Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 9 February 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Planning Committee Meeting

 

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 9 February 2010 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 - 1 December 2009

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Urgent Business

Development Application Reports

D1/10       71-73 Frenchmans Road, Randwick (Deferred)

D2/10       1130 Anzac Parade, Maroubra

D3/10       23-25 Strachan Street, Kingsford

D4/10       373 Avoca Street, Randwick

D5/10       61 High Street, Randwick

D6/10       13-15 Silver Street, Randwick

D7/10       164 Belmore Road, Randwick

 

 

Miscellaneous Reports

M1/10       Land & Environment Court proceeding in relation to 1406-1408 Anzac Parade, Little Bay

M2/10       Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP) - Council procedures

M3/10       UNSW request to amend Council's S94A Development Contributions Plan

M4/10       Advising of Monitoring & Advice Procedures for Political Donation Disclosures & Affordable Rental Housing Development    

 

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D1/10

 

 

Subject:                  71-73 Frenchmans Road, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/927/2008

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Introduction

 

The subject application is for demolition of the rear wing of the existing building on site, construction of a 4-storey extension to the rear of the existing building to be retained, alterations and additions to the existing building with the erection of a new 4th floor level, and provision of a surface car park with 8 spaces. As part of the proposal, the applicant has offered to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Council for a lump sum of $70,000.

 

The application was considered by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 24 November 2009 when it was resolved that the “application be deferred to investigate any further opportunities to increase the provision of parking on the site.”

 

On 8 December 2009, the applicant submitted an amended plan demonstrating the provision of 4 additional parking spaces at the rear of the site. This will bring the total number of parking bays to 12.

 

Issues

 

Parking

The original proposal will result in a numeric shortfall of 10 car parking spaces when assessed against the provisions of the Development Control Plan – Parking.

 

Council has engaged a planning consultant, URaP-TTW, to undertake an independent car parking review of the proposed development (dated 6 November 2009). The study has utilised a set of lower parking rates than Council’s DCP to calculate the parking requirement of the proposed development, given the site’s high accessibility and the relative small size of the dwelling units. The study concludes that the parking deficiency, after allowing for the existing parking credit, would be in the order of 7 or 8 spaces, instead of Council’s calculation of 10 spaces by strict application of the DCP parking rates.

 

The revised design will provide 4 extra parking bays and a new driveway in addition to the parking facilities contained in the original design scheme. The amended proposal will reduce the shortfall to 3 or 4 spaces, having regard to the consultant’s parking calculations.

 

The amended proposal will require the construction of a second driveway crossing off Roscrea Avenue and will reduce kerb side parking by approximately 2 spaces. However, it is considered that the impact on public parking is minimal and the provision of 4 extra on-site parking bays will more than compensate for the above loss.

 

When all relevant factors are considered, including good public transport links, the fact that the site cannot benefit from further consolidation and that the use of car stackers is impractical, the application is deemed to be supportable in this regard.

 


Landscape

The original proposal has included a deep soil landscaped garden of approximately 144m2 in area to the rear of the building. The garden will support a range of trees, shrubs and ground covers that soften the building structures and improve visual privacy between properties. The revised proposal will require removal of the majority of the above landscaped area (by approximately 130m2).

 

From a landscape design perspective, it is preferred to retain the deep soil garden to improve the streetscape presentation of the development and amenity for the surrounding residents. However, the provision of additional on-site parking would assist in accommodating the demands of the occupants within the site and potentially reduce pressures on kerb side spaces.

 

In order to protect the streetscape amenity, a specific condition is recommended to require suitable shrub planting at the north-eastern corner of the site for visual screening purposes.

 

Based on the above, it is considered that the amended design is acceptable, subject to the recommended condition. 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development

Direction 4a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development      

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no financial implication associated with the revised development proposal.

 

Conclusion

 

The revised design will provide 4 extra parking bays and a new driveway in addition to the parking facilities contained in the original design scheme. The amended proposal will reduce the parking shortfall from 7 or 8 spaces to 3 or 4 spaces, having regard to the report prepared by Council’s independent consultant, URaP-TTW. When all relevant factors are considered (good public transport links, the fact that the site cannot benefit from further consolidation and that the use of car stackers is impractical) the application is deemed to be supportable in this regard.

 

In order to ameliorate the visual impacts of the extended parking area, a special condition is recommended to require suitable shrub planting to be provided in the garden bed at the north-eastern corner of the site.

 

The application satisfies the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The potential impacts of the proposal are deemed to be acceptable and the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council, as the consent authority, supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 32(3) and 33(5) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio and maximum building height respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, 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. 927/2008 for demolition of the rear wing of the existing building on site, construction of a new 4th floor level on the existing building to be retained, and construction of a 4-storey rear extension, to create 2 x retail suites, 1 x health consulting room, 4 x 2-bedroom units, 3 x 1-bedroom units, 6 x studio units and car parking for 12 vehicles, at  71-73 Frenchmans Road, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

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

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

ATES-01D

09.04.2009

1 May 2009

ATES-02D

09.04.2009

1 May 2009

ATES-03D

09.04.2009

1 May 2009

ATES-04D

09.04.2009

1 May 2009

ATES-06D

09.04.2009

1 May 2009

ATES-07C

03.12.2008

19 December 2008

       

prepared by CSA Architects; as amended by the drawing received by Council on 8 December 2009 demonstrating a revised car parking design incorporating 12 parking bays; the application form and any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be consistent with the approved drawings.

 

3.       Suitable Australian native shrubs are to be planted in the garden bed at the north-eastern corner of the site. The selected species shall be capable of reaching a minimum height of 3m at maturity. The shrubs are to be adequately spaced so as to enable effective screening of the car parking areas. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate application.

 

4.       The proposed car parking spaces are to be designed, constructed, line-marked and sign-posted as being compliant with Australian Standard 2890.1(2004): Off-Street Car Parking. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate application.

 

5.       A minimum of six (6) bicycle parking spaces are to be provided within the development. The design and construction of the bicycle parking facilities are to be compliant with Australian Standards 2890.3: Bicycle Parking Facilities. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate application.

 

6.       Ceiling fans are to be installed within the development in accordance with the approved drawings.

 

7.       The metal roofing of the development is to be pre-painted or colour-bonded so that no unreasonable light overspill or reflection will result.

 

8.       A fixed planter box of not less than 900mm in width with suitable planting is to be installed within the central courtyard/light well adjacent to the bedroom window of Unit 2, in order to improve privacy for the above dwelling.

 

9.       The south-western wall to the central courtyard/light well abutting the shared boundary with No. 67-69 Frenchmans Road shall be appropriately finished (for instance, rendered and paint-finished) on both sides.

 

10.     The south-western screen walls to the rear-facing balconies of Units 2, 7 and 11 shall have a minimum height of 1800mm as measured from the finished floor level.

 

11.     The south-western windows of Units 2, 7 and 11, which are located adjacent to the balconies, shall be constructed with fixed, obscured glazing.

 

12.     Access to the residential garbage room shall be controlled by an appropriate security system, such as lock and key or swipe card, etc. The system shall be designed so that the commercial tenants do not have access to the residential bin room. Details of compliance shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to issuing of the Occupation Certificate.

 

13.     Suitable ventilation grilles shall be installed in the enclosing walls to both the commercial and residential garbage rooms, so that these areas can be naturally ventilated from the car park.

 

14.     Street and unit numbering must be provided to the premises in a prominent position, in accordance with 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.

 

15.     Power supply and telecommunications cabling to the development shall be underground.

 

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

 

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

 

18.     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 paving or the like on the ground) without the written consent of Council.

 

19.     Any gates/bi-folding doors shall be constructed so that the gates/doors, when hung, will be fitted in such a manner that they will not open over the footway or public place.

 

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

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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)

 

23.     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 condition is applied to meet additional demands for public facilities:

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost $100,001 - $200,000

------

0.5%

------

Development cost more than $200,000

$1,682,545

1.0%

$16,825.45

 

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

 

25.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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.

 

30.     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”.

 

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

 

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

 

32.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

·    Has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land that states that the market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work does not exceed $5000.

 

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 work.

 

34.     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.

 

35.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

38.     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.

 

39.     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 all of the premises adjoining the subject site.

 

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 abovestated premises, prior to the commencement of any works.

 

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

 

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.     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 constructed 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.

 

44.     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.

 

a)     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.

 

b)     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.

 

c)     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.

 

d)     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.

 

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

 

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 upon any part of the footpath, road or nature strip or in any public place:-

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·           construction traffic management provisions.

 

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

 

46.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

50.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

§   Details of hazardous materials, including asbestos

§   Method/s of demolition and removal of asbestos

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

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

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

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

§   Date the demolition and removal of asbestos will commence

 

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

 

52.     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 50 m2 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 demolition and remedial works , which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately and the relevant requirements contained in the Asbestos Survey and conditions of consent in relation to the safe removal and disposal of asbestos, have been satisfied.

 

The following condition is applied to provide access and facilities for people with disabilities:

 

53.     Access for people with disabilities must be provided to and within the entrance floor of the building in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS1428.1 to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority. Details of the proposed access for people with disabilities are to be included in the plans/specifications for the construction certificate.

 

Road/Asset Openings

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that appropriate provisions are made for infrastructure, drainage and services:

 

54.     Any openings within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place (i.e. for proposed drainage works or installation of services), must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of Council:

 

a)   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.

 

b)   The owner/developer 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.

 

c)   Relevant Road/Asset Opening Permit fees, construction fees, inspection fees and security deposits, must be paid to Council prior to commencing any works within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or other public place.

 

d)   Excavations and trenches must be back-filled and compacted in accordance with AUSPEC standards 306U.

 

e)   Excavations or trenches located upon a road or footpath are required to be provided with 50mm depth of cold-mix bitumen finish, level with the existing road/ground surface, to enable Council to readily complete the finishing works at a future date.

 

f)    Excavations or trenches located upon turfed areas are required to be back-filled, compacted, top-soiled and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf.

 

g)   The work and area must be maintained in a clean, safe and tidy condition at all times and the area must be thoroughly cleaned at the end of each day’s activities and upon completion.

 

h)   Public and vehicular safety must be maintained at all times and any related directions issued by Council officers must be complied with.

 

i)    The work can only be carried out in accordance with approved hours of building work as specified in the development consent, unless the express written approval of Council has been obtained beforehand.

 

j)    All work, including the provision of barricades, fencing, lighting, signage and traffic control, must be carried out in accordance with the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority publication - ‘Traffic Control at Work Sites’ and Australian Standard AS 1742.3 – Traffic Control Devices for Works on Roads, at all times.

 

k)   Not more than half of any road is to be opened up at any one time and excavations must be provided with suitable fencing/ barricades and flashing amber lights if not completed by the end of the day.

 

l)    Any necessary approvals must be obtained from NSW Police, Roads & Traffic Authority, State Transit Authority and relevant Service Authorities, prior to commencing work upon or within the road, footway or nature strip.

 

All conditions and requirements of the NSW Police, Roads & Traffic Authority, State Transit Authority and Council must be complied with at all times.

 

m)  A detailed Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council and relevant Authorities, prior to carrying out any work which results in the closure or partial closure of a State or Regional Road , as identified by the NSW Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

n)   Sediment control measures must be implemented in accordance with the conditions of development consent and soil, sand or any other material must not be allowed to enter the stormwater drainage system or cause a pollution incident.

 

o)   The owner/developer must have a Public Liability Insurance Policy in force, with a minimum cover of $10 million and a copy of the insurance policy must be provided to Council prior to carrying out any works within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place.

 

p)   Council’s Road / Asset Opening Officer must be notified at least 48 hours in advance of commencing any excavation works and also immediately upon completing the works (on 9399 0691 or 0409 033 921 during business hours), to enable any necessary inspections or works to be carried out.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

·       Details of the proposed recycling and waste disposal contractors.

·       Waste storage facilities and equipment.

·       Access and traffic arrangements.

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

·       Cleaning arrangements, hygiene, safety and amenity.

 

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

 

The following condition is applied to maintain reasonable levels of public health, amenity and safety:

 

56.     The demolition, removal, storage, handling and disposal of products and materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy and the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW and the NSW Department of Environment & Conservation (formerly the Environment Protection Authority), including:

 

·    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 Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos

·       Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·       Relevant Department of Environment & Conservation (DEC) / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW Guidelines.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

59.     The use of the premises and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance or damage to other premises.

 

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

 

·     before 8.00am or after 10.00pm on any Saturday, Sunday or public holiday; or

·     before 7.00am or after 10.00pm on any other day.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

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

 

62.     The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance and there are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to a public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

63.     Development consent is required to be obtained in relation to the specific ‘use’ of commercial tenancies/occupancies and ‘shop fit outs’, in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

a)   $2000.00   -      Damage/Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Traffic Conditions/Civil Works Conditions

 

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

 

65.     Prior to the issuing of any Interim or Final Occupation Certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

·      Remove the existing vehicular crossing in Roscrea Ave and to construct a new concrete heavy duty vehicular crossing and layback (maximum 6.00m wide) at kerb opposite the extended vehicular entrance, closest to the rear of the site.

 

·      Construct a new concrete heavy duty vehicular crossing and layback (maximum 6.00m wide) at kerb opposite the new vehicular entrance in Roscrea Avenue, closest to Frenchmans Road.

 

·      Re-construct the kerb and gutter for the full Roscrea Avenue site frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit points, this shall include a minimum 1.00m wide road re-knit in front of the new concrete kerb and gutter.

 

66.     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.

 

67.     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.

 

68.     All new walls adjacent to vehicular crossings must be lowered to a height of 600mm above the internal driveway level for a distance of 1.50m within the site or splayed 1.5 metre by 1.5 metre to provide satisfactory sight lines. Details are to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the release of the construction certificate showing compliance with this condition.

 

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

 

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

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

70.     The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary in Roscrea Avenue for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

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

 

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

 

72.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $1939 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of the Roscrea Avenue site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Service Authority Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

77.     The applicant shall meet the full cost of the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site to be replaced with aerial bundled cables. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be replaced. All work must be to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development.

 

Drainage Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      the kerb and gutter in Roscrea Avenue OR

 

·      The stormwater easement at the rear of the property.

 

Note:

Documentary evidence confirming use rights over the stormwater easement shall be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate

 

 

82.     Onsite stormwater detention must be provided for the redeveloped portion of the site to ensure that the maximum discharge from the redeveloped portion of the site does not exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 5 year storm of 1 hour duration for the existing site conditions. All other stormwater run-off from the above site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 year storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the kerb and gutter or drainage system as required by Council.  Provision is to be made for satisfactory overland flow should a storm in excess of the above parameters occur.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

84.     Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas accessible by residents of all units 

 

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

 

·           150mm in uncovered carparking areas (with an isolated maximum depth of 200mm permissible at the low point pit within the detention area).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

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

 

87.     The applicant shall ensure that the structural integrity of the existing stormwater drainage line, located adjacent to the northern site boundary within a private drainage easement, is maintained. Details of how the stormwater line is to be protected during construction of the development shall be submitted to the certifying authority for approval, and approved, prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for this development. The applicant shall also detail how access to the private drainage easement and pipeline is to be provided to those parties with an interest in the easement and pipeline.

 

88.     The applicant shall ensure that no existing overland stormwater flowpath through the development site is blocked or altered in such a way as to direct stormwater overland flow into an adjoining property.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

b)      prior to stormwater discharging into any absorption/infiltration system.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·      Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·      Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

·      Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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

 

Waste Management Conditions

 

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

 

95.     The garbage room for the residential areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a total of 13 x 240 litre bins (7 garbage bins & 6 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins. Details showing compliance with this requirement are to be shown on the plans submitted to the certifying authority for the construction certificate.

 

96.     The applicant is to liaise with Council’s Manager of Waste regarding the required size of the commercial bin area. Details showing compliance with his requirements are to be shown in the Waste Management Plan and on plans submitted to the certifying authority for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

98.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

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

 

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

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

100.    Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plans By Michael Zinn Landscape Designer, project number 376, drawing number 01(A) and 02(B), dated 9 December 2008 and 21 April 2009 respectively (except where amended by the drawing stamp-received by Council on 8 December 2009), subject to the following additional requirements being shown on an amended plan, which shall be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the issue of a construction certificate (with a copy of the approved plan to be forwarded to Council if not the PCA, prior to the commencement of site works) and is to include:

 

a.       All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm.

 

b.       In order to reduce the amount of storm-water generated by the site, as well as to recharge groundwater supplies, porous/permeable paving shall be used in all hard surfacing not over slab.

 

c.       To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaped areas, an automatic drip irrigation system shall be installed throughout all planted areas. Details shall be provided showing that the system will be connected to the site’s rainwater tanks, with back-up connection to the mains supply, in accordance with all current Sydney Water requirements.

 

d.       All detention tanks and below ground stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm to ensure sufficient soil depth to permit the establishment of landscaping.

 

101.    Any substation required shall be screened from view, with the proposed location, elevation and screening method to be shown.

 

102.    The nature-strip on Council's Roscrea Avenue 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.

 

Streetscape Works

 

103.    The applicant shall meet all costs associated with upgrading the Frenchman’s Road site frontage in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Frenchman’s Road Commercial Centre, with all works carried out on public property to be in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council property.

 

A detailed streetscape plan for the Frenchman’s Road frontage showing existing and proposed paving design, plantings, street furniture, grades, finished levels, services, extent and location of awnings, doors/entranceways, traffic signs and any other details required shall be submitted to, and be approved by, Council’s Director of City Services, prior to the commencement of any streetscape works.

 

The applicant will be required to liaise with Council’s Landscape Architect on 9399-0915, prior to the preparation of this separate streetscape plan in order to obtain more detailed, site specific landscape design requirements.

 

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

 

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

 

Tree Management

 

104.    The applicant shall submit a total payment of $107.25 (including GST), being to cover the cost for Council to supply and install 1 x 25 litre street tree, Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush), on Council’s Roscrea Avenue nature strip, spaced evenly between the existing street tree growing near the western boundary, and the proposed vehicle crossing, at the completion of all works.

 

The contribution shall be paid into Tree Amenity Income account no 4001.768401 at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

The applicant will be required to contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613, giving at least two working weeks notice, to arrange for planting of the new street tree upon completion of all site works.

 

105.    With the exception of the Dracaena draco (Dragon Tree), which is to be retained as part of this application (refer to Tree Protection measures below), approval is granted for the removal of all other existing vegetation within the site in order to accommodate the proposed works and associated landscaping as shown.

 

Tree Protection Measures

 

106.    In order to ensure retention of the Dracaena draco (Dragon Tree) located along the northern site boundary, within an existing garden bed fronting Roscrea Avenue in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application MUST show its retention, with the position of its trunk and full diameter of its canopy clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       All construction certificate plans must show that other than re-constructing the perimeter of the garden where this tree is growing, there shall be no alteration to existing soil levels or the location of any other new structures, services, detention tanks, stormwater infiltration systems or pipes within a minimum distance of 2 metres of its trunk, with the submitted hydraulic plans needing to be amended to show compliance with this requirement.

 

c.       To prevent failure of this tree should the existing low masonry wall surrounding this garden area be demolished as part of the works, new retaining walls to the same height must be re-constructed as soon as practically possible to assist with its stability.

 

d.       This tree is to be physically protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing which shall be located around the perimeter of this garden area, ie, a distance of 1.5 metres to its east and south, 1 metre to its west, and along the northern boundary, so as to completely enclose this tree for the duration of the works.

 

e.       This fencing shall be installed prior to the commencement of demolition and construction works and shall remain in place until all works are completed, to which signage containing the following words shall be clearly displayed and permanently attached: “TREE PROTECTION ZONE, DO NOT ENTER".

 

f.        Within the zone specified in point ‘d’ above, there is to be no storage of materials or machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble.

 

g.       Any roots encountered during excavations associated with re-constructing this garden area (as described in point ‘b’ above) shall be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible. Roots shall not be left exposed

 

107.    In order to also ensure retention of the Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush), located on Council’s Roscrea Avenue nature strip, about halfway along the length of the northern boundary, between the two existing vehicle crossings in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application MUST show its retention, with the position of its trunk and full diameter of its canopy to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       All construction certificate plans must show that any services, stormwater infiltration systems, pipes etc which need to be installed over public property along this frontage, must be done so along the edge of the proposed vehicle crossing, so as to minimise any damage to its root system caused by excavations.

 

c.       This tree is to be physically protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing which shall be located a minimum distance of 2 metres to both its west and east (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), as well as along the back of the kerb to its north, and the pedestrian footpath to its west, in order to completely enclose this tree for the duration of the works.

 

d.       This fencing shall be installed prior to the commencement of demolition and construction works and shall remain in place until all works are completed, to which signage containing the following words shall be clearly displayed and permanently attached: “TREE PROTECTION ZONE, DO NOT ENTER".

 

e.       The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to this street tree, and shall contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 should pruning or any similar such work appear necessary, with the applicant required to cover all associated costs with such work, to Council’s satisfaction, prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate.

 

f.        Within this zone specified in point ‘c’ above, there is to be no storage of materials or machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble.

 

g.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, cheque or bank guarantee (with no expiry date) for an amount of $1,500.00 (no GST) shall also 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, preservation of this street tree.

 

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 Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613).

 

Any contravention of Council's conditions relating to the tree 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.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works:

 

108.    All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan must be constructed prior to the issue of a strata subdivision certificate.

 

109.    All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan must correspond to those depicted in this development consent and future construction certificates for the building.

 

110.    Prior to endorsement of the strata plans, all facilities required under this development consent (such as parking spaces, terraces and courtyards) must be provided in accordance with the relevant requirements.

 

111.    A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.

 

Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to the Building Developing and Plumbing section of the website www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to “Water Servicing Coordinator” under Developing Your Land” or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

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

 

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

 

112.    The applicant shall provide Council with the finalised survey plan of the property prior to receiving subdivision approval.

 

113.    The applicant shall create suitable rights of carriageway, easements for services, support and stormwater lines, as required. The applicant shall be advised that the minimum easement width for any stormwater line is 0.9 metres.

 

114.    A "restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant" (under section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919) shall be placed on the title of the subject property, in conjunction with the registration of the proposed plan of strata subdivision for this property, to ensure that the onsite detention system is maintained and that no works which could affect the design function of the detention system are undertaken without the prior consent (in writing) from Council. Such restriction and positive covenant shall not be released, varied or modified without the consent of the Council.

 

Notes:

a.   The "restriction as to user and positive covenant" are to be to the satisfaction of Council. A copy of Council’s standard wording/layout for the restriction and positive covenant may be obtained from Council’s Development Engineer.

 

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

 

115.    A formal subdivision application is required to be submitted to and approved by the Council or an accredited certifier and all conditions of this development consent are required to be satisfied prior to the release of the subdivision plans.

 

116.    Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority, together with any other certification relied upon, must be provided to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the issuing of a subdivision certificate.

 

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 and developer are 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 prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

A2.     The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specification must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

In this regard, the development consent plans do not show compliance with the deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the BCA, including:

a)     Part B1                  -     Structural provisions

b)     Part C1                 -     Fire resistance and stability

c)     Part C2                 -     Compartmentation and separation

d)     Clause C3.2            -     Protection of openings in external walls

e)     Part D3                 -     Access for people with disabilities

f)      Clause D3.5            -     Car parking for people with disabilities

g)     Part E1                  -     Fire fighting equipment

h)     Part E2                  -     Smoke Hazard Management

i)      Part E3                  -     Lift Installations

j)      Part E4                  -     Emergency lighting, exit signs & warning systems

k)     Part F1                  -     Damp and weatherproofing

l)      Part F2                  -     Sanitary and other facilities

m)     Part F3                  -     Room sizes

n)     Part F4                  -     Light and ventilation

o)     Part F5                  -     Sound Transmission and Insulation

p)     Section J               -     Energy efficiency

 

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.

 

You are 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 prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

A3.     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.

 

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

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D2/10

 

 

Subject:                  1130 Anzac Parade, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/524/2008/B

Author:                   Frank Ko, Executive Planner      

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(1A) -Modification of condition of the development consent in relation to Section 94A contributions

 

Ward:                      South Ward

 

Applicant:                Greek Orthodox Parish of South East Sydney - St Spyridon

 

Owner:                         St Spyridon College High School

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application has been referred to the Planning Committee for determination as the original application was determined by Council.

 

The original application for staged works including alterations to the library, extension of the car park, demolition of existing demountable buildings, and construction of new classrooms, a walkway, tower, colonnade, entry portico and a multi-purpose hall was approved at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 21 October 2008 subject to conditions. The original estimated cost of development was $8 million.

 

The subject application under the provisions of Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning Assessment Act, 1979 (as amended) proposes the modification of a condition of the consent in relation to Section 94A contributions.

 

This application is in response to a Ministerial Direction issued on 9 September 2009 under Section 94E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), preventing the imposition of Section 94A contributions on development carried out under the Building Education Revolution (BER) program.

 

The BER program is a critical component of the Government’s economic stimulus package, ensuring the timely construction and refurbishment of school infrastructure.

 

The Ministerial Direction does not apply to non-BER funded components of the project.

 

The applicant has provided evidence showing part of the approved development (i.e. multi-purpose hall) at the St Spyridon College has been accepted as a BER project with funds being provided by the Federal Government of $2.5 million and requested an exemption of $25,000 (i.e. 1% of $2.5 million) to be applied accordingly.

 

As a result, the application seeks reduction of the Section 94A contributions levy from $80,000 to $55,000 to reflect the Ministerial Direction.

 

The proposed amendment to the condition of consent is considered to be reasonable and will remain substantially the same development as that previously approved.

 

For the above reasons, the subject application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposed Modification

 

The subject application seeks consent to amend condition 4 of the development consent in relation to Section 94A contributions.

 

This application is in response to a Ministerial Direction issued on 9 September 2009 under Section 94E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, preventing the imposition of Section 94A contributions on development carried out under the Building Education Revolution (BER) program. The BER program is a critical component of the Government’s economic stimulus package, ensuring the timely construction and refurbishment of school infrastructure. However, it is noted that the Ministerial Direction does not apply to non-BER funded components of the project.

 

Condition 4 of the development consent reads:

 

4.  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

$8,000,000

1%

$80,000

 

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 applicant provided evidence showing part of the approved development (i.e. multi-purpose hall) at the St Spyridon College has been accepted as a BER project with funds being provided by the Federal Government of $2.5 million and requested an exemption of $25,000 (i.e. 1% of $2.5 million) to be applied accordingly.

 

As a result, the application seeks reduction of the Section 94A contributions levy from $80,000 to $55,000 to reflect the Ministerial Direction issued on 9 September 2009. 

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located on the northern side of Anzac Parade between Beauchamp Road to the north and Truscott Avenue to the south. It is bound by Anzac Parade to its south west and 12 detached dwelling houses to its north, north east and south east and by Malabar Road to its east.

 

It has a frontage of approximately 250 metres to Anzac Parade and a depth ranging between approximately 60m and 100m. It has an overall site area of 19,999m2, according to title.

 

The site currently consists of one and two storey brick shops roofed with slate and metal.

 

The topography is generally flat with a very slight fall to the north west of approximately 1.75m over its entire 250m frontage to Anzac Parade.

 

It is currently occupied by a six school buildings of between one and two storeys, car parking, playing fields, sports courts and four demountable metal buildings to the south east of the site.

 

4.    Site History

 

Previous applications submitted for development on the site include:

 

Development No.

Description

Determination

DA/365/1986

Erect new secondary school

Approved:

26-May-1987

DA/387/1990

Relocate 4 demountable classrooms

Approved:

29-Dec-1990

DA/677/1999

Additional temporary demountable classrooms & walkway to allow teaching of Greek culture, dance & language

Approved:

02-Aug-1999

DA/483/2003

New 2 storey school building (Block C) for use as classrooms, including a covered courtyard, canteen, common room & masonry wall

Approved:

29-Aug-2003

DA/524/2008

Alterations to the library, extension of the carpark, demolition of existing demountable buildings, and construction of new classrooms, a walkway, tower, colonnade, entry portico and a multi-purpose hall.

Approved:

21 October 2008

DA/524/2008/A

Section 96(1A) – Modify internal configuration of the approved multi purpose building and alter window & door openings.

Approved:

21 August 2009

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The subject application was not required to be notified under Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The subject application has been referred to Council’s Strategic Planning division and the following comments have been provided:

 

“A Section 96 application (DA/524/2008/B) has been received to amend condition 4 of DA/524/2008 in relation to the payment of Section 94A development contributions. This is in response to a Ministerial Direction issued on 9 September 2009 under section 94E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), preventing the imposition of development contributions on development carried out under the Building Education Revolution (BER) Program.

 

Condition 4 was imposed prior to the direction being issued, the condition remains in force until such time that the condition is amended (to reflect any component of the school development that is a BER project) or a new DA is submitted. The Minister has no power to change development conditions already imposed. Informal advice provided by the Department of Planning indicated that a Section 96 application is appropriate to amend the condition to reflect the Ministerial Direction. An exemption of development contributions in respect to a BER funded project is to mitigate the impact of the development contributions on the development. The development is to remain substantially the same.”

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

The application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (as amended) and in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

7.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 & Development Control Plan - Parking

The proposal involves amendment to a condition relating to Section 94A contributions and does not alter the existing compliance with the relevant provisions of Randwick Local Environmental plan 1998 and Development Control Plan for parking.

7.2      Randwick City Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

As noted above, the subject condition was imposed prior to the Ministerial Direction being issued and the Minister has no power to change development conditions already imposed. However, an informal advice provided by the Director of Regional Coordination at Department of Planning indicated that a Section 96 application is appropriate to amend the condition to reflect the Ministerial Direction regarding BER project.

 

A new DA is not require as the exemption of development contributions for any component of the BER funded project is to mitigate the impact of the levy on the development.

 

For the above reasons, it is considered appropriate to allow the exemption of the component of the approved development that is subject to the BER funded project from the original development.

 

8.    Section 96 Amendment

 

8.1      Substantially the same

The proposed modification to the original development is considered to represent substantially the same development.

 

8.2      Consideration of submissions

As noted in Section 5 above, the amendment to the approval is considered to be minor and the subject application was not required to be notified under Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:       A vibrant and diverse community.

Direction 2c:      Strong partnerships between Councils, community groups and government agencies.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the approved development have been assessed against the requirements of the relevant planning guidelines of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and Council’s Development Control Plans for parking as well as in regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, as amended. The proposed modifications are considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same development as that previously approved and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify condition 4 of the Development Consent No. 524/2008 in relation to Section 94A contribution for St Spyridon College at 1130 Anzac Parade, Maroubra, in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition 4 to read:

 

4.     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

$5,500,000

1%

$55,000

 

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.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D3/10

 

 

Subject:                  23-25 Strachan Street, Kingsford

Folder No:                   DA/488/2009

Author:                   David Mooney, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing buildings and construction of a new 4 storey, 44 room boarding house (SEPP1 objection for landscaped area and floor space ratio)

 

Ward:                      West Ward

 

Applicant:                Pioneer Consultants Pty Ltd

 

Owner:                         Pioneer Consultant Pty Ltd

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Executive Summary

 

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

 

The proposal is for demolition of existing buildings and construction of a new 4 storey, 42-room boarding house. There is a SEPP1 objection for external wall height. The proposal satisfies the purpose of the standard and the SEPP 1 objection is well founded by the applicant.

 

The site is located on the southern side of Strachan Street, Kingsford between Houston Road and Houston Lane. The site is 855.1m² with 22.55m frontage to Strachan Street.

 

The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council policy. There were several objections and the primary issues included noise impact, inadequate parking, excessive scale, privacy and overshadowing. These issues are addressed in this assessment report.

 

The proposal satisfies the environmental and planning assessment requirements that apply and the Assessing Officer recommends deferred commencement approval subject to conditions. The deferred commencement condition deals with building materials and colours.

 

1.    The Proposal

 

The proposal is for demolition of existing buildings and construction of a new 4 storey, 42-room boarding house. The application was lodged with 5 car-parking spaces although those spaces have since been deleted to comply with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. There is a SEPP1 objection for external wall height.

 

The application was lodged before SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 came into force but may be considered under that policy according to the savings and transitional provisions that apply. There are floor space ratio, landscaped area and car-parking ‘bonuses’ that apply under the SEPP.

 

2.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located on the southern side of Strachan Street, Kingsford between Houston Road and Houston Lane. The site is made up of 2 Torrens lots and there are 2 single storey dwellings present. The site is 855.1m² and falls on a gentle westerly aspect giving it a mild cross-fall of 1 in 20. The site is rectangular with an off-set street frontage. The boundary dimensions are:

 

·      Northern Strachan Street frontage is 22.55m,

·      Western Houston Road secondary frontage is 41.555m,

·      Eastern side boundary is 35.275m

·      Southern rear boundary (and lot width) is 21.66m

 

There is a 4 storey apartment building to the south, and a 2 storey dwelling to the east. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of single dwellings. 3 and 4 storey apartment buildings occur frequently. Kingsford Town Centre is one block to the east of the site. The University of New South Wales is a 10 minute walk to the north east. Figure 1 is an aerial view of the site.

 

Figure 1 – An Aerial view of the site

 

3.    Site History

 

The present application was the subject of Council’s pre-lodgement service PL/4/2009. Council’s property database records the building and development application history for the site:

 

·      BA/164/1975           Alterations

·      BA/1421/1979          Garage

·      BA/1202/1983          Fence

·      BA/171/1993           Additions

·      DA/1081/2007          3 Storey apartment building (not commenced)

 

4.    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1

 

The proposal seeks a variation to the maximum external wall height. The proposal has external walls (up to a flat roof) to 12m, which exceeds the maximum external wall height specified in Clause 33 Randwick LEP 1998 of 10m.

 

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).

 

Assessing Officer: The stated purpose of the standards as outlined in the LEP is:

 

Building Heights: 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 for surrounding areas.

 

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

 

External wall height

 

 

Assessing Officer: The applicant’s arguments are sound. The top level is set-in from the permitter of the building except in the north-west corner. The additional building mass in the north-west corner of the site has allowed the scheme to realise most of the allowable floor space ratio, and retain generous setbacks to the southern and western boundaries. The proposed building causes less overshadowing than a building that fills the height/setback envelope because of these generous boundary setbacks. The extra mass has the support of the SEPP 65 Design Review Panel because “It is a corner building and traditionally building lines come forward to hold the corner and bring emphasis to the corners within the whole block”

 

The proposal satisfies the purpose of the building height standards and the SEPP 1 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.”

 

Assessing Officer: The applicant has presented a case to establish that compliance with the standards would not hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act. The proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the character of the locality and this is consistent with the objects as quoted in the SEPP. The variation from the External Wall Height standards is consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as it 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.

 

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”.

 

Assessing Officer: 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:

 

Table - Establishing compliance is unreasonable or necessary

Method

Assessment

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.

 

Assessing Officer: 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.

 

Comment:

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.

 

Comment:

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.

 

Comment:

The floor space ratio 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.

 

Comment:

 

The existing Residential A zoning is considered to be appropriate for the locality.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

Council advertised the proposal in the Southern Courier and notified it by letter to nearby landowners in accordance with policy on 2 occasions. The second occasion was for changes to the scheme to make it compliant with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and included omission of all on-site parking. Submissions received and the issues raised are considered here:

 

5.1 Objections

 

·      2/79 Houston Road

·      3/79 Houston Road

·      11/79 Houston Road

·      27 Strachan Street

·      10/70 Houston Road

·      Confidential objection

 

Issue: Inadequate on-site parking and impact on the availability of street parking.

 

Assessing Officer: SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 expressly forbids provision of new parking for a new boarding house. The planning intent is to keep the capital investment value low so that the boarding rooms can be let at lower rents. The impact on the availability of off-street parking would have been broadly examined and deemed to have been acceptable by the State Government when writing the SEPP.

 

Issue: Excessive floor space ratio, inadequate setbacks and landscaping and the impact on the character of the locality.

 

Assessing Officer: Floor space ratio complies with the maximum specified in SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The SEPP 65 Design Review Panel says of setbacks and landscaping: “It is a corner building and traditionally building lines come forward to hold the corner and bring emphasis to the corners within the whole block. Moving the building closer to the street also benefits the neighbours, as it allows increased rear setbacks and more garden areas.”

 

Issue: Noise impact from occupants on balconies and in common areas; loud music; and driveway adjacent to 40-42 Houston Road.

 

Assessing Officer: There is an operational management plan which includes a requirement that noise be kept to a minimum. An on-site manager would be present on the site to deal with any complaints in the first instance. The manager’s contact details will be displayed at the front of the premises. There are a range of remedies available to a neighbour in the case of ‘offensive noises’ and further consent conditions are not necessary. The driveway adjacent to 40-42 has been deleted.

 

Issue: Impact of noise, vibration and dust during construction.

 

Assessing Officer: There are conditions in the recommendation dealing with managing the construction site.

 

Issue: Building is likely to be occupied in excess of capacity causing over-population, and in breach of fire safety and occupational health and safety regulations.

 

Assessing Officer: There is a condition in the recommendation limiting occupation.

 

Issue: Building may be used to accommodate the homeless, mentally ill or the drug affected. Not in their interests to be housed together in large complexes.

 

Assessing Officer: The welfare of these kinds of people when they come into care is generally managed by state welfare agencies and does not require consent conditions or warrant refusal of this development application.

 

Issue: There is no live-in manager to enforce house-rules about noise and anti-social behaviour.

 

Assessing Officer: SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 requires a boarding room to be provided for a boarding house manager. There is one boarding room so designated on the plans.

 

Issue: Overshadowing to 27 Strachan Street and 40-42 Houston Road

 

Assessing Officer: Solar access and overshadowing is addressed in the environmental assessment section of this report. The proposal achieves superior solar performance to a building that would fill the LEP height and DCP setbacks for multi-unit housing

 

Issue: Overlooking to 27 Strachan Street and 40-42 Houston Road

 

Assessing Officer: Privacy and overlooking is addressed in the environmental assessment section of this report. The proposal achieves a generous separation from the neighbouring properties and generally provides for a 10m buffer.

 

Issue: Loss of outlook to open sky from 40-42 Houston Road

 

Assessing Officer: The outlook to the lower sky from 40-42 is partly through the LEP building envelope on the subject site and it is unable to be retained for this reason. The proposal allows more outlook to the sky than a scheme that would fill the LEP building envelope because of generous southern and western boundary setbacks.

 

Issue: Loss of fresh air to 40-42 Houston Road

 

Assessing Officer: The proposal allows greater circulation of air to 40-42 than a scheme that would fill the LEP building envelope because of generous setbacks to the southern and western boundary.

 

Issue: Loss of significant vegetation from the development site.

 

Assessing Officer: This issue is addressed by Council’s Landscape Technician in the Technical Officer’s Comments section of this report.

 

Issue: Loss of rental income from investment properties due to saturation of the market and impact on the availability of on-street parking.

 

Assessing Officer: More affordable rental housing is, broadly, the aim of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and it is achieved by allowing floor space ratio and on-site parking bonuses, among other planning measures.

 

Issue: Project timing is in competition with university construction projects. There has been a decline in international students.

 

Assessing Officer: More affordable rental accommodation close to the University would be necessary to continue to attract international students.

 

Issue: Proposal does not meet boarding house requirements because there are no cook staff and communal facilities.

 

Assessing Officer: There are no requirements for cook staff. The proposed communal facilities are adequate.

 

Issue: There is the possibility of rubbish being thrown on to the roof of 27 Strachan Street.

 

Assessing Officer: This would illegal and the owner of 27 Strachan Street would be entitled to prosecute any person that threw rubbish onto their roof. There is no additional need for consent conditions to address this matter.

 

Issue: Cumulative impact on infrastructure and traffic.

 

Assessing Officer: The site is zoned and serviced for the proposed development.

 

5.2 Kingsford Precinct Committee

 

Recently we received the following letter from a resident about DA/488/2009. Since there will not have been a precinct meeting during the consultation period for this DA, the chairperson and secretary are sending this submission on behalf of the precinct.

 

One of us has since visited the site and agrees that this proposal represents a gross overdevelopment. Seen from the street, the existing two properties, when combined can be said to have a frontage equivalent to one residential property. Thus it is an extreme change to consider that such a site be developed so that it can be occupied by almost 80 people. This is certainly high density living and, being so close to the UNSW, will add to the existing problems of on-street parking, as only five parking spaces will be provided. It can also be anticipated that, from the balconies and BBQ area, there will be an unacceptable noise impact on nearby residents.

 

In recent years, this precinct has passed motions, which have urged RCC to develop a Development Control Plan for Boarding Houses. We suggest that if this was available, that this DA would be dismissed immediately as it would not comply with the reasonable requirements of such a DCP. In its continued absence, we recommend that the DA be rejected.

 

Assessing Officer: The site is located close to the University and in Randwick’s highest density residential zone. The proposal complies with the maximum floor space ratio for the site (specified in SEPP Affordable Rental Housing). The proposed density is acceptable. The Committee’s concerns about on-street parking and noise impact are addressed elsewhere in this report.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The Assessing Officer referred the application to Council’s Technical Officers, and they have provided the following comments.

 

Development Engineer

 

An amended application has been received for the demolition of the existing dwellings and construction of a 4 storey boarding house with 41 rooms plus one Manager’s room giving a total of 42 rooms.

 

The amendments relate to removing the basement car park and providing only motorcycle parking (9 spaces) at ground level at the rear southern boundary

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Drwg No DA01-03 by J Cracknel & P Lonergan dated 10 November 2009;

·      Landscape Plan Proj No 534 dwg No 01 by M Zinn dated Nov 2009

 

Waste Management

Council’s Waste Management Development Officers have been advised that the applicant has still shown a bin storage area for 11 waste bins and 4 recycle bins and has put forward the argument that a 32 room boarding house at 2-4 Strachan St (DA 1077/07) was approved with 8 bins and a 42 room boarding house at 305 Anzac Pde (DA 237/07) was approved with 10 bins.

 

Council’s Waste Management Development Officers have had advised by e-mail (21/12/09):

 

Council's guideline for garbage generation rates for boarding houses is 60L/occupant/week. If all 43 accommodate 1 occupant than the development will generate 2,520L garbage per week, which requires 11x240L garbage bins. The Council supplies equivalent number of recycling bins, therefore the developer needs to provide storage area for minimum of 22x 240L garbage bins and collection presentation area to present all the bins in a single row for collection.

 

The Assessing Officer is advised that the applicant is deficient by 7 recycling bins and Development Engineering has included a condition at the request of Council’s Waste Management Development Officers that requires the garbage room area to be redesigned prior to the issuing of a construction certificate which shows the garbage room containing 22 x 240 bins (11 waste & 11 recycle).

 

It should be noted that an inspection by Council’s Waste Management Development Officer to the other sites quoted by the applicant in regards to garbage room usage has found these sites are using more bins than what they are paying for.

 

Assessing Officer: The Engineer’s consent condition for bin storage is included in the recommendation.

 

Drainage

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.

 

Assessing Officer: The Engineer’s consent condition for drainage plans included in the recommendation.

 

Parking

The applicant has submitted amended plans which have deleted the basement car park and thus no parking for cars has been provided in the amended plans. The applicant does provide 9 Motorcycle Parking Bays.

 

The applicant has referred to the SEPP - Affordable Housing as the reason to not requiring the provision of off-street parking. The Planning Assessment Officer is to confirm that this is correct.

 

The Planning Assessment Officer is advised that Council’s Development Engineering does not agree with the SEPP – Affordable Housing and would prefer off-street parking be provided for the development.

 

Assessing Officer: The SEPP does prohibit the provision of new car parking spaces for boarding houses at Clause 30. The planning intent is to keep the capital investment cost of boarding houses lower so that the boarding rooms cost less to rent.

 

Service Authority

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The proposed works will be in excess of $2 million. A site inspection revealed that there are only feeder lines into the subject site. Consequently the applicant will only need to meet all costs associated with undergrounding the cables servicing the subject site.

 

Assessing Officer: The Development Engineer’s conditions about undergrounding of services are included in the recommendation.

 

Landscape Technician

 

While this application has been amended since the pre-lodgement in May 2009 (refer PL/4/09), the changes made do not affect the original landscape comments, with conditions in this report remaining consistent.

 

Whilst there is no vegetation either on Council’s Strachan Street nature strip, or within the front yard of 25 Strachan Street; within the front yard of number 23, there are two, multi-trunk Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palms), of around 4-5 metres in height, which appear in reasonable health and condition, and are seen as attractive accent plantings.

 

However, they are exempt from the provisions of Council’s TPO due to their inappropriate location hard up against the front of this existing dwelling, and as it would not be physically possible to retain either specimen, approval has been granted for their removal as part of any future proposal.

 

Still within the front yard of no 23, right in the northwest corner of this site, there is one Metrosideros excelsa ‘Variegata’ (Variegated NZ Xmas Tree), and then immediately to its south, one Persea amercianna (Avocado Tree), and then further to their south again, about halfway along the length of the western boundary, a Morus nigra (Mulberry Tree), all of which are about 4 metres in height.

 

While they were observed to provide partial privacy and screening between this private property and the adjoining public domain, none are deemed to be particularly desirable species or significant in anyway, and as such, approval is granted for their removal in order to accommodate the proposed works. 

 

In the rear yard of 23 Strachan Street, along the rear (southern) boundary there are two small Olea europaea (European Olives), of about 4 metres in height, and then to their east, in the rear yard of 25 Strachan, along its western boundary, between the existing free-standing garage and dwelling, there is from south to north, one Mangifera indica (Mango Tree) of around 5 metres in height, and then another Persea americanna (Avocado Tree) of slightly smaller dimensions.

 

Whilst being the most established vegetation within either property, all are insignificant, and not deemed worthy of retention, with approval granted for their removal.

 

Beyond the northwest corner of the site, within an irregularly shaped garden area on public land at the intersection of Strachan Street and Houston Road, there is a variety of decorative, low growing Dianella varieties, as well as a semi-established Platanus x hybrida (London Plane Tree) of approximately 8 metres in height, which is prominent in the streetscape.

 

Given the close proximity of this garden to the site, as well as competition for parking spaces due mainly to the presence of the UNSW nearby, there is a high likelihood that damage will be caused to this area during the course of works by trucks, machinery and the delivery or stockpiling of materials and similar, and as they need to be protected and preserved, relevant conditions, together with a monetary bond as security for compliance, have been included in this report.

 

Still on public property, along the length of the Houston Road nature strip (which is poorly maintained and strewn with litter), there is a row of five Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda’s), of between about 1-4 metres in height, which despite being in average condition due to past damage/vandalism, are still covered by Council’s TPO.

 

While only small at this point in time, their value will increase in time as they become larger and more recognizable in the streetscape, and will also soften the visual impact of the proposed building onto the Houston Road frontage, with relevant measures to ensure their preservation included in this report.

 

The comments made in relation to the preparation of a formal landscape plan have been acknowledged, with the submitted plan proposing a high quality treatment which will benefit both future occupants, neighbours and the streetscape, and will need to be fully implemented.

 

Building Services Officer

 

The Proposal

The proposal provides for the demolition of the existing 2 dwellings and construction of a new 4 storey Multi Unit Housing residential development containing 44 self containing.

 

BCA Building Classification

Class      - 2    (Residential Units)

 

Background

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

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Assessing Officer: The Building Services conditions about BCA and fire safety compliance are included in the recommendation.

 

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.

 

Assessing Officer: The Building Services conditions about site management are included in the recommendation.

 

Access for people with a disability:

Access and facilities for people with disabilities are not required under the Building Code of Australia, however, Council multi unit housing code requires 1 adaptable unit/every 14 units. Therefore, 4 adaptable units are required.

 

Assessing Officer: Council’s multi-unit housing code does not apply to boarding houses.

 

Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel

The applicant submitted amended plans subsequent to the Panel’s review. Some of the Design Review Panel’s recommendations would have resulted in a larger and higher building and as a result they were not incorporated in amendments to the proposal.

 

The Panel has previously seen this proposal at pre-DA stage in April 2009, and this proposal has now been lodged as a DA. The Panel had considered an earlier scheme for the site by different architects that had been approved.

 

The proposal does not meet the allowable FSR and landscaping controls. These will be part of a SEPP 1 objection process by the applicant. The report prepared by Cracknell and Lonergan Architects argues that these controls and much of the legal/planning framework prevents the deployment of quality hostel accommodation, suited to student accommodation.

 

Assessing Officer: The proposal actually does comply with higher maximum floor space ratio for the site specified in SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

There are some particularities of the site which allow such variations to the controls to be considered.

 

Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

The site is on a prominent corner at the intersection of Houston Road and Strachan Street. Both streets are unusually wide, which allows for perpendicular parking in the street reserve. The street width also calls for new buildings with a positive urban scale, character and engagement with the street.

 

The improvement of the public domain should also form part of this proposal, whether through Section 94 provisions or a Voluntary Agreement.

 

Assessing Officer: Section 94 developer contributions are levied in the recommendation.

 

The Panel supports the position of the building forward of the building line on both Strachan St and Houston Road. It is a corner building and traditionally building lines come forward to hold the corner and bring emphasis to the corners within the whole block. Moving the building closer to the street also benefits the neighbours, as it allows increased rear setbacks and more garden areas.

 

The montage is particularly unclear and does not give a good impression of what the final appearance will be when compared to the plans. Glazing lines for doors and windows are not evident on the drawing. A better drawing would reveal a more solid building. It would also reveal a large area of unprotected glass (north and west facing) on all the corner apartments.

 

Assessing Officer: The recommendation includes a deferred commencement condition that requires details of building materials and a photomontage.

 

While the building does not attempt to relate to the context in scale, bulk, or appearance, its context has a variety of styles and relatively poor building stock.  The Panel supports well designed contemporary architecture within an older suburb/context, however the building has to meet all requirements of SEPP 65.

 

The continuous, unrelenting fence directly on the boundary is considered a poor street front interface.

 

Assessing Officer: There is a deferred commencement condition in the recommendation that requires a lower fence and submission of more details on the design and material.

 

The Scale of the Proposal

More detail with shading devices to protect the exposed western glass may help the scale of the project. An open corridor for the east west link would break the elevation on Houston Road. This happens on the ground floor but consideration should be given to opening the corridor to the west on all levels.

 

Assessing Officer: The western glass is amply shaded by balcony overhangs or roof devices at least 1m wide. An open corridor on the east west link on all levels was included in the plan revisions 11 November 2009.

 

The Built Form of the Proposal

The form is monolithic as expressed in the montage. The clarity is appealing but the Panel is concerned that it does not reflect good environmental design practice or likely construction details. The west and north elevations have very little detail to comment on. The drawings and the design are not adequately developed –the neighbouring buildings are drawn with more detail.

 

Assessing Officer: There is a deferred commencement condition in the recommendation that requires more detail on building materials and colours. Construction details can be dealt with in the Construction Certificate.

 

The three curved ends / corner elements should be adjusted in their geometry to provide these units with usable balconies and shading.

 

Assessing Officer: Several balconies on the northern elevation are little more than ‘break-out’ spaces and are not useful as outdoor recreational spaces. This is because of the unusual ovoid shape of the building. Increasing the balcony space would either upset the shape of the building, or reduce internal floor area. Since balconies are not a requirement of boarding houses (in fact, Clause 29 of SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009 prohibits Council from refusing consent on the grounds of open space) and there is a large communal space at ground level, these changes recommended by the Design Review Panel are not necessary.

 

The south side could also appear bulky in scale with the narrow open corridors placed against the units. The corridors could be widened as discussed in the meeting to create a narrow space (1000mm +-) between the units and the corridor. Bikes, drying clothes or plants could occupy this zone. It would also allow for lower windows to open up to the space from the units. This space could also be added to the north/south corridor.

 

Assessing Officer: Widening the corridors would also add to the footprint of the building decreasing the landscaped area.

 

The northern stair could be rotated to reduce the length of the east west corridor.

 

Assessing Officer: Rotating the northern stair would reduce the length of the east west corridor by just 1m. This is not a design issue that is fatal to the development application.

 

The Panel recommends that the "band element" to the rear should be deleted.

 

Assessing Officer: This is an architectural device that is intended to allow the ovoid spirit of the building to be observed within the site. It is at the rear of the building and not significant to the streetscape. It does not need to be deleted.

 

The provision of 3 car spaces on site is considered by the Panel to be unnecessary particularly when 2 car spaces in the street are lost to provide driveway access. This space would be much better given over to landscape.

 

Assessing Officer: The proposal was amended to omit parking altogether to comply with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

As noted previously the Panel would like to see better use of the roof design to optimise benefits of winter sun and summer breezes to all the top floor apartments.

 

Assessing Officer: The roof includes sky-lights. While not as good as clerestory windows, the sky-lights are adequate for the purpose.

 

The Proposed Density

This density is reasonable given that the placement of the building is far enough forward to not impact adversely on the neighbours in terms of light and ventilation.

 

The site also lends itself to this type of development due to the proximity of the Kingsford's commercial centre, public transport, major public facilities such as UNSW and the Hospital, and local parks.

 

Council may need to develop a policy for hostel developments in the way that it has a policy for rejuvenating RFB’s.

 

Assessing Officer: The Panel’s comments are noted.

 

Resources and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

The detail is scant on the drawings.

 

Fans, good cross ventilation and proper weather and sun protection need to be shown on the drawings if they are to be employed.  Window operation should also be indicated and the roof thickness should reflect the depth required for polystyrene insulation and pebble ballast.  Ventilating skylights to internal rooms for the top floor apartments should be considered.

 

Windows should be provided to the kitchen areas (and the bathrooms) for cross ventilation and balance of natural light. Windows with sills at 1500 should be able to comply to BCA requirements even without moving the corridor out from the building.

 

In particular the single orientation units would benefit from sun shading, ventilating and shaded skylights / clerestory windows. Indeed, better use of the roofs for light, amenity, greenery and useable space is strongly encouraged.

 

Assessing Officer: The proposal satisfies BASIX requirements for energy and water efficiency and thermal comfort. The kitchens and bathrooms are provided with windows, where possible. There are some internal bathrooms although relocating them would upset the functional floor layout. The single orientation units already have the benefit of balcony overhangs and roof devices to provide sun-shading. There are skylights in the roof and while clerestory windows are better, this is not a critical design issue. Roof gardens and roof terraces are typically unpopular with the neighbours, especially for student accommodation, because of the perceived noise impact from parties and there is no need to force inclusion of them where the applicant has not proposed them.

 

The Proposed Landscape

The landscape area should be significantly increased by deleting the carparking.

 

Assessing Officer: The car parking has been deleted.

 

The Panel has also suggested in the past reports that new street trees should be planted in the verge / parking lane, which should be coordinated with Council and form part of this application.

 

There are areas between the architectural drawings and the landscape drawing that are not coordinated.

 

Assessing Officer: Landscape issues have been examined by Council’s Landscape Technician and are the subject of conditions in the recommendation.

 

The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

The plans of each unit are clever with the separated dining kitchen and independent sleeping living zone. Removing the bathroom from the eastern most studio would open the corridor to the east. The fire stairs may potentially be open stairs which would be an improvement. Some BCA advice should be sought. Moreover, the switching of the position of the stair and the lift will allow the stair to be free and relate better to the other stair.

 

Assessing Officer: The eastern studio needs a bathroom because there are no communal facilities. Fire stairs cannot be open because they would not comply with the ‘deemed to satisfy’ provisions of the BCA. Swapping the stair with the lift would put the lift tower closer to the perimeter of the building; potentially increasing overshadowing. These changes are not critical design issues.

 

Balconies should be more consistent in area. The shape of the building may need to be altered to accommodate this, particularly in the southern and north eastern most units.

 

Assessing Officer: This issue is already examined under the ‘built form’ heading of the Design Review Panel’s comments.

 

The lowest units are buried or are too low for privacy. Units that are 900 above ground for example are far more pleasant to be in.

 

Assessing Officer: The units are only partially buried into the site so that the living spaces are on the same grade as their small courtyards. This removes the need for steps. Privacy for the lower units is protected by a fence. Raising the units by 900mm would cause the whole building to exceed the maximum building height.

 

The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

The corridors need more work so that they do not become furtive and confronting.

 

Assessing Officer: The corridors strike a happy balance between furtive and confronting.

 

More open stairs will assist security.

 

Assessing Officer: The proposal is serviced by 2 stairwells and a lift and does not require any more vertical circulation.

 

The common spaces, such as the entry, garden and corridors, have the potential to be more generous.

 

Assessing Officer: Adding to the entry and corridors would add to the footprint of the building and potentially cause non-compliance with the maximum Floor Space Ratio. The greater area of landscaped area is a more desirable urban design outcome.

 

BCA advice should be sought and incorporated into the design documentation.

 

Assessing Officer: BCA issues are resolved as part of the Construction Certificate application.

 

Social issues

Council will need to consider this housing type and density, not just on this site but for the wider residential area that surrounds and services the university. There is a clear and pressing need for a coordinated approach with the university to ensure that an affordable variety of housing stock is available in the vicinity.

 

Assessing Officer: The Panel’s comments are noted.

 

The Aesthetics of the Proposal

Before any comments can be made about the aesthetics of the building the Panel would like to see the design developed to address environmental performance to ensure comfortable living spaces as well as responsible energy requirements.

 

As noted previously, detailed sections / part elevations also need to be presented to give certainty on the material character. At present the scheme is somewhat schematic, well short of the detail required by the RFDC and in other applications.

 

Assessing Officer: There is a deferred commencement consent condition in the recommendation dealing with building materials and colours.

 

7.    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

 

Clause 12 Zone Objectives

The proposal adds to the stock of boarding houses in the locality, ostensibly increasing the range and affordability of residential accommodation. Amenity impacts are adequately dealt with by the proposed operational plan of management and the recommended conditions of consent. The proposal is consistent with the 2C Residential Zone objectives.

 

The objectives of Zone No 2C are:

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

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

 

Clauses 31, 32 and 33 Development Standards

The table below compares the proposed building to the relevant Randwick LEP development standards.

 

Table – Assessment of LEP Development Standards

Clause

Description

Standard

Proposed

Compliance

31

Landscaped area

50%

45.7%

No

32

Floor Space Ratio

0.9:1

1.35:1

No

33(a)

Building Height

12m

12m

Yes

33(b)

Ext Wall Height

10m

12m

No

 

Non-compliance with the external wall height standard is examined the SEPP 1 objection section of this report. Non-compliance with the other standards is remedied by the more generous allowances in SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 as discussed elsewhere in this report.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

The application was lodged under this SEPP and requires assessment under Clause 29 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent and Clause 30 – Standards for Boarding houses. The following tables outline the necessary assessment.

 

Table – Assessment of Clause 29   Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent

Standard

Assessment

Density or scale if the density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio are not more than 1.4:1.

1.35:1 Complies

Building height if all proposed buildings comply with the maximum building height under another environmental planning instrument for any building on the land (12m)

12m Complies

Landscape treatment if the front setback area is compatible with the streetscape in which the building is located,

Buildings fronting Strachan Street have very little and poorly landscaped front setbacks. The proposal includes a variable front setback with at least 1m to the street boundary and landscaping. It is compatible with and somewhat superior to the existing Strachan Street streetscape. Complies

where the development provides for one or more communal living rooms, if at least one of those rooms receives a minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter,

A communal kiosk is provided in the back yard and achieves the necessary solar access. Complies

if at least the following private open space areas are provided (other than the front setback area):

(i)  one area of at least 20 square metres with a minimum dimension of 3 metres is provided for the use of the lodgers,

(ii)  if accommodation is provided on site for a boarding house manager—one area of at least 8 square metres with a minimum dimension of 2.5 metres is provided adjacent to that accommodation,

There is a communal open space of 180m2 in the back yard, and a 12m2 courtyard adjacent to the boarding house manager’s unit. Complies

if not more than:

(i)  one parking space is provided for each 10 boarding rooms or part thereof, and

(ii)  one parking space is provided for each person employed in connection with the development and who is a resident on site,

This subclause conflicts with subclause 30(f) which prohibits additional parking on the site.

if each boarding room has a gross floor area (excluding any area used for the purposes of private kitchen or bathroom facilities) of at least:

(i)  12 square metres in the case of a boarding room intended to be used by a single lodger, or

(ii)  16 square metres in any other case.

All boarding rooms are larger than the minimum specified in this clause.

A boarding house may have private kitchen or bathroom facilities in each boarding room but is not required to have those facilities in any boarding room.

The proposal includes private facilities in each room.

 

Table – Assessment of Clause 30   Standards for boarding houses

Standard

Assessment

(a) if a boarding house has 5 or more boarding rooms, at least one communal living room will be provided,

There is a communal kiosk in the back yard. Complies.

(b) no boarding room will have a gross floor area (excluding any area used for the purposes of private kitchen or bathroom facilities) of more than 25 square metres,

The boarding rooms are up to 26.7m2 in area including bathroom and kitchen facilities. The bathroom and kitchen facilities are more than 1.7m2. Complies.

(c) no boarding room will be occupied by more than 2 adult lodgers,

Consent condition.

(d) adequate bathroom and kitchen facilities will be available within the boarding house for the use of each lodger,

There are private facilities in each room and they are adequate. Complies

(e) if the boarding house has capacity to accommodate 20 or more lodgers, a boarding room or on site dwelling will be provided for a boarding house manager,

One room is designated for use by a boarding house manager. Complies.

(f) if the boarding house is on land within a zone where residential flat buildings are permissible, no new car parking for lodgers will be provided on the site,

There is no new parking. Complies.

(g) if the boarding house is on land zoned primarily for commercial purposes, no part of the ground floor of the boarding house that fronts a street will be used for residential purposes unless another environmental planning instrument permits such a use,

Not applicable

(h) at least one parking space will be provided for a bicycle, and one will be provided for a motorcycle, for every 5 boarding rooms.

There are 9 bicycle racks and 9 motorbike parking spaces. Complies.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 - Remediation of Land

There may be asbestos present in the existing dwellings because they are old. The recommendation includes consent conditions dealing with asbestos disposal.

 

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

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

 

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

The development application was accompanied by the requisite Design Verification Statement verifying the design against the 10 design principles in this SEPP. The development application was referred to the Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel and their comments are examined in an earlier section of this report.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200000

$2,100,000

1.0%

$21,000

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan – Amendment 41

 

The development application was lodged before the 15 January 2010 gazettal of LEP Amendment 41 (formerly known as Draft Randwick LEP 2007). The savings and transitional provisions require Council to take it into consideration as though it had been exhibited, but not yet made. The proposal is not inconsistent with Amendment 41.

 

8.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Solar access and overshadowing

 

Overshadowing of the southern apartment building begins at about 11:30 in the morning during the winter solstice and primarily affects the ground level for the duration of the afternoon. All but the western-most window on the ground floor receives the requisite 3 hours of sunlight specified in Council’s Multi-Unit Housing DCP. The western-most window on the ground floor receives about 2 and a half hours sunlight during the morning. There is no overshadowing impact to western lots and the proposal affects lots to the west only during the afternoon. Figures 2 and 3 below show the proposed development to have superior solar performance to a building that would fill the LEP height and DCP setback envelope. The left diagram shows overshadowing at 12 Noon and the right diagram shows overshadowing at 3pm. The top diagram shows a building that fills a nominal complying envelope and the bottom diagram shows the proposed building.

 

Figure 2 Comparative overshadowing at 12 Noon, Winter Solstice

Figure 3 Comparative overshadowing at 3pm, Winter Solstice

 

Visual privacy

 

Privacy to the dwellings adjoining the site is generally protected by 10m+ buffer distances. There is a condition in the recommendation that requires the south facing louvered windows on units 1, 12 and 24 to be frosted glass. In addition there are privacy screen adjacent to the west facing doors.

 

Operation and management

 

The proposal was accompanied by an operation and management schedule that specifies manager duties, house rules (including noise minimisation rules), apartment contents, fire safety and rubbish disposal. There is a condition in the recommendation that requires the premises to be used in accordance with the operation and management schedule.

 


General amenity for lodgers

 

The following table examines the facilities proposed to be offered to lodgers in the boarding house. Amenity standards have been extracted from the City of Sydney Development Control Plan for Boarding Houses and while not technically applicable, they serve as a useful guide to the general amenity of the proposal.

 

Table – Assessment of proposed facilities for lodgers

Facility

Amenity Standards

Proposal

Sleeping Room

Minimum room size 10.5m2 per person and an additional 5.5m2 per subsequent person

All rooms are in excess of 20m2 and include bathroom and kitchen facilities.

Maximum of 4 people per room

All rooms are double rooms.

Minimum 12m2 for on-site manager’s accommodation

Manager’s accommodation is 23m2.

Rooms positioned to be separate from significant noise sources.

Rooms are adequately separated from communal and outdoor recreational spaces. The site is not significantly affected by road or aircraft noise.

Storage Space and Furnishings

At least 1m3 per person. Lockable in double rooms

There is adequately sized wardrobe in each room.

A bed, wardrobe, mirror, table, chair, night light, waste container, latching device on the door, curtains or blinds, and a phone line.

The plans show these facilities and they specified in the operations and management schedule.

Natural light from a window (and not solely from a skylight)

All boarding rooms have amply sized windows

Kitchens

A communal kitchen and dining area

All boarding rooms have separate kitchen facilities.

Sinks with hot and cold water

Stove top cookers

A refrigerator

A freezer

Storage for dry goods

Exhaust ventilation

Lockable drawer or cupboard for food storage for each lodger.

All kitchen areas shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition at all times.

Operations and management schedule specifies the lodgers are responsible for keeping boarding rooms clean and tidy.

No bathrooms shall open onto communal kitchen facilities.

Complies

The floor of the kitchen shall be constructed of a smooth and impervious surface.

Complies

Kitchen facilities shall be available for all residents 24 hours a day.

Complies

Indoor communal areas

A common living area

Partially enclosed outdoor communal area

Separate communal areas should be provided on each level depending on the number of bedrooms

Each boarding room has a living area

Communal recreation areas should have a northerly aspect and should be located where they will have a minimal impact on adjoining properties in terms of noise generation. The use of double glazing can assist with this.

The communal outdoor space is in the back yard and the neighbour’s acoustic privacy is protected by the operations and management schedule and a 1800mm high masonry wall on the boundary.

Consideration should be given to ensure that habitable rooms adjoining the recreational area are also protected from excessive noise.

Habitable rooms facing are protected by closing doors and windows.

Internal doors to communal areas should contain glass to enable natural surveillance from circulation areas.

There are no internal doors to circulation areas.

The use of highlight windows is encouraged along side boundaries, to minimise direct overlooking, particularly when adjoining or adjacent to residential properties.

Neighbour’s privacy is protected by 10m+ buffer distances. Consent conditions require south facing louvered windows on dwellings 1, 12 and 24 to be frosted glass.

Outdoor space requirements

20m2 of communal and partly covered outdoor space should be provided at ground level in a courtyard or terrace area (min width of 3m)

The communal kiosk in the back yard is enclosed and 44m2.

The outdoor space should be north facing where it can receive at least 2 hours of solar access to at least 50% of its area between 9am and 3pm during the winter solstice

The outdoor space is in the south western portion of the lot, but receives adequate sunlight during the morning.

Communal open space areas should be connected to communal indoor spaces, such as kitchens and living areas. Communal facilities such as BBQs, seating and pergolas are also encouraged.

The enclosed communal kiosk is situated within and directly accessible from the back yard.

Ideally 30% of all bedrooms should have some access to private open space in the form of a balcony or ground level terrace area of not less than 4m2.

All boarding rooms have individual courtyards or balconies. More than 30% of balconies meet the minimum 4m2.

Planting should be used to screen communal outdoor areas or private balconies from adjoining properties or the public way, with trellis, screens with climbing vines or the like used to complement deciduous tree planting.

The proposal includes a suitable landscaping plan.

The operational management plan should address the control of the outdoor areas to protect adjoining properties from excessive noise.

The operations and management schedule specifies that noise must be kept to a minimum.

A minimum of 50% of the uncovered site area should comprise soft/porous surfaces.

More than 50% of the uncovered area is permeable

Laundries, Bathrooms and Drying Facilities

2 x 5kg automatic washing machine and 2 domestic dryers.

All boarding rooms are provided with separate and adequate facilities.

At least one large laundry tub with running hot and cold water.

72.5m of clothes line in an outdoor area (can be retractable).

Outside drying areas shall be located on the north-eastern side of the communal courtyard to enable maximum solar access.

Internal drying and laundry facilities shall be located in a safe and accessible location for all residents.

All laundry facilities must be nominated on the plans and details of the energy star rating of appliances must be submitted with the construction certificate. A minimum of 3½ stars must be achieved unless otherwise stipulated by BASIX.

Bathroom facilities must be in an accessible location for all occupants.

Minimum 3 showers and 3 closet pans and 3 wash basins with hot and cold water.

Where receptacles are provided for the disposal of sanitary napkins, these are to be serviced and able to be readily cleaned regularly.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in sustainability, excellence in urban design and development, integrated transport and land use.

Direction 4a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development, integrating transport and pedestrian links between town centres and key locations.

Key Action:       Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 


Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

This development application is referred to Council for determination because the estimated cost of work exceeds $2M.

 

The proposal is for demolition of existing buildings and construction of a new 4 storey, 42-room boarding house. There is a SEPP1 objection for external wall height. The proposal satisfies the purpose of the standard and the SEPP 1 objection is well founded by the applicant.

 

The site is located on the southern side of Strachan Street, Kingsford between Houston Road and Houston Lane. The site is 855.1m² with 22.55m frontage to Strachan Street.

 

The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council policy. There were several objections and the primary issues included noise impact, inadequate parking, excessive scale, privacy and overshadowing. These issues are addressed in this assessment report.

 

The proposal satisfies the environmental and planning assessment requirements that apply and the Assessing Officer recommends deferred commencement approval subject to conditions. The deferred commencement condition deals with building materials and colours.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 33 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to maximum external wall heights, 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 by Deferred Commencement under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to Development Application No. 488/2009 for demolition of existing buildings and construction of a new 4 storey, 42-room boarding house, at 23-25 Strachan Street, Kingsford subject to the following conditions:

 

Deferred Commencement Conditions:

The consent is not to operate until the following details/plan amendments have been submitted to, and approved by, Council’s Director of City Planning:

 

1.     A detailed coloured drawing in 1:100 scale and a material sample board that clearly demonstrate the colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces of the proposed buildings. The above documentation shall include the following information:

 

·       Tone / tinting and texture of the external walls.

·       Types and colours / tinting of all glazing materials used for windows, doors and wall openings.

·       Colours and materials of the proposed external door and window frames and balcony balustrades.

·       Colours and materials of fencing along both the northern and western property boundaries. Plain colourbond will be inappropriate. Fences on the street boundary must not be more than 1.2m high.

 

2.     A photomontage perspective prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person in 3-dimensional architectural modelling and rendering, demonstrating how the proposed buildings will appear in the streetscape context of Houston Road. The image shall clearly indicate the architectural form of the development and depict as accurate as possible the building materials and external colouring. 

 

Evidence required to satisfy the above conditions must be submitted to Council within 12 months of the date of this consent.

 

C.     Subject to compliance with the Deferred Commencement Conditions, to the satisfaction of the Director of City Planning, Development Consent is granted under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, subject to the following conditions:

 

Approved plans

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA_03, DA-04, DA_05 and DA-07, dated 10 November 2009 and received by Council 11 November 2009, and plans numbered DA_08 and DA_09, dated 30 October 2009 and received by Council 21 January 2010, 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 condition is applied to meet additional demands for public facilities

 

2.       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 $200000

$2,100,000

1.0%

$21,000

 

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

 

3.       The boarding house must provide lodgers with a principal place of residence for at least 3 months and must not be let to any person for a duration that is less than 3 months.

 

4.       The south facing louvered windows to units 1, 12 and 24 must be installed with frosted glass.

 

5.       Use of the premises must be in accordance with the Operation and Management schedule on pages 35 and 36 of the Statement of Environmental Effects received by Council 17 July 2009.

 

6.       No boarding room shall be occupied by more than 2 adult lodgers.

 

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

 

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

 

8.       The Strachan Street fence must be constructed of a material that compatible with the architectural style of the building. Plain metal is inappropriate. Design details must be approved by Council before a Construction Certificate is issued.

 

9.       Street numbering must be provided to the premises in a prominent position, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

In this regard, prior to occupation of the building, an application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, together with the required fee, for the allocation of an appropriate street number/s to the development.

 

10.     Power supply and telecommunications cabling to the development shall be underground.

 

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

 

12.     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 paving or the like on the ground) without the written consent of Council.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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.     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:

 

17.     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.

 

18.     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.

 

19.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

23.     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.

 

 

24.     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.

 

25.     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

 

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.

 

26.     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

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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:

 

30.     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.

 

31.     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.

 

32.     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:

 

33.     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.

 

34.     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).

 

35.     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.

 

36.     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.

 

37.     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.

 

a)     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.

 

b)     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.

 

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

 

d)     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.

 

e)     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.

 

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

 

g)     A 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.

 

38.     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.

 

39.     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.

 

40.     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.

 

41.     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.

 

42.     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.

 

43.     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.

 

44.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

a)   $5000.00   -      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:

 

47.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

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

 

a)  Remove the existing sandstone kerb and gutter along the Houston Rd frontage and replace it with new concrete kerb and gutter with a minimum 1.00m wide road reknit.

 

b)  Reconstruct any damaged sections of council’s footpath along the full site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

c)  Amend and relocate “No Stopping” sign adjacent to redundant vehicular crossing in Strachan St. The signage is to be amended to Council’s Traffic Engineer’s requirements.

 

48.     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.

 

49.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

All traffic associated with the subject development shall comply with the terms of the approved construction traffic management plan.

 

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

 

52.     The Council’s Development Engineer has inspected the above site and has determined that the design alignment level (concrete/paved/tiled level) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the Strachan Street and Houston Road site frontages.

 

 

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

 

54.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer has been issued at a prescribed fee of $1828.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

55.     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.

 

56.     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.

 

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

 

58.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

a.       The kerb and gutter or drainage system at the front of the property; OR

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

69.     Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas accessible by residents of all units.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

b)        prior to stormwater discharging into any absorption/infiltration system.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

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

a.  If new linen plans are being prepared for the site, the plans shall indicate the location and dimensions of the detention/infiltration areas. 

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

 

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

 

c)        The location of the detention basin with finished surface levels;

d)        Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

e)        Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

h)        Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

83.     The garbage room area will have to be redesigned so as to be able to contain a total of 22 x 240 litre bins (11 garbage bins & 11 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins. Details showing compliance with this requirement are to be shown on the plans submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

84.     The waste storage area/s are to be provided with a tap and hose and the floor is to be graded and drained to the sewer to the requirements of Sydney Water.

 

85.     The waste storage area shall be clearly signposted.

 

86.     Prior to the Certifying Authority issuing an occupation certificate for the proposed development the applicant is to contact Council’s Manager of Waste in regards to meeting Council’s requirements for waste services to the development site.

 

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

 

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

 

 

Landscape Conditions

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

 

88.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan D.A. by Michael Zinn, drawing number, project number 534, dated November 2009, prior to the PCA issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, with the future owner/on-site manager to ensure that this landscaping is maintained in accordance with these plans.

 

89.     While the provision of a hedge of Syzygium paniculatum ‘Dwarf’ (Lilly Pilly’s), along the northern boundary, fronting Strachan Street is supported by Council, the applicant/future on-site manager or similar, will be responsible for ensure that this hedge is regularly trimmed so as to remain contained wholly within the site, so that it does not encroach onto the adjoining public footpath and cause an obstruction to pedestrians.

 

90.     To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaping, an automatic drip irrigation system shall be installed throughout all planted areas. Details shall be provided showing that the system will be connected to the sites rainwater tanks, with back-up connection to the mains supply, in accordance with all current Sydney Water requirements.

 

91.     The nature-strip upon both of Council's Strachan Street and Houston Road footways 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.

 

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

 

All detention tanks and below ground stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm to ensure sufficient soil depth to permit the establishment of landscaping.

 

Tree Removals within site

 

93.     Approval is granted for removal of the following trees, subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan:

 

a)   Two, multi-trunk Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palms), in the front yard of 23 Strachan Street, as they are exempt from the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to their inappropriate location hard up against the front of this existing dwelling;

 

b)   Still within the front yard of no 23, right in the northwest corner of this site, one Metrosideros excelsa ‘Variegata’ (Variegated NZ Xmas Tree), and then immediately to its south, a Persea amercianna (Avocado Tree), and then further to their south again, about halfway along the length of the western boundary, a Morus nigra (Mulberry Tree), due to their insignificance and in order to accommodate the proposed works and associated landscaping as shown;

 

c)   In the rear yard of 23 Strachan Street, along the rear (southern) boundary, two small Olea europaea (European Olives), and then to their east, in the rear yard of 25 Strachan Street, along its western boundary, between the existing free-standing garage and dwelling, from south to north, one Mangifera indica (Mango Tree) and then another Persea americanna (Avocado Tree) for the same reasons outlined point ‘b’ above.

 

NOTE: While the submitted Landscape Plan proposes the planting of two Plane Trees within the Strachan Street nature strip in front of the site, this is not supported by Council given the narrow width of the verge, and the fact that parked cars will damage these trees as they overhang the kerb.

 

Protection of existing Street Trees

 

94.     In order to ensure retention of the row of five small Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda’s) spaced evenly along the length of the Houston Road frontage, as well as the larger Platanus x hybrida (London Plane Tree) and the under-planting of Dianella’s in the garden bed at the corner of Strachan Street and Houston Road in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed/connected over public property, must be done so at the maximum distance away from each of their trunks in order to minimise root damage.

 

c.       Each of the five (5) Jacaranda’s must be physically protected (individually) by installing a total of four star pickets at a setback of 1.0 metre to their north and south (measured off the outside edge of their trunks at ground level), as well as against the back of the kerb to their west, and against the footpath to their east, to which safety tape/para-webbing shall be permanently attached so as to completely enclose each tree for the duration of works.

 

d.       This fencing shall be installed prior to the commencement of demolition and construction works and shall remain in place until all works are completed, to which signage containing the following words shall be clearly displayed and permanently attached: “TREE PROTECTION ZONE, DO NOT ENTER".

 

e.       The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to any of these street trees/garden areas, and shall contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 should pruning, replacement or any similar such work be necessary, with the applicant to cover all associated costs, to Council’s satisfaction, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate.

 

f.        Within the zones specified in point ‘c’ above, as well as the garden area at the intersection of Strachan Street & Houston Road, there is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble, with all Site Management Plans to acknowledge this requirement.

 

g.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $5,000.00 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, preservation of these street trees and garden areas.

 

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 Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613).

 

Any contravention of Council's conditions relating to these areas 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.

 

·      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.

 

Advisory Conditions

 

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.

 

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

 


Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D4/10

 

 

Subject:                  373 Avoca Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/654/2009

Author:                   Louis Coorey, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

1Proposal:                   Internal alterations to existing Health Consulting rooms and new double garage and carport with studio above to Bundock Street

 

Ward:                      East Ward

 

Applicant:                Plan Ahead Designs

 

Owner:                         S F Foong Pty Limited

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The proposed development is for internal alterations to an existing dwelling and replacement of an existing flat roofed garage & carport at the rear of the site with a new double garage and carport with studio above fronting Bundock Street. It is noted the subject site is a corner lot on Avoca and Bundock Streets which is occupied by a two storey dwelling with health consulting rooms contained within the front portion.

 

As a result of the notification period three objections were received from nearby neighbours raising issues related to excessive bulk, scale, noise and visual privacy.

 

The original proposal was superseded by amended plans, received by Council on 19 November 2009. These amendments include:

 

-    replacing the northern orientated gable roof with a hipped roof setback 1.5m from the northern side boundary shared with no 371 Avoca Street

-    reducing the height of the side boundary fence from 2m high down to 1.8m

-    providing a setback of the awning over the BBQ area so that the profile along the northern side boundary is the similar to that which currently exists on site.

 

The proposed development, containing the garage, store, WC on ground level and attic/studio within the roof level seeks approximately 30sqm of additional floor area and results in a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.7:1 which does not comply with the 0.5:1 FSR standard under Clause 32(2) of the Randwick Local Environment Plan 1998 (RLEP). The proposed development will result in a 44% variation to the standard. Given the resultant FSR is a greater than 10% variation to the maximum standard, the NSW Department of Planning requires this application to be referred to Council for determination

 

It is important to note that the current floor space (FSR) on site is 0.62:1 and that the additional attic studio floor area is primarily contained with the roof space over the garage with only a small portion added to the ground level along Bundock Street.

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with the FSR standard under Clause 32(1) of RLEP is unreasonable and unnecessary. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection the following matters are identified:

 

·      The proposed additional bulk is mostly contained within a conventional hipped roof form adjoining the northern and eastern neighbours with a gable and dormer facing Bundock Street and the rear of the existing two storey dwelling respectively

·      The resultant building would not be out of place with the scale of the existing dwelling which has a significantly sized wall along the Bundock Street boundary

·      The proposal represents only a minor increase in bulk compared to that which currently exists on site, and it will not result in any precedent for other buildings within the locality given the unique nature of the site being a corner allotment and

·      The proposal will not result in any significant adverse amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties and their occupants having particular regard to obtrusive wall heights, affects on solar access or any significant visual or acoustic privacy impacts.

 

The proposed development is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

 

 

2.    The Proposal

The original proposal sought the following:

 

1.    Inclusion of an additional bathroom at the first floor level of the dwelling house and

2.    Alterations and additions to the garage structure in the rear yard to provide for additional living space in the form of studio room at first floor level and associated WC, laundry and store area at ground floor level.

 

In response to a number of concerns raised with the applicant the following modifications were made to the proposed development:

 

1.   Replacing the north facing gable roof form (adjacent to the northern neighbour at 371 Avoca Street) with a hipped roof form which means the roof slopes away from the northern neighbour’s rear yard. The hipped roof also contains two skylights with at least a 1.5m sill height above the studios floor level

2.   Setback a portion of the carports roof from the northern side boundary so that its profile would be similar to the existing awning lean to structure

3.   A reduction in the size of the dormer facing west

4.   A reduction in the height of the northern and southern side boundary fences down from 2m to 1.8m.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the South western corner of Avoca St and Bundock St. It is presently occupied by an existing two storey brick dwelling containing health consulting rooms at the front of the dwelling with garage and carport parking at the rear off Bundock Street. The site has a frontage at Avoca Street measuring 10.06m and a long frontage of 36.575m along Bundock Street towards the south. The subject site has an area of 368sqm.

 

Neighbouring the property to the north is a semi detached dwelling at No. 371 Avoca Street, to the east is the side of a single dwelling fronting Bundock Street, to the west and south are opposite sides of Avoca and Bundock Streets respectively. The surrounding area is predominantly a mixture of low to medium density residential dwellings with some multi storey residential flat dwellings. Figure 1 and various photos below are of the subject site including the existing rear garage.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

 

 

 

Aerial View of subject site and surrounds

1. The existing building viewed from southern side (opposite side of Bundock Street) showing a significant portion of the existing dwelling located along the southern side boundary fronting Bundock Street.

 

2. View looking from Bundock Street towards the subject site. Note: The proposed garage with studio above would adjoin the eastern neighbour’s front balcony.

3.  Side view of the northern elevation of the existing garage and awning lean to structure at the rear of the subject site.

 

 

4. View to the rear from the northern neighbour’s site showing the obscured glazing to the side balcony of No. 2 Bundock Street.

 

4.    State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards

 

The proposed development results in a floor space ratio of 0.7:1 and does not comply with the 0.5:1 standard under Clause 32(1) of the Randwick Local Environment Plan 1998 (RLEP) which relates to buildings other than dwellings on 2A zoned land. The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with clause 32(1) of RLEP is unreasonable and unnecessary.

 

Clause 32 (1) – Floor Space Ratio (FSR)

 

Clause 32 (1) sets out maximum standards for the floor space ratio within a 2A zone. The maximum FSR for land within a 2A zone is 0.5:1. In this respect the proposed development for additional floor area resulting in a FSR of 0.7:1 does not comply with the maximum allowable resulting in a variation of 44% as shown in the table below.  It is noted that any variation to a development standard over 10% precludes determination under Delegated Authority, and requires the application be considered and determined at a Council meeting.

Residential

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

32 (1) Floor Space Ratio standard for sites Zone 2A

For buildings other than dwellings within the 2A zone is 0.5:1.

0.7:1

No, does not comply with the FSR. See SEPP 1 objection below.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Objection to Development Standards (SEPP 1)

 

The applicant has lodged a SEPP 1 objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) in support of the non compliance with the floor space ratio standard under Clause 32(1) RLEP 1998. 

 

In assessing the SEPP 1 objection, the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 are addressed. In this respect, before a proposed development can be approved by the consent authority, a SEPP 1 objection is a precondition which must be satisfied in relation to the following matters:

 

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). In particular, the submitted SEPP 1 objection would address 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 applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

The purpose of the floor space ratio standard:

 

“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.” 

 

The development standard is intended to maintain the existing low density and open character of the locality as well as minimising the impacts arising from the bulk and scale of buildings.

 

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

 

·        On the northern side boundary the wall height of the proposed replacement garage will only increase a minor amount and would not result in any significant adverse impacts on the northern neighbour’s rear yard area.

·        The majority of the additional floor area is mostly contained in the new roof form which is hipped away from the two adjoining neighbours at 371 Avoca Street to the north and 2 Bundock Street to the east. The apparent bulk of the proposal is contained within the gable/balcony facing Bundock Street and the dormer facing the rear of the dwelling. In other words, the proposed development does not result in any significant additional bulk or adverse impacts on the adjoining properties as it has been designed so that it steps away from the neighbouring properties. In addition, the proposals additional external wall height is mostly representative and consistent with more recent garage designs in the locality. Overall, the proposed addition is effectively an extension towards the Bundock Street frontage and inclusion of a part hipped/part dormer/part gable roof where it has been designed so that the lesser bulk adjoins the neighbouring properties and the greater bulk is directed away from the neighbouring properties.

·        The proposed use is ancillary to the use of the dwelling house and Health Consulting rooms (studio/record keeping storage area)

·        There would be no public benefit in ensuring compliance with the development standard as the proposed development whilst resulting in increases in bulk would not however result in any appreciable increase in adverse amenity impacts on either the neighbouring properties or the streetscape and merely seeks to improve functionality of the existing uses on site.

 

As will be discussed in the following sections, the proposal (as conditioned) does not represent a scale that is out of keeping with the existing two storey dwelling on site or the existing character of the locality and will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining residential properties in terms of perceived bulk and scale, maximum external wall height or privacy.

 

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.”

 

The variation from the floor space ratio standard is not inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as it 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 the Residential 2A Zone in that it will allow development which is ancillary to the present use of the site as an attached health consulting room to a two storey dwelling, whose approved bulk, scale and use was approved under the current LEP standards and DCP guidelines where it was considered to be consistent with the allowable and desired character of the locality. Further, the resultant FSR for the site is considered to have been adequately allocated throughout the site where it would not look out of place with the existing structures on site.

 

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 standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning significance.  It is not considered that the strict application of the standard would allow the best economic use of the site and the delivery of a suitably scaled in-fill development in an established neighbourhood.

 

Overall, the scale of the development is considered to be relatively minor and it is not considered that there would be a public benefit in maintaining the standard under the RLEP in this particular instance given the unique nature of the site as a corner allotment, the bulk and scale of existing buildings on site and the approved use of the site as a Health Consulting rooms in conjunction with a dwelling.

 

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.

 

Comment:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the proposed new area is primarily contained within a roof and dormer attic space on a corner allotment whose southern boundary adjoins a side Street. The proposed development does not represent a bulk or scale out of keeping with the existing dwelling or present a poor precedent for other developments along Bundock Street given the unique configuration of the site and the additional floor area contained with the roof space over the garage and 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.

 

Comment:

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.

 

Comment:

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.

 

Comment:

The floor space ratio standard has not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council. It is noted that the majority of uses within the immediate locality are purely for residential purposes whereby the FSR ratio guidelines are dictated to by the Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies allowing a more generous FSR restriction of 0.6:1 meaning the proposed developments non compliance would be further reduced. It is also noted that the unique nature of the site means that the generous side frontages means that parking pressures that would be a concern for a site with only a single frontage as opposed to the subject site which enjoys a dual frontage. 

 

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.

 

Comment:

 

The existing Residential A zoning is considered to be appropriate for the locality.

 

 

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

5.1 Objections

 

Objections

Author and objection

Comment

371 Avoca Street

Northern neighbour of subject site.

This DA appears to be for a boarding house development for short term accommodation rooms, not medical consulting rooms as stated on plans and shadow diagrams.

This DA is not seeking consent for a boarding house.

Upper level plans shown on plans have incorrect details shown for the existing main house (i.e. window location and wall details).

The upper level plans are correct in so far as they related to the scope of the application which is to install a bathroom to the upper level.

The consultation room as indicated on plan next door to the kitchen is a habitable room.

No evidence exists that this is a habitable room

Window location for laundry is not indicated on plan of existing house.

The laundry does not fall within the scope of this application

Future amenity/privacy for 371 Avoca St will be severely compromised if any area above the existing garage is habitable.

The area above the garage has been significantly reduced in size. It is considered that the use of the premises would not result in any inordinate levels of noise disturbance out of keeping with normal residential use.

Additional bathroom details in existing house were also not shown on the proposed plans, why? Is this an attempt for intensification of use of the existing house?

A bathroom whether shown or not shown is not considered a form of development which would necessarily intensify the use of the site out of keeping with the current approved use as a residential dwelling with some health consulting rooms.

Roof height of the proposed studio above garage is also excessive.

Acknowledged. The amended application has replaced the gable roof adjoining the objector’s rear yard with a hipped roof which slopes away from the objectors premises and is not considered out of keeping with the scale and dimensions of garages within the locality.

Zoning for 2(A) FSR 0.5:1 has been exceeded in this proposal and no SEPP 1 objection showing why it should be allowed has been provided with the proposed plans.

A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted and is considered well founded.

 

A 20% increase in FSR from 0.5:1 to 0.7:1 in this 2(A) zone without a valid argument is not sufficient justification for the departure from FSR constraint.

A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted and is considered well founded.

 

This development proposal does clearly compromise the amenity of the surrounding residential area and is not compatible with the dominant character of the existing development in the area. The existing two storey house is sufficient intensification of use of the existing property.

The proposed development for an outbuilding with a studio and storage area contained predominately within a part gable a part hipped roof form, is considered acceptable having regard to the objectives of the 2A zone.

Whilst it is acknowledged that there is a significant front setback for dwellings fronting Bundock Street, it is not considered that the proposed outbuilding and roof stop should be made to be consistent with this dominant setback.  In particular, the proposed development only differs from the current outbuildings general bulk and scale by the addition of a gable roof form to Bundock Street and a mostly hipped roof form in all other directions except for a small gable facing the rear of the dwelling. This scale is considered to be compatible with both the existing outbuilding and the scale of the main dwelling house/health consulting rooms.

The proposed development will comply with the objectives of the 2A zone under the RLEP 1998 in that it will continue to maintain the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the City of Randwick as the added bulk and its use is largely limited to the roof area atop a double garage, will not result in any significant adverse amenity impact on the objectors premises or the streetscape.

There are definite negative social impacts by permitting further intensification of use of the property at 373 Avoca Street as detailed by my ongoing noise complaints to Council.

The residential use of the subject studio area in a responsible manner and the small size of the skylights would not result in any significant adverse noise impacts on the adjoining and neighbouring properties

The shadow diagrams are also flawed as no representation has been shown for shadowing during the Summer Solstice (21 December) when shadowing will impact the rear yard for 371 Avoca Street. Please ensure updated shadow diagrams for summer solstice are supplied.

The proposal is located on the southern side of the objector’s site; and as such it is not considered that there would be any significant loss of natural light or solar access to their rear yard or habitable living areas.

SEE indicates 2 studio apartments above the garage hence additional noise sources which will impact 371 Avoca Street.

The application has since been amended to provide for only one studio area without a bathroom at upper level. See comments above regarding noise.

Any opening which allows overlooking on the northern elevation should be deleted.

It is not considered the proposed development results in any overlooking into the objectors premises.

The gable roof with window has since been amended where it is replaced with a hipped roof and includes two skylights which have an effective sill height 1.5m above the studio floor level.

Western elevation openings allow for possible noise impacts. Already have substantial acoustic/privacy impacts with the existing two storey house adjacent.

See comments above regarding noise.

In respect to visual privacy impacts it is not considered the window at the northern dormer affords any direct sightlines into the objector’s rear yard or habitable living areas.

Any new garage built under the proposal will require a setback from the existing boundary with 371 Avoca St.

The original proposal contained a gable roof form along the objector’s boundary and did present additional bulk. The amended development replaced the gable roof form with a hipped roof form setback 1500mm from the shared boundary significantly reducing the bulk and scale when viewed from the objector’s rear yard.

The substantial bulk of this proposed double garage and carport in conjunction with a proposed 1.8m brick fence will restrict the southerly airflow to 371 Avoca St and the avenue of backyards adjacent to 371 Avoca. It will convert my backyard into a cell block cutting off my current view of the sky and trees to the south.

The proposed bulk and scale of the development as amended will not present a bulk and scale which is significantly out of keeping with the existing bulk and scale of the outbuilding or the fence.

The proposed 1.8m brick fence if extended as far forward as the footpath will severely impact my car port use. I will not be able to see any pedestrians approaching from the right when I reverse out of my car port if the fence is built at that height.

A condition is included to ensure the side boundary fence in front of the main building line is limited to a maximum height of 1.2m above ground level or 1.8m where the upper two thirds are 50% open.

Such a development is not consistent with adjacent sites and sites in the locality. Simply because in the past Sydney’s building regulations were lax i.e. reference to 3 blocks of flats further north in Avoca St as indicated in SEE is not sufficient reason for a departure from the FSR for this single residential dwelling.

The adjacent sites only have a single frontage and the proposed development merely takes advantage of the dual frontage afforded to it.

Request that the Council planner investigate use of the subject premises as medical consulting rooms: as the claimed use of house is questionable, it’s really a boarding house in disguise.

Council consent has only ever been granted for use of a portion of the dwelling house as health consulting rooms whereby the main use remains as a dwelling house. No consent has been granted for use as a boarding house.

The proposed 1.8m brick fence will not provide an insulation barrier for the loud TV and raised voices talking that are evident late into the night from the short term accommodation occupants that reside at the property and which frequently continue on into the early hours of the morning especially during the warmer months.

Whilst the solid brick fence may provide some improved level of noise attenuation, it is not considered necessary given the main uses of the subject site is as a dwelling house and when used in an orderly fashion it will not lend itself to inordinate noise disturbance.

The garden bed on the northern side of 373 Avoca St uses the boundary fence as a support vehicle and consequently the fence palings have been impacted. A retaining wall needs to be provided wholly within the property of 373 Avoca St for the garden bed.

 

The garden bed is relatively small and a retaining wall is not considered necessary. Nonetheless, the proposed brick fence adequately constructed would ensure the issue with the existing fence is resolved.

The residential dwelling at 371 Avoca St is much higher up off from the ground than the residential dwelling at 373 Avoca St consequently a brick fence serves no purpose.

 

The proposed fence is considered acceptable having regard to providing a barrier between the properties.

Noise impacts to 371 Avoca St are considerable. During the past summer the noise impacts have been unacceptable. Randwick is an old residential suburb of Sydney with a dense pattern of residential development. There is not a lot of distance separating one dwelling from the next.  As a consequence the level of peace and enjoyment of residents in the suburb is particularly sensitive to neighbourhood noise.

See comments above regarding noise.

Council was contacted 19 January 2009 re noise complaints at 373 Avoca St and the Compliance Officer inspected 26 January 2009, there has been no real improvement in the noise situation forthcoming.

 

Council’s Regulatory officer has inspected the premises and found that there was no unauthorised use of the premises and no breaches of any noise regulations.

Second submission following amended plans

 

Dormer window as with all skylights are to consist of opaque glass.

Not a necessity as their sill levels are above the required minimum of 1.5m above floor level.

Western elevation openings allow for possible noise impacts. Already have substantial acoustic/privacy impacts with the existing two storey house adjacent.

See comments above.

Proposed 1.8m brick fence to be constructed wholly within the property of 373 Avoca St including its foundations.

A suitable condition is included

Proposed 1.8m brick fence to terminate where existing paling fence currently ends else will impact my carport use.

See earlier comment above regarding fencing in front of the building line.

Existing front fence of 373 Avoca St to remain at its current height else will impact my carport use.

See comments above.

Proposed balconies on Bundock St to be deleted not in keeping with style of existing streetscape.

 

Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed balcony to the front is not indicative of garages along Bundock Street, it is considered the small depth of the balcony means it does not lend itself to being used by large groups of people and it is setback a reasonable distance from the nearest adjoining neighbour at No 2 Bundock Street. It will also reduce the dominance of the proposed garage along this street frontage.

Third Submission following amended plans

 

A building of such bulk and height and at such close proximity will cause a boxing in of my single storey cottage.

The proposed development along the neighbour’s northern side boundary is mostly similar in terms of external wall height and the additional height is limited to a small increase in the garages wall height as well as a hipped roof form that is setback 1.5m from the neighbour’s boundary.

The addition of a dormer to the western side of the proposed hipped roof is similarly not considered to result in any significant adverse impacts in relation to the increased bulk being sought.

Overall, it is not considered the proposed development would result in any appreciable difference in terms of bulk and scale having regard to the impacts on neighbours dwelling.

The extra height of such a building irrespective of an increase in setback of loft during both summer and winter (in particular winter) will cause extra shadowing and will block out some of my view of the sky and diminish my feeling of open space in my backyard.

The proposed development is to the south of the neighbours dwelling and any additional overshadowing would occur during the height of summer months where overshadowing will only ever occur at either ends of the day well before 9am and well after 3pm. There will be no overshadowing impact during the winter solstice between 9am and 3pm.

Clearly the garage structure and loft will cause an additional invasion of privacy to my small backyard from the dormer windows located not on only on the northern side but also on the western side facing existing dwelling. This garden is a refuge for me and I don’t want it overshadowed, with a further lack of privacy and possible negative noise impacts.

The sill height of skylights and the dormer are above the preferred minimum of 1.5m above the attic/studio floor level and any view will be across the neighbour’s site where there will be no direct view into the neighbours rear yard or habitable living areas.

I am also aware that my bathroom, dining and lounge room windows will be in full view of the proposed loft dormer windows on the western side facing the existing dwelling. I do not wish to have the blinds always drawn because of the structure being proposed.

See comment directly above.

Even if you have now indicated removal of wet area in loft I still want to bring to your attention that this proposed development is going to increase the capacity of letting space for this property.

A condition is included restricting the use of the attic space and store area to be ancillary to the main use of the house and health consulting room and not to be used for separate occupation or be let for any separate commercial purposes.

The size of the WC area on ground floor suggests ample space for a shower to be added.

There are no objections to a shower being added to this WC area.

The consequences of the development are likely to further negatively impact on the value of my property.

Value of a property is open to various factors and the assertion that the proposed development would reduce the value of the neighbour’s site is a tenuous one.

Proposed balconies on Bundock St elevation to be deleted not in keeping with style of existing streetscape.

See previous comments above regarding the proposed balcony fronting Bundock Street.

 

Objections

Author and objection

Comment

369 Avoca Street

Two doors down from the subject site

Impact on privacy from northern and western windows.

It is not considered the proposed development results in any overlooking into the objectors premises.

The gable roof with north facing window has since been amended where it is replaced with a hipped roof and includes two skylights which have an effective sill height of at least 1.5m above the studio floor level. The amended design only allows a view across the objector’s site rather than directly into it and would therefore satisfy Councils requirements regarding privacy.

In respect to visual privacy impacts from the western dormer window, it is not considered any direct sightlines are available into the objector’s rear yard or habitable living areas.

Noise disturbance from proposed development.

The residential use of the subject studio area in a responsible manner and the small size of the skylights and windows would not result in any significant adverse noise impacts on the adjoining and neighbouring properties.

The addition of a bathroom at ground level will create a noise disturbance.

It is not considered that the use of the bathroom at ground level would result in any significant adverse noise disturbance unless it was malfunctioning.

The proposed development exceeds the floor space ratio and is indulgent in height and width

The proposed development is considered acceptable having regard to the relevant performance requirements and objectives of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. In respect to external wall height and its width, it is considered the difference between the current structure and the proposed development is relatively minor. The portion of the proposed development containing the most significant change is the roof form on top, which is considered suitably dimensioned and scaled in respect to the existing dwelling on site as well as garages within Randwick Council.

Interrupts natural air floor to neighbouring properties.

The proposed developments additional bulk is not considered to result in any significant affect on natural air flow.

Is it to be a boarding house?

The subject application is not for a boarding house.

The proposal is an overdevelopment of the site.

It is considered the proposed development is acceptable having regard to the existing outbuilding on site, the bulk of the main building on site and considered roof design in various directions.

 

Second submission following amended plans

 

Still concerned with the privacy and noise impact from the skylights at the northern side of the hipped roof.

The amended design meets the preferred minimum sill height controls for privacy under the DCP and as a result there are no privacy concerns from the proposed northern skylights.

In respect to noise impacts see comments above.

Floor space ratio already exceeded in previous developments is further impact neighbouring properties.

The proposed development is considered acceptable having regard to the added bulk and scale and it is not considered that there will be any unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on the objector’s premises.

Installation of security cameras raises issues of personal security

No security cameras are added as part of this development application.

Council should consider neighbours and not just the applicants

All relevant concerns have been considered.

 


 

Objections

Author and objection

Comment

2 Bundock Street

Northern site

Does not fit into the existing streetscape.

The proposed development is largely limited to a roof atop an outbuilding and would not present a scale which is out of keeping with the scale of the existing outbuilding or the existing dwelling on the subject site. Further, it is considered that the unique nature of the corner allotment does not present any justification for sites along Bundock Street to build garages forward of their main building lines.

The development is likely to accommodate students or backpackers

The application is for an upper level contained mostly within the roof space above a garage used for studio/attic/storage area. The proposed ground level is mostly seeking to reconfigure parking and add some storage, WC and BBQ areas. The proposed development to seek these areas to be used ancillary to the main use of the house as a dwelling with health consulting rooms. No consent is being granted for separate residential accommodation or commercial premises and a suitable condition is attached.

The proposed development will result in an additional demand for on street parking.

The additional floor area provided as part of the proposed development is relatively minor and would not place any further requirement for parking than that which is currently being provided on site.

Detrimental impact on the value of my property.

There are numerous factors that may affect the monetary value of a property ranging from the state of the property market to the physical and location conditions of the property and the perception and preferences of potential buyers. Any claim that the proposal would significantly effect the value of the property would therefore be tenuous and a matter of speculation.  Notwithstanding, it is considered that the proposal satisfies the relevant assessment criteria and will contribute to the character of the area.

 

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

Development Engineer

The following comments were provided:

 

An application has been received for alterations and additions at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

•    Dwg No 861-07 by Plan Ahead Architecture dated 16 Sept 2009;

 

Landscape Comments

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

 

Should the application be approved the following conditions shall apply:

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)        Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The development application was lodged before the 15 January 2010 gazettal of LEP Amendment 41. The savings and transitional provisions require Council to take it into consideration as though it had been exhibited, but not yet made. The proposal is not inconsistent with Amendment 41.

 

(b)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Clause 10 - 2A zone

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

 

Clause 32 Floor space ratio

See discussion under Section 4 above.

 

SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

The proposal is for additions to an outbuilding and therefore no subject to BASIX requirements.

 

7.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan No. Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP

 

The table below assesses the proposed development against Councils preferred solutions for building design criteria and were non compliance occurs a discussion is carried out under the main issues section below addressing the proposed developments compliance with the relevant objectives and performance requirements under the DCP.

 

Note: Non compliances with DCP preferred solutions are highlighted by an asterisk (*). See comments addressing compliance with relevant Performance requirements and objectives under the DCP.

 


Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

Clause

Standard

Check

y/n

Landscaping

40 % of site provided as landscaped area

37 %  (136sqm)

No*

25m² of private open space provided.

58 m2 +

Yes

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

6m x 9.5m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

No change

n/a

Floor area

(Site area 368 m2) maximum FSR 0.6:1 

0.7:1

No*

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

3.75m

Yes

External wall height to the rear maximum 3.5m.

3.75 m to Bundock Street. 3.6m to northern side boundary

No*

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

>1 m for underground rainwater tanks

No*

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

Footings for garage and fence at boundary

No*

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

<4 m

No*

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

n/a

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

Nil setback to Bundock Street boundary as wells as nil setbacks to northern side and eastern rear boundary

No*

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

<4 m

No*

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

<900 mm

No*

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

n/a

n/a

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

n/a

n/a

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

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

None

Yes

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

None

Yes

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

Provided to skylights

Yes

Garages & Driveways

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

Proposal provides the same parking currently provided on site and the additional floor area is not considered to result in any significant added demand for on street parking. Further, the corner allotment means the dual frontage allows for parking.

n/a

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

Complies

n/a

Driveway minimum width of 3m and side setback 1m

Existing

n/a

Driveway maximum width of 3m at the boundary.

Existing

n/a

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

Existing

n/a

Garages and carports to rear lanes set back 1m.

n/a

n/a

Parking and access is provided from the rear.

n/a

n/a

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

In line with a portion of the building line along Bundock St

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

Complies

Yes

Fences

Sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

No sandstone

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

n/a

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

New dwellings comply with 3.5 stars on the NatHERS.

n/a

n/a

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

Slightly reduced

Yes

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

Yes

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

No impact to solar collectors

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

No impact to north facing living room windows

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

Slightly reduced to front yard of 2 Bundock Street

Yes

 

Main issues

Type

Description

Non complying setbacks:

 

Bundock Street frontage.

The proposed garage is sited to the Bundock Street boundary and does not comply with the preferred solutions that carports or garages be located behind the main building line and be consistent with the dominant building line along the street.

Although this issue was raised as a concern, it is considered the proposed nil setbacks are acceptable on the basis that the existing dwelling already contains a sizable portion of its southern elevation sited to the Bundock Street boundary and this boundary forms the secondary street frontage and not the primary frontage. As a result, it is considered unreasonable to expect the garage to be set back further than what is proposed.

Upper balcony to Bundock Street frontage

The proposed development seeks to provide an upper balcony fronting Bundock Street. It is considered acceptable in that its small size and location means it unlikely to result in any significant potential for noise and visual impacts on the eastern side neighbour at 2 Bundock Street. Further, the small depth of the balcony means it does not lend itself to being used by large groups of people, it is setback a reasonable distance from the nearest adjoining neighbour at No 2 Bundock Street and the balconies incorporation in the upper level design steps away from Bundock Street which maintains a smaller profile than the existing dwelling along Bundock Street.

Northern side and rear eastern side boundaries

The proposed outbuilding is sited on the northern side boundary shared with 371 Avoca Street and the rear eastern side boundary shared with 2 Bundock Street.

There are no major objections on the basis of the following:

·      The existing outbuilding is sited along these boundaries and

·      The additional roof is setback 1500mm from the northern side boundary

·      There is no significant adverse impact from the nil setback at the rear eastern boundary as the hipped roof rises away from the neighbouring property at the rear

Overall the non complying setbacks will not considered to result in any appreciable adverse amenity impacts on both the northern and eastern neighbouring properties having particular regard to privacy, solar access or general obtrusiveness and the proposed development satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP-Dwelling Houses.

Outbuilding within 900mm and 4.5m of the side and rear boundaries respectively

The proposed outbuilding is sited along the northern and eastern boundaries and does not comply with the preferred solutions. There are no major objections as a suitable condition is included requiring the adjoining land to be suitably supported.

>1m excavation   below ground level for rainwater tanks

The proposed development is excavating below the preferred maximum of 1m to accommodate the rainwater tanks.

It is considered that a suitable condition could be included to address the significant excavation by requiring the adjoining land to be adequately supported.

Landscaped area

The proposed development extends towards the existing Bundock Street alignment reducing the landscaped area provided on site. It is considered the reduction in landscaped area is acceptable on the basis that the proposed development would continue to satisfy the performance requirements and objectives under the DCP on the basis of the following:

-        The proposed development does not result in a reduction in the area used for private open space in the rear yard and has adequate areas for vegetation.

-        The proposed developments maintains a compatible additional bulk and scale with other building sought along Bundock Street.

Floor Space Ratio

The preferred solution indicates that the maximum floor space ratio for a site area of 368m2 is 0.60:1 and the proposed development does not comply proposing a floor space ratio of 0.7:1, exceeding the preferred solution by 36.8m2. It is noted the existing floor space ratio is at 0.62:1 and the proposed development results in an effective increase of 29m2 mostly contained within the upper roof dormer level.

There are no major objections to the non complying floor space ratio for the following reasons:

·      The additional floor area is largely a result of moving the garage to the Bundock Street boundary and the studio area within the roof addition.

·      It will present a scale that is subordinate to the main two storey dwelling which also has a sizable portion of its southern elevation along the Bundock Street boundary.

·      the proposal meets the preferred solutions for Solar Access and Overshadowing (See above in Solar Access and Overshadowing); and

·      no unreasonable privacy impacts will result from the proposed development (See  above in Visual and Acoustic Privacy);

In respect to the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP it is considered that the proposal satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP- Dwelling Houses.

Height

The proposed outbuilding has a wall height of 3.75m at the southern elevation and a height of 3.6m at the northern elevation adjoining the northern neighbour’s rear yard and does not comply with the preferred maximum of 3.5m under the DCP.

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

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

Overall, it is considered there are no major objections given the following:

·      The level of non compliance is minor and,

·      It does not result in any significant adverse amenity impact on the neighbouring properties or the streetscape in terms of bulk and scale.

Front fence

The plans show the side boundary fences extending beyond the building line fronting Avoca Street. As the plans may appear to represent a fence along this boundary, a condition is included should consent be provided requiring the fence to be restricted to a certain height depending on the design of any fence in front of the building line to Avoca Street.

 

7.2 Council Policies

 

Section 94 Contributions plans

This application is EXEMPT from a levy under Council’s s94A Development Contributions Plan as it falls into the category of development with a cost of works less than $100,000.

 

8.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction:  Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal subject to a non standard conditions requiring the restriction of the side boundary fencing along the northern and southern sides to a maximum height of 1.8m above natural ground level, the restrictions on the fencing in front of the Avoca Street building line and the use of the studio attic area will result in a development which substantially complies with the relevant assessment criteria under the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. On this basis, it is considered the proposed development would not result in any unreasonable or significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality and represents an acceptable form of development.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 32(1) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to Floor Space Ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, 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. DA/654/2009 for alterations and additions at No. 373 Avoca Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 861-07, dated 18 November 2009 and received by Council on 19 November 2009, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

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

 

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

 

3.       The fencing in front of the main building on the northern and southern side boundaries are restricted to maximum height of 1.2m with a solid design or 1.8m and designed so that the upper two thirds are 50% open.

 

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

 

4.       The proposed fences located on the northern and southern side boundaries behind the front building line shall not exceed a maximum height of 1800mm, measured above the existing ground levels.

 

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

 

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

 

5.       The treatment of the brick wall along the northern side boundary shared with the neighbouring property at No 371 Avoca Street shall be treated so that it is compatible with the neutral colour scheme of the adjoining dwelling.

 

6.       The design, materials and colour of the roofing to the proposed building/s are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing roof.

 

7.       Metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. colourbond) and form part of the colour scheme and external finishes for the development.

 

8.       There must be no encroachment of the structures or associated articles (including footings) onto Council’s road reserve, footway, nature strip, public place or adjoining properties.

 

9.       The garage/studio must only be used for the purposes specified in the development consent and the building must not be used for separate residential/commercial accommodation or as a separate residential occupancy/commercial use at any time. The garage, outbuilding, upper studio shall not be let, adapted or used for separate residential occupation or commercial purposes at any time.

 

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 provide adequate provisions for access, transport and infrastructure:

11.     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.

 

12.     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:

 

13.     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 match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

14.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $121(inclusive of GST). 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 r service authority assets:

15.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

17.     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.

 

18.     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.

 

19.     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)

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

21.     Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

Absorption pits must be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed or flow onto any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance.

 

Details of any works proposed to be carried out in or on a public road/footway are to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to commencement of works.

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

 

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

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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).

 

25.     Prior to the commencement of any building works, the following requirements must be complied with:

 

a)    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.

 

A copy of the construction certificate, the approved development consent plans and 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.

 

b)    a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) must be appointed to carry out the necessary building inspections and to issue an occupation certificate; and

 

c)    a principal contractor must be appointed for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, an owner-builder permit may be obtained in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and the PCA and Council are to be notified accordingly; and

                                        

d)    the principal contractor must be advised of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority; and

 

e)    at least two days notice must be given to the Council, in writing, prior to commencing building works.

 

26.     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 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).

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

29.     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.

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

 

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

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

 

Smoke alarms must comply with AS3786 – Smoke alarms and be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.

 

Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be included in the plans/specification for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

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

 

·          Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines & Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

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

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

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

·          Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·          Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·          Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·          Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

35.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

·           new dwellings or additions to dwellings sited up to shared property boundaries (e.g. additions to a semi-detached dwelling or a terraced dwelling),

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

·           as otherwise may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

39.     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 requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and NSW DECC Guidelines must be satisfied at all times.

 

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

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan is required to be developed and implemented throughout the works, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of site works.

 

The Construction Noise Management Plan is to be prepared in accordance with the relevant provisions of the DECC Construction Noise Guideline.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity to the satisfaction of Council. 

 

A copy of the Construction Site Management Plan must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

The sediment and erosion control measures are to be in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be provided in the Construction Site Management Plan. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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:

 

43.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

●    before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Placement of a waste skip (greater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

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

 

A4      This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards and you are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A5      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D5/10

 

 

Subject:                  61 High Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/881/2009

Author:                   David Mooney, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Internal re-development of Level 5 Prince of Wales Private Hospital

 

Ward:                      Central Ward

 

Applicant:                Mitchell McLennan

 

Owner:                         Healthscope Pty Ltd under lease from the South Eastern Sydney & Illawarra Area Health Services.

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

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

 

The application seeks approval for internal work to improve facilities on the 5th level of the Prince of Wales Private Hospital.

 

Prince of Wales Private Hospital is located on levels 5 to 7 of the main Prince of Wales hospital building on the Randwick Hospitals Campus.

 

The proposal comprises internal works only and was not exhibited in the Southern Courier or notified to adjoining land-owners.

 

The proposal qualifies for a Masterplan waiver because it is relatively minor ancillary to the current use of the land.

 

The proposal is permissible with development consent and consistent with the relevant Zone 5 Special Uses objective.

 

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application seeks approval for internal work to improve facilities on the 5th level of the Prince of Wales Private Hospital. The redevelopment would upgrade existing facilities in order to improve health services provided by the hospital. The redevelopment includes:

 

·      2 additional operating theatres,

·      Extension to the central sterilising services department, and

·      Converting the old intensive care unit to a recovery ward.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

Prince of Wales Private Hospital is located on levels 5 to 7 of the main Prince of Wales hospital building on the Randwick Hospitals Campus.

 

The Hospitals Campus is bound by Avoca Street, High Street, Barker Street and Hospital Road in Randwick. It also accommodates other medical facilities such as the Prince of Wales Public Hospital, Royal Hospital for Women, the Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute and the Sydney Children’s Hospital.

 

4.    Site History

 

Council approved 21 June 1996, DA/85/1994 to construct one additional floor on the clinic building and the use of levels 5-7 as a private hospital.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal comprised internal works only and was not exhibited in the Southern Courier or notified to adjoining land-owners.

 

6.    Master Planning Requirements

 

The proposal qualifies for a Masterplan waiver because it is relatively minor and ancillary to the current use of the land. There is a masterplan waiver in the recommendation to this report.

7.    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 (Consolidation)

The development application was lodged before the 15 January 2010 gazettal of LEP Amendment 41. The savings and transitional provisions require Council to take it into consideration as though it had been exhibited, but not yet made. The proposal is not inconsistent with Amendment 41.

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

Clause 17 – Zone 5 Special Uses: The proposal is permissible with development consent and consistent with the following relevant zone objective.

 

·      To enable associated and ancillary development.

 

Development Control Plan – Parking

The proposal does not involve a direct increase in the number of beds, employees and doctors and so does not require additional parking under this DCP.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

The proposal is exempt from developer contributions because it is a hospital.

 

8.    Environmental Assessment

 

The proposal satisfies the requirements of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:       A vibrant and diverse community.

Direction 2d:      New and upgraded community facilities that are multi purpose and in accessible locations.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal is permissible with development consent and consistent with the relevant Zone 5 Special Uses objectives.

 

Approval, subject to conditions, is recommended.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council as consent authority waive the requirement for a masterplan under Clause 40A(30) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 on the basis that the proposed development is ancillary to the current use of the land.

 

B.     That Council, as consent authority, grant development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, to Development Application No. DA/881/2009 for internal re-development of level 5 Prince of Wales Private Hospital at 61 High Street, Randwick subject to the following conditions:

 

Approved Plans

 

1)     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered A200, A203, dated 24 November 2009 and received by Council on 30 November 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 & Assessment Act 1979 and other Acts and Regulations:

 

2)     The relevant requirements of the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be complied with and a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water.  An Application for a Section 73 Certificate must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator. For details, please refer to the “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Following the application, a “Notice of Requirements” will be provided, detailing water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid.  Please make early contact with the Water Servicing Co-ordinator, as building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

A copy of Sydney Water’s ‘Notice of Requirements’ must be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Construction Certificate.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing an occupation certificate or subdivision certificate (whichever the sooner).

 

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

 

4)     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.

 

5)     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).

 

6)     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.

 

7)     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

 

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

 

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

 

b)     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

 

c)     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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

12)   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).

 

13)   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.

 

14)   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.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D6/10

 

 

Subject:                  13-15 Silver Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/311/2008/B

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(1A) Application to delete conditions 76 and 101

Original consent: Demolition of existing buildings & construction of 3 storey building with 4 tenancies for use as medical centre with 11 on site car park spaces, with roof terrace

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Anthony Rowan Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Titan Enterprise Holdings Pty Limited

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Executive Summary

 

The Section 96 application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as it involves the deletion of a condition requiring the removal of power poles and undergrounding of power cables in the street contrary to Council policy. The approved development (DA 311/2008) comprised the demolition of existing buildings and construction of 3 storey building with 4 tenancies for use as medical centre with 11 on site car park spaces and a roof terrace at 13-15 Silver Street, Randwick. This DA was determined at the Ordinary Council meeting of the 21 October 2008.

 

The application is for a Section 96(1A) Modification of Development Consent 311/2008 to delete Condition No. 76 which reads as follows:

 

Condition No. 76 :  The applicant shall meet the full cost of the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site to be relocated underground and all redundant power poles to be removed. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be relocated. All wires cables must be relocated underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.”

 

Additionally, the application seeks to delete Condition No.101 relating to civil works in Council’s footpath along the Silver Street frontage of the subject site which reads as follows:

 

Condition No.101 :  The applicant shall meet all costs associated with upgrading the Silver Street site frontage in accordance with Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre. All works carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council property.

 

A detailed streetscape plan for the Silver Street frontage showing proposed footpath design, street furniture, grades, finished levels, extent and location of awnings, doors/entranceways and any other details required by Council’s Landscape Architect shall be submitted to, and approved by, Council’s Director of City Services prior to commencement of the streetscape works.

 

The applicant will be required to contact and liaise with Council’s Project Co-ordinator, Mr Paul Lunniss on 9399-0934, prior to preparation of the streetscape plan in order to obtain more detailed, site specific landscape design requirements from the relevant Departments of Council.

 

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

 

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

 

 

Following assessment of the application, the proposed deletion of conditions No. 76 and 101 is not considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·          The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 will result in a development with unsightly and unsafe power lines, poles and telecommunication cables around the subject site contrary to that part of the development consent for which approval was granted. The proposed deletion of Condition No. 76 in effect maintains/perpetuates the existing unsatisfactory overhead power and telecommunications supply to the subject site which the approved proposal was required to remove.

 

·          The Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 results in a development with unsightly power poles and lines and telecommunication cables that has an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the streetscape and detracts from the existing character of development in the locality.

 

·          The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 results in a development that fails to comply with provisions of Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005.

 

·          The proposed deletion of Condition No. 101 results in a development that fails to comply with provisions of Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre.

 

·          The proposed deletion of Conditions No. 76 and 101 results in a development that fails to comply with Clause 9 of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

·          The proposed deletion of Conditions No. 76 and 101 results in a development that will be inconsistent with the general aims of the Randwick LEP 1998 as listed in Clause 2 of the LEP.

 

·          The proposed deletion of Conditions No. 76 and 101 results in a development that will be inconsistent with the specific objectives of the General Business 3A zone contained in Clause 13 of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

·          The proposed deletion of Condition No. 101 will result in a development with inconsistent and variable footpath civil works/construction standards that would be unsightly and unsafe for public use.

 

·          Conditions No. 76 and 101 are valid conditions in that they serve a planning purpose; fairly and reasonably relate to the original development for which approval has been granted; and are reasonable conditions to apply.

 

It is recommended that the application be refused.

 

The Proposal

 

The application is for a Section 96(1A) Modification of Development Consent 1069/2007 to allow for the deletion of Condition No. 76 which requires the applicant to meet the full cost of existing overhead power lines and telecommunication cables to be relocated underground. The application also seeks to delete Condition 101 which requires civil works in, and upgrading of, the Silver Street frontage of the subject site to Council’s standards.

 

Condition No. 76

 

The applicant advises that Condition No. 76 should not be applied for the following reasons (with Council’s response below):

 

1.     Neither Energy Australia nor Optus considers the identified underground laying of power lines or cables is derived from the development, and neither provider requires it to be carried out for servicing the development.

 

Council’s comments:  Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables requires all power and telecommunication cables fronting a development site to be placed underground and does not limit this requirement only to cables servicing a site. Nor does the policy require cables to be derived from particular developments for their underground laying to be effected. As indicated in relevant sections of this report, the policy aims to remove unsightly and unsafe above ground cables and associated power poles that have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the streetscape and detracts from the existing character of development in the locality. The policy does not identify categories of cabling that may be exempt from the policy but is aimed specifically at all large developments costing $2 million and above in any location within the Randwick LGA. The subject site is a relatively large site with significant frontage and exposure to Silver Street, and is approved for a significantly large medical centre at a cost of $2.7 million. As such, the proposal  is subject to Council’s policy for undergrounding of cables.

 

2.     Cost of undergrounding of cables is excessive, totalling some $492,250.00. It amounts to about 18.2% of the total construction cost of the development (estimated at $2.7 million).

 

Council’s comments:  At the meeting held with the applicant and consultants on 9 December 2009, Council officers advised the applicant to provide a comprehensive, Energy Australia verified, assessment and breakdown of the cost to support the applicant’s claim regarding the cost of undergrounding the cables. Details of costing reflecting the amount quoted have been provided with the Section 96 application as prepared by the applicant’s project consultant. However, these details appear broad and do not contain specific advice, assessment and confirmation from Energy Australia and any other service provider. Accordingly, inadequate detail of the exact cost has been provided with the Section 96 application.  

 

3.     The imposition of condition No. 76 is unreasonable for it fails each of the tests of the so-called Newbury principle.

 

Council’s comments:  The application of condition No. 76 in the development consent is valid when tested against the Newbury principle as follows:

 

1.      The condition must be imposed for a planning purpose

 

As indicated in relevant sections of this report, the intention of condition 76 is to control and mitigate the impacts of unsightly and unsafe poles, power lines and cables serving and fronting the subject site on the amenity of the streetscape, surrounding areas and neighbourhood. Specifically, Condition No. 76 is related to planning aspects of the use and development of the subject land in that it is intended to control, mitigate and eliminate the impacts of :

 

·      a development served and fronted by power poles, lines and cables that would be unsightly and, therefore, have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the streetscape and detracts from the desired urban design/character of development in the locality.

 

·      a development served and fronted by power poles, lines and cables that would inhibit the growth of street tree planting that are essential for screening and softening the builtform, bulk and scale of the development in the context of the streetscape and existing development and zoning in the locality.

 

·      a development served and fronted by power poles, lines and cables that would be potentially unsafe for a number of reasons including damage to property and danger to lives of residents in the locality and workers on site arising from  vehicles and equipment striking and/or crashing into poles and lines during construction and storm events.

 

In view of the planning intention of Condition No. 76 as listed above, deletion of the subject condition would result in a development that would be:

 

(1) inconsistent with general aims of the Randwick LEP 1998 as listed in Clause 2 of the LEP and in particular “(e) to ensure the conservation of the environmental heritage and aesthetic character of the City” and “(g) to promote, protect and enhance the environmental qualities of the City” and

 

(2) inconsistent with the specific objectives of the General Business 3A zone, namely, “(1)(b) to facilitate development of land, in places identified by the Council as suitable to be used as business centres, for commercial, retail , residential and community purposes: (vi) by maintaining and improving the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the City of Randwick.”

 

2.      The condition must fairly and reasonably relate to the development for which approval has been granted.

 

Condition No. 76 is a valid condition for the following reasons:

 

·      The authority of Council to impose Condition No. 76 derives from an authority to impose a condition reasonably related to the application of planning policy formulated through Council’s resolution (that is, through the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting held on 8 November 2005) as provided for under relevant Act and Ordinances.

 

·      The condition aims to control and mitigate the amenity and safety impacts of power poles, lines and cables which are reasonably connected to the proposed development in that they serve the proposed development and are located on the street front of the proposed development. 

 

3.      The condition must be reasonable.

 

Condition No. 76 is reasonable primarily because any reasonable consent authority properly advised would impose such a condition to protect the amenity and safety of surrounding areas and neighbourhood. In this regard, fundamentally, the retention of above-ground power poles/lines and telecommunication cables in the streetscape serving the proposed development and fronting the subject site would result in an incompatible development to the desired urban character for the subject site and results in a safety risk to surrounding property and lives especially during construction. As such, a condition to control and mitigate these undesirable consequences is considered entirely reasonable. Additionally, the implementation of this desired urban character and safe environment has been satisfactorily achieved  in other major projects approved in Randwick LGA where the requirement for undergrounding of poles and cables have been applied in development consents and accepted by applicants.

 

Condition No. 101

 

The applicant advises that Condition No. 101 should not be applied to the applicant for the following reasons (with Council’s response below):

 

1.       The scope of Condition No. 101 is such that it would result in a duplication of works already committed to in the intended VPA for the subject site. Actual scope of the works is not clear.

 

Council’s comments:  The terms of the VPA apply to the whole of Randwick Junction Town Centre whereas the upgrading works required under Condition No. 101, which is a standard development condition applicable to most approved developments, is specific to Council’s footpath fronting the subject site. For sites in commercial centre, such as the development site, there are specific urban design guidelines prepared by Council to ensure all works are undertaken in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council’s footpath/property. Accordingly, the application of Condition No. 101 is not considered a duplication of works required in the VPA.

 

2.       Development could proceed without requiring any works to the footpath which is in reasonable condition and does not need to be altered to accommodate the development.

 

Council’s comments:  The applicant’s description of the existing footpath represents an opinion and unsubstantiated visual assessment which ignores the following fact: the proposed development is not a small scaled alteration and addition to a building but a construction of a major new commercial building that will entail, inter alia, new driveways, and additional pedestrian and vehicular activity on and across Council’s property (ie, Council’s footpath and driveway). Under these circumstances upgrading works to Council’s footpath and driveway can be reasonably expected such that the application of a standard condition, such as Condition No. 101, is reasonable and appropriate.  

 

3.     Condition No. 101 does not satisfy the Newbury principle

 

Council’s comments:  The application of condition No. 101 in the development consent is valid when tested against the Newbury principle as follows:

 

1.      The condition must be imposed for a planning purpose

 

As indicated above, the intention of condition 101 is to ensure all works undertaken on Council’s property (in this case, the footpath fronting the subject site) arising from the approved redevelopment of the subject site, are in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council’s footpath/property.

 

2.      The condition must fairly and reasonably relate to the development for which approval has been granted.

 

As indicated above, the approved development involves construction of a new and significantly large commercial building that will result in, among other things, new driveways, increased pedestrian activity on, and additional vehicular movements across, Council’s property (ie, Council’s footpath and driveway). The approved development will have impacts on Council’s footpath such that upgrading works to the footpath can be reasonably expected.

 

3.      The condition must be reasonable.

 

Condition No. 101 is reasonable primarily because any reasonable consent authority properly advised would impose such a condition to ensure Council’s property is reinstated, maintained and upgraded to Council’s standard. The standards in this case are contained in Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre. As such, a condition seeking to apply the standards contained in the guidelines to ensure consistency in civil works is entirely reasonable.

The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Belmore Road on the corner of Belmore Road and Silver Street. The subject site has a generally regular shape except for a splayed front boundary at the corner. It has a southern frontage to Silver Street of approximately 42m, western side boundary of 9.45m, northern boundary of 59m. Whilst the eastern boundary comprises a sharp splayed corner of 19.35m at the intersection of Silver Street and Belmore Road, the site does not have an address to Belmore Road. The site has an area of 469sqm and falls gently east to west by approximately 2.91m.

 

Existing on the site is a mixed-use part one and part two storey development. The two storey section comprises a late Inter-war type design building on the eastern corner to Silver Street and Belmore Road previously occupied by a medical centre on the first floor and a small retail business on the ground floor. The single storey component is located on the western section of the subject site and comprises a dwelling and a previous doctor’s surgery. The building is now vacant.

 

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

 

To the north:

A single-storey commercial building, occupied by the Commonwealth Bank of typical 1970s commercial design.  Buildings further north of the bank comprises two-storey terraced period style units with shopfronts to the Belmore Road boundary.

 

To the east:

Across Belmore Road are predominantly two and three storey terraced buildings with ground floor shop and upper floor residential/commercial uses.

 

To the south :

Across Silver Street is a part one storey and part three storey 1920s style building with ground floor café/restaurant use and upper floor residential/commercial uses in the three storey section fronting Belmore Road and a TAB shop in the rear single storey section fronting Silver Street. Adjoining the TAB shop to the west is a three storey period style building containing commercial uses which is bounded by Arthur Lane. Across Arthur Lane is a public carpark and residential flat buildings all fronting Silver Street.

 

To the west :

A three story period style residential flat building at No. 11 Silver Street which is bounded by Elizabeth Street on its western side. Across Elizabeth Street is a row of residential flat buildings of various styles all fronting Silver Street.

 

Site History

 

The original development application was approved under a deferred commencement consent on 21 October 2008 essentially requiring the applicant to enter into a voluntary planning agreement (VPA) for the payment of a development contribution for townscape improvements within the Randwick Junction Town Centre.

 

In accordance with Section 93G of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), a draft VPA was publicly exhibited from the 18 August to 18 September 2009. Following this exhibition process, the Planning Committee Meeting on 10 September 2009 resolved to enter into the Voluntary Planning Agreement as publicly exhibited. 

Community Consultation

 

Given that the application is made under Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, which relates to modifications which have minimal environmental impact, formal notification of the proposal is not necessary under Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification of Development Proposals.

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:-

 

1       Environmental Health and Building Comments

No referral/comments in relation to health and building issues is required for this application.

 

2       Development Engineer Comments

Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

“The modifications to the development consent that relate to Development Engineering is the proposed deletion of Condition No 76 which relates to the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site being relocated underground and all redundant power poles being removed.

 

The assessing officer is advised that imposition of Condition No 76 arises from the resolution of a Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting that was held 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.

 

Development Engineering does not support deletion of Condition No. 76, however the S96 application may need to be referred to Council for its deletion.”

 

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

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended

Building Code of Australia.

 


Section 96 Assessment

 

Under the provisions of Section 96(1A), a consent authority may modify a development consent if it is satisfied that the development to which the development as modified is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted; and has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modifications.

 

Substantially the same

The development as proposed to be modified will be substantially the same development as that for which consent was originally granted. Notwithstanding this, the proposed changes to the approved development relating to the deletion of the requirement to underground cables is not acceptable, primarily, for the reasons set out in the assessment below:

 

a.     The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 will result in a  development with unsightly and unsafe power lines, poles and telecommunication cables around the subject site contrary to that for which approval was granted. Approval of the Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 results in (1) a development with unsightly power poles and lines that has an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the Silver Street streetscape and detracts from the desired character of the proposed development in the locality and (2) a potentially unsafe development posed by existing poles and overhead power lines and telecommunications cables during and post construction. The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 in effect maintains/perpetuates the existing unsatisfactory overhead power and telecommunications supply to the subject site which the approved proposal was required to remove.

 

b.     The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 results in a  development that fails to comply with provisions of Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005.

 

c.     The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 results in a  development that will be inconsistent with

 

 

1)       general aims of the Randwick LEP 1998 as listed in Clause 2 of the LEP and in particular “(e) to ensure the conservation of the environmental heritage and aesthetic character of the City” and “(g) to promote, protect and enhance the environmental qualities of the City” and

 

2)       the specific objectives of the General Business 3A zone, namely, “(1)(b) to facilitate development of land, in places identified by the Council as suitable to be used as business centres, for commercial, retail , residential and community purposes: (vi) by maintaining and improving the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the City of Randwick.”

 

Similarly, the proposed changes to the approved development relating to the deletion of the requirement for upgrading works to Council’s footpath is not acceptable, primarily, for the reasons that approval of the Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 101 would result in result in a development with inconsistent and variable footpath civil works/construction standards that would be unsightly and unsafe for public use. Additionally, the proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 101 will result in a development that would be inconsistent with provisions of Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre.

 


Consideration of submissions

 

As indicated in Section 5 above, the application was not required to be advertised/notified.

 

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.

 

1          Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Clause 9    Objectives

The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Conditions No. 76 and 101 results in a  development that will be inconsistent with

 

1.     general aims of the Randwick LEP 1998 as listed in Clause 2 of the LEP and in particular “(e) to ensure the conservation of the environmental heritage and aesthetic character of the City” and “(g) to promote, protect and enhance the environmental qualities of the City” and

 

2.     the specific objectives of the General Business 3A zone, namely, “(1)(b) to facilitate development of land, in places identified by the Council as suitable to be used as business centres, for commercial, retail , residential and community purposes: (vi) by maintaining and improving the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the City of Randwick.”

 

2          Policy Controls

The policy for replacing overhead wires with underground cables was adopted at the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting on 8 November 2005. This policy, amongst other things, requires that applicants of development applications be required to meet all costs associated with replacing overhead wires with underground cables in the vicinity of the development site when the cost of works on the site exceeds $2 million. The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 results in a development that fails to comply with provisions of Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005. For the reasons discussed in relevant sections above, the applicant’s request to delete condition No. 76 is not supported.

 

3          Urban Design

 

The retention of unsightly above-ground power poles/lines and telecommunication cables in the streetscape fronting the subject site and its approved medical centre development will be detrimental to the visual amenity of this streetscape. Fundamentally, the retention of unsightly above-ground power poles/lines and telecommunication cables in the streetscape fronting the subject site is incompatible with the desired urban character for the Randwick Junction town centre given the subject sites extensive frontage in the streetscape (which, by virtue of its intersection with Belmore Road, is also exposed to, and visible from, Belmore Road).

 

The deletion of Condition 101 will result is detrimental urban design and streetscape impacts due to (1) a potential lack of control and consistency in the civil works that will need to be undertaken on Council’s footpath fronting the subject site and (2) a potential departure in development standards from that recommended in Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre.

 

Significantly as well, Conditions No 76 and 101 are valid conditions under the Newbury test in that it serves a planning purpose; fairly and reasonably relate to the original development for which approval has been granted; and are reasonable conditions to impose.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 5a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed Section 96 modification in effect reverses the part of the original consent relating to undergrounding of cables, such that the amended proposal is unacceptable. In particular, the proposal will result in an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the streetscape and detract from the desired character of development in the locality and adverse impact in terms of safety due to potential damage to property and danger to lives of residents in the locality and workers on site posed by vehicles and equipment striking and/or crashing into poles and lines during construction and storm events; and result in a development that fails to comply with the Randwick LEP, and Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005. Furthermore, Condition No. 76 is a valid condition when tested against the Newbury principle.

 

The proposed deletion of Condition 101 will also result in an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the streetscape and detract from the desired character of development in the locality and will give rise to adverse impact in terms of safety due to inconsistent and variable standards in civil works on Council’s property.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority, refuse its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/311/2008 for demolition of existing  buildings and construction of a 3 storey building with 4 tenancies for use as medical centre with 11 on site car park spaces, with roof terrace at 13-15 Silver Street, Randwick, for the following reasons:

 

1.       The proposed deletion Condition No. 76 will result in a development with unsightly and unsafe power lines, poles and telecommunication cables around the subject site contrary to that part of the development consent for which approval was granted. The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition No. 76 in effect maintains/perpetuates the existing unsatisfactory overhead power and telecommunications supply to the subject site which the approved proposal was required to remove.

 

2.       The proposal to delete Condition No. 76 results in a development with unsightly and unsafe power poles and lines and telecommunication cables that has an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the streetscape and detracts from the existing character of development in the locality.

 

3.       The proposed deletion Condition No. 76 results in a development that fails to comply with provisions of Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005.

 

4.       The proposed deletion Condition No. 101 results in a development that fails to comply with provisions of Council’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Randwick Commercial Centre.

 

5.       The proposed deletion Condition No. 76 and 101 results in a development that fails to comply with Clause 9 of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

6.       The proposed deletion Conditions No. 76 and 101 results in a development that will be inconsistent with the general aims of the Randwick LEP 1998 as listed in Clause 2 of the LEP.

 

7.       The proposed deletion Conditions No. 76 and 101 results in a development that will be inconsistent with the specific objectives of the General Business 3A zone contained in Clause 13 of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

8.       The proposed deletion Condition No. 101 will result in a development with inconsistent and variable footpath civil works/construction standards that would be unsightly and unsafe for public use.

 

9.       Conditions No. 76 and 101 are valid conditions in that they serve a planning purpose; fairly and reasonably relate to the original development for which approval has been granted; and are reasonable conditions to apply.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D7/10

 

 

Subject:                  164 Belmore Road, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/522/2008

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

Development Application No. 522/2008 for the demolition of existing building and construction of part 3, part 4 storey building comprising day surgery and medical centre with ground floor retail and car parking at No. 164 Belmore Road, Randwick was considered by the Council on 9 June 2009. At the meeting, Council resolved to grant a Deferred Commencement Consent subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Issues

 

Section 93G of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) provides that a planning agreement cannot be entered into unless public notice has been given of the proposed agreement and made available for inspection by the public for a period of not less than 28 days. A draft VPA for the proposed development at No 164 Belmore Road, and an accompanying explanatory note, were publicly exhibited from 18 August to 18 September 2009 at Council.

 

No submissions were received in relation to the exhibition of the draft VPA.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

It should be noted that, the draft VPA included a clause (Clause 8) that removes the requirement for the VPA to be registered on title as per Condition No. D2 of the Deferred Commencement Consent. Following discussions between Council’s solicitor and the applicant’s solicitor, the applicant has agreed to further amend Clauses 2 and 3 of the draft VPA to provide for payment of the development contribution on the day that the VPA is executed rather than on the day that a construction certificate is applied for, as originally intended. This effectively means that, because payment of the development charge is made immediately on execution of the VPA and not at construction certificate stage, there is no longer any need for registration of the VPA on title (a copy of the draft VPA (as amended) and its accompanying explanatory note is attached below). In order to make the terms of the amended draft VPA consistent with the provisions of the deferred commencement condition of consent, the applicant has agreed to lodge a Section 96(1A) application to delete Condition No. 2 of the deferred commencement consent, the merits of which, Council will need to be satisfied prior to determination.

 

Relationship to the City Plan

 

The relationship to the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in urban design and development. 

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Public exhibition of the draft VPA relating to the proposed development at No. 164 Belmore Road has been appropriately undertaken pursuant to Section 93G of the EP&A Act. Accordingly, the VPA has been duly processed and is now acceptable and ready to be entered into between the applicant and Council subject to amendments to Clauses 2 and 3 of the draft VPA as discussed Section 2 above.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council enter into the Voluntary Planning Agreement relating to the proposed development under DA No. 522/2008 at 164 Belmore Road, Randwick as publicly exhibited from 18 August to 18 September 2009 including the amendments to the provisions of Clauses 2 and 3 of the draft VPA to allow for payment of the development charge immediately upon execution of the Agreement.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) 164 Belmore Road, Randwick

 

 

 

 


Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) 164 Belmore Road, Randwick

Attachment 1

 

 














 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Miscellaneous Report No. M1/10

 

 

Subject:                  Land & Environment Court proceeding in relation to 1406-1408 Anzac Parade, Little Bay

Folder No:                   DA/81/2009

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

Council at its Extraordinary meeting of 6 October 2009 refused development consent to DA/81/2009 for a stage 1 concept plan comprising a new residential development of 450 dwellings at the site of the former UNSW Sporting fields at Little Bay, contrary to the officers recommendation.

 

The development application was the subject of a Class 1 appeal at the time of Council’s decision. The matter was heard before Commissioner Murrell on 30 November and 1, 2 and 3 December 2009. Evidence in support of Council’s refusal in the proceedings was given by Mr Michael Brown (Planning Consultant), Mr Richard Dekker (Hydraulic consultant), Mr Ken Moon from the RTA, Mr Kerry Kyriacou on the issue of the setback to lot 5 and Mr John Flanigan on the safety assessment relating to the proximity of the development to the Coast golf course. The Commissioner handed down an oral judgement on 23 December 2009 that upheld the appeal.

 

Issues

 

In her oral judgement Commissioner Murrell indicated that she was of the view that the proposed development was eminently suitable for the site as in fill housing and that there were not unacceptable adverse impacts on existing or future development. The Commissioner was also of the view that the development would provide a variety of housing types and would have an identity that was distinct from the Prince Henry development to the south.

 

In relation to the floor space ratio, the Commissioner concluded that the whole of the site should be taken into account in determining the allocation of floor space and had no difficulty with the concept of future development relying on SEPP1 objections in order to achieve the proposed FSRs.

 

On the issue of a link road across Anzac Parade the Commissioner was of the view that it would be more efficient for such a link to be provided and given that the site was large with significant frontage to Anzac Parade it would be appropriate to allow the link.

 

The applicant as part of the proceedings also attempted to reduce the front setback of lot 5 to a zero setback on the basis that they were unable to secure the purchase of a part of the road reserve from Council, and that the proposal would be consistent in setback with the development on the Prince Henry site. The Commissioner was not prepared to allow the development on lot 5 to have a zero setback on the basis of the evidence given by Mr Kyriacou in opposition to the proposed nil setback. However, the Commissioner was satisfied that the proposed height of lot 11 to Anzac Parade and lot 6 adjacent to the golf course, would achieve a good outcome in urban design terms and would provide for a good economic use of the site. It should be noted that lot 6 is now approved at 5 full storeys as originally recommended by Council officers and contrary to the peer review recommendation of Mr Stuart McDonald.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 5c:      New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The legal costs of the proceedings totalled $84,290 including the cost of the consultant planning and hydraulic experts. It should also be noted that the applicant was prepared to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Council that would have provided Council with 4 affordable housing dwellings with a likely value of over $2 million. This offer was withdrawn by the applicant subsequent to Council’s refusal of the application.

 

Recommendation

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Miscellaneous Report No. M2/10

 

 

Subject:                  Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP) - Council procedures

Folder No:                   F2009/00256

Author:                   Karen Armstrong, Manager Strategic Planning     

 

Introduction

 

The Joint Regional planning panels (JRRP) were recently established by the NSW Government to assess regionally significant development proposals. These panels operate according to a Code of Conduct, Procedures for Operation, a Planning Circular and a User Guide prepared by the NSW Government.

 

In assessing proposals within Randwick City, the application is assessed by council officers and reported directly to the JRPP for determination. Councils also have the opportunity to prepare a Council submission directly to the JRPP for consideration, to ensure that the Council’s position and issues are fully represented. Given these two separate inputs to the JRPP, a set of Council procedures has been prepared for these and is attached for Council’s consideration.

 

Background

 

The JRPPs were introduced under the NSW Government’s planning reforms, via amendments to the EPA Act which commenced on 1 July 2009.

 

A General Manager’s report to the Council meeting of 26 May 2009 provided background information on the proposed 5 member panels and sought Council nominees for the relevant panel. A Councillor Bulletin of 31 July 2009 advised of the selected members for the Sydney East panel and of the NSW government’s procedures and information, as set out on a specific JRPP web site (www.jrpp.nsw.gov.au).

 

Issues

 

The NSW Government’s JRPP Operational Procedures set out the roles of councils in relation to the JRPP, the assessment and determination/meeting processes and post meeting procedures.

 

The draft Council procedures at Attachment 1 have been prepared to supplement these JRPP procedures in terms of internal Council processes to ensure that both the broad strategic planning input and the more detailed development assessment is provided to these regionally significant applications, in a transparent and efficient manner. The draft Council procedures also clarify the points at which the Councillors will be advised of the application and opportunities to comment on the proposal. These include, in summary:

 

-        Advice of development proposals as soon as lodged, via the Councillor Bulletin

-        Council report and draft submission for Council consideration

-        Potential for a briefing from applicants

-        Web access to the detailed assessment report, once forwarded to the JRPP

-        Individual submission and opportunity to speak at the JRPP meeting

-        Opportunity to speak at the JRPP meeting on behalf of Council.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction:          New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The JRPPs have commenced operation across NSW since July 2009 and the first was held in Randwick City in January 2010. These draft Council procedures seek to assist Councillors and Council staff by clarifying their role and internal procedures and processes in the assessment and determination of regionally significant development proposals.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council note and endorse the Council Procedures for submissions/reports to the Joint Regional Planning Panel.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Draft Council procedures for submissions-reports to the JRPP - January 2010

 

 

 

 


Draft Council procedures for submissions-reports to the JRPP - January 2010

Attachment 1

 

 

 
 

Council Procedures

for submissions/reports

to the Joint Regional Planning Panel

 

 

These Council procedures and processes apply to regionally significant development proposals to be determined by the Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP). The appropriate opportunities for Council input to proposals are outlined. Internal procedures for staff are documented to ensure efficiency and transparency. These procedures supplement the existing NSW government procedures for the operation of JRPPs.

 

Development applications (DAs) to be determined by the JRPP are referred to the Council for officers to undertake the planning assessment, which includes notification, exhibition and review of submissions. Separate to this and to ensure that the Council’s views are suitably represented to the JRPP, a Council may make a Council submission on a proposal, which is forwarded directly to the JRPP.

 

Procedures upon lodgement:

 

Councillors:

·    Councillors are informed via the Clr bulletin of any proposed development and the exhibition period.

·    Councillors may request a briefing from the applicant.

 

Internal processes:

·    The Development Assessment Committee (DAC) reviews and allocates the DA to an Assessment planning officer and refers relevant details to the Manager, Strategic Planning (SP) with advice as to any referrals to be made to Strategic planning officers (e.g. heritage, social issues).

·    Manager, SP assigns a Strategic planning officer to prepare a memo to the Clr bulletin.

·    Any briefing request will be arranged according to Council’s briefings policy.

 

Procedures for the Council submission:

 

Councillors:

·    A draft Council submission will be reported to the Council for its formal endorsement (the Council may resolve to amend the submission as it considers suitable).

 

Internal processes:

·    Manager, SP assigns a Strategic planning officer to prepare the Council submission and report to Council.

·    The draft submission will address:

 

Nature of the proposal

Relevant State and local plans/policies and compliance

Indication of in-principle support/or otherwise for the proposal

Key issues/concerns arising that may need to be addressed in the detailed assessment and determination, to ensure a suitable development outcome

 

·    The Council submission and report will clearly note that this is an issues overview of the proposal rather than a detailed assessment.

·    The Council report will be signed off by the Director, City Planning.

·    The Council submission is required at minimum 7 days prior to the JRPP meeting.

·    The draft submission will ideally be reported to a Council meeting but if time does not allow (e.g. Xmas holiday period), it will be reported in a Clr Bulletin.

·    The endorsed Council submission is forwarded to the JRPP panel secretariat.

·    Any Councillor division on the report will be noted to the JRPP.

 

Procedures for the Assessment Report:

 

Councillors:

·    The assessment report is not required to be endorsed or presented to the Council. While it must be referred directly to the JRPP upon completion, it will also be available to view on the Council web site.

 

Internal procedures:

·    A copy of the Council submission, as endorsed, will be provided to the assessment officer to review the issues raised (although the JRPP procedures note that this submission does not need to be specifically addressed in the assessment report).

·    The assessment is undertaken according to the standard EP & A Act/Regulation requirements for DAs and the JRRP operational procedures.

·    The assessment report will be signed off by the Manager, Development Assessments

·    The assessment report once forwarded to the JRPP will be placed on Council’s web-site, as required by the JRPP procedures.

 

Procedures for further Councillor involvement:

 

Councillors:

·    A Councillor may make an individual submission within the exhibition period (unless the Councillor is a member of the JRPP), which will be considered in the same manner as other public submissions.

·    A Councillor who makes a submission may register to speak at a JRRP meeting, according to the JRPP procedures, as may other submitters.

·    Alternatively, a Councillor may speak on behalf of the Council, in relation to the Council submission.

 

Internal procedures:

·    The report to Council will include a recommendation as to whether or not to nominate a Councillor to speak on behalf of the Council on its submission.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Miscellaneous Report No. M3/10

 

 

Subject:                  UNSW request to amend Council's S94A Development Contributions Plan

Folder No:                   F2004/06783

Author:                   Karen Armstrong, Manager Strategic Planning     

 

Introduction

 

The University of NSW has recently written to the Council formally requesting that the Council amend its S94A Development Contributions Plan to exempt the UNSW from payment of the levy (see Attachment 1). Council officers met with UNSW representatives in late November to clarify their request and issues.

 

This report addresses the University’s request and suggests that the S94A levy continue to be applied to the university, while recognising that any amendment to the Plan could include funding for specific infrastructure works in the public domain surrounding the university and linking to the nearby town centres.

 

Background

 

The S94A Plan was introduced in July 2007, replacing the previous nexus based S94 plan, to require a levy of up to 1% of the cost of development proposals subject to a development application.

 

The S94A levy enables the Council to provide quality and diverse public infrastructure and facilities to meet the needs and expectations of our existing and future population (including residents and workers).

 

The Plan recognises the expected growth in population and jobs in Randwick City will be focused in and around the UNSW and our City’s town centres. The Department of Planning’s East Sub-Regional Strategy suggests that at least 2,900 extra jobs will be created in the University-hospital ‘specialised centre’ over 20 years. This precinct contains almost 40% of Randwick City’s jobs and the University is the highest employer in the City, with around 5,200 staff (2008). Over 42,000 students are enrolled at the University. Hence, while providing a valuable asset to our City in terms of jobs, study and related facilities, the University is also expected to continue to place strong pressures on our City’s local infrastructure.

 

In recognition of the importance of the university and hospital specialised centre, a discussion paper/centre plan is being prepared as input to the Comprehensive LEP review currently underway, with discussion papers intended for reporting to the Council progressively over 2010.

 

Current exemptions in the S94A Plan

 

The S94A Plan provides for a number of exemptions from the levy (clause 11), including any Class 10 (non-habitable) building, all Complying Development and any residential alterations/additions that do not involve enlargement or intensification of the building/land.

 

The Plan also provides for exemptions for certain uses provided that the applicant can show that the proposed development provides a public benefit and/or the applicant has financial difficulties that would impact on payment of the levy. This is noted to apply to development such as public housing, public hospitals, charities etc.

 

A Ministerial Direction by the Minister for Planning limits the application of a S94A levy to 0% where the proposed development costs less than $100,000 and 0.5% for development of $100,001-$200,000. It also exempts certain development such as affordable housing, adaptive re-use of heritage buildings, energy and water saving development etc from the levy.

 

The Department of Planning’s S94 Practice notes do not require exemption of education facilities.

 

A recent Ministerial Direction has exempted projects funded under the Building Education Revolution (BER) program, applying to primary and high schools but not tertiary institutions.

 

Issues

 

UNSW reasons to seek exemption

The UNSW’s letter (Attachment 1) includes a number of reasons why it should be exempted from the S94A levy. These are outlined and addressed below:

 

UNSW is not a developer

The UNSW notes that it is a not-for-profit institution substantially funded by the Commonwealth Government. Its surplus income is reinvested in the university. It is thus incongruent to be deemed a ‘developer’ under  the S94A plan.  

 

Response: The S94A contributions plan refers to applicants, rather than developers. The S94A levy is not intended to absorb surplus profits of new development – a S94A levy is required to address expected increased demands on the City’s infrastructure, through the works outlined in the S94A Plan and implemented via Council’s annual Delivery Plan. The University letter confirms that it will grow and expand it academic activities over time.

 

While not developing for profit in all cases, some university developments are developed and operated by for-profit groups, such as the 1030 bed University Village.

 

The S94A levy is applied at the point of development (Construction Certificate), in which case the funding for the development has already been confirmed and S94A can reasonably be expected to be incorporated into the cost of development projects, as per all other application/development related costs. 

 

Benefits and contributions to Randwick City

The UNSW letter outlines a range of economic, social and other ways that it benefits and contributes to the Randwick city community.

 

Response: The Council acknowledges and appreciates the wide range of benefits the university provides to our City. At the same time, the benefits the Council provides to the university, without the benefit of any rating base, are also substantial, including:

 

Capital infrastructure:

 

-   roads and associated traffic measures, curb/gutters,

-   footpaths, bicycle paths,

-   street signage, banners, lighting,

-   street furniture

-   stormwater/drainage

-   street trees/landscaping

-   recreation facilities – parks, active and passive

-   community facilities – libraries, halls

-   town centre public domain

In addition, Council provides ongoing cleaning, maintenance, repair, graffiti removal and upgrades all public infrastructure/facilities.

 

Council further provides services that benefit the university and students such as:

 

-   crime prevention and safety planning and implementation

-   cultural planning and implementation

-   recreation planning and implementation

-   traffic demand planning and improvements

-   parking schemes planning and improvements

 

Commonwealth Economic stimulus package

The UNSW considers that projects funded under the Commonwealth economic stimulus package should not fund minor S94A works which do not meet the Commonwealth funding criteria.

 

Response: The NSW Government has excluded from S94A levies only those projects that are under the Building Education Revolution (BER) funding (ie public or non-govt schools). The S94A is a reasonable and equitable levy to apply to all development, whether the development is dependent on one-off grants or other funding sources.

 

Dept of Planning (DOP) practice notes

The UNSW notes that the DOP guidelines include education facilities as a possible exemption from S94A levies, at the discretion of each council.

 

Response: The Council has complied with the DOP practice notes in preparing the S94A Plan including its guidance on exemptions, which notes after listing a range of possible facilities to exempt:

 

‘This is not to promote exemption for these types of facilities. Rather, it demonstrates that some councils do exempt certain types of developments where nexus may be difficult to demonstrate or for some other purpose (such as a public good)’.

 

The exemptions included in the S94A Plan are based on public good eg public hospitals. However, there must be a suitable limit on exemptions to the S94A Plan  which, as outlined above, are already significant.

 

Alternatives/options

 

In lieu of S94A, the UNSW has offered its expertise, experience, staff and resources to assist in the planning work for the University/hospital specialised centre/precinct and implementation including a governance body for the precinct, finalising the precinct plan, integrating the DCP, and improving public transport services.

 

While these activities are a suitable application of the UNSW resources and are appreciated by the Council, these are also expected of a university of this calibre internationally and given its standing in the local area, and thus these activities are not considered to warrant a S94A exemption.

 

The S94A plan provides alternative approaches that would enable any funds paid by university developments to be applied to works and with timing as recommended by the university. One approach is for the applicant to provide a material public benefit as noted in the S94A works schedule, to equal or greater value than the applicant’s potential S94A levy. Alternatively, under a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA), the applicant may dedicate land, pay money, carry out works and/or provide other material public benefits.

 

A further and preferred option is to amend the S94A Plan to add specific works to the works schedule that are within the vicinity of the University, in accordance with imminent NSW government requirements and needs of the Plan, as outlined below.

 

Legislative revisions to S94A Plan requirements have recently been introduced by the NSW Government and new draft guidelines to replace the current practice notes have been issued for comment. These draft guidelines remain the same in relation to exemptions. The draft guidelines are currently being reviewed and the implications will be reported to the February Council meeting. When finalised, all councils will be required to review their existing S94/S94A plans in accordance with the final guidelines, by mid-late 2011.

 

The Council’s S94A Plan has now been in place for over 2 years and a review is programmed for this year.

 

Given a number of changes to the planning system since the S94A Plan was introduced, and given also the fluctuations in the economy, the expected revenue of the Plan has been below the revenue estimates that provided the basis for the plan. For example, new and amended SEPPs are increasingly providing for the extension of the category of complying development, which is currently exempted from the S94A Plan. At the same time, a backlog of S94 contributions revenue has been reduced via substantial implementation of the S94A works schedule giving impetus for its review/update. Major works completed include the Randwick library upgrade, the Prince Henry centre fit-out, coastal walkway extensions, Pioneer park and other sports fields and parks upgrades.

 

When the S94A plan is reviewed, including its works schedule, a preferred option for addressing the UNSW’s concerns would be to include a specific works item for the public domain surrounding the university and linking to the nearby town centres (Kensington, Kingsford, Randwick and the Spot). This is consistent with the suggestions that have arisen from the University/hospital specialised centre planning and working group, that the public domain around these 2 key institutions and nearby centres would benefit from a range of infrastructure improvements. This would recognise that the S94A contributions arising from development on the University will be matched by specific capital works in the work schedule, within the locality of the University. This would also benefit surrounding town centres by providing improved public domain links to and enhancing the economic vitality in the town centres. This preferred option should be flagged with the UNSW in response to their letter and provide a basis for further discussion on this matter of importance to both the Council and University.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4b:      New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The UNSW is a significant institution in Randwick City and the Council will continue to work closely with the University to achieve development that enhances the built environment, as well as jobs, study opportunities and local infrastructure improvements for the benefit of all Randwick residents, workers and visitors.

Recommendation

 

That the Council note and endorse this report as a basis for responding to the University’s request to amend the S94A Plan, with a suggested approach of amending the S94A Plan works schedule in the next S94A Plan review to specifically include public domain works around the University and linking to the nearby town centres. 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Letter from the UNSW dated 3 November 2009

 

 

 

 


Letter from the UNSW dated 3 November 2009

Attachment 1

 

 







Planning Committee

9 February 2010

 

 

 

Miscellaneous Report No. M4/10

 

 

Subject:                  Advising of Monitoring & Advice Procedures for Political Donation Disclosures & Affordable Rental Housing Development

Folder No:                   F2005/00303

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

On 25 November 2009, the Director General of Planning NSW advised local councils of new requirements for the monitoring of political donation disclosures and development under State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The purpose of this report is to advise Councillors of the new requirements.

 

Issues

 

Political Donations and Gift Disclosures:

The Director General has requested that all Councils provide a list of development applications determined from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2010 which were accompanied by a political donation and gift disclosure statement. The list will indicate whether the disclosure statement was made by the development applicant or a person making a submission.

 

SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009:

The SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 aims to increase the amount and diversity of affordable housing in NSW. Similar to the political disclosure data, Council will have to provide a list of all development applications determined under the SEPP from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2010.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in Urban Design & Development.

Direction 4b:      New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Recommendation

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil