008;

·      Plans by Fox Johnson 

 

Parking provision

 

Based on the final unit mix as advised by the Assessment Planner the parking calculations for this development are as follows:

 

 

Type                    Number         Parking Required Based on DCP-Parking

Studio*                 20                               10

1 bed                    13                               13

2 bed                    25                               30

3 bed                    1                                 1.5

 

*Includes 1 bed dwellings up to 40m2

 

Visitor spaces required for 59 units total   14.75

 

Commercial        410m2                      10.25

 

Total Parking required                                 79.5

Total Parking provided                                76

Shortfall                                                   3.5

 

The proposed development is therefore deficient in parking by 3.5 spaces based on the provision calculated using the DCP-Parking. Given that the development site is well served by public transport, the magnitude of the deficiency is low on a percentage basis, (4-5%) and the fact that the number of visitor spaces could be reduced to 11 without having a significant effect on on-street parking during the peak commercial/office hours, the development engineer is of the opinion that the proposed parking provision is supportable. 

 

Vehicular Access

 

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

 

The driveway opening at the Ascot Street frontage must be a minimum of 5.50 metres wide and located at least 1.5 metres clear of the side property.

 

RTA Comments

 

The Development Engineer is of the opinion that there are no RTA comments specifically relating to this development application, (comments have been received for previous applications on this site). The proposed vehicular entry/exit point is off Ascot Street and it is anticipated that the development will not significantly impact on the operation of Anzac Parade or other streets/intersections surrounding the development site.

 

Awning Comments

 

The minimum clear distance from the existing footpaths in Anzac Parade and Ascot Street to the underside of the proposed awning shall be 3.0 metres. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

All new awnings shall be set back a minimum of 600mm from the face of kerb. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

Splay Corner Comments

 

To improve visibility at the intersection of Anzac Parade and Ascot Street, a minimum 3.0 metre x 3.0 metre splay corner shall be provided at ground level. There shall be no walls or planting higher than 600mm located within the splay corner.

 

Service Authority Comments

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Given that the cost of works is over $2 million, the applicant shall be required to meet the full cost for undergrounding cables in the vicinity of the development site. A condition regarding this matter has been included in this report.

 

Groundwater Comments

 

The applicant has submitted a geotechnical report by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd dated 9/7/2008, (this report was submitted in compliance with a deferred commencement condition for DA 788/2005), and a covering letter dated 3/10/08 advising Council that the July report is relevant to this current application. This report states that groundwater was encountered at depths in the order of 2.6 – 3.0 metres below ground level. Given that the basement excavation will extend more than 6 metres below ground level, it is expected that groundwater will be encountered within the excavation.

 

A condition has been included in this report requiring the basement carpark to be suitably tanked and waterproofed.

 

Further, it is understood that the application has been referred to the Department of Natural Resources as integrated development. The Planning Officer is to ensure that all comments/conditions provided by the Department of Natural Resources are incorporated into the development approval.  Note a condition requiring the applicant to obtain a license from the DWE and to comply with the DWE’s General Terms of Approval has been included within this report.

 

Any proposed dewatering of the site that requires discharge into Council’s stormwater system external to the site will require approval from Council under Section 138 of the Roads Act. A condition addressing this issue has been included within this report.

 

Residential waste

 

Council’s standard requirement for a development of this size would be to require a chute and compactor system to minimise the number of bins to be presented for collection. The applicant has not proposed a chute system because of the multi-tower nature of the proposal. An amended waste management plan has been forwarded to Council and the applicant proposes to use a compactor on the residential garbage, (excluding recyclables). Conditions relating to the waster management plan and waste management in general have been included within this report. Note: the residential component of the application is now for 55 units and therefore the applicant will need to provide 28 recycle bins and 14 garbage bins, (to be used in conjunction with the compactor).

 

Commercial waste

 

The retail/commercial waste storage area shall be sized to contain a total of 6 x 240 litre bins (3 x garbage bins and 3 x recycling bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to each of the bins.

 

Drainage Comments

 

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

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

 

Flooding Comments

 

The applicant has submitted a flood study and Hydraulic modelling by Worley Parsons dated 7/10/08. The study has determined the following:

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year storm event for the Anzac Parade frontage is the 2 hour storm event.

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Anzac Parade frontage at the northern boundary is 26.88 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Anzac Parade frontage at the southern boundary (intersection of Anzac Parade and Ascot Street) is 26.68 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year storm event for the Ascot Street frontage is the 48 hour storm event.

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Ascot Street frontage at the eastern boundary is 27.15 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level at the intersection of Ascot Street and Anzac Parade has been taken as 26.68 metres (AHD).

 

Conditions aimed at ensuring protection of all habitable floor levels, openings and the internal driveway from stormwater inundation have been included within this report.

 


Building Services Officer

 

The Officer’s recommended conditions are included in the recommendation. Comments are reproduced below.

 

The Proposal

 

The proposal provides for the demolition of the existing buildings located upon the site and construction of a new 7 storey mixed residential and commercial development with 2 levels of basement car parking for 76 vehicles, 59 sole occupancy units and 3 commercial premises at ground floor level.

 

BCA Building Classification

 

Class -      5/6   (Office/Retail/Shops)

Class  -      2      (Residential units)

Class -      7a    (Carpark)

 

Background

 

The existing buildings on site are post war brick mixed residential and commercial buildings bounded by buildings of a similar nature.

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

 

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

 

Site Management:

 

Standard conditions are proposed to be included in the consent to address construction site management issues, such as the location of stock piled material or the storage and disposal of excavated materials, sediment and erosion control, public safety and perimeter safety fencing.

 

Access for people with a disability:

 

The proposal does not appear to demonstrate compliance with the BCA requirements and Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) objectives, in relation to access and facilities for people with a disability.

 

Access for people with a disability is required to be provided to the basement car park and the ground floor shops and, sanitary facilities for people with a disability are also required to be provided to the development, in accordance with the provisions of the BCA.

 

Further, adaptable apartments are also required in accordance with Council’s DCP

 

Standard conditions should be included to address these requirements.

 

Assessing Officer; there is a condition in the recommendation dealing with these requirements.

 

The applicant or other person having the benefit of the consent will also be advised to fulfil their obligations under the DDA.


Environmental Health Officer

 

The Officer’s recommended conditions are included in the recommendation. Comments are reproduced below.

 

The proposal

 

The proposal involves retail/commercial ground floor premises and 65 residential units with 2 basement parking levels containing 76 vehicles. The proposal is an Integrated Development as the basement protrudes into groundwater.

 

There is a previous deferred commencement approval (DA/788/2005) for a 6-level development on site which proposed ground floor retail/commercial spaces with 50 residential units and basement parking for 74 vehicles. It is noted there is no letter in Pathway indicating the consent has become operational.

 

A report on Preliminary geotechnical investigation and dewatering assessment was prepared by Douglas Partners (Project 45615, July 2008). The basement will require excavation to depths of approximately 5.5m to 6.5m, the excavation will extend below the groundwater table and will require temporary dewatering to allow construction and tanking of the basement structure.

 

Previous Laboratory testing was conducted on groundwater samples to test for a suite of common contaminants. The results of the laboratory testing for the soil and groundwater samples were below the guideline criteria adopted in the Jeffery & Katauskas Pty Ltd June 2004 (REF: 1860VBRRPT and E1860FLFRPT) report, with the exception of a slightly elevated level of zinc in the ground water sample.

 

Douglas Partners (Project 45615, July 2008) conducted groundwater monitoring, based on the pH screening results it is considered that the natural soils within the maximum sampling depth of 9.45m did not provide positive indications for actual acid sulphate soils and potential acid sulphate soils.

 

The detailed tests results indicated that there are elevated levels of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in the groundwater samples from BH 103 and elevated concentrations of dissolved copper in the water from BH 103 and Zinc in the water from both BH 103 & BH 104.

 

The concentrations of heavy metals, BTEX and PAH were generally below the laboratory detection limits or within the adopted acceptance criteria.

 

Additional information in relation to investigation and the remediation of the subject site is required before confirming the site status/suitability for the proposed development. In this regard, given previous J&K (June 2004) site investigations and the latest Douglas Partners (July 2008) report, further information and review will be required, including the requirement of a Site Audit Statement.

 

Assessing Officer; the Environmental Health Officer’s recommended conditions deal with the additional site auditing requirements and they are included in the recommendation to this report.

 

7.      Environmental Assessment

 

The site has been inspected and the proposal has been assessed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Zone objectives

The land is zoned 3B local business and the proposal is permissible with development consent. The 3B zone objectives aim to provide opportunities for local retail and business development, and to allow other uses including a range of residential uses where they do not interfere with the primary business function of the zone.

 

The proposal includes a mix of residential apartment types and commercial spaces. The proposed services, parking and infrastructure are adequate. The development application satisfies the 3B zone objectives.

 

Excavation and filling of land

Where a proposal involves excavation and filling of land, the Council must consider the likely effect on the existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality, and the effect of the proposed works on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land.

 

The proposal involves excavations up to 6.5 metre deep for 2 levels of basement car parking. The application was accompanied by the requisite flood, dewatering and geo-technical studies. Where necessary, there are conditions in the recommendation that deal with flooding, dewatering and site stability.

 

Kensington Town Centre

Clause 42C of the LEP specifies the Kensington Town Centre objectives that a development proposal must satisfy. Generally, the town centre objectives aim to achieve a high quality of building design to encourage a vibrant, active and diverse town centre where medium density housing compliments the primary business role of the town centre.

 

The design quality of proposal is regarded by the Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel as thoughtful and potentially exemplary. The design, provision of infrastructure and services and the proposed mix of uses satisfy the Kensington Town Centre objectives.

 

Development Standards

The land is subject to a building envelope under the Kensington Town Centre DCP. The DCP standards for maximum building height, number of storeys, minimum frontage and lot size have the effect of development standards under the Randwick LEP 1998. Table 1 shows an assessment of the proposal against these standards:

 

Table 1 – Assessment under LEP development standards

Standard

DCP

Proposal

Compliance

Minimum Frontage

20m

39m

Yes

Minimum Area

900m2

1600m2

Yes

Max Storeys Anzac Pde

6 + habitable roof

6 + habitable roof

Yes

Max Storeys Ascot St

5 + habitable roof

6

No

Maximum Height

21.6m/17.1m

23.35m/20.1m

No

 

Non-compliance with the maximum height and number of storeys is addressed under the SEPP 1 heading of this report.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards

The proposal does not comply with development standards for maximum height and maximum number of storeys. Non-compliance is assessed under State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 after the four principles in Lloyd J in Winten Property Group Limited v North Sydney Council [2001] NSWLEC 46 (6 April 2001):

 

(Principle 1) What is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

 

The purpose for the development standards is explained in the Kensington Town Centre LEP/DCP:

 

·      To ensure appropriate scale relationship between new development and: street width; local context; adjacent dwellings; and Contributory Buildings.

 

·      To achieve well proportioned buildings.

 

·      To maintain public view corridors from the east side of Randwick Racecourse over the town centre to the Monastery of the Missionary of the Sacred Heart.

 

·      To ensure appropriate management of overshadowing, access to sunlight and privacy

 

·      To achieve a visual transition between the heights of buildings on Anzac Parade and the heights of buildings behind the main streets.

 

(Principle 2) Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

There are several arguments in support of the proposed encroachments:

 

·      The proposal has an appropriate scale relationship to the street, adjacent dwellings and the local context.

 

Approximately 75% of the 6th level facing Ascot St is contained within the 6 storey envelope where it returns around from Anzac Pde. Only 25% of the length of the building encroaches on the envelope. The proposal steps down to 5 storeys before a setback to the eastern boundary. The setback is not required by the DCP but improves the relationship to the apartment building further east. There are no Contributory Buildings nearby.

 

The prescribed maximum height (in metres) does not account for the allowance for habitable roof space in Clause 4.6.9. This appears to be an oversight in the drafting of clause 4.2.4. When adjusted for the error, the maximum overall heights change to 24.5m/20.4m and in that case, the proposed building complies.

 

·      The building proportions are well executed. Architectural expression is considered to be ‘thoughtful and potentially exemplary’ by the Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel. The building has a genuine horizontal tripartite expression and includes a strong vertical emphasis on the main corner as required by clause 4.6.4 of the DCP. The elevations include subtle reverse splays, louvered panels, deep openings and wide spandrels, providing visual interest.

 

·      The subject site is not within the public view corridors from the east side of Randwick Racecourse over the town centre to the Monastery of the Missionary of the Sacred Heart.

 

·      The impact of overshadowing from the proposed building approximates the overshadowing from the prescribed envelope. Privacy is adequately managed by buffer distances and, where necessary, privacy screens.

 

·      The proposed building achieves a more refined height transition from Anzac Pde to lower buildings to the east. The proposed building is 6 storeys with a habitable roof facing Anzac Pde, transitioning to 6 levels, then 5 levels before a setback to the eastern boundary. The prescribed envelope is blockier: 6 storeys with a habitable roof face Anzac Pde, and then 5 storeys with a habitable roof abutting the eastern boundary.

 

·      The prescribed envelope tends to ignore boundary conditions. Strict application would result in a building abutting the eastern boundary that is 17m high, 22m deep and just 6.5m wide. This would be an impractical and unreasonable imposition on the proposal.

 

(Principle 3) Would compliance tend to hinder the reasonable development of the land?

 

The proposed building is slimmer than the 22m allowed by the building envelope. Slimmer buildings tend to receive more sunlight and natural ventilation and SEPP 65 specifies a maximum of 18m for this reason. The building has 66% of apartments with an excellent northerly or easterly orientation; 83% of apartments with a cross-over, cross-through or dual aspect layout; and 100% of apartments receive direct sun for at least 3 hours between 9am and 3pm during the winter solstice. This vastly improves on the already approved proposal.

 

The floor area lost to slimmer building design is re-distributed along the Ascot St frontage and in the internal pavilion building. The overall floor area proposed is approximately 80% of the total envelope and within the DCP maximum of 85%. The encroachments are a result of distributing building mass in a manner that better suits internal amenity rather than resulting from over-development. Table 2 shows a level by level comparison of the envelope floor area and the proposed floor area.

 

Table 2 – Level by level comparison of the envelope floor area allowance

Level

Envelope (m2)

85% (m2)

Proposal (m2)

Difference (m2)

Ground

1085[1]

922.25

732.6

-189.65

Second

1085

922.25

933.4

+11.15

Third

1085

922.25

953.53

+31.28

Fourth

1063

903.55

862.69

-40.86

Fifth

802

681.7

647.54

-34.16

Sixth

564

479.4

559.96

+80.56

Seventh

225[2]

191.76

344.76

+153

TOTAL

6248

5310.8

5034.48

-276.32

 

Compliance with the envelope in a manner that also approximates the internal amenity of the proposed design would significantly reduce the floor area yield and is considered to be unreasonable in light of the proposal’s good performance against the maximum height objectives.

 

(Principle 4) Is the objection well founded?

 

The main points of the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection include:

 

·      The proposed non-compliance is recessed from the perimeter of the site which limits the perception of the variation.

 

·      The upper level has been designed within a roof form within a typical roof space which is envisaged by the DCP.

 

·      The site is a corner site situated in an important location, and has the capacity to support a development of this scale.

 

·      The height does not result in any adverse aural or visual privacy impacts.

 

·      The proposal provides for improved amenity and increased landscaping at the communal area.

 

·      The variation will not result in any adverse impacts such as overshadowing, privacy impacts or significant view loss. A reasonable level of solar access is maintained to the north facing properties on the southern side of the site.

 

·      Given there are other 8-9 level buildings in the town centre, the proposal will not appear out of context.

 

With the exception of the point about 8-9 storey buildings in the town centre (these are located where the envelope permits higher buildings), the applicant’s case is adequately founded to support the proposal.

 

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008

This is an administrative LEP that updates and consolidates the current LEP with all amendments. The proposal is consistent with the relevant provisions of the Draft LEP.

 

Civil Aviation (Building Control) Regulations 1998

The proposed building height requires an approval from Sydney Airport Corporation Ltd under the Civil Aviation Regulations. Council have consulted with the Airport Corporation on this proposal. The Corporation’s comments are reproduced below.

 

Sydney Airport Corporation Ltd

 

The Sydney Airport Corporation Ltd (SACL) has no objection to the erection of the PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT at 112-124 ANZAC PARADE, KENSINGTON to a height of 52.85 metres above Australian Height Datum (AHD)

 

The approved height is inclusive of all lift over-runs, vents, chimneys, aerials, TV antennae, construction cranes, etc.

 

Should you wish to exceed 52.85 metres above Australian Height Datum (AHD), a new application must be submitted.

 

Should the height of any temporary structure and/or equipments be greater than 150 feet (45.72m) above existing ground height (AEGH), a new approval must be south in accordance with the Civil Aviation (Buildings Control) Regulations Statutory Rules 1998 No. 161.

 

Construction cranes may be required to operate at a height significantly higher than that of the proposed controlled activity and consequently, may not be approved under the Airports (Protection of Airspace) regulations.

 

SACL advises that approval to operate construction equipment (i.e cranes) should be obtained prior to any commitment to construct.

 

Assessing Officer; an advice to the applicant about these matters is included in the recommendation to this report.

 

Section 91 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Integrated Development

 

The development requires a site dewatering permit from the Department of Water and Energy under Part 5 of the Water Act 1919. The Department have given their general terms of approval (GTA) for such a permit under the integrated development provisions of the Act. The Department’s comments are shown below. The Department’s general terms of approval are included as consent conditions in the recommendation.

 

Department of Water and Energy

 

The Department has determined that a Licence under Part V of the Water Act 1912 is required in relation to this development.  The enclosed attachment is the Department’s General Terms of Approval (GTAs). They are the conditions under which the Department would, in principle, accept the proposed development activity.

 

Please note that the Department will not allow any proposal that requires permanent or semi-permanent pumping of the groundwater to protect the building.  Therefore any proposal must ensure that the design of the building will not require this style of facility or activity.  To comply with this requirement, the construction of the basement, or any structure that may be impacted by groundwater, will require a water proof retention system (i.e. a fully tanked structure) with an adequate provision for future fluctuations of the watertable level.

 

Some requirements, although not directly related to the issuing of a Water Licence can have impacts upon the proposal, such that the project may need to be modified.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

However, if a staged consent is not desirable to Council, then it is strongly recommended that the issues described in the GTAs are addressed by the applicant and assessed by Council before any consent is given.  These issues have the potential to adversely impact upon any proposal and must be adequately addressed.

 

Assessing Officer; the Department’s recommendation on staging the consent is incongruous with Council’s legal obligations. The applicant has not sought a staged consent and Council is prohibited from imposing stages by Section 83B(2) of the Act.

 

Nevertheless, an ordinary consent (as recommended) would allow demolition work and the necessary groundwater investigations before a Construction Certificate is issued for the excavation and construction. The applicant may wish to enact the consent in this manner.

 

It is the Assessing Officer’s view that the dewatering requirements are not prohibitive to the development. While further exploration of the groundwater conditions may result in the need for more expensive engineering in the basement levels, the development could still be carried-out as planned. In any case, a valid consent for 2 basement levels already exists and was granted by Council without objection from the Department 10 July 2007.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy: BASIX

The development application was accompanied by the requisite BASIX certificate showing that energy/water efficiency and thermal comfort targets have been met.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings

The application was accompanied by the requisite design verification statement certifying the development against the 10 design quality principles. The application was reviewed by the Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel. The Panel’s comments are reproduced below.

 

Randwick/Waverly Design Review Panel

It was noted that this was a Development Application, and the third Panel meeting with this applicant. The Panel reviewed a number of times a previous proposal for the site, which lacked architectural distinction and had many compromised aspects.

 

The three key issues that have not been satisfactorily resolved and remain against the proposal are as follows;

 

Height

 

The Panel has noted in each report that further justification has been required to justify the eight storey height proposed on Anzac Parade. No satisfactory justification has been put forward to support the proposal. Therefore the Panel does not see any reason to support an eight storey proposal, when the DCP puts forward six storeys as the desired future scale for the Anzac Parade frontage. The proposal is therefore at least a storey too high, not withstanding the setbacks of the upper storeys.

 

The scale and overshadowing effects of this additional height are not supported.

 

Assessing Officer; the proposal was reduced in height to improve compliance with the DCP envelope. The overall height of the building is considered in detail under the SEPP 1 Objection heading of this report.

 

Fire Stair Locations / Shading of Courtyard

 

The Panel has frequently raised the issue of the escape stairs being located on the outside corners. These locations, in Blocks 1 and 4, result in longer corridors, and mean that a utilitarian escape stair occupies a prominent position at outside corners in the scheme. Habitable rooms would better occupy these key locations, with the stairs relocated inboard.

 

This projecting stair in Block 1 is particularly a problem for the scheme, as it unnecessarily overshadows the courtyard. Units 2d, 3d, 4d, 8d, 9d, 10d also suffer too much overshadowing, and lack an oblique view to the north-east out of the courtyard past the adjoining flat building. Opening the oblique view would also benefit Units 14d, 15d, and 16d. Replanning and relocating the projecting stair in this corner would substantially alleviate the above problems, and improve the amenity of those apartments.

 

Assessing Officer; the projecting stair in block 1 has been lowered and an apartment omitted to improve solar access to the courtyard.

 

The Panel acknowledges that other aspects of the planning have been very well refined.

 

Single Orientation Units to Anzac Parade

 

The Panel has consistently raised concerns regarding the single orientation units facing west to the noisy Anzac Parade frontage. There has been little attempt at improving this condition to make it satisfactory for the future occupants, in terms of internal environment and amenity. 

 

Possible improvements include replanning, the introduction of a plenum, and types of double glazing / noise barrier planning.

 

Assessing Officer; the applicant has now submitted an acoustic report detailing the necessary sound proofing measures for the single aspect apartments facing Anzac Pde.

 

The remainder of the previous Panel report (in italics) is repeated below, with some supplementary comments (not in italics).

 

Landscaping

 

A landscape architect has now submitted a well-considered design for the common areas, comprising;

 

·      the common courtyard, which is now well articulated and graded

·      the deep soil planting along the rear boundaries, which is in a substantial area of deep soil along the rear boundary

·      the two rooftop gardens (over Block 1 and 4), which are both common property

·      street trees to both Anzac Parade and Ascot Street frontages

 

Elevations

 

Resolved elevations have now been presented. The Panel generally is supportive of the design quality reflected in the overall character of the elevations. The relationship between base and setback top is well handled, and the deep slots between the various parts of the project give a successful modeling and articulation.

 

However the detail of the facades still needs to be adequately demonstrated (including spandrel separation, balustrades and handrails, window and door design showing operation, roof construction, drainage, colours and materials and the like). Therefore 1:50 elevations to the principal frontages are required, as has been requested previously.

 

Assessing Officer; the elevations are sufficiently detailed for development application assessment.

 

Summary and Recommendation

 

The Panel considers that this proposal has merit, but that the issues identified above need further design consideration. The DA shows considerable architectural skill and resolution.

 

The Panel did not support many aspects of the previous proposal, and considered that the proposal failed to meet a number of the SEPP requirements.

 

The Panel notes that this is a large and important site in the Anzac Parade context, and its redevelopment should offer a range of genuine public benefits. Given the site’s recent history of unsatisfactory proposals, the Panel is pleased to see a more thoughtful and potentially exemplary building under SEPP 65.

 

However the issues identified at the top of this report need to be corrected before the Panel could support the application. These issues have been raised repeatedly in discussions with the applicant, and to the Panel’s knowledge have at no point been satisfactorily addressed.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2008

Commenting on the previous proposal with 68 parking spaces, 2 basement levels and vehicular access off Ascot St, the Local Traffic Committee did not raise any issues with traffic generation, instead focusing on the layout of parking spaces. The proposed development is similar in size to the previous proposal with 76 parking spaces, 2 basement levels and vehicular access off Ascot St.

 

The Traffic Committee’s earlier comments are reproduced below:

 

Local Traffic Committee

There is no indication that the Visitor Parking is to be marked as “Visitor Parking”

 

There are 2 car wash bays indicated – this would seem to be less than the 4 required.

 

The clearance height of the Service Bay is difficult to gauge. It is suggested that the clearance be no less than 4.5m in order to satisfy the needs of removalist vans, waste contractors vehicles and other larger service vehicles.

 

It would seem that the supply of parking spaces is less than the DCP requirement; by 2 spaces.

 

The Disabled Persons Parking Space numbered B2 is sub-standard in width

 

The Disabled Persons Parking Space numbered B1 is located in a poor position relative to the elevators.  Consideration should be given to swapping space 22 with space 21.

 

It should be noted that removal of, or adjustment to, the Bus Zone / Bus Stop arrangement at the Anzac Parade frontage of the site, is unlikely to be considered as a result of this Application.

 

Assessing Officer; the parking and vehicular access have been assessed by the Development Engineer and are acceptable.

Development Control Plan – Kensington Town Centre

The site is under site specific development controls in the Kensington Town Centre DCP. The proposal is assessed against these controls below. Areas of non-compliance are addressed first. A compliance table for the remaining provisions is shown last.

 

Block 02 Envelope Controls, Non-compliance

The DCP describes a lot-perimeter building envelope on the southern and western boundaries. Six storeys plus a habitable roof space are to face Anzac Pde and 5 storeys with a habitable roof space are to face Ascot St. The envelope is up-to 22m wide and specifies a 4m setback for the upper-most levels on each street. A colonnade is shown at the rear of the Anzac Pde envelope and a private courtyard is to occupy the north-eastern corner. New buildings must abut the street boundary and the DCP describes minimum and maximum floor to ceiling heights.

 

Non-compliance with the maximum height and number of storeys is addressed in the SEPP 1 section of this report. The proposal also encroaches on the remaining envelope provisions:

 

·      A 4-storey pavilion building occupies part of the north eastern portion of the site, where there should be a private courtyard.

 

·      The Ascot St/Anzac Pde corner portion of the building does not include the requisite 4m setbacks at levels 5 and 6.

 

·      The Ascot St building does not include the requisite 4m setback at levels 4, 5 and 6.

 

·      The balconies facing Anzac Pde at levels 5 and 6 encroach on the 4m setback.

 

Figure 3 shows a perspective diagram of the proposed building within the prescribed building envelope. The encroachments can be seen.

 

Figure 3 – A south-west perspective diagram of the building envelope.

 


There are several arguments to support the proposal:

 

·      Just 80% of the gross floor area of the envelope is utilised out of a maximum of 85%. The proposed buildings are slimmer than the envelope and floor area is distributed to achieve superior solar access and natural ventilation.

 

·      The building emphasises the Anzac Pde/Ascot St intersection with a strong vertical building element. This would assist landmark way-finding in the town centre, in-line with the DCP requirements for corner sites.

 

·      Overshadowing is comparable to the prescribed envelope. The Ascot St building, in particular, is closer to the southern (street) boundary but further from the eastern boundary and no higher than a 5 storey building with a roof.

 

·      The pavilion building defines the northern edge of the internal courtyard. This provides, in design terms, a higher quality space than if the space had withered toward the northern and eastern boundary. It is publicly accessible from the ground level shops and includes a casual café-seating type area, and a series of pathways and gardens dealing with the change in grade over the basement parking. It also enjoys useable sunlight through the winter solstice. The courtyard is considered to be comparable in its amenity to the courtyard/colonnade arrangement in the envelope.

 

·      The ground level courtyard is complemented by landscaped roof terraces.

 

·      The balcony encroachments on the Anzac Pde frontage are minor.

 

Apartment and Balcony Size, Non-compliance

The DCP specifies the following minimum apartment area:

 

·      Studio                                                       40m²

·      1-bedroom cross-through                              50m²

·      1-bedroom cross-over                                  55m²

·      2-bedroom corner                                        80m²

·      2-bedroom cross-through                              90m²

·      2-bedroom cross-over                                  90m²

·      2-bedroom corner with study                         120m²

·      3-bedroom                                                 125m²

 

The DCP specifies the following minimum apartment dimensions:

 

·      Studio                                                       3.5m clear internal width

·      1, 2 and 3-bedroom apartments                     4.5m clear internal width

·      Crossover/through apartments < 18m deep       4m clear internal width

·      Main bedroom                                             12m² shortest wall 3.0m

·      Other bedrooms                                           9m² shortest wall 2.5m

·      Living rooms                                        15m² shortest wall 3.5m

·      Dining rooms                                       9m² shortest wall 2.5m

 

The DCP specifies the following minimum balcony size:

 

·      minimum depth                                            2.5m

·      Studio/1bed area                                         6m²

·      2/3-bedroom apartment                                10

 

Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the range of apartment and balcony size. While there are some that are under-size, the proposal generally performs well on measures of central tendency. Bedrooms are frequently smaller than required, while combined living and dining rooms are frequently larger. Balconies tend to be narrower than required, but larger overall.

 

Council’s Design Review Panel regards the design quality of the building as “thoughtful and potentially exemplary” confirming a good level of amenity for each apartment despite the lack of size in some cases.

 

Table 1 – Summary of apartment area with measures of central tendency

 

Total no. of

Range (m2)

Mean (m2)

Median (m2)

Mode (m2)

Studio

15

40-42

40.5

40

40

1 bed

18

40-65

53.6

59

59

2 bed

25

62-88

79.28

80

62

3 bed

1

100

 

 

 

 

Table 2 Summary of dimensions with measures of central tendency (m)

 

Internal width

Master Bed

Other Bed

Combined living/dining

Studio

4.5

 

Area

Wall

 

 

 

 

Area

Wall

1 bed

Range

4–7.5

Range

9-12

3

 

 

 

Range

18-29

3-4.5

Mean

5.6

Mean

9.5

3

 

 

 

Mean

24

4.2

Median

5.5

Median

9

3

 

 

 

Median

26.5

4.2

Mode

7.5

Mode

9

3

 

Area

Wall

Mode

26.5

4.5

2 bed

Range

4-7

Range

8.7 -10.2

3

Range

9-13.5

2.2-3

Range

21.7-40

3.3-5

Mean

5.4

Mean

9.9

3

Mean

9.9

2.9

Mean

29.9

3.9

Median

5.3

Median

9.6

3

Median

9.6

3

Median

29

4

Mode

4.5

Mode

9

3

Mode

9

3

Mode

29

4

3 bed

5.8

O’all

9.6

3

 

10

2.9

 

41

5.7

 

Table 3 Summary of balcony size with measures of central tendency

 

Area (m2)

Shortest dimension

% with N or E aspect

Studio

Range

5-11

Range

1.4-2.5

100

Mean

7.8

Mean

2

Median

8

Median

2.1

Mode

8

Mode

2

1 bed

Range

6.5-13.2

Range

1.8-2.7

44

Mean

9.2

Mean

2

Median

9.7

Median

2

Mode

6.5

Mode

2

2 bed

Range

5-11

2

56

Mean

8.3

Median

8

Mode

8

3 bed

8

2

100

 

Remaining Provisions, Compliance table

Table 4 outlines the remaining provisions of the Kensington Town Centre DCP and certifies that the proposal is compliant.

 

Table 4 – Compliance table, Kensington Town Centre DCP

Clause

Requirement

Compliance

Site amalgamation

Minimum frontage 20m, except for corner sites.

Corner site of approx.1600m2. Adequate separation between lots. Complies.

Minimum area 900m2.

20m separation between developable properties

New built form

Demonstrate that the achieved Gross Floor Area occupies no more than 80-85% of the Building Envelope.

The gross floor area is approximately 80% of the gross floor area of the building envelope. Complies

Architectural character

Design by a registered architect.

Designed by a registered architect and considered by the SEPP 65 design review panel. Complies

Address SEPP 65 design principles.

Articulation zone

Physically articulate all facades to achieve an Articulation Zone with a minimum depth of 600mm and a maximum depth of 2.5 m

Articulation zones are up to 1.9m. Complies

Ensure that buildings along Anzac Parade reinforce the continuity of the street edge.

Good street edge continuity. Complies

Accessibility

Achieve building / retail / commercial entrances which are flush with the footpath/external ground level or provide a suitably ramped alternative as set out in AS 1428.

Condition in the recommendation that requires compliance with the BCA.

Rights of way

Unless otherwise indicated on the Block by Block controls, direct vehicular access from Anzac Parade is not permitted.

Access off Ascot Street. Complies

Provide 6 meter wide 2-way vehicle access via existing rear lanes, new below ground rear ROWs or side streets as indicated in the block by block controls.

Allowance for basement level thoroughfare in the eastern portion of the site. Complies

Design driveways to basement or semi-basement driveways to minimise visual impact on the street and maximise pedestrian safety. Setback any garage doors from the street alignment

Site entrance adequately integrated with street façade. Garage door setback from street alignment. Complies.

On-site parking

Minimum dimensions for carpark design and layout must be based on the dimensional requirements of a service van as described in the DCP – Parking.

See comments from Council’s Development Engineer in the Technical Officer section of this report. Satisfactory

Tandem or stack parking (maximum two spaces) is permitted.

Only 2 parking spaces are stacked in a tandem arrangement. Complies

Carparking areas may be designed as semi-basement car parking

Full basement parking. Satisfactory

Submit a Traffic and Parking Analysis prepared by a suitably qualified Traffic Engineer.

Not required. See development engineer’s comments

Active frontages

Minimise blank walls at ground level.

Street facades are sufficiently articulate and active. Complies

Maximise glazing for retail uses, but break large glazed shopfronts into discrete sections.

Awnings

Provide continuous street frontage awnings to all new development to the extent indicated on the Block by Block controls. 

Awning arrangements are satisfactory. Complies

Building entrances

Provide clearly identifiable, sheltered, well-lit and safe spaces to enter the building, meet and collect mail.

Building entry arrangements are satisfactory. Complies

 

Provide separate entrances, where possible, for pedestrians and vehicles, commercial and residential occupants and ground floor apartments.

Façade composition

Ensure that each building has a unique identity.

Architectural expression is well executed and considered to be ‘thoughtful and potentially exemplary’ by the Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel. The elevations include louvered panels, deep returns and wide spandrels, providing the requisite visual interest. The building has a genuine horizontal tripartite expression and there is vertical emphasis on the main corner of the building. Complies.

Design buildings to address the street but ensure that the rear and side facades also provide visual interest to the street and surrounding neighbours.

Compose the façade with an emphasis on vertical elements.

Ensure that the façade expresses a tripartite arrangement which clearly indicates a bottom, middle and top related to the overall proportion of the building.  Generally, the bottom will read as the area below the awning, and the top will read as the uppermost, setback storeys.

Enhance articulation, lightweight structures, sunshading devices and balconies may penetrate the building envelope (but not the property line) by up to 600mm.

Materials & finishes

Comply with colours, finishes and materials identified in the Randwick City Council Kensington Town Centre Style Guide.

There is a condition in the recommendation that requires a final colour and materials scheme to be submitted for approval. Satisfactory.

Use high quality and durable materials and finishes.

Use pastel or earthy colour schemes and avoid corporate and bright colours.

Rear colonnades

Include rear colonnades where shown in the Block by Block controls.

There is a suitable thoroughfare at the rear of the Anzac Pde building. Complies

Roof forms

Wholly contain lift over-runs and service plants within roof structures or roof lines.

Roof composition is low profile but with striking angles and visual interest. Lift towers are concealed from view.

Minimise the bulk and mass of roofs and their potential for overshadowing.

Design roofs to generate an interesting skyline and enhance views from adjoining developments.

Solar access

Maintain sunlight access to private and public open spaces and habitable rooms of adjoining development for at least 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.  If existing sunlight access to adjoining development is already below this level, maintain whatever exists.

 

Dwellings to the south in Ascot St have their northern street-elevation over-shadowed increasingly from midday onward. Solar access is retained in the morning. Private open spaces at the rear of those lots keep existing solar access. The apartment building to the east retains solar access to the northern elevation. The western elevation is overshadowed increasingly from mid-afternoon. Overshadowing is consistent with the prescribed building envelope.

Ensure that living spaces of at least 75% of apartments receive a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

100% of the proposed apartments receive at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

Street corners

Emphasis verticality at corners, if possible by concentrating the tallest portion of the building on the corner itself.  Utilise design devices such as increased wall heights, splayed corner details, increased height, expression of junction of building planes and other architecture features to reinforce the way finding attributes of street corners.

Good corner emphasis with subtle reverse splays. Design detail of the west and south elevations reinforce street hierarchy and would assist landmark way-finding. Ground level commercial frontages integrate well with building entry. Generally a successful façade resolution. Complies.

Design corners to add variety and interest to the street and clarify the street hierarchy.

Present each frontage of a corner building as a main street frontage.

Visual privacy

Organise the layout of spaces within the building to achieve visual privacy.

Primary openings are oriented front and rear. There are no significant acoustic or visual privacy issues. The far eastern apartments have privacy screens to protect the buildings to the east. There is a condition in the recommendation that requires these screens to be fixed and not operable. Complies.

Unless otherwise indicated on the Block by Block controls, orient primary openings on all developments to the front and rear of the building.

Where the separation between buildings is less than 12 metres, use screening devices such as louvres and opaque glass to maximise privacy.

Acoustic privacy

Comply with BCA requirements for acoustic control of airborne noise and impact noise between apartments.

There are conditions in the recommendation that require compliance with the BCA for sound transmission between apartments and for protection from traffic noise. Complies.

Apartment layout

Achieve apartments with dual aspect to allow direct flow of air from one side of the apartment to the other.

Use a variety of apartment styles to maximise natural ventilation and access to natural daylight.

83% of apartments (or 49 out of 59) are cross-through cross-over or dual aspect apartments. 66% of apartments (or 39 out of 50) enjoy an easterly and/or northerly aspect. Satisfactory.

Apartment mix

A mix of studios, 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom and 3 or more bedroom apartments

There is a wide range of apartments including, studios, 1 bed, 1 bed + study, 2 bed, 2 bed and 3 bed. Studio and 1 bed apartments comprise 42% of the overall mix. There are just 4 ground level apartments, limiting opportunities to provide a mix of types, but the building is serviced by lifts and generous communal roof terraces making adaptability and accessibility for elderly people, families with children and people with a disability achievable at all levels. There are conditions in the recommendation that require at least 3 accessible apartments in accordance with the prescribed rate in the DCP. Satisfactory.

Provide a mix of layouts and sizes, and consider the design needs of those who work from home.

Ensure that studios and one-bedroom apartments to comprise no more than 40%

ground floor apartments to comprise a mix of apartment types, where gardens, adaptability and accessibility are more easily achieved for elderly people, families with children or people with disabilities.

provide access for people with a disability to and within at least 3 apartments.

Building use

Ground floor – retail and commercial

Ground floor is retail or commercial space. Upper levels are residential. Satisfactory.

Storey 2 – commercial and residential (retail uses if justified by an economic impact study)

Storeys 3 and above – residential

Garden or ground floor apartments

Clearly define private and public spaces.

 

Provide maximum flexibility for future alternative uses by complying with floor to ceiling height controls.

Residential courtyards are separate and defined. Floor to ceiling height is less than the requisite 3.5m but is 2.7m with a 55cm spandrel allowing some flexibility for future uses. Satisfactory.

Stairs, lifts & corridors

Maximise the amenity of circulation spaces by providing generous spaces, eg. High ceilings, wide corridors.

Internal circulation spaces are generous and well-lit. 30 apartments are serviced by the northern lift. 25 apartments are serviced by the southern lift (4 apartments are at ground level). Not more than 8 apartments are grouped to a single lobby. 87% of upper level apartments are within 12 metres of a lift. Satisfactory.

Provide at least one lift to service no more than 40 apartments over the full rise of the building.

Optimise security by grouping apartments to a maximum of 10 around a common lobby.

Ensure that no apartment is more than 12 metres away from a lift.

 

Storage

Provide accessible and adequate storage at the prescribed rates

There is adequate storage space in each unit, accessible from the living area.

Provide at least 50% of this storage within the apartment accessible from either a hall or a living space.

Energy efficiency

Comply with a minimum 3.5 star House Energy Rating for the building envelope of each new apartment.

The proposed building satisfies BASIX energy, water and thermal comfort requirements.

Where possible provide solar hot water heaters integrated into the design of each new development.

Lighting efficiency

Design buildings to maximise available natural light without creating major heat gain pathways.

66% of apartments (or 39 out of 50) enjoy an easterly and/or northerly aspect. Satisfactory.

Optimise the number of north-facing windows.

Natural ventilation

Ensure that all apartments are single-loaded or dual aspect to allow the direct flow of air from one side of the apartment to the other.

83% of apartments (or 49 out of 59) are cross-through cross-over or dual aspect apartments.

Consider the use of crossover apartments.

Site servicing & waste management

Incorporate all stages of waste management into new development.

See comments from Council’s Development Engineer in the Technical Officer section of this report. Satisfactory

Design waste management so that residents find it convenient to use.

Provide adequate space within new development for the unloading and loading of service vehicles.

Space heating & cooling

Use passive solar design to reduce the necessity for mechanical heating and cooling.

The proposal satisfies BASIX requirements for thermal comfort.

Stormwater management

Minimise runoff by the reuse of stormwater for irrigation.

See comments from Council’s Development Engineer in the Technical Officer section of this report. Satisfactory

Set building floor levels with freeboard of at least 300mm above the 1 in 100 year flood level.

Communal open space

Maximise ground level communal open space.

There are ground level and roof-top communal open spaces. The spaces are generously proportioned, enjoy good solar access, and are well serviced with infrastructure and landscaping.

Locate communal open spaces so they form a focus of the development.

Avoid fragmenting communal open space.

Design communal open spaces which provide a pleasant outlook for residents.

Private open space

Provide at least one balcony or terrace for each apartment directly accessible from the main living area.

Each apartment has a balcony or terrace extending directly from the main internal living area and is adequately sized for a table and chairs and a flower box or two. Only the eastern most apartments require privacy screening and this is shown on the plans. 75% of balconies have an excellent northern or eastern orientation. 100% receive at least 3 hours of sunlight.

Ensure that the main balcony extends the living space by being sufficiently well proportioned to accommodate a dining table and chairs, with additional space for flower boxes or potted plants.

Assist visual privacy by recessing and/or partially enclosing the main balcony.

Orientate balconies to maximise solar access.

Safety & security

Orient entrances towards the public street and ensure visibility between entrances, foyers and the street.

Safety and security are well handled. Sightlines into and over the site ensure casual surveillance of communal areas and access-ways. Access control is secure. Territoriality is adequately defined. Satisfactory.

Provide direct and well-lit access between carparks and apartments, between carparks and lift lobbies and to all apartment entrances.

 

Section 94A Contributions Plan

 

Table 3 - Section 94A Contributions

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

Contribution

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$12,173,469.00

1.0%

$121,734.69

 

Conclusion

 

Originally for a building up to 8-storeys with 65 apartments, the proposal was amended so that there are now 7-storeys facing Anzac Pde, up-to 6 facing Ascot St and a 4-storey pavilion building flanking the northern side of a publicly accessibly, internal courtyard. There is 410m2 of commercial floor space on the ground floor, 59 apartments and 2 levels of basement parking for 76 cars.

 

Made-up of 2 Torrens lots, the site has a 40m frontage to Anzac Pde and a 39m frontage to Ascot St in Kensington.

There were 2 objections to the original proposal, raising issues with height, overshadowing, visual and acoustic privacy, traffic generation and parking. The amended proposal reduced the impact of the development and was not renotified. The objector’s issues are addressed in the report.

 

The proposal is the subject of a SEPP 1 objection because of height encroachments. The design responds to the height objectives by offering a more refined height transition from Anzac Parade to lower buildings to the east.

 

There are several encroachments on the DCP building envelope. These are a result of a slimmer building design intended to achieve superior solar access and natural ventilation. The overall floor area of the proposed building is 80% of the envelope, which is less than the 85% prescribed.

 

Overshadowing is comparable to a complying building and privacy is adequately protected by buffer distances or, where necessary, privacy screens.

 

The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the relevant assessment criteria and approval subject to conditions is recommended.

 

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 736/2008 for demolition of existing structures and construction of mixed use development up to 7 storeys with ground floor retail, 59 residential units and basement parking for 76 vehicles at 112-124 Anzac Parade, Kensington subject to the following conditions.

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA08B to DA24B, received by Council on 27 January 2009, 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.       Fixed privacy screens must be installed to a height of at least 1.5m on the easterly aspect of the balconies for apartments numbered 1d, 7d, 13d, 12a and 20a. The privacy screens may be operable above a height of 1.5m.

 

3.       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.

 

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

 

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

     

In this regard, an Application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, together with the required fee, for the allocation of appropriate street and unit numbers for the development, prior to issuing an occupation certificate.

 

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

 

7.       No cooking facilities or sanitary fittings other than those indicated on the approved plans are to be installed in the premises without the prior written consent of the Council.

 

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

 

9.       Internal or external clothes drying facilities are to be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Should external clothes drying facilities be provided, the facilities must be adequately screened by vegetation and details are to be incorporated into the landscaping plans, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

13.     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.

 

14.     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)

 

15.     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.

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

Contribution

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$12,173,469.00

1.0%

$121,734.69

 

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

 

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

 

Security Deposit Conditions

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

 

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

 

·      $2000.00    -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

Traffic conditions/Civil Works Conditions

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

 

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

 

·      Construct a heavy-duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Ascot Street.

 

·      Remove all redundant concrete vehicular crossings and layback and to reinstate the area with footpath and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

·      Reconstruct the kerb and gutter along both site frontages except opposite the vehicular entrance to the site (including associated roadworks as required).

 

·      Reconstruct the existing Council footpath along both site frontages in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Kensington Commercial Centre.

 

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

 

20.     The applicant shall note that all external work, carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council's Policy for "Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works". An application for the cost of the Council civil works is to be submitted to Council at the completion of the internal building works. An application fee shall be payable to Council for the quotation of the required works. The applicant may elect to use his contractor for the required works, subject to Council approval, however a design and supervision fee based on the lowest quotation from Council's nominated contractor will be required to be paid prior to the commencement of any works.

 

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

 

22.     To prevent vehicular conflict on the internal circulation ramp linking the basement 1 carpark and the basement 2 carpark, a signalling system shall be provided. The signalling system shall be designed by a suitably qualified traffic consultant. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement and the signalling system must be approved by the Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Construction Certificate.

 

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

 

24.     The driveway opening at the Ascot Street frontage must be 5.50 metres wide and located at least 1.5 metres clear of the side property.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

27.     To improve visibility at the intersection of Anzac Parade and Ascot Street, a minimum 3.0 metre x 3.0 metre splay corner shall be provided at ground level. There shall be no walls or planting higher than 600mm located within the splay corner.

 

28.     The minimum clear distance from the existing footpaths in Anzac Parade and Ascot Street to the underside of the proposed awning shall be 3.00 metres. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

29.     All new awnings shall be set back a minimum of 600mm from the face of kerb. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

30.     Upon completion of the construction of the awnings, certification of the structural adequacy of the awnings must be provided to the Council.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

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

 

31.     The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must:

 

·      match the back of the existing footpath along both the Anzac Parade and Ascot Street site frontages.

 

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

 

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

 

33.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $1715 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage to Ascot Street. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. Change to ascot street only

 

Service Authority Conditions

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

 

34.     A public utility impact assessment must be carried out on all public utility services on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the development/building works and include relevant information from public utility authorities and exploratory trenching or pot-holing, if necessary, to determine the position and level of service.

 

35.     The applicant must meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia and Sydney Water to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Drainage Conditions

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

 

40.     The floor level of all ground floor habitable and storage areas shall be at a minimum of 300mm above the calculated critical 1 in 100 year flood level for both the Anzac Parade and Ascot Street site frontages. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement. The critical 1 in 100 year flood levels for this site, based on the flood analysis prepared by Worley Parsons (dated 7/10/08) and submitted with this application are as follows:

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Anzac Parade frontage at the northern boundary is 26.88 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Anzac Parade frontage at the southern boundary (intersection of Anzac Parade and Ascot Street) is 26.68 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Ascot Street frontage at the eastern boundary is 27.15 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level at the intersection of Ascot Street and Anzac Parade has been taken as 26.68 metres (AHD).

 

The applicant must contact Council’s Development Engineer to discuss Council’s requirements for protection of openings and habitable floor levels prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate application.

 

41.     The proposed internal driveway must be designed with a high point at a minimum of 150mm above the calculated critical 1 in 100 year flood level for Ascot Street. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement. The critical 1 in 100 year flood levels for this site at the vehicular crossing, based on the flood analysis prepared by Worley Parsons (dated 7/10/08) and submitted with this application are as follows:

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Ascot Street frontage at the eastern edge of the driveway opening is approximately 27.08 metres (AHD).

 

·      The critical 1 in 100 year flood level for the Ascot Street frontage at the western edge of the driveway opening is approximately 27.02 metres (AHD).

 

The applicant must contact Council’s Development Engineer to discuss Council’s requirements for protection of the basement carpark and the design of the internal driveway prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate application.

 

42.     All windows, vents and other openings into the basement carpark (excluding the driveway opening) must be located at least 300 mm above the determined 1 in 100 year flood level. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

o  Roof areas

o  Paved areas

o  Grassed areas

o  Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      The underground drainage system in Anzac Parade, via a new and/or existing kerb inlet pit; OR

 

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

 

Notes:

 

·      All new kerb inlet pits shall be constructed in general accordance with Council’s standard drawing SD7a.

 

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

 

47.     Should stormwater be discharged to Council’s street drainage system, on-site detention must be provided to ensure that the maximum discharge from the above site is not to exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 10 year storm of 1 hour duration for the existing site conditions. All other stormwater run-off from the above site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 year storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the kerb and gutter or drainage system as required by Council.  Provision is to be made for satisfactory overland flow should a storm in excess of the above parameters occur.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

51.     The maximum depth of ponding in above ground detention areas (and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage) shall be as follows:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

59.     Three covered car washing bays shall be provided for this development.

 

·      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.

 

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

 

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

 

·      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.

 

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

 

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

·      Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·      Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

·      Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

 

·      The “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” are to be to the satisfaction of Council. A copy of Council’s standard wording/layout for the restriction and positive covenant may be obtained from Council’s Development Engineer.

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

 

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

 

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

 

64.     A report must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority or an accredited certifier prior to issuing the Construction Certificate for excavation of the basement levels, detailing the proposed method of excavation and dewatering process. The approved report must be forwarded to Council, (if Council is not the Certifying Authority). This report is to be prepared by suitably qualified and experienced Geotechnical, Hydrological and Structural Engineers and is to include but not limited to:

 

·      The proposed method of shoring/piling and dewatering.

 

·      The zone of influence of any possible settlement.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

65.     Prior to lodgement of a Construction Certificate application the applicant must obtain from the Department of Natural Resources, the general terms of approval and any specific requirements for dewatering of the site to facilitate construction of the basement carpark levels. In particular, the applicant must obtain in writing the Department’s general terms of approval for the issuing of a Part V license under the Water Act 1912.

 

The Construction Certificate application must demonstrate compliance with the general terms of approval for a Part V License. No construction certificate is to be issued until such time as the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Department of Natural Resources and the Certifying Authority that the proposed method for construction of the basement carpark and dewatering of the site is strictly in accordance with the Department of Natural Resouces’ requirements and best current engineering practice.

 

No dewatering of the site shall take place until such time as a Part V license has been obtained. A copy of the Part V license must be forwarded to Council prior to the commencement of any dewatering on the site.

 

66.     Details of any proposed connection and / or disposal of groundwater to Council’s external stormwater drainage system must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Development Engineer, prior to commencing these works, in accordance with section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

The subject details must include the following information:

 

·      Site plan

·      Hydraulic engineering details of the proposed disposal/connection of groundwater or site stormwater to Council/s drainage system

·      Volume of water to be discharged

·      Location and size of drainage pipes

·      Duration, dates and time/s for the proposed works and disposal

·      Details of water quality and compliance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Act 1997

·      Details of associated plant and equipment, including noise levels from the plant and equipment and compliance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Act 1997 and associated Regulations and Guidelines

·      Copy of any required approvals and licences from other Authorities (e.g.  A water licence from the Department of Planning/Department of Water & Energy).

·      Details of compliance with any relevant approvals and licences

 

Waste Management Conditions

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

 

67.     The residential waste storage area/s shall be sized to contain:

 

·      a compactor (with safe working area);

·      a total of 14 x 240 litre garbage bins; and

·      a total of 28 x 240 litre recycling bins.

 

The compactor shall be managed by a caretaker and shall be located in an area that is not accessible to residents. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with these requirements.

 

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

 

69.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

70.     The commercial waste storage area shall be sized to contain a minimum total of 6 x 240 litre bins (3 x garbage bins and 3 x recycling bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to each of these bins.

 

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

 

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

 

Landscape Conditions

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

 

72.     Detailed landscape drawings and specifications, (prepared in general accordance with the Landscape Concept Plans prepared by 360 Degrees), shall be submitted to, and be approved by, the certifying authority, prior to the issue of a construction certificate. The landscape drawings and specifications are to be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect who is eligible for membership with the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA), and will include:

 

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

 

·      A planting plan at a scale of 1:100 or 1:200 indicating the location of all proposed planting, with all plants to be drawn at their mature size with a suitable mixture of appropriately selected and located groundcovers, plants, shrubs, accent or feature specimens and canopy trees.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

73.     The applicant shall meet all costs associated with upgrading the Anzac Parade and Ascot Street site frontages in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Kensington Commercial Centre. All works carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council property.

 

74.     A detailed streetscape plan for both the Anzac Parade and Ascot Street frontages showing proposed paving design, street furniture, grades, finished levels, extent and location of awnings, doors/entranceways, the bus stop and any other details required by Council’s Landscape Architect shall be submitted to, and approved by, Council’s Director of City Services prior to commencement of the streetscape works.

 

Although Council has prepared a suburb-wide preliminary design for the upgrading of all footpath areas in the Kensington Commercial Centre, the applicant will still be required to liaise with Council’s Landscape Architect on 9399-0915, prior to preparation of the streetscape plan to obtain more detailed, site specific landscape design requirements.

 

Following approval of the streetscape plan; and prior to commencement of the streetscape works on Council property, the applicant shall liaise with Council’s Pre-paid Works Designer on 9399-0922, regarding scheduling of work including inspections, supervision fees and compliance with Council’s requirements for public liability insurance.

 

The approved streetscape works shall be completed to the satisfaction of Council’s Landscape Architect and Pre-paid Works Designer, prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate.

 

75.     To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaping, an automatic drip irrigation system shall be installed throughout all planted areas to provide full coverage with no overspray onto driveways and pathways.

 

The applicant will be required to demonstrate that the system will be connected to the sites rainwater tanks, with backup connection the mains supply, in accordance with all current Sydney Water requirements.

 

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

 

77.     All detention tanks and below ground stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm to ensure sufficient soil depth to permit the establishment of landscaping on top of these services as stipulated by these conditions of development consent.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

     

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      Should the Detailed Site Investigation Report identify that the land is contaminated and the land requires remedial works to meet the relevant criteria in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM) 1999, the following matters must be complied with:

 

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

 

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

 

o  This RAP is to include procedures for the following:

 

§ Excavation of Hydrocarbon-contaminated soil,

§ Validation sampling and analysis,

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

§ Site management planning,

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

§ Unexpected finds.

 

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

 

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

 

Any requirements contained within an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which forms part of the Site Audit Statement and Site Audit Report, form part of this consent and Council must be consulted with prior to the development of the EMP. The presence of any EMP may be required to be included on the certificate of title.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

§ hazard identification and control

§ worker health & safety, work zones and decontamination procedures

§ cross contamination

§ site drainage and dewatering

§ air and water quality monitoring

§ disposable of hazardous wastes

§ contingency plans and incident reporting, and

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

 

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

 

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

 

o  The Environmental Consultant and Auditor, in their assessment of appropriate soil investigation levels, must take into account all environmental concerns (for example, the potential effects on wildlife) and the protection of ground and surface water.

 

o  Any variations to the proposed remediation works or remediation action plan shall be approved by the Site Auditor and a written statement is to be provided to the Council by the Site Auditor prior to the commencement of such works, which confirms the Site Auditors approval of the amended remediation action plan / works, and

 

o  Should any underground tanks be discovered they shall be removed in accordance with relevant NSW DEC/EPA Guidelines; Australian Institute of Petroleum’s (AIP) Code of Practice for the Design, Installation and Operation of Underground Petroleum Storage Systems (CP4-1998); and WorkCover NSW requirements. In the event of of conflict between AIP Code of Practice and WorkCover requirements the latter shall prevail.

 

o  Any odours from excavated materials shall be mitigated by the use of an odour suppressant, such as Biosolve, and shall not give rise to an offensive odour as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Stockpiles shall also be covered and dampened down to reduce odour and dust impacts.

 

On-site land farming of contaminated soil is not permitted, except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Environmental Health & Building Services.

 

o  All trucks and service vehicles leaving the site shall go through a suitably constructed on site truck wash down area, to ensure no tracking of material occurs from the site onto roads adjoining the site. Details are to be submitted to Council in the Site Management Plan.

 

o  Prior to the commencement and throughout the duration of the remediation and construction works adequate sediment and stormwater control measures shall be in place and maintained on site at all times.  Sediment laden stormwater shall be controlled using measures outlined in the manual Managing Urban Stormwater Soils and Construction produced by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

o  Remediation work shall be conducted within the following hours:

 

§     Monday – Friday 7am – 5pm

§     Saturday             8am – 5pm

§     No work permitted on Sundays or Public Holidays

 

o  A sign displaying the contact details of the remediation contractor (and the site manager if different to remediation contractor) shall be displayed on the site adjacent to the site access. This sign shall be displayed throughout the duration of the remediation works.

 

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

 

In this regards, the written concurrence from Council’s Manager Health Building & Regulatory Services accepting the changed status and proposed actions regarding land contamination & groundwater contamination shall be obtained prior to finalising remediation works and/or an occupation certificate being issued.

 

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

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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