Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 1 December 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

1 December 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, 1 December 2009 at 6:00pm.

 

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor, J Procopiadis, Andrews (Chairperson), Belleli, Bowen, Hughes, Matson, Matthews, Nash (Deputy Chairperson), Notley-Smith, 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 - 10 November 2009

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Urgent Business

Development Application Reports

D84/09      17 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

D85/09      238-240 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

D86/09      19A Boronia Street, Kensington

D87/09      60 Meeks Street, Kingsford 

D88/09      484 - 486 Malabar Road, Maroubra

D89/09      28 French Street, Maroubra

D90/09      66 Nagle Avenue, Maroubra

D91/09      87 St Marks Road, Randwick

D92/09      1/9A Carr Street, Coogee

Miscellaneous Reports

Nil   

 

Closed Session

Nil

Notices of Rescission Motions

Nil

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee

1 December 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D84/09

 

 

Subject:                  17 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/412/2009

Author:                   David Mooney, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing structures on site and construction of an attached dual occupancy building over 4 levels with swimming pool, retaining walls and associated landscaping

 

Ward:                      North Ward

 

Applicant:                N Brummer

 

Owner:                         N Brummer

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to the Planning Committee because the estimated cost of work exceeds $2M.

 

The proposal involves demolition of the existing dwelling and tennis court, and construction of an attached dual occupancy with basement parking, outdoor-pool and landscaping.

 

The site is on the eastern side of Gordon Street, north of Moore Street, Coogee. The eastern boundary adjoins the Gordons Bay coastal reserve. The site is irregular in shape and approximately 55m long, 17m wide and 914.9m2. The site topography is already heavily modified for the existing dwelling and tennis court. The local topography slopes east toward Gordon’s Bay on a moderate slope increasing to steep closer to the foreshore.

 

The application was accompanied by a SEPP 1 Objection to Clause 31 Randwick LEP for building height. The SEPP 1 objection is acceptable.

 

There was one objection to the proposal, primarily on the grounds of a proposed blade wall. The blade wall was modified in the way suggested by the objection.

 

The proposal satisfies the performance requirements of Council’s Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, and other Section 79C requirements.

 

Approval subject to conditions is recommended.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot 32 in DP 166175, No. 17 Gordon Avenue. The site is located on the eastern side of Gordon Avenue, approximately 60m from the intersection with Moore Street. The site falls from the street to the rear with a cross fall of approximately 6.96m. The dimension and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, side boundary

50.585m

 

Southern, side boundary

61.48m

 

Eastern, rear boundary

19.35m

 

Wester, Gordon Avenue boundary

15.24m

 

 

 

914.9m2

 

At present, the site is occupied by a part 2- and part 3-storey detached dwelling house. Vehicular access is obtained from Gordon Avenue via a concrete driveway. There is a tennis court to the rear of the dwelling supported by retaining walls adjacent to the rear boundary. The above structures partially encroach upon Council’s land. The surface area of encroachment amounts to approximately 9.9m2.

 

To the north of the site is a part 1- and part 2-storey detached dwelling (No. 15 Gordon Avenue). Development Consent No. 295/2009 for redevelopment of the site with a part 1- and part 3-storey dwelling with swimming pool was granted by Council on 8 September 2009. To the south of the site are two detached dwellings (No. 19 Gordon Avenue and No. 2A Major Street. The rear of the site adjoins the Gordon Bay Reserve.

 

The locality is characterised by a mixture of detached and semi-detached residential developments.

 

Figure 1 The subject site and surrounding environment

 

Figure 2 Street elevation of the existing development on site

Figure 3 Rear elevation of the existing dwelling on site

Figure 4 Adjoining dwelling at No. 15 Gordon Avenue as viewed from the tennis court of the site

Figure 5 Existing tennis court on the site, the adjoining dwelling at No. 2A Major Street is seen on the right hand side of the photograph

 

3.      The Proposal

 

The development proposal includes the following components:

 

·      Demolition of the existing dwelling house on site.

·      Partial demolition of the existing tennis court and removal of structures that currently encroach upon Council’s land.

·      Construction of an attached dual occupancy over 4 levels with the following floor space elements:

Lower pool level: 2 x bedrooms, family room and amenities (Unit 2)

Sub-floor level: living and dining rooms, kitchen, bedroom and amenities (Unit 2)

Ground level: living and dining room, cinema and amenities (Unit 1) plus garage

First level: 3 x bedrooms, study room and amenities (Unit 1)

·      Retaining walls and boundary fencing.

·      General landscape works.

 

Figure 6 3-D virtual model of the proposed development

Figure 7 3-D virtual model of the proposed development

 

4.      Site History

 

4.1    Plan amendments

A request was made by letter dated 1 September 2009 for the submission of amended plans and additional information addressing the following issues:

 

·      The retaining walls in the rear courtyard area should be setback further from the eastern boundary. The retaining walls should be stepped or tiered to reduce visual bulk. Cascading creeper plants may be utilised to conceal the wall structures.

 

·      The boundary walls and fences should incorporate suitable stepping to follow the slope of the site.

 

·      Increased rear setbacks to the ground and first floor levels should be provided to avoid encroachment on the foreshore building line.

 

·      The blade wall on the southern elevation adjacent to the rear balconies should be deleted.

 

·      1:50 scale elevation and section drawings are to be submitted to show the design, configuration and materials of the privacy and sun shade screens.

 

Revised drawings were received on 2 October 2009. The amended design is considered to have addressed all of Council’s concerns and forms the subject of this assessment.

 

4.2    Previous development applications relating to the site

 

There are no recent development approvals relating to the subject site.

 

5.      State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 1 Development Standards

 

The proposal seeks to vary a development standard contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted to Council.

 

Pursuant to Clauses 33(1) and (3) of RLEP 1998, the maximum overall building and external wall heights within 2A Zones are 9.5m and 7m respectively. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Overall building height

External wall height

Proposal

Northern façade 10.7m

Northern façade 8.7m

Southern façade 12.0m

Southern façade 12.0m

LEP development standard

9.5m

7m

Excess height above LEP standard

Northern façade 1.2m

Southern façade 2.5m

Northern façade 1.7m

Southern façade 5m

 

In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection, the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 have been addressed. The case has established that the upholding of a SEPP 1 objection is a precondition which must be satisfied before a proposed development can be approved by the consent authority:

 

Matter 1

The Court must be satisfied that “the objection is well founded” (clause 7 of SEPP 1). The objection is to be in writing, be an objection “that compliance with that development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case”, and specify “the grounds of that objection” (clause 6 of SEPP 1).

 

·      Comments:

The stated purpose of the FSR standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

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

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following reasons:

 

-        The proposed building is presented in a stepped form that follows the natural fall and contours of the land. The design scheme is considered to respect the site topography and will not result in adverse visual impacts on the adjoining public reserve and the coastal foreshore.

 

-        There is an area on the southern elevation where the external wall height exceeds the LEP standard by 5m. However, the area in question accounts for 300mm in width. The non-compliance corresponds to a sudden drop in the existing ground level due to the tennis court and associated site modification.

 

-        A significant portion of the building bulk is located below the street level due to the slope of the site. The development will present a 1 ½ storey height to Gordon Avenue, consistent with the existing streetscape character.

 

-        The proposed built form has incorporated staggered wall planes, window openings, louvre screening devices and a combination of surface finishes on all elevations, which will appropriately articulate the building facades and create visual interest. The design scheme adopts a flat roof, which will minimize the overall building height. The above design measures will minimize the visual scale and bulk of the structures, despite non-compliance with the building and external wall heights standards. Overall, the architectural character and form of the proposal are considered to carry positive design merits.

 

-        The proposal has included a combination of trees, shrubs and ground covers along the perimeter and rear portion of the site. The development scheme is considered to have provided a satisfactory landscape setting that visually softens the building structures. In fact, the proposal has provided significant additional landscaped area over the LEP development standard (61% provided, 40% required).

 

-        The proposal achieves full compliance with the FSR standard stipulated in the LEP.

 

-        As will be discussed in the following sections, the proposal does not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining residential properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy or view loss.

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

-        The dwellings to the north and south of the proposed building have been protected from overlooking by the incorporation of screen planting, as well as fixed privacy screens and feature screen blade walls.

 

-        The building, has been specifically setback further from the southern boundary to minimize impacts on the privacy and sunlight access of dwellings to the south (i.e. No. 19 Gordon Avenue and No. 2A Major Street).

 

-        There are no overshadowing issues from the proposed building on the private open space and living room windows of the dwellings to the south.

 

-        The maximum ridge height of the building is generally consistent with the maximum ridge height of the existing dwelling on the site and adjoining dwellings to the north and south and is thus not inconsistent with the existing scale of the locality.

 

-        Due to the slope of the site, the building will have the appearance of a 1 to 2 storey building at the Gordon Avenue elevation and in this regards the proposed building will not impact on the scale of the existing streetscape.

 

-        Level 1 of the proposed building is setback a considerable distance from the lower 3 levels, thus giving the appearance of a 2-3 storey dwelling when viewed from Gordon Bay Reserve and the foreshore area. Additionally, as shown in the photomontage, the pool level will not be readily visible when viewed from the foreshore area as the existing dense foreshore planting obscures the pool level.

 

-        The proposal will not impact on view currently enjoyed by dwellings to the west of the site. This is further evidenced by the photomontage which shows the levels of No. 24 and No. 26 Gordon Avenue as being visible beyond the proposal (meaning their views are maintained).

 

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 objection has addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standard, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The objection has appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. As such, it is considered that the objection is well founded.

 

Matter 2

The Court must be of the opinion that “granting of consent to that development application is consistent with the aims of this Policy as set out in clause 3” (clause 7 of SEPP 1).

 

The aims and objects of SEPP 1 set out in clause 3 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 last mentioned objects in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are to encourage:

 

“(1) 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 purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(2) the promotion and coordination of the orderly and economic use of developed land.”

 

·      Comments:

The variations from the building and external wall height standards are not inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as they would not detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act embodied in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii). Specifically, the resultant development would promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental or social impacts.

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of Residential 2A Zone in that it will allow attached dual occupancy development, which is consistent with the desired character of the locality.

 


Matter 3

The Court must be satisfied that a consideration of the matters in clause 8(a) and (b) of SEPP 1 justifies the upholding of the SEPP 1 objection. The matters in clause 8(a) and (b) are:

 

“(a) whether non-compliance with the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and

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

 

·      Comments:

The proposed development and variation from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not allow the best economic use of the site and the delivery of a suitably scaled in-fill residential development in an established neighbourhood.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

Preston C J expressed the view that an objection under SEPP 1 may be well founded and be consistent with the aims set out in clause 3 of the Policy in a variety of ways:

 

First

The most commonly invoked way is to establish that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

The rationale is that development standards are not ends in themselves but means of achieving ends. The ends are environmental or planning objectives. If the proposed development proffers an alternative means of achieving the objective, strict compliance with the standard would be unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the design scheme will achieve the objectives of the development standard.

 

Second

A second way is to establish that the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is relevant to the subject development.

 

Third

A third way is to establish that the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

Comments:

The underlying objective of the standards would not be defeated or thwarted as full compliance in this instance is unreasonable.

 

Fourth

A fourth way is to establish that the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

Comments:

The building height development standard has not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

Fifth

A fifth way is to establish that “the zoning of particular land” was “unreasonable or inappropriate” so that “a development standard appropriate for that zoning was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land” and that “compliance with the standard in that case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

 

Comments:

The existing Residential A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality.

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The subject application has been notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 30 June to 14 July 2009 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The following submission was received at the conclusion of the public consultation process:

 

·      GSA Planning on behalf of owners of No. 19 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

 

The issues raised in the submission are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The proposed blade wall on the southern elevation of the building will obstruct oblique views of Gordon Bay currently obtained from the rear balconies of No. 19 Gordon Avenue. It will also increase overshadowing and impose a ‘sense of enclosure’ upon the above adjoining property. The upper section of the blade wall should be deleted.

The revised drawings have deleted the upper section of the blade wall component, which is consistent with the request made in the submission.

 

The resultant design will retain a sense of openness, improve oblique views to Gordons Bay and minimise shadow impacts on No. 19.

The FSR has not been calculated in accordance with Council’s planning control documents.

The revised floor space calculations are considered to be consistent with the definition under RLEP 1998.

The proposed FSR will exceed the controls stipulated in the LEP and DCP.

The proposal complies with the FSR standard in RLEP 1998.

The footprint of the development will extend past the existing rear building line.

The proposed rear setback is considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposal does not comply with the external wall height and overall height controls in the LEP.

A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted which appropriately justifies the proposed design and height. The SEPP 1 objection is considered to be well founded. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

 


7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Development Engineer and Landscape Development Officer

 

The subject application has been referred to Council’s Development Engineering Section for assessment. The comments provided are extracted below:

 

An application has been received for demolition of the existing residence and the construction of a new dwelling and swimming pool at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Architectural Plans by Madeleine Blanchfield architects dated 5th May 2009.

·      Statement of Environmental Effects dated May 2009.

·      Landscape Concept Plan by Spirit Level Designs, drawing number LP01, job number 627, revision D, dated 30/09/09.

 

Adjoining Property Comments

The assessing officer is advised that a development application is currently under assessment for the neighbouring site at No.15 Gordon Avenue (DA/295/ 2009).

 

Landscape Comments

The small plants growing on Council’s public verge, against the front boundary fence, will need to be removed as part of the works to ensure that the maximum area of nature strip is available to pedestrians, with either new turf or more desirable and decorative species to be installed in their place to provide a consistent appearance of the site and dwelling to the streetscape. Street tree plantings will not be possible given a lack of available space for access and opening car doors when parked at the kerb.

 

Any Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palms) encountered throughout the site, being those within the front yard as well as the row of five (5) in the rear yard, along the southern site boundary, adjacent the tennis court, can all be removed as they are an exempt species under Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO), which will allow the provision of more suitable coastal species in their place. 

 

Despite being a desirable species, it would not be physically possible to retain the 3 metre tall Howea fosteriana (Kentia Palm), also in this front yard, near the northwest corner of the site as part of the proposed works, and as it could be easily replaced as part of the new landscape scheme, the relevant approval has been included in this report.

 

One of the main issues at this site from both a landscape/environmental, as well as a planning perspective, is the presence of a continuous row of thirteen (13) trees, varying in size from small shrubs to mature trees of between 3-10 metres in height, growing on the adjoining property to the south, 19 Gordon Avenue, virtually hard up against the common boundary, which overhang into the subject site to varying degrees.

 

In order to access this area of the site, a site inspection was held with the property owner, where it was observed that they comprised from west to east, 3 x Melaleuca quinquinervia (Broad Leafed Paperbarks), a Strelitzia nicholii (Giant Bird of Paradise), a Grevillea ‘Banksia’ (Grevillea), a Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani), Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), another Broad Leafed Paperbark, a small Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Tuckeroo), another Coastal Banksia, 2 x Casurina glauca (Swamp She Oaks) and a Broad Leafed Paperbark.

 

It is assumed that this group were originally planted by the neighbour for the purposes of screening, privacy and amenity, and as they have established and formed co-joined canopies over time, they now also function as a windbreak, provide shade, and would offer a food and habitat source for fauna along this harsh coastal strip, complementing the native bushland reserve to the east, Gordons Bay Reserve.

 

While the canopies of the larger trees (primarily the Paperbarks), overhang the common boundary into the subject site, both the existing and proposed dwellings are setback at such a distance that any pruning required would be manageable, and an amount that these trees could sustain, with relevant conditions able to be provided in this report.

 

Therefore, the main focus of this report relates to the same concerns which were raised in an issues paper dated 1st September 2009, being the impact of demolition, excavations and changes in level on their root systems, and subsequently their future health and stability.

 

These trees are growing in a narrow, slightly raised garden bed on the neighbouring property, with a 1.8 metre high brick wall dividing the two properties, with an existing concrete side access path which includes several sets of steps and landings leading to a tiled patio within the subject site at RL 31.30, where a sandstone retaining wall that is setback slightly within 19 Gordon Avenue, drops off down to the tennis court at RL 25.38.

 

These structures are physical barriers to root growth from these trees, but it is still reasonable to assume that some level of disturbance will occur during the proposed works, with the amended plans (stamped 2nd October 2009) proposing a more favourable solution plans showing that in response to previous advice regarding minimising impact on these trees, the side access path.

 

Conditions in this report detail the measures that will need to be imposed to ensure the retention of these neighbouring trees, and relate mainly to construction techniques, setbacks off the common boundary, the treatment of roots, finished ground levels and surface treatments, which should be sufficient to ensure their preservation.

 

Another main issue needing to be considered with this application is the fact that Gordons Bay Reserve immediately adjoins the rear boundary, and contains a typical collection of native coastal plants comprising dense, low growing vegetation, as well as 3-5 metre tall shrubs and trees including Lomandra longifolia (Mat Rush), Leptospermum laevigatum (Coastal Tea Tree), Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), Acacia longifolia (Coast Wattle) and Westringia fruticosa (Coastal Rosemary).

 

Clause 29 of Council’s LEP, Foreshore Scenic Protection Area, applies to this site, and as the Reserve is zoned 6A - Open Space, is also protected by SEPP 19 - Bushland in Urban Areas, as well as SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection, with no items of national environmental significance (pursuant to the EPBC Act [Clth]), nationally rare (ROTAP) species, state listed threatened species, populations, or ecological communities (pursuant to TSC Act [NSW]) having been recorded in Gordons Bay Reserve.

 

As this reserve contains remnants of native bushland which both Council and volunteer community organisations have spent large quantities of time and funds to regenerate, Council must ensure that any issues which pose a direct or indirect threat to this delicate ecosystem and the scenic quality of the location are managed appropriately.

 

Removal of the tennis court will significantly reduce the area of impervious surface, which will increase infiltration rates within the site, as well as minimise runoff and erosion in the reserve, both of which are favourable outcomes, and while some coastal planting is proposed in the lowest, most eastern terrace, the main concern for the reserve relates to unauthorised access which may damage plant life and import weed seeds, as well as sedimentation during the course of works; however, the site specific conditions listed in this report are anticipated to prevent any undesirable impact on the reserve.

 

The treatment of stormwater is another concern for Council, with the plans indicating that all sub-soil drainage and pipes will be connected to a dispersement drain and absorption pit within the lower terrace, which both Council’s Development Engineer and Natural Systems Co-ordinator have confirmed is acceptable (refer Drainage Comments below), providing suitable sediment control devices are implemented in order to minimise erosion and ongoing disturbance of the reserve.

 

Driveway/ Parking Comments

An analysis of car sweeping paths using the B85 template of Australian Standard 2890.1;2004 has indicated the cars will be able to manoeuvre in and out of the carspaces without difficulty. Driveway grades also fully comply with Councils requirements as they do not exceed a grade of 1 in 8.  There is no objection from Development Engineering in regards to the parking arrangements.

 

Drainage Comments

On-site detention (OSD) will not be required.

Drainage concept plans have been submitted by Steve Paul & partners hydraulic engineers who propose that rainwater runoff be drained to Council’s stormwater line in Gordon’s Bay coastal reserve. Councils Bushland Supervisor has indicated that this arrangement is satisfactory as long as erosion and control measures be put in place during construction and any trenches are hand dug within Gordon’s Bay Coastal Reserve.

 

Specific drainage conditions from the bushland supervisor have been incorporated into this report.

 

7.2    Building Surveyor

 

The subject application has been referred to Council’s Building Surveyor for assessment. The comments provided are extracted below:

 

BCA Building Classification

Class - 2 (Residential Units)

Class - 7a (Carpark)

Class - 10b (Swimming pool)

 

BCA Type of construction

Type A

 

Background

The existing building on site is a post war brick cottage bounded by buildings of a similar nature.

 

 

Key Issues

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Noise:

There is potential for the generation of noise from the proposed development due to the installation of plant and equipment, for the swimming pool pump and air conditioning units. Conditions should be imposed on the consent to address potential noise emissions from the development.

 

Site Management:

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

 

Access for people with a disability:

Access and facilities for people with disabilities is not required under the Building Code of Australia, wherever practicable the entrance to a multi unit housing development should aim to facilitate some degree of accessibility to the building. In this regard the ground floor/street level affords access to the building.

 

7.3    Bushland Management Officer

 

The subject application has been referred to Council’s Bushland Management Section for assessment. The comments provided are extracted below:

 

Background

Bushland is present in the adjacent Gordons Bay Reserve to the east of the property. The Reserve is zoned 6A Open Space and, hence, the bushland is protected by SEPP 19- Bushland in Urban Areas and SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection. Council has undertaken many years of bush regeneration work in Gordons Bay Reserve adjacent to this property.

 

No items of national environmental significance (pursuant to the EPBC Act [Clth]) or nationally rare (ROTAP) species or state listed threatened species, populations, or ecological communities (pursuant to TSC Act [NSW]) have been recorded in Gordons Bay Reserve. No known locally rare species, which are present in Gordons Bay Reserve, would be affected by the proposed development.

 

Issues

·      Gordons Bay Reserve, including the bushland and naturally regenerating areas, is sensitive to disturbances from further uphill. The proposed development poses a number of potential threats to Gordons Bay Reserve, including bushland, due to:

-  demolition works,

-  earthworks,

-  construction works,

-  access during and after development,

-  placement, storage and disposal of items and substances during - development,

-  run-off during and after development (see following),

-  invasion by species proposed in landscaping,

-  deleterious genetic effects on populations of indigenous species by planting non-local provenance plant stock

 

The effects may be significant and permanent and may be caused unintentionally. The degree to which most of these potential threats may impact the Reserve is significantly increased due to the position of the proposed development at the top of a steep slope above the bushland.

 

·      17 Gordon Ave falls within the Randwick LEP foreshore scenic protection area. Clause 29 of the LEP states that:


(2)  The consent of the Council is required to erect a building within the foreshore scenic protection area which exceeds 5 metres in height measured vertically from any point on ground level to the highest point of the building.

(3)  The Council may only grant consent referred to in subclause (2) after it has considered the probable aesthetic appearance of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore.

(4)  Subclause (2) does not apply to development which, in the opinion of the Council, is of a minor nature and will not adversely affect the amenity or the character of the locality.

 

SEPP 71-Coastal Protection, Clause 8 Matters for Consideration 8e and 8f, which relate to detrimental impacts of the a development on the amenity of the coastal foreshore including overshadowing and the scenic qualities of the foreshore are also called into play by this application.

 

The north-eastern corner of the property is a significant intrusion into the natural scenic quality of Gordons Bay and the Coast Walk.  Drawing D06 (P00049421) demonstrates that the height of the proposed wall, including the swimming pool fence is RL 25.8. The proposal’s treatment of the north-eastern boundary exceeds the requirements of the Randwick LEP, Sect 29, which stipulates a maximum of 5m.

 

The ground level in the Reserve at the north-eastern corner of the property is approximately at RL 22.  The levels in the Reserve fall quickly from RL 22 to RL 18 and less on the nearby Coast Walk, a major recreation resource under Council’s care and control and a major local and international tourist attraction.  At the point where the property is closest to the Coast Walk, a distance of 6 m, the level rise is almost 8 metres.

 

This has a significant impact on the scenic quality of the foreshore as the highest point of the retaining wall will be very visible from the Coast Walk for a distance of 130m as walkers turn south and head directly towards this point.  

 

·      Uncontrolled overland stormwater flow currently enters Gordons Bay Reserve from the existing tennis court and from broken storm-water pipes.  This water has caused major soil erosion problems in the Reserve for many years and the collapse of large shrubs as their roots have been undermined. 

 

·      The existing tennis court has encroached on the Reserve in its north-eastern corner by 3.5m approximately.  The concrete crib-lock wall that supports the tennis court on its eastern and northern edge is in a state of collapse, probably due to the uncontrolled run-off, and deposits concrete rubble and bricks into the Reserve. This wall is an eyesore and a safety risk to users of the Coast Walk.

 

·      Damage to the Reserve infrastructure and bushland is possible during the construction phase of this development. Rectification of damage should be at the developer’s expense.

 

Conclusion

Given adequate mitigation measures, including those identified in the recommendations below, there is unlikely to be significant disturbance to, or degradation of, Gordons Bay Reserve’s bushland and scenic quality. Without such measures, the proposed development is likely to significantly disturb and degrade the bushland in the Reserve.  The proposal will significantly impact upon the scenic quality and the foreshore and the proposed retaining wall on the north-eastern boundary unless a more sympathetic treatment of the north eastern corner of the property is devised.

 

Comments:

There is a tennis court to the rear of the existing dwelling supported by crib-lock concrete retaining walls adjacent to the rear boundary. The above structures partially encroach upon Council’s land. The surface area of encroachment amounts to approximately 9.9m2. The encroaching structures are proposed to be demolished with the land in question returned to Council.

 

·      Visibility of existing retaining walls of No. 17

The design scheme includes the construction of a new retaining wall along the eastern boundary. Bushland Management is concerned about the height and scale of the wall structures and their prominent, elevated position in relation to the foreshore and coastal walkway.

 

An inspection of the site and the coastal walkway within Gordon Bay Reserve has been undertaken. It is noted that the north-eastern corner of the existing retaining wall of No. 15 Gordon is highly visible from a number of vantage points on the walkway. However, the existing retaining wall of No. 17 Gordon Avenue is substantially hidden behind the mass shrub planting within the Reserve and No. 15.

 

Figure 8 The existing retaining walls to the rear courtyard of No. 15 Gordon Avenue; note the permanent steel palisade fence and the attached climbing plants

 

 

Figure 9 The existing tennis court of the site (right); note that only temporary fence is available without climbing plants

<- Figure 10 A photograph toward the existing tennis court retaining wall at 17 Gordons Ave from the Coastal walkway. The wall is visible, but highly obscured by the dense coastal vegetation.

 

·      Height, bulk and scale of proposed retaining walls

The revised submission includes detailed elevation drawings of the proposed retaining wall structures (drawing number A10F). The existing tennis court level is RL25.00. The height of the proposed boundary retaining wall will be reduced by 800mm to RL24.20. This is in addition to the removal of the encroaching structures. The retaining wall will have a height of up to 4.21m (RL24.20 minus RL19.99) above the level of the adjoining reserve area. The height of the retaining wall (RL24.2) is the same as what has been approved for No. 15 Gordon Avenue under Development Consent No. 295/2009.

 

The northern boundary of the subject site extends beyond the rear boundary of No. 15 Gordon Avenue by approximately 7.1m. Consequently, there will be an exposed retaining wall section along the northern boundary of the site supporting the rear courtyard. 

 

As previously discussed, the rear portion of the site is not readily visible from the adjoining public reserve. The amended design scheme incorporates cascading creeping plants to screen and soften the retaining wall structures.

 

The design will also reduce the scale of the boundary walls by including a separate tier of walling to support the swimming pool and lawn areas. The second tier of retaining wall has a height of approximately 800mm (RL25.00 minus RL24.20). Mass shrub planting will be installed between the two sets of retaining walls.

 

Given the steep slope of the site, the construction of retaining walls is inevitable in order to create a level and functional outdoor living space. The landform has already been substantially modified by the existing structures. It is considered unreasonable to require complete removal of all backfilling given that the design has appropriately terraced the rear portion of the courtyard and incorporated suitable planting to soften the structures.

 

The Bushland Management Officer’s recommended conditions have been amended accordingly.

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998

The site is located within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998. The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential A Zone, in that the development will deliver lower density housing, which is compatible with the desired character of the locality.

 

 

 

 

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

Clause

Required

Proposed

Compliance

22 Services

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

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

Complies, subject to conditions

29 Foreshore scenic protection area

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

The subject site is located within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area under the LEP.

 

The proposed building is presented in a stepped form that follows the natural fall and contours of the land.

 

The development presents a 1 ½ storey height to Gordon Avenue and is compatible with the existing streetscape character. The facades are suitably articulated with window openings, sun shade devices and privacy screens, which will minimise the visual scale of the structures as viewed from the private and public domain.

 

The proposed colour scheme adopts a neutral palette with a light tone, which is suitable to the character of the coastal location.

 

The landscape plan indicates the planting of a combination of trees, shrubs and ground covers. Suitable creeping plants will also be incorporated to screen the retaining wall structures to the rear of the site. The proposal is considered to provide an appropriate landscape setting for the building.

 

The application has included a photomontage indicating the proposed building as viewed from the southern side of Gordon Bay. The image demonstrates that distant views will consist of a development embedded within the existing built and natural environment. The design scheme will not detract from the prevailing height, bulk and scale of the surrounding residences. The development will respect the predominant cascading built forms in the area, which follow the distinct local topography.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

Complies

31 Landscaped area

(1) Minimum 40% of the site (366.0m2)

(3) Not more than 50% of landscaped area is provided over basement or podium

61% of the site or 559m2

 

0% of the landscaped area is provided over podium or basement.

Complies

32 Floor space ratio

(1) Maximum 0.5:1 (457.5m2)

0.5:1 or 453m2

Complies

33 Building heights

(1) Maximum height 9.5m

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

Maximum overall height

Northern façade:

10.7m

Southern façade:

12.0m

Maximum external wall height

Northern façade:

8.7m

Southern façade:

12.0m

No, a SEPP 1 objection is submitted

40 Excavation and filling of land

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

The site has already been significantly modified to accommodate the existing dwelling and tennis court. The proposal will require additional excavation.

 

The application has been referred to Council’s Development Engineer for assessment. It is considered that the proposal will not adversely impact on the drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to the recommended engineering conditions.

 

Specific conditions are also recommended to ensure that suitable soil retention and erosion control measures are undertaken during works on the site.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

Complies, subject to conditions

 

8.2    Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008

The proposed development is consistent with the general aims and objectives of Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008.

 

8.3    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 19 Bushland in Urban Areas

Clause 9 of the SEPP applies to land adjoining land zoned or reserved for public open space. The relevant provisions under Clause 9 are addressed as follows:

 

(c)    The need to retain any bushland on the land.

There is a tennis court to the rear of the dwelling supported by retaining walls adjacent to the eastern boundary. The above structures partially encroach upon Gordon Bay Reserve, which is classified as Zone No. 6A (Public Open Zone) under RLEP 1998. The surface area of encroachment amounts to approximately 9.9m2. The proposal will demolish the encroaching structures and return the land back to Council. In this respect, the development is considered to contribute to bushland retention in the public reserve.

 

(d)    The effect of the proposed development on bushland zoned or reserved for public open space purposes and, in particular, on the erosion of soils, the siltation of streams and waterways and the spread of weeds and exotic plants within the bushland.

Council’s Bushland Management staff has noted the ageing condition of the existing tennis court retaining walls. It appears that some soil and sediments have flowed down from the site onto the reserve area. The proposed development will rectify the above issue by constructing new retaining walls with mass native planting in the rear yard areas.

 

(e)    Any other matters which, in the opinion of the approving or consent authority, are relevant to the protection and preservation of bushland zoned or reserved for public open space purposes.

Refer to comments above.

 

8.4    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 71 Coastal Protection

The subject site is located within the Coastal Zone as defined under the Coastal Protection Act 1979. Accordingly, SEPP No. 71 applies to the proposed development.

 

Clause 8 of the SEPP specifies matters that Council is to take into account when determining a development application, which are addressed as follows:

 

Requirements

Comments

(a) Aims of the Policy in Clause 2.

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the aims of the SEPP in that the nature, bulk and scale of the building structures will not diminish the scenic quality of the coastal foreshore. The building is adequately setback from the rear and will not adversely impact on the stability and visual quality of the rock cliff. Suitable landscaping has been included in the design scheme to offer a potential habitat for native flora and fauna.

(b) Existing public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability should be retained and, where possible, improved.

The proposal will not obstruct existing pedestrian access within the Gordon Bay Reserve.

(c) Opportunities to provide new public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability.

The subject allotment is wholly privately owned and new public access is not feasible for the site. However, the existing tennis court structures that encroach upon the Reserve will be demolished with the area returned to Council. 

(d) The suitability of development given its type, location and design and its relationship with the surrounding area.

The proposed building is presented in a stepped form that follows the natural fall and contours of the land. The proposal will maintain the existing lower density housing form in the locality.

(e) Any detrimental impact that development may have on the amenity of the coastal foreshore, including any significant overshadowing of the coastal foreshore and any significant loss of views from a public place to the coastal foreshore.

The proposal will not result in any unreasonable overshadowing on the adjoining properties (refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details) and public domain.

 

The development will present a 1 ½ storey building height towards Gordon Avenue. The building steps down the slope and will not result in any significant loss of views from a public place.

(f) The scenic qualities of the NSW coast, and means to protect and improve these qualities.

The application has included a photomontage indicating the proposed building as viewed from the southern side of Gordon Avenue. The image demonstrates that distant views will consist of a development embedded within the existing built environment and natural setting.

(g) Measures to conserve animals and plants, and their habitats (within the meaning of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995).

There is no known threatened animal or plant species within the subject site. The design scheme will include various native vegetation species that can potentially create a habitat for the local flora and fauna.

(h) Measures to conserve fish and marine vegetation (within the meaning of Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994).

The proposed building works will not extend to, or in close proximity to, the mean high water mark.

(i) Existing wildlife corridors and the impact of development on these corridors.

The existing tennis court structures that encroach upon the Reserve will be demolished with the area returned to Council. Improved retaining wall structures will be constructed in the rear section of the site. The above measures are considered to enhance Gordon Bay Reserve as a habitat for local flora and fauna.

(j) The likely impact of coastal processes and coastal hazards on development and any likely impacts of development on coastal processes and coastal hazards.

The site is separated from the mean high water mark by Gordon Bay Reserve. The proposal is not considered to be materially affected by, or contribute to, adverse coastal hazards.

(k) Measures to reduce the potential for conflict between land-based and water-based coastal activities.

The proposal will not affect the usage of the public walkways in Gordon Bay Reserve.

(l) Measures to protect the cultural places, values, customs, beliefs and traditional knowledge of Aborigines.

There are no known Aboriginal sites or relics within the subject allotment.

(m) Likely impacts of development on the water quality of coastal water bodies.

Adequate drainage conditions are recommended to ensure that any stormwater runoff from the site will not adversely impact on the water quality of the bay and ocean.

(n) The conservation and presentation of items of heritage, archaeological or historic significance.

There are no known heritage items or relics within the subject allotment. The site is not located within any heritage conservation area.

(o) [Provisions relating to preparation of LEP’s]

N/A

(p) The cumulative impacts of the proposed development on the environment. Measures to ensure that water and energy usage by the proposed development is efficient.

Specific conditions are recommended to ensure that the commitments listed on the BASIX Certificate are implemented in the development.

 

The proposal is not considered to contribute significantly and unreasonably to any cumulative environmental impacts on the coastal foreshore.

 

8.5    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) (Building Sustainability Index) 2004

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by a BASIX Certificate numbered 254148M. The requirements specified in the above certificate will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. 

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

9.1    Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

A total of 61% of the site or 559m2 is reserved as landscaped areas. Satisfactory.

S1

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

The rear courtyard has an area of over 400m2. Satisfactory.

S1

Each dwelling must provide an area of private open space capable of containing a rectangle of minimum dimensions of 3m x 4m with minor changes in level.

The terrace areas of each dwelling are capable of accommodating a rectangle of the following dimensions:

Unit 1

Bedroom balcony: 5m x 5m

Living room balcony: 2.5m x 7m 

Unit 2

Living room balcony: 2.5m x 7m

Bedroom balcony: 5m x 2.5m

 

The sizes of the private terraces are considered to be adequate for passive recreation purposes.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

32% of the site or 292m2 are permeable. Satisfactory.

 

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 applies. 

0.5:1, satisfactory.

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

Northern façade:

8.7m

Southern façade:

12.0m

Refer the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

The site is already heavily modified by the importation of fill for a tennis court, and by previous excavations for the existing dwelling. The proposed building generally works with the existing levels. There are excavations at the rear of the site to lower the level of the tennis court (and convert it to garden space) so that it relates better to the adjacent foreshore reserve. There are excavations up to 3.25m in parts of the site for new basement levels. These excavations are within the footprint of the proposed building and help the building step down the slope of the land. There are some minor areas of fill to facilitate stair construction and landscaping. Satisfactory.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

No

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Only those excavations that lower the height of the artificially raised tennis court so to convert it to garden space and improve its relationship to the adjacent foreshore reserve.

S4

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

All levels above ground are at least 1.5 from the southern boundary. Satisfactory.

S5

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

Not applicable.

 

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

More than the average of adjoining dwellings. Satisfactory.

S2

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

No

S3

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

Yes

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Yes

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

1.5m on southern boundary. The 3rd levels are apparent only on the subject site because of the heavily modified landform that exists (for the tennis court). The apparent height of the building above the southern (higher) site is just 2 storeys, making the 1.5m setback appropriate. Satisfactory.

 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

North facing courtyards and balconies are generally protected by privacy screens or sufficiently distant (9m) from adjoining dwellings and private open spaces. An additional screen is required on the northern aspect of eastern balcony at first floor. This is included as a condition in the recommendation. A south facing window does not require protection because it is a bedroom window.

S1

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

S1

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

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

These standards are specified in the BCA and are adequately covered by Construction Certificate requirements.

 

Safety & Security

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

The proposed front door faces the street. Complies.

S1,3

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

The proposed dwelling has windows that overlook the street. Complies.

S2

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

Suitable condition included.

 

Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Council’s Parking DCP requires 1 space, for dwellings with 2 bedrooms or less, or 2 spaces, for dwellings with 3 bedrooms or more.

Parking and driveway arrangements have been assessed by Council’s Development Engineer and are satisfactory.

S1

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

S1

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

S1

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

S1

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

S1

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

N/A

S2

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

S2

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

Yes. Satisfactory.

S2

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

20% Satisfactory.

 

Fences

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

There is a condition in the recommendation that requires a management plan for sandstone recovery and re-use.

S1

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

Front boundary wall between 720mm and 1360mm according to slope. Well integrated with landscaping. Satisfactory.

S1

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

Higher elements of garden walls in the front setback are between 1200mm and 1860mm high with upper 500mm steel frame with tensioned wire. Satisfactory.

 

Foreshore Development

 

Performance Requirements

Assessment

P1

No encroachments on Foreshore Building Line at identified properties.

No

P2

Building form, colour, materials and finishes are sympathetic.

Yes

P3

Stepped buildings on sloping sites are articulated.

Building steps down the lot

P4

Buildings incorporate sufficient setbacks to allow fair sharing of views.

Side boundary setbacks are satisfactory. Building complies with foreshore setback. View sharing is acceptable.

P5

Ancillary structures do not detract from the appearance of developments.

Fences and other ancillary structures are well integrated with the main building.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Achieves compliance with BASIX requirements.

S2

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

Private open space receives adequate sunlight during the morning. Satisfactory.

S2,8

North-facing windows to living areas receive at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

Living areas receive adequate sunlight through east facing windows.

S9

Solar access to existing or future solar collectors on adjacent buildings is maintained between 9am and 3pm each throughout the year.

No impact on existing or future solar collectors on properties to the south.

S9

North-facing windows to living areas of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.  If currently less than 3 hours, it is not further reduced.

All windows at 2a Major Street retain full solar access until 2pm, where shadows increasingly encroach on western-most windows. Living room windows at 19 Gordons Avenue retain full existing solar access.

S9

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

Private open space at 19 Gordons Avenue retains adequate solar access until Noon and is increasingly overshadowed thereafter. 2A Major Street remains unaffected until 2pm. Satisfactory.

 

9.2    Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Parking

 

Parking and driveway arrangement were assessed by Council’s Development Engineer and are satisfactory.

 

9.3    Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$3,289,550

 

1.0%

$32,895.50

 

10.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of the draft Randwick LEP 2008.

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

Clause 7 of the EP&A Regulation 2000 requires the consent authority to consider the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. A standard condition is recommended to address the above matter.

 

Clause 92 of the Regulation requires the consent authority to consider relevant Australian Standards relating to the demolition of structures. A standard condition is recommended to require compliance with Australian Standard 2601.

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

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

 

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

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

The site is located within an established residential neighbourhood. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

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

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

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

The proposal is not considered to result in significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality, subject to the recommended conditions. The development is considered to be within the public interest.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

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

 

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

 

The submitted SEPP 1 objection is considered to appropriately justify the proposed design and is well founded.

 

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

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 33(1) and 33(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to maximum and external wall heights respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clause, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 412/2009 for demolition of existing structures on site and construction of an attached dual occupancy building over 4 levels with swimming pool, retaining walls and associated landscaping, at No. 17 Gordon Avenue, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

Conditions of Consent

 

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 in the following table, the application form and any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared By

A01(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

Du Plessis + Du Plessis Architects

A02(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A03(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A04(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A05(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A06(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A07(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A08(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A09(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A10(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A11(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A12(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

A13(F)

01.10.09

2 October 2009

627 LP01 (D)

30/09/09

2 October 2009

Spirit Level Designs

 

2.       The northern aspect of the east facing balcony at 1st floor level must be installed with a 1.5m high privacy screen. Design details must be shown on the Construction Certificate plans. This condition may be waivered by the written agreement of the landowner of 15 Gordon Avenue, Coogee.

 

3.       A management plan for the identification and re-use on the site of any recoverable sandstone must be submitted to Council for approval before a Construction Certificate is issued. Sandstone must be recovered and re-used in accordance with the approved management plan.

 

4.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be consistent with the submitted colour and material schedule entitled “Sample Board”, received by Council 24 June 2009.

 

5.       The proposed metal security fence above the retaining walls along the eastern (rear) boundary of the site must have a height of not more than 2000mm, as measured from the top of the retaining walls. The above fence shall retain a minimum of 60% openness to minimise visual bulk. Details demonstrating compliance shall be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

7.       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.

 

8.       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.

 

9.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents.

 

10.     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.

 

The following conditions are applied to promote occupant safety in the building:

 

11.     Operable windows to a room, corridor, stairway or the like with a floor level more than 4m above the external ground/surface level, must be designed and constructed to reduce the likelihood of a child accessing and falling through the window opening.

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

i.      The window having a minimum sill height of 1.5m above the internal floor level,

ii.     Providing a window locking device at least 1.5m above the internal floor level,

iii.     Fixing or securing the window (e.g. by screws or a window locking device) to restrict or to be able to secure the extent of the opening to a maximum width of 125mm,

iv.    Installing a fixed heavy-duty gauge metal screen over the opening (e.g. A metal security screen or metal security mesh and frame system, but not standard fly-screen material), or

v.     Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

12.     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:

 

13.     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

$3,289,550

 

1.0%

$32,895.50

       

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:

 

14.     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.

 

15.     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.

 

16.     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)

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

20.     There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to a public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

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

 

21.     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.

 

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

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

26.     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”.

 

27.     An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any occupation of the building in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

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

 

28.     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.

 

29.     In accordance with clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition, that in the case of residential building work, a contract of insurance must be obtained and in force, in accordance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

Where the work is to be done by a licensed contractor, excavation or building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA):

·       has been informed in writing of the licensee’s name and contractor number; and

·       is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the insurance requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989, or

 

 

 

 

Where the work to be done by any other person (i.e. an owner-builder), excavation or building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority:

·       has been informed of the person’s name and owner-builder permit number, or

·       has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land that states that the market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work does not exceed $5,000.

 

Details of the principal building contractor and compliance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989 (i.e. Details of the principal licensed building contractor and a copy of the Certificate of Insurance) are to be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of works, with the notice of appointment of the PCA / notice of intention to commence building work.

 

30.     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.

 

31.     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.

 

32.     As a minimum, the building is required to be provided with a smoke alarm system complying with Clause 3 of Specification E2.2a of the Building Code of Australia or a smoke detection system complying with Clause 4 of Specification E2.2a of the Building Code of Australia or a combination of a smoke alarm system within the sole-occupancy units and a smoke detection system in areas not within the sole-occupancy units.  The smoke detectors located within the stairway, corridors or the like must be interconnected.

 

Additional requirements regarding the design and installation of the smoke detection and alarm system may be specified in the construction certificate for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

34.     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.

 

35.     A report shall be prepared by a professional engineer and submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, detailing the proposed methods of excavation, shoring or pile construction, including details of potential vibration emissions.  The report, must demonstrate the suitability of the proposed methods of construction to overcome any potential damage to nearby land/premises.

 

Any practices or procedures specified in the engineer’s report in relation to the avoidance or minimisation of structural damage to nearby premises, must be fully complied with and incorporated into the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

A copy of the engineers report is to be submitted to the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority.

 

36.     Driven type piles/shoring must not be provided unless a geotechnical engineer’s report is submitted to the certifying authority, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, which demonstrates that damage should not occur to any adjoining premises and public place as a result of the works.

 

Any practices or recommendations specified in the engineer’s report in relation to the avoidance or minimisation of structural damage to nearby premises or land must be fully complied with and incorporated into the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

37.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer or suitably qualified and experienced building surveyor shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works detailing the current condition and status of all buildings, including ancillary structures (i.e. including dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc.) located upon No.19 Gordon Avenue.

 

The report is to be supported with photographic evidence of the status and condition of the buildings and a copy of the report must also be forwarded to the Council and to the owners of each of the abovementioned premises, prior to the commencement of any works.

 

38.     The installation of ground or rock anchors underneath any adjoining premises must not be carried out without specific written consent of the owners of the affected adjoining premises (including the Council if bounding a public roadway or public place) and where applicable, details of compliance must be provided to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of any excavation or building works.

 

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

 

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

 

40.     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.

 

41.     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).

 

42.     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.

 

43.     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.

 

44.     A report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and a copy is to be provided to Council upon commencement of works or as otherwise 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.

 

45.     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)     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.

 

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

 

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

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

·       Placement of a waste skip or any other container or article on the road, nature strip or footpath.

 

g)     A Road/Asset Opening Permit must be obtained from Council prior to carrying out any 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 Council’s Road/Asset Opening Officer on 9399 0691 or 9399 0999.

 

h)     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.

 

46.     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.

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details and methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·           construction noise and vibration management;

·      construction traffic management provisions.

 

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

 

48.     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.

 

49.     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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

51.     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.

 

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

 

53.     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.

 

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

 

The swimming pool is to be surrounded by a fence having a minimum height of 1.2m, that separates the pool from any residential building situated on the premises and from any place (whether public or private) adjoining the premises; and that is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with AS 1926.1 - 2007.

 

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

 

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

 

A ‘warning notice’ must be erected in a prominent position in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool, in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Regulation 2008, detailing pool safety requirements, resuscitation techniques and the importance of the supervision of children at all times.

 

55.     Spa pools are to be provided with a child resistant barrier, in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and regulations.

 

A ‘warning notice’ must be erected  in a prominent position in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool, in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Regulation 2008, detailing pool safety requirements, resuscitation techniques and the importance of the supervision of children at all times.

 

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

 

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

 

57.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for the protection of Gordons Bay Reserve’s scenic quality and bushland:

 

60.     The part of Gordons Bay Reserve currently occupied by the north-eastern corner of the tennis court must be rehabilitated after completion of the boundary structures and before an Occupation Certificate can be issued.  This work will include;

 

·      grading of the land back to the property boundary at the same slope gradient existing in the reserve  immediately below the property,

·      removal of all building debris, old and new,

·      stabilising the reconstructed slope with unbroken rows of coir logs (eg Ecologs) on the contour at a maximum of 2m intervals,

·      mulching the reconstructed slope with hardwood chip mulch.

 

61.     Where those species which have been identified as occurring naturally in the reserve are proposed for use within the site, local provenance stock must be used in order to maintain genetic biodiversity, with Council's Community Nursery able to assist in this regard.

 

62.     A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque, for an amount of $2,500.00 (no GST), shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and ultimately, protection of the bushland/reserve.

 

The refundable deposit will be eligible for refund following the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, subject to completion and submission of Council’s ‘Security Deposit Refund Application Form’, and pending a satisfactory inspection by Council’s Natural Systems Coordinator (9399-0613).

 

Any contravention of Council's conditions or on-site instructions at any time during the course of the works, or prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, may result in Council claiming all or part of the lodged security in order to perform any rectification works necessary, as per the requirements of 80A (6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

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

63.     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, reserve, verge or any public place; or as security for completing any public work; and for remedying any defect on such public works, in accordance with section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

a)   $2000.00   -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

o  Construct concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

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

 

o  Re-construct any remaining kerb and gutter across the full site frontage except opposite the vehicular access.

 

65.     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, public verge and reserve 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.

 

66.     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.

 

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

 

67.     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 50mm ABOVE the top of the kerb at all points opposite the kerb, along the full site frontage.

 

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

 

69.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $670 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:

70.     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.

 

71.     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.

 

72.     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:

 

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

 

74.     Any stormwater runoff which cannot be directed to the kerb and gutter at the front of the property shall be discharged to Council’s stormwater line in the coastal reserve at the rear of the site in general accordance with plans by Steve Paul & Associates , design drawing No.SW-001, SW-100 to SW-105 dated 19th June 2009 subject to following conditions.

 

75.     Any trenches to be dug within Gordon’s Bay reserve for the laying of stormwater pipes shall be hand dug to assist in the protection of vegetation within the reserve.

 

76.     Backwash and splash water from the proposed pool shall be directed to the site’s sewerage system. No discharge to the stormwater system shall be allowed. Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

77.     All storm-water, pool water, irrigation water, etc., shall be directed into the appropriate disposal systems and not be allowed to enter Gordon’s Bay Reserve. All hard surfaces adjacent to Gordon’s Bay Reserve shall be designed to fall away from the Reserve.

 

78.     All site stormwater which is discharged from the site, must be taken through a sediment/silt arrester pit. The sediment/silt arrestor pit shall be constructed with:

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

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

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

 

·      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 (Mascot GMS Multi-purpose filter screen or similar).

 

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

 

·      The inlet pipeline located on the side of the pit so that the stormwater will discharge across the face of the screen.

 

·      A sign adjacent to this pit stating that:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

79.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by Spirit Level Designs, drawing number LP01, job number 627, revision D, dated 30/09/09, subject to the following changes being made:

 

o  Incorporation of suitable native coastal species within the raised garden planter fronting Gordons Avenue, at the expense of the mass planted Yucca elephantipes (Yucca) in this area, with similar low growing species to be provided in front of this wall to soften its appearance to the streetscape, but most be those which will not encroach significantly onto the public footpath area;

 

o  Provision of a minimum of 2 x 75 litre (pot size at the time of planting) native coastal trees within the rear portion of the site, selecting those species which will attain a minimum height at maturity of between 4-7 metres, and will need to be strategically placed in order to soften the visual dominance of the proposed building on the adjoining public domain;

 

o  Where those species which have been recorded as occurring naturally in the reserve and are proposed for use in site landscaping, the applicant will be required to use local provenance stock in order to maintain genetic biodiversity, with Council’s Community Nursery (9399-0933) able to assist in this regard.

 

80.     The PCA must ensure that landscaping is installed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of consent, prior to the PCA issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, with the applicant required to ensure that it is maintained in accordance with these plans.

 

81.     The nature-strip upon Council's footway shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu Turf or similar. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

Tree Removals

 

82.     Permission is granted for the removal of all vegetation within the site as part of this application, including the Howea fosteriana (Kentia Palm) within the front yard, due both to its small size as well as to accommodate the proposed works, as well as any Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palms) throughout the site, being within the front yard, as well as along the southern boundary, adjacent the tennis court, as they are an exempt species under Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO), but is on the basis of full implementation of the approved landscaping.

 

83.     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.

 

Tree Pruning

 

84.     Permission is granted for the selective pruning of only those lower growing, lower order branches from the northern aspects of those neighbouring trees which are located on 19 Gordon Avenue (refer Tree Protection Measures below), being primarily 3rd order laterals, where they overhang the common boundary and specifically need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the trees; or, to provide the necessary clearances both during the course of demolition, construction and upon completion.

 

85.     This approval does not imply any right of entry onto a neighbouring property nor does it allow pruning beyond a common boundary; however, where such measures are desirable in the best interests of correct pruning procedures, and ultimately, the ongoing health of these trees, the applicant must negotiate with the neighbour/tree owner for access to perform this work.

 

86.     In an effort to avoid damage to the trees, this pruning may be performed prior to demolition, and must only be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level V in Arboriculture, and who is also a registered member of a nationally recognised organisation/association, with all pruning to be performed to Australian Standard AS 4373-1996 'Pruning of Amenity Trees.’

 

Tree Protection Measures

 

87.     As part of this application, the applicant will be responsible for ensuing preservation of the continuous row of 13 trees growing on the adjoining property to the south, 19 Gordon Avenue, against the common boundary, comprising from west to east, 3 x Melaleuca quinquinervia (Broad Leafed Paperbarks), a Strelitzia nicholii (Giant Bird of Paradise), a Grevillea ‘Banksia’ (Grevillea), a Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani), a Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), another Broad Leafed Paperbark, a small Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Tuckeroo), another Coastal Banksia, 2 x Casurina glauca (Swamp She Oaks) and a Broad Leafed Paperbark.

 

 

88.     In order to ensure this, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the construction certificate application must show the retention of these trees, with the position and diameter of their trunks as well as the extent of their canopies to be clearly and accurately shown.

 

b.       Prior to the commencement of any physical site works on site, the PCA must ensure that an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level V in Arboriculture, and is also a registered member of a nationally recognised association or organisation, is engaged to supervise, conduct and provide recommendations for ALL works adjacent to these trees, between the existing/proposed dwelling and southern site boundary, including but not limited to: demolition, excavations for footings, walls, paths, fencing, changes in level, surface treatments and similar.

 

c.       The site Arborist must ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent and industry best practice, with all site staff required to adhere to any instructions issued. 

 

d.       The Arborist/Architect/Builder must liaise between each other to ensure that the deep soil garden bed proposed along the southern boundary (as shown on drawing number A04, issue F, dated 01.10.2009 by Du Plessis Architects) follows the existing contours/ground levels as close as practically possible, with changes in level (cut or fill) to be restricted to 200mm where practically possible.

 

e.       The Construction Certificate plans must also show that a construction method which does not require any further works beyond the point of excavation for the southern wall of the proposed building, at the setbacks shown on the submitted lower sub-floor, sub-floor, ground level and first floor plans, must be used, with suitable details, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority, to be provided.  

 

f.        Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed along the southern side setback, must be located on the northern side of the proposed garden areas along the common boundary so as to minimise root disturbance and damage to these neighbouring trees.

 

g.       In order to prevent soil/sediment being washed over the root systems of these trees following demolition of the existing common boundary wall, suitable erosion control measures shall be provided at ground level in this area, with all Site Management Plans needing to recognise the fact that material storage cannot be located adjacent these trees.

 

h.       The site Arborist is the only person permitted to prune roots, and generally, those which have a diameter of 75mm or more need to be preserved and structures designed over/around them, with lesser roots that need to be pruned to be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected are backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

The applicant/developer is advised to ensure that the development is not inconsistent with Council's consent and if necessary consult with Council’s Building Certification Services or your accredited certifier (as applicable) prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

A2      The applicant/owner is advised that this approval does not guarantee compliance with the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and the applicant should therefore consider their liability under the Act.  In this regard, the applicant is advised that compliance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standard 1428.1 - Design for Access and Mobility does not necessarily satisfy the objectives of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

The applicant/owner is requested to give consideration to providing access and facilities for people with disabilities in accordance with Australian Standard 1428 Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4 - Design for Access and Mobility, which may be necessary to satisfy the objectives of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

A3      Building or excavations works must not be commenced until a construction certificate has been obtained from Council's Building Certification Services or an Accredited Certifier and either Council's Building Certification Services or an Accredited Certifier has been appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) for this development.

 

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

 

A4      A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

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

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

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

 

A5    Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

A6    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

1 December 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D85/09

 

 

Subject:                  238-240 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/601/2009

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Internal alterations to the existing residential Unit 3 to convert the existing lounge room into a hairdressing/beauty and massage business including under awning illuminated sign.

 

Ward:                      East Ward

 

Applicant:                Louie Vaccarella

 

Owner:                         Louie Vaccarella

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application details internal alterations to the existing residential Unit 3 to convert the existing lounge room into a hairdressing/beauty and massage business.

 

In accordance with Council’s Resolution on 27 June 2006, the application is referred to Council for determination as the proposed use involves massage services. 

 

It is considered that the proposed use is legitimate and the premises is not intended to be used for the purposes of providing sexual services.  Further, the applicant has provided documentation to Council detailing the qualification of the Beauty therapy studied (which included body massage and body treatments using machinery) and hairdressing certificate.

 

The proposed use as a hairdressing/beauty and massage business is legitimate and the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details internal alterations to the existing residential Unit 3 to convert the existing lounge room into a hairdressing/beauty and massage business. The proposal also includes advertising signage for a new illuminated under awning sign. 

 

The proposed hours of operation are from Monday to Wednesday & Friday from 8.00am - 7.00pm Thursday from 8.00am – 9.00pm and Saturday 9.00am – 4.00pm.  The proposed number of employees is 2 to 3.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Coogee Bay Road between Arden Street and Brook Street in Coogee and is presently occupied by an existing two storey building with basement underneath, commercial use on the ground floor and residential use above.  The subject premise is Unit 3 on the first floor level and the area of the unit is 74m.  The overall site area is approx. 354.1m².

 

Neighbouring the property to the east and west of the subject site are two storey mixed use buildings, with commercial use on the ground floor level and residential units above. The surrounding area is commercial in character and consists predominantly of commercial and retail uses with residential use above.

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/908/2008

Construction of a new metal roof over an existing roof terrace area with brick columns and fire rated glass block panel to the eastern and western sides of the terrace.

Approved:

18 March 2009.

DA/796/2006

Installation of a new charcoal griller and mechanical exhaust to the existing restaurant.

 

 

The application was recommended for refusal on 19 December 2006 as the proposal has been installed and was in operation.

CDC/126/2006

Shop fit-out and occupation of restaurant with a new shop front and signage to replace the existing.

Approved:

5 September 2006.

SC/34/2001

Strata Subdivide into 4 new lots.

Approved:

29 November 2001.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan 1998. As a result of the notification, no submissions were received.

 

5.1 Support

 

No submissions in support of the proposal were received.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers and the following comments have been provided:-

 

(a)    Development Engineers

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Plan by John Spiteri design dated August 2009.

·      Statement of Environmental Effects stamped by Council 1st September 2009.

 

General comments

As the alterations are mainly internal, only minimal conditions are required from Development Engineering.

 

Landscape comments

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

 

(b)    Environmental Health and Building Services

 

Environmental Health comments

 

The proposal

 

Hairdressing salon within residential unit

 

Key Issues

 

Compliance with Public Health Codes/Guidelines etc

 

Building Services comments

 

The Proposal

 

Internal alterations and change of use of the lounge room of Unit 3 to a hairdressing salon/beauty/massage parlour in the existing three storey building.

 

BCA Building Classification

 

Class        -      6      (Shops/hairdressing salon)

Class        -      2      (Residential units)

 

 

 

Background

 

The existing building on site is a three storey commercial and residential building, bounded by buildings of a similar nature.

 

Key Issues

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

 

Details of compliance with BCA are not included in the DA documentation and therefore further detailed information would need to be incorporated in the documentation for a construction certificate. It is noted that AND the applicant has advised that the ceilings throughout both ground floor shops have FRL’s of -/60/60 (See CC/711/1999)

 

Site Management:

 

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

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

A master plan is no required for this site as the total site area is less than required for the submission of a master plan (4000 m2).

 

8.    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 No. 3A (General Business Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

The following Clause of the LEP 1998 applies to the proposal:

 

Clause 13 Zone No 3A (General Business Zone)

 

The objectives of the zone are to provide for local retail and business development, whilst minimising impacts upon the adjoining and nearby residential zones.

 

The proposal is suitably located in an established local business strip and will not result in any unreasonable adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining residents. The residential component to the rear of the business at Unit 3 is maintained and the proposed activity will enhance and compliment the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

The proposal is therefore consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone.

 

(b)    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64) aims to ensure that signs are compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, provide effective communication in suitable locations; and are of high quality design and finish. 

 

The proposed signage is consistent with the above aims and objectives of the policy.  Also Schedule 1 of the SEPP will be satisfied as the signage will be compatible with the existing and future character of the area; does not compromise existing views or vistas; is of a scale and form appropriate for the streetscape; and does not compromise safety.

 

(c)    SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

 

In accordance with the provision of the SEPP, a BASIX certificate is not applicable to commercial development.

 

8.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan Parking (DCP – Parking)

The DCP indicates a rate of 1 space per 40m2 of gross floor area for business premises.  The gross floor area for the business will be 21.15m2 and therefore the proposal will generate a car parking requirement of one carspace in addition to the demands from the residential unit. 

 

Council only requires additional parking to be provided to cater for additional demands arising from increases in floor space or change in use.  The proposal does not increase the gross floor area to the premises; however the proposed use will generate a demand for one additional parking space on the site.

 

It is considered appropriate to waiver this requirement for an additional carspace based on the following aspects:

 

·           No additional floor space is proposed, however the proposal maintains the existing single carspace currently allocated to the unit.

·           Converting a two bedroom unit to a one bedroom unit to allow for the conversion of the existing lounge room into the proposed business use will consequently reduce the parking demands for the unit from 1.2 spaces to 1 space.

·           On street parking exists along Coogee Bay Road and surrounding side streets.

·           The use will be low in intensity.  It is expected that no more than three clients and three employees will be present at any one time.

·           Any demand for clientele parking will be short-term and most clients are expected to be from the local area.

·           Public transport facilities are available along Coogee Bay Road.

·           The use will not involve significant unloading and loading activities in relation to its operation.

 

It is considered that the proposal will meet the relevant objectives of the parking DCP.

 

b.      Development Control Plan – Outdoor Advertising

 

The objectives and controls of the DCP for outdoor advertising include that advertising is in keeping with the scale and character of the building to which it is attached and does not detract from the architectural style or features of the building, the visual complexity of streetscape is reduced by providing fewer more effective signs, and that the advertising must relate to the business or activity carried out at the premises.

 

The proposal includes a new illuminated under awning sign directly opposite the existing entry door to Units 3 & 4.  The size is 900mm in length x 450mm in height x 250mm in width.

 

The proposed new illuminated under sign is consistent with the surrounding signage and relates to the identified business.  The proposed signage will have no unreasonable impact on the streetscape and will comply with the relevant aims and objectives and general provisions/controls of the DCP for Outdoor Advertising in a business zone.

 

8.2 Council Policies

No Council policies are relevant to the proposal.

 

9.    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.

 

Nature of the Use

The proposed use is consistent with the general aims of RLEP 1998 and the relevant objectives of the 3A zone in that the proposal will provide a business to serve the needs of the surrounding residents, workers and visitors to the area.  

 

The details provided with the application adequately describe a development for the purpose for which approval is sought, i.e. as a legitimate premises providing massage service with the hairdressing/beauty being the primary activity of the business. A good indication of the legitimacy of the proposal is the type of signage provided to the premises.  The applicant has advised that the business name is “Sea Breeze Hair & Beauty” and will be placed on the proposed illuminated advertising sign.  In this regard the proposed advertising signage specifically alerts potential clients to the exact nature and scope of services.

 

Hours of operation

The applicant has stated that the proposed hours of operation are from Monday to Wednesday & Friday 8.00am to 7.00pm, Thursday 8.00am - 9.00pm and Saturday 9.00am – 4.00pm. 

 

It is not considered that the proposed hours will result in any unreasonable adverse impact upon the amenity of the surrounding commercial and residential properties.  The proposed trading hours will be consistent with other adjoining commercial/retail uses within this area and will satisfy the relevant assessment criteria.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 8:      A Strong Local Economy.

Direction 8a:    Vibrant business, commercial and industrial sectors that provide ongoing and diverse employment opportunities.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

Conclusion

 

The proposal to convert the existing lounge room into a hairdressing/beauty and massage business including fitout and signage will comply with the relevant assessment criteria outlined in the RLEP 1998, Outdoor Advertising DCP and Parking DCP. The proposal is permissible with consent in the Local Business 3B zone and the proposed use is considered to be consistent with surrounding small business uses.  Subject to conditions to restrict the type of massage service provided, the inoffensive nature of the use will not result in any unreasonable adverse impact upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality. The proposed hours are reasonable in this local strip of businesses.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 601/2009 for internal alterations to the existing residential Unit 3 to convert the existing lounge room into a hairdressing/beauty and massage business including under awning illuminated sign at No. 238–240 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee subject to the following conditions:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plan numbered 09.153 (Sheet No. 1 of 1), dated August 2009 and received by Council on 1 September 2009, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations and to provide for reasonable levels of safety and amenity:

 

2.       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.

 

3.       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 (BCA).

 

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

 

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

 

5.       Prior to the commencement of any building or ‘fit-out’ 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 person’s intention to commence building works.

 

6.       The 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.

 

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

 

8.       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 the proposed works are suitable, the plans will be appropriately stamped by Sydney Water or their Agent.  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 prior to the commencement of any building works.

 

9.       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.

 

10.     Public health, safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition and building works and the following requirements must be complied with at all times (as applicable):

 

a)     The roadway, footpath and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe condition and free from any obstructions, trip hazards, 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 Building Services section.

 

d)     Public safety must be maintained at all times and public access to any demolition and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted. If necessary, a temporary safety fence or hoarding is to be provided to protect the public. 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.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or items upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or any public place, a Local Approval application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Health, Building & Regulatory Services department beforehand. Details and plans are to be submitted with the application, together with payment of the weekly charge in accordance with Council’s adopted Pricing Policy.

 

e)     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.

 

The requirements and practices contained in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and relevant DECC Construction Noise and Vibration Guidelines are to be satisfied and a Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan is to be developed and implemented throughout the works to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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:

 

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

 

12.     There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises which will give rise to a public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

13.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage, collection and disposal of waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

14.     Hairdressers, Beauty salons must comply with the Local Government (Orders) Regulations 1999 and the Public Health Act & Regulations 1991, and the premises is to be registered with Council prior to occupation and on an annual basis and the approved registration/inspection fee is to be forwarded to the Council prior to occupation.

 

15.     The operation of the premises is to be restricted to hair salon, beauty salon and remedial massage only. The premises is not to be used for the purpose of a brothel and in this regard, no sexual services are to be offered in association with the massage usage.

 

16.     All furniture (e.g. chairs, tables, treatment beds) shelves and fittings must be constructed of, or covered with material that is smooth, impervious to moisture and capable of being easily cleaned.

 

17.     The premises must comply with the Local Government (Orders) Regulations 2005, Public Health Act 1991 & Public Health (Skin Penetration) Regulations 2000 at all times.

 

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:

 

18.     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.

 

19.     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.

 

20.     The hours of the operation of the business are restricted to:

 

Monday through to Wednesday & Friday inclusive, from: 8.00am to 7.00pm;

Thursday from: 8.00am - 9.00pm; and

Saturday from: 9.00am – 4.00pm. 

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

 

21.     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.

 

22.     The minimum clear distance from the existing footpath in Coogee Bay Road to the underside of the proposed under-awning advertising sign, (i.e. the sign to be installed above the footpath in Coogee Bay Road), shall be 2.60 metres.

 

Waste management

 

23.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage, collection and disposal of trade/commercial waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

24.     Any trade/commercial waste materials must not be disposed in or through Council’s domestic garbage service.  All trade/commercial waste materials must be collected by Council’s Trade Waste Service or a waste contractor authorised by the Waste Service of New South Wales. Details of the proposed waste collection and disposal service are to be submitted to Council prior to commencing operation of the business.

 

The following conditions are applied to improve the levels of fire safety afforded to occupants and fire fighters in the event of a fire:

 

25.     Provide a tight fitting, self closing, 35mm thick solid core door to separate the new commercial component from the residential portion.

 

26.     Provide a hard wired AS 3786 compliant smoke detector in the new commercial component at 1st floor level.

 

27.     Provide a suitable portable fire extinguisher in the new commercial component at 1st floor level.

 

28.     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.

 

The Fire Safety Certificate must include 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.

 

An annual Fire Safety Statement must be submitted to the Council and the NSW Fire Brigades, each year after the date of the Fire Safety Certificate, in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1      The applicant shall be advised that Council may, in the future, be implementing a new policy (under Section 611 of the Local Government Act) wherein fees may apply for advertising in public airspace.

 

         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.

 

A2      The assessment of this development application does not include an assessment of the proposed building work under the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

All new building work must comply with the BCA and relevant Australian Standards and details of compliance must be provided in the Construction Certificate application.

 

 

 

Notes:      

 

·         The standard conditions may be modified or supplemented by additional non-standard site specific conditions to address any specific environmental, amenity, construction and safety considerations associated with the proposal.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

1 December 2009

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D86/09

 

 

Subject:                  19A Boronia Street, Kensington

Folder No:                   DA/430/2009

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a three (3) storey residential flat building containing 3 units with basement parking for 5 cars, associated landscaping works and strata subdivision

 

Ward:                      West Ward

 

Applicant:                Antonius and Associates Pty Ltd

 

Owner:                         Mr Eddie Lee and Mrs Edna Lee

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The subject proposal is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as it contains variations to the floor space ratio development standard stipulated in Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 by more than 10%. The applicant has submitted a SEPP 1 objection to development standards to address these non-compliances.

 

The subject application is for the demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a three (3) storey residential flat building containing 3 units with basement parking for 5 cars, associated landscaping works and strata subdivision. It is noted that an application was approved under DA/289/2004 for similar works. However, the works will not be commenced in time and the application is set to lapse. The applicant has therefore submitted the subject application with some internal modifications and minor changes to window and door openings.

 

The site is located on the eastern side of Boronia Street with frontage width and land area of 20.12m and 335.1m2 respectively. The site is presently occupied by an existing 1-2 storey brick and tile dwelling with an existing detached garage to the northern side of the site. There is no significant planting to the rear.

 

The application was notified and advertised to the adjoining and nearby properties from 8 to 22 July 2009 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of one (1) submission was received at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The issues raised were in relation to excessive bulk and scale, overshadowing, privacy impacts, and lack of landscaped area on the site.  

 

It is noted that following consultation with Council, the applicants have amended the plans to indicate an overall height reduction of the development through the deletion of the topmost attic level. This serves to minimise the overall impact of the proposal in terms of bulk and scale, maintain a generally open appearance to the penthouse unit and minimise any impacts to the solar access of adjacent properties.

 

The site is located within Zone No. 2C (Residential C Zone) under RLEP 1998. The proposal is consistent with the zoning objectives.

 

The proposal has an FSR of 1.08:1 and does not comply with Clause 32(2) of the LEP, which stipulates a maximum FSR of 0.65:1 for sites located in Residential 2C zones with sites areas of less that 700sqm. Notwithstanding this, the proposal is considered to be suitable infill development which is compatible with the scale of neighbouring buildings.

 

Clause 31(2) requires 50% of the site to be dedicated as landscaped area, which equates to 167.55m2. Clause 31(3) provides that not more than 50% of the required landscaped area provision (that is, 83.775m2) is to be accommodated over podiums or excavated basements. The proposal will reserve 40.05% of the site as landscaped area (135.64m2). This represents a shortfall of 9.5% (31.9m2). Additionally, a total of 83.2% of the landscaped area (69.7m2) is provided over podium or basement.

 

The proposed building does not comply with Clause 33(2) and 33(4) of the LEP for   maximum building height and maximum external wall height. The LEP stipulates a maximum building height of 12m and a maximum external wall height of 10 for building located within Residential 2C zones. The proposal has a maximum building height of 12.25m and a maximum external wall height of 11m. 

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under SEPP No. 1 – Development Standards justifying that the above breaches will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. The objection has been assessed and is considered to be well founded.

 

The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes proposed are considered to be satisfactory. The design carries positive architectural merits and will be sympathetic to the character of the existing streetscape. The proposal is considered to satisfy the performance requirements of the DCP – Multi Unit Housing.

 

The proposal maintains the same landscaped area provision and distribution between deep soil and podium as the previously approved scheme, with minimal change to the footprint, mass and scaling of the previously approved building.

 

The proposal complies with the numerical car parking requirement of the DCP – Car parking.

 

It has been demonstrated in this report that the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP have been achieved in that the proposed development will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining dwellings and the character of the locality.

 

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

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposed development is a three (3) storey building and comprises the following works:

 

·      Demolition of the existing structures on the site

·      3 x 2 bedroom residential units over three storeys with basement carparking for 5 cars, accessed from Boronia Street. The development has been assessed as a 3 x 3 bedroom development due to the large media rooms proposed for each unit which are readily capable of being converted into a third bedroom.

·      A skillion roof profile raised to the western (street) elevation.

·      Landscaping to the rear and sides of the site.

 

The external finishes of the proposed building will be a combination of rendered and painted and face brick-work elements. Car parking for the development would be accommodated within one basement level of car parking containing a total of 5 car spaces set toward the rear of the site and accessed via a side driveway. 

 

2.1    Application History

 

The application was lodged on 26 June 2009. Accordingly, the plans accompanying the development application were referred to Council’s Health and Building officer and Development Engineers for comment.

 

Issues were raised by Council in relation to the following: 

 

·      The initial ‘Landscape Plan’ was inadequate and insufficient for development of this scale and the applicant was required to submit a professionally prepared plan which provides both a higher level of detail as well as a higher quality treatment to the site.  

·      The proposed ‘attic’ level creates excessive bulk and scale, further exacerbating the applications non-compliance with the maximum floor space ratio control.

 

Subsequently, an amended ‘Landscape Planting Plan’, prepared by Michael Siu Landscape Architects Pty Ltd was received on 14 September 2009 and amended DA plans prepared by Antonius and Associates was received 6 November 2009. The supplementary information was referred to the relevant Council officers and the application is now deemed to satisfy the matters raised by Council officers and form the subject of the current assessment.  

 

The amended plans do not reach full compliance with the statutory floor space ratio limit and minimum requirements for landscaped area. The applicant has therefore submitted a SEPP 1 objection to address this non-compliance with the corresponding clause as contained in the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site known as Lot A in DP 346018 and is located on the eastern side of Boronia Street almost close to its intersection with Salisbury Road in Kensington. The site is presently occupied by an existing 1-2 storey brick and tile dwelling with an existing detached garage to the northern side of the site. There is no significant planting to the rear.

 

The site has a frontage width (western boundary) of 20.12 m, side (northern and southern) boundary depths of 16.61m and 16.92m, respectively and has an overall site area of 335.1m². Neighbouring the property to the south is 21-25 Boronia Street, a 3-5 storey residential flat building. Adjoining the property to the north is 19 Boronia Street, a 2 storey residential flat building. Adjoining the site to the east is the rear of 21 Anzac Parade, a 3 storey residential flat building.

 

The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of large, older style residential flat buildings commensurate with the 2C residential zone. Refer to images of the site and surrounds below.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing building

2. Adjoining double storey residential flat building to the north


 

3. Adjoining 3 storey residential flat building immediately to the south of the site

4. The rear yard of the site.

5. Development on the opposite side of Boronia Street

6. Development to the rear of the subject site (RFB)

 

4.    Site History

 

A pre-lodgement development application was held on 2 April 2003

 

DA/289/2004 – Deferred commencement approval was granted on 2 December 2004 for the demolition of the existing building and construction of a three storey multi-unit housing development comprising 4 dwellings and carparking for 5 vehicles.

 

Note: It should be noted that the current application is substantially the same as works approved under DA/289/2004. However, the works will not be commenced in time and the application is set to lapse. The applicants have therefore submitted the subject application with some internal modifications and minor changes to window and door openings.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

5.1 Objections

 

The proposal has been notified and advertised from 8 July 2009 to 22 July 2009 in accordance with the in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. In response, one submission was received from the owner/resident of 3/21-25 Boronia Street raising the following issues:

 

·      The applicant incorrectly refers to the proposed development as being 3 stories with an attic level, when in reality the application proposes a 4 storey residential flat building.

 

Comment: The applicant has submitted amended plans received by Council on 6 November 2009 indicating the deletion of the upper attic level. The amended development is a three (3) storey residential flat building with basement parking for 5 vehicles.

 

·      The applicant refers to the addition of the attic level as a “minor change” but it results in a 4 storey building.

 

Comment: The applicant has submitted amended plans received by Council on 6 November 2009 indicating the deletion of the upper attic level. The amended development is a three (3) storey residential flat building.

 

·      The proposal will result in significant overshadowing to 21-25 Boronia Street as the units contained in No. 21-25 rely one on one window for the majority of light to the dwellings.

 

Comment: Although the proposal will result in some unavoidable overshadowing to the south, it will not reduce solar access to any existing north-facing windows of adjoining properties to less than 3 hours on the winter solstice. This is attributed to the generous southern side setback and articulation of the southern elevation. The resultant shadows move significantly throughout the day and due to the changing topography on and between the sites along this side of Boronia Street, overshadowing effects are minimised. Further, the application has included shadow diagrams, which demonstrate that the proposal will have acceptable impacts on existing residential properties to the south of the subject site.

 

·      The proposed south facing windows will result in overlooking into the north facing windows of No. 21-25 Boronia Street.

 

Comment: The proposed south facing windows to the building serve only bedrooms (with modest sized windows) and stairwells. These areas are not considered to be rooms of high traffic and therefore represent minimal overlooking impacts to the residential flat building to the south. Further, there is adequate building separation of 8m–10.9m between the subject site and 21-25 Boronia Street such that the proposal does not result in an unreasonable loss of privacy.

 

·      The development should be considered as high density and does not adhere to LEP requirements resulting in a 4 storey building on a small building footprint.

 

Comment: The applicant has submitted amended plans received by Council on 6 November 2009 indicating the deletion of the upper attic level. The amended development is a three (3) storey residential flat building. Further, the height, bulk and scale of the proposal at 3 storeys has been assessed and found to be appropriate in the builtform context of the site and the adjoining development at 19, 21-25, 24 Boronia Street, and 21-23 Anzac Parade, which are 2 and 3 storey residential flat buildings respectively. 

 

·      The proposal is 12m high and is significantly more bulky than No. 21-25 Boronia Street.

 

Comment: The applicant has submitted a SEPP 1 objection to the relevant development standard and the objection was considered to be well founded. Further, the portion of non-compliance is restricted to the rear of the site and is a result of the topography. This non-compliance does not represent unreasonable or excessive bulk and scale when viewed from the street. The development is consistent with the scale of the surrounding development and is commensurate with the 2C zoning of the area.

 

·      The applicant incorrectly refers No. 21-25 Boronia Street as a 3-5 storey building. It is a 3 storey building on the eastern side with two split half levels on the western side.

 

Comment: Noted.

 

·      The applicant is undermining Council’s environmental planning controls by not providing 50% of the site as landscaped area. Referring to surrounding parks does not make up for the shortfall of landscaped area on the site.

 

Comment: The proposal provides adequate areas of communal and private open space, which adds to the amenity of the units. The deep soil landscaped area has been concentrated towards the rear of the site, which provides for substantial screening plants between the subject site and buildings to the rear. The minor deficiency and will not result in significant adverse impacts as the deep soil planting has been located at the lowest area of the site to maximise opportunities for stormwater infiltration. The objectives of Clause 31 will be met by the development despite non-compliance the statutory standard. The landscape plan lodged with the application has been referred to Council’s Engineers for comment and no objections have been raised to the landscape provision.

 

·      The applicant’s referral to the 2001 application approved for No. 3 Salisbury Road does not mean the subject application should be approved by default as ‘infill development’ as the adjoining properties of that application are not affected by overshadowing and loss of privacy.

 

Comment: The subject application has been subject to a comprehensive merit based assessment and has been found to be suitable infill development consistent with the scale of the surrounding development and is commensurate with the 2C zoning of the area. The proposal carries positive architectural merits and will be sympathetic to the character of the existing streetscape and is considered to satisfy the performance requirements of the DCP – Multi Unit Housing, Parking and other relevant assessment criteria.  

 

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:-

 

Manager Environmental Health and Building Services

The application was referred to the Manager Environmental Health and Building Services for comment.  No objections were raised subject to conditions with any approval. The following comments were made:

 

Health and Building Services comments

 

The Proposal

The proposal provides for the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new 3 storey Multi Unit Housing residential development containing 3 sole occupancy units and basement carparking.

BCA Building Classification

Class -      2      (Residential Units)

Class -      7a    (Carpark)

 

Background

The existing building on site is a post war brick cottage bounded by buildings of a similar nature and multi-unit housing.

 

Key Issues

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Noise:

There is potential for the generation of noise from the proposed development due to the installation of plant and equipment, such as any mechanical exhaust system serving the basement car park. Conditions should be imposed on the consent to address potential noise emissions from the development.

 

Site Management:

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

 

Recommendation:

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

 

Development Engineers

The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineers for comment. No objections were raised subject to conditions with any approval. The following comments were made:

 

Engineers Comments

 

An application has been received for demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of a residential flat building at the above site containing 3 x 2 bedroom units with large media room and basement car-parking for 5 vehicles including associated strata subdivision.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Job No 2003:231, sheets DA01-14, Rev C, by Antonius & Assoc dated Feb 2003.

·      Landscape Planting Plan by Michael Siu Landscape Architects Pty Ltd, drawing number L01/1-R14601, dated 8th September 2009 and stamped 14th September 2009.

 

Landscape Comments

While the site inspection revealed a complete absence of any vegetation within the site, there were observed to be two Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtles), of approximately 3-4 metres in height each, within Council’s Boronia Street nature strip, with the larger specimen located centrally across the width of the site, just south of the existing crossing, and the smaller tree towards the southern site boundary.

 

The southern-most street tree would need to be removed in order to accommodate the new crossing hard up against the southern boundary as has been shown, and consistent with advice provided for the previous application (refer DA/289/2004), Council would not object to this due to its small size and the ability to provide a replacement immediately to its north to maintain consistency in the streetscape, with conditions in this report requiring that the applicant cover all costs.

 

The small shrubs located within adjoining properties, against the common boundary, were all observed to be insignificant, and are too small to be covered by the TPO.

 

While this application does not comply with the minimum landscape area requirements specified in Council’s LEP for Multi-unit housing in the 2C Zone, a SEPP 1 Objection claims that this departure from the standard should be deemed acceptable in this instance due to a combination of:

 

§ the steep fall of the site to the rear, which means that the basement ramp occupies a large portion of the property;

§ the presence of public open space at Centennial & Moore Parks nearby;

§ the proposed landscape works, and;

§ the fact that the building will be consistent with surrounding development.

 

The assessing officer should ensure that these issues are considered as part of the overall assessment.

 

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.

 

Traffic Comments

The internal driveway must be a minimum 3.30m wide (clear width) at all points along the internal driveway.

 

Parking provision requirement

3 x 2 Bedroom units = 3 x 1.2=3.6

Visitor Space = 3 x 0.25 =0.75

Total Required = 4.35 spaces Say 4 spaces (Satisfactory spaces provided)

 

Should the assessing officer consider the proposed media room as an additional bedroom that the parking provisions would be calculated as follows:

 

3 x 3 Bedroom units = 3 x 1.5 = 4.5

Visitor Space = 3 x 0.25= 0.75    

Total Required = 5.25 spaces Say 5 spaces (Satisfactory spaces provided)

 

Note: A carwash bay is not required as only 3 Units are proposed.

 

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 in excess of $1 million but 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.

 

Recommendation:

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

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

Clause 40A(1) of RLEP 1998 provides that consent may be granted to a development application made in respect of a site consisting of more than 4,000m2 only if: (a) a master plan has been adopted, and (b) the consent authority is satisfied that the development is not inconsistent with the provisions of that master plan. The site has a land area of 335.1m² and a master plan is not required.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

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

 

Clause 12 – Zone No 2C (Residential 2C Zone)

The objectives of Zone No 2C are:

 

(a)  to allow a variety of housing types within residential areas, and

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

(c)  to enable residential development in a variety of medium density housing forms where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas, 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.

 

Multi-unit housing development is impermissible in the zone. The proposal will provide additional residential accommodation for the area and the proposal will have a bulk and scale that is commensurate with the adjoining development in the area and will provide a greater mix of housing types.

 

As such, the proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

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

 

Clause

Required

Proposed

Compliance

22 Services

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

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

Complies, subject to conditions

31 Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of the site area (or 167.55m2)

 

 

 

 

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas not to exceed 50% of landscaped area provision

40.05% (135.64m2) – Shortfall of 9.5% (31.9m2)

 

 

 

83.2% (69.72) of the total landscaped areas are provided above basement levels.

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

32 Floor space ratio

0.65:1 for sites less than 700m2 in 2C zones

1.08:1 (369.9sqm)

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

33 Building height

(2) Overall height: 12m

 

(4) External wall height: 10m

Maximum height 12.25m

 

Maximum wall height exceeds 10m by 1m.

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

40 Excavation and filling of land

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

The proposal will involve an earth-cut up to approximately 2.6 metres for the basement car parking. The applicant has submitted a Geotechnical Investigation Report for the site (Prepared by Michael Adler and Associates – Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, report no. 04/01268, and received by Council on 29 June 2009) indicating that the proposed earthworks will not have any detrimental effect on the soil stability and environmental quality of the subject site and locality. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to the provisions of Clause 40.

Complies, subject to conditions

8.2      Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2008

 

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

 

Clause

Provision

Proposal

Compliance

17

Zone No. 2C Residential C Zone

Multi Unit Housing requires consent

The proposed land use is permissible with Council’s consent

Yes

33

Floor space ratios

(3) Sites within 2C Zone less than 700m2: 0.65:1

 

Total proposed GFA:369.9m2 1.08:1

 

 

No, refer to discussion in the “SEPP 1” section of this report

34

Building heights

(3) Maximum height for 2C Zone: 12m

(5) Maximum height for external wall for 2C Zone: 10m

 

Maximum height 12.25m

 

Maximum wall height exceeds 10m by 1m.

 

No, refer to discussion in the “SEPP 1” section of this report

35

Landscaped area

(3) Minimum 50% of total site area

 

 

 

 

(4) Landscaped areas over podiums or basement areas not to exceed 50% of total landscaped area provision

 

40.05% (135.64m2) – Shortfall of 9.5% (31.9m2)

 

 

 

 

83.2% (69.72) of the total landscaped areas are provided above basement levels.

 

No, refer to discussion in the “SEPP 1” section of this report

 

8.3             State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted with the development application. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the following matters are addressed:

 

8.3.1    Development standards

 

The proposal seeks variation to the following control contained in RLEP 1998:

 

·      Clause 31(2) minimum 50% of the site to be dedicated as landscaped areas

·      Clause 31(3) not more than 50% of the required landscaped area provision is accommodated above podiums or basements

·      Clause 32(2) 0.65:1 maximum floor space ratio

·      Clause 33 (2) 12m maximum overall building height

·      Clause 33(4) 10m maximum external wall height

 

The above provisions are numerical development standards contained in the statutory plan.

 

In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection, the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 have been addressed. The case has established that the upholding of a SEPP 1 objection is a precondition which must be satisfied before a proposed development can be approved by the consent authority:

 

8.3.2    The underlying objectives or purpose of the standards

 

Minimum landscaped areas:

·      To establish minimum requirements for the provision of landscaping to soften the visual impact of development, assist in the reduction of urban runoff and provide adequate areas of open space for recreational purposes.

 

Maximum FSR:

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

 

Maximum building and external wall height:

·      To set upper limits for the height of buildings in residential and business zones that are consistent with the redevelopment potential of land in those zones given other development restrictions, such as floor space and landscaping, and have regard for the amenity of surrounding areas.

 

8.3.3  Consistency of the development with the aims of SEPP 1, the local planning objectives for the locality and objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended

 

Matter 1

The Court must be satisfied that “the objection is well founded” (clause 7 of SEPP 1). The objection is to be in writing, be an objection “that compliance with that development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case”, and specify “the grounds of that objection” (clause 6 of SEPP 1).

 

(a) Landscaped area

 

Clause 31(2) requires 50% of the site to be dedicated as landscaped area, which equates to 167.55m2. Clause 31(3) provides that not more than 50% of the required landscaped area provision (83.77m2) is to be accommodated over podiums or excavated basements.

 

The proposal will reserve 40.05% (135.64m2) of the site as landscaped area (103.9m2). This represents a shortfall of 9.5% (31.9m2).

 

A total of 83.2% (69.72) of the landscaped area is provided over podium or basement.

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following reasons:

 

·      The proposal provides adequate areas of communal and private open space, which adds to the amenity of the units.

·      The deep soil landscaped area has been concentrated towards the rear of the site, which provides for substantial screening plants between the subject site and buildings to the rear.

·      The deficiency in deep soil provision is minor deficiency and will not result in significant impacts.

·      The deep soil planting has been located at the lowest area of the site to maximise opportunities for stormwater infiltration.

·      Landscaping has also been well integrated into the street setback which helps to ‘soften’ the appearance of the development from the street in accordance with the objectives of the landscaping standards.

·      The objectives of clause 31(3) will be met by the development despite non-compliance the statutory standard.

·      The landscape plan lodged with the application indicates a range of trees, shrubs and grassed areas that will provide for a range of passive and active recreation areas suitable for the number of units proposed and will also contribute to achieving privacy and separation between surrounding properties and make a streetscape contribution.

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

·      The site is in close proximity to high quality recreational areas including Centennial Park and Moore Park. Centennial Park being within walking distance

·      Sufficient area at the rear has been provided for substantial growth of vegetation which will be possible as it will obtain satisfactory sunlight.

·      Planting to podium areas has been maximised to soften the visual impact of the development. The existing planting to the street and the neighbouring dwellings along with the proposed planting will provide a balanced combination of built form and vegetation along Boronia Street and between the neighbouring dwellings.

·      Each unit has adequate private open space accessed directly from their living areas. The minimum open space of 8m2 that is required under the DCP has been provided to each unit.

·      Strict adherence to the LEP on this site would not support a development that complements the existing urban character. The site is an infill development and some concessions need to be made to ensure that it complements the existing street character and built form of the street. The shortfall in landscaping is considered minor and it is considered that the proposed landscaping is acceptable in this instance on the above merits and that strict compliance with Clause 31 Landscaped Areas, is unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances.

 

(b) Floor space ratio (FSR)

 

Pursuant to Clause 32(2) of RLEP 1998, the maximum floor space ratio for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No. 2C is 0.65:1, where the site area is less than 700m2.

 

The proposal has a floor space ratio of 1.08:1 (369.9sqm) and does not comply with the requirement of clause 32(2) of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following reasons:

 

The objective of the floor space ratio (FSR) standard is to establish a reasonable upper limit for development in residential zones through a limit on the amount of floor space that can be provided. This will help to reduce the potential for adverse impact on nearby and adjoining development while still providing for reasonable levels of development and redevelopment. An accepted measure of the impacts on amenity is the degree of compliance a proposal achieves with Council’s amenity standards for overshadowing, visual privacy, views etc.

 

·      Consistent with the objective of the FSR standard, the development minimises impacts to neighbouring properties despite the non-compliance of the proposal with the density standard of 0.65:1.

·      As discussed in this report and the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection the FSR non-compliance will not result in unreasonable overshadowing, inadequate landscaping or privacy impacts. The design of the building minimises its visual bulk.

·      The redevelopment of the site for multi-unit housing is consistent with the objectives of the 2(C) zoning of the site. Current development on the site has a density less than that envisaged by the 2(C) zone.

·      The addition of three dwellings in this location is not excessive and can be accommodated on the site.

·      Surrounding buildings are of a similar bulk and scale to the proposal and the development is consistent with surrounding built forms and will not result in excessive building bulk on the street.

·      The site is not highly visible from surrounding areas or the foreshore and the bulk of the additional floor space has been adequately articulated to reduce impacts on the outlook of surrounding properties.

·      It would be unreasonable to enforce compliance with the FSR standard contained within the RLEP when the proposed development on the site achieves the underlying purpose of the standard and meets Council’s controls with regard to streetscape, residential amenity, and height. It is considered that SEPP 1 objection is well founded and should be supported.

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

·      The proposal does not impact on the amenity of the neighbouring dwellings to an extent that would be considered unacceptable.

·      The proposals building bulk is compatible with surrounding built forms.

·      The proposals floor space ratio does not result in increased levels of overshadowing that is greater than the maximum amount allowed in Council’s DCP.

·      The proposal does not reduce the existing level of privacy of adjoining and nearby developments.

·      The exterior of the building has been well articulated with height and setback variations, balconies and different roof forms. This modulation of walls and articulation of the building envelope will ensure its building bulk is compatible. The proposed level of finish along with the distribution of massing and façade articulation will enhance the streetscape.

·      The amount of car parking required for the number of units proposed complies with Council’s DCP.

·      Strict adherence to the LEP on this site would not support a development that complements the existing urban character. The site is an infill development and some concessions need to be made to ensure that it complements the existing street character and built form of the street.

·      It is considered that the SEPP No. 1 objection should be supported considering that it is consistent with the underlying purpose of the development standard and it is consistent with the broader environmental objectives of the locality.

 

(c) Maximum building and external wall height

 

The proposed building does not comply with Clause 33(2) and 33(4) of the LEP for   maximum building height and maximum external wall height. The LEP stipulates a maximum building height of 12m and a maximum external wall height of 10 for building located within Residential 2C zones. The proposal has a maximum building height of 12.25m and a maximum external wall height of 11m. 

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following reasons:

 

·      The breach against the LEP standard is due to the drop in topography toward the rear of the site and is restricted to the south eastern corner of the site.

·      The breaches are minor in nature. The maximum overall building height is only 0.25m in excess of the LEP control. 

·      The built form is suitably modulated with staggered wall planes and progressive front setbacks to minimise the perception of bulk and scale and respond to the contextual character.

·      The proposal will not result in unreasonable shadow impacts on the adjoining properties and the surrounding areas.

·      The non-compliance is restricted to the rear of the site and does not represent any excessive bulk and scale when viewed from the street. 

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

·      The proposal does not impact on the amenity of the neighbouring dwellings to an extent that would be considered unacceptable.

·      The proposals building bulk is compatible with the surrounding built forms.

·      The proposals increase in height limit to the rear does not result in increased levels of overshadowing that is greater than the maximum amount allowed in council’s DCP.

·      The proposal will not significantly impede the views from neighbouring dwellings.

·      The proposal does not reduce the existing level of privacy of adjoining and nearby developments.

·      The minor height non compliance is mainly contributed to the steep slope of the site which falls towards the rear.

·      The exterior of the building has been well articulated with height and setback variations, balconies and different roof forms. This modulation of walls and articulation of the building envelope will ensure its building bulk is compatible.

·      The proposed level of finish along with the distribution of massing and facade articulation will enhance the streetscape.

·      Strict adherence to the LEP on this site would not support a development that complements the existing urban character. The site is an infill development and some concessions need to be made to ensure that it complements the existing street character and built form of the street.

·      It is considered that the proposed height is acceptable in this instance on the above merits and that strict compliance with council’s LEP regarding height limits is unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances.

·      It is considered that the SEPP No.1 objection should be supported considering that it is consistent with the underlying purpose of the development standard and it is consistent with the broader environmental objectives of the locality.

(d) Conclusion

 

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 objections have addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The objections have been appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of each case. As such, it is considered that the objections are well founded.

Matter 2

The Court must be of the opinion that “granting of consent to that development application is consistent with the aims of this Policy as set out in clause 3” (clause 7 of SEPP 1).

 

The aims and objects of SEPP 1 set out in clause 3 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 last mentioned objects in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are to encourage:

 

“(1) 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 purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(2) the promotion and coordination of the orderly and economic use of developed land.”

 

The variations from the standards for FSR, landscaped area, and height are not inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as they would not detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act embodied in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii). Specifically, the resultant development would promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental or social impacts.

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of Residential 2C Zone in that it will allow development of multi unit development, which is consistent with the desired character of the locality.

 

Matter 3

The Court must be satisfied that a consideration of the matters in clause 8(a) and (b) of SEPP 1 justifies the upholding of the SEPP 1 objection. The matters in clause 8(a) and (b) are:

 

“(a) whether non-compliance with the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not aid in maintaining the ability to develop medium density housing forms such as multi unit housing, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

Preston C J expressed the view that an objection under SEPP 1 may be well founded and be consistent with the aims set out in clause 3 of the Policy in a variety of ways:

 

First

The most commonly invoked way is to establish that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

The rationale is that development standards are not ends in themselves but means of achieving ends. The ends are environmental or planning objectives. If the proposed development proffers an alternative means of achieving the objective, strict compliance with the standard would be unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the proposal will achieve the objectives of the development standard.

 

Second

A second way is to establish that the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is relevant to the subject development.

 

Third

A third way is to establish that the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

 

Comments:

The underlying objective of the standards would not be defeated or thwarted as full compliance in this instance is unreasonable.

 

Fourth

A fourth way is to establish that the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

Comments:

The FSR, landscape, and height development standards have not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

Fifth

A fifth way is to establish that “the zoning of particular land” was “unreasonable or inappropriate” so that “a development standard appropriate for that zoning was also unreasonable or unnecessary as it applied to that land” and that “compliance with the standard in that case would also be unreasonable or unnecessary.

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2C zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by medium density multi unit development. 

 

 

 

8.4      State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 - Remediation of Land

SEPP No. 55 aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land for the purposes of reducing risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment. The subject site has been used continuously for residential and health consulting purposes for a prolonged period and is not considered to carry contamination potential. Accordingly, the site is considered suitable for the proposed land use.

 

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

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

 

The proposal is for a new multi-unit housing development and the applicant will be required to submit a BASIX certificate prior to the issue of a construction 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.

 

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.

 

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

Application of Policy-

This Policy applies to development being:

(a)    The erection of a new residential flat building, and

(a)    The substantial redevelopment or the substantial refurbishment of an existing residential flat building, and

(b)    The conversion of an existing building to a residential flat building.

(c)    If particular development comprises development to which subclause (1) applies and other development, this Policy applies to the part of the development that is development to which subclause (1) applies and does not apply to the other part.

The guide stipulates that the SEPP is to be applied in accordance with the following paragraph:

The proposed works do not fall under SEPP 65 and as such the application was not referred to the Design Review Panel.

 

 

 

 

 

9.    Policy Controls

9.1      Development Control Plan – Multi-Unit Housing

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

Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

The application was accompanied by a suitable site analysis plan reflecting the elements of the proposed development.  

P2 Development sites have appropriate areas/dimensions to allow for satisfactory siting of buildings.

S2 Sites are of regular shape with frontages of at least 20m.

The site is of regular shape with an existing frontage of 20.12m. Complies.

The site allows for satisfactory siting of buildings.

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

Not applicable.

Height

P1 Heights of walls, their location and orientation do not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties.

 

The proposed development is generally consistent with the overall building and external wall height controls with the exception of the south eastern corner (rear) due to a fall in topography toward the rear of the site. This does not result in excessive bulk and scale when viewed from the street.

The proposal has a height and scale which is compatible with the surrounding built environment and does not detract from the prevailing character of the locality. 

The proposal does not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining residential properties in terms of privacy, view loss, or visual bulk and scale.

P2 Variations in massing and height create visual interest, distribute the bulk of the building and minimise amenity impacts on the streetscape and adjoining properties.

 

The building is appropriately articulated with staggering wall alignments, a combination of materials, balconies, and creates satisfactory visual interest through use of an interesting roof form and blade walls etc.

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

Complies - setback is 3m consistent with 19 Boronia Street and existing dwelling. 21-25 Boronia is setback 6 metres, however 3 metres is considered acceptable as the majority of buildings along this side of Boronia Street have similar 3 – 3.5m setbacks to the front.

P2  Side boundary setbacks

Side setbacks to ensure:

§ Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

§ Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

§ Landscaping and private open space provided.

§ Streetscape amenity is maintained.

S2  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 5 metres.

 

 

No part closer than 3.5 metres.

 

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

 

 

North: 2.5m Does not comply

South: 3.7m Complies

 

North: Min. 2.5m Does not comply

South: Min. 3.7m. Complies

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is approximately 8.1m. Complies

Setbacks to the northern boundary of the site do not comply with preferred solutions. This portion of the building does not contribute to

 

 

overshadowing and represents minimal potential to overlook into the adjoining property as the windows proposed are of block glass. A suitable condition will be imposed to ensure that the wrap-around section of balcony is screened from the property to the north to maintain adequate levels of privacy.

The southern side setbacks do not comply due to the protruding lobby/stairwell areas. The bulk of the southern elevation is setback from the southern side boundary by 5m and the small portion of non-compliance is not anticipated to generate any unreasonable privacy and overshadowing concerns.

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

Ensure that:

§ Solar access and overshadowing are minimised.

§ Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

§ Landscaping, communal recreation facilities and outdoor clothes drying spaces provided.

§ Building built across site.

S3  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 8 metres.

No part closer than 6 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

2.99m – 3.5m Does not comply

2.99m – 3.5m Does not comply

8m Complies

 

The proposal is setback further from the rear boundary than the existing dwelling on the site (which is setback approximately 2.35 metres). The proposal relies on the setback of the existing building to the east to provide separation of approximately 11 metres between the external walls of the buildings.

 

 

The proposed setback allows for deep soil planting and will not result in overshadowing, visual privacy or visual bulk impacts to surrounding properties.

P4  General

Eaves, window hoods and other sun-shading or weather protection pose no significant adverse impact on adjoining properties.

S4 No device may encroach more than 25% of the Preferred Solution.

The proposed shading devices and design of the development will not result in significant shadow impacts on the adjoining properties.

Density

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

 

The proposed development is not inconsistent with the character of the locality and the proposed dwellings maintain even distribution of scale and form to ensure that adequate character/scale elements are afforded to the streetscape.

Building bulk has been distributed to avoid unacceptable impacts upon adjacent properties.

Fences

P1  Fences to be/have:       

§ consistent with streetscape;