Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 9 June 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

9 June 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 June 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, 9 June 2009 at 6:00pm.

 

 

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 - 12 May 2009

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

 

Urgent Business

 

Development Application Reports

D36/09      5 Undine Street, Maroubra

D37/09      12 Mundarrah Street, Clovelly

D38/09      164 Belmore Road, Randwick

D39/09      139 Bunnerong Road, Kingsford

D40/09      2 - 4 Darwin Avenue, Little Bay   

 

Miscellaneous Reports

M8/09       Industrial Lands Discussion Paper     

 

Notice of Rescission Motions

NR3/09      Notice of Rescission Motion from Councillors Andrews, Matthews & White - 155-157 Arden Street, Coogee  

 

Closed Session

Nil

 

Notices of Rescission Motions

Nil

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee

9 June 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D36/09

 

 

Subject:                  5 Undine Street, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/734/2008

Author:                   Lauren Hendriks, Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a new part two/part three storey dwelling.

 

Ward:                      Central Ward

 

Applicant:                Sanctum Design Consultants

 

Owner:                         Terri Yazbak

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.Executive Summary

 

The application has been referred to the Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Seng, Andrews and Nash.

 

The subject application is for the demolition of the existing dwelling house on the site and the construction of a new two storey freestanding dwelling house with a double garage & plant room at lower ground level. The existing pool to the rear of the subject site is to be retained and the application is to also include a new front fence.

 

The application was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 13 October to 6 November 2009 in accordance with the provisions of the Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. Three objections were received during the notification period. The main issues raised by the objections were regarding view loss, privacy loss, bulk, setbacks, overshadowing, the floor space ratio & open space requirements.

 

Amended plans were requested to address a number of issues raised by Council regarding view and privacy loss, bulk, setbacks, overshadowing and the floor space ratio.  Amended plans were received by Council on 3 March 2009. The following amendments were made:

 

·      The floor plans were amended to reduce the proposed total floor area to fully comply with Council’s DCP controls;

·      The total length of the proposed residence was reduced from 20.88m to 19.73m and the overhang of the first floor rear terrace roof was reduced  by 900mm, significantly reducing building bulk particularly at the rear while the front (street) wall setback has been reduced from 8m to 6.5m;

·      The first floor terrace has been setback a further 2.42m;  and

·      The rear building setback of the proposal was increased by 2.42m, from 11.405m to 13.825m. This positioned the ground floor rear wall of the proposed residence behind the existing high section of timber paling fence between No. 5 and N. 7 Undine Street and the first floor rear wall approximately 1.36m behind the adjoining rear wall at No. 3 Undine Street.

 

The amended plans were renotified to the objectors from 9 March 2009 to 24 March 2009. Three objections were again received during the notification period. The main issues raised by the objections to the amended plans were in regards to view loss, privacy loss, bulk, setbacks and overshadowing.

 

Further amended plans were requested by Council to adjust the proposed driveway levels at the request of Council’s development engineers. These amended plans were received by Council on 19 May 2009.

 

The amended proposal addressed the objectors’ concerns by increasing the rear setback of the dwelling and reducing its total floor area and length.  The amended proposal is generally consistent with floor space controls and setback requirements. The proposed dwelling is compatible with the streetscape and would not unduly impact upon the solar access and amenity presently enjoyed by neighbouring properties. The Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle to guide the assessment of view loss and it is considered the proposed development as amended satisfies the planning principle in that the level of view loss and views retained from the objectors’ habitable living spaces are acceptable and reasonable in the circumstances.

 

The amended proposal satisfies the relevant legislation, State policies and Local planning controls. Therefore, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal involves demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new part two/part three storey dwelling. At lower ground level there is a garage and plant room proposed.  At ground level there is a living room, retreat, guest room, kitchen meals room, bathroom & laundry proposed and at first floor level there are four bedrooms, a bathroom and an ensuite proposed.  There are also ground floor and first floor terraces proposed to the front and rear of the dwelling.   

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Undine Street.  The foreshore of Lurline Bay is to the north and the site is within the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. The site has a frontage width of 12.19m, a depth of 38.555m and has an overall site area of 469.99m22. Currently on the site there is a single storey freestanding dwelling and a swimming pool to the rear.

 

The site rises approximately a metre from east to west, from the pool coping to the rear, to the front fence, then falls approximately a metre to the street kerb. Undine Street falls towards Lurline Bay to the North at a grade of approximately 1:12, however, the subject site has undergone levelling, resulting in a relatively flat site across its width with a 2m high retaining wall along the northern boundary of the site.

 

Neighbouring the property to the north is a part two/part three storey detached dwelling, to the south is a two storey detached dwelling and to the rear is a two storey detached dwelling fronting Wilson Street. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of one and two storey freestanding dwellings.

 

4.    Site History

 

BA/882/1968 - Approved for additions to the existing dwelling house.

BA/1293/1974 - Approved for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house.

BA/175/1979 - Approved for a swimming pool to the rear.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with Council Policy. The following submissions were received:

 

·      3 Undine Street

 

·      7 Undine Street

 

·      9 Undine Street.

 

5.1 Objections

 

Note: the following objections are summarised from both the original objections & objections to the amended plans.

 


On behalf of owners/residents – 7 Undine Street, Maroubra

 

Table 1 – Assessment of issues raised in submissions from the public

Issue

Comment

The proposal is inconsistent with the stated objectives of the residential 2(a) zone under Randwick LEP 1998.  This is because the proposal has significant impacts on the amenity of surrounding properties. 

The proposal is considered to meet the objectives of the residential 2A zone of the Randwick LEP 1998 and the impacts of the amended proposal on the amenity of surrounding properties are considered to be reasonable. Refer to the environmental assessment and Randwick LEP 1998 sections of the report for discussion of the impacts of the proposal on neighbouring properties.

The proposal will have significant additional shadowing impacts on the rear living areas and private open space on 7 Undine Street. The extent of additional and unnecessary additional overshadowing caused by the proposal which extends unreasonably beyond the prevailing rear building line is unacceptable.

The proposal will overshadow two living area windows on the northern elevation of the adjoining property to the south until after midday.  However, one of the windows was already predominantly overshadowed and other the one is only partly overshadowed by midday. At least a significant part of the objector’s private open space will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. Refer to the discussion on ‘solar access’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for further discussion. 

Only part of the substantial upper level rear balcony is screened. In order to prevent overlooking from that balcony, any additional screening to overcome the privacy concern would worsen the overshadowing impacts.

No screening is proposed to the rear first floor terrace. A condition has been included within the recommendation to ensure that no screening is provided to the first floor rear terrace in order to minimise overshadowing and view loss. Refer to ‘visual privacy’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for further discussion of the privacy impacts of the terrace. 

The proposal has significant privacy impacts on No. 7 Undine Street’s primary living area and outdoor space. The size, location, siting and height of the upper level rear terraces is a concern as they will allow for unreasonable levels of overlooking into the rear yard of No. 7 Undine Street and into the rear facing windows and living areas.

A degree of overlooking is generally accepted as being reasonable for the sake of retaining and capturing views as in this instance.  Refer to ‘visual privacy’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion on the visual privacy impacts of the proposal. 

The proposal will result in a loss of outlook and views to No 7 Undine Street’s. The proposal will result in a loss of important views through blocking of view corridors that benefit multiple properties.

The Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle to guide the assessment of view loss. It is considered the proposed development as amended satisfies the planning principle in that the level of view loss and therefore those views retained from the objectors’ habitable living spaces are acceptable and reasonable in the circumstances. Refer to ‘view sharing’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion.

The proposal extends at two storeys well beyond the predominant rear building line observed by existing development on the eastern side of Undine Street and does not meet performance requirement P2 which requires that development fits into the surrounding environment and pattern of development by recognising form and style of existing buildings, orientation and view corridors. The proposal would not satisfy the stated Objective and Performance Requirements P4 & P6 which requires a building to preserve privacy and natural light access for neighbouring residents and a sharing of views.

 

The amended proposal is considered to be suitable for the subject site and reasonable in terms of view sharing, privacy and solar access.  Refer to the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion of the impacts of the proposal in relation to setbacks, privacy and solar access.

The proposed rear setback and retention of the existing pool does not leave much purposeful or usable ground level open space relative to the size of the dwelling.

The proposal complies with the Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan Preferred Solutions for Landscaping and & Open Space. The proposal has an area of useable open space of approximately 5m x 12m, which is considered to be an adequate size for the dwelling.

 

The first floor deck to the rear is excessively deep and wide and has significant impacts on the solar access and privacy of neighbouring dwellings and would not satisfy P2.

The amended proposal is considered to be reasonable in terms of view sharing, privacy and overshadowing.  Refer to ‘solar access’ and ‘visual privacy’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion of the solar access and privacy impacts of the first floor rear terrace.

 

The proposal does not comply with Council’s requirements for FSR.

The amended proposal complies with Council’s requirements for FSR.

 

The building bulk (namely the siting of that bulk at the rear) is not compatible with surrounding built forms and does not minimise the adverse effects on neighbours.

The building bulk of the amended proposal is considered to be suitable for the site and to have a reasonable impact on neighbouring properties.  Refer to ‘visual & acoustic privacy’, ‘solar access’ & ‘view sharing’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion of the impact of the building bulk to the rear.

 

The proposal is inconsistent with Clause 10(1)(C) of the RLEP 1998 in that the proposal will compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas.

The proposal is considered to meet the objectives of the residential 2A zone of the Randwick LEP 1998 and the impacts of the amended proposal on the amenity of surrounding properties are considered to be reasonable. Refer to the environmental assessment and Randwick LEP 1998 sections of the report for discussion of the impacts of the proposal on neighbouring properties.

 

Owner/resident – 3 Undine Street, Maroubra

 

Table 1 – Assessment of issues raised in submissions from the public

Issue

Comment

The rear setbacks are inadequate and should be kept in line with the neighbouring properties. The proposal will diminish the privacy the objector currently enjoys.

The Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle to guide the assessment of view loss. It is considered the proposed development as amended satisfies the planning principle in that the level of view loss and therefore those views retained from the objectors’ habitable living spaces are acceptable and reasonable in the circumstances. Refer to the ‘view sharing’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion.

 

The objector’s existing views of neighbouring trees and gardens will be replaced by large block walls, downgrading the objector’s outlook and value of their property.

It is acknowledged that the proposal may reduce the outlook to the south-west of the objector’s property as some existing vegetation on the subject site will be replaced by the proposed dwelling.  However, this is not significant enough grounds for refusal as the proposal complies with the landscaped area requirements. Downgrading of the value of the objector’s property is not a matter for consideration in this assessment.

 

 The front setback, including the front terrace, is not in alignment with the rest of the properties on the street and is therefore detrimental to the street aesthetics.

The average of the adjoining dwelling setbacks is 5.05m and the proposed front setback is 5m, which complies.  Refer to ‘building setbacks’ in the Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies section of the report for further detail. 

 

The proposed plans include a structure on the roof which increases the building height to above the Council height limits and casts shadows on the neighbouring properties.

The architectural element located on the roof extends 400mm above Council’s 7m wall height control. The element is considered to meet the relevant performance requirements and objectives of the DCP  for the following reasons:-

·      Since the 9am and 3pm winter sun angle is 18 degrees, and the rake of the roof element is only 12.5 degrees up toward the roof centre, it does not result in any additional overshadowing of the adjoining properties;

·      The variation from the control is relatively minor, being a 1400mm section of the element which is up to 400mm above the height limit; and

·      The element will maintain visual interest to the dwelling from the streetscape.

 

 

Owners/residents – 9 Undine Street, Maroubra

 

Table 1 – Assessment of issues raised in submissions from the public

Issue

Comment

The proposal will have a significant impact on the objector’s current enjoyment of ocean views from their first floor rear living area and open plan kitchen. The proposal at No 5 appears to have been designed to maximise rear views from the proposed residence without any regard to the amenity of neighbouring properties. The amended application still seems focussed on maximising its views at the expense of all neighbouring properties south. The view loss means that the whole design of the objector’s home is less amenable due to the fact that the only practical reason for having living areas and a kitchen upstairs is to take advantage of views.

 

The Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle to guide the assessment of view loss. It is considered the proposed development as amended satisfies the planning principle in that the level of view loss and therefore those views retained from the objectors’ habitable living spaces are acceptable and reasonable in the circumstances. Refer to ‘view sharing’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion.

The proposed open rear first floor terrace has significant impacts on the objector’s privacy and any future screening to be used by the residents of No. 5 will have the same net effect as a wall would, resulting in ocean view loss to No. 9 Undine Street. These issues could easily be resolved if the rear boundary was kept in line with the existing building line. The top floor balcony is off a bedroom and therefore the resident will want to introduce some form of privacy screening to enable practical use of the balcony from their bedroom.  Any non fixed screening introduced will have the same impact as a fixed screening or wall.

 

No screening is proposed to the rear first floor rear terrace. A condition has been included within the recommendation to ensure that no screening is provided to the first floor rear terrace in order to minimise overshadowing and view loss. Refer to ‘visual privacy’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for further discussion of the privacy impacts of the terrace. 

The proposal, if approved would set a precedence for view loss and privacy loss, and properties further south are likely to extend further and further out in an attempt to regain lost views.

The Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle to guide the assessment of view loss. It is considered the proposed development as amended satisfies the planning principle in that the level of view loss and therefore those views retained from the objectors’ habitable living spaces are acceptable and reasonable in the circumstances. A degree of overlooking is generally accepted as being reasonable for the sake of retaining and capturing views. Refer to ‘visual privacy’ and ‘view sharing’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion of the impacts of the proposal on view loss and privacy.

 

5.2 Support

 

No letters of support were received.

 

6.   Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

An amended application has been received for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling with basement garage at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      DA-1 Sheets A00-A13 Rev A  and A14 by Sanctum Design dated 18.05.09;

·      Landscape Plan Job Ref 08/133DA1 Sheets 1 & 2 by P Scrivener dated 28.08.08.

 

Landscape Comments

The inspection confirmed a complete absence of any significant vegetation at this site which would be covered by Council's Tree Preservation Order, presumably due to a combination of this property’s exposure to harsh coastal winds, combined with a lack of soil depth due to the presence of bedrock close to and above ground level, as can be seen on the nature strip, meaning that the installation of street trees will not be possible.

 

Therefore, conditions in this report relate solely to the installation of an appropriate landscape scheme which will complement the proposed dwelling and surrounds, with the submitted proposal to result in a substantial improvement to site amenity.

 

Drainage Comments

The requirement for an infiltration/rubble pit will not be enforced due to the ground conditions (i.e. rock is near the surface). All site stormwater shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter via a sediment/silt arrestor pit.

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

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

 

Zone Objectives

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

 

Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

Clause 29 of the RLEP requires Council to consider the probable aesthetic appearance of a proposed building in relation to the foreshore.  The proposal is for demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of a new two storey dwelling on the site. Given other examples of this type of development and the general consistency in bulk and scale of the development with those that exist along Undine Street, it is not considered the proposed development will have any unreasonable impacts on the appearance along the foreshore.

 

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008

The draft LEP is an administrative update of the existing LEP. It amalgamates all previous amendments but does not substantially change the existing plan. The proposal is not inconsistent with the aims and objectives of draft RLEP 2008.

 

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

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

 

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

 

7.2      Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

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

 

Clause

Standard

Check

Y/N

Landscaping

40 % of site provided as landscaped area

57%

Yes

25m² of private open space provided.

25m2 +

Yes

Min. dimensions of 3m x 4m & minor level change

5m x 12m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

36%

Yes

Floor area

(Site area 470.1m2) maximum FSR 0.57:1 

0.53:1

Yes

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

6.4m

Note: A small section of an architectural feature on the roof extends up to a maximum height of 7.4m, however, it is not an external wall and will not result in any additional adverse impacts on the neighbouring properties. 

Yes

External wall height to the rear maximum 3.5m.

n/a

n/a

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

3m

Suitable conditions included within the recommendation to ensure excavations are appropriately supported.

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

Up to 900mm

Yes

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

13.5m

Yes

The length of a 2nd storey maximum 12m less than 1.5m from a southern boundary.

Maximum length 4m

Yes

The 2nd storey addition to a semi respects the adjoining semi-detached dwelling.

n/a

n/a

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

Adjoining dwelling setbacks

·    1 Undine Street - Approx. 5m (Council’s GIS)

·    3 Undine Street – Approx. 5.8m (Council’s GIS)

·    7 Undine Street – 4.6m (survey plan)

·    9 Undine Street – Approx. 4.8m (Council’s GIS)

Average= Approx. 5.05m

Proposed front setback, 5m, which complies.

Yes

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

13.825m

Yes

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

Minimum 900mm

Yes

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Minimum 900mm

No – refer to ‘first floor side setbacks’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

n/a

n/a

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

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

W12 Kitchen, W5 Living & W7 Bed 1

 

No – refer to ‘visual privacy’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion

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

Rear first floor terrace

No – refer to ‘visual privacy’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion

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

Not required

n/a

Safety & Security

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

Yes

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

Study and bedroom

Study and bedroom

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

Standard condition

Standard condition

 Garages & Driveways

 

 

 

Garages & Driveways

(continued)

1 space, for dwellings with 2 bedrooms or less, or 2 spaces, for dwellings with 3 bedrooms or more.

2 spaces

Yes

Parking spaces have a min. dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m.

5.9m x 5.6m (two spaces)

Yes

Driveway minimum width of 3m and side setback 1m

Width 3m

Setback 1.5m

Yes

Driveway maximum width of 3m at the boundary.

3m

Yes

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

Complies

Yes

Garages and carports to rear lanes set back 1m.

n/a

n/a

Parking and access is provided from the rear.

n/a

n/a

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

Yes

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

46%

No – refer to ‘Width of the garage’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion

Fences

Sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

No sandstone

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

1.2m

Yes

Fences in front of the building line or on street frontages up to 1.8m and upper 2/3 is at least 50% open.

n/a

n/a

Foreshore Development

 

No encroachments on Foreshore Building Line.

n/a

Stepped buildings on sloping sites are articulated.

n/a

Form, colour, materials and finishes are sympathetic.

Yes, complies

Buildings incorporate setbacks to allow sharing of views.

Refer to ‘view sharing’ in the environmental issues section of the report for discussion.

Ancillary structures do not detract from appearance.

None

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

New dwellings comply with 3.5 stars on the NatHERS.

See BASIX

n/a

Private open space receive at least 3 hours sunlight 9am - 3pm on 21 June.

The majority of private open space to the rear of the proposed dwelling will receive 3 hours of sunlight.

Yes

North-facing living areas receive at least 3 hrs sunlight 9am - 3pm 21 June.

The proposed dwelling has north facing windows, some of which will receive 3 hours of solar access. Complies.

Solar access to existing or future solar collectors on adjacent buildings is maintained 9am - 3pm.

The proposal will not affect solar collectors of adjoining properties. Complies.

North-facing windows to living areas of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight 9am - 3pm 21 June, or not further reduced.

The proposed dwelling will overshadow some windows on the northern elevation of the adjoining property to the south until after midday. Does not comply.  Refer to ‘solar access’ in the environmental assessment section of the report for discussion refer to main issues above.

Principal outdoor recreation space of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight 9am- 3pm 21 June, or not further reduced.

At least some of the private open space to the rear of the adjoining dwelling to the south will receive 3 hours of sunlight.

Yes

 

b. Development Control Plan – Parking

 

7.3      Section 94A Contributions

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$906, 070

1.0%

$9,060.70

 

7.4 Council Policies

7.4.1 Rainwater Tanks Policy 2003

Council’s rainwater tank policy requires that all new developments install a rainwater tank for the collection and re-use of roof water. The rainwater tank is required to be new dwellings are required to be connected for the internal purposes of toilet flushing and clothes washing. All new dwellings houses are required to install a rainwater tank with a preferred size of 5,000 Litres, but not less than 2,000 Litres.  The proposal includes a three rainwater tanks with a combined capacity of 5,500 litres, which meets the requirements of the policy.

 

8    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

The primary environmental assessment issues are floor space ratios, boundary setbacks, width of the garage, visual and acoustic privacy and view sharing. These key issues are discussed below.

 

First floor side setbacks

The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Preferred Solutions require that side setbacks be 1.5 metres at second floor level.  The proposal includes a 4.08m section of the second floor level that is 900mm from the southern side boundary, which does not comply. However, the building form and side setback still ensures occupants and neighbours have adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air and is considered to meet the relevant objectives and performance requirements due to modest height of the second floor level and only a small section, being 4.08m in length, is non-compliant.

 

Width of the garage

The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Preferred Solutions for driveways and car parking structures are that they do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment.  The proposed garage and part of the proposed driveway occupies 46% of the width of the allotment, which does not comply. However, given that the garage is to be located predominantly below ground level and will not dominate or detract from the appearance of the development and the streetscape, it is considered to meet the relevant objectives and performance requirements.

 

Solar access

The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Preferred Solutions for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Preferred Solutions require that north-facing windows to neighbouring properties receive at least 3 hours of sunlight over at least part of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. The proposed dwelling will overshadow two windows to living areas on the northern elevation of the adjoining property to the south until after midday. However, one the windows was already predominantly overshadowed, and the other one that is overshadowed is only partly overshadowed by midday. Therefore, the proposal is considered to meet the relevant objectives and performance requirements.

 

It is also noted that the proposal will partly overshadow the private open space to the rear of the adjoining dwelling to the south. However, the amended proposal which increased the rear setback reduced these impacts, and at least part of the private open space will still receive at least 3 hours of sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. As such, the proposal is considered to meet the relevant objectives and performance requirements.

 

Visual & acoustic privacy

The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Preferred Solutions for privacy require that overlooking of internal living areas and private open spaces to neighbouring dwellings is obscured or screened within 9m and beyond a 45 degree angle from the plane of the wall containing the opening. The proposal includes an unscreened rear first floor terrace 3.5m x 8.6m and W12 to the Kitchen, W5 to the Retreat & W7 to Bedroom 1 are within 9m of neighbouring dwelling’s habitable windows, and do not comply. 

 

W12 to the kitchen

W12 will not result in overlooking to the neighbouring dwelling at No. 7 Undine Street as the view is obscured by an existing high timber paling boundary fence between No. 5 & No. 7 Undine Street.  As such W12 meets the relevant objectives and performance requirements.     

 

W5 to the Retreat & W7 to bedroom 1

W5 & W7 are located directly opposite the front terrace & balcony at No. 3 Undine Street. Given the balcony and terrace are to the front of No. 3 Undine Street, and are visible from Undine Street.  Therefore, the additional potential overlooking from No. 5 Undine Street is considered to be acceptable as they are already visible from a public place. Further, no objections have been raised in regards to these windows.

 

Rear First Floor Terrace

The proposed rear first floor terrace does not comply with the relevant Preferred Solutions as it will result in overlooking to the private open space of adjoining dwellings and windows to No. 9 Undine Street. However, screening the terrace would result in substantial view loss to neighbouring dwellings. No. 9 and No. 11 to the south also have rear first floor unscreened balconies/terraces. A degree of overlooking is generally accepted as being reasonable for the sake of retaining and capturing views. As such, the proposed rear terrace is considered to be reasonable in this particular instance.

 

View loss assessment

Introduction

An assessment of the proposed development and its impact on views is carried out from No. 7 and No. 9 Undine Street. This assessment is guided by a four step process identified by the Land and Environment Court as a planning principle. 

 

Step 1. “The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (eg of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, eg a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured.”

 

From No. 7 and No. 9 Undine Street, the key view that would be affected by the proposal is a relatively narrow horizontal band of ocean to the north-east between the horizon line and the tops of neighbouring and distant buildings and fences. It is a partial ocean view and does not include any “iconic” items or unoccupied land forms.  Refer to Photos 2-5 below.

Photo 2 – Direct north-eastern view from the southern corner of the ground floor terrace at No. 7 Undine Street from a standing position. The view is partially obscured by existing vegetation and fences.

 

 

 

 

Photo 3 – View to the north-east from No. 7 Undine Street’s first floor balcony adjoining a bedroom from a standing position. The view is partially obscured by rooftops & existing vegetation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 4 – View to the north-east taken from the north-eastern edge of No. 9 Undine Street’s first floor terrace in a standing position. The first floor terrace is adjacent to the dining area and kitchen of No. 9 Undine Street. The view is partially obscured by rooftops & existing vegetation.

 

 

 

 

Photo 5 – View to the north-east taken from the meal’s room of No. 9 Undine Street in a standing position. The view is partially obscured by rooftops & existing vegetation.

 

 

In addition, No. 7 and No. 9 Undine Street have larger views to the north which include extensive views over Lurline Bay and the various headlands and cliffs as far away as North Bondi. No. 7 Undine Street also enjoys partial views from a south-east (rear) facing bedroom window. It is a partial ocean view and does not include any “iconic” items or unoccupied land forms. 

 

Step 2. “The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.”

 

The main view in question from No. 7 Undine Street is from its ground floor rear (south-east) terrace and also from the north-east side first floor balcony (off a bedroom).  Both these views are across side boundaries and are best enjoyed from standing position, but are still available from a sitting position. In relation to the view from the first floor balcony, this view is difficult to retain as a significant portion of the view corridor is a side view across the roof of the existing single storey dwelling on the subject site, and any two storey dwelling on the subject site is likely to result in significant view loss from this balcony. The view from the ground floor terrace is easier to retain as it is a side view predominantly enjoyed across the rear yards of dwellings to the north-east.

 

The key view in question from No. 9 Undine Street is from the first floor rear (south-east) living area and terrace.  This view is also across side boundaries and is best enjoyed from standing position but is available from a sitting position. This view is also a side view predominantly enjoyed across the rear yards of dwellings to the north-east.

 

For both No. 7 and No. 9 the other view over Lurline Bay and the various headlands and cliffs to the north is from the first floor balconies to the front of the dwelling.  Both standing and sitting positions would enjoy excellent views in these locations.  No. 7 Undine Street also enjoys a partial ocean view from a south-east (rear) facing bedroom window. This view is across the rear boundary of the property and is best enjoyed from standing position but is still available from a sitting position.

 

Step 3. “The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.”

 

No. 7 Undine Street

The amended plans position the ground floor rear setback of the proposal behind the existing timber paling side boundary fence. Consequently, the proposal will result in a negligible loss of ocean view for No. 7 from its rear (south-east) terrace as illustrated by Photo 6 below. Therefore the view loss is considered to be negligible in this instance.

 

The first floor bedroom balcony to the north-east indicates that the occupants will still be able to enjoy a proportion of their ocean view to the east, although a significant portion of the view to the north-east will be lost. Refer to Photo 7 below. This view loss is considered to be severe.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 6. Montage of the impact of the proposal on ocean views from No. 7 Undine Street’s rear (south-east) terrace. 

 

 

 

Photo 7. Montage of the impact of the proposal on ocean views from No. 7 Undine Street’s side (north-east) balcony off a bedroom. 

 

 

No. 9 Undine Street

The rear setback of the solid wall of the first floor level of the proposal is setback further than 3 Undine Street beyond, and as such the proposed wall will result in negligible view loss to 9 Undine Street. This is illustrated in Photo 8. below. The first floor terrace to the rear of the proposed dwelling however will result in some view loss to No. 9 Undine Street, as can be seen in the photo montage in Photo 8.  The terrace is an open structure, and will only result in a small portion of the view from No. 9 Undine Street’s rear terrace, living area and kitchen to be lost. Therefore the view loss is considered to be minor. 

 

 

Photo 8. Montage of the impact of the proposal on ocean views from No. 9 Undine Street’s rear (south-east) terrace.

 

In addition to the above, and as evident from the site plan, the proposal will result in negligible view loss from the proposal on the northern views from both front balconies of No. 7 & No. 9 Undine Street.

 

Step 4. “The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.”

 

The proposal complies with Council’s DCP controls. The impact of the proposal on ocean views enjoyed from the rear ground floor terrace of No. 7 Undine Street, the south-east (rear) facing bedroom window on the first floor of No. 7 Undine Street, and the views enjoyed to the north from the front balconies to No. 7 and No. 9 Undine Street is considered to be negligible.

 

The proposal will have an impact on ocean views enjoyed from the south-east (rear) first floor terrace of No. 9 Undine Street. This impact is considered to be minor. Given the additional potential and amenity the first floor south-east (rear) terrace will provide to the proposed dwelling and that being an open structure it will only have a minor impact on the views from No. 9 Undine Street’s rear terrace, living area and kitchen, the proposal is considered to be reasonable in this regard.

 

The proposal will also have a severe impact on ocean views enjoyed from the side bedroom balcony to the north-east of the dwelling at No. 7 Undine Street. However, the view from this balcony is difficult to retain as a significant portion of the view corridor is a side view across the roof of the existing single storey dwelling on the site, and any two storey dwelling on the subject site is likely to result in significant view loss from this balcony. A more skilful design could not provide a substantial first floor level to No. 5 Undine Street, without having severe ocean view loss impacts on this balcony to No. 7 Undine Street.  Therefore the proposal is considered to be reasonable in this regard.

 

Summary: The amended proposal is not considered to result in any unreasonable impacts on views from No. 7 and No. 9 Undine Street.

 


Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

Key Action:       Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

That Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/734/2008 for permission to demolish the existing dwelling and construct a new two storey dwelling house at 5 Undine Street, Maroubra, subject to the following conditions: 

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered YAZ–0708 Sheet A02 Issue DA-2 Revision A, YAZ–0708 Sheet A03 Issue DA-2, YAZ–0708 Sheet A04 Issue DA-2 Revision A, YAZ-0708 Sheet A05 Issue DA-2, YAZ-0708 Sheet A06 Issue DA-2, YAZ-0708 Sheet A07 Issue DA-2, YAZ-0708 Sheet A08 Issue DA-2  Revision A, YAZ-0708 Issue DA-2 Sheet A09 Issue DA-2 and YAZ-0708 Sheet A14 Issue Number DA-2,  by Sanctum Design Consultants, dated 18.05.2009 and received by Council on the 19th May 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:

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be in general accordance with the External Finishes Schedule received by Council on the 10th October 2008.

 

3.       There must be no encroachment of the structure/s or associated articles onto Council’s road reserve, footway, nature strip or public place.

 

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

 

5.       The finished ground levels external to the building are to be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised (other than for the provision of approved paving or the like on the ground) without the written consent of Council.

 

6.       External lighting to the premises shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents.

 

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.       In order to preserve view corridors to the neighbouring dwellings at No. 7 and No. 9 Undine Street, no screens are to be provided to the rear first floor upper level terrace.

 

The following condition/s are imposed to satisfy the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable

Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$906, 070

1.0%

$9,060.70

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

13.     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)

 

14.     In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue an 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 an Occupation Certificate.

 

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

 

15.     External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to the adjoining premises.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans & specifications and development consent conditions must be kept on the site at all times and be made available to the Council officers and all building contractors for assessment.

 

18.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that all building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (Building Code of Australia).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

20.     The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or other certifying authority if the Principal Certifying Authority agrees), in accordance with sections 109 E (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 162A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, to monitor compliance with the relevant standards of construction, Council’s development consent and the construction certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected and a satisfactory inspection must be carried out, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction or finalisation of the works (as applicable).

 

The principal contractor or owner-builder (as applicable) must ensure that the required critical stage and other inspections, as specified in the Principal Certifying Authority’s “Notice of Critical Stage Inspections”, are carried out to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority and at least 48 hours notice (excluding weekends and public holidays) is to be given to the Principal Certifying Authority, to carry out the required inspection, before carrying out any further works.  Details of critical stage inspections carried out and copies of certification relied upon must also be forwarded to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

21.     A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site for the duration of the works, which contains the following details:

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

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

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

 

22.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with.

 

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

 

23.     The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, is to be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, in accordance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

At the time of this development consent, Long Service Levy payment is applicable on building work having a value of $25,000 or more, at the rate of 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

24.     An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any occupation of the building work encompassed in this development consent (including alterations and additions to existing buildings), in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

An Occupation Certificate must not be issued for the development if the development is inconsistent with the development consent.  The relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

25.     Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, a statement is required to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority or other suitably qualified person, which confirms that the development is not inconsistent with the development consent and the relevant conditions of development consent have been satisfied.

 

26.     Smoke alarms must be installed in each Class 1 building or residential dwelling in accordance with the relevant provisions of Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. – Housing Provisions.

 

Smoke alarms must comply with AS3786 – Smoke alarms and be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.  Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be included in the plans/specification for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

27.     The demolition of buildings and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials must be carried out in accordance with the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW, the NSW Department of Environment & Climate Change and Randwick City Council policies, including:

 

·          Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

·          WorkCover NSW Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·          The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

·          Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005)

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

28.     A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures.

 

The Demolition Work Plan must include the following information (as applicable):

·          The name, address, contact details and licence number of the Demolisher /Asbestos Removal Contractor

·          Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·          Method/s of demolition (including removal of any asbestos)

·          Measures and processes to be implemented to ensure the health & safety of workers and community

·          Measures to be implemented to minimise any airborne dust and asbestos

·          Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·          Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·          Date the demolition works will commence

 

The Demolition Work Plan must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA), not less than two (2) working days before commencing any demolition work.  A copy of the Demolition Work Plan must be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

If the work involves asbestos products or materials, a copy of the Demolition Work Plan must be provided to Council not less than 2 days before commencing those works.

 

Note it is the responsibility of the persons undertaking demolition work to obtain the relevant WorkCover licences and permits.

 

29.     Any work involving the demolition, storage or disposal of asbestos products and materials must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements:

 

·          Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

 

·          Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005)

 

·          A WorkCover licensed demolition or asbestos removal contractor must undertake removal of more than 10m2 of bonded asbestos (or as otherwise specified by WorkCover or relevant legislation).  Removal of friable asbestos material must only be undertaken by contractor that holds a current friable asbestos removal licence.

 

·          On sites involving the removal of asbestos, a sign must be clearly displayed in a prominent visible position at the front of the site, containing the words ‘DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS’ and include details of the licensed contractor.

 

·          Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005.

 

·          A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (ie an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council and the Principal certifying authority upon completion of the asbestos related works which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately and the relevant conditions of consent have been satisfied.

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development Section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

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

 

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

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

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

·          as otherwise required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

The report (including photographs) are required to detail the current condition and status of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon the adjoining premises, which may be affected by the subject works.  A copy of the dilapidation report is to be given to the owners of the premises encompassed in the report/s before commencing any works.

 

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

 

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

 

Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring or piling are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority for the development prior to commencing such excavations or works.

 

32.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 E of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that the adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times.

 

1)     If the development involves an excavation that extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, the person having the benefit of the development must, at the person’s own expense:

 

a)     protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

b)     where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

 

2)     The condition referred to in subclause 1) does not apply if the person having the benefit of the development consent owns the adjoining land or the owner of the adjoining land has given consent in writing to that condition not applying.

 

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

 

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

 

34.     Noise and vibration from any rock excavation machinery, pile drivers and all plant and equipment must be minimised, by using appropriate plant and equipment, silencers and the implementation of noise management strategies.

 

A construction noise and vibration minimisation strategy, prepared by a suitably qualified person is to be implemented throughout the works, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of works.

 

35.     A Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate or compliance certificate is to be forwarded to the principal certifying authority (and a copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not the principal certifying authority), detailing compliance with Council’s approval at the following stage/s of construction:

 

a)      Prior to construction of the footings or first completed floor slab (prior to the pouring of concrete), showing the area of the land, building and boundary setbacks and levels of the building.

 

b)      On completion of the erection of the building showing the area of the land, the position of the building and boundary setbacks and verifying the building has been constructed at the approved levels.

 

36.     Temporary toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site throughout the course of demolition and construction, to the satisfaction of WorkCover NSW and the toilet facilities must be connected to a public sewer or other sewage management facility approved by Council.

 

37.     Public safety must be maintained at all times and public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted, when work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

A temporary safety fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the perimeter of the site (unless the site is separated from the adjoining land by an existing structurally adequate fence, having a minimum height of 1.5 metres).  Temporary fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed of cyclone wire fencing, with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control, or other material approved by Council.

 

Temporary site fences are to be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

The public safety provisions and temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or public place, the written consent from Council’s Building Services section must be obtained beforehand and detailed plans are to be submitted to Council for consideration, together with payment of the weekly charge in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges.

 

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

 

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

·      location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·      location of building materials for construction;

·      provisions for public safety;

·      dust control measures;

·      site access location and construction

·      details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·      protective measures for tree preservation;

·      provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·      location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·      details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·      construction noise and vibration management;

·      construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

39.     During construction stages, sediment laden stormwater run-off shall be controlled using the sediment control measures outlined in the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

Details of the proposed sediment control measures are to be detailed in the Construction Site Management Plan which must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority or Council prior to the commencement of any site works.  The sediment and erosion control measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout construction.  A copy of the approved details must be forwarded to the Council and a copy is to be maintained on-site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

Details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures shall include; a site plan; indicating the slope of land, access points & access control measures, location and type of sediment & erosion controls, location of existing vegetation to be retained, location of material stockpiles and storage areas, location of building operations and equipment, methods of sediment control, details of drainage systems and details of existing and proposed vegetation.

 

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

 

 

a)       Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials, construction equipment or5 other activities must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time and the footpath, nature strip and road must be maintained in a clean condition and free from any obstructions, soil and debris at all times.

 

b)       Stockpiles of soil, sand, aggregate or other materials must not be located on any footpath, roadway, nature strip, drainage line or any public place and the stockpiles must be protected with adequate sediment control measures.

 

c)       Building operations such as brick cutting, washing tools or equipment and mixing mortar are not permitted on public footpaths, roadways, nature strips, in any public place or any location which may lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater drainage system.

 

d)       Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council.  Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Health Building and Regulatory Services section.

 

e)       Any part of Council’s road, footway or nature strip which is damaged as a result of the work must be repaired or replaced to Council’s satisfaction.

 

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

 

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

 

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

(Noise from domestic air conditioners)

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

        before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that adequate provisions are made for the management of waste from the development:

 

43.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage and removal of waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

44.     Demolition and construction wastes shall be managed in general accordance with the submitted Waste Management Plan dated 18/9/08 and received by Council on the 10th October 2008.

 

Where practicable waste materials must be re-used or recycled, rather than disposed. Details and receipts verifying the recycling and disposal of materials must be kept on site at all times and presented to Council officers upon request.

 

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

 

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

 

a)   $3000.00   -      Damage/Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

46.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate the applicant must meet all costs associated for a Council approved contractor to:

 

·        Construct a concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site including any associated works such as retaining walls, steps, guardrails, handrails etc.

Note: Steps on Council’s nature strip are to be located a minimum 2.50m back from the face of the Council kerb.

 

·      Remove any redundant concrete vehicular crossing and layback and to reinstate the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

 

These works are to be constructed to the satisfaction of Council’s Engineering Technical Officer.

 

47.     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.

 

48.     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.

 

49.     The driveway opening at the site frontage shall be a minimum 3.50m wide.

 

50.     The internal driveway is to be constructed in accordance with driveway gradients shown on the submitted plan known as:

 

 

·    Sheet A14 by sanctum Design Consultant dated 15.05.09.

 

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

 

51.     The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must be as follows:

 

·      Driveway Entrance – Southern Edge RL 21.20 AHD.

- Northern Edge RL 20.82 AHD.

 

·      Pedestrian Gate Entrance – RL 22.45 AHD.

 

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

 

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

 

53.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $536.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

54.     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.

 

55.     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.

 

56.     A Road / Asset Opening Permit must be obtained from Council prior to carrying out any public utility service works within or upon a road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place, in accordance with section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and all of the conditions and requirements contained in the Road / Asset Opening Permit must be complied with.

 

The owner/builder must ensure that all works within or upon the road reserve, footpath, nature strip or other public place are completed to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate for the development.

 

For further information, please contact Councils Road / Asset Opening Officer on 9399 0691 or 9399 0999.

 

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

 

57.     Generally all site stormwater shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrester pit that drains to Council's kerb and gutter.

 

The location and details of the proposed internal stormwater pipelines and silt arrestor pit and the infiltration area shall be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. A copy of the plans shall be forwarded to Council, prior to a construction certificate being issued, if Council is not the certifying authority.

 

Notes:

 

The sediment/silt arrestor pit shall be constructed:-

 

i.        within the site at or near the street boundary.

ii.       with a child proof and corrosion resistant fastening system (e.g. spring loaded jay-bolt).

iii.       with a minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes (preferably located in the walls of the pit at the floor level) and with a suitable geotextile material with a high filtration rating located around the weep holes.

iv.      with the pit floor being a minimum 300mm below the invert level of the outlet pipelines.

v.       with a galvanised heavy duty screen (Lysaght RH3030 Maximesh or similar) located over the outlet pipes draining to the infiltration pit and the kerb. (Similar to a Mascot GRC stormwater discharge control pit, product code DS3SDC).

 

58.     As the above site may encounter groundwater/seepage water within the depth of the basement excavation, the basement garage  or similar structures are to be suitably tanked and/or waterproofed. A Structural Engineer\Geotechnical Engineer shall certify the tanking & waterproofing has been carried out to an acceptable standard, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority. A copy of the certification is to be forwarded to Council.

 

Notes:-

 

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

 

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

 

59.     Any seepage water must be drained directly into an absorption pit within the site. Seepage water must not be drained from the site.

 

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

 

60.     Landscaping at the site must be installed in accordance with the Landscape Plans by Paul Scrivener Landscape Architects, sheets 1-2, job reference 08/1333DA1, issue A, dated 28.08.08, prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, and shall be maintained in accordance with these plans.

 

61.     All costs associated with upgrading/landscaping the Undine Street nature strip (as has been shown), shall be borne wholly by the applicant, who must liaise with Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613, prior to planting, with all works on this area of public property to be completed to Council’s satisfaction, prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1      Demolition, building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

·          A Construction Certificate has been obtained from Council or an Accredited Certifier

·          Council or an Accredited Certifier has been appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority for the development

·          Council and the Principal Certifying Authority have been given at least 2 days notice (in writing) prior to commencing any works.

 

Failure to comply with these important requirements is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.  Alternatively, Council may issue a penalty infringement notice (for up to $1,500) for each offence.

 

A2      A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Certification Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

·          Install or erect any site fencing, hoardings or site structures

·          Operate a crane or hoist goods or materials over a footpath or road

·          Placement of a waste skip or any other container or article.

 

For further information please contact Council’s Building Certification Services on 9399 0944.

 

A3      Specific details of the location of the building/s should be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the proposed building work will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

A4      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 June 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D37/09

 

 

Subject:                  12 Mundarrah Street, Clovelly

Folder No:                   DA/765/2008/A

Author:                   Lauren Hendriks, Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(2) modification of approved development to delete condition 3 of the original consent to allow for the construction of a carport to the front of the dwelling.

 

Ward:                      North Ward

 

Applicant:                Lester Suy Pip Willis & Emily Jane Whitworth

 

Owner:                         Lester Suy Pip Willis & Emily Jane Whitworth

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.Executive Summary

 

This section 96A modification application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as it was called up by Councillors Tracey, Smith and Woodsmith. 

 

The approved development involves alterations and new first floor addition to the existing semi-detached dwelling house including new front carspace, new fence/wall on front, side and rear boundaries, new storage and awning to the perimeter of the rear yard.

 

The proposed modification seeks consent to delete condition 3 to allow for construction of the originally proposed carport, with an increased front setback of 1 metre. The approved development included a new first floor addition and provision of a carspace to the front of the semi-detached dwelling.  Consequently, this application which seeks to allow for a carport over the approved carspace is considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same as the originally approved development and satisfies Section 96 of the Act.

 

The modified application was notified to the neighbouring properties that were notified of the original application.  One submission was received in regards to the application, however no objections were received.

 

The proposed carport does not comply with the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies in that the carport is located in front of the main building line and will compromise the local streetscape. Consequently, the subject application is recommended for refusal.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposed modification is to delete condition 3 to allow for the construction of a carport to the front of the dwelling. In the original application the proposed carport extended to the front boundary; however, in this section 96 application the proposed carport will be setback 1m from the front property boundary.

 

Note: This section 96 application originally included alterations to the northern boundary wall; however, the applicant has withdrawn these alterations from the current application. 

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Mundarrah Street. The adjoining property to the north is a four storey residential flat building with ground floor carparking, the adjoining property to the south is the adjoining semi-detached dwelling, which is single storey and the adjoining property to the rear is a double storey detached dwelling.  The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of single and double storey residential dwellings and residential flat buildings. 

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/765/2008 – Approved on 19th February 2009 for alterations and new first floor addition to the existing semi-detached dwelling house including new front carspace, new fence/wall on front, side and rear boundaries, new storage and awning to the perimeter of the rear yard.

 

Pl/19/2008 – The original application, DA/765/2008, was the subject of a formal pre-lodgement meeting held between the applicants and Council on 27th May 2008.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

5.1 Submissions

Owner – 10 Mundarrah Street, Clovelly

Issue

Comment

No objection to the application.

Noted.

Issue regarding access across the objector’s property for construction is unresolved and there is no agreement in place with the owners of No 12 regarding access to build/maintain the wall.

These are not planning matters and are therefore not included as a consideration in the assessment of the application. 

The owners of No 12 Mundarrah Street are proposing to plant trees along the wall and the build up of dropped leaves and of twigs between the wall and the existing fence could, in the absence of any openings in the wall to allow cleaning, be a problem attracting rats and other vermin.

No changes are proposed to the boundary wall on the subject site as originally approved and therefore an assessment of the wall is not included in the subject application.

 

5.2 Support

 

No letters of support have been received.

 

6.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

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

 

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

SEPP: BASIX requirements came into force for all new dwellings, dual occupancies and some transient residential accommodation where development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2004. A BASIX assessment is a mandatory component of the development approval process under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) Regulation 2004 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

 

Clause 55A of the EP & A Regulation requires that a new BASIX certificate be lodged for amended plans or where a section 96 modification makes a material change to the BASIX commitments as originally approved.

 

The proposed modification seeks to delete condition 3 of the original consent to allow for the construction of a carport to the front of the dwelling and will not result in any material changes to the BASIX commitments as originally approved. Therefore an amended BASIX certificate is not required.

 

Section 94 Contributions

The proposed modifications will not result in any changes to the Section 94 Contributions required under the original application.

 

Clause 29 - Foreshore Scenic Protection

The subject site is located in the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. Clause 29 of the RLEP 1998 requires Council to consider the probable aesthetic appearance of the proposal in relation to the foreshore. The subject site is not visible from the foreshore and therefore it will not detract from the scenic qualities of this foreshore location. The development is satisfactory with regard to Clause 29 of RLEP 1998.

 

Clause 10 – Zone 2A

(1) The objectives of Zone No 2A are:

(a)   to maintain the character of established residential areas, and

(b)   to allow for a range of community facilities to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, and

(c)   to enable redevelopment for low density housing forms, including dwelling houses, dual occupancy, semi-detached housing, and the like, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development, and

(d)   to allow people to carry out a range of activities from their homes, where such activities are not likely to adversely affect the environment of the locality, and

(e)   to enable a mix of housing types to encourage housing affordability.

 

An inspection of the site and surrounds revealed that there are no other carports or garages built to the front boundary in Mundarrah Street.  Consequently the proposed carport will not maintain the character of the established residential area and will detract from the visual appearance of the local streetscape.  The proposed carport is considered to be inconsistent with the general aims and objectives of the RLEP 1998.

 

(b)    Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2007

The proposed carport is inconsistent with the general aims and objectives of the draft RLEP 2007 in that the proposed carport will not maintain the established character of the street.

 

6.1 Policy Controls

(a) Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The subject application seeks to delete condition 3 of the original consent allow for the construction of a carport to the front of the dwelling.  The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan Preferred Solutions require that carspaces are of minimum dimensions 5.5m x 2.5m, and the proposed carspace is 5.64m x 3.07m, which complies. The Preferred Solutions also require that garages and carports located behind the building line where parking only available from the front of the site and that driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment. The carport is proposed to be located in front of the existing building line and is proposed to occupy 39% of the width of the allotment, and as such does not comply. 

 

Generally, structures to the front boundary of semi detached dwellings are not supported as they create the appearance of excessive bulk to the front of the dwelling.  In instances where they have been approved the structures are generally light weight, of minimal height, and there are other similar structures in the immediate vicinity. No other carports or garages are provided to the freestanding or semi-detached dwelling houses on the western side of Mundarrah Street, although there is a three storey residential flat building with ground level car parking located adjacent to the site at No 10 Mundarrah Street. There are no garages or carports built to the front boundary on the eastern side. 

 

It is acknowledged that in the subject application the carport has been setback an additional 1 metre from the front boundary to lessen the impact of the structure from the streetscape. However, the carport will still be visually dominating, detract from the appearance of the pair of semis and be out of character in the streetscape.  As such, it is considered that the proposed carport will not meet the relevant objectives and performance requirements for carports in the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP. Therefore, the subject application is recommended for refusal.

 

(b) Development Control Plan – Parking

The Development Control Plan for Parking requires that require that carspaces are of minimum dimensions 5.5m x 2.5m. The proposed carspace is 5.64m x 3.07m, which complies.

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

The proposed carport will detract from the appearance of the pair of semis and the local streetscape and is not suitable for the site.  Therefore, the subject application is recommended for refusal.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction:  Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modifications to the original development consent satisfy Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in that the amended proposal will constitute substantially the same development. The proposed carport does not comply with the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies in that the carport is located in front of the main building line and will compromise the local streetscape. Consequently, it is recommended that the section 96 application be refused.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the responsible Consent Authority refuse consent under Section 96AA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No DA/765/2008 for permission to modify approved development by deleting condition 3 of the original consent to allow for the construction of a carport to the front of the dwelling for the following reasons:

 

1.       The proposed development does not comply with the preferred solutions of Part 4.7 Garages Carports and Driveways of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies in that the carport is located forward of the building line and occupies 39% of the site frontage.

 

2.       The proposed development does not comply with the objectives and performance requirements of Part 4.7 of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies in that the carport will dominate and detract from the appearance of the pair of semis and local streetscape.

 

3.       The proposed development does not comply with Clause 10(1)(a) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 in that the carport is inconsistent with the character of the established residential area.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 June 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D38/09

 

 

Subject:                  164 Belmore Road, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/522/2008

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing building and construction of part 3, part 4 storey building comprising day surgery and medical centre with ground floor retail and car parking (Heritage Conservation Area).

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Vavayis& Associates

Owner:                         Mr M Lambros

Summary

Recommendation:     Deferred Commencement Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee as the proposed development involves a Voluntary Planning Agreement to provide for the payment of a Development Contribution for townscape improvement works to Council.

 

The subject application is for the demolition of existing building and construction of part 3, part 4 storey building comprising day surgery and medical centre with ground floor retail and car parking.

 

The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site.

 

The proposal does not comply with the maximum 2:1 FSR of the Randwick LEP 1998 as it has an FSR of 2.2:1. The proposal also breaches the maximum 12m building height having a maximum height of 15.4m to top of lift overrun and maximum 14.67m for the main building. Objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) have been submitted in relation to the breach of these controls. The non-compliances have been assessed and found acceptable as the breach in the FSR and height controls are minor and localised; the parts of the building affected by the breach will not be visually intrusive or bulky; and the additional density and height will not give rise to any detrimental impacts to surrounding uses in terms of overshadowing, overlooking, over bearing bulk and scale and loss of views.

 

The proposal also complies with the objectives and controls contained in the DCP – Randwick Junction with the exception of the maximum FSR and building height controls (which have been addressed in the SEPP 1 assessment).

 

The proposal does not comply with the requirements of the DCP – Parking in terms of the numerical carparking spaces required. The applicant has provided appropriate reasons in the submitted Traffic Report for the shortfall in carparking which have been assessed and considered reasonable.

 

The applicant has agreed to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement to provide for the payment of a Development Contribution to Council towards the cost of construction of townscape improvements including pavement and road upgrading within the Randwick Junction Town Centre. A deferred commencement condition will be applied to allow the agreement to be finalised prior to any consent becoming operable should approval be granted.

 

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

 

2.        The Proposal

 

The proposal is for the demolition of existing building and construction of part 3, part 4 storey building comprising day surgery and medical centre with ground floor retail and car parking. The proposed works include:

 

Ground Floor

·              At grade vehicular and pedestrian access from Belmore Road.

·              Retail tenancy with frontage to Belmore Road.

·              6 carparking spaces to the rear western end.

·              New internal stairwell and lift with foyer area.

·              Plant and services room

·              Garbage and Recycling area

 

First Floor

·              A single tenancy medical centre.

·              Lift and stairwell.

·              WC and plant room

 

Second Floor

·              Day surgery – operating suites with 2 operating rooms and 2 patient recovery areas containing a total of 11 recovery places, scrubbing area, patient and staff change rooms and nurse stations.

·              Staff room

·              Storage room

·              Lift and stairwell.

·              WC and plant room

 

Part Third Floor

·              Day surgery with waiting and reception area, and offices and admin areas.

·              A balcony facing but setback by maximum 14.5m from Belmore Road and wrapping around along the northern boundary.

·              Storage room

·              Medical gases store room

·              Lift and stairwell.

·              WC and plant room

 

The proposed building will have a gross floor area of 993.4 sqm.

 

The Statement of Environmental Effects advises that the medical facility as whole will have the following hours of operation - Mon to Sat 7:00am to 6:00pm

 

3.        The subject site and surrounding area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Belmore Road on the intersection of Belmore Road, Avoca Street and High Street.

 

Figure 1 : Aerial view of the subject site

 

The subject site has a generally rectangular shape except for a splayed rear boundary and a splayed front boundary to Belmore Road. It has a northern boundary of 36.41m; a front eastern frontage to Belmore Road of 13.41m; southern side boundary of 39.49m; and a western rear boundary of 12.23m. The site has an area of 447.56 sqm and falls gently east to west by approximately 2.91m.

 

Existing on the site is a two-storey attached brick building with flat roof containing an existing medical centre use with 7 carparking spaces on-site to the rear accessed via a single driveway from Belmore Road along the northern boundary. This vehicular access is enabled by an existing right-of-way which is 1.56m wide and straddles the boundary between the adjoining northern property at 160 Belmore Road and the subject site.

 

Development in the locality is predominantly comprised of a variety of late 19th and early 20th Century retail /commercial and residential structures which typify the visual qualities of suburban town centres established along Sydney’s tram routes of the period.

 

To the north:

On the opposite side of the existing right-of-way is a two storey brick and metal clad commercial building and glazed awning to Belmore Road, occupied by Orthosports, and of typical 1970s commercial design.  Buildings further north of the Orthosports building comprises singe to two-storey retail/commercial buildings with shopfronts to Belmore Road.

 

To the east:

Across Belmore Road is the junction of Belmore Road and Avoca Street marked by the statue of Captain James Cook. Immediately opposite the site are two buildings, known as “Corana” and “Hygeia”, and listed as Heritage Items in the Randwick LEP 1998 comprising c1890-1915 Victorian terraces.

 

To the south :

Mixed use building at 166-168 Belmore Road, located on the corner of Belmore Road and High Street and divided into two separate retail tenancies with separate forms of articulation and facade treatment to this corner.

 

To the west :

An existing at grade carpark servicing the existing 8 storey medical centre building at 66 High Street which is visible over the parapet of the existing building on-site when viewed from the Belmore Road street level. 

 

4.        Site History

 

The subject site has the following relevant history:

 

·      DA 7/1975 was approved on 14 March 1975 for use of the existing premises as a real estate agency and medical suites.

 

·      DA 146/1987 was approved on 14 July 1987 for the conversion of a portion of the ground floor area to provide additional facilities for the existing medical centre.

 

Apart from the above, there is no recent relevant history applicable to the subject site and development proposal.

 

5.        Community Consultation

 

The proposal was notified and advertised from 6 August 2008 to 20 August 2008 in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. In response, three submissions were objecting to the proposal for the following reasons:

 

 

Proposed FSR exceeds maximum FSR permitted resulting in an excessive bulk, scale and character.

 

Comment: Whilst the proposal exceeds the maximum permissible FSR 2:1 (895.12 sqm) with a proposed FSR of 2.2:1 (993.4 sqm), the proposal will be consistent with objectives of the business zone; have a bulk and scale that is not considered to be out of character in the context of existing development in the adjoining/surrounding land and is not considered to result in any detrimental impact on the amenity of adjoining residents (see assessment of SEPP No 1 Objection in Section 10.1.1 below).

 

Proposal exceeds maximum building height controls.

 

Comment: The increase in the building height over the maximum building height standards is confined to a limited area to the rear of the proposed development containing the part 4 storey level. The breach in the height limit is not considered excessive in terms of visual bulk and scale (as indicated in the assessment of SEPP No.1 Objection in Section 10.1.1 below) and does not give rise to unreasonable or detrimental amenity impacts on adjoining properties as assessed in Section 10.3.2.2 below.

 

Shortfall in carparking is contrary to DCP – Parking 

 

Comment: The deficiency in carparking is addressed in Section 10.4.2 of this report which assesses the applicant’s justification for the deficiency as outlined in the applicant’s Traffic Report. Essentially, the applicant has indicated that, the day surgery use generates a significantly lower carking demand than a medical centre use because day surgery consultations are longer, resulting in less patient turn over as day surgery patients do not normally have to wait while another patient is treated. Furthermore, day surgery patients and are not normally allowed to drive after surgery due to medication effects (patients are either dropped off by someone or arrive using another travel mode, usually a taxi and, vice versa, picked up by someone or by a taxi). If a patient is dropped off privately, the delivery vehicle usually does not stay at or near the premises due to the duration of treatment and recovery being substantially longer than that of a medical consultation with a GP. Accordingly, the deficiency in carparking has been estimated to be 12 carspaces rather than 30 spaces under the DCP(see assessment in Section 10.4.2 below) which reflects a more realistic parking demand inclusive of the day surgery use rather than one that is based solely on a medical centre use as dictated by the DCP -Parking. The applicant advises that this carparking deficiency can be accommodated in existing on-street parking facilities especially with the availability of carparking in the Randwick Plaza and Royal Randwick Shopping centre nearby.

 

All carparking provided on-site should be allocated to patients and carers and ambulance parking should be provided on-site.

 

Comment: As discussed in Section 10.4.2 below, the carparking demand of the proposed day surgeries will be significantly lower than a medical centre use as day surgery patients do not normally wait while another patient is treated and day surgery patients and are not normally allowed to drive after surgery due to medication effects (patients are either dropped off by someone or arrive using another travel mode, usually a taxi and, vice versa, picked up by someone or by a taxi). If a patient is dropped off privately, the delivery vehicle usually does not stay at or near the premises due to the duration of treatment and recovery being substantially longer than that of a medical consultation with a GP. Notwithstanding this, a condition will be applied requiring 3 carspaces provided to be allocated to patients with 1 to be allocated to the day surgery as a drop off space/ambulance bay and 2 to the medical centre.

 

The design of the proposal is not harmonious to the prevailing streetscape.

 

Comment: As discussed in Section 10.5.2 below, the design of the proposal is acceptable as (1) it provides a strong edge to Belmore Road in the form of a contemporary designed commercial/retail frontage at the  ground and 1st floor storeys; (2) it steps back the building from Belmore Road to reduce its bulk and scale; and (3) it replaces an existing building of undistinguished and dated design which has little architectural merit in terms of being identified as contributory item in the streetscape. In this regard, Council’s Heritage Planner advises in Section 6.1 below that:

 

“Given the nature of the neighbouring development in the vicinity of the site, the modern form, proportions and design of the new building and of its doors and fenestration are appropriate. Combined with the materials proposed these will help to mark it out as a contemporary building which will help to continue to provide a strong commercial edge to Belmore Road and counterbalance the historic buildings opposite the site and in the vicinity.”

 

Provision of pedestrian access in the adjoining right-of-way will create a danger/security concern in the right-of-way.

 

Comment: On the contrary, it is considered that the proposed pedestrian access (to the rear carpark and foyer/lift to the medical uses above) in the right-of-way will serve to “open-up” the existing right-of-way by facilitating public surveillance and monitoring of the right-of-way on account of the expected increase in pedestrian traffic to the rear carpark and main foyer/lift to the medical centre uses above. Additionally, a condition requiring appropriate lighting and signage in the right-of-way will be applied should approval be granted.

 

Proposal does not provide for undergrounding of cables.

 

Comment: Council’s policy for undergrounding of power cables applies to development with a cost of development of $2 million or more. The proposal has an estimated cost of development of $1.4 million and, as such, the requirement for undergrounding of power cables does not apply. However, a condition requiring aerial bundling of cables will still be applicable should approval be granted for the proposal.

 

6.        Technical Officer’s Comments

 

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

 

6.1      Heritage Comments

 

Council’s Heritage Planner advises as follows:

 

“The subject site is near the southern end of the Randwick Junction Conservation Area near the intersection of Belmore Road, Avoca Street, Mears Avenue and High Street. Neither it or its immediate neighbours are listed as individual heritage items in the Randwick LEP 1998. The site is occupied by a two storey medical centre which covers about half of the site. The DA proposes to demolish this and erect a new two/three and four storey building covering the whole of the land; this is to be used as a medical centre and day surgery spanning the upper three floors, with a shop, services and parking on the ground floor.

 

The DA is accompanied by a comprehensive and well prepared heritage impact statement (HIS) prepared in July 2008 by City Plan Heritage as part of the SEE. The HIS investigates the history of the site and the existing building but indicates that its date of construction ‘is not known at this stage’. There is some documentary evidence of earlier residential buildings on the site, but no surviving physical evidence. The existing building was converted from residential flats to real estate and medical suites under a 1975 development consent, and further alterations were undertaken in 1987. The HIS assesses the heritage significance of the building using the NSW Assessment Criteria and concludes that it fails to satisfy any of the criteria. I support this assessment. There would, therefore, be no objection on heritage grounds to demolition of the building.

 

The existing building is of undistinguished design and sits in a streetscape of similarly undistinguished mid to late 20th century buildings in the vicinity of the site on the western side of Belmore Road. None of these buildings appear to merit being identified as contributory items to the conservation area. More distinguished contributory buildings can be found on the eastern side of Belmore Road and in the surrounding area as follows:

 

§ Early Georgian Stone Building, c.1859, 200 Avoca Street

§ Statue of Captain James Cook, RN, corner Belmore Road and Avoca Street

§ Federation Commercial Building, c.1895, 127-129 Belmore Road

§ ‘Cooks Lodge’, c.1878, 119 Belmore Road

§ Commercial Building, c.1920, 120-126 Belmore Road

§ ‘Sandgate’, c.1870, 128 Belmore Road (listed on the State Heritage Register)

§ ‘Goldring House’, c.1886, 203-209 Avoca Street

§ ‘Corana’ and ‘Hygeia’, 211-215 Avoca Street.

 

The DCP identifies a number of important view corridors in the vicinity of the site; these connect the western side of Belmore Road near the site with significant streetscape elements to the south, south east and south west. The latter include the Early Georgian Stone Building and the statue of James Cook opposite the site listed above, ‘Corana’ and ‘Hygeia’ to the south east and elements to the south of the conservation area such as the Prince of Wales Hospital and the High Cross and Royal Hotel.

 

The new building proposed for the site is a well articulated simple modern flat roofed design. A two storey front section is proposed of a similar height to the neighbouring buildings, after which the building steps up approximately 2.2m to a third level and then a further 3.6m to a fourth. The overall effect would, in my opinion, be compatible with the height, scale, bulk and form of the neighbouring buildings and those in the vicinity of the site. The additional height would also offer an advantage by providing additional screening to the over-scaled multi-storey medical centre building in High Street visible over the parapet of the existing building in the photo above.

 

I note that the proposal significantly exceeds the maximum FSR and height prescribed in clauses 32 and 33 of the LEP. In my view, however, the building would not impact adversely on the conservation area or on the individual heritage items identified above, and hence no objection to it is raised on heritage grounds. The medical centre use is consistent with the use to which the building has been put for many years and is appropriate to its proximity to the hospital precinct.

 

Given the nature of the neighbouring development in the vicinity of the site, the modern form, proportions and design of the new building and of its doors and fenestration are appropriate. Combined with the materials proposed these will help to mark it out as a contemporary building which will help to continue to provide a strong commercial edge to Belmore Road and counterbalance the historic buildings opposite the site and in the vicinity.

 

The external colours proposed for the new building are described in the HIS and are considered to be acceptable in the very mixed context of the site.

 

The HIS recommends that a photographic record be made of the existing building prior to demolition commencing, but in my view given its lack of heritage significance this is not necessary.

 

Postscript

If Council accepts the SEPP1 objection and approves the additional FSR and height proposed, I recommend that it consider amending the LEP to permit a similar excess on other properties on the western side of Belmore Road. The controls should limit the height on the site frontage to a similar height to that proposed in this DA, with similar additional steps to those proposed in this DA.”

 

6.2      Development Engineering Comments

 

Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

“An application has been received for demolition of an existing medical centre and the construction of a medical centre, day surgery and retail unit at the above site.

 

Traffic Comments

Parking provision

Using Council’s DCP-Parking the proposed development would generate the following parking provision:

 

85 sq m of retail (1 space per 40 sq m):                       2.1 spaces

374 sq m medical centre (1 space per 25 sq m):            15.0 spaces

333 sq m Level 2 Day Surgery (1 space per 25 sq m):     13.3 spaces

162 sq m Level 3 Day Surgery (1 space per 25 sq m):     6.5 spaces

 

The total parking provision based on DCP-Parking is therefore 36.9 spaces, say 37 spaces.

 

The applicant’s Traffic Consultant has argued that a “Day Surgery” varies from a medical centre in that bookings are taken, patient numbers are limited (based on the number of surgery theatres), procedures are generally of a longer nature and patients are generally not able to operate a vehicle post operation and therefore are collected from the surgery or use public transport. The applicant has made an argument that the provision of 11 spaces is a more reasonable parking generation for the “Day Surgery”. If the reduced parking provision was to be accepted the calculated required parking provision would reduce from 37 spaces to 28 spaces.

 

The applicant proposes to provide 6 carspaces and therefore there is a parking deficiency ranging between 31 and 22 spaces. 

 

The Assessing Officer is advised that Development Engineering considers the deficiency to be high and the Assessment Planner is requested to liaise with the Development Engineer if there are other issues with the development application. The Development Engineer does not generally support developments that rely on on-street parking spaces to meet parking demand however it should be noted that the subject site suffers from geometric constraints and it is likely that any development of the site would result in some form of parking deficiency. It is also noted that the site, being part of Randwick’s commercial centre, is served extensively by public transport.

 

As the site is located within Randwick’s Commercial Centre the Assessing Officer is requested to consider imposing Section 94 contributions at the appropriate rate if the development is approved or to enter into a voluntary planning agreement (VPA). The Assessment Planner is advised that the voluntary planning agreement must provide a significant number of new parking spaces or alternatively provide for streetscape upgrade over a significant area in response to the high parking deficiency. The Assessment Planner is advised that, separate to the VPA, a condition requiring the applicant to fully reconstruct the area fronting the development site has been included within this report.

 

Landscape Comments

Standard landscape conditions have been included within this report.

 

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.

 

Service Authority Comments

At the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting on 8 November 2005, it was resolved on the motion of Councillors Nash and Belelli that:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Given that the proposed works will be greater than $1 million and less than $2 million the applicant will be required to meet all costs associated with replacing the overhead wires with Aerial Bundled Cables in the vicinity of the development site.

 

Awning Comments

The minimum clear distance from the existing footpath in Belmore Road 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.

 

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

 

Comment: The deficiency in carparking is addressed in Section 10.4.2 of this report which assesses the applicant’s justification for the deficiency as outlined in the applicant’s Traffic Report. Essentially, the applicant has indicated that, the day surgery use generates a significantly lower carking demand than a medical centre use (as applied for the proposal under the DCP – Parking). Based on the proposed use, and given the existing modal split between patients travelling by private car and those taking public transport/walking to the existing medical centre, the shortfall in carparking is effectively 12 carspaces. The applicant advises that this lower figure can be accommodated in existing on-street parking facilities especially with the availability of carparking in the Randwick Plaza and Royal Randwick Shopping centre nearby.

 

6.3      Building Comments

 

Council’s Building and Development Control Officer advises that no objections are raised to the proposed development subject to conditions should consent be granted.

 

6.4      Environmental Health Comments

 

The Environmental Health Officer advises as follows:

 

“Council is in receipt of a development application for the above premises, the proposal includes the demolition of the existing two storey building and the construction of a part three/part four storey development, to be used for the purpose of a medical centre and day surgery with retail tenancy at the ground floor.

 

The new building will provide for six car parking spaces to be located at the rear of the site and beneath the under-croft of the first floor of the proposed building.

 

The proposed hours of operation will be six days a week, 7am – 6pm.

 

The ground floor is proposed for a retail tenancy, the appropriate condition shall be imposed to ensure the correct approval is obtained prior to fit out.

 

The first floor will be occupied by a medical centre, the second floor and third floors will operate in conjunction as a day surgery, with the third floor accommodating administration and storage rooms and will only service the operating suites on the second floor.

 

An acoustic report has not been submitted in relation to the potential or existing noise sources, which may impact on the proposed development or the existing amenity of the surrounding environment, accordingly an acoustic report will be requested prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development.

 

Recommendation

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

 

7.        Master Planning Requirements

 

Clause 40A of Randwick LEP requires the preparation and adoption of a master plan for the redevelopment of sites having an area in excess of 4,000 square metres and which must be adopted and in force prior to the grant of development consent. The site has an area of 447.56 sqm and therefore is not subject to the master plan provision of the Randwick LEP 1998.

8.        Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

8.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The subject site is zoned General Business 3A and the proposal is permissible with development consent.

 

The controls applicable to land zoned General Business 3A are as follows:

Business 3A

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

32 – FSR

2:1 (895.12m2)

2.2:1 (993.4m2)

No (SEPP 1 Objection submitted)

33(1) – Building Height

Max 12m

Max 15.4m to top of lift overrun

Max 14.6m fro main building

No (SEPP 1 Objection submitted)

Other Clauses

Effect

Applies

Comment

46

Vicinity of Heritage Conservation Area and Heritage Item

Yes – Randwick junction Heritage Conservation Area and nearby Heritage Items

Yes – Heritage Assessment provided and met

 

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

 

Clause 22           Services

 

9.        Policy Controls

 

The following Development Control Plans are applicable in the subject site:

 

9.1      Development Control Plan – Randwick Junction

 

Compliance with relevant provisions of the DCP is as follows:

Controls

 

Provided / Proposed

Y / N

1.  Max 2:1 FSR and Max 12m Building Height as prescribed in the Randwick LEP 1998

1. Max 2.2:1 FSR and maximum 15.4m (top of lift overrun) and Max 14.6m (main building) building height

 

No (addressed in SEPP 1 Objections)

2.  Setback - New development to be built to the street alignment and to side boundaries of the allotment.

2.  Development is constructed to the street alignment and to the southern side boundary in line with neighbouring buildings which do not have any setbacks from streetfront and side boundaries.

Yes

3.  New development must address requirements for people with disability in AS 1428: Access and Mobility

3.  Grade access to ground floor retail tenancy and lift access to all floor levels, thus complying with relevant provisions of AS 1428: Access and Mobility. Plans indicate areas having appropriate wheelchair access and disabled toilets.

Yes

4.  Ground level commercial floorspace to incorporate “at grade” threshold access at street frontage.

4.  Plans indicate “at grade” access from Belmore Road to the commercial shopfront.

Yes

5.  All vehicular access and servicing areas to be in accordance with DCP - Parking.

5.  Proposed carpark and accessway are in accordance with the carparking dimensions and configuration of the DCP – Parking.

Yes

6.  No vehicular access points and loading/unloading facilities on Alison Road, Avoca Street and Belmore Road.

6.  No vehicular access / loading and unloading will be from Alison Road, Avoca Street and Belmore Road.  

Yes

7.  No carpark ventilation grills on Alison Road, Avoca Street and Belmore Road and carparks to be adequately screened to minimise visual impact and be well-lit for security.

7.  Carpark will be contained within rear undercroft area and forming part of the overall building envelope and thus suitably screened. Internal lighting to the relevant Australian Standard will be provided in the carpark.

Yes

8.  Commercial activity areas to achieve at least 4 hours sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on June 21 and use of appropriate shading devices to minimise direct summer sunlight.

8.  The only activity area proposed comprises a balcony  for the Day surgery on the part 4 level which will receive unlimited solar access between 9 am and 3 pm. Notwithstanding this, the windows on ground, 1st, 2nd and 3rd floors will be orientated east so as to achieve at least 4 hours sunlight in winter. Sunshading devices will be kept to minimum as the orientation of the subject site is eastwards which requires daylight to be maximised in winter.

Yes

9.  New development not to intrude on privacy of adjoining dwellings and important views and view corridors.

9   The wrap-around balcony on the part 4 storey level will be mainly orientated to Belmore Road and the right-of-way where no residential properties are present. There are no view corridors that will be affected by the proposal.

Yes

10    New development should achieve acceptable background noise levels for residential and commercial uses.

10    The applicant advises that the proposal will be designed to comply with the relevant Australian Standard for noise level and acoustic treatment.  Additionally, a standard condition requiring submission to Council of an acoustic report  prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, demonstrating and certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the development comply with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW Environmental Protection Authority Noise Control Manual & Industrial Noise Policy and conditions of Council’s approval.

  

Yes

11    Safety and security measures to be provided including avoidance of concealment/recessed areas in building facades and building design that addresses streetfront. 

11    The proposal has a design that enhances security and safety including a building that addresses the primary street frontage, windows serving the main lobby area and avoidance of any shadowed alcove areas in the building façade.

Yes

 

9.2    Development Control Plan – Parking

The DCP - Carparking requirement for medical centres is 1 space per 25 sqm and business (retail/commercial) premises 1 space per 40 sqm. When applied to the proposed floor area, the proposal will require for the retail tenancy (85 sqm) 2.12 carspaces, and for the medical centre (836 sqm) 33.44 carspaces, being a total of 36 carspaces. The proposal provides for 6 carspaces in the basement carpark resulting in a numerical shortfall of 30 carspaces.

 

The applicant’s justification for the shortfall is discussed in Section 10 below.

 

10.      Environmental Assessment

 

10.1    Statutory Controls – S79C(1)(a)

 

10.1.1 Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Clause 32 Floor Space Ratio

A floor space ratio of 2:1 is applicable to the subject site pursuant to Clause 32 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposed development has a non-complying FSR of 2.2:1.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

2.       The underlying object or purpose of the standard

 

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

 

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

 

3.       Consistency of the development with aims of the SEPP, objectives of the EP&A Act 1979 and local planning objectives for the locality

 

In relation to FSR, the Randwick LEP, amongst other things, seeks to allow for retail/commercial development in local business centres to ensure the vitality of the General Business Zone 3A and the urban environment. Accordingly, notwithstanding the increase in FSR, the proposed development will be consistent with the objectives 1(a) to 1(c) of the 3A zone. In this regard, the proposal will ensure these planning objectives for the zone are facilitated through the proposed development by providing opportunities for medical centre uses while providing opportunities also for a local retail tenancy without interfering with the primary business function of the zone and the amenity of the locality.

 

The scale of the proposal is consistent with the Desired Future Character objectives of the DCP – Randwick Junction, in that it will specifically :

 

·      “Encourage the provision of a variety of residential and commercial accommodation in Randwick Junction; and

 

·      Encourage a diverse range of commercial activities that enhances the vitality of Randwick Junction as a desirable business location”

 

Accordingly, the proposal will contribute towards a more economically viable retail core for this local business centre which is centrally located and in close proximity to public transport, enhanced employment opportunities for the local community and an orderly and economic use of land for both residential and commercial/retail uses within the Centre. Furthermore, the general medical practice and day surgeries proposed within the centre will have considerable synergy with the nearby medical precinct designated in the High Street hospitals and UNSW complex.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

“to encourage:

 

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

 

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

 

The variation from the FSR control is not inconsistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section (a) (i) and (ii), specifically, in that the resultant development would promote the orderly economic use and development of the subject land in line with the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

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

 

It is considered that a development strictly compliant with the prescribed FSR control would be unreasonable in the subject site because the non-compliant proposal can readily achieve the associated objectives of the standards as follows:

 

·      the proposal would allow for a reasonable redevelopment of the land with a bulk and scale that would be visually compatible with existing development in the locality which is mainly a mix of 2 to 3 storeys forms with high parapets on relatively small allotments. In this context, the proposal has been designed with a gradual setback from Belmore Road with the ground and first floors built to the street alignment, the second floor setback by maximum 4.5m behind the first floor parapet and the third floor setback by a maximum 18m (to the glass line). This setback and parapet arrangement significantly reduces the visual bulk and scale of the proposed building in the streetscape.

·      The proposal does not represent an overdevelopment of the site in that it maximises the usability of the land given its general business centre location on a main road and the good amenity available for each proposed medical tenancy in terms of solar access and ventilation available in the form of the proposed part-4 level common balcony.

·      the new building will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining and neighbouring properties in terms of solar access and privacy (see Section 10.5.2.2 below).

·      the proposal exhibits a design that implements an appropriate degree of articulation and facade treatment that complements existing development in the streetscape by combining a vertical stepped with appropriate material and feature detailing.   

·      the proposal has provided an elevated terrace/balcony on the part-4 storey level with light-weight framed glazed balustrade which has the effect of breaking the mass of the proposed building while ensuring good solar access and ventilation for the proposed medical centre uses on this floor.

 

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

 

5.       Whether the objection is well founded.

 

The applicant has stated the following reasons in the SEPP 1 Objection as to why compliance with the FSR standard is unreasonable and unnecessary:

 

·      “The proposed building has been designed so the ground and first floors are built to Belmore Road street alignment. The second floor is recessed behind the first floor parapet; and the third floor is setback 60% of the length of the building.

·      The style of the proposed development is consistent with the desired future character requirements of the Randwick Junction DCP 1999, in particular the requirement that new development ‘maintain and enhance the positive attributes of the existing built environment within Randwick Junction” and “that new development complements and contributes positively to the built environment of Randwick Junction” A part of facilitating new development that complements and contributes positively to the built environment is allowing a variation of floor space ratios and buildings which bring a high quality design to the area.

·      The non-compliant floor space ratio is due to the nature of the proposed uses on the site. The first floor of the building will be occupied by a medical centre, which will operate in isolation of the day surgery which will occupy the second and third floors. The second and third floors will operate in conjunction with accommodating administration and storage rooms, and will service the operating suites on the second floor. Patients will travel straight to the third level via the lift or stairs before proceeding to the second floor for treatment. General access to the second floor will not be permitted and patient access will only be permitted when accompanied by a staff member.

·      The proposed development has conforming bulk and scale in respect of the Junction locality , and that the building envelope is appropriate and compatible with “nearby and adjoining development: (as required by Clause 32).

·      Compliance with the FSR development standard is unnecessary with regard to the demonstrated consistency with the objectives of the standard and the absence of adverse impacts in terms of bulk and scale, overshadowing, loss of privacy, loss of solar access and loss of views.

·      There are not expected to be any adverse amenity impacts on the nearby and adjoining development, Belmore Road streetscape or the Junction precinct. Therefore, in this instance it would be unreasonable for the development to comply with a FSR of 2:1 as it would significantly restrict the reasonable operation of the day surgery and medical centre.

 

Additionally, in the SEPP 1 Objection, the applicant has:

 

§  Articulated the underlying and stated objectives of the standard clearly.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Clause 33           Building Height

 

Clause 33 of the Randwick LEP 1998 sets a maximum 12 metre building height limitation in the Local Business 3A zone as measured from existing ground level. The proposal would have a maximum building height of approximately 15.4m to the top of lift over-run and a maximum 14.6m for the main building.

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards (SEPP 1) in respect to the non-compliance with the maximum permissible building height standard and has argued that strict compliance with clause 33 of Randwick LEP No 1998 is unreasonable and unnecessary. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP No. 1 objection the following matters are addressed:

 

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

 

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

 

2.       The underlying object or purpose of the standard

 

The underlying objectives of the standard, as outlined in Randwick LEP 1998, are to:

 

·      Minimise the impact of the development on adjoining the nearby land;

·      Control the bulk and scale of development through the imposition of appropriate height limits and

·      Ensure that there is a sympathetic transition between the prevailing scale and character of existing building in the locality and new development.

 

In addition, the underlying purpose of the building heights standard as stated in Randwick LEP 1998 is;

 

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

 

3.         Consistency of the development with aims of the SEPP, objectives of the EP&A Act 1979 and local planning objectives for the locality

 

The proposed development will be consistent with all the objectives of the 3A zone as outlined in Clause 13 of the Randwick LEP in that it will promote the development of land in accordance with a location that has been identified by Council as suitable to be used as a general business centre resulting in a more economically viable business core for this local centre along Belmore Road which is centrally located and in close proximity to public transport. The proposal will also enhance employment opportunities for the local community, and an orderly and economic use of land for both residential and commercial/retail uses within the local centre with minimal adverse environmental and amenity impacts on neighbouring uses. Specifically, in relation to height, the proposed development will provide an appropriate builtform and edge to Belmore Road generally consistent with the builtform and street edge effects envisaged under the Randwick LEP 1998 given the mixed local business characteristics of the site.

 

Additionally, the height of the proposed development will not contradict the Desired Future Character objectives of the DCP – Randwick Junction, which seek, amongst other things, to :

 

·      “Encourage the provision of a variety of residential and commercial accommodation in Randwick Junction; and

 

·      Encourage a diverse range of commercial activities that enhances the vitality of Randwick Junction as a desirable business location”

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

“to encourage:

 

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

 

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

 

The variation from the height standard is not inconsistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section (a) (i) and (ii), specifically, in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and development of the subject land in line with the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

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

 

It is considered that a development compliant with the prescribed height control would be unreasonable in the subject site in that

 

·      the proposal will have a height, bulk and scale that would not be visually intrusive in the existing streetscape as it will distribute the proposed floor area over three varied height forms expressed by the proposed gradual setback from the Belmore Road alignment. 

·      The portion of the building that is non-compliant in height is localised/confined to the top part-4 storey section which will occupy approximately 55% of the building footprint to the rear part of the subject site away from Belmore Road.

·      the additional height does not represent a distortion to the redevelopment potential of the land given that the adjoining allotment immediately to the west of the subject site has an existing 8 storey building at 66 High Street which is visible from Belmore Road. The part-4 storey portion of the proposed building will assist in screening the view of this dominant adjoining building from Belmore Road.

·      The two storey section of the building that will be built to the Belmore Road boundary will provide an appropriate building edge in along Belmore Road streetscape As such, effectively, in terms of bulk and scale, the proposal will not be out of character with the existing two storey buildings to the north and south of the subject site.

·      A measure as to the suitability of the development is the extent of impact to adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing. The upper-most level of the proposal will not result in excessive overshadowing impacts to adjoining properties during the midwinter period as indicated in the accompanying shadow diagrams. The proposal will also have minimal impact in terms of loss of privacy and views (see Section 10.5.2.2 below)

 

The development meets the stated and underlying objectives of the height standard. As such it is unnecessary and unreasonable to enforce the height standard in the circumstances of the case.

 

5.      Whether the objection is well founded.

 

The applicant has stated the following reasons in the SEPP 1 Objection as to why compliance with the building height standard is unreasonable and unnecessary:

 

·      “The proposed building has been designed so the ground and first floors are built to Belmore Road street alignment. The second floor is recessed behind the first floor parapet; and the third floor is setback 60% of the length of the building.

·      The building façade has been well articulated and designed to improve the appearance of the building when viewed from the Belmore Road streetscape and the public domain. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposal is “consistent with the redevelopment potential” of the subject site (as required by Clause 33 of the LEP).

·      The design of the proposed development is consistent with the desired future character requirements of the Randwick Junction DCP 1999, in particular the requirement that new development ‘maintain and enhance the positive attributes of the existing built environment within Randwick Junction” and “that new development complements and contributes positively to the built environment of Randwick Junction”. A part of facilitating new development that complements and contributes positively to the built environment is allowing a variation to maximum building height control and providing buildings which bring a high quality design to the area.

·      The non-compliant floor space ratio is due to the nature of the proposed uses on the site. The first floor of the building will be occupied by a medical centre, which will operate in isolation of the day surgery which will occupy the second and third floors. The day surgery requires the occupation of two floors due to the required separation of the administration, patient waiting room and storage facilities from the operating and recover rooms.

·      The use of the building for a medical and day surgery requires that ambulance access be provided onsite. This access will be provided by the existing driveway from Belmore Road to the carpark located on the ground floor to the rear of the proposed building. In order to accommodate ambulance parking within the carpark, the floor to ceiling height must be a minimum of 3.9m in accordance with ambulance service access requirements. This results in the increased building height at the rear of the proposed building. Accordingly, and to mitigate any impact from this additional height, the second and third floor levels are recessed so as not to punctuate important views from existing vantage points within the Randwick Junction townscape.

·      Compliance with the building height development standard is unnecessary with regard to the demonstrated consistency with the objectives of the standard and the absence of adverse impacts in terms of bulk and scale, overshadowing, loss of privacy, loss of solar access and loss of views.

·      There are not expected to be any adverse amenity impacts on the nearby and adjoining development, Belmore Road streetscape or the Junction precinct. Therefore, in this instance it would be unreasonable for the development to comply with a FSR of 2:1 as it would significantly restrict the reasonable operation of the day surgery and medical centre.

 

Additionally, in the SEPP 1 Objection, the applicant has:

 

§  Articulated the underlying and stated objectives of the standard clearly.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Clause 22    Services

 

Clause 22 states that Council may grant consent to the carrying out of development where it is satisfied that adequate facilities for water supply, sewage removal/disposal and drainage are available. All necessary services will be provided for the approved development given its existing urban location within the Randwick Junction Commercial Centre and the existing availability of services for the subject site.

 

Clause 46 – Development in the vicinity of heritage items, heritage conservation areas and known or potential archaelogical sites

 

Clause 46 of RLEP 1998 relates to development in the vicinity of heritage items and heritage conservation areas which requires Council to consider the effect of such development on the heritage significance of the area or item. The subject site lies within the Randwick Junction Heritage Conservation Area. A Heritage Impact Assessment has been prepared by City Plan Heritage and lodged with the application which has been assessed by Council’s Heritage Planner. The Heritage Planner raises no objections to the proposed development as indicated in Section 6.1 above.

 

10.2  Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies – S79C(1)(a)

 

SEPP 2004 – Application of Development Standards

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

10.3  Any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93E, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93E

 

A Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) is proposed between the developer and Council, pursuant to Section 93E of the Act. Under the agreement, the developer will pay a lump sum Development Contribution of $93,380.00 to Council which will be applied to the cost of construction of the townscape improvements including pavement and road upgrading within the boundaries of the Randwick Junction Town Centre in the General Business Zone 3A as planned to be carried out by Council.

 

The proposed planning agreement involves specific purposes listed in clause 2.4 of Council’s Planning Agreements Policy, as it would meet demand created by the proposed development for new public infrastructure and secure planning benefits for the public. The proposed agreement also satisfies the acceptability test set out in clause 2.5 the Planning Agreements Policy through:-

 

·      Serving proper planning purposes, having regard to statutory planning controls and providing for a reasonable means of achieving that purpose.

·      Producing outcomes that meet the general values and expectations of the community and protect the public interest.

·      Promoting Council’s strategic objectives for planning agreements and conforming to the principles governing the Council’s use of planning agreements.

 

The final details of the VPA still require further notification and acceptance by Council.  Accordingly, there is a need to grant deferred commencement development consent to ensure that the VPA is in place prior to the consent becoming operable.  The details of this deferred commencement are provided in the recommendation of this report. 

 

10.4  Policy Controls– Section 79C(1)(a)

 

10.4.1                 DCP – Randwick Junction

Section 9.1 above indicates that the proposal would comply with all the provisions of the DCP – Randwick Junction.

 

10.4.2                 DCP – Parking

The proposal will provide 6 carspaces in the basement carpark resulting in a shortfall of 30 carspaces compared to the DCP – Parking requirement of 36 carspaces. The applicant’s Traffic Report prepared by TEF provides the following assessment in support of the shortfall in carparking:

 

·      The car parking rate in the DCP – Parking applies to “medical centres”. However, the proposed day surgery use on the 2nd and 3rd floors do not operate similarly to medical centres in that :

 

§ Day surgery appointments are longer and their times are more strictly adhered to than at medical centres. Due to this arrangement, day surgery patients do not normally have to wait while another patient is treated (that is, the number and turnover of patients waiting to be treated in day surgery is significantly less than in medical centres).  

 

§ Day surgery patients are not normally allowed to drive after surgery due to medication effects. Typically at day surgeries, patients are either dropped off by someone or arrive using another travel mode, usually a taxi. If a patient is dropped off privately, the delivery vehicle usually does not stay at or near the premises due to the duration of treatment and recovery being substantially longer than that of a medical consultation with a GP.  Because the area around the medical centre is a well established retail centre, it is possible that people who deliver patients would stay in the area for shopping, however in this case their parking demand would be attributed to the retail uses rather than to the subject day surgery. 

 

§ Substantial floor areas at the day surgeries are those which, unlike medical suites, do not generate parking demand or trips. These include pre-operative and recover beds and recliner chairs. The time spent by patients in these areas before and after operations is part of the overall treatment. In effect, day surgeries require more room per patient than medical suites.

 

·      Only two patients can be operated upon at any one time in day surgery, and therefore patients are expected to arrive two at a time with or without accompanying persons. The time periods between appointments would depend on the day surgery specialisation and therefore on the typical duration of operations. The maximum number of recovery places is 11, which effectively limits the total number of patients to 1 as well. Accordingly, only two patients will arrive at any one time, generating short term parking for one (1) space.

 

·      The number of staff in pre-operative and recovery areas is lower compared to medical suites of the same size. Typically, one nurse would be sufficient to look after the designated recovery places in the proposed day surgery. The likely parking demand generated by the day surgery, based on the number of staff required would amount to 13 people. Staff car usage rate at the existing centre is 75% (12 drivers out of 16 staff). Applying this rate to the proposed staff number in the day surgery results in a lower staff parking demand of 10 spaces.

 

In view of the above, the total parking demand generated by the proposed development is estimated to be:

 

Day surgery on 2nd and 3rd floors : 1 patient + 10 staff = 11 car spaces.

Medical centre on 1st floor : 15 carspaces

Retail tenancy on ground floor = 2 carspaces

Total = 28 carspaces

 

The provision of 6 carspaces in the proposed development results in a shortfall of 22 carspaces. The traffic consultant advises that, when the existing shortfall of 10 carspaces for the existing medical centre use is considered (given that a similar medical centre is proposed to be reinstated in the proposed development), the relative shortfall in carparking, in effect, will be 12 carspaces. The applicant maintains that this relative shortfall is acceptable and reasonable in terms of the existing availability of public transport including bus services in the Randwick Junction town centre.

 

The parking analysis in the applicant’s Traffic Report is considered reasonable especially in view of the ready availability of frequent bus services on Belmore Road and the existence of a multiple bus stop 10m from the subject site on Belmore Road.

 

It is noted that the applicant has agreed to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) with the Council for townscape improvements relating to pavement and road upgrading within the Randwick Junction town centre. The VPA is discussed in Section 10.3 above, under the Section 79c consideration about planning agreements.

 

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

 

10.5.1        Natural Environmental Impacts

The subject site contains existing residential/commercial buildings and associated external paved/slab areas within an existing built-up area in the Randwick Junction town centre.  As such, there are no threatened species, populations or ecological communities or habitats that would be affected by the proposed development either within, or in the vicinity of, the development site.

 

10.5.2        Built Environmental Impacts

 

10.5.2.1    Urban Design and Heritage

The proposal will have a modern design with rendered brick exterior for the ground and 1st floor to be consistent with the two existing adjoining brick buildings and the overall mixed range of texture and finish of materials on Belmore Road. The setback  3rd and part-4 storey levels will be constructed in pre-finished board cladding to provide a more appropriate back-drop to the lower levels. Glazed panelling to the street front on the ground floor will be consistent with the commercial nature of the streetscape.

 

While an indicative sample of the material for the exterior of the proposal has been provided, it is considered appropriate that a condition be applied requiring greater detailing of all colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building so as to ensure compatibility and maintain the integrity and amenity of the building within the streetscape and overall heritage conservation area.

 

In terms of height and scale, the proposal will have a stepped appearance away from Belmore Road whilst maintaining a solid edge to Belmore Road at Ground and 1st floor storeys. This results in a visual bulk and scale that is non-intrusive and complementary to the adjoining and surrounding development within the Randwick Junction streetscape.

 

The development application submission includes a Heritage Impact Statement in accordance with Clause 43 of the Randwick LEP 1998 which has been assessed by Council’s Heritage Planner. Council’s Heritage Planner advises that the proposed building  generally is of a scale compatible with the height, scale, bulk and form of the neighbouring buildings and those in the vicinity of the site. Specifically, the Heritage Planner advises that “the additional height (of the proposal) would … offer an advantage by providing additional screening to the over-scaled multi-storey medical centre building in High Street visible over the parapet of the existing building (on-site)”. Additionally, the Heritage Planner notes that the proposed building would not impact adversely on the conservation area or on the nearby individual heritage items identified in the Randwick LEP.

 


10.5.2.2    Sunlight, Privacy and Views

 

10.5.2.2.1 Sunlight

At 9am shadows from the proposal will fall almost entirely onto the adjoining existing at grade carpark servicing the existing 8 storey medical centre building at 66 High Street and limited rear section of the existing retail/commercial building at 166-168 Belmore Road. By 12 noon the proposal will overshadow the roof of the existing retail/commercial building at 166-168 Belmore Road which is built to the common northern boundary with the subject site. By 3:00pm the proposal will predominantly overshadow Belmore Road. Overall, the overshadowing impact is considered reasonable and acceptable falling predominantly onto carpark and road areas and adjoining commercial/retail building with minimal, if no, impact on any adjoining residential properties.

 

10.5.2.2.2 Privacy

The proposal will be entirely for a day surgery and medical centre use with fixed glazed windows mainly to medical practices/offices facing Belmore Road on all levels and facing the existing right-of-way from the part 4 storey level. All these openings mainly will face existing commercial/retail uses with little, if no, loss of privacy to any residential uses. Overall, the proposal will be acceptable in terms of privacy.

 

10.5.2.2.3 Loss of views

The proposal will not affected any view corridors given the low to medium mixed use nature of the surrounding development within a relatively flat topographical context that characterises the Randwick Junction town centre.

 

10.5.2.3    Traffic and access

The applicant’s Traffic Report indicates that the new proposal will result in an additional 6 vehicular trips per hour during both peak period over and above the traffic generated by the existing medical centre. This traffic generation is expected to result in a very low traffic impact in the surrounding road network which is considered acceptable.

 

The applicant advises that a loading and unloading zone is not provided on-site due to the space constraints within the basement carpark. Additionally, the applicant advises that the due to the nature of the proposed use (ie., day surgery/medical centre) only a small number of deliveries are expected which will predominantly involve couriers and other small vehicles. Accordingly, a dedicated loading/unloading zone is not considered necessary for the day surgery/medical centre use. The applicant’s advice is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

10.5.2.4    Ecologically Sustainable Development

The proposed development will maximise daylight penetration into the day surgery/medical uses on the part 3rd floor with its east and north facing wrap around balcony. The proposal will also achieve a good balance in the use of construction material that assists in achieving an appropriate level of thermal massing.

 

The proposed development will be well served by public buses along Belmore Road, allowing for a significant degree of patronage by public transport from the surrounding locality and beyond in keeping with the promotion of public transport usage as a primary means of enhancing ecological sustainability and the reduction of greenhouse gases. 

 

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

 


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

The proposal will increase the availability of services, in this case day surgery and medical services in the Randwick Junction town centre. The proposal will promote the key directions and actions for the Randwick City Plan and the objectives of the Business 3A zone contained in the Randwick LEP 1998 especially being a use that is complementary to the established medical precinct bounded by High Street, Avoca Road and Barker Street. The added effect of the proposal would be to bring more people to the Randwick Junction town centre thus enhancing the viability of the town centre both in economic and institutional terms.

 

Overall the proposal presents a positive impact within the site and locality.

 

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

The subject site is zoned General Business 3A and the proposed day surgery/medical centre use is permissible in the zone. The subject site is therefore suitable for the proposed development and use whilst retaining the existing and desired future character of the locality and maintaining the integrity of the heritage conservation area. The site is well located within the Randwick Junction town centre with public bus services available directly on Belmore Road.

 

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

The DA was notified and advertised from 6 August 2008 to 20 August 2008. Three submissions were received as described and addressed in Section 5 above.

 

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

The proposed development will be in the public interest as it will provide a day surgery/medical facility in a location within the Randwick Junction Town Centre that is highly accessible by public buses and private vehicles. In addition, the proposal will complement and consolidate the role and function of the Randwick Junction town centre in accordance with the Randwick City Plan and the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in urban design and development. 

Direction:          Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site.

 

The proposal does not comply with the maximum 2:1 FSR and the maximum 12m building height standard of the Randwick LEP 1998. Objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) have been submitted in relation to the breach of these controls. The non-compliances have been assessed and compliance with the standard is considered to be unnecessary and unreasonable in eth circumstances of the case.

 

The proposal does not comply with the requirements of the DCP – Parking in terms of the numerical carparking spaces required. The applicant has provided appropriate reasons for the shortfall in carparking which have been assessed and considered reasonable. Additionally, the applicant has agreed to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement to provide for the payment of a Development Contribution to Council towards the cost of construction of townscape improvements including pavement and road upgrading within the Randwick Junction Town Centre. The final details of the VPA will require further notification and acceptance by Council.  Accordingly, there is a need to grant deferred commencement development consent to ensure that the VPA is in place prior to the consent becoming operable. 

 

The proposal will have minimal impact on the amenity of surrounding properties in terms of solar access, privacy and views.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.       THAT Council support the objection under State Environmental Planning No. 1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 32 and 33 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (as amended), relating to maximum floor space ratio and maximum building height, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of the clauses and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

AND

 

B.       THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent as a Deferred Commencement under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No DA/522/2008 for the demolition of existing building and construction of part 3, part 4 storey building comprising day surgery and medical centre with ground floor retail and car parking (Heritage Conservation Area) at 164 Belmore Road, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

Deferred Commencement Conditions

 

This consent does not operate until the applicant satisfies the Council, in accordance with the Regulations, as to all matters specified in this condition:

 

D1)    Enter into a voluntary planning agreement (VPA) to the satisfaction of the council generally in accordance with the Draft VPA annexed to this development consent providing for the payment of a lump sum Development Contribution of $93,380.00  by bank cheque to Randwick City Council which will be applied towards the cost of construction of townscape improvements including pavement and road upgrading within the boundaries of the Randwick Junction Town Centre in the General Business Zone 3A as planned to be carried out by Council. 

 

D2)    Immediately upon execution the applicant shall register upon the title to the land the VPA.

 

D3)    Council has acknowledged compliance with this condition in writing.

 

Period within which evidence must be produced

 

The applicant must produce evidence to Council sufficient enough to enable it to be satisfied as to those matters above within 365 days (1 year) of the date of determination.

 

Clause 95(4) of the Regulation:

 

"The applicant may produce evidence to the consent authority sufficient to enable it to be satisfied as to those matters and, if the consent authority has specified a period for the purpose, the evidence must be produced within that period."

 

No development can lawfully occur under this consent unless it operates.

 

Note:  Nothing in the Act prevents a person from doing such things as may be necessary to comply with this condition. (See section 80(3) of the Act)

 

Note:  Implementing the development prior to written confirmation of compliance may result in legal proceedings. If such proceedings are required Council will seek all costs associated with such proceedings as well as any penalty or order that the Court may impose. No Construction Certificate can be issued until all conditions including this condition required to be satisfied prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate have been satisfied.

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered D0001 B, D0002 A, D1001 E,  D1002 E, D2001 E and D3001 E, dated 31 January 2008, and received by Council on 28 July 2008, the application form, and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the details/amendments approved pursuant to the deferred commencement conditions and by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

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

 

2.       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.

 

3.       Appropriate lighting and signage in the adjoining right-of-way to maintain pedestrian safety and security shall be installed. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

4.       There must be no encroachment of the structures including eaves, gutters, hoods and similar structures or attachments onto any adjoining premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place, unless permission has been obtained from the owner/s of the adjoining land accordingly.

 

5.       The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent.  Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

6.       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.

 

7.       All signage and advertising must be in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan (DCP) for Outdoor Advertising and development consent must be obtained for all signage and advertising in accordance with Council’s Local Environmental Plan 1998 (unless exempt from approval under Council's DCP for Exempt and Complying Development).

 

All advertising and signage must be written in English language or both English and relevant non-English language equally.  The use of non-English language advertising only is not permissible.

 

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

 

8.       To ensure infill development cohesive with the established Randwick Junction Conservation Area, The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be as indicated on the development application. Any additional external finishes are to be commensurate in quality with the proposed finishes and compatible with the surrounding buildings in the heritage conservation area.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures in the form of a schedule or brochure and sample board are to be confirmed by submission to and approval by Council’s Director City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11.     All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), in accordance with Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 for a building of mixed classifications including Classes 9a, 5/6 and 7a.

 

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

 

A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans & specifications and development consent conditions must be kept on the site at all times and be made available to the Council officers and all building contractors for assessment.

 

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

 

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

 

ii)       appoint a principal contractor for the building work and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing, and

 

iii)       notify the principal contractor of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority, and

 

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

 

14.     The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or another certifying authority if the Principal Certifying Authority agrees), in accordance with sections 109 E (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 162A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, to monitor compliance with the relevant standards of construction, Council’s development consent and the construction certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected in accordance with section 81A (2) (b1) (ii) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and a satisfactory inspection must be carried out, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction or finalisation of the works (as applicable).

 

Documentary evidence of the building inspections carried out and details of compliance with Council’s consent is to be maintained by the Principal Certifying Authority.  Details of critical stage inspections carried out and copies of certification relied upon must also be forwarded to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

The principal contractor must ensure that the required critical stage and other inspections, as specified in the Principal Certifying Authority’s “Notice of Critical Stage Inspections”, are carried out to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority and at least 48 hours notice (excluding weekends and public holidays) is to be given to the Principal Certifying Authority, to carry out the required inspection, before carrying out any further works.

 

15.     A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site for the duration of the works, which contains the following details:

 

·       name, address, contractor licence number and telephone number of the principal contractor, including a telephone number at which the person may be contacted outside working hours,

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

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

 

16.     An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any occupation of the building work encompassed in this development consent, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

An Occupation Certificate must not be issued for the development if the development is inconsistent with the development consent.  The requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

17.     Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, a statement is required to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority, which confirms that the development is not inconsistent with the development consent and the relevant conditions of development consent have been satisfied.

 

Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority together with any other certification relied upon must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

18.     The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, is to be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, in accordance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

At the time of this development consent, Long Service Levy payment is applicable on building work having a value of $25,000 or more, at the rate of 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

20.     A Fire Safety Certificate must be submitted to Council prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

A single and complete Fire Safety Certificate must be provided which includes details of all of the fire safety measures contained in the building and as detailed in the fire safety schedule attached to the Construction Certificate.

 

Prior to issuing any Occupation Certificate the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that all of the relevant fire safety measures have been included and are sufficiently detailed within the Fire safety Certificate.

 

A copy of the fire safety certificate must be displayed in the building near the entrance and a copy must be forwarded to the NSW Fire Brigades.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

24.     The adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times.

 

If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of any building located on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must:

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

·       effectively support  the excavation and building; and

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

 

Notes

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

25.     Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and (except as detailed below) between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays.

 

All building, demolition and associated site works are strictly prohibited on Sundays, Public Holidays and also on Saturdays adjacent to a Public Holiday.

 

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

 

26.     A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and a copy is to be provided to Council upon commencement of works (or as may otherwise be specified by the PCA or Council), certifying that noise and vibration emissions from the construction of the development satisfies the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, Councils conditions of consent and relevant Standards relating to noise and vibration.  In support of the above, it is necessary to submit all relevant readings and calculations made.

 

Any recommendations and requirements contained in the report are to be implemented accordingly and should noise and vibration emissions not comply with the terms and conditions of consent, work must cease forthwith and is not to recommence until details of compliance are submitted to the PCA and Council.

 

27.     A Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate or compliance certificate is to be forwarded to the principal certifying authority (and a copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not the principal certifying authority), detailing compliance with Council’s approval at the following stage/s of construction:

 

a)     Prior to construction of the first completed floor/floor slab (prior to pouring of concrete), showing the area of land, building and boundary setbacks and verifying that the building is being construction at the approved levels.

 

b)     On completion of the erection of the building showing the area of the land, the position of the building and boundary setbacks and verifying the building has been constructed at the approved levels.

 

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

 

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

 

29.     Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and (except as detailed below) between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays.

 

All building, demolition and associated site works are strictly prohibited on Sundays, Public Holidays and also on Saturdays adjacent to a Public Holiday.

 

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

 

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

 

a)     The roadway, footpath and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe condition and free from any obstructions, materials, soils or debris at all times.  Any damage caused to the road, footway or nature strip must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

b)     Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials, construction equipment or other materials or articles must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time and the footpath, nature strip and road must be maintained in a clean condition and free from any obstructions, soil and debris at all times.

 

c)     Bulk bins, waste containers or other articles must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council.  Applications to place a waste container or other articles in a public place can be made to Council’s Health, Building & Regulatory Services department.

 

d)     Temporary toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site throughout the course of demolition and construction, to the satisfaction of WorkCover NSW and the toilet facilities must be connected to a public sewer or other sewage management facility approved by Council.

 

e)     A temporary timber, asphalt or concrete crossing is to be provided to the site entrance across the kerb and footway area, with splayed edges, to the satisfaction of Council, unless access is via an existing concrete crossover.

 

f)      The applicant/builder is required to hold Public Liability Insurance, with a minimum liability of $10 million and a copy of the Insurance cover is to be provided to Council.

 

g)     A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities upon any part of the footpath, road or nature strip or in any public place:-

 

·       Install or erect any site fencing, hoardings or site structures

·       Operate a crane or hoist goods or materials over a footpath or road

·       Placement of a waste skip or any other container or article in a public place.

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·           construction traffic management provisions.

 

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

 

32.     During demolition excavation and construction works, dust emissions must be minimised, so as not to result in a nuisance to nearby residents or result in a potential pollution incident.

 

Adequate dust control measures must be provided to the site prior to the works commencing and the measures and practices must be maintained throughout the demolition, excavation and construction process, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

 

·       Provision of geotextile fabric to all perimeter site fencing (attached on the prevailing wind side of the site fencing).

·       Covering of stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material with adequately secured tarpaulins or plastic sheeting.

·       Installation of a water sprinkling system or provision hoses or the like.

·       Regular watering-down of all loose materials and stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material.

·       Minimisation/relocation of stockpiles of materials, to minimise potential for disturbance by prevailing winds.

·       Revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

33.     During construction stages, sediment laden stormwater run-off shall be controlled using the sediment control measures outlined in the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

Details of the proposed sediment control measures are to be detailed in the Site Management Plan and must be submitted to and approved by the principal certifying authority prior to the commencement of any site works.  The sediment and erosion control measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout construction.  A copy of the approved details must be forwarded to the Council and a copy is to be maintained on-site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

Details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures shall include; a site plan; indicating the slope of land, access points & access control measures, location and type of sediment & erosion controls, location of existing vegetation to be retained, location of material stockpiles and storage areas, location of building operations and equipment, methods of sediment control, details of drainage systems and details of existing and proposed vegetation.

 

Stockpiles of soil, sand, aggregate or other materials must not be located on any footpath, roadway, nature strip, drainage line or any public place and the stockpiles must be protected with adequate sediment control measures.

 

Building operations such as brick cutting, washing tools or equipment and mixing mortar are not permitted on public footpaths, roadways, nature strips, in any public place or any location which may lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater drainage system.

 

A warning sign for soil and water management must be displayed in a prominent position on the building site, visible to both the public and site workers.  The sign must be displayed throughout the construction period.  Copies of a suitable warning sign are available at Council’s Customer Service Centre for a nominal fee.

 

34.     Public safety must be maintained at all times and public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted.

 

A temporary safety fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the perimeter of the site. Temporary fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed of cyclone wire fencing, with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control, or other material approved by Council.

 

If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient or the building involves the enclosure of a public place, a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.

 

If necessary, an awning is to be erected sufficiently to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work from falling into the public place or adjoining premises.

 

The public place adjacent to the work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place and any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed upon completion of the work.

 

Temporary fences and hoardings are to be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

The public safety provisions and temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or any public place, the written consent from Council’s Building Services section must be obtained beforehand and detailed plans are to be submitted to Council for consideration, together with payment of the weekly charge in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges.

 

35.     A ‘B Class’ overhead type hoarding is required is be provided to protect the public, located adjacent to the development, prior to the commencement of any works on the site which comprise:-

 

·       any works or hoisting of materials over a public footway or adjoining premises, or

·       any building or demolition works on buildings which are over 7.5m in height and located within 3.6 metres of the street alignment.

 

The public safety provisions and temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any hoardings, site fencing or amenities upon a footpath or public place, the written consent from Council’s Building Services section must be obtained beforehand and detailed plans are to be submitted to Council for consideration, together with payment of the weekly charge in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges.

 

36.     The demolition, removal, storage, handling and disposal of  materials and all building work must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements (as applicable):

 

§   Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

§   Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

§   Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

§   Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 2001

§   WorkCover NSW – Guidelines and Codes of Practice

§   Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

§   The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

37.     A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures.

 

The Work Plan must include the following information (as applicable):

 

§   The name, address, contact details and licence number of the Demolisher /Asbestos Removal Contractor

§   Details of hazardous materials, including asbestos

§   Method/s of demolition and removal of asbestos

§   Measures and processes to be implemented to ensure the health & safety of workers and community

§   Measures to be implemented to minimise any airborne asbestos and dust

§   Methods and location of disposal of any asbestos or other hazardous materials

§   Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented as identified in the Asbestos Survey

§   Date the demolition and removal of asbestos will commence

 

The Demolition Work Plan must be submitted to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA), not less than two (2) working days before commencing any demolition works.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

38.     Any work involving the demolition, storage and disposal of asbestos products and materials must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a)     Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005).

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

b)     A WorkCover licensed demolition or asbestos removal contractor must undertake removal of more than 10m2 of bonded asbestos (or as otherwise specified by WorkCover or relevant legislation). Removal of friable asbestos material must only be undertaken by contractor that holds a current friable asbestos removal licence.

 

c)     On sites involving the removal of asbestos, a  professionally manufactured sign must be clearly displayed in a prominent visible position at the front of the site, containing the words ‘DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” and include details of the licensed contractor. The sign shall measure not less than 400mm x 300mm and the sign is to be installed prior to demolition work commencing and is to remain in place until such time as all asbestos has been safely removed from the site.

 

d)     Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996. Asbestos waste must be disposed of at an approved waste disposal depot (refer to the DEC or Waste Service NSW for details of sites). Copies of all receipts detailing method and location of disposal must be maintained on site and be provided to Council officers upon request, as evidence of correct disposal.

 

e)     A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council upon completion of the works prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued, which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately and the relevant requirements contained in the Asbestos Survey and conditions of consent in relation to the safe removal and disposal of asbestos, have been satisfied.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide access and facilities for people with disabilities:

 

39.     Access, facilities and car parking for people with disabilities must be provided to and within the building in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS1428.1 & AS2890.1 and relevant Council development control plans for the subject development, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.  Details of the proposed access, facilities and car parking for people with disabilities are to be included in the plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

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:

 

40.     The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance, vibration to other premises or, result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

43.     A separate development application and construction certificate or a complying development certificate  must be obtained for the fitout to the medical centre and if the premises is to be used at any time for any of the purposes detailed below:

 

·       All food businesses (including premises used for the sale, storage, preparation and distribution of food and drinks)

·       Hairdressing salons, Beauty salons, Businesses involving Skin Penetration & Piercing, Massage businesses

·       Licensed premises, places of public entertainment and hotels

·       Premises which have a Cooling Tower or Warm Water System

·       Business providing any form of sexual service (i.e. brothel or the like).

 

Business premises which are used for these purposes must comply with relevant public health and safety legislation and requirements and they must be registered with Council prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued for the development. The relevant registration and inspection fee is also required to be paid to Council in accordance with Council’s adopted Pricing Policy.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that adequate provisions are made for the management of waste from the development:

 

44.     Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed development, a Waste Management Plan detailing the waste and recycling storage and removal strategy for all of the development, is required to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Services.

 

The Waste Management plan is required to be prepared in accordance with Council's Waste Management Guidelines for Proposed Development and must include the following details (as applicable):

 

·       The use of the premises and the number and size of occupancies.

·       The type and quantity of waste to be generated by the development.

·       Demolition and construction waste, including materials to be re-used or recycled.

·       Details of the proposed recycling and waste disposal contractors.

·       Waste storage facilities and equipment.

·       Access and traffic arrangements.

·       The procedures and arrangements for on-going waste management including collection, storage and removal of waste and recycling of materials.

·       Cleaning arrangements, hygiene, safety and amenity.

 

Further details of Council's requirements and guidelines, including pro-forma Waste Management plan forms can be obtained from Council's Waste Management Officer on 9399 0520.

 

The following conditions have been applied to ensure compliance with Local Government Legislation and Policies of Council:

 

45.     The Medical centre is to be set up and operated in compliance with the requirements of the NSW Health Department and any relevant licences obtained prior to the occupation of the premises.

 

46.     No approval is given or implied for the use of the medical centre, as a methadone clinic or the like or the dispensing of methadone or the like.

 

47.     The storage, transport and disposal of sharps and clinical waste (classified as ‘hazardous waste’) in accordance with Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005, Protection of the Environment Operations Amendment (Scheduled Activities and Waste) Regulation 2008 and the NSW Health: Waste Management Guidelines for Health Care Facilities and any relevant Australian Standards.

 

48.     The occupier of a hospital, day procedure centre, pathology laboratory, mortuary or medical research facility where clinical and related waste is generated:

 

a)       must develop a clinical and related waste management plan in accordance with the NSW Health: Waste Management Guidelines for Health Care Facilities (as in force from time to time), and

b)       must designate an appropriate person or persons responsible for implementing and monitoring the clinical and related waste management plan, and

c)       must keep the clinical and related waste management plan up to date, retained on the premises and available for inspection by the appropriate regulatory authority.

 

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

 

49.     Any work involving the demolition, storage and disposal of asbestos products and materials must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a)  Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and the requirements of WorkCover NSW.

 

b)  Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005).

 

c)  A WorkCover licensed demolition or asbestos removal contractor must undertake removal of more than 10m2 of bonded asbestos (or as otherwise specified by WorkCover or relevant legislation). Removal of friable asbestos material must only be undertaken by contractor that holds a current friable asbestos removal licence.

 

d)  On sites involving the removal of asbestos, a sign must be clearly displayed in a prominent visible position at the front of the site, containing the words ‘DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” and include details of the licensed contractor.

 

e)  Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

f)   A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority upon completion of the asbestos related works, which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately and the relevant conditions of consent have been satisfied.

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

52.     A report and certification from a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in Acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, which demonstrates and certifies that noise and vibration emissions from the development complies with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW Environmental Protection Authority Noise Control Manual, Industrial Noise Policy and conditions of Council’s approval, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

53.     The hours of operation are restricted to:

 

Monday – Saturday:  7:00am – 6:00pm

 

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:

 

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

 

The following conditions are applied to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

55.     A separate development application and construction certificate or a complying development certificate (as applicable) must be obtained if the premises is to be used at any time for any of the purposes detailed below:

 

·       All food businesses (including premises used for the sale, storage, preparation and distribution of food and drinks)

·       Hairdressing salons, Beauty salons, Businesses involving Skin Penetration & Piercing, Massage businesses

·       Licensed premises, places of public entertainment and hotels

·       Places of Shared Accommodation (including Boarding / Lodging Houses, Bed & Breakfast businesses, Backpackers, Residential Hotels or the like

·       Premises which have a Cooling Tower or Warm Water System

·       Business providing any form of sexual service (i.e. brothel or the like).

 

Business premises which are used for these purposes must comply with relevant public health and safety legislation and requirements and they must be registered with Council prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued for the development. The relevant registration and inspection fee is also required to be paid to Council in accordance with Council’s adopted Pricing Policy.

 

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

 

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

 

a)   $1500.00   -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

a)   Remove the existing vehicular crossing and layback and to construct a new heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site. Note: Construction of the new vehicular crossing is likely to require relocation of the existing Energy Australia power pole located along the northern edge of the existing vehicular crossing.

 

b)   Remove the existing kerb and to construct new kerb along the full Belmore Road site frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit point.

 

c)   Reconstruct the Council footpath along the full Belmore Road site frontage in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for Randwick.

 

58.     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.

 

59.     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.

 

60.     The vehicular access and ground level carpark (including, but not limited to, the ramp grades, carpark layout and height clearances) are to be in accordance with the requirements of AS2890.1:2004. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

61.     All vehicles must enter and exit the site in a forward direction and all vehicular manoeuvres must be limited to the development site and that part of the right of carriageway over the adjoining site to the north which benefits the development site. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

62.     Any proposed security shutter or “boom gate” across the right of way over the development site and/or over the right of way within the adjoining property to the north of the development site must be located a minimum of 5 metres from the Belmore Road property alignment. Any security shutter for the proposed carpark must be located clear of the right of way over the development site. Any proposed security shutter or “boom gate” must be left open during operational hours of the medical centre and day surgery. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with these requirements.

 

63.     A Works Zone is to be provided in Belmore Road 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.

 

64.     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.

 

65.     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.

 

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

 

67.     The minimum clear distance from the existing footpath in Belmore Road 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.

 

68.     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.

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

 

69.     The minimum clear distance from the existing footpath in Belmore Road to the underside of any proposed under awning sign shall be 2.6 metres. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

71.     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.

 

72.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer has been issued at a prescribed fee of $590 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

73.     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.

 

74.     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.

 

75.     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.

 

76.     A Road / Asset Opening Permit must be obtained from Council prior to carrying out any public utility service works within or upon a road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place, in accordance with section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and all of the conditions and requirements contained in the Road / Asset Opening Permit must be complied with.

                                         

The owner/builder must ensure that all works within or upon the road reserve, footpath, nature strip or other public place are completed to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate for the development.

 

For further information, please contact Councils Road / Asset Opening Officer on 9399 0691 or 9399 0999.

 

77.     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.

 

78.     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 replaced with Aerial Bundled Cables. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be replaced. All wires cables must be replaced to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

c)       Generally all internal pipelines must be capable of discharging a 1 in 20 year storm flow.  However the minimum pipe size for pipes that accept stormwater from a surface inlet pit must be 150mm diameter.

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

81.     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.

 

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

 

a)       The kerb and gutter or drainage system at the front of the property; OR

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

 

83.     Should stormwater be discharged to Council’s street drainage system, on-site detention must be provided to ensure that the maximum discharge from the above site is not to exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 5 year storm of 1 hour duration for the existing site conditions. All other stormwater run-off from the above site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 year storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the kerb and gutter or drainage system as required by Council.  Provision is to be made for satisfactory overland flow should a storm in excess of the above parameters occur.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

84.     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.

 

85.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

88.     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.

 

89.     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).

 

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

 

91.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

·      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.

 

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

 

Notes:

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

b.     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.

 

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

 

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

b)     Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

c)     Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

f)     Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

95.     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.

 

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

 

96.     The waste storage area is 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.

 

97.     The waste storage area shall be clearly signposted.

 

98.     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.

 

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

 

99.     Detailed landscape drawings and specifications shall be submitted to, and be approved by the certifying authority, prior to a construction certificate being issued.  A copy of the approved plan shall be forwarded to Council if Council is not the certifier for the site.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

101.    Permission is granted for the removal of only those trees falling within the area occupied by the approved works. Removal of any remaining trees on the site are subject to separate application under the Tree Preservation Order.

 

102.    The applicant shall be required to ensure the retention and long term health of all trees located on adjoining properties adjacent to the proposed development. As a general guide there shall be minimal excavation or root pruning within the dripline/s of the subject tree/s.

 

103.    The applicant shall meet all costs associated with upgrading the Belmore Road site frontage in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre. All works carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council property.

 

A detailed streetscape plan for the Silver Street frontage showing proposed footpath design, street furniture, grades, finished levels, extent and location of awnings, doors/entranceways 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.

 

The applicant will be required to contact and liaise with Council’s Project Co-ordinator, Mr Paul Lunniss on 9399-0934, prior to preparation of the streetscape plan in order to obtain more detailed, site specific landscape design requirements from the relevant Departments of Council.