Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 20 July 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

20 July 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, 20 July 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 - 8 June 2010

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Urgent Business

Development Application Reports

D41/10      35 Napier Street, Malabar (deferred)

D42/10      4 Cuzco Street, South Coogee

D43/10      49 Meymott Street, Coogee

D44/10      34 Milford Street, Randwick

D45/10      7/32 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

D46/10      554 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

D47/10      51-53 Endeavour Avenue, La Perouse

D48/10      349 Alison Road, Coogee

D49/10      10-14 Duke Street, Kensington

D50/10      23 King Street, Randwick

D51/10      24-26 Gale Road, Maroubra

D52/10      4 Woodland Street, Coogee

D53/10      16A Melody Street, Coogee

D54/10      59 Jennings Street Matraville

 

Miscellaneous Reports

M11/10     Department of Defence - Bundock Street, Randwick

M12/10     Newmarket, Young Street Randwick Planning Proposal

M13/10     Randwick City Public Art Strategy

M14/10     'Scores on Doors' Food Safety Program    

 

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee

20 July 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D41/10

 

 

Subject:                  35 Napier Street, Malabar

Folder No:                   DA/795/2009

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

Council at its Ordinary meeting held on 23 March 2010 resolved (Andrews/Nash) that:

 

“this development application be deferred to the next ordinary meeting of Council to allow consideration of a further objection and a detailed analysis of the view impacts of the proposal by the planning consultant.”

 

A mediation session between the parties was held on 16 June 2010. The parties have arrived at outcomes on a number of amendments to the proposal which lessen its impacts. The applicant has subsequently amended the plans in accordance with the outcomes.

 

Issues

 

The outcomes reached at the mediation involved the following:

 

·           Deletion of bedroom 3 of dwelling B fronting Victoria St

·           Providing a concrete roof over Dwelling B in lieu of a metal roof thereby allowing for a 400mm reduction in height

·           Lowering of Dwelling A subject to Councils Development Engineer confirming that the gradients to the garage will still meet the minimum standards

·           The objectors requested that applicant investigate the potential to further lower Dwelling B along the Victoria St frontage.

 

The applicant has submitted amended plans in accordance with the above outcomes. The amended plans indicate the deletion of bedroom 3 to dwelling B, and a reduction in height of 535mm to both Dwellings A & B arising from the amendment to the roof of Dwelling B and the modification of the driveway grades. Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the amended driveway grades and they will allow for safe and straightforward manoeuvring.

 

The maximum height of the proposal along its Victoria St frontage is now 6.9m (which includes the roof slab edge of 300mm) in compliance with the maximum wall height standard of 7m and well below the maximum overall height limit of 9.5m. Further, with the decrease in height, the proposed building to its north-east will now have a maximum height of 7.9m reducing the non compliance with the maximum wall height standard and remaining in compliance with the maximum overall height requirement. The deletion of bedroom 3 results in the floor space ratio of the development being reduced from 0.58:1 to 0.55:1.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design.

Direction(4b):    Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed amendments to the development application are consistent with the outcomes reached at the mediation and lessen the amenity impacts of the proposal on the amenity of the neighbouring residents.

 

The application is, therefore, recommended for approval.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses  32 and 33 of the RLEP relating to Floor Space Ratios and Building Wall Heights 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. 795/2009 for demolition of existing structures and construction of new part 2, part 3 storey attached dual occupancy with garaging, swimming pool and associated works at No. 35 Napier Street, Malabar subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.      The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the amended plans dated 18/6/2010 prepared by Classic Plans Pty Ltd and received by Council on 28 June 2010 and numbered 014/09 revision D, (sheets 1, 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7A, 8 and 9) any supporting information received with the application.

 

2.      The proposed courtyard fencing along the Victoria Street frontage having a maximum height of 1.8 metres as measured above the ground.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

6.      The external walls of the dwelling must be located not less than 900mm from the boundary.

 

7.      Eaves, gutters, hoods and similar structures or attachments are required to be setback from the side boundaries of the allotment a minimum distance of 500mm and details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate details.

 

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

 

9.      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.

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

11.     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.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions applicable to all applications lodged from 2 July 2007:

 

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

 

12.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $1,402,060, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $14,020.60.

 

The levy must be paid in cash, bank cheque or by credit card prior to

 

a)   a construction certificate being issued

b)   a subdivision 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 & Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

13.     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.

 

14.     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).

 

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

 

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

 

16.     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.

 

17.     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.

 

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

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

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

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

 

19.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

21.     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 any relevant Certificate of Insurance) or a copy of the Owner-Builder Permit (as applicable) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to commencement of works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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.

 

25.     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)

 

26.     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 conditions are applied to provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

 

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

 

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

 

a)     Construct a new concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Napier Street including any retaining walls with associated guard/handrail as required by Council’s Engineering Technical Officer.

 

Note: The internal driveway and Council driveway servicing the garage in Napier Street are to be constructed in accordance with the driveway ramp section plan submitted to Council (dwg No 014/09 Sheet7A of 9 dated 30/6/10)

 

b)     Construct a new concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Victoria Street.

 

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

 

d)     Construct a new concrete footpath, adjacent to the kerb, along the Victoria Street site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

29.     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.

 

30.     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:

 

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

 

Napier St Frontage –      Driveway Entrance – Northern Edge RL 13.725.

                                    Southern Edge RL 13.580.

                                   

Pedestrian Entrance - 50mm above the existing Council footpath level opposite the pedestrian entrance.

 

Victoria St Frontage -     Driveway Entrance – RL 15.700.

                                  Pedestrian Entrance – RL 15.450.

 

32.     The above design alignment levels issued by Council must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

33.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $805.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid to Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

36.     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 Councils Road / Asset Opening Officer on 9399 0691 or 9399 0999.

 

37.     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 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 or release of the plan of subdivision, whichever occurs first.

 

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

 

38.     Generally all site stormwater shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrester pit that drains to an infiltration area with a minimum 5 m2 base area. An overflow pipe shall be provided from the silt arrestor pit that drains to Council's kerb and gutter.

 

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

 

Notes:

a.     The sediment/silt arrestor pit shall be constructed:-

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

b.     The infiltration/rubble pit shall:-

 

i.   have a minimum 300 mm of soil cover (600 mm where the pit is located under a garden/landscaping area).

ii.   be located a minimum of 3.0 metres from the dwelling or other structure (closer if a structural engineer certifies that the infiltration area will not adversely affect the structure) and 2.1 metres from the adjacent side or rear boundaries.

iii.  be constructed with a minimum 200 mm thick layer of 20 mm basalt/blue metal (or similar) that is wrapped in a suitable geotextile material covering with a high filtration rating (Geofabrics Bidim "A" range of filtration fabrics or equivalent). A suitable means of dispersing the stormwater over the area of infiltration is to be constructed.

 

Note:  other equivalent methods of infiltration may be adopted.

iv.  have a minimum base area of  5.0 square metres (m2).

 

The outlet from the silt arrestor pit to the infiltration area shall be located at least 50 mm below the outlet from the silt arrestor pit to the kerb and gutter.

 

c.     The requirement for an infiltration/rubble pit will not be enforced should the underground soil conditions preclude the construction of the infiltration pit (eg rock is located within 300 mm of the base of the infiltration area). If the infiltration/rubble pit is not constructed then all site stormwater shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter via a sediment/silt arrestor pit (as detailed in note a. above).

 

All works shall be to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

d.     The overflow pipe/s from any rainwater tank/s shall be directed into the infiltration area.

 

39.     The infiltration areas/Absorption Trenches must be designed in accordance with "Section 8.5 ABSORPTION TRENCHES" as stipulated in Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

40.     Should a charged system be required to drain any portion of the site, the charged system must be designed with suitable clear-outs/inspection points at pipe bends and junctions.

 

41.     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 required 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 Randwick City Council's Stormwater Code.

 

42.     All pump out water must pass through a stilling pit prior to being discharged by gravity to the kerb and gutter.

 

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

 

43.     Prior to the credited certifier 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 dual occupancy

 

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

 

44.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Concept Landscape Plan by Classic Plans, drawing number 014/09, sheet 9 of 9, dated  22/10/09, prior to the PCA issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, and shall be maintained in accordance with this plan.

 

45.     The nature-strips on both of Council's 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.

 

Tree Removals on Private Property

 

46.     Approval is granted for the removal of all existing vegetation within the site, as all were observed to be exempt from the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to either their small size or inappropriate location close to the existing dwelling, but is subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan.

 

Street Tree Removal

 

47.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $745.25 (including GST), being the cost for Council to:

 

a.       Remove the existing Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Xmas Tree/Pohutukawa), located on the Victoria Street frontage, towards the southern site boundary, in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle crossing as has been shown; and

 

b.       Supply and install 1 x 25 litre replacement street tree, Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) on the Victoria Street verge, spaced an equal distance between the proposed vehicle crossing and intersection of Napier Street at the completion of all works.

 

The contribution must be paid into Tree Amenity Income 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 four working weeks notice, to arrange for both removal of the existing street tree prior to commencement, and provision of the replacement tree following completion of site works

 

Street Tree Protection

 

48.     In order to ensure retention of the two Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwoods) located on Council’s Napier Street nature strip, between the existing/proposed vehicle crossing and intersection of Victoria Street in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.  Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed over public property, must be done so against either side of this new crossing in order to minimise root damage.

 

c.  Each tree must be individually protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing, which shall be located a minimum distance of 2.0 metres to the west, south and east (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), matching up with the back of the pedestrian footpath to its north, in order 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 either of these street trees, 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 the zone specified in point ‘c’ above, 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.

 

g.  A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $1,000.00 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, 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.

 

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

 

49.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Concept Landscape Plan by Classic Plans, drawing number 014/09, sheet 9 of 9, dated  22/10/09, prior to the PCA issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, and shall be maintained in accordance with this plan.

 

50.     The nature-strips on both of Council's 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.

 

Tree Removals on Private Property

 

51.     Approval is granted for the removal of all existing vegetation within the site, as all were observed to be exempt from the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to either their small size or inappropriate location close to the existing dwelling, but is subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan.

 

Street Tree Removal

 

52.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $745.25 (including GST), being the cost for Council to:

 

a.   Remove the existing Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Xmas Tree/Pohutukawa), located on the Victoria Street frontage, towards the southern site boundary, in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle crossing as has been shown; and

 

b.   Supply and install 1 x 25 litre replacement street tree, Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) on the Victoria Street verge, spaced an equal distance between the proposed vehicle crossing and intersection of Napier Street at the completion of all works.

 

The contribution must be paid into Tree Amenity Income 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 four working weeks notice, to arrange for both removal of the existing street tree prior to commencement, and provision of the replacement tree following completion of site works

 

Street Tree Protection

 

53.     In order to ensure retention of the two Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwoods) located on Council’s Napier Street nature strip, between the existing/proposed vehicle crossing and intersection of Victoria Street in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed over public property, must be done so against either side of this new crossing in order to minimise root damage.

 

c.       Each tree must be individually protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing, which shall be located a minimum distance of 2.0 metres to the west, south and east (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), matching up with the back of the pedestrian footpath to its north, in order 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 either of these street trees, 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 the zone specified in point ‘c’ above, 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.

 

g.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $1,000.00 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, 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.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Supplementary Development Assessment Report - Prepared by S. Harding - Willana Associates Pty Ltd (UNDER SEPARATE COVER ATTACHMENT)

 

 

2.View

Peer Review prepated by G. Turrusi of Gat & Associates Pty Ltd

 

 

3.View

Report 35 Napier Street, Malabar

 

 

 

 


Peer Review prepated by G. Turrusi of Gat & Associates Pty Ltd

Attachment 2

 

 

 

 

 



Report 35 Napier Street, Malabar

Attachment 3

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D24/10

 

 

Subject:                  35 Napier Street, Malabar

Folder No:                   DA/795/2009

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 


Introduction

 

Council at its Ordinary meeting held 23 March 2010 resolved that:

 

“…this development application be deferred to the next ordinary meeting of Council to allow consideration of a further objection and a detailed analysis of the view impacts of the proposal by the planning consultant.”

 

Issues

 

In order to allow for the accurate assessment of any view loss impacts, the applicant was requested to erected height poles on the subject site.

 

The poles were erected and an inspection of any potential view loss from a number of the properties in the vicinity of the site was carried out on 7 April 2010. A view analysis was subsequently prepared by Mr Stuart Harding of Willana & Associates (attached). The assessment concludes that the impacts are acceptable when assessed against the relevant Planning Principle established by the Land and Environment Court. Mr Harding’s supplementary report also addresses the issues referred to in the further submissions received by Council.

 

A peer review of Mr Harding’s analysis was also undertaken on behalf of Council by an independent planning consultant to ensure a rigorous consideration of the view impacts. Mr Gerard Turrisi of Gat & Associates has endorsed the outcome of the analysis and is satisfied that the proposed development is a reasonable outcome for the site and should be supported.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design.

Direction(4b):    Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

 


Report 35 Napier Street, Malabar

Attachment 3

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses  32 and 33 of the RLEP relating to Floor Space Ratios and Building Wall Heights 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. 795/2009 for demolition of existing structures and construction of new part 2, part 3 storey attached dual occupancy with garaging, swimming pool and associated works at No. 35 Napier Street, Malabar subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.      The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the amended plans dated 12 February 2010 prepared by Classic Plans Pty Ltd and received by Council on 15 February 2010 and numbered 014/09, (sheets 1, 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9) any supporting information received with the application.

 

2.      The proposed courtyard fencing along the Victoria Street frontage having a maximum height of 1.8 metres as measured above the ground.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

6.      The external walls of the dwelling must be located not less than 900mm from the boundary.

 

7.      Eaves, gutters, hoods and similar structures or attachments are required to be setback from the side boundaries of the allotment a minimum distance of 500mm and details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate details.

 

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

 

9.      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.

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

11.     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.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions applicable to all applications lodged from 2 July 2007:

 

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

 

12.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $1,402,060, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $14,020.60.

 

The levy must be paid in cash, bank cheque or by credit card prior to

 

a)   a construction certificate being issued

b)   a subdivision 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 & Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

13.     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.

 

14.     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).

 

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

 

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

 

16.     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.

 

17.     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.

 

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

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

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

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

 

19.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

21.     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 any relevant Certificate of Insurance) or a copy of the Owner-Builder Permit (as applicable) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to commencement of works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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.

 

25.     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)

 

26.     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 conditions are applied to provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

 

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

 

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

 

a)   Construct a new concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Napier Street.

 

b)   Construct a new concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Victoria Street.

 

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

 

d)   Construct a new concrete footpath, adjacent to the kerb, along the Victoria Street site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

29.     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.

 

30.     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:

 

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

 

Napier St Frontage –        Driveway Entrance - 50mm above the existing Council   footpath level at both the northern and southern edge of the driveway entrance.

                                     

Pedestrian Entrance –         50mm above the existing Council footpath level opposite the pedestrian entrance.

 

Victoria St Frontage -      Driveway Entrance – 350mm below the Council kerb level opposite the driveway entrance.

 

                                      Pedestrian Entrance – RL 15.45

 

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

 

33.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $805.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid to Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

36.     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.

 

37.     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 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:

 

38.     Generally all site stormwater shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrester pit that drains to an infiltration area with a minimum 5 m2 base area. An overflow pipe shall be provided from the silt arrestor pit that drains to Council's kerb and gutter.

 

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

 

Notes:

 

a.     The sediment/silt arrestor pit shall be constructed:-

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

b.       The infiltration/rubble pit shall:-

i.  have a minimum 300 mm of soil cover (600 mm where the pit is located under a garden/landscaping area).

ii.  be located a minimum of 3.0 metres from the dwelling or other structure (closer if a structural engineer certifies that the infiltration area will not adversely affect the structure) and 2.1 metres from the adjacent side or rear boundaries.

iii. be constructed with a minimum 200 mm thick layer of 20 mm basalt/blue metal (or similar) that is wrapped in a suitable geotextile material covering with a high filtration rating (Geofabrics Bidim "A" range of filtration fabrics or equivalent). A suitable means of dispersing the stormwater over the area of infiltration is to be constructed.

 

Note:  other equivalent methods of infiltration may be adopted.

 

iv. have a minimum base area of  5.0 square metres (m2).

 

The outlet from the silt arrestor pit to the infiltration area shall be located at least 50 mm below the outlet from the silt arrestor pit to the kerb and gutter.

 

c.       The requirement for an infiltration/rubble pit will not be enforced should the underground soil conditions preclude the construction of the infiltration pit (eg rock is located within 300 mm of the base of the infiltration area). If the infiltration/rubble pit is not constructed then all site stormwater shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter via a sediment/silt arrestor pit (as detailed in note a. above).

 

All works shall be to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

d.       The overflow pipe/s from any rainwater tank/s shall be directed into the infiltration area.

 

39.     The infiltration areas/Absorption Trenches must be designed in accordance with "Section 8.5 ABSORPTION TRENCHES" as stipulated in Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

40.     Should a charged system be required to drain any portion of the site, the charged system must be designed with suitable clear-outs/inspection points at pipe bends and junctions.

 

41.     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 required 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 Randwick City Council's Stormwater Code.

 

42.     All pump out water must pass through a stilling pit prior to being discharged by gravity to the kerb and gutter.

 

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

 

43.     Prior to the credited certifier 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 dual occupancy

 

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

 

44.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Concept Landscape Plan by Classic Plans, drawing number 014/09, sheet 9 of 9, dated  22/10/09, prior to the PCA issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, and shall be maintained in accordance with this plan.

 

45.     The nature-strips on both of Council's 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.

 

Tree Removals on Private Property

 

46.     Approval is granted for the removal of all existing vegetation within the site, as all were observed to be exempt from the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to either their small size or inappropriate location close to the existing dwelling, but is subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan.

 

Street Tree Removal

 

47.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $745.25 (including GST), being the cost for Council to:

 

a.   Remove the existing Metrosideros excelsa (NZ Xmas Tree/Pohutukawa), located on the Victoria Street frontage, towards the southern site boundary, in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle crossing as has been shown; and

 

b.   Supply and install 1 x 25 litre replacement street tree, Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) on the Victoria Street verge, spaced an equal distance between the proposed vehicle crossing and intersection of Napier Street at the completion of all works.

 

The contribution must be paid into Tree Amenity Income 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 four working weeks notice, to arrange for both removal of the existing street tree prior to commencement, and provision of the replacement tree following completion of site works

 

Street Tree Protection

 

48.     In order to ensure retention of the two Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwoods) located on Council’s Napier Street nature strip, between the existing/proposed vehicle crossing and intersection of Victoria Street in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

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

 

b.   Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed over public property, must be done so against either side of this new crossing in order to minimise root damage.

 

c.   Each tree must be individually protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing, which shall be located a minimum distance of 2.0 metres to the west, south and east (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), matching up with the back of the pedestrian footpath to its north, in order 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 either of these street trees, 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 the zone specified in point ‘c’ above, 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.

 

g.   A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $1,000.00 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, 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.

 

 

 


Planning Committee

20 July 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D42/10

 

 

Subject:                  4 Cuzco Street, South Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/581/2009/A

Author:                   SJB Planning, Surry Hills     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 (2) application to delete Conditions Nos. 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 relating to privacy and light spill. Original consent: Demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new 2 storey dwelling with basement level double garage

 

Ward:                      East Ward

 

Applicant:                CM Hairis Architects

 

Owner:                         Nicholas & Kathy Apres

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

An application under section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) is proposed which seeks to modify the development consent to DA/581/2009.

 

At its meeting on 23 March 2010, Council granted development consent to DA/581/2009 for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new 2 storey dwelling with basement level double garage. Prior to Council determining the original application a mediation meeting between the applicant and objectors was held on 11 February 2010. However, this meeting did not result in an agreed resolution.

 

The proposed modified development is to delete Conditions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of development consent DA/581/2009 which relate to light spill and privacy.

 

The modification application was notified for 14 days from 22 April 2010 to 6 May 2010 in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan - Public notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. Four (4) submissions were received during the notification period and are addressed in this report.

 

The proposed modified development is substantially the same development as that originally approved by Council and satisfies the requirements of section 96 of the EPA Act relating to modification of consents.

 

The site is zoned 2A (Residential A Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) (RELP 1998) and the proposal is permissible with Council’s consent. The proposed modified development is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the relevant objectives of the Residential A zone, particularly in that it provides a single detached dwelling that is compatible with the desired character of the locality and which reasonably protects the amenity of existing residents.

 

A detailed assessment has been undertaken of the possible impact of the proposed changes on the local environment. The assessment indicates that the proposed changes are consistent with the Performance Requirements of Council’s Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan (DCP) and relevant planning principles established by the NSW Land and Environment Court. The proposal will not result in any unacceptable environmental impacts on surrounding properties.

 

The main environmental considerations are possible impacts in relation to light spill, views and the privacy of surrounding properties. As conditioned, the proposed treatment of the glazed wall in the western elevation will not result in adverse light spill.

 

In relation to views, the proposal will not affect the valued views from No. 81 Denning Street of the northern coastal headlands and the ’Wedding Cake’, but will have a minor and acceptable impact on the outlook of No. 81 to the east. The proposal has no adverse impact on views from any other properties. In relation to privacy, the proposed modifications as conditioned will maintain a reasonable level of privacy to the dwellings and private open spaces of adjoining properties consistent with the Performance Requirements of Council’s DCP and relevant planning principles established by the NSW Land and Environment Court.

 

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

 

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal is an application under section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) to modify development consent DA/581/2009 for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new 2 storey dwelling with basement level double garage at 4 Cuzco Street, South Coogee.

 

The s96(2) modification application seeks:

 

·      to delete Conditions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of development consent DA/581/2009 concerning light spill and privacy; and

·        to propose related modifications as described below:

 

1.     Glazed Wall to the Stairwell in the west elevation (Condition 11):

 

·      That the glazed wall to the stairwell in the west elevation be setback 1.5m from the western boundary at the centreline of the glazed wall (instead of being setback 1.5m from the western boundary for its entire length as required by Condition 11); and 

 

·      That the top half of the glazed wall to the stairwell in the west elevation be fitted with vertical privacy louvres (instead of being reduced in extent and treated to limit any light spill as required by Condition 11);

 

2.     North-facing glazed openings to bedrooms 1 and 4 on the first floor (Condition12):

 

·      Delete the requirement of Condition 12 for north-facing glazed openings to bedrooms 1 and 4 to be obscure glazing up to 1.5m high.

 

3.     North-facing balcony to bedrooms 1 and 4 on the first floor (Condition 13):

 

·      That the width of the north-facing first floor balcony be increased to a width of 1.8m (instead of a width of 1m as required by Condition 13);

 

·      Delete the requirement of Condition 13 that the glazed balustrade be installed with obscure glazing;

 

·      Delete the requirement of Condition 13 that 1.8m high vertical privacy louvres be fitted along the eastern edge of the balcony;

 

·      Full height vertical privacy louvres be fitted along the entire length of the western edge of the balcony; and

 

·      A 2.1m fence be provided along the northern (rear) boundary of the site.

 

4.   East facing window to bedroom 1 on the first floor (Condition 14):

 

·      Delete the requirement of Condition 14 that the east-facing window to bedroom 1 on the first floor be fitted with fixed and obscure glazing below a height of 1.5m from finished floor level.

 

5.   South-facing balcony to bedroom 2 at first floor level (Condition 15):

 

·      Delete the requirement of Condition 15 that “the south-facing balcony to bedroom 2 on the first floor shall be installed with a 1.8m privacy screen along the eastern edge to protect the privacy of the adjoining eastern property”.

Conditions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of development consent DA/581/2009 are reproduced in full below:

 

11.     The proposed glazed wall to the stairwell in the west elevation shall be setback 1.5m from the western boundary and shall be reduced in extent and treated to limit any light spill from this stairwell to adjoining properties. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

12.     The north-facing glazed openings for bedrooms 1 and 4 in the first floor shall be obscure glazing up to 1.5m high. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

13.     The north-facing common balcony adjoining bedrooms 1 and 4 shall be reduced to a maximum 1m width; and shall be installed with obscure glazing along the whole length of the glass balustrade; and shall be installed with a 1.8m privacy screen along the eastern edge. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

14.     The east-facing window to bedroom 1 on the east elevation at the first floor level shall be of fixed and obscure glazing below 1.5m from the finished floor level. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

15.     The south-facing balcony to bedroom 2 on the first floor shall be installed with a 1.8m privacy screen along the eastern edge to protect the privacy of the adjoining eastern property. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located at 4 Cuzco Street on the northern side of the road (refer Figure 1 below).

 

The site has an irregular shape and covers an area of 341.4m2. It has a frontage of 14.02m to Cuzco Street, a rear boundary (north) of 10.67m and east and west boundaries of 27.66m and 27.89m respectively.

 

The site slopes from the street to the rear and has a cross fall of 2.23m at the street-front and 1.8m at the rear (north). The site currently contains a detached brick and tile cottage which is single level on the western side and two levels on the eastern side as the site falls from west to east (refer Figures 2 and 3 below).

 

Figure 1: Aerial view of the site, No. 4 Cuzco Street, South Coogee (site outlined in yellow).

 

Figure 2: Street view of the site, 4 Cuzco Street .

 

Figure 3: View of the rear of the site.

 

The site is adjoined by the following properties (refer to Figure 1 above and to Figures 4 to 7 below):

 

East:

·      No. 6 Cuzco Street – a two storey detached dwelling.

 

West:

·      No. 83 Denning Street (cnr Cuzco Street) – contains a single storey dwelling elevated above ground level at the rear; and

·      No. 81 Denning Street – contains a three storey dwelling with elevated balconies to the rear overlooking the site. 

 


North:

·      No. 79 Denning Street – a large 3 storey house with elevated balconies to the rear overlooking the site; and swimming pool and rear yard immediately adjoining the northern boundary of the site.

 

Figure 4: From left to right: Street view of Nos. 79, 81 and 83 Denning Street which adjoin the site.

Figure 5: The site to the left and No. 6 Cuzco Street to the right viewed from the south.

Figure 6: The rear of No. 81 Denning Street viewed from the rear of the site.

Figure 7: The rear of No. 79 Denning Street viewed from the rear of the site.

 

Figure 8: The rear of No. 79 Denning Street.

 

4.    Site History

 

At its meeting on 23 March 2010, Council granted development consent to DA/581/2009 for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new 2 storey dwelling with basement level double garage. The s96(2) application seeks to modify this development consent.

 

Prior to Council determining the application a mediation meeting between the applicant and objectors was held on 11 February 2010. However, this meeting did not result in an agreed resolution.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The modification application was notified for 14 days from 22 April 2010 to 6 May 2010 in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan - Public notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. Submissions from the following persons were received during the notification period:

 

·      Residents, 1A Cuzco Street, South Coogee;

·      Residents, 6 Cuzco Street, South Coogee;

·      Residents, 79 Denning Street, South Coogee; and

·      Residents, 81 Denning Street, South Coogee.

 

Following the notification period, Council’s planning assessment consultant visited each of the above properties and interviewed the respective residents.

 

5.1 Objections

 

This section of the report presents the salient points of objection and provides a brief response to each.

 

·       The use of a “back hand” approach to remove conditions which were considered necessary to allow the development to be approved.

 

The modification application has been duly made under section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the EPA Act).   A modification application under section 96 is a proper process for the assessment and determination of changes to a development after its consent.

 

·       Without the conditions the development would not be substantially the same as the development as approved

 

The proposed modifications result in a development that is substantially the same as the originally approved development. The modification application is for a dwelling house which is similar to the originally approved dwelling house in its placement on the site and in its size, form, bulk, height and architectural appearance. The proposed changes, which relate to particular balcony and window treatments, are minor variations of the overall design. In determining the modification application Council must take into consideration the possible effects of the modified development in accordance with section 96(3) of the EPA Act.

 

·       Without Conditions 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 the original development application would not have been approved.

 

The original development was approved with various conditions attached, including Conditions 11 to 15. It is the purpose of this report is to assess whether the original development should be modified by the removal of these conditions.

 

·           Loss of privacy – No.79 Denning Street

 

The residents at No. 79 Denning Street made a substantial submission which focused on possible loss of privacy resulting from the modified north-facing first floor balcony and associated bedroom windows.

 

In Meriton v Sydney City Council (2004) NSWLEC313 the NSW Land and Environment Court established a planning principle relating to the protection of visual privacy. The principle involves four main considerations: density; separation; use; and design. As outlined below, these considerations have been made in assessing the possible impact of the proposed modified development on the privacy of No. 79 Denning Street:

 

·      Density

Development in South Coogee appears to be undergoing change to produce a more densified residential area in which privacy is more difficult to protect. Nevertheless, there is a reasonable expectation that a dwelling and some of its open space is private.  In this case it is considered that the proposed modified development allows No. 79 Denning Street to maintain a reasonable degree of privacy to its dwelling and to the part of its rear yard occupied by a swimming pool.

 

·      Separation

There is sufficient separation between the proposed modified balcony and the house of No. 79 Denning Street to protect the privacy of the house. The proposed 1.8m wide balcony is at least 10.5m at an oblique angle from the nearest bedroom of No. 79. This separation complies with Council’s Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan (DCP) which requires unscreened balcony to balcony separation of 9m.

 

The proposed modified first-floor balcony will not overlook the living room and main balcony of No. 79 Denning Street which are situated a full storey above and are screened by a solid blade wall at the southern end of the balcony of No. 79.

 

The proposed modified first-floor balcony will directly overlook part of the rear yard of No. 79. It is setback 5.835m from the common boundary with No. 79 which is adjoined by the swimming pool of No. 79. This setback complies with the DCP requirement of a minimum of 4.5m, but is insufficient without some form of screening to protect the privacy of the swimming pool of No. 79. However, the proposed modification includes a 2.1m high boundary fence which screens views of the pool area (refer to figures below). The screening effect of the proposed fence is supplemented by proposed planting to 2.4m high in accordance with Condition 68 d) and e) of the original approval which require plantings similar in height to the typical boundary fence and which are capable of screening the rear yard of No. 79 from overlooking.

 

It is considered that the screening provided by the proposed 2.1m high fence is sufficient to provide screening of the swimming pool area of No. 79. Additional screening is provided by the landscaping required by Condition 68 d) and e). The previous conditioned measures of obscure glazing to the balcony balustrade and bedroom windows are not necessary to protect the privacy of the swimming pool area at No. 79 given the screening effect of the proposed 2.1m high fence.

 

The northern part of the rear yard of No. 79 will be visible (with or without obscure glazing to 1.5m high) from the proposed modified balcony and bedrooms the more important pool area will be adequately protected. The protection of some of the privacy of the rear yard is consistent with the observed degree of privacy existing generally in the neighbourhood. 

 

·      Use

The overlooking that may occur from the proposed modified development is from bedrooms and a balcony attached to bedrooms. Some overlooking from these areas is likely to be less common as these are the less used areas of a dwelling. The proposed balcony width of 1.8m is a modest width consistent with casual use of the balcony associated with the adjoining bedroom.

 

·      Design

It is considered that the proposed modifications arise from an approved and well designed development. Notwithstanding that the approved dwelling does not strictly comply with some preferred solutions of the DCP, it is assessed as being a well designed development that meets the objectives of the DCP and which is appropriate to its site and locality in terms of bulk, height, scale, setbacks and overall character. It is considered that an alternate design would not result in less impact on privacy, while providing the applicant with the same level of amenity.

 

Figure 9: Sight lines from proposed modified balcony over.

 

Figure 10: View from front outdoor living area of house at 1A Cuzco Street.

 

In summary, the proposed modified development will not result in an unacceptable impact on the privacy of No. 79 Denning Street - the privacy of the dwelling at No. 79 and the privacy of the most important part of its rear yard - the swimming pool area - is maintained.

A final consideration concerning privacy impact is the planning principle employed in Super Studio v Waverley (2004) NSWLEC91 that the “acceptability of an impact depends not only on the extent of the impact but also on the reasonableness of, and necessity for, the development that causes it.”

 

Applying the principle here, the proposed modified first-floor balcony and the removal of obscure glazing to the bedroom windows are proposed primarily so as to obtain the valued northern views of the coastal headlands and the ‘Wedding Cake’. This is reasonable given that these views are limited, if not unavailable, from the ground floor of the approved dwelling, and given that the surrounding dwellings also obtain and seek to maintain northern coastal views as evidenced by the submissions received to this application.

 

·           View loss - 81 Denning Street

The Council assessment of the originally approved development contained a detailed analysis of view loss with respect to No. 81 Denning Street which applied the four planning principles of view sharing established in Tenacity v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC140. The analysis concluded that the loss of view for No. 81 was reasonable and acceptable. It is considered that the proposed modified development results in a similar impact on the views of No. 81 which is relatively minor and remains acceptable for the following reasons (refer also to the figures below):

 

·      The view east of rooftops with the ocean beyond is partially obscured. The more valued views of the northern coastal headlands and the ‘Wedding Cake’ are not affected;

·      The view affected is across a rear boundary from the dining room and living room. Similar views from the ground floor level are not affected;

·      The view loss is minor considering that the more valued views of the northern coastal headlands and the ‘Wedding Cake’ which are also available from the living room, dining room and ground floor terrace of No. 81 are not affected; and

·      The proposed modifications are reasonable as discussed in relation to No 79 Denning Street.

Figure 11: View east from Dining Room of No. 81 Denning Street showing approved dwelling and proposed modification to the balcony.

Figure 12: View east from Living Room of No. 81 Denning Street showing approved dwelling and proposed modification to the balcony.

 

·           Light spill – No. 81 Denning Street

 

It is considered that the proposed setback of the glazed wall to the stairwell (1.5m from the western boundary at the centreline of the wall instead of being setback 1.5m for its entire length as required by Condition 11) is reasonable and will not adversely affect the amenity of No. 81 in terms of light spill subject to adequate screening being provided.

 

The applicant proposes that the top half of the glazed wall be fitted with vertical privacy louvers (instead of being reduced in extent and treated to limit any light spill as required by Condition 11). While the privacy louvres are considered a suitable treatment for mitigating light spill, their proposed application to only the top half of the glazed wall will still allow light spill for the unscreened part of the glazing above the adjoining boundary fence. It is therefore recommended that the proposed louvres be applied to the entire glazed wall.

 

·           View loss – 1A Cuzco Street

 

The residents at 1A Cuzco Street objected to loss of the northern coastal/headland outlook from their home living area and front outdoor verandah area.

 

No. 1A Cuzco Street is located on the southern side of Cuzco Street, opposite the site. The coastal view from the living area and front outdoor verandah area of this dwelling are shown by the photographs below:

 

Figure 13: View from living room of house at 1A Cuzco Street.

Figure 14: View from front outdoor living area of house at 1A Cuzco Street.

 

The proposed modification relevant to these views is the deletion of Condition 15 which requires a 1.8m high privacy screen to be installed along the eastern edge of the south-facing balcony to bedroom 2 on the first floor of the house. As demonstrated by the above photographs, the removal of the privacy screen will result in a very minor improvement of the view of the ocean from the front outdoor living area of No. 1A and have very little effect, if any, on the view of the coast from the front living room. The more valued views of the ‘Wedding Cake’ and the northern headlands are not affected.

 

·           The residents at No. 6 Cuzco Street indicated that: “Overall our residence is not greatly affected by the removal of these conditions”.

 

No. 6 Cuzco Street adjoins the subject site to the east. The dwelling at No. 6 Cuzco Street is not adversely affected by the proposed modifications as considered below:

 

·      Condition 11 - Any light spill from the glazed wall to the stairwell in the west elevation of the approved dwelling is unlikely to affect No. 6 Cuzco, given that No. 4 is located on the eastern side of No. 6 and is therefore screened by the approved dwelling;

 

·      Condition 12 – It is not necessary to retain the obscure glazing to the north-facing bedroom openings as required by Condition 12, provided  a screen is installed to the eastern end of the adjoining balcony of the approved dwelling;

 

·      Condition 13 – Similarly, the provision of a screen at the eastern end of the north-facing balcony will ensure that a balcony width of 1.8m (instead of a width of 1m as required by Condition 13) will not result in adverse overlooking of No. 6 Cuzco Street and will render the use of obscure glass to the balustrade as required by Condition 13 as unnecessary;

 

·      Condition 14 – It is unnecessary to protect the privacy of No. 6 by the use of obscure glass to the east-facing window of bedroom 1 as required by Condition 14, given that the primary view from this bedroom window is over the roof of No. 6. Further, the windows in the opposing elevation of No. 6 are in the storey below, are offset from the east facing window of bedroom one and have obscure glazing; and

 

·      Condition 15 – Condition 15 requires “the south-facing balcony to bedroom 2 on the first floor shall be installed with a 1.8m privacy screen along the eastern edge to protect the privacy of the adjoining eastern property.” This requirement is unnecessary, given that the primary view from the balcony is over the roof of the dwelling at No. 6 and does not overlook the private open space of No. 6, nor does it unreasonably affect any of the windows of the dwelling at No. 6. 

 

5.2 Support

No submissions of support were received during the notification period.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The application has not been referred to Council technical officers.

 

7.    Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act)

 

7.1    Section 96(2) of the EPA Act – Other modifications

Section 96(2) of the EPA Act provides for the modification of development consents and states:

 

 ‘A consent authority may, on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by the consent authority and subject to and in accordance with the regulations, modify the consent if:

 

(a)    it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all), and

 

(b)    it has consulted with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body (within the meaning of Division 5) in respect of a condition imposed as a requirement of a concurrence to the consent or in accordance with the general terms of an approval proposed to be granted by the approval body and that Minister, authority or body has not, within 21 days after being consulted, objected to the modification of that consent, and

 

(c)    it has notified the application in accordance with:

(i)   the regulations, if the regulations so require, or

(ii)  a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and

 

(d)    it has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within the period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.’

 

In relation to sub clause (a), the proposed modifications are considered to result in a development that is substantially the same as the originally approved development. The modification application is for a dwelling house which is similar to the originally approved dwelling house in its placement on the site and in its size, form, bulk, height and architectural appearance. The proposed changes, which relate to particular balcony and window treatments, are minor variations of the overall design.

 

Sub-clause (b) is not applicable.

 

In relation to sub clause (c), the application has been notified in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan – Public Notification and therefore satisfies sub clause (c).

 

Lastly, in relation to sub clause (d), Council is required to consider any submissions made in accordance with its Notification DCP. Four (4) submissions have been received and have been considered in this report.

 

It is seen from the above that the development that is substantially the same as the approved development and subject to the procedures provided by the relevant sub clauses (c) and (d) may be considered by Council under section 96(2) of the EPA Act.

 

7.2 Section 96(3) of the EPA Act

Section 96(3) of the EPA Act requires that when determining an application to modify a consent, Council “must take into consideration such of the matters referred to in section 79C (1) as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application”.

 

Assessment of the proposed modifications with regard to the relevant matters referred to in section 79C(1) is outlined in the following sections of this report.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2A (Residential A Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) (RELP 1998) and the proposal is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

The proposed modified development is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the relevant objectives of the Residential A zone, particularly in that it provides a single detached dwelling that is compatible with the desired character of the locality and which reasonably protects the amenity of existing residents.

 

The following Clauses of RLEP 1998 are relevant:

 

Clause 29 – Foreshore Scenic Protection

 

Clause 29 requires Council to consider the probable aesthetic appearance of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore. The purpose of the clause is to protect and improve the visual qualities of visually prominent areas along the coast.

 

It is considered that the proposed modified development retains the aesthetic appearance of the originally approved dwelling. The appearance of the modified development is consistent with existing visual character of the locality which is developing as an area of increased density with larger, contemporary styled detached houses.

 

8.1 Policy Controls

 

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

The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan (DCP) uses a “performance” approach to design guidance and development control. This allows flexibility in building design while ensuring that development meets important site planning and design objectives. The DCP states that a proposal is deemed to satisfy the Objectives and Performance requirements of the DCP if it complies with the corresponding Preferred Solutions.

 

The following tables assess the proposed modified development against the relevant Performance Requirements and Preferred Solutions:

 

Building Setbacks

 

Performance Requirement/Preferred Solution

Assessment

P2

Rear Setback

Building forms and setbacks allow neighbours adequate access to natural light and a share of views and preserve established trees and vegetation and be generally consistent with the setback of adjoining properties.

 

Required setback to rear boundary: 4.5m

Proposed setback to rear boundary: 5.835m

 

Complies.

 

 

S2

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

P3

Side setbacks

Building forms and setbacks allow occupants and neighbours adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air.

Setback of north-facing balcony to the western boundary:

·      Required: 1.5m

·      Proposed: approximately 1.1m minimum at the northwest corner of balcony

 

Setback of north-facing balcony to the eastern boundary:

·      Required: 3.0m

·      Proposed: 1.5m (as per the original approval)

 

Setback of glazed wall to the western boundary:

·      Required: 1.5m

·      Proposed: 1.5m at midpoint (min. 1.150m, max. 1.830m)

 

The proposed side setbacks are considered satisfactory – they are consistent with the side setbacks of the approved dwelling and meet the relevant Performance Requirement.

S3

Side setbacks are no less than:

·      900mm for any part of a building over 1m above grounds level and up to one level in height

·      1.5m for any part of a building, the height of which is two levels at that point;

·      3.0m for any part of a building, the height of which is more than two levels at that point.

 

Visual and Acoustic Privacy

 

Performance Requirement/Preferred Solution

Assessment

P1

Overlooking of internal living areas and private open spaces of residential development is minimised through appropriate building layout, location and design of windows and balconies and, where necessary, separation, screening devices and landscaping.

 

East facing window of bedroom 1:

It is unnecessary to protect the privacy of No. 6 Cuzco St by the use of obscure glass to the east-facing window of bedroom 1 as required by Condition 14, given that the primary view from this bedroom window is over the roof of No. 6. Further, the windows in the opposing elevation of No. 6 are in the storey below, are offset from the east facing window of bedroom one and have obscure glazing. No direct or objectionable overlooking occurs. The relevant Performance Requirement (P1) is satisfied.

 

North facing balcony and windows of bedrooms 1 and 4:

The proposed modified balcony and the associated bedroom windows are adequately separated from (more than 9m) the windows at Nos. 79 and 81 Denning Street.

 

The proposed modified balcony and the associated bedroom windows are within 9m of the private open space areas of Nos. 79 and 81 Denning Street and a western window, the private open space and a balcony of the dwelling at No. 6 Cuzco Street. These areas within 9m of the balcony will be adequately screened by the following measures:

 

·      The proposed 2.1m high fence to the northern boundary (rear) boundary of the site;

·      The proposed privacy louvres to the western edge of the balcony;

·      The existing requirement of Condition 13 for the eastern edge of the balcony to include a privacy screen; and

·      The existing requirement of Condition 68 d) and e) for landscape planting.

 

No obscure glazing of the bedroom windows or the balcony balustrade is necessary to protect the privacy of adjoining properties. The relevant Performance Requirements (P1 and P2) are satisfied.

 

South facing balcony of Bedroom 2:

Condition 15 requires “the south-facing balcony to bedroom 2 on the first floor shall be installed with a 1.8m privacy screen along the eastern edge to protect the privacy of the adjoining eastern property.” This requirement is unnecessary, given that the primary view from the balcony is over the roof of the dwelling at No. 6 Cuzco Street and does not overlook the private open space of No. 6, nor does it unreasonably affect any of the windows of the dwelling at No. 6.  The relevant Performance Requirement (P2) is satisfied.

 

P2

Balconies are designed to provide adequate privacy for occupants of the building when viewed from other private open spaces, public spaces or the street.

 

S1

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

 

S1

Where a direct view is available into the private open space of an existing dwelling, outlook is screened within 9m and beyond a 45 degree angle

S1

Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more above floor level or fixed obscure glazing to any part of the window less than 1.5m above floor level.

 

9.    Environmental Assessment

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to section 79C of the EPA Act. The following table provides a summary of the assessment of the proposed modified development against the relevant matters for consideration under

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comment

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

 

Refer to the section of this report, ‘Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments’. 

 

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

 

Refer to the section of this report, ‘Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments’. 

 

Section 79C(1)(b) – The likely impacts of the development

 

The environmental impacts of the proposed modified development on the locality have been assessed in this report.

 

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

 

The proposed modification does not substantially alter the fundamental character of the originally approved development which was deemed suitable in its relationship to the site. The site continues to remain suitable for the development as demonstrated by the assessment undertaken in this report.

 

Section 79C(1)(d) – Any submissions made in accordance with the EPA Act or EPA regulation

 

Four (4) submissions were received and have been addressed in the relevant sections of this report.

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

 

The proposed modified development is substantially the same as the originally approved development which has been deemed to be in the public interest. It is considered that the proposed modified development does not result in any unacceptable environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality and as such is in the public interest.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

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

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

Key action:        Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modified development is to delete Conditions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of development consent DA/581/2009 which relate to light spill and privacy.

 

A detailed assessment has been undertaken of the possible impact of the proposed changes on the local environment. The assessment indicates that the proposed changes are consistent with the Performance Requirements of Council’s Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan (DCP) and relevant planning principles established by the NSW Land and Environment Court. The proposal will not result in any unacceptable environmental impacts on surrounding properties.

 

The main environmental considerations are possible impacts in relation to light spill, views and the privacy of surrounding properties. As conditioned, the proposed treatment of the glazed wall in the western elevation will not result in adverse light spill.

 

In relation to views, the proposal will not affect the valued views from No. 81 Denning Street of the northern coastal headlands and the ’Wedding Cake’, but will have a minor and acceptable impact on the outlook of No. 81 to the east. The proposal has no adverse impact on views from any other properties. In relation to privacy, the proposed modifications as conditioned will maintain a reasonable level of privacy to the dwellings and private open spaces of adjoining properties consistent with the Performance Requirements of Council’s DCP and relevant planning principles established by the NSW Land and Environment Court.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.       That Council as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/581/2009 for No. 4 Cuzco Street, South Coogee in the following manner:-

 

·              Amendment of Condition 1 which will read as follows:

 

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

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared By

02 Rev B

undated

20 November 2009

Con Harris Architects

03 Rev B

undated

20 November 2009

04 Rev B

undated

20 November 2009

 

the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the Section 96 drawings, which will be read as follows

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared By

01 Rev a

07/04/2010

15 April 2010

Con Harris Architects

02 Rev a

07/04/2010

15 April 2010

 

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:

 

·              Delete Conditions No. 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

20 July 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D43/10

 

 

Subject:                  49 Meymott Street, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/277/2010

Author:                   SJB Planning, Surry Hills     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to existing dwelling including substantial two storey addition at rear, double garage to front of dwelling with landscaped area above, swimming pool and cabana to rear, water feature, fencing and associated works

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Godhard

Owner:                         Nick & Melissa Potter

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The Development Application has been submitted to Council, seeking alterations and additions to the existing single storey detached dwelling. The works include; a two storey addition at the rear, a double garage to the front of the dwelling with landscaped area above, a swimming pool and cabana to the rear, a water feature, fencing and associated works.

 

This assessment report has been prepared by a consultant planner (SJB Planning (NSW) Pty Ltd) and the application is referred to the Planning Committee as a neighbour to the site is a relative of a Council staff member.

 

The main issues resulting from the proposal relate to the potential impacts that the erection of an upper level to the existing dwelling may have upon the amenity of the adjoining properties in terms of privacy and overshadowing.

 

During the notification period, one (1) submission was received. The submission was a joint submission addressing the concerns of three adjacent properties. The submission raised issues relating to solar access, privacy and geotechnical reporting.

 

The assessment of the proposal against the relevant controls of Council concludes that the development is suitable for the site and that the proposed works will not adversely impact on adjoining properties subject to the recommended conditions of consent. It is recommended that the proposal be supported as detailed within this report.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposed development is for alterations and additions to an existing, free standing dwelling and involves the following works:

 

-      Demolition of the rear brick, timber and fibro clad section of the existing dwelling;

-      Addition of a new 2 storey section at the rear of the existing dwelling comprising a master bedroom with ensuite, study and storage areas and a void over ground floor dining room below;

-      Reconfiguration of the existing front section of the dwelling at ground level including creation of a new entry area;

-      New pergola along the eastern edge of the dwelling with part of the pergola containing a roof and being part open;

-      Excavation/removal of a raised garden platform and turfed area in the rear yard;

-      Construction of new in ground pool and a cabana in the rear yard;

-      Construction of a retaining wall adjacent to the western and northern boundaries;

-      Removal of various trees and pruning of various trees;

-      Landscaping to the rear and side yards including paving, installation of a water feature in the eastern yard under the new pergola, new plantings including ‘mixed screen planting’ along the eastern boundary, hedge planting along the western boundary, various feature tree plantings, mass ground cover plantings and numerous climber plantings;

-      Works to the front of the property including demolition of existing garden stairs and pathways, demolition of front entry stairs, enclosure of front verandah, construction of a recessed double car garage with driveway to Meymott Street, new pathways leading to the street frontage and also to the side of the dwelling and new dwelling entry, various retaining walls, new front fence, new pedestrian gate and new driveway gate;

-      Landscaping to the front yard including new garden above proposed garage, various planters, various feature trees, various sections of hedging and smaller plantings; and

-      Installation of three skylights along the western side of the existing roof.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is described as Lot 10 DP 5108, 49 Meymott Street Coogee. The site is located at the eastern end of Meymott Street, on the northern (elevated) side of the street (refer to Figure 1).

 

Figure 1 – An aerial view of the site.

 

The site has a frontage of 12.80m to Meymott Street, a depth of 64.42m along the eastern side boundary, a depth of 65.07m along the western side boundary. The site is slightly irregular in shape as the front boundary is slightly skewed and the rear boundary is irregular.

 

The site has an area of 795m2. The site is located on a sloping site such that the site rises from Meymott Street (where the level in the centre of the front boundary is RL 76.65) up to the rear of the site where the level in the centre of the rear boundary is RL 83.35 (a level difference of 6.7m).

 

On site at present there is an existing free standing single storey dwelling (refer to Figures 2 and 3).

 

The site contains a raised landscaped platform (retained with a brick walls) in the rear north west corner. The raised section is approximately 1.5m higher than the remaining parts of the rear yard (refer to Figure 4)

 

The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of single and two storey free standing dwellings (with some semi-detached dwellings).

 

Properties to the west are orientated in a similar north-south direction to the subject site while properties to the east address Higgs Street and are perpendicular to the subject site orientated in an east-west direction (refer to Figure 1).

 

 

Figure 2 – Southern elevation (front view) of subject dwelling

 

Figure 3 – Northern elevation (rear view) of subject dwelling

 

Figure 4 – View looking north of rear yard and raised landscaped platform.

  

4.    Site History and Application History

 

4.1      Site History

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

 

4.2    Application History

 

Pre-DA

The applicant undertook a formal Pre-DA (PL/54/2009). Council provided advice in accordance with letter dated 21 December 2009 and the current DA is generally commensurate with Council’s advice.

 

Current DA

The applicant provided additional shadow diagrams to Council. The additional diagrams did not detail any amendments to the proposal, rather they provided further analysis of the potential overshadowing impacts.

 

As there were no changes to the proposal the additional shadow diagrams were not required to be re-notified. Notwithstanding the additional shadow diagrams were provided to the contact person named on the one joint submission received for their consideration.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with Council’s policy. One submission was received. The submission was stated to be written on behalf of three property owners, being the owners of 6, 8 and 10 Higgs Street although its is noted that the submission was not signed by the owner of 10 Higgs Street.

A site inspection was carried out and an inspection of the properties at 6 and 8 Higgs Street was also carried out.

 

The issues raised in the joint submission and the issues raised during the inspection of 6 and 8 Higgs Street are detailed below:

 

Issue: The proposed first floor addition and the works to the rear yard (including the construction of a new cabana) will result privacy impacts for the rear private open spaces and potentially internal living areas (particularly for 6 Higgs Street) of properties at 6, 8 and 10 Higgs Street.  

 

The proposed pruning of several mature trees, which currently provide effective visual screening between the subject site and properties to the east, will accentuate the privacy impacts.

 

Mature plantings to the height of 2m are requested for the proposed hedge treatment along the common boundary between the subject site and 6 and 8 Higgs Street to assist in alleviating the visual privacy impacts.

 

In addition it is requested that the fence adjacent to the rear boundary of 6 Higgs Street is built up to the same height as it at 8 Higgs Street and the new fence should not have gaps between palings as the current fence has.

 

Comment: The proposed first floor addition is for a bedroom and small study and not main living areas. There is considerable separation between the subject building and the dwellings to the east in Higgs Street. Both these factors will minimise overlooking opportunities from the proposed addition.

 

The proposed cabana is in a similar location to the existing raised landscaped platform in the rear yard of the subject site, however the finished floor level of the cabana is considerably lower than the height of the current landscaped platform (i.e. a difference of approximately 1.1m in height).

 

Notwithstanding the above discussion and given the potential that the upgraded outdoor living spaces will be used more intensely than the current rear yard, specific conditions of consent have been recommended which will ensure a good level of screening is provided along the eastern side boundary between the subject site and the rear yards of 6 and 8 Higgs Street.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent (refer to condition 2) the proposal will not result in unreasonable privacy impacts on the adjoining properties. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

 

Issue: The proposed development will result in increased overshadowing impacts to 6, 8 and 10 Higgs Street. The impacts will be “extremely dominant” during summer.

 

Comment: The shadow diagrams submitted indicate that the overshadowing satisfies the preferred solutions in Council’s DCP and that the shadows cast by the proposed addition at 3pm in mid summer will fall within or be equal to the shadow cast by the existing eastern boundary fence. A detailed discussion of solar access is provided in the table within section 8 of this report.

 

Issue: There is a lack of geotechnical reporting with the application. Excavation associated with the proposed pool and works could impact adversely on the structural integrity of retaining walls and structures in the adjacent properties in Higgs Street.

 

Comment: A proposed condition in the recommendation requires all excavations and backfilling to be performed safely and in accordance with professional standards (refer to condition 29 & 30). The recommended conditions of consent also require the preparation of dilapidation reports (refer to condition 31).

 

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

It is noted that there are no specific engineering comments with respect to drainage or other engineering matters apart from the recommendation for the imposition for various standard conditions of consent.

 

Landscape Comments

Consistent with advice provided for the pre-lodgement application (refer PL/54/2009), no objections are raised to removing the Thuja occidentalis (Cedar, tree 1), located right in the southeast corner of the site, as despite being the only established vegetation within this front setback, will be in direct conflict with the substantial works proposed in this area relating to the new excavated garage and paths, with the landscape works as shown to involve a substantial increase in plant material which will improve both the appearance of the site and its presentation to the streetscape, with conditions relating to these components having been included in this report.

 

On higher ground further to the north, in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the east, 10 Higgs Street, close to the common boundary and adjacent the southeast corner of the existing dwelling within the subject site, there is a 7 metre tall Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm), which is a feature of the area due to both its elevated location and the visual accent created by its single trunk and bold crown.

 

Its western aspect overhangs into the subject site, above the existing dwelling, and while no pruning will be required given an absence of work to the roofline, damage to the western side of its root plate is likely during excavations for the new retaining wall/planter proposed along the length of this boundary as shown, including replacing the existing concrete path with stone paving.

 

As this species of palm is particularly susceptible to disease/infection from physical damage and pathogens introduced through foreign soils, conditions that will minimise any impact both above and below ground will need to be imposed.

 

Further to the north again, in the rear yard of 8 Higgs Street, there is a similar sized Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum) and Olea europaea (Olive Tree), which are located closer to the common boundary than the palm described above, and as their western aspects also overhang into the subject site, have been pruned back in the past, which has affected their form and condition, with the relevant consent to perform further pruning if necessary away from the proposed pergola included in this report.

 

Still within this neighbouring property at 8 Higgs Street, immediately to the north of the trees described above, there is a 7m tall Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), which despite being a native species, is leaning acutely to the west, substantially overhanging into the subject site, close to the northeast corner of the existing dwelling.

 

While the first floor is setback substantially off this boundary, a large portion of its canopy may still be in conflict with the proposed ground floor pergola, with the applicant needing to clearly represent the location and extent of both the tree and the works so that a determination can be made on the amount of pruning allowable, with Council to require design changes should the amount of pruning be such that it would affect this tree in a negative way.

 

The semi-mature Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) and two more Olive Trees growing further to the north, in the rear yard of 6 Higgs Street, are also located close to the boundary, and may need to have some of their branches pruned for the proposed pergola, but as this would not affect these trees in any way, the relevant consent has been included in this report.

 

All vegetation within the rear yard of the subject site, being a Cotoneaster along the western boundary, as well as a Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda, tree 2) and Robinia pseudoacacia (Robinia, tree 3) in the upper, most northern terrace, were observed to be insignificant and undesirable, and are not a constraint to any development, with the replacement landscape works and replacement tree planting deemed appropriate for the site and scope of works being proposed.

 

The large clump of Strelitzia nicholii (Giant Bird of Paradise) beyond the rear (northern) site boundary, within 30 Dudley Street, serves a screening function between the two properties, and should not be affected as the proposed cabana is setback slightly off this boundary, with the plans also showing that the existing fence will be retained in-situ.

 

Consistent with the above advice the following conditions have been recommended with regards to landscaping: 

 

·      The PCA must ensure that landscaping at this site is installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by Spirit Level Designs, drawing number LP01, job number 691, revision B, dated 31/03/10, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, with the applicant/owner required to maintain this landscaping in a health and vigorous state until maturity.

 

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

 

a)       The Thuja occidentalis (Conifer, tree 1) in the front yard, right in the southeast corner of the site, in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle access, excavated garage, access paths and associated landscape works as shown;

 

b)       The Cotoneaster species (Cotoneaster) in the rear yard, along the western boundary, due to being an environmental weed which is responsible for invading native bushland;

 

c)       A Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda, tree 2) in the rear yard, in the upper, most northern terrace area, in order to accommodate the proposed pool and cabana area as shown, as well as the Robinia pseudoacacia (Robinia, tree 3), to its north, for the same reason, as well as the fact that it is recognized as an undesirable species due to its sharp thorns and ability to spread by suckers.

 

·      Permission is also granted for selective and minimal pruning from the western aspects of the following neighbouring trees, only where they specifically overhang the common boundary into the subject site, and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the trees; or; conflict/interference with the proposed works:

 

d)       The Pittosporum undulatum (Pittosporum), Olea europaea (European Olive), and Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) all located in the rear yard of 8 Higgs Street, to accommodate the pergola, entry area and first floor as shown;

 

e)       The Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) and two Olea europaea (European Olive) in the rear yard of 6 Higgs Street, to accommodate the proposed pergola as shown.

 

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

 

·      All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level III in Arboriculture, and who is also a registered member of a nationally recognised organisation/association, with all pruning to be performed to Australian Standard AS 4373-1996 'Pruning of Amenity Trees.’

 

·      In order to ensure retention of the row of trees located in the rear yards of those adjoining properties to the east, all close to the common boundary, being from south to north, a Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) within 10 Higgs Street, and a Pittosporum undulatum (Pittosporum), Olea europaea (European Olive) and a Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) all within 8 Higgs Street in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       All initial excavations associated with the retaining wall/raised planter proposed parallel to the eastern site boundary, beneath the extent of the drip-line of the Canary Island Date Palm, must be undertaken by hand, with any roots encountered which are in conflict with the proposed works and need to be cut to be done so cleanly by hand, and the affected area to be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible. Roots are not to be left exposed to the atmosphere.

 

c.       Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed along the eastern side setback, must be done so at the maximum setback possible off the boundary so as to minimise root damage.

 

d.       In order to prevent soil, sediment, concrete, cement and any other materials that are toxic to trees being allowed to wash towards these neighbouring trees, erosion control measures shall be provided along the eastern boundary, beneath the extent of their drip-lines, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge this requirement.

 

It is also noted that a condition of consent has been recommended with regard to the type, maturity and size of plants forming the hedge along the eastern boundary of the property at the rear of the properties at 6 and 8 Higgs Street respectively (refer to condition 2).

 


7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

7.1    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to consider whether land is contaminated prior to granting consent to the carrying out of any development on that land. Should the land be contaminated, Council must be satisfied that the land is suitable in a contaminated state for the proposed use. If the land requires remediation to be undertaken to make the land suitable for the proposed use, Council must be satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

 

As the site has a long history of residential use it is reasonable to assume that the site is not contaminated and is suitable for the proposed works.

 

7.2    State Environmental Planning Policy (BASIX) 2004

SEPP: BASIX requirements came into force for all new dwellings and alterations and additions to dwellings, where the development application was lodged on or after 1 July 2004. A BASIX assessment is a mandatory component of the development approval process under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) Regulation 2004 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

 

The proposal is for alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house. The applicant has provided a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP. The provision of a certificate indicates that compliance with the current targets set for energy, thermal and water conservation have been met by the development. Standard conditions of consent requiring the continued compliance of the development with the SEPP: BASIX have been included in the recommendation section of this report.

 

7.3    Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidated)

The Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) was gazetted on 15 January 2010.  Clause 7 of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) requires that a development application lodged but not finally determined prior to the appointed day will continue to be assessed and determined under the provisions of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) that was in force immediately before the commencement of this plan. The subject application was lodged on 22 April 2010 and the RLEP (Consolidation) is therefore relevant to this development.

 

The site is zoned Residential 2A under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

Clause 10 – Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone)

The objectives of Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) are:

 

(a)  to provide a low density residential environment, and

(b)  to maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas, and

(c)  to protect the amenity of existing residents, and

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

(e)  to encourage housing affordability, and

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

 

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) 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.

 

It is considered that the proposal is consistent with objectives (a), (b) and (c) of the zone. The proposal retains the low density residential environment within Meymott Street and adjacent areas.

 

The works will not alter the predominant attributes of the area, which are buildings of a one and two storey scale that have rear landscaped setbacks. The proposed works will not compromise the amenity of adjoining properties, and subject to the recommended conditions of consent will not result in adverse impacts on privacy or overshadowing.

 

Objectives (d) and (e) are not relevant in this instance, as the residential use of the site will continue. Affordable housing is not relevant as the proposal affects one existing dwelling and does not increase the density on the site.

 

The new works to the dwelling will improve the internal amenity for the occupants, which could enable them to undertake a home based business in the future in accordance with objective (f).

  

Clause 20E – Landscaped Area

Clause 20E requires a minimum of 40% of the site area to be landscaped. The site area is 795m2, a minimum of 318m2 of landscaped area therefore is required.

 

Under the RLEP (Consolidation), landscaped area is defined as follows:

 

“landscaped area means the part of a site area that is used, or capable of being used, for outdoor recreation or garden areas (such as lawns, gardens, unroofed swimming pools, clothes drying areas, barbecue areas, footpaths and the like) and includes landscaped podium areas and water

tanks located at ground level. It does not include areas used for parking, driveways, balconies, rooftop gardens or areas used for garbage or recycling material storage or sorting.”

 

In this instance, the landscaped area on the site includes the front yard and paths, the side pathway, pergola area and the rear yard including the pool and the cabana areas. The lawn and garden area above the proposed garage has also been considered as a landscaped podium in this instance and is included in the calculations for landscaped area.  The total landscaped area equals approximately 530m2, which is approximately 67% of the site area. The proposal therefore complies with the landscaped area requirements.

 

Clause 20F – Floor space ratios

The controls for floor space ratio under Clause 20F do not apply to dwelling houses.

 

Clause 20G – Building Heights

The controls for building heights under Clause 20G do not apply to dwelling houses.

 

Clause 22 – Services

Clause 22 requires that adequate facilities for the supply of water and for the removal or disposal of sewage and drainage are available to the land. All services are available to the site, given the existence of the dwelling on the site.

 


Clause 28 – Tree preservation orders

Various trees are proposed to be removed and or pruned. The application was referred to Council landscape expert who has indicated conditional support for the removal and pruning of nominated trees.

 

Clause 42B – Contaminated land

Clause 42B of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) requires that Council should be satisfied that contaminated land will be suitable for the proposed purpose of the development after remediation and that remediation will be carried before the land is used for that purpose.

 

As previously stated in relation to SEPP 55, the long term use of the site for residential purposes means that it is reasonable to assume that the site is suitable for the proposed residential use.

 

8.      Policy Controls

 

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

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

 

Standard

Requirement – preferred solutions

Provided

Compliance

Solar access and energy efficiency

Private open space of subject dwelling and neighbouring dwellings receives at least 3 hours of sunlight between 9:00am and 3:00pm on 21 June

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

North facing windows to living areas of subject dwelling and neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours of sunlight over at least part of their surface between 9:00am and 3:00pm on 21 June

 

 

The proposed development will retain a minimum of 3 hours sunlight to the private open space of the subject site.

 

The proposal will reduce the solar access to No 8 and to No 10 Higgs Street however the reduction in solar access is relatively minimal and the proposal does not reduce the sunlight to the rear yards of 8 and 10 Higgs Street to an extent where they will not receive sunlight for a minimum of 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 21. Specifically new shadow from the proposed rear addition will not fall over the rear yards of 8 and 10 Higgs Street until approximately 1pm and it is only a small section at the rear of 8 Higgs Street at that stage. The new shadow, or additional shadow, increases throughout the afternoon so that by 3pm in mid winter the shadow from the proposed addition will have extended towards and be ‘touching’ the rear building walls of the dwellings at 8 and 10 Higgs Street. Notwithstanding, the width of the new shadowing is limited so that the rear yards of both 8 and 10 Higgs Street will maintain sunlight to their respective rear yards during the entire afternoon period in mid winter. In this regard the proposal satisfies the preferred solution.

 

The north facing windows of the living room of the proposed addition will receive a minimum of 3hrs sunlight between 9:00am and 3:00pm on 21 June.

 

Solar access to north facing windows of adjacent properties will be unaffected by the proposed development. In particular it is noted that the shadow from the proposed additions that will fall on or near the rear (north facing) windows of 47 Meymott Street will fall within the shadow already cast by existing structures including the dividing fence and the two shed structures in the rear yard of 47 Meymott.

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

 

Water management

 

Clause 22 of the LEP requires Council to be satisfied that adequate facilities for the supply of water and for the removal or disposal of sewage and drainage are available to the land.

 

Conditions to be provided by Councils Engineer

Appropriate conditions have been provided by Council’s Engineer to address the issue of water disposal from the site.

Landscaping and open space

40% of site area as landscaped area

 

Minimum of at least 25m² of useable private open space

 

Private open space dimensions min 3m x 4m

 

Min 20% of site area is soft landscaping.

 

67% (530m²)

 

 

 

 

Rear yard alone achieves approximately 200m²

 

 

 

 

Minimum 12.5m x 15.1

 

 

 

 

In excess of 20% achieved

 

YES

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

YES

Floor area

Min allotment size 450m2

 

Max FSR: 0.5:1 for sites over 600m²

 

795m²

 

 

0.37:1

YES

 

 

YES

 

 

Height, form and materials

Max external wall height: 7m

 

Max external wall height of additions to the rear: 3.5m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Max building height: 9.5m

 

Cut or fill not to exceed 1m within 900mm of the boundary

 

Excavation does not occur within 3m of the rear boundary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Materials

The maximum height of the proposed        YES

addition is 6.68m.

 

 

Approximately 6.38m                                NO.

 

Comment: The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to the wall height of the rear addition as it accords with the section objectives and the performance requirements P1, P2, P3, P4 and P6.

 

Specifically the rear second storey addition is considered to be located and is of a form that will minimise amenity impacts to adjacent properties. The flat roof design and significant side setback to the eastern boundary help mitigate bulk and scale, overshadowing and visual privacy impacts particularly to the adjacent properties in Higgs Street. The proposal complies with the solar access requirements of the DCP and subject to recommended conditions of consent will have negligible impacts on the privacy of adjacent properties.

 

The positioning of the second storey building bulk to the rear of the site means that it will not be easily ‘read’ or seen from the Meymott Street frontage or from public locations to the west or north. Further, there will only be small glimpses of the proposed addition from Higgs Street through the relatively small gaps between the buildings at 10, 8 and 6 Higgs Street. It is also noted that existing and proposed vegetation along the eastern boundary of the site will effectively screen the second storey addition even where small glimpses are possible from the east.

 

6.68m                                                       YES

 

 

Excavation greater than 1m not proposed      YES

within 900mm of boundaries.

 

 

 

 

The removal of an elevated landscaped             NO

platform is proposed. The platform is earth

and is retained by a brick wall in poor

condition.

The excavation of this platform is proposed

within 3m of the rear boundary.

 

Comment: The removal of the earth platform is considered acceptable as it will return the rear yard to an even level and will also result in ground levels being commensurate with the ground levels at the adjacent sites to the north. The proposal to remove the earth platform accords with the section objectives and performance requirements P3 and P4.

 

The walls of the proposed rear addition            YES

will be clad with painted FC sheeting and

the roof will include Colorbond metal        

sheeting. The colours chosen for the wall  

cladding, the front fence and garage door

are soft tones and are suitable for the       

location of the dwelling. The materials       

although contemporary, are                     

commensurate with the context of           

development in the vicinity of the site and

respond to the location and form of the existing building.

 

Comment: Complies with relevant objectives and performance requirements

 

Setbacks

Front

 

 

Side

 

 

 

 

 

Rear

 

Existing setback or minimum of 4.5m

 

Min ground floor 900mm and 1.5m for 2 storey

 

 

Min 4.5m from rear boundary

 

The proposed garage is setback in accordance with the building lines of the garages at adjacent properties to the west and the east.

 

W: 1m for ground floor and 1.84 for 2nd storey

 

E:  4.8m at ground and 2nd storey

YES

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

Visual & acoustic privacy

Habitable room windows with direct outlook to others windows within 9m are offset by more than 45º or have fixed obscure glazing or sill height to 1.5m.

 

 

Direct view into private open space of adjoining dwellings is obscured or screened within 9m.

 

 

Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more above floor level or fixed obscure glazing to any part of the window less than 1.5m above floor level.

 

 

Front doors are visible from the street.

 

 

At least one habitable room window overlooks the street.

 

 

 

All openings at ground level will be screened from openings and the private open space of adjacent sites due to boundary fences and landscaped screening.

 

The proposal involves 4 windows at first floor level including one to the western elevation, two to the eastern elevation and one large window to the northern elevation.

 

The western facing window services a bathroom and will not result in overlooking opportunities.

 

The southern most eastern facing window sits above a void and will not result in overlooking opportunities.

 

The two remaining windows serve the proposed master bedroom. It is noted that these windows include a 500mm deep reveal which will provide some visual privacy screening and solar shading.

 

With regards to the north facing window, it is considered that the combination of the proposed screening devices, the location of existing and proposed vegetation and the location of existing shed structures along the common boundary with 47 Meymott Street, will mitigate any overlooking potential into the rear yard of 47 Meymott Street.

 

Likewise, the proposed vegetation along the rear boundary and the separation between the rear building line and the rear boundary (i.e. in excess of 15m) will prevent overlooking opportunities from the north facing window into properties to the north (i.e. 30 Dudley Street and 4 Higgs Street).

 

In terms of overlooking opportunities from the proposed first level into the rear yards and towards the west facing openings of dwellings at 6 and 8 Higgs Street it is considered that these opportunities will be minimal given the considerable change in levels between the FFL of the proposed first level and the ground levels at 6 and 8 Higgs Street. The proposed building is setback 4.8m from the eastern side boundary and the rear building walls of the dwellings at 6 and 8 Higgs Street are setback in excess of 15m from the common boundary with the subject site. This effectively creates a separation of 20m.

 

Further the proposal includes the retention of a dividing fence along the eastern boundary with a “mixed screen planting” also positioned adjacent to the eastern boundary for its entire length.

 

It is noted that existing vegetation which provides good vegetation screening between the subject dwelling and the properties at 6 and 8 Higgs Street is proposed to be pruned to facilitate the development, thus reducing the existing screening levels.

 

It is therefore considered reasonable that in order to ensure a similar level (if not better level) of screening and visual privacy to the properties to the east opposite the first floor addition, that a condition be imposed which requires the proposed “mixed screen planting” along the eastern boundary to be of mature on planting. This requirement will only relate to the screen plantings between the southern boundary of 8 Higgs Street and the northern boundary of 6 Higgs Street.

 

It is also noted that the proposed works to the rear yard, including the cabana, pool and associated decking may result in overlooking opportunities in the north east corner towards the rear private open space and west facing windows of 6 Higgs Street.

 

Notwithstanding that the current circumstance allows for almost direct overlooking from the north west corner of the site into the rear yard of 6 Higgs Street and the removal of the raised landscaped platform in the rear yard of the subject site will improve this situation. It is considered reasonable that a condition requiring mature plantings along the boundary and a fence of the same height as the existing fence at the rear of 8 Higgs Street be recommended to mitigate this impact.

YES

 

Complies with each of the relevant preferred solutions. Notwithstanding, additional conditions of consent have been recommended to ensure a high level of privacy is provided to the properties at 6 and 8 Higgs Street which run perpendicular to the subject site and are opposite the proposed first floor addition and rear yard upgrading.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Safety and security

Front doors are visible from the street.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

Front fences comply with standards in section 4.8.

It is noted that the proposed relocation of the entry to the eastern side of the building does not comply with the preferred solution where by it will not be visible from the street.

 

Notwithstanding the pedestrian entry and footpath leading to the entry are exposed to the street frontage and can be viewed from inside the dwelling so that casual surveillance is achieved.

 

There are two windows (serving habitable rooms) addressing the street frontage.

 

 

 

 

Front fence design involves a 1 – 1.2m high cement rendered and painted fence. The design is consistent with the style and height of fencing along Meymott Street and accords with the performance requirements for fencing.

NO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

Garages, driveways & car parking

 

 

2 spaces per 3+ bedrooms.

 

Car parking space minimum dimensions of 5.5m x 2.5m

 

Driveways have a minimum width of 3m and setback at least 1m from the side boundary.

 

Max driveway width of 3m at front boundary.

 

 

Where vehicular access is only available from the front of the allotment, garages to be behind front building line.

 

2 spaces proposed in new garage.

 

 

6.8m x 3m

 

 

 

 

 

4.5m width with 2.5m setback to side boundary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.5m

 

 

 

 

 

The garage is located in front of the dwelling but within the ‘implied’ or established building line for garages in Meymott Street.

 

Comment: The proposal is considered acceptable as there is an established pattern of development in Meymott Street whereby garages have been approved and built in front of dwellings. The front of the garage is setback in accordance with the predominant building line of the garages at adjoining sites. The proposal accords with the objectives of this section and performance requirements P1, P2 and P3.

YES

 

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NO. Accepted by Council’s engineer.

 

 

NO.

 

8.3      Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

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

 

Category

Cost

Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$489,000

1.0%

$4,890

  

9.      Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of Randwick LEP 2008 (Consolidation).

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

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

 

Appropriate conditions are recommended to address the relevant fire safety provisions of the Regulation. 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

For the reasons outlined in this report, it is considered that the proposal is suitable for the site and will not adversely impact upon any adjoining properties. The development will improve the internal and external amenity for the occupants of the site. The development is considered to be in the public interest for these reasons.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:         Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development complies with the objectives and performance requirements of relevant Local and State planning controls.

 

The proposed alterations and additions to the existing are permissible with the consent of Council. The development generally complies with the relevant aims and objectives contained in the Randwick LEP 1998 (consolidation) and Randwick DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

The proposed works, while substantial, will result in a dwelling of a scale and building footprint that is consistent with or less than the development potential achievable at the site as determined by the applicable planning controls.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions, the development will not result in significant adverse impacts upon surrounding dwellings. With the inclusion of appropriate conditions of consent, the development will achieve a reasonable level of privacy and amenity for both the subject site and the adjoining properties.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, to Development Application No. 277/2010 for alterations and additions to existing dwelling including substantial two storey addition at rear, double garage to front of dwelling with landscaped area above, swimming pool and cabana to rear, water feature, fencing and associated works at No. 49 Meymott 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 AR.DA.2002, AR.DA.2003, AR.DA.3001, AR.DA.3101 all Revision A prepared by Tanner Architects, received by Council 22 April 2010, and the Landscape Concept Plan drawing number LP01 Revision B prepared by Spirit Level Designs received by Council on 22 April 2010 and on 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.     In order to maintain reasonable levels of screening, privacy and environmental amenity between the subject site and those adjoining properties on lower ground to the east, a continuous evergreen screen/hedge using a suitably hardy, resilient and densely foliaged species, and which will attain a minimum height of 3 metres at maturity, shall be provided within a deep soil garden bed along the length of the eastern edge of the site starting at the southern boundary of 8 Higgs Street and extending to the northern boundary of 6 Higgs Street. The plants must be must be semi-advanced stock, ie; minimum of 1.5m in height at the time of planting.

 

Details confirming compliance with these requirements are to be provided on the landscape plan.

 

3.     The external materials, colours and finishes of the building are required to match the materials, colours and finishes detailed in the Sample Board submitted with the Development Application.

 

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

 

5.     Street numbering must be provided to the premises in a prominent position, in

accordance with the Australia Post guidelines and AS/NZS 4819 (2003) to the

satisfaction of Council, prior to an occupation certificate being issued for

the development.

 

6.     The finished ground levels external to the building are to be consistent with

the development consent and are not to be raised (other than for the

provision of approved

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

8.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $489,000 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $4,890.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

9.     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.

 

10.    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.

 

11.    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)

 

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

 

13.   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.

 

14.   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).

 

15.   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.

 

16.   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).

 

17.   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”.

 

18.   In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, 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.

 

19.   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.

 

20.   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.

 

21.   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:

 

22.   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.

 

23.   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.

 

24.   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.

 

25.   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.

26.   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.

27.   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.

 

28.   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.

 

29.   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.

 

30.   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.

 

31.   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. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

37.   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.

38.   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.

 

39.   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 provide adequate provisions for access, transport and infrastructure:

 

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

 

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

b.     Replace the existing Council asphalt footpath with concrete along the site frontage.

 

41.   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.

 

42.   All external civil work to be carried out on Council property (including the installation and repair of roads, footpaths, vehicular crossings, kerb and guttering and drainage works), must be carried out in accordance with Council’s Policy for “Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works” and the following requirements:

 

a)     All work on Council land must be carried out by Council, unless specific written approval has been obtained from Council to use non-Council contractors.

b)     Details of the proposed civil works to be carried out on Council land must be submitted to Council in a Pre-paid Works Application Form, prior to issuing an occupation certificate, together with payment of the relevant fees.

c)     If it is proposed to use non-Council contractors to carry out the civil works on Council land, the work must not commence until the written approval has been obtained from Council and the work must be carried out in accordance with the conditions of consent, Council’s design details and payment of a Council design and supervision fee.

d)     The civil works must be completed in accordance with Council’s conditions of consent and approved design and construction documentation, prior to occupation of the development, or as otherwise approved by Council in writing.

 

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

 

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

 

44.   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. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

45.   The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $121.00 (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 for service authority assets:

 

46.   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.

 

47.   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 conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for drainage and associated infrastructure:

 

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

 

49.   Stormwater runoff from the site shall be discharged either:

 

a.     To the kerb and gutter along the site frontage by gravity; OR

b.     To a suitably sized infiltration area. As a guide the infiltration area shall be sized based on a minimum requirement of 1 m2 of infiltration area (together with 1 m3 of storage volume) for every 20 m2 of roof/impervious area on the site.

 

Prior to the use of infiltration in rear draining lots (where there is no formal overland escape route to Council’s kerb and gutter/street drainage system),  a geotechnical investigation will be required to determine whether the ground is suitable for infiltration. Should rock and/or a water table be encountered within two metres of the proposed base of the infiltration pit, or the ground conditions comprise low permeability soils such as clay, infiltration may not be appropriate.

 

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

 

Notes:

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

52.   The PCA must ensure that landscaping at this site is installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by Spirit Level Designs, drawing number LP01, job number 691, revision B, dated 31/03/10, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, with the applicant/owner required to maintain this landscaping in a health and vigorous state until maturity.

 

Removal of trees within site

 

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

 

a.     The Thuja occidentalis (Conifer, tree 1) in the front yard, right in the southeast corner of the site, in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle access, excavated garage, access paths and associated landscape works as shown;

b.     The Cotoneaster species (Cotoneaster) in the rear yard, along the western boundary, due to being an environmental weed which is responsible for invading native bushland;

c.     A Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda, tree 2) in the rear yard, in the upper, most northern terrace area, in order to accommodate the proposed pool and cabana area as shown, as well as the Robinia pseudoacacia (Robinia, tree 3), to its north, for the same reason, as well as the fact that it is recognized as an undesirable species due to its sharp thorns and ability to spread by suckers.

 

Pruning of neighbouring trees

 

54.   Permission is also granted for selective and minimal pruning from the western aspects of the following neighbouring trees, only where they specifically overhang the common boundary into the subject site, and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the trees; or; conflict/interference with the proposed works:

 

a.     The Pittosporum undulatum (Pittosporum), Olea europaea (European Olive), and Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) all located in the rear yard of 8 Higgs Street, to accommodate the pergola, entry area and first floor as shown;

b.     The Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) and two Olea europaea (European Olive) in the rear yard of 6 Higgs Street, to accommodate the proposed pergola as shown.

 

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

 

56.   All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level III in Arboriculture, and who is also a registered member of a nationally recognised organisation/association, with all pruning to be performed to Australian Standard AS 4373-1996 'Pruning of Amenity Trees.’

 

Protection of neighbouring trees

 

57.   In order to ensure retention of the row of trees located in the rear yards of those adjoining properties to the east, all close to the common boundary, being from south to north, a Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) within 10 Higgs Street, and a Pittosporum undulatum (Pittosporum), Olea europaea (European Olive) and a Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) all within 8 Higgs Street in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

b.     All initial excavations associated with the retaining wall/raised planter proposed parallel to the eastern site boundary, beneath the extent of the drip-line of the Canary Island Date Palm, must be undertaken by hand, with any roots encountered which are in conflict with the proposed works and need to be cut to be done so cleanly by hand, and the affected area to be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible. Roots are not to be left exposed to the atmosphere.

c.     Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed along the eastern side setback, must be done so at the maximum setback possible off the boundary so as to minimise root damage.

d.     In order to prevent soil, sediment, concrete, cement and any other materials that are toxic to trees being allowed to wash towards these neighbouring trees, erosion control measures shall be provided along the eastern boundary, beneath the extent of their drip-lines, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge this requirement.

 

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

20 July 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D44/10

 

 

Subject:                  34 Milford Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/964/2009

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a part 3- and part 4-storey residential flat building consisting of 2 x 1-bedroom units and 2 x 3-bedroom units, car parking for 7 vehicles and associated landscape works. (SEPP 1 Objections for FSR and external wall height)

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                J and D Mavrodontidis

Owner:                         J and D Mavrodontidis

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

The subject proposal is referred to the Planning Committee Meeting for determination as it contains variations to the FSR and external wall height development standards by more than 10%.

 

The proposal was advertised and notified from 20 January to 3 February 2010 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of twenty-four (24) submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The issues raised in the submissions are primarily related to development density, streetscape, building height, bulk and scale, view loss, solar access, visual and acoustic privacy, traffic congestion, land subsidence, stormwater management, construction related disturbances and reduction in property values.

 

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

 

The subject site is located within Zone No. 2B (Residential B Zone) under RLEP 1998. The proposed development will deliver a multi-unit flat building that is considered to be consistent with the zoning objectives.

 

The proposal has an FSR of 0.71:1, which exceeds the LEP development standard by 0.06:1. The proposed external wall height reaches up to 9.5m, and exceeds the LEP standard by 2.5m. Notwithstanding, the development scheme has incorporated suitable design measures to minimise the visual scale and bulk of the structures, and is suitable to the corner location of the site.

 

The Randwick Multi-Unit Housing DCP specifies detailed built form, setbacks and amenity controls for residential flat buildings across Randwick City. The building height, setbacks, landscaped open space provision, façade treatment, solar access and privacy protection measures of the development comply with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP and are considered to be satisfactory. The proposal has also incorporated appropriate off-street parking facilities and satisfies the requirement of the Parking DCP.

 

The proposal is considered to have implications on the distant water views currently obtained from the neighbouring properties at Nos. 26 to 32 Milford Street. The applicant has installed height poles on the subject site and submitted detailed photomontage images and view sharing analyses. The potential view loss impacts on the aforementioned properties have been fully assessed. It is considered that the proposal is skilfully designed and will achieve satisfactory view sharing with the neighbouring properties.

 

The proposed development meets the objectives and performance requirements of relevant State and Local planning controls and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot B in DP 441827, No. 34 Milford Street, Randwick. The site is located at the north-western corner of the intersection between Milford and Judge Streets. The dimensions and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, rear boundary

15.235m

 

Southern, Milford Street boundary

12.955m

 

South-eastern corner splay

3.285m

 

Eastern, Judge Street boundary

30.555m

 

Western, side boundary

33.005m

 

 

 

499.5m2

 

The site is elevated approximately 0.7m to 1.3m and 1.3m to 2.0m over the Milford Street and Judge Street footpaths respectively.

 

At present, the site is occupied by a single-storey detached dwelling of brick and tiled roof construction. The site is adjoined to the west by a single-storey detached dwelling (No. 32 Milford Street). A 3.66m wide public footpath adjoins the site on its northern boundary. To the east of the site on the opposite side of Judge Street are a part 1- and part 2-storey detached dwelling (No. 7 Judge Street) and a part 3- and part 4-storey residential flat building (No. 30 Clyde Street). To the south of the site on the opposite side of Milford Street is a detached dwelling (No. 4 Judge Street).

 

The locality is characterised by a mixture of detached and semi-detached dwelling houses, in-fill multi-unit residential buildings and educational establishment.

 

Figure 1 Milford Street elevation of the existing dwelling on the subject site

Figure 2 Judge Street elevation of the existing dwelling on the subject site

 

Figure 3 Existing public footpath located adjacent to the northern boundary of the subject site

 

 

3.      The Proposal

 

The proposed development includes the following components:

 

·      Demolition of all existing structures on site.

·      Site modification and earthworks.

·      Construction of a part 3- and part 4-storey residential flat building comprising 2 x 1-bedroom dwellings at ground level, 1 x 3-bedroom dwelling at first level, 1 x 3-bedroom dwelling at second level, and semi-basement car park for 7 vehicles.

·      General landscaping.

 

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

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to Council.

 

(i)     Floor space ratio

Pursuant to Clause 32(1) of RLEP 1998, the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No. 2B is 0.65:1 or 324.7m2 gross floor area (GFA). The proposal has an FSR of 0.71:1 or 356.5m2 GFA, and exceeds the development standard by 0.06:1 or 31.8m2. The proposal entails a variation to the standard by 9.8%.

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio (FSR)

Gross floor area (GFA)

Proposed FSR / GFA

0.71:1

356.5m2

Permissible FSR /  GFA

0.65:1

324.7m2

FSR / GFA in excess of LEP standard

0.06:1

31.8m2

 

(ii)    Building heights

Clauses 33(1) and 33(3) specify the maximum overall and external wall heights of 9.5m and 7m respectively in Residential 2B Zone. Given the flat roof configuration of the works, the overall building height of the development is equivalent to its external wall height, being 9.5m (southern elevation) at maximum.

 

The proposal complies with the maximum building height requirement prescribed in Clause 33(1). However, the proposal does not comply with the maximum external wall height requirement under Clause 33(3).

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

External wall height

Proposed development

9.5m

Permissible height

7.5m

Building height in excess of LEP standard

2.5m

(which equates to 33.3% variation to the standard)

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

“To 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 stated purpose of the building height standards as outlined in the LEP is:

 

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

 

The applicant has submitted written SEPP 1 Objections, which outline the following key justifications for the variations to the standard:

 

Floor space ratio

Page 3

The proposed built form has incorporated design measures to minimise perceived scale and bulk of the development. These include the provision of balconies, screens and a combination of materials and finishes to appropriately articulate the building facades, break down the proportions and create visual interest, in addition to the design of a flat roof. The floor areas of the proposed units are not excessive and will provide suitable amenity for future occupants in terms of natural lighting and cross ventilation.

 

Page 5

From a merit point of view, the proposal presents an appropriate visual transition between the dwelling houses on the western side of the site and the residential flat building to the east and improves the visual relationship to the street and surrounds. It is compliant with the overall height standard in the LEP, the landscaping and setback controls in the DCP which has ensured reasonable levels of amenity for surrounding residences. The proposal is consistent with other residential flat development in the surrounding area in terms of height, bulk and scale. As important, the proposal has been designed to enhance the streetscape appearance through the use of sympathetic proportions and high quality materials and finishes.

 

Accordingly, it is considered that strict compliance with the height control would unnecessarily and unreasonably restrict the evolution of the subject site in the circumstances of the case.

 

External wall height

Page 3

The proposed development has been setback from the eastern boundary and incorporates an extensive amount of landscaping, which will enhance the appearance of the development in the locality.

 

The proposal has been designed to minimise the impact on the adjoining and surrounding developments. The proposal is surrounded by a pathway to the north and roads to the east and south and the building is generally oriented in those directions. On the western elevation high level windows have been incorporated to maintain privacy to the adjoining dwelling to the west and only service rooms (kitchens and bathrooms) have been located along this side of the building to minimise any privacy issues. The shadow to be cast by the proposed development will primarily fall on the surrounding roads to the east and south and, to a limited extent (in the early morning) on the adjoining development to the west.

 

In our opinion, the imposition of the development standard would interfere with the proper management and proposed improvements on the subject site. The existing dwelling house is inefficient in design and does not utilise the site in a way that provides adequate amenity. The proposed development provides a residential flat building with improved streetscape appearance. It provides generous levels of private and shared open space, landscaping and visual separation and does not adversely impact the amenity of adjoining properties. As important, the proposed development provides a range of high quality contemporary residential accommodation available in the locality. In our opinion, the imposition of the development standard would inhibit the benefits that may result from the proposal.

 

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

 

-        The subject locality is characterised by a mixture of multi-unit, semi-detached and detached residential developments. The proposal will create a part 3- and part 4-storey residential flat building. The development scheme fully complies with the maximum building height standard stipulated in RLEP 1998. The proposal has a height and scale, which are compatible with the existing flat developments in the surrounding built environment, and do not detract from the prevailing residential character of the locality.

 

Despite the fact that there are single- and double-storey detached dwellings in the immediate surroundings, the current planning controls specified in RLEP 1998 allow for higher density developments. The proposal represents a reasonable attempt to realise the full development potential of the site.

 

-        The proposed built form has incorporated staggered wall planes, balconies, tubular screen members, window openings and a combination of compatible surface finishes, which will finely articulate the building facades and create visual interest. The design scheme adopts a flat roof, which will minimise the overall building height. The lift overrun is stepped in away from the street frontages and will not be readily visible from the public domain.

 

The above design measures will minimise the visual scale and bulk of the structures, despite non-compliance with the FSR and external wall height development standards. Overall, the architectural character and form of the proposal are considered to carry satisfactory design merits.

 

-        The proposal reserves 66.9% of the site as landscaped areas, and exceeds the minimum requirement stipulated in the LEP (being 50% of the site area) by 84.7m2. The site coverage is therefore less than what is envisaged in the LEP. The submitted landscape plans indicate the provision of screen planting along the side and rear boundaries of the site. The design scheme will deliver a suitable landscape ambience to the building and minimise adverse privacy impacts on the neighbours.

 

-        Due to the topography of the site, a podium containing car parking facilities will be constructed to provide a levelled platform for accommodating the flat building. The proposal will utilise gabion walling comprising galvanised mesh filled with rocks and rubbles from site excavation to enclose the semi-basement car park. The submitted drawings have clearly demonstrated that the above wall treatment will provide a natural appearance to the street frontages. Given that the building will be setback from the edge of the podium, the development will maintain a human scale to the footpaths and will not result in detrimental impacts on the visual quality and amenity of the public domain.

 

-        The proposed housing density is justified by the site’s proximity to the Randwick town centre, the hospital and UNSW precincts and public transport services along Avoca Street and Carrington Road. The proposal is considered to introduce a suitable amount of residential population to a locality, which is highly accessible to retail, commercial and community services and public transport.

 

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

 

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

The aims and objects of SEPP 1 set out in clause 3 are to provide “flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act”. The last mentioned objects in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are to encourage:

 

“(1) the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

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

 


Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standards in question is unreasonable and unnecessary as the design scheme will achieve the underlying purposes of the standards.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standards is relevant to the subject development. As discussed above, the proposal is considered to satisfy the underlying purposes of the FSR and external wall height standards.

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective of the standards would not be defeated or thwarted as full numerical compliance in this particular instance is unreasonable. The proposed external wall height and FSR will not result in detrimental streetscape or amenity impacts on the locality. The resultant built form and scale are compatible with the surrounding residential premises and represent a suitable infill development.

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Each development application received by Council is assessed with regard to its merits. There has been no precedent established by Council’s assessment decisions, which in effect would abandon the development standards prescribed in the LEP.

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential B zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality. The RLEP (Consolidation), effective from 15 January 2010, has maintained the 2B zoning for the site.

 

5.      Site History

 

5.1    Restrictive covenant

There was a restrictive covenant A376725 relating to the subject site, which was registered on 30 April 1918. Under the covenant, the following restrictions applied:

… no building shall be erected on the said land any part of which shall be within thirty feet of the building line of Milford Street.

 

The proposed semi-basement car park and front balconies would have resulted in a breach against the provisions of the above covenant.

 

Pursuant to Section 81J(d) of the Real Property Act, the Registrar-General may extinguish a restrictive covenant upon the making of an application by the property owner.

 

Following the lodgement of the subject development proposal with Council, an application had been made to the Registrar General to have the covenant set aside pursuant to Section 81J of the Real Property Act. The applicant has submitted copies of the Registration Notice from the Department of Lands dated 22 March 2010 and a title search dated 23 March 2010, which clearly indicate that there is no longer any covenant over the subject land.

 

5.2    Previous development consents relating to the site

There are no recent development approvals relating to the site.

5.3    Plan amendments

On 10 May 2010, the applicant submitted amended plans that include the following changes:

 

·      Reduction of the depth of the front balconies by 500mm.

·      Deletion of western blade walls to the front balconies.

·      Provision of privacy screens to the rear balconies.

·      Addition of skylight over the top floor living areas.

·      Addition of external blinds to eastern windows.

·      Reduction of the ridge height of the projecting kitchen and bathroom areas in the western section of the building by 400mm.

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The subject application was advertised and notified from 20 January to 3 February 2010 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The following submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process:

 

·      22 Clyde Street, Randwick

·      24 Clyde Street, Randwick

·      1 Coogee Street, Randwick

·      3 Judge Street, Randwick

·      4 Judge Street, Randwick

·      6 Judge Street, Randwick

·      7 Judge Street, Randwick

·      1/7B Judge Street, Randwick

·      2/7B Judge Street, Randwick

·      6/7B Judge Street, Randwick (3/28A Darling Point Road, Darling Point)

·      12/7B Judge Street, Randwick

·      20 Milford Street, Randwick

·      24 Milford Street, Randwick

·      26 Milford Street, Randwick

·      28 Milford Street, Randwick (PO Box 182 Randwick NSW 2031)

·      30 Milford Street, Randwick

·      32 Milford Street, Randwick

·      20 Pitt Street, Randwick

·      31 Pitt Street, Randwick

·      33 Pitt Street, Randwick

·      Jamieson Foley Consulting Forensic Engineers on behalf of the Milford / Judge Streets Residents’ Action Committee

·      Design Collaborative Pty. Ltd. on behalf of 32 Milford Street, Randwick

·      Randwick Precinct Committee

·      1 x anonymous submission

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

Issues

Comments

The proposed floor space ratio and building height do not comply with Council’s planning controls and will result in an excessive visual bulk and scale.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objections are not well founded and the development application should be refused on this basis.

The proposed floor space ratio and building height are considered to be satisfactory and will not result in detrimental impacts on the streetscape.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objections are considered to be well founded. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

The development proposal has included minimal provision for deep soil landscaped areas.

The proposed landscaped open space provision exceeds the minimum requirements stated in the LEP. The design scheme has incorporated adequate deep soil planting areas and will deliver a suitable landscape ambience to the building.

The design scheme is not compatible with the character of the streetscape and the surrounding residential developments.

The subject locality is not listed as a heritage conservation area under RLEP 1998. The surrounding context is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential buildings.

 

The proposed development is suitably designed and articulated and will not result in detrimental impacts on the existing streetscape character. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

The proposal has not provided sufficient setbacks from the property boundaries.

The proposal has reserved adequate setbacks from the street frontages and side and rear boundaries. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

There is an existing covenant A376725 relating to the subject site that restricts any part of a building from being erected within 30 feet of the Milford Street boundary. The proposed basement car park and front balconies are in breach of this covenant.

The existing restrictive covenant A376725 has been extinguished and set aside by the Registrar-General pursuant to Section 81J of the Real Property Act. Accordingly, the above covenant is no longer applicable to the site.

The proposed development will obstruct scenic views currently available to Nos. 26 to 32 Milford Street.

 

The amount of floor space, positioning of the building and site landscaping contribute to the view loss and a more skilful design could reduce the impact.

 

A possible alternate scheme would be to construct 3 x side by side townhouses in lieu of a four-storey flat building.

The proposed development is not considered to result in unreasonable view loss impacts on the adjoining and nearby residential dwellings. A detailed assessment is provided in the “DCP” section of this report.

 

The amount of floor space, height, scale, layout and detailing of the development are considered to be satisfactory having regard to the relevant provisions of RLEP 1998 and DCP – Multi-Unit Housing. The design scheme is skilful and appropriate to the site and its context. Consequently, it is not considered reasonable to require substantial changes to the scope and form of the proposal as suggested by the neighbouring property owners.

The proposal will adversely impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding dwellings. 

It is acknowledged that the proposed building would be visible from the living room windows of a number of residential premises in the locality. However, as will be discussed in detail in this report, the development will fully comply with the solar access and view sharing performance requirements of the DCP – Multi Unit Housing. The proposed design is also considered to be satisfactory and will not result in detrimental impacts on the streetscape character. The fact that the building would become part of the skyline in the locality should not be construed as a negative visual impact.

The proposed development, in particular the rear balconies and side windows, will result in adverse privacy impacts on the adjoining and nearby dwellings.

The proposed development has incorporated appropriate design measures to minimise overlooking into the adjoining and nearby dwellings. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed development will result in unreasonable overshadowing of the living rooms and private open space of the adjoining and nearby properties.

The proposal will comply with the solar access performance requirements stated in the DCP – Multi Unit Housing. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The development will result in significant noise impacts on the adjoining and nearby properties due to the number of proposed dwelling units, the provision of rear balconies and the location of the principal building entry near the common boundary.

The proposal will not result in unreasonable noise impacts on the adjoining and nearby properties. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed development will increase pedestrian traffic along the laneway to the north of the site and result in safety and security impacts.

The principal pedestrian entry to the building is accessible off Milford Street. The proposal is likely to result in a slight increase in the use of the public footpath to the north of the site. However, the increased usage of this public walkway is considered to improve its safety and security. 

The building will adversely impact on the amenity of the surrounding footpaths by reducing sunlight and casual surveillance.

The proposed development is considered to improve casual surveillance of the surrounding footpaths and walkways.

 

The proposed flat building will cast additional shadows on the footpaths of Milford and Judge Streets. However, the anticipated shadows are not considered to unreasonably affect the functionality and amenity of the footpaths.

The development will adversely affect the receipt of signals by existing TV antennae due to the height of the building.

There is no evidence to support the claim that the proposed building will interfere with TV station signals.

The proposal will adversely impact on the wildlife habitat in the locality.

The subject site is not identified as being a critical wildlife habitat or having endangered flora or fauna species.

The site should be converted to a public reserve for the enjoyment of the local residents.

The site is a private property and is not zoned for open space purposes.

The existing Sydney Water ventilation pipe on the Judge Street footpath immediately outside of the site should be relocated and incorporated as part of the development.

It is not considered appropriate to impose a special condition that impacts on the property of Sydney Water without their prior approval. However, a standard condition is recommended to ensure the development satisfies the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation.

The proposal will generate additional vehicular traffic in the surrounding local streets and reduce kerb-side parking supply. The development would have adverse impacts on the safety of the local roads.

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the proposal and raised no objections on traffic grounds. The development also fully complies with the parking requirements of DCP – Parking.

 

The development should provide at least 2 car spaces per dwelling plus 2 visitor bays (being 10 on-site spaces in total) to minimise congestion in the surrounding streets.

The development proposal fully satisfies the parking requirements of DCP – Parking. The site is located within walking distance from public bus services on Avoca Street. It is not considered necessary to require the provision of additional parking spaces in this instance.

The development will obstruct vehicular traffic in Judge Street during the construction phase.

A standard condition is recommended to require the preparation of a traffic management plan prior to the commencement of works, to minimise adverse impacts on the surrounding road network.

Where the development application is approved, Council should undertake a road safety audit of the subject precinct with a view to providing more formalised traffic controls.

This matter is outside the scope of the subject development application.

A dilapidation report should be prepared to monitor any damage to the adjoining properties as a result of the construction works.

A standard condition is recommended to require the preparation of a dilapidation report in respect to the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street. Given that the site is bounded by a public walkway to the north and roads to the east and south, it is not considered that dilapidation reporting for other properties is necessary in this instance. 

The submitted geotechnical report has not provided conclusive information about the potential impacts on soil stability in the surrounding areas.

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal and raised no objections on engineering or safety grounds. Specific conditions are recommended to ensure adequate soil retention measures are implemented during works on the site.

The application has not included detailed information relating to the proposed construction method.

Detailed construction drawings and works execution methodology are not required for planning assessment at the development application stage.

The proposed building will adversely affect stormwater flow in the locality.

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal and raised no objections on stormwater management grounds, subject the recommended conditions.

The proposed earthworks will destabilise the sub soil and rock stratum in the area and adversely impact on the structural integrity of the surrounding properties.

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal and raised no objections on engineering or safety grounds. Specific conditions are recommended to ensure adequate soil retention measures are implemented during works on the site.

The development will result in changes to overland flow, flooding, soil erosion and ground settlement during the construction phase.

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal and raised no objections on engineering or safety grounds, subject to the recommended engineering conditions.

The development will generate noise, vibration, dust, polluted runoff and other disturbance during the construction phase.

Standard construction management conditions are recommended to minimise adverse amenity impacts on the surrounding residences.

The approval of the proposal will establish an undesirable planning precedent for similarly scaled developments in the locality.

Each development application is considered having regard to its merits and the provisions of relevant planning controls. The approval of the subject development is not considered to establish a precedent that affects future decision making. 

The proposed development will decrease property prices of the surrounding dwellings.

Variation in property values are not considered to be a valid objection on town planning grounds.

The submitted documentation is misleading and contains multiple errors. There are drafting errors relating to the footpath levels shown on the elevation drawings. The shadow diagrams fail to describe the anticipated impacts on the properties on Judge Street.

The submitted architectural drawings and shadow diagrams have been checked and are not considered to contain any material errors or deceptive information.

 

The shadow diagrams have clearly described the potential impacts on the relevant properties.

The submitted photomontages are not accurate in that they do not accurately reflect the extent of view loss and overshadowing, and the existing light conditions of the rooms within No. 32 Milford Street.

The submitted photomontages are prepared based on actual height poles erected on the subject site and are not considered to be inaccurate.

 

 

The height poles have not been correctly installed on the subject site and hence cannot accurately describe the anticipated impacts.

The applicant has submitted a statement from the consultant surveyor, which indicates that the height poles have been installed correctly and reasonably reflect the proposed building height.

 

As noted by the architect, the poles had some minor deflection due to wind condition. Nevertheless, the degree of deflection is minor in nature and will not materially affect the subsequent view loss and photomontage analysis.

The development scheme does not comply with the applicable State and Local planning controls.

The proposal is considered to satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of relevant State and Local planning controls.

 


7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Development Engineer and Landscape Development Officer

The comments provided by Council’s Development Engineering Section are extracted below:

 

Landscape Comments

The site inspection revealed an absence of any significant vegetation within the site; however, there are several trees and shrubs located on adjoining private and public property that may be affected by this application, as discussed below.

 

They comprise firstly, two closely planted 6-8 metre tall Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) on higher ground within the adjoining property to the west, 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary, about halfway the length of these sites, whose eastern aspects already overhang the roof of the subject dwelling within no.34.

 

Both Council and the applicant have a common law responsibility to ensure that neither tree is damaged in anyway as part of this development due to their location on a neighbouring property.

 

An existing brick retaining wall supports the difference in level between the two properties, the subject site being lower, with the plans showing that the western wall of the basement level will be setback a distance of 1.4m off the boundary, with a landscaped garden at ground level to be provided adjacent both trees.

 

While this would not directly affect either tree due to the differences in level and existing structures described above, it is likely that this wall will become unstable during excavations for the basement, with the ground floor plan indicating that a new wall will be constructed along the length of this boundary.

 

Therefore, the only threat to their preservation is seen to be de-stabilisation in the time between when the existing wall is demolished and the new wall is constructed, with conditions requiring that temporary shoring be provided in order to prevent failure of the soil profile and trees.

 

Despite it appearing that conflict between these two trees and the western elevation of the building will not occur due to the 2.9 metre setback, clearances may be required during the course of construction for scaffolding or similar, and as the amount of pruning required would only be minimal, the relevant permission has been provided.

 

Council’s Judge Street verge is currently in a poor condition due to its slope down to the east, where it meets the roadway, with a row of small trees planted along its length, being from south to north, two small Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) of around 2-3 metres in height to the south of the existing crossing, and then to its north, a Hibiscus, another Bottlebrush and a Tristaniopsis laurina (Watergum), near the steps which must be a replacement for a larger tree that was recently removed as evidenced by the remaining stump.

 

The plans show that the masonry wall which exists around the perimeter of the site, along the length of both frontages, will be replaced with sandstone filled gabions, and in order to soften the appearance and dominance of this wall over the Judge Street frontage, it has been setback 1.5m within the site in order to allow planting to be provided in front.

 

To further soften the appearance of both the wall and building on those properties to the east, on lower ground, being 7 Judge Street and 30 Clyde Street, the applicant has proposed that the existing small Bottlebrush’s be replaced with an avenue of taller growing Coastal Banksia’s. 

 

Both initiatives are supported by Council, with conditions allowing the applicant to remove the existing small trees along Judge Street as part of the works, and rather than re-instating turf along this frontage, which may result in a poorly maintained verge again due to its slope, low growing native species shall be provided in this area.

 

There is a narrow garden bed along the edge of the public walkway that adjoins the northern site boundary, and contains three semi-mature Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia’s) of around 4-5 metres in height.

 

While not significant in anyway, they have been provided for the purpose of beautification, and are technically covered by the TPO due their location on public property.

 

The existing retaining wall/fence along the length of this frontage will also be replaced with a gabion wall, with the plans showing their location and the fact that they will be retained, with conditions relating to their protection during the course of both processes having been included in this report.

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

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

 

Parking provision

The proposal is for 2 x 1 bedroom units and 2 x 3 bedroom units with the resultant parking requirement being as follows:

 

2 x 1 bedroom    =      2 x 1 spaces              = 2 spaces

2 x 3 bedroom    =      2 x 1.5 spaces           = 3 spaces

Visitor Parking    =      4 x 0.25 spaces         = 1 space

 

Total required is 6 spaces and 7 spaces are proposed.

 

A Traffic Impact Report by Jamieson Foley dated 15/2/10 has been submitted which suggested “ …. that based on projected car ownership rates for the particular development ten spaces be supplied rather than the presently supplied seven off-street spaces.”

 

Development Engineering considers that as the applicant already proposes more off-street parking than required in Council’s DCP – Parking, requesting additional off-street parking as recommended by Jamison Foley although would be appreciated cannot be supported as the applicant has met Council’s requirements.

 

Service Authority Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Given that the proposed works will be in excess of $2 million the applicant will be required to meet all costs associated with replacing the overhead wires with underground cables in the vicinity of the development site.

 

An inspection of the site revealed that there is overhead powerlines which run adjacent to the northern rear boundary along the Council passageway over and across Judge Street to its eastern side. Consequently, the applicant will need to underground all electricity and telecommunication cables/wires that service the development site as well as those that cross the Judge Street carriageway from the power poles located in the Council passageway at the rear of the site. These cables are to be located underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority

 

7.2    Building Surveyor

The comments provided by Council’s Building Surveyor are extracted below:

 

BCA Building Classification

Class - 2 (Residential Units)

Class - 7a (Car park)

 

Background

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

 

Key Issues

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Noise:

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

 

Site Management:

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

 

Access for people with a disability:

Although access and facilities for people with disabilities is not required under the Building Code of Australia, wherever practicable the entrance to a multi unit housing development should aim to facilitate some degree of accessibility to the building. In this regard there is a lft poroposed from the basement carpark to all units.

 

8.      Master Planning Requirements

 

The subject site has a land area of only 499.5m2 and a master plan is not required.

 

9.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

9.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998

The Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) was gazetted on 15 January 2010. Clause 7 of the Consolidation LEP requires that a development application lodged but not finally determined prior to the appointed day will continue to be assessed and determined under the provisions of the RLEP 1998. The subject application was lodged on 22 December 2009 and is therefore subject to the savings provision. Furthermore, when determining an application to which Clause 7 applies, the consent authority must have regard to the provisions of the new plan as if it had been exhibited under the Act but had not been made.

 

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

 

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

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

21 Subdivision

Subdivision permissible with development consent

The proposal does not include Strata subdivision.

Not applicable

31 Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of site area (or 249.8m2)

66.9% (334.5m2)

Complies

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or basements not exceeding 50% of total provision

50% of required landscaped areas are provided on deep soil (167.3m2)

Complies

32 Floor space ratio

(1) Maximum 0.65:1 (or 324.7m2 GFA)

0.71:1 (356.5m2 GFA)

Does not comply, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

33 Building heights

(1) Maximum building height 9.5m

Maximum 9.5m

Complies

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

Maximum 9.5m (western elevation)

Does not comply, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

40 Excavation and filling of land

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

The proposal requires significant excavation to accommodate a semi-basement car park.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the application and raised no objections on engineering or safety grounds.

 

Specific conditions are recommended to ensure that suitable retaining walls and protection measures are implemented during works on the site.

 

The proposal is not considered to adversely impact on the drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to the recommended engineering and construction management conditions.

Complies, subject to conditions

 

9.2    Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 (Consolidation)

The proposed development is consistent with the general aims and zoning objectives prescribed under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

9.3    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 65 Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

SEPP No. 65 applies to the subject proposal and the application was referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) for comments. The Design Quality Principles prescribed in the above SEPP and the comments provided by the Panel are addressed as follows:

 

Principle 1 Context

DRP comments:

 

Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

A comprehensive urban analysis has been provided.

 

The site is on the corner of Milford and Judge Streets overlooking the Coogee basin and is within close proximity to Randwick’s main shopping centre. The area is well serviced with public facilities, open space and transport. 

 

The context is diverse but predominantly apartment buildings varying from 2 to 8 storeys and large houses. The applicant notes that “the proposal forms a transition between the predominant scales found in the vicinity and mediates the scale of the apartment building immediately to the east.”

 

The principal building alignment to Milford Street is consistent with generous garden setbacks of the neighbours. On the north boundary of the site there is a public walkway and to Judge Street to the east there is a large setback due to an existing covenant.


Comments:

At present, the locality is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments varying from single to three or more storeys in height. The proposal has a height and scale, which are compatible with the existing residential flat developments in the surrounding built environment, and do not detract form the prevailing character of the locality.

 

Principle 2 Scale

DRP comments:

 

The Scale of the Proposal

The existing house is to be demolished and the new building will have a smaller footprint. The proposed development has scale and proportion that is comparable and appropriate to some of the larger houses and small apartment buildings in the vicinity.

 

The Location Analysis provided by the Applicant shows that due to the extremely steep topography many of the surrounding buildings in the area, including houses, have a very prominent east elevation. Sandstone retaining walls and excavated face stone are common in the area and commonly serve as building platform plinths. The proposal successfully uses this reference for the enclosure of the car parking.

 

Comments:

The proposed building is considered to be of an adequate scale given the varying heights of existing buildings along Milford and Judge Streets, and is suitable to the corner location of the site. The facades of the building have incorporated appropriate modulations and contemporary design elements, which will reduce the visual bulk and scale of the structures as viewed from the public and private domain. 

 

Principle 3 Built form

DRP comments:

 

The Built Form of the Proposal

The built form has been placed on the site to generally conform to the setback controls. The proposed building pulls back from the Milford Street neighbour creating an improved northern aspect and views for that neighbour.

 

The base of the building is expressed as a gabion wall to be filled with stone from the site. It is built to the street alignment which is a common condition to the street however the 300 thick gabion wall will be more open allowing light and ventilation to enter the car park area. The Panel considers that this is a very good solution and, with the proposed landscaping, will be a positive addition to the streetscape.

 

The Panel considers that the proposed building is well mannered and proportioned however a small reduction to the height of the west projecting kitchen and bathroom roofs could be achieved.

 

Comments:

The revised drawings have reduced the ridge height of the projecting kitchen and bathroom areas on the western elevation by approximately 400mm.

 

The proposed built form has incorporated staggered wall planes, balconies, screening devices and a combination of surface finishes, which will appropriately articulate the building facades and create visual interest. The podium structures are enclosed by gabion walls, which will enable natural lighting and ventilation of the parking facility and provide a high quality presentation to the street, without resulting in adverse visual impacts.

 

Principle 4 Density

DRP comments:

 

The Proposed Density

The proposed density is considered appropriate as the bulk and scale of the building create no negative impacts. The new apartments have the potential for high amenity and the project adds variety to the area’s housing stock.

 

Comments:

The proposed housing density is justified by the site’s proximity to major activity nodes, including the Randwick town centre, Prince of Wales Hospital and the University of New South Wales campus, as well as public transport services along Avoca Street and Carrington Road. The proposal is considered to introduce a suitable amount of residential population to a locality, which is highly accessible to retail, commercial, community and public transport services.

 

Principle 5 Resource, energy and water efficiency

DRP comments:

 

Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

The proposal has the potential to have high environmental performance due to access to natural light and ventilation, good orientation and appropriate shading.

 

The Panel recommends a reduction in the amount of fixed glass to the east by adding some operable segments and the addition of a clerestory skylight to the dining area of the top floor apartment in order to capture winter sunlight.

 

Apartment 3 living room could benefit from a window beside the sliding door so that ventilation can be achieved without compromising security.

 

Comments:

·      The revised drawings have included external blinds over the east-facing living room windows for Apartments 3 and 4 to minimise heat intake.

 

·      A skylight has been added over the living areas of the top floor Apartment 4 to improve natural lighting.

 

·      The horizontal sash windows to the kitchen as well as the south-facing casement windows to the living areas of Apartments 3 and 4 are operable and will allow cross-ventilation.

 

·      Each dwelling unit is provided with generous window openings to maximise natural lighting and ventilation.

 

Principle 6 Landscape

DRP comments:

 

The Proposed Landscape

The proposal creates good landscape opportunities (exceeding the landscape and deep soil controls) and the landscape design is well considered. Garden apartments have private gardens on title and communal gardens occupy the ground level which is elevated above Milford and Judge Streets.


Consideration could be given to more screen planting along the west boundary, particularly to the northern portion of the site.

 

Comments:

The revised drawings have included additional screen planting adjacent to the western boundary to improve privacy protection for the neighbouring dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

The design scheme has reserved adequate deep soil planting areas along the front, rear and side common boundaries of the site. The development will provide a suitable landscape setting that softens the building structures on site and contributes to the amenity of the neighbours and the street.

 

Principle 7 Amenity

DRP comments:

 

The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

Privacy, views, orientation, internal planning arrangements and opportunities for cross ventilation and natural light have been well resolved and the proposal has the potential to deliver high quality living spaces and good neighbourhood built form relationships.  

 

The entry/laundry area could be increased in the northern garden apartment.

 

Comments:

·      The main entry to Apartment 2 on the ground floor level has been widened as per the DRP recommendation.

 

·      Each dwelling has direct access to a private balcony or terrace from the main living areas.

 

·      The proposed units provide operable windows on more than one elevation with a separation distance of less than 18m. The dwellings are considered to provide adequate natural cross-ventilation.

 

·      Each of the proposed units will receive direct sunlight for at least the morning periods throughout the year.

 

Principle 8 Safety and security

DRP comments:

 

The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

Satisfactory.

 

Comments:

The proposed balconies and windows will provide suitable casual surveillance to Milford and Judge Streets as well as the public footpath to the north of the site.

 

Principle 9 Social dimensions

DRP comments:

 

Social issues

The local area has high amenity and access to public transport, parks, shopping, work opportunities, education and health facilities therefore it is appropriate that a reasonable density is achieved for this site.

 


Comments:

The proposed dwelling mix has included both one-bedroom and three-bedroom units, which can cater for different household types and needs.

 

Principle 10 Aesthetics

DRP comments:

 

The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The current proposal is of good design.

Screening elements need detail development and the Applicant should submit large scale wall sections to fully describe the design intent.

 

Comments:

Satisfactory.

 

A further submission from 32 Milford Street was received on 5 July 2010. The submission has raised issues relating to the comments made by the Design Review Panel. The concerns of the submission are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The DRP has not undertaken an accurate site analysis in that the locality is dominated by medium sized Californian bungalows, and is not “predominantly apartment buildings varying from 2 to 8 storeys”. The information contained in the site analysis is misleading.

 

The DRP’s site analysis has not made reference to the local heritage items in Milford Street, and how they contribute to the character of the locality.

Council’s assessment officer has reviewed the development application and supporting drawings and documents, and has undertaken inspections of the subject site, neighbouring properties and the surrounding areas.

 

It is noted that the locality is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments varying from single to three or more storeys in height. There is a number of local heritage items (listed under RLEP 1998) in the western section of Milford Street. They are located over 95m from the subject site.

 

The assessment officer has carried out an independent assessment of the proposed development having regard to the submitted information, the relevant planning controls, the DRP comments, Council’s internal engineering referral comments, information collected during site inspections and the merits of the proposal.

 

The DRP is not an approval body and the comments provided are advisory in nature.

The setback to the proposed front balconies does not respect the streetscape pattern and will result in detrimental amenity impacts on 32 Milford Street.

The proposed front setback to the development is considered by the assessment officer to be satisfactory. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The DRP should have regard to the potential impacts of the external wall heights on the views, privacy and solar access of 32 Milford Street when undertaking their site analysis.

 

 

 

 

It is considered that the proposed external wall height is satisfactory and will not result in unreasonable impacts on the streetscape or the amenity of the surrounding properties. The details of the assessment are provided under the “SEPP 1” and “DCP” sections of this report.

 

The DRP is not an approval body and the comments provided are advisory in nature.

The DRP should have informed the owners of 32 Milford Street about the outcome of their assessment.

Council’s DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans does not stipulate public notification of the outcome of the DRP assessment.

 

However, a copy of the DRP comments is placed on the development application file and will be available for public inspection via a formal Access to Information Application.

The DRP comments have not addressed the proposal’s non-compliance with the Council’s wall height, FSR and setback controls, and how these breaches impact on the amenity of 32 Milford Street.

The proposal contains a number of departures from the numerical controls stated in the LEP and DCP. However, the height, scale, floor space and setbacks of the proposed residential flat building are considered to be satisfactory. The development will not result in unreasonable impacts on the amenity of 32 Milford Street. Refer to the “SEPP 1” and “DCP” sections of this report for details.

The proposed rear balconies will overlook the courtyard of 32 Milford Street.

The revised design scheme has incorporated screening devices in the rear balconies to minimise privacy impacts on the neighbours. Additionally, the landscape plan shows the provision of adequate planting to enhance screening and privacy protection.

The proposed rear setback will adversely impact on the privacy of 31 and 33 Pitt Street as well as the views from 28 Milford Street.

The proposed rear setback is not considered to result in detrimental privacy impacts on 31 and 33 Pitt Street, given the significant separation distance between the site and the abovementioned properties, as well as the proposed privacy screens attached to the rear balconies.

 

The proposed design is considered to have achieved suitable view sharing with the neighbouring properties. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The design revision to the proposal, including reduction in the height of the roof over the kitchen and bathroom areas, has not been notified to the surrounding residents.

At Council’s request, the applicant has submitted amended plans that include various design revision to the proposal, including reduction in roof height above the western kitchen and bathroom areas, deletion of the western blade wall of the front balconies, increased setback to the front balconies and other minor changes.

 

The revised proposal has not been re-notified as the changes will improve the amenity of the neighbouring properties.

The DRP has not considered the community objections to the proposal.

The submissions received have been considered and addressed by the assessment officer. Refer to the “Community Consultation” section of this report for details.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by BASIX Certificate numbered 285677M. The commitments listed on the BASIX Certificate will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

10.    Policy Controls

 

10.1  Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Multi Unit Housing

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

 

Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

A detailed site analysis has been submitted with the development application.

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

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

The subject site is generally rectangular in configuration and is located at the corner of Milford and Judge Streets. The allotment has frontage widths of 12.955m and 30.555m to Milford and Judge Streets respectively. Satisfactory. 

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

The proposed building is suitably articulated and addresses both street frontages.

Height

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

 

 

A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted for non-compliance with the external wall height standard stated in the LEP. The Objection has been assessed and is considered to be well founded. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

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

 

The building bulk is suitably distributed over an architectural form that creates visual interest in terms of articulation and façade treatment. The proposal is considered to have minimised streetscape and amenity impacts.

Building Setbacks P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

Front wall: 10.1m

Front balcony: 7.6m

 

The front setback of the adjoining properties on the northern side of Milford Street are as follows:

No. 32: 9.0m (survey plan)

No. 30: 7.65m (survey plan)

No. 28: approx. 4.6m (Council’s GIS)

No. 26: approx. 4.5m (Council’s GIS)

 

The existing dwelling on site is setback approximately 9.2m to 9.6m from the boundary. The proposal has increased the setback between the building front walls and the Milford Street alignment as compared to the existing dwelling on site.

 

It is noted that the front balconies will protrude forward of the front wall alignment of No. 32 Milford Street by approximately 0.4m to 2.4m (refer to drawing number dwg 3.1). Notwithstanding, the balconies are partially open and will not adversely accentuate the perceived visual bulk. The side elevations of the balconies do not incorporate any privacy screens, with the exception of balustrades, to maintain a sense of openness and minimise obstruction of sightlines and views from No. 32 Milford Street.

 

Given the corner location of the site, the configuration and siting of the building will appropriately address both street frontages and are considered to be satisfactory from an urban design perspective.

P2  Side boundary setbacks

Side setbacks to ensure:

§ Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

§ Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

§ Landscaping and private open space provided.

§ Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

S2  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 4 metres.

No part closer than 2.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

Eastern boundary

Building: 1.5m to 1.8m

Car park: 0m

 

The eastern boundary setback does not meet the preferred solution.

 

However, it should be noted that the site is a corner allotment with dual frontages to Milford and Judge Streets. The development provides a suitable architectural response to the corner location and appropriately addresses both frontages.

 

Due to the topography of the site, a podium containing car parking facilities will be constructed to provide a levelled platform for accommodating the flat building. The podium will be built up to the Judge Street boundary.

 

The proposal will utilise gabion walling comprising galvanised mesh filled with rocks and rubbles from site excavation to enclose the semi-basement car park. The submitted drawings have clearly demonstrated that the above wall treatment will provide a natural appearance to the street frontages.

 

Given that the building will be setback a minimum of 1.5m from the edge of the podium, the development will maintain a human scale to the footpaths and will not result in detrimental impacts on the visual quality and amenity of the public domain.

 

Therefore, the proposed eastern setback is considered to be satisfactory.

 

Western boundary

3.1m to 4m

The western boundary setback meets the preferred solution.

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

Ensure that:

§ Solar access and overshadowing are minimised.

§ Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

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

§ Building built across site.

S3  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 6 metres.

No part closer than 4.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

Balcony: 3.3m

Wall: 4.6m

 

The proposal does not meet the preferred solution.

 

The northern boundary of the site adjoins a 3.66m wide public walkway. The building separation between the subject development and the nearby properties at No. 31-33 Pitt Street will be effectively increased by this walkway.

 

The proposed rear facing balconies are attached to bedrooms, which are low intensity use areas within the dwellings. Privacy screens will also be installed to minimise direct overlooking.

 

In addition, the landscape plans show the planting of (from west to east) an olive tree (mature height 9m/spread 3.5m), a lemon tree (4m/3m) and a cheese tree (8m/6m). The above canopy trees will further enhance the privacy of the courtyard areas of No. 31-33 Pitt Street.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

P4  General

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

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

Satisfactory.

Density

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

 

The proposed density and FSR are considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

Fences

P1  Fences to be/have:       

§ consistent with streetscape;

§ Entrances highlighted; and

§ Planting used to soften and provide privacy.

 

S1 Solid front fences no higher than 1.2 metres. May increase to 1.8 metres when 50 % transparent.

 

 

The proposed fencing to be installed above the edge of the car parking podium has a height of approximately 1m and is approximately 50% transparent. Satisfactory.

Landscaping and Private Open Space

P1  Landscaped Areas

Areas are sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

S1 Minimum for landscaped area 2 metres.

Satisfactory.

P2 Areas around multi-unit buildings are communal open space and not divided up for allocation to individual units.

 

Communal gardens are provided along all four property boundaries of the site. Communal open space and clothes drying area are provided adjacent to the western side boundary. Satisfactory.

P3  Private Open Space

Provides privacy for its users, is readily accessible, and provides opportunities for outdoor recreation / living.

 

Satisfactory.

P4 Is located in front of the building only where setback and fence design sympathetic.

 

The private open space (in the form of terraces and balconies) of the southern apartments is located to the front of the building. However, adequate planting and privacy screens have been incorporated in the design to improve the living amenity.

P6  Flats and apartments

Each dwelling has direct access to an area of private open space.

S6 Minimum of 8 m2 and minimum dimension of 2 metres.

Satisfactory.

Privacy

P1  Visual Privacy

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

 

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

 

The western elevation of the building contains kitchen, toilet and bathroom windows and a semi-open stairwell.

 

Windows

The revised drawings propose the use of obscured glazing for the bathroom windows. The lower sash of the toilet windows will be constructed with obscured glazing.

 

The amended plans also show the use of obscured glazing for the operable sashes of the kitchen windows.

 

The above measures are considered to have minimised direct overlooking into the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

Stairwell

The proposed stairwell is setback 4m from the common boundary. It is also semi enclosed by full height tubular privacy screens. The landscape plan also shows the planting of a row of canopy trees adjacent to the rear courtyard of No. 32 Milford Street, which will reach up to 8m to 15m in height at maturity.

 

The above design measures will minimise direct and oblique overlooking into the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

The proposed rear facing balconies are attached to bedrooms, which are low intensity use areas within the dwellings. Privacy screens will also be installed to minimise direct overlooking.

 

In addition, the landscape plans show the planting of (from west to east) an olive tree (mature height 9m/spread 3.5m), a lemon tree (4m/3m) and a cheese tree (8m/6m). The above canopy trees will further enhance the privacy of the courtyard areas of No. 31-33 Pitt Street.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

P3  Acoustic Privacy

Building layout and design minimises noise transmission of noise. Quiet areas separate noise-generating activities.

 

The primary living room windows are oriented away from the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street. Only kitchen and toilet windows are provided on the western elevation.

 

Although the stairwell and lift lobby are accommodated in the western elevation, the building contains only 4 dwellings and will not generate excessive pedestrian traffic. It should be noted that the ground floor level of the development is at least 1m below the side walk level of No. 32 Milford Street. Furthermore, screen planting will be provided along the western boundary of the site.

 

The principal private open space (living room balconies and terraces) of the development is oriented towards the public domain and is not located immediately adjacent to the adjoining dwelling.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered to have minimised noise impacts on the neighbours and is satisfactory in this regard.

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

A standard condition is recommended to require compliance with the Building Code of Australia.

View Sharing

P1 Design and location of buildings considers surroundings for assessing impact on views.

 

Refer to discussions below.

P2 Development minimises effects on views and shows how view loss is minimised.

 

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

Design, orientation, siting and landscaping minimises loss of solar access.

 

Refer to comments below.

P1.1  Solar access to existing solar collectors maintained between 9am and 3pm.

 

The northern roof pane of the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street will receive more than 3 hours of direct sunlight on the winter solstice.

P1.2 Living areas of neighbours’ dwellings receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

No. 32 Milford Street

The principal living room windows of No. 32 Milford Street are oriented to the north and will not be impacted by the proposal. The shadow diagrams provided by the applicant have been checked and demonstrate that the existing east-facing lounge window will not be impacted at 9am on the winter solstice.

No. 7 Judge Street

There will be no shadow impacts on No. 7 Judge Street on the winter solstice.

No. 30 Clyde Street

There will be minimal shadow impacts on the western façade of No. 30 Clyde Street at 3pm on the winter solstice.

The proposal will comply with the DCP performance requirement.

P1.3 Neighbour’s principal private outdoor open space receives 3 hours of sunlight over at least 50% of its area throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

The rear private open space and swimming pool areas of No. 32 Milford Street will not be impacted by the proposal.

 

The development will not overshadow the principal private open space of the surrounding properties for more than 3 hours on the winter solstice.

 

Satisfactory.

P4  Building Layout, Design and Construction

Protect from prevailing strong winds and adverse weather.

§ Living areas are orientated to the north.

§ Larger windows are located on the north.

S4 75% of dwellings achieve 3.5star Nat HERS rating or equivalent.

No dwelling achieves less than 3 stars. The Anthers rating for each dwelling (on a typical unit basis) is provided with the application.

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

P5 Buildings have roofs with pitch suitable for solar collectors.

S5  Adequate area of roof between 45 degrees east and 45 degrees west or north, and a slope between 15 and 55 degrees to the horizontal for installation of solar collectors.

The proposed roof design will not preclude the installation of solar collectors in the future.

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

The main entry to the building is not directly visible from the street. However, there is a well defined pathway connecting the public footpath to the lift lobby.

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

The development scheme proposes the use of gabion walls to enclose the semi-basement car park. The design will achieve a satisfactory streetscape outcome. Refer to the “SEPP 1” and “SEPP 65” sections of this report for details.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

Perforated mesh garage door is proposed. Satisfactory. 

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

To be required by condition.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

To be required by condition.

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

To be required by condition.

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

To be required by condition.

Parking

Required On-site Parking

1 bedroom dwelling

1 space per  dwelling

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

3 or more bedroom   

1.5 spaces per dwelling

Visitor parking is 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

The proposed car parking facilities satisfy the requirements of the Parking DCP. Refer to the “Parking DCP” section of this report for details.

P1 Garages and parking structures do not dominate the street frontage.

 

The development scheme proposes the use of gabion walls to enclose the semi-basement car park. The design will achieve a satisfactory streetscape outcome. Refer to the “SEPP 1” and “SEPP 65” sections of this report for details.

P2 Parking spaces for people with a disability provided as required (refer to dwelling number requirements in P1 and P2 Barrier Free Access.

 

Not applicable.

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

To be required by condition.

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

S2 Vehicles enter with a single turn and leave in no more than 2 turns.

Satisfactory.

P3 Driveways and access roads avoid a ‘gun barrel’ effect.

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Satisfactory.

P4 Space between boundaries and driveways, access ways and parking spaces enables landscaping and planting.

S4 Driveways have a minimum width of 3 metres and is at least 1 metre from any side or rear fence.

Satisfactory in terms of safety and manoeuvring efficiency.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

Satisfactory.

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

S6  Driveway gradients do not exceed 1 in 6 or 1 in 5 for ramps over 20m.

Satisfactory subject to condition.

Storage

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

S1 10m2 of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1m. At least 50% of storage space is within dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area. Storage facilities may be in basement areas, or attached to garages.

The proposal has included adequate storage units for each dwelling in the semi-basement car park. 

Barrier-Free Access

P1 Design must provide access for people with special access needs as required (foyer parking open space).

S1 Publicly accessible areas comply with the Building Code of Australia for access and mobility.

A standard condition is recommended to address this matter.

P2  Dwelling requirements:

  0 – 14 dwellings    0

15 – 29 dwellings    1

30 – 44 dwellings    2

45 – 60 dwellings    3 so on…

The requirements of AS1428.1 and AS 4299 are to be considered.

 

Not applicable.

P3 Dwellings for people with a disability have corresponding parking space.

 

Not applicable.

P4 Passenger lifts provide access for people with a disability to common and parking areas.

 

A passenger lift is provided in the development, which can provide access for people with disabilities to the common and car parking areas.

Utilities/Site Facilities

P1 Mailboxes provided in accordance with Australia Post.

 

To be required by condition.

P2 Provisions for a single common TV and radio reception device.

 

To be required by condition.

P3 Electrical reticulation underground and mater boxes placed in positions acceptable to Energy Australia.

 

To be required by condition.

P4 Reticulated gas to a meter for each dwelling and service points for cooking and heating in units.

 

To be required by condition.

P5 Water and sewerage provided in accordance with requirements of Sydney Water.

 

To be required by condition.

P6 Telephone lines provided in accordance with the service provider.

 

To be required by condition.

P7 Internal laundry to each dwelling, communal clothes drying made available and screened from the street.

 

Satisfactory.

Waste Minimisation and Management

P1 Waste collection and separation facilities for each dwelling.

S1 Each kitchen has a waste cupboard for separation of recycling materials, with adequate storage for one day’s waste.

Satisfactory.

P2 Waste storage to be provided in a centralised position that has easy access for moving bins to the street for collection.

 

Satisfactory.

P3 The location and design of waste facilities does not visually detract from the development or the streetscape.

S3 Waste facilities not to be located between the front building alignment and the road.

The proposed waste storage areas are contained within the semi-basement car park.

 

View sharing

The proposed development is considered to result in varying degree of impacts on the views currently available to the adjoining and nearby properties at Nos. 26 to 30 Milford Street.

 

At Council’s request, the applicant has installed height poles at each critical corners of the proposed building to depict the overall height and form of the development, with a view to providing an accurate basis for view loss analysis. Council’s assessment officer as well as the architect undertook inspections and photographic recording of the neighbouring properties at Nos. 28, 30 and 32 Milford Street on 22 April 2010. The height poles were dismantled on the following day as the roof tiles have been temporarily removed to facilitate their installation. Following the inspections, the architect submitted photomontage images and analyses demonstrating the anticipated impacts on each of the above properties.

 

On 7 May 2010, the owner of No. 26 Milford Street lodged a submission with Council raising issues of view loss impacts, after the height poles had already been dismantled. Notwithstanding, the assessment officer has undertaken an inspection of this property and the potential view loss impacts are analysed below.

 

The photomontages prepared by the architect have been extracted below to demonstrate the anticipated impacts from the development. Please note that:

 

·      Red hatchings: represent the alignment of the proposed external walls

·      Orange hatchings: represent the alignment of the proposed balconies attached to the street and rear façades of the building

 

The following paragraphs provide a four-step analysis of view loss established in the NSW Land and Environment Court case Tenacity v Warringah Council (2004):

 

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

 

The existing views currently available to the neighbouring properties in question are described below:

 

No. 26 Milford Street

Current views:

Views from the east-facing windows attached to the upper floor lounge room area. They consist of panoramic views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley. The views are obtained from both a sitting and standing position.

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the proposed building height and front setback, it is anticipated that no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views, will result.

Current views:

Views from the front balcony on the upper floor level looking south-east. They consist of panoramic views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley. The views are obtained from both a sitting and standing position.  

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the proposed building height and front setback, it is anticipated that no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views, will result.

Current views:

Views from the east-facing bedroom window on the upper floor level. They consist of panoramic views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley, which are obtained with a person sitting or standing close to the window panes, as the window mullions and sashes contribute substantially to view restrictions.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that a minor portion of the distant buildings and vegetation will be obscured following the development. However, none of the significant elements, such as water views, will be affected.

Current views:

Views from the east-facing sunroom window in the rear section of the upper floor level. They include oblique views of the sky-water interface and the northern part of Coogee Valley.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that the proposed building will become visible from this window. However, none of the significant elements of the views, including the sky-water interface, will be affected.

Current views:

Views from the rooftop terrace above the front garage looking east. They consist of broken sky-water interface and distant buildings punctuated by existing vegetation in the locality.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that the proposed building will not affect any part of the sky-water interface currently obtainable from the rooftop terrace. 

 


 

No. 28 Milford Street

Location plan

Current views:

The existing views currently obtained from the east-facing lounge room window (Window 1 as indicated in the location plan above) primarily consist of distant vegetation and buildings and the skyline. The views are obtained at both a standing and sitting position.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that up to half of the district views will be obscured. The rear section of the proposed building will be visible from this window.

 

Current views:

The existing views currently obtained from the east-facing window attached to the rear living room (Window 2 as indicated in the location plan above) consist of a small portion of the filtered, distant sky-water interface broken by existing buildings in the Coogee Bay area, as well as district views of buildings and vegetation. The limited water views are obtained generally at a standing position.

Anticipated impacts:

The sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development.

Current views:

The existing views currently obtained from the east-facing window attached to the rear living room (Window 3 as indicated in the location plan above) consist of a small portion of the filtered, distant sky-water interface broken by existing buildings in the Coogee Bay area, as well as district views of buildings and vegetation. The limited water views are obtained generally at a standing position.

Anticipated impacts:

The sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development.

 

No. 30 Milford Street

Location plan

Overall view of the windows within the bedroom

Close-up view obtained from the windows

Current views:

The east-facing windows attached to the first floor master bedroom currently enjoy horizon views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley. The views are obtained at both a standing and sitting position.

 

 

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the photomontages and height poles, it is anticipated that a small portion of water views will be obscured following the development. However the majority of the sky-water interface will be retained.

 

No. 32 Milford Street

Location plan – front verandah

 

 

Current views:

At present, oblique horizon views of the sky-water interface as well as district views of Coogee Valley are obtained from the front verandah looking towards the south-east. The views are obtained generally at a standing position, and to a lesser extent, at a sitting position, depending on the height of the person.

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the photomontages and height poles, it is anticipated that approximately 40% of the horizon views will be obscured following the development.

Location plan – study room

Note: the red hatchings represent alignment of the external walls; the orange hatchings represent alignment of the front balconies; the white arrow denotes the key water views currently obtainable

Current views:

The views currently obtained with a person standing at the side door of the study room include:

·      Filtered water views punctuated by existing vegetation in the locality, obtained with a person standing and facing east.

·      Partial sky-water interface views punctuated by existing vegetation on the subject site and the verandah columns, obliquely obtained with a person standing and facing south-east.

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the photomontages and height poles, it is anticipated that the majority of the filtered water views to the east will be obscured. However, the broken sky-water interface views towards the south-east will remain intact.

Location plan – secondary bedroom

 

Note: the red hatchings represent alignment of the external walls; the orange hatchings represent alignment of the front balconies; the black arrows denote the key water and district views currently obtainable

Current views:

The existing views obtained from a person standing at the doorway to the secondary bedroom consist of:

·      Filtered water views punctuated by existing vegetation in the locality towards the east.

·      Oblique sky-water interface views punctuated by the verandah columns towards the south-east.

·      Oblique district views of Coogee Valley towards the south-east.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that the existing filtered water views towards the east will be obscured following the development. However, the oblique, broken sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley will remain intact.

 

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

 

No. 26 Milford Street

First floor lounge room windows

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

First floor front balcony

Views obtained primarily across the side boundary and to a minor extent from the front boundary;

Standing and sitting views

First floor bedroom windows

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

First floor rear sunroom windows

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Primarily standing views

Roof top terrace above front garage

Views obtained primarily across the side boundary and to a minor extent from the front boundary;

Standing and sitting views

No. 28 Milford Street

Lounge room window (Window 1)

District views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

Rear living room window (Window 2)

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing views

Rear living room window (Window 3)

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing views

No. 30 Milford Street

Upper floor master bedroom window

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

No. 32 Milford Street

Front verandah

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Primarily standing views (and to a lesser extent sitting views depending on the height of the person)

Study room

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing views

Secondary bedroom

Views obtained across the side and front boundaries;

Standing views

 

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

 

Location

Extent of impact

No. 26 Milford Street

First floor lounge room windows

It is anticipated that there will be no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

First floor front balcony

It is anticipated that no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views, will result. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

First floor bedroom windows

It is anticipated that a minor portion of the distant buildings and vegetation will be obscured following the development. However, none of the significant elements, such as water views, will be affected. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

First floor rear sunroom windows

It is anticipated that the proposed building will become visible from the windows. However, none of the significant elements of the views, including the sky-water interface, will be affected. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

Roof top terrace above front garage

It is anticipated that the proposed building will not affect any part of the sky-water interface currently obtainable from the rooftop terrace. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

No. 28 Milford Street

Lounge room window (Window 1)

It is anticipated that up to half of the district views will be obscured. Notwithstanding, the views in question are not highly scenic or iconic in nature and consequently the degree of impact is considered to be minor.

Rear living room window (Window 2)

The existing sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development. The sky-water views in question are highly restrictive in nature given its limited horizontal span and water contents. The views are also broken by distant buildings. As a result, the degree of the impact is considered to be moderate in nature.

 

Rear living room window (Window 3)

The existing sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development. The sky-water views in question are highly restrictive in nature given its limited horizontal span and water contents. The views are also broken by distant buildings. As a result, the degree of the impact is considered to be moderate.

No. 30 Milford Street

Upper floor master bedroom window

It is anticipated that a small portion of water views will be obscured following the development. However, the vast majority of the horizon and water views will remain intact. The degree of the impact is therefore considered to be minor.

 

No. 32 Milford Street

Front verandah

It is anticipated that approximately 40% of the horizon views will be obscured following the development. The remaining sky-water interface as well as the distant Coogee Valley will remain clearly visible. The degree of the impact is considered to be moderate.

 

Study room

It is anticipated that the majority of the filtered water views to the east will be obscured. However, the broken sky-water interface views towards the south-east will remain intact. The degree of the impact is considered to be minor.

 

Secondary bedroom

It is anticipated that the existing filtered water views towards the east will be obscured following the development. However, the oblique, broken sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley will remain intact. The degree of the impact is considered to be minor.

 

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

 

·      Based on the above analysis, it is anticipated that the proposed development will not result in any material impact on the scenic views currently obtained from No. 26 Milford Street, which is located on the uphill side and separated from the subject site by three residential allotments.

 

·      The proposed development will completely obscure the distant water views currently obtained from the east-facing living room windows in the rear section of the dwelling at No. 28 Milford Street.

 

It is considered unreasonable to refuse the development application on the grounds of view loss from the aforementioned windows, where the views in question are highly limited in horizontal span and are significantly restricted by distant buildings and vegetation. The water contents are limited in extent and are not considered to be iconic in nature as defined in the planning principle.

 

Moreover, the views are obtained across the side boundaries of three downhill properties, being Nos. 30, 32 and 34 Milford Street, which have only been made possible by the extension of the dwelling towards the northern boundary with minimal rear setback untypical of the development pattern in the locality.

 

·      The proposal will also have a minor impact on the water views currently available to the upper floor master bedroom of the dwelling at No. 30 Milford Street.

 

The existing views are obtained across the side boundaries of both Nos. 32 and 34 Milford Street, which by virtue of the planning principle, are much more difficult to retain. Additionally, the views are obtained from the bedroom area, which is a less intensely used space within the dwelling and should be given less weight as compared to those that are captured from the principal living rooms. Regardless of the above, the vast majority of the sky-water interface and general water views will remain unaffected by the proposal.

 

·      At present, there are a number of areas within the dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street that enjoy scenic water views.

 

The most significant impact relates to the loss of approximately 40% of the sky-water interface views currently captured from the front verandah of the dwelling. The remaining water and district views will remain intact. It should be noted that part of the views anticipated to be lost are filtered by existing foliage within the side walk areas of Nos. 32 and 34 Milford Street. They are obtained over the front hipped roof of the existing dwelling house on the subject site.

 

The retention of the remaining water and district views is made possible by the proposed 3.1m to 4.0m western side setback as well as the staggered front wall arrangement proposed for the flat building. The architect has submitted a photomontage model based on a hypothetical development for a first floor addition to the existing dwelling house with a standard side setback of 900mm. The analysis clearly demonstrates that the existing water and horizon views from the verandah of No. 32 will be substantially obscured by a typical first floor addition.

 

Standing view from the front verandah of No. 32 Milford Street looking south-east across the side boundary, based on a hypothetical first floor addition to the existing dwelling house on the subject site

 

The study room and secondary bedroom in the front section of the dwelling presently enjoy oblique sky-water interface views and filtered water views through the gaps between the verandah columns when a person is deliberately standing close to the side doors to the above areas. The submitted photomontages have demonstrated that the development will retain the identified sky-water interface views despite their obliqueness and restricted nature.

 

The development scheme has reserved additional landscaped areas beyond the minimum requirements stipulated in the LEP. The substantial western side setback also assists in opening up view corridors from the front verandah of No. 32 Milford Street. The revised drawings show that the side elevations of the proposed front balconies will remain open, with the exception of the balustrades, which will enhance a sense of openness to the neighbour. It is considered that the proposed architectural design is skilful and contributes to the minimisation of view loss impact.

 

The landscape plans show the planting of an Albizia julibrissin ‘Rosea’ (silk tree) in the front setback area of the subject site. This feature tree is capable of reaching a mature height and spread of 5m and 4m respectively. This tree has the potential to obstruct views from the front verandah of No. 32 Milford Street and a special condition is recommended to require its deletion from the landscape plan.

 

·      It is acknowledged that the proposed development contains deviations from the FSR and external wall height standards contained in the LEP. Notwithstanding, as is discussed in the body of this report, the proposal has adopted a form and scale that are suitable to the corner location of the site. The development will not constitute a dominant or intrusive element in the area given the existing diversity of housing form, nor will it result in unreasonable overshadowing or privacy impacts. Overall, the proposed development is considered to be reasonable and satisfies the broad performance requirements of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP. The proposed works represent a reasonable attempt to realise the permissible development potential of the land having regard to its 2B zoning.

 

Therefore, the intrusion of the views is justified when considering the architectural merits and view retention measures of the proposal. It is considered that the potential view loss is reasonable in this instance.

 

10.2  Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Parking

The DCP specifies the following car parking rates for multi-unit housing:

 

 

Rate

Required

Proposed

Resident

1 space per 1-bedroom unit

1.5 spaces per 3-bedroom unit

5

6

Visitor

1 space per 4 dwellings or part thereof

1

1

Bicycle

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

2

To be required by condition

Car wash bay

1 space per 12 dwellings

Nil

Nil

Total car parking

 

6

7

 

The proposed development complies with the parking rates specified in the DCP. A special condition is recommended to ensure suitable bicycle parking facilities are provided on the site.

 

10.3  Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200000

$1,478,503

 

1.0%

$14,785.03

 

11.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of Randwick LEP 2008 (Consolidation).

 

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

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

 

Appropriate conditions are recommended to address the relevant fire safety provisions of the Regulation. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Relationship to City Plan

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

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

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development complies with the objectives and performance requirements of relevant Local and State planning controls.

 

The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to the non-compliance with the floor space ratio and external wall height standards are considered to be well founded. The development scheme will not result in unreasonable impacts on the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, view sharing, solar access and privacy.

 

The design will be compatible with the streetscape character of Milford and Judge Streets. The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes proposed are considered to be satisfactory.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 32(1) and 33(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio and external wall 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 adjoining premises and 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. 964/2009 for demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a part 3 and part 4-storey residential flat building consisting of 2 x 1-bedroom units and 2 x 3-bedroom units, car parking for 7 vehicles and associated landscape works, at No. 34 Milford Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

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

 

Plan Number / Title

Dated

Received

Prepared By

Dwg 0.1 (DA)

10.12.09

10 May 2010

Hill Thalis Architecture + Urban Projects Pty. Ltd.

Dwg 1 (DA)

10.12.09

10 May 2010

Dwg 2 (A2)

31.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.1 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.2 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.3 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 4 (A2)

30.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 4.2 (A1)

25.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 5 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 6 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 7 (A2)

31.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 8.1 (A1)

25.03.10

10 May 2010

Detail Study – Privacy Screens (Issue A)

23 March 2010

10 May 2010

Detail Study – Permeable Gabion Walls (Issue A)

23 March 2010

10 May 2010

 

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:

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AMENTITY:

 

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

 

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

 

3.       A minimum of two (2) bicycle parking spaces are to be provided within the proposed development. The design and construction of the bicycle parking facilities are to be compliant with Australian Standard 2890.3: Bicycle Parking Facilities. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate application.

 

4.       The proposed Albizia julibrissin “Rosea” tree (Silk Tree) located adjacent to the south-western corner of the building shall be deleted, in order to minimise obstruction of distant views from the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street. Details demonstrating compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

5.       The reflectivity index of glass used in the external facades of the development must not exceed 20 per cent. Details of compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

6.       Suitable security lighting is to be installed in the main pedestrian entry path adjacent to the western boundary of the site. The above lighting devices shall be low level lighting where the light source is positioned no higher than 1200mm above the finished ground level, and is to be directed towards the ground. Details are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

7.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4282-1997: Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting, 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.

 

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

         

          In this regard, 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.

 

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

 

10.     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.

 

11.     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.

 

12.     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:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

14.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $1,478,503, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $14,785.03.

 

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 condition is applied to provide adequate provisions for parking to the development:

 

15.     Public access to the visitor’s car parking space is to be maintained at all times and an intercom system is to be provided adjacent to the vehicular entrance to the car park, together with appropriate signage providing instructions for use. The visitor parking space is to be clearly signposted.

 

The following condition is applied to promote occupant safety:

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

19.     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:

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     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.

 

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.

 

24.     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.

 

25.     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”.

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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.     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.

 

31.     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.

 

32.     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:

 

33.     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.

 

34.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

36.     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 the adjoining premises at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

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

 

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

 

38.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to 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:

 

39.     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.

 

40.     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).

 

41.     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.

 

42.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

g)     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.

 

h)     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.

 

i)      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.

 

45.     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.

 

46.     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.

 

47.     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.

 

48.     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.

 

49.     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.

 

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 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.

 

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 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.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

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

 

53.     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:

 

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

 

a)   Construct a full width heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

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

 

c)   Reconstruct and regrade the Council concrete footpath along the full Judge Street site frontage to meet the new Council driveway levels.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

55.     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.

 

56.     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.

 

57.     A Works Zone is to be provided in either Milford Street or Judge Street 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.

 

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

 

58.     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 be as follows:

 

Milford Street Frontage - match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

Judge Street Frontage – Driveway Entrance shall be RL 39.65 AHD

 

Note: This will require the reconstruction of the council footpath along the Judge St frontage.

 

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

 

60.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer has been issued at a prescribed fee of $1,344.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

61.     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.

 

62.     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.

 

63.     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.

 

64.     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.

 

65.     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.

 

66.     The applicant shall meet the full cost for the overhead power lines/cables that run from the Power Poles in the Council passageway adjacent to the northern rear boundary of the development to the Power Pole on the eastern side of Judge Street (across the Judge St carriageway) to be relocated underground. These power lines/cables are to be located underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate.

 

Note: It is recommended that the applicant liaise with the relevant service utility authority in regards to the indicative costings and scope of works prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

67.     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:

 

68.     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.

 

69.     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.

 

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

 

·      The kerb and gutter or drainage system at either site frontage of the property; OR

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

72.     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.

 

73.     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.

 

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

 

75.     Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas to be dedicated as common property.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

77.     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.

 

78.     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).

 

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

 

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

 

81.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

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

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

c.  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.

 

84.     One covered car washing bay shall be provided for this development.

 

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

 

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

 

c)       The car washing bay may be located within the visitor parking spaces provided they are signposted with ‘Exclusive Carwash Bay Use Sat 2:00pm – 5:00pm and Sunday 10:00am – 2:00pm, Visitor parking at other times’

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

b) Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

c) Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

f) Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

86.     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.

 

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

 

Notes:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

89.     If any temporary dewatering of the site is required to facilitate construction of any part of the basement car park and/or detention tank a licence under Part V of the Water Act 1912 will be required. The licence must be obtained from the NSW Department of Water and Energy prior to installation of the works. A copy of the license agreement must be forwarded to Council prior to any dewatering being undertaken.

 

90.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to any proposed discharge of groundwater into Council’s drainage system external to the site, in accordance with the requirements of Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

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

 

91.     The garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a minimum of 4 x 240 litre bins (2 garbage bins & 2 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.

 

92.     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.

 

93.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

94.     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 additional residential development.

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

95.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan and Plant Schedule + Images by Jane Irwin Landscape Architecture, drawings L01 & L02, issue C, dated 05.05.10; however, the following changes must be made on an amened plan, which is to be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the commencement of any site works:

 

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

 

b.     The ‘mixed shrub planting’ proposed between the sandstone gabion wall and eastern site boundary, along the length of the Judge Street frontage, must select species that will not encroach onto the pedestrian footpath and cause an obstruction or require regular maintenance or trimming;

 

c.     Clarification on exactly what species are to be planted where, including quantity, spacing, maintenance practices such as hedging or similar;

 

d.     All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape plans;

 

e.     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;

 

f.      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 sites rainwater tanks, with back-up connection to the mains supply, in accordance with all current Sydney Water requirements;

 

g.     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.

 

96.     The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved documentation, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate and shall be maintained in accordance with those plans.

 

Judge Street Verge

 

97.     Rather than re-turfing the sloping Judge Street verge, Council requires that low growing, low maintenance native species be provided in this area in order to soften the appearance of the proposed gabion walls and proposed building, and to generally improve and enhance presentation of the development to the public domain/streetscape.

 

98.     The applicant’s Landscape Architect will need to prepare a separate planting plan for this area showing the following:

 

·      Selection of either Lomanda ‘Tanika’ or ‘Katrinus’; or; Dianella ‘Little Jess’ or ‘Breeze’, either singularly or in an arrangement that is acceptable to Council, and may also incorporate native ground covers;

 

·      A planting rate of 9-Viro tubes or 6 x 140mm pots per square metre;

 

·      For line of sight reasons, all species within a distance of 1.5 metres from the vehicle crossing must be those that will not exceed 600mm in height at maturity;

 

·      Minor re-grading of this area will need to be performed in order to provide a smooth transition between the footpath level and back of kerb;

 

·      A total of four 25 litre/300mm (pot size at the time of planting) Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s), spaced evenly along this frontage, comprising two each to the south and north of the vehicle crossing, installed a distance of 3.5 metres from the edge of the crossing, which are also to be staked and tied.

 

      This Planting Plan must be submitted to, and be approved by, Council’s Director of City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to the Certifying Authority issuing a Construction Certificate for the development, with all costs associated with this work to be borne wholly by the applicant.

 

A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $2,000.00 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 completion of this external landscape works.

 

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 this area 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.

 

Removal of Council’s Street Trees

 

99.     Approval is granted for the applicant to remove and dispose of (at their own cost) the row of small trees along the Judge Street verge, being the two Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) to the south of the existing vehicle crossing, and then to its north, the Hibiscus species (Hibiscus), another Weeping Bottlebrush and a Tristaniopsis laurina (Watergum), and must satisfy themselves as to the location of all site services prior to the commencement of any works on public property.

 

Removal of trees within site

 

100.    No objections are raised to removing any existing vegetation within the site where necessary as part of the proposed works, as all were observed to be insignificant, and too small to be covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO), but is subject to full implementation of the approved landscape works both within the site and externally.

 

Pruning of neighbouring trees

 

101.    Permission is granted for the selective and minimal pruning of only those lower order branches in the upper canopy, and on the eastern aspects, of the two Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s), which are located on the adjoining property to the west, 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary, only where they need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the trees or conflict with scaffolding or similar during the course of works.

 

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

 

103.    All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level III in Arboriculture, and who is also a registered member of a nationally recognised organisation/association, with all pruning to be performed to Australian Standard AS 4373-1996 'Pruning of Amenity Trees.’

 

Protection of neighbouring trees

 

104.    In order to ensure retention of the two Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) located beyond the western site boundary, within the adjoining property at 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the construction certificate application must continue to show their retention, with the position and diameter of both their trunks and canopies and their relationship to any proposed works to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       In order to maintain the integrity of the soil profile as well as the on-going stability of these two trees, temporary shoring (to the satisfaction of the PCA) must be provided along the western boundary, extending for a distance of 2 metres to the north and south of both their trunks, for the time between when the existing common boundary wall/fence is demolished and the new wall is constructed.

 

c.       Any roots encountered during this process that need to be cut must be done so by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

Protection of public trees

 

105.    The applicant must also ensure retention of the three Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia’s) located in the pedestrian walkway, within a narrow garden bed, adjacent the northern site boundary in good health as part of this application, with 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 around their bases, with any roots that need to be cut for the proposed sandstone gabion wall to be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

·        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 MATTERS:

 

1.  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.

 

2.  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.

 

3. 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

20 July 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D45/10

 

 

Subject:                  7/32 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/14/2010

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Enclosure of existing balcony to unit 7

 

Ward:                      East Ward

 

Applicant:                J Pini

                

Owner:                         Owners Corporation SP 4921

 

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

The proposal details the enclosure of the existing balcony to Unit 7 within the existing residential flat building. The application is referred to the Planning Committee as it includes a SEPP 1 Objection to the maximum floor space ratio control in the Randwick LEP.

 

The proposed development for the enclosure of the balcony will detract from the overall appearance of the building, compromise the architectural integrity of the building and set a poor precedent for future enclosure of other balconies to the building.

 

The application is recommended for refusal.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal includes the enclosure of the existing balcony at unit 7 by the installation of aluminium sliding windows to the three open sides of the balcony. The enclosure of the balcony will provide for an additional 5m of additional floor area.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The locality is primarily residential in nature and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwelling and residential flat buildings.

 

The subject site is on the northern side of Coogee Bay Road and is an irregular shaped allotment with pedestrian access from Coogee Bay Road via a right of carriage way with vehicular access from Judge Lane at the rear of the site. Directly to the western side of the property is the existing Claremont College School Campus.

 

4.    Site History

 

Development consent was granted for the erection of the existing 5 storey residential flat building under DA/166/1968. The building was subsequently strata subdivided by the Strata Certificate SC/30/1970. Two Complying Development Certificates have also been granted for the removal of internal walls to dwellings 6 & 13, under CDC/3/2005 and CDC/9/2002, respectively.

 

A detailed perusal of Councils historical records has established that there are no other approvals for enclosures of balconies to this building.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

6.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

-    Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

-    Randwick Local Environmental Plan.

-    Building Code of Australia.

-    Development Control Plan- Multi Unit Housing Development.

 


(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

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

 

The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 32 FSR

Clause 32 of LEP 1998 states that the maximum floor space ratios for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within the 2B Zone is 0.65:1. The resultant floor space ratio of the building is 1.7:1 which exceeds the control and a SEPP 1Objection has been lodged and is discussed below.

 

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

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to Council.

 

(i)     Floor space ratio

Pursuant to Clause 32(1) of RLEP 1998, the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No. 2B is 0.65:1 or 546m2 gross floor area (GFA). The proposal has an FSR of 1.7:1 or 1429m2 GFA, and exceeds the development standard by 1.05:1 or 883m2. The proposal entails a variation to the standard by 260%.

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio (FSR)

Gross floor area (GFA)

Existing building

1.69.:1

1427m2

Proposed development inclusive of existing floor space

1.7:1

1429m2

Permissible FSR /  GFA

0.65:1

546m2

FSR / GFA in excess of LEP standard

1.05:1

833m2

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

“To 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 applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

·      The subject balcony is close to the building landing, is obscured from vision and is a security risk, and

 

·      The compromised security requires that windows and doors be kept closed at all times which affects ventilation in the building, and 

 

·      The open nature of the balcony does not allow for privacy on the balcony or the adjoining rooms, and

 

·      The enclosure of the balcony will reduce unreasonable noise pollution from the adjoining school and the area in general, and

 

·      The proposed development will not have any visual impact upon the public domain as it is at the rear of the building.

 

·      The proposal looks upon other apartments that have enclosed balconies.

 

·      The enclosure with glass windows will be more aesthetically pleasing as the current balcony is abandoned space.

 

It is considered that the proposal is unsatisfactory and compliance with the aforementioned development standards is reasonable and necessary based on the following reasons:

 

·      The proposal would involve the development of an older residential flat building in a fashion contrary to the current design guidelines and negative impact on streetscape and loss of amenity to occupants of the building would occur; and

 

·      The proposal would result in the loss of the only private outdoor living space for the unit; and.

 

·      The proposal would adversely impact the physical appearance of the building with regard to the perceived bulk and scale of the building; and

 

·      The existing building currently exceeds Council’s standard for floor space ratio. Should consent be granted for the application, the development would be visually intrusive in the existing setting and would detrimentally affect the visual amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties; and

 

·      The argument that the impact of the proposed development is lessened by its location to the rear of the property and that it enjoys precedent given the enclosure of the balcony beneath is not supported as the location of the development to the rear of the property does not justify the proposed piecemeal enclosure of the balcony to the building. Furthermore, the enclosure of the balcony beneath the subject site was not approved by Council and should not be relied on as a reliable precedent, especially given the contemporary focus within Council’s planning policies on improving the appearance of residential flat buildings.

 

·      The argument that the building will be in keeping with the perceived bulk and scale of surrounding development is not supported due to the potential for the loss of articulation to the building and the subjugation of the architectural features by the enclosure of the balconies to the building in a piecemeal approach.

 

·      Approval of the proposed enclosure would set and undesirable precedent for the remaining units to the building and surrounding residential flat buildings in the area.

 

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 Objection has addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. However, the objection has not properly justified that strict compliance with the development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. As such, it is considered that the objection is not well founded and should not be supported.

 

Matter 2

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

 

The aims and objects of SEPP 1 set out in clause 3 are to provide “flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act”. The last mentioned objects in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are to encourage:

 

“(1) the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of Residential 2B Zone in that it is not in conflict with the existing multi-unit residential housing, which is consistent with the desired character of the locality.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

·      Comments:

The proposed development and variations from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standards in question is reasonable and necessary to maintain the underlying purposes of the standards.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standards is relevant to the subject development. As discussed above, the proposal does not satisfy the underlying purposes of the FSR standards.

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Each development application received by Council is assessed with regard to its merits. There has been no precedent established by Council’s assessment decisions, which in effect would abandon the development standards prescribed in the LEP.

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

6.1 Policy Controls

 

a.    Development Control Plan for Multi-Unit Housing 

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

 


Development Control Plan – Multi-unit Housing

Clause

Standard

Check

y/n

Building Height

 

P1

 

 

 

 

P2

Heights of walls, their location and orientation do not cause substantiated adverse impacts on the streetscape or adjoining properties, particularly in relation to privacy, solar access and building bulk.

 

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

No change is proposed from the existing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The proposal to provide windows to the balcony of the unit would have the effect of increasing the perceived bulk of the building. Although situated at the rear of the building and not visible from Coogee Bay Road, the proposal would form precedence for the progressive enclosure of balconies to the building in a piecemeal fashion.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No

Side and rear setbacks

Buildings (including balconies) maintain a minimum average setback (measured for the length of the building along that boundary) of 5

metres from any side boundary

 

No part of the building is closer than 3.5 metres from any side boundary.

 

Buildings (including balconies) maintain a minimum average setback (measured for the length of the building along that boundary) of 8 metres from the rear boundary

 

No part of the building is closer than 6 metres from the rear boundary.

No change is proposed from the existing side setbacks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No change is proposed from the existing side setbacks.

 

 

 

No change is proposed from the existing rear setback.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No change is proposed from the existing rear setback.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

Density

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

The proposal to provide windows to the balcony of the unit will affect the perceived bulk of the building in such a way that the building will appear less articulated and bulky as viewed from neighbouring properties and the rear lane. Whilst the enclosure of the balcony will increase the floor space available to the occupants, it would not contribute to the amenity of the area with regard to streetscape and would set an undesirable precedent for the character of residential flat buildings to the area.

No

Privacy

Where there is a horizontal Separation of less than 10 metres between windows, they should offset, angled or screened to reduce potential privacy impacts.

The existing balcony to the subject site currently overlooks the communal open space. The proposal to enclose the existing balcony will would not impose any additional loss of privacy to the neighbouring properties.

Yes

Private open space

P3

Private open space :

 

- Provides privacy for its users;

 

- is readily accessible from the main living areas of the dwelling so that it can become an extension of the dwelling;

- provides opportunities for outdoor recreation and living.

 

Note:

The piecemeal enclosure of balconies on buildings, in particular where a precedent on existing buildings does not exist, is strongly discouraged.

 

 

Enclosed balconies are included in the calculations of floor space.

 

Continuous balconies wrapped around a building and/or enclosed in a manner which significantly contributes to the apparent bulk of the building are not encouraged.

 

 

The enclosure of the balcony would result in the loss of private open space for the occupants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The historic unauthorised enclosure of other balconies to the building does not set a precedent for the proposed enclosure of the balcony.

 

 

The non-compliance of the  floor space ratio has been addressed previously in this report. Does not comply.

 

The proposal to enclose the balcony would contribute to the apparent bulk of the building as viewed from the rear lane and adjoining properties due to the loss of articulation to the building and increase to the perceived bulk and scale of the building.

 

 

No

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No

 

 

 

 

 

No

 

 

No

 

 

 

 

 

b.    Council Urban Design Policy – Design Ideas for Rejuvenating Residential Flat Buildings

 

The Design Policy – Design Ideas for Rejuvenating Residential Flat Buildings has the aim of promoting design excellence in the refurbishment of walk-up flat buildings. The table below assesses the proposal against the relevant objectives of the policy.

Standard

Check

y/n

 

Design principles for RFB development

- Internal amenity

 

 

 

- Streetscape appearance

 

 

The proposed balcony enclosure will improve the internal amenity of the occupants of the unit however will remove all private open space available to the unit.

 

The proposed balcony enclosure will compromise the built form of the residential flat building given the loss of articulation to the building and increase to the perceived bulk and scale of the building.  It would involve the development of an older residential flat building in a fashion contrary to the current design guidelines where negative impact on streetscape and loss of amenity to neighbouring properties would occur.

 

 

 

No

 

 

 

No

 

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

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. Maximise opportunities for residents to enjoy both active and passive open areas.

Achieve sustainable and high quality design for alterations and additions with particular recognition of areas that are under pressure and need a balanced approach such as beach suburbs. Manage the impact of new and existing development.

 

Comment: The proposal does not constitute excellent or improved urban design and would have the effect of minimising private open space to the individual dwelling. The proposal is therefore inconsistent with the objectives of the City Plan.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the relevant assessment criteria and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Multi Unit Housing, reduces the private open space available to the occupants of the unit to zero and has the potential to result in significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the character of the locality.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council not support the objection lodged under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Claus 32 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor Space Ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development is inconsistent with the objective of the clause and will adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, refuse consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No.DA/121/2009 for the enclosure of an existing balcony for Unit 7 at 32 Coogee Bay Road, Randwick for the following reasons:

 

1.   The additional floor area to the building resulting from the enclosure of the balcony will not comply with the maximum floor space ratio of 0.65:1, and purpose of Clause 32 of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

2.   The proposed enclosure of the existing balcony will add to the perceived bulk of the building and detract from the overall appearance of the building and compromise the existing architectural integrity as viewed in the local streetscape.

 

3.   The proposed balcony enclosure will result in a loss of private open space to the subject dwelling. 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil


Planning Committee

20 July 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D46/10

 

 

Subject:                  554 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

Folder No:                   DA/222/2009/A

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of the development consent granted by Council to the approved 4 storey mixed use development by amending openings, internal layout of units, basement layout, landscaping, balconies/courtyards, and dwelling mix.

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                SSRB Developments

Owner:                         Ms M J Smith & Ms I Borg

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This section 96 modification application is referred to the Planning Committee because the original development application was determined by Council.

 

The approved development, determined at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 20 October 2009 involves demolition of the existing detached dwelling on the site and construction of a four (4) storey mixed use development comprising of a ground level commercial tenancy, 16 residential units, 2 levels of parking for 23 vehicles and associated site works.

 

The proposed modifications include alterations to the approved development by amending openings, internal layout of units, basement layout, landscaping, balconies/courtyards, and dwelling mix.

 

The modification application was notified and advertised in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan – Public Notification and advertising from 7 April – 21 April 2010. At the conclusion of the notification and advertising period, two (2) petitions containing 151 signatures and 183 signatures, respectively, were received. The issues raise in these submissions have been addressed in section 5 of this report. 

 

The proposed modifications do not give rise to unreasonable additional adverse impacts to surrounding properties and there is no substantial change to the massing of the approved building. The proposal is considered to be substantially the same development as was originally approved and satisfies Section 96 of the Act.

 

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

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application is seeking to make modifications to the approved development which was granted development consent to demolish the existing detached dwelling on the site and construct of a four (4) storey mixed use development comprising of a ground level commercial tenancy, 16 residential units, 2 levels of parking for 23 vehicles and associated site works. The current Section 96 application proposes the following works:

 

Basement Level

·           Stair egress added at the south western corner to provide require egress under BCA with some car parking spaces width amended to 2.4m to allow path between spaces 18 & 19.

·           Lobby added adjacent to lift and entry point flipped to ensure provide improved pedestrian safety in that car park level.

·           North east fire stair layout amended with transition ramp added to achieve head height clearances.

·           Structural column added adjacent to the lift shaft at the request of the structural engineer.

·           Storeroom adjacent to the lift dedicated as “Clean up materials store” in accordance with councils directives.

 

Ground Floor

·           Provision of fire exit (as described above) to Harold Street on south western part of the site (approved 1200mm high planter is retained but reduced in width to accommodate stair) to satisfy BCA egress requirements.

·           Amend configuration and layout of Unit 1 to provide an accessible one bedroom accessible unit in lieu of the approved accessible bedsitter unit. The change will not result in an increase to the area of the approved unit.

·           The southern side cladding of the commercial unit has been replaced with masonry and high level sliding windows to create a more residential feel to the unit. Louvres have been added to the balcony of Unit 1 for privacy and security.

·           Brick work corners have been added to the commercial shop front to comply with BCA fire separation issue to the northern corner (southern corner has been mirrored to match)

·           Lobby entry has been amended on elevation to comply with the change in material to the unit 1.

·           A trades person WC added adjacent to bike store (a BCA requirement)

·           The bin storage RL has been lowered to achieve minimum BCA head height requirements.

·           The level of the ground adjacent to the bin store door at the boundary has been raised 100mm to RL 14.700, to achieve a transition ramp access to the bin store.

·           The bike store RL has been lowered 200mm to RL 14.7 to achieve minimum BCA head height requirements above.

·           Wall thicknesses and types amended between Unit 1/commercial office/carpark to achieve BCA separation compliance.

·           Part of approved storage area in disabled car space has been deleted to achieve north east fire stair head height under. (BCA requirement)

·           Car spaces V3/V4 adjusted to 2400 width (from 2500) to allow structural column to align with column in B1 at engineers request.

 

Level 1A

·           Entry levels to Units 3 and 4 raised to RL 17.04 to achieve head height to bike store under. (BCA requirement)

·           Steps added internally to Unit 3 entry and Unit 4 kitchen and bedroom 2 to accommodate raised level as above

·           Courtyard of Bed 2 to Unit 4 has been raised to suit above level change.

 

Level 1 & 2

·           Panel return to north western edge of balcony (Units 8 & 13) added to provide fire separation at boundary for BCA compliance

·           Unit 7 & 8 and Units 12 & 13 laundry layout amended (internal change)

·           Units 7 & 12 access to Bed 2 and bath layout has been amended to remove door of bedroom from living area and create better access (internal change)

·           Unit 6, 11 & 16 balcony treatment - has been amended (structural frame removed), louvres still maintained to balcony, and unit 16 south facing balcony has been deleted, as below.

·           South western corner of Units 5, 10 & 15 - the curtain wall system shown in DA has been replaced by paneled wall treatment and residential style awning windows (material change)

·           Unit 2 (level 1) – the layout has been amended to match the layout of Unit 9 above to provide consistent unit layouts. The change will not result in an increase to the area of the approved unit.

·           Internal courtyard balcony returns (brick) have been mirror reversed on plan so that the return now abuts the northern boundary and provides fire separation in compliance with BCA. Also provides better visual privacy to neighbours (Unit 2, 9, 14, 3, 8 & 13)

·           Walls (to Unit 8, 13, 2, 9 & 14) have been extended 700m into the existing recess between the balconies and lobby to improve solar access.

·           Front door of Unit 2, 5, 9 & 10 moved by 250mm to achieve 6m distance to fire stair as required by BCA

 

Level 3

·           Unit 16 amended to a one bedroom unit in lieu of approved studio apartment.