Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 24 August 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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

 

 

Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 at 6:00pm.

 

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

We humbly beseech you to bestow your blessings upon this Council and to direct and prosper our deliberations to the advancement of your glory and the true welfare of the people of Randwick and Australia.

Amen”

 

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

I would like to acknowledge that we are here today on the land of the Bidjigal people of the Dharwahal Nation.  The Bidjigal people are the traditional owners and custodians of this land and form part of the wider aboriginal nations of the Sydney area.  On behalf of Randwick City Council I would also like to acknowledge and pay my respects to the Elders both past and present.”

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes
Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 July 2010

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council by Members of the Public

Mayoral Minutes

Additional Mayoral Minutes, if any, will be distributed on the night of the meeting.

Urgent Business

Director City Planning Reports

CP63/10    4 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

CP64/10    254 Clovelly Road, Coogee

CP65/10    350 Maroubra Road, Maroubra

CP66/10    72 Denning Street, South Coogee

CP67/10    88-102 Moverly Road, South Coogee

CP68/10    13-15 Botany Street, Randwick

CP69/10    495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

CP70/10    Voluntary Planning Agreement - 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

CP71/10    Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP1) from 1 July to 31 July 2010

CP72/10    Draft Prince Henry Centre Plan of Management for Exhibition Purposes

General Manager's Reports

GM37/10    Review of the 2009-13 Management Plan - June 2010 Quarterly Report

GM38/10    South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club - Extension of Lease

GM39/10    Request for payment of travel expenses - Manager Administrative Services

Director City Services Reports

CS18/10    Buildings for our Community Program - Pioneers Park amenities building (upper field) project reschedule

CS19/10    Pool Enclosure - Des Renford Aquatic Centre - Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program (Round 3)

CS20/10    Maroubra Beach - Beach Soccer

CS21/10    Coral Sea Park - proposed new sportsfield lighting project

CS22/10    Formal Amalgamation of Randwick and Botany SES Units

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF37/10    2009-10 Financial Statements (Unaudited)

GF38/10    Affixing of the Council Seal

GF39/10    Investment Report - July 2010  

 

Petitions

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM39/10    Motion Pursuant to Notice from Cr Matson - Proposal to Upgrade Marine Reserve to Marine Sanctuary  

Closed Session

MM36/10   General Manager's Performance Review 2009-2010

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (a) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

  

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

……………………………………………………

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP63/10

 

 

Subject:                  4 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

Folder No:                   DA/232/2008/C

Author:                   Willana Associates, Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                     S96 modification to delete condition 6 to allow for construction of the roof terrace; and inclusion of additional privacy screens around the proposed roof terrace

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Mr Pizzuto c/- Nolan Planning Consultants

Owner:                         Marino Pizzuto

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application proposes to modify Development Consent 232/2008 by deleting condition No. 6.  This condition deleted the garage roof top deck from the original scheme.  The condition reads as follows:

 

“To maintain privacy to the adjoining properties the proposed roof terrace to the garage and access steps are to be deleted from the plans and the garage roof is not to be used for trafficable purposes.”

 

The application has been referred to Council as an objector is related to a Council staff member.

 

Development Application 232/2008 was submitted to Council on 9 April 2008 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including a new swimming pool, decking to the rear, construction of a new garage with a roof top deck, fencing, and ancillary works.  Development Consent was issued on 11 June 2008 for the majority of the proposed works.  Condition 6 deleted the garage’s roof top deck to avoid adverse impacts to the privacy of adjoining allotments. Council was also of the opinion the deck’s built form was inconsistent with the locality’s established built form character and nature.  The applicant proceeded to construct only the privacy screening associated with the roof top deck, on the basis Condition No 6 required specific elements of the deck to be removed from the plans, one of which did not include the privacy screening. 

 

In relation to this modification application, Council received seventeen (17) objections from the public.  The objections raised visual privacy, aural privacy and incompatible built form as concerns.  Inspections at the site and surrounding properties confirm the objections are warranted.  In particular, use of the deck will result in unreasonable privacy impacts to No. 6 Northumberland Street.  The proposed extension to the privacy screening would be incompatible with the built form character and general nature of the laneway.  The proposed deck would be an unnecessary addition to the sites existing adequate ground level and first floor open space facilities.  

 

In this case, it is recommended Council refuse modification application 232/2008/C.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application proposes deleting condition 6 of development consent 232/2008 which prohibited the use of the garage roof as a deck.  This application seeks to have that condition deleted to allow the roof to be used as an open deck.  The deck will be approximately 21m² in area and accessible from ground level.  An additional 1.5 metre high, timber slatted privacy screen is proposed along the garage’s western elevation, such that privacy screens would extend along the full length of the elevation. A section of 300 millimetre high opaque glass is also proposed on top of each of the screens.  A conventional glass balustrade is proposed along the garage’s southern elevation.   

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Northumberland Street.  It is rectangular in shape, 10.06 metres wide, 35.42 metres deep, and 356.4m² in area. Northumberland Lane provides rear lane access to the site.  The site comprises a recently constructed two (2) storey dwelling with a double garage and inground swimming pool located in the rear yard. 

 

Immediately surrounding properties are similar in terms of size and built form.  The broader locality is much the same, but also includes residential flat buildings, semi detached dwellings, attached dwellings and detached dual occupancies.  A dominant characteristic of the immediate locality is the uniform subdivision pattern resulting from parallel and perpendicular roads.  As a result, allotments are similarly sized and parallel.

       

4.    Site History

 

The current dwelling at the site is a result of extensive alterations and additions undertaken to the original dwelling in about 2000.

 

On 9 April 2008, a Development Application (DA) was submitted proposing additional alterations and additions to the dwelling, including an inground swimming pool, rear decking, fencing, an additional garage, and a deck above the new garage, with ancillary privacy screens.  Council issued consent (232/2008) to the DA on 11 June 2008.  As part of the DA assessment, Council received several objections relating to privacy implications from the proposed garage roof top deck.  Concerns were also raised in relation to its built form compatibility with existing development along the lane way.  Council concurred with the objections and included condition 6 on the consent requiring that the garage roof top deck be non – trafficable.  The privacy screening associated with the garage roof top deck was constructed as the applicant submits that Condition 6 of the consent referred only to the trafficable nature of the roof top, and did not explicitly refer to the privacy screening.

 

In May 2009, Modification Application 232/2008/B was submitted proposing deletion of Condition 6 of development consent 232/2008.  In summary, the application states the privacy concerns are addressed in light of the constructed privacy screens, the distance between the deck and the adjoining southern properties, and the lower finished floor level of the deck from the adjoining northern property.  The application also submitted that built form is no longer an issue given the privacy screens have been constructed and represent the full extent of built form for the roof top deck.  The application was refused by Council on the basis the privacy screens were of an insufficient height to avoid overlooking.  Council also submits that screens of a sufficient height to protect privacy would generate built form incompatible with the established character.

 

The applicant sought a review of Council’s determination to the Modification Application on 21 December 2009, according to Section 82a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.  The application contends that built form in the locality is irregular and in this case, the proposal would not be unreasonable.  The applicant maintained that the privacy screens, as constructed, are sufficient to conserve privacy.  The application was considered at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 23 February 2010 in which it was resolved to maintain the original condition deleting the garage roof top deck.      

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. 17 submissions were received from the following stakeholders:

 

121B Boundary Street, Clovelly

7 Campbell Street, Clovelly

21 Campbell Street, Clovelly

18 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

19 Campbell Street, Clovelly

17 Campbell Street, Clovelly

3 Campbell Street, Clovelly

11 Campbell Street, Clovelly

7A Campbell Street, Clovelly

3 Campbell Street, Clovelly

23 Campbell Street, Clovelly

6 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

9 Campbell Street, Clovelly

7 Shackel Avenue, Clovelly

15 Campbell Street, Clovelly

16 Northumberland Street, Clovelly

5 Campbell Street, Clovelly

 

A mediation session was conducted between the applicant and the objectors.  A resolution was not achieved during the session.

 

5.1 Objections

In total, 17 submissions were received by council, objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

 

Privacy

Submissions raised concerns that the deck would allow for overlooking into the private open space and internal floor area of dwellings on adjoining allotments as a result of the elevated nature of the deck.  Concern was also raised in relation to the impact of noise from the deck to adjoining properties.

 

Incompatible built form

Submissions raised concerns that the built form of the garage roof top deck, by virtue of the privacy screens, is incompatible with the existing character and nature of the laneway.

 

5.2 Support

No submissions in support of the proposal were received by Council.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

Referrals to technical officers was not required as part of the assessment.

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

The following environmental planning instruments apply to the application. An assessment against their provisions is provided in section 8.

 

§  State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

§  Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (consolidation) (RLEP 1998)

 

7.1 Relevant Policy Controls

The following development control plan applies to the application.  An assessment against its provisions is provided in section 8.

 

§  Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

7.2 Relevant Planning Principles

The following planning principle espoused by the NSW Land and Environment Court is relevant to the application.  An assessment against the principle is provided in section 8.

 

§  ‘Necessity of development’ as provided in Super Studio v Waverley [2004] NSWLEC 91

 

8.    Environmental Assessment

 

The following is an assessment of the application with regard to Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, including those environmental planning instruments, policies or principles listed in section 7 above.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

The subject site has been occupied for residential purposes during an extended period of time.  In this case, the potential for contamination is limited and the provisions of the policy in relation to the proposal are satisfied.

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (consolidation) (RLEP 1998)

An assessment of the proposal against the relevant clauses of the RLEP 1998 is provided below:

 

Clause 8 – Zones

The subject site is within Zone No 2A (Residential A Zone) according to clause 8 and the corresponding zoning maps.

 

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

The objectives of Zone No 2A are:

§  To provide a low density residential environment, and

§  To maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas, and

§  To protect the amenity of existing residents, and

§  To allow for a range of community uses to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, and

§  To encourage housing affordability, and

§  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.

 

Clause 10 also provides that ‘dwelling houses’ are permissible in the subject zone, with consent.

 

The application assessment concludes the following zone objectives would not be satisfied:

 

§  To protect the amenity of existing residents, and

§  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 objectives would not be satisfied as occupants of the deck will look directly into the private open space of 6 Northumberland Street (adjoining property to the south), and 2 Northumberland Street (adjoining property to the north), thereby affecting their amenity.  Unreasonable noise transmission to adjoining properties is highly probable given the decks elevated and open nature, providing further adverse amenity impacts.  The following photographs, taken from the roof of the garage in question, demonstrate the extent of overlooking and probability for noise transmission.

 

Photograph taken from garage roof overlooking private open space of No. 6 Northumberland Street.

Photograph taken from garage roof overlooking private open space of No. 2 Northumberland Street.

 

The finished ground level at the subject site appears to have been raised to facilitate the construction of the dwelling.  This renders the garage roof substantially higher than the finished ground level at 6 Northumberland Street.  This would result in the occupants of the private open space at 6 Northumberland Street, looking directly at the occupants of the proposed deck.  In a low density residential environment such as this, it is an unreasonable impact to amenity.  For this reason, the proposal would not satisfy the previously stated zone objectives.  The following photograph is taken from the private open space of 6 Northumberland Street.  It demonstrates the ease of which its occupants will look directly at the occupants of the proposed deck.

 

Photograph looking from the private open space at No. 6 Northumberland Street up at the proposed rear deck.

 

Clause 29 – Foreshore Scenic Protection area

The site is located within the foreshore scenic protection area.  Clause 29 of RLEP 1998 requires council to consider the probable aesthetic appearance of proposed development in relation to the foreshore.

 

The quantity of built form generated by the proposal is minimal.  In this case, impacts on the visual qualities of the foreshore are negligible.

 

Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

In light of the specific nature of the proposal and the public objections, only those items in the Dwelling House DCP of relevance are addressed.

 

Part 2 – Designing in Context

In summary, Part 2 of the DCP seeks to ensure proposed development is sympathetic to surrounding character.  A sympathetic development is deemed to respond sensitively to existing built form character, qualities of the natural environment and a site’s opportunities and constraints.

 

The privacy screen treatment is unlike other properties facing the laneway.  Garages facing the laneway are single storey and without vertical walls extending above the gutter line.  The screens height and width generates an overbearing impression, which is inconsistent with the open nature of the laneway.  In this case, the proposed outcome is out of context with existing development and would not satisfy the objectives of Part 2 of the DCP.

4.5 – Visual and Acoustic Privacy

 

The objective of this part is to “ensure new buildings and additions meet occupants’ and neighbours’ requirements for visual and acoustic privacy.”

 

The following relevant performance requirement is also provided:

 

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

 

As provided in the applications assessment against the provisions of the RLEP 1998, the proposal will result in adverse amenity impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties.  In this case, Part 4.5 of the DCP is not satisfied by the application.

 

4.9 – Foreshore Development

The objectives of this part are:

 

§  To protect the landscape qualities and aesthetic appearance of ocean foreshore areas.

§  To conserve the natural form of the land water interface and reinforce the original character of the foreshore.

§  The following relevant performance requirements are also provided:

§  Building form, colours, materials and finishes are sympathetic to surrounding natural forms.

§  Buildings incorporate sufficient setbacks to allow planting and a fair sharing of views.

§  Ancillary structures do not detract from the appearance of developments and are sympathetic to the landscape and visual qualities of the foreshore.

 

The development’s minor scale will not result in any discernible impacts on the appearance of the foreshore.  As stated earlier, the screening treatment is out of context in terms of building form and the nature of the lane way.  In this case, the ancillary structure is not consistent with the performance requirements of part 4.9 in that the ancillary garage detracts from the appearance of development on the subject site and those surrounding.

 

NSW Land & Environment Court Planning Principles

In Super Studio v Waverley [2004] NSWLEC 91, then Senior Commissioner Roseth espoused the following planning principle:

 

“…the acceptability of an impact depends not only on the extent of the impact but also on reasonableness of, and necessity for, the development that causes it.”

 

An inspection of the site identified a first floor balcony extends from the front (eastern) elevation of the existing dwelling.  Additional paved private open space is provided at the rear of the property, adjacent to the rear sliding door and between the southern boundary fence and the swimming pool.  In this case, ample private open space exists at the site.  Given this assessment determines that the proposal results in adverse amenity impacts to adjoining properties, and with consideration to the abovementioned planning principle, the proposed garage deck has amenity impacts that are not considered reasonable given the options for private open space that are available.

 

Is the proposed modification of minimal environmental impact?

Section 96(1A)(a) of the Act requires the consent authority to be satisfied the proposed development is of minimal environment impact.  Based on the proposal’s impacts to the amenity of adjoining properties, the consent authority cannot be satisfied the modification is of minimal environmental impact.

 


Is the proposed modification substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted?

Section 96(1A)(b) of the Act requires the consent authority to be satisfied the development as modified, would be substantially the same as that which was originally consented to.

 

The proposed modification would be in keeping with the alterations and additions previously approved to the dwelling.

 

Has the application been notified in accordance with the regulations or a relevant development control plan?

Section 96(1A)(c) of the Act requires notification of modification applications in accordance with applicable regulations or development control plans.

 

The application was notified between 3 June 2010 and 17 June 2010, from which council received seventeen (17) objections.  Submissions in support of the proposal were not received by Council. 

 

Have public submissions concerning the proposed modification been considered?

Section 96(1A)(d) of the Act requires the consent authority to consider submissions received during any notification period.

 

The previously mentioned submissions objected to the proposal’s privacy impacts and incompatibility with existing built form.  As detailed previously in this report, the objections are warranted.

 

Section 79C assessment

Section 96(3) of the Act requires the consent authority to consider Section 79C of the Act when determining modification applications.  As required by Section 79C(a), an assessment against relevant environmental planning instruments, draft environmental planning instruments, development control plans or planning agreements, has been provided previously in this report.  The following is an assessment against the remaining provisions of Section 79C, being Section 79C (b) – (e).

 

Have the likely impacts to natural, built, social and economic environments been considered?

The development’s minor scale provides for indiscernible impacts to the natural environment.  This report determined previously that the development is out of character with existing development facing the laneway, by virtue of its height.  It was also determined that the development unreasonably affects the privacy of adjoining properties.  In this case, the proposal will adversely affect the surrounding built and social environments.  Following this, adverse impacts to the economic environment are likely.

 

Is the site suitable for the development?

The site is not affected by constraints prohibiting the development.  However, the proposal has been found to be incompatible with its context.

 

Have public submissions been considered?

Submissions from the public have been addressed previously.

 

Is the proposal in the public interest?

The proposal is not in the public interest given:

 

§  It is inconsistent with relevant objectives of the Residential A zone.

§  The objectives and/or performance criteria of Part 2 – Designing in Context, Clause 4.5 – Visual and Acoustic Privacy and Clause 4.9 – Foreshore Development of the Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan are not satisfied.

§  The modification is not of a minor environmental impact.

§  It results in adverse impacts to the built and social environments.

§  It will result in unreasonable impacts to the privacy of 2 and 6 Northumberland Street.

§  Its built form is incompatible with existing development facing Northumberland laneway.

§  Existing areas of private open space at the site are sufficient.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in Urban Design and Development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Development consent 232/2008 was issued on 9 April 2008 for a range of alterations to an existing dwelling at 4 Northumberland Street, Clovelly.  As part of the application, a garage with a roof top deck was proposed at the rear of the property.  In its assessment of the application, Council determined that occupants of the garage roof top deck would unreasonably affect the privacy of adjoining properties.  In this case, Condition 6 was included in the consent, requiring that the garage roof remain non-trafficable.

 

This modification application seeks to delete Condition 6, and consequently, use the garage roof top as an open deck.  Additional 1.5 metre high privacy screening is also proposed, such that screening would extent the full length of the garage’s western elevation.

 

The application was notified between 3 June 2010 and 17 June 2010, from which council received seventeen (17) objections.  Submissions in support of the proposal were not received by Council.  The objections raised concerns in relation to privacy impacts and incompatible built form.

 

An assessment of the proposed modification has determined the proposal would adversely affect the privacy of adjoining properties.  Particularly, occupants of the deck would look directly in to the private open space of number 2 and number 6 Northumberland Street.  Noise from its occupants would also transmit into the respective adjoining properties.  Conversely, occupants of the private open space at 2 and 6 Northumberland Street, would look directly up at deck’s occupants.  In comparison to the low density, detached dwelling nature of the subject locality, such impacts are unreasonable.

 

The built form generated by the privacy screening is incompatible with existing building character and the general nature of the laneway.  The proposed built form represents a two storey configuration which is unlike existing garages along the laneway.  Such a configuration creates an enclosing effect, which is incompatible with the open nature of the laneway.

 

A number of other external private open spaces currently exist at the site.  They include a balcony extending off the eastern (front) elevation, a sealed area adjacent to the rear sliding door and another sealed area between the southern boundary fence and the pool.  The proposed additional open space area, considering its impacts, is unnecessary.

 

In this case, it is recommended modification application 232/2008/C is refused by council.  It is also recommended the consent be amended by including a condition requiring removal of the existing privacy screening along the garages western elevation. 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse its consent to modify Development Consent No 232/2008 under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for the following reasons:

 

1.     The proposal is inconsistent with relevant objectives of the Residential A zone.

 

2.     The objectives and/or performance criteria of Part 2 – Designing in Context, Clause 4.5 – Visual and Acoustic Privacy and Clause 4.9 – Foreshore Development of the Dwelling Houses and Dual Occupancies Development Control Plan are not satisfied.

 

3.     The proposed modification is not of a minimal environmental impact.

 

4.     The proposal will result in adverse impacts to the built and social environments.

 

5.     The proposal will result in unreasonable impacts to the privacy of neighbouring residents.

 

6.     The proposed built form is incompatible with existing development facing Northumberland lane.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP64/10

 

 

Subject:                  254 Clovelly Road, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/123/2010

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing structures on site, construction of an attached dual occupancy comprising 2 x 4-bedroom dwellings with double garages and swimming pools, and Torrens Title subdivision into 2 allotments

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Sheer Property Group Pty. Ltd.

Owner:                         N S Darke

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval subject to conditions

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

The subject proposal is referred to Council for determination as it contains variations to the allotment size and FSR development standards by more than 10%. 

 

The proposal was notified from 2 to 17 March 2010 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of one (1) submission was received at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The issues raised are primarily related to insufficient allotment size for subdivision, planning precedent, building height and scale, excavation and construction damage, which have been addressed in the body of this report.

 

The site is located within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP (1998) (Consolidation). 

 

The proposed development has an FSR of 0.65:1, and exceeds the LEP standard by 0.15:1. The proposed external wall height amounts to 7.3m and marginally exceeds the development standard by 300mm. The frontage width of the site is 14m and falls short of the LEP standard of 15m for attached dual occupancy development.

 

Notwithstanding, the proposed design is sympathetic to the character of the Clovelly Road and Dans Avenue streetscape. The built form, proportions, massing and landscaped area provision are considered to be compatible with the lower density character of the locality. The development scheme will not result in a significant impact on the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy. The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to the non-compliance with the aforementioned development standards are considered to be well founded.

 

The proposal involves Torrens Title subdivision of the site into two allotments, each of which will have a land area and frontage width of 254.25m2 and 7m respectively. The proposed subdivision is substantially short of the development standards stipulated in the LEP, being 400m2 allotment area and 12m frontage width.

 

The proposal is not considered to be consistent with the predominant subdivision pattern in the locality. The proposed subdivision, if approved, will facilitate other considerably smaller subdivisions and hence incrementally increase development density in the area, where the resultant built forms on such lots will result in cumulative adverse impacts on the streetscape, on-street parking, landscaping and neighbourhood amenity.

 

The subdivision component of the application is therefore not considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the existing low density residential environment, or protect the amenity of the existing residences. The SEPP 1 Objection relating to variations from the subdivision control has not presented appropriate evidence to demonstrate the satisfaction of the zoning objectives and purpose of the development standard, and accordingly is not considered to be well founded. The full compliance with the development standard is therefore necessary to ensure orderly development of the land. A special condition is recommended to delete the subdivision component from the proposal.

 

The Randwick DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies specifies detailed built form, setbacks and amenity controls, which apply to the proposal. The proposed building height, setbacks, landscaped open space provision, façade treatment, privacy protection measures and solar access of the development comply with the objectives of the DCP and are considered to be satisfactory, subject to the recommended conditions.

 

The proposed development meets the objectives and purposes of relevant State and Local planning controls, subject to the recommended conditions. Therefore, the proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot 8 in DP 8781, No. 254 Clovelly Road, Coogee. The site is located on the southern side of Clovelly Road and has rear access from Dans Avenue. The land slopes from the front to the rear with a fall of approximately 4m. The dimensions and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, Clovelly Road boundary

14.02m

 

Southern, Dans Avenue boundary

14.02m

 

Eastern, side boundary

36.27m

 

Western, side boundary

36.27m

 

 

 

508.5m2

 

At present, the site accommodates a 2-storey residential flat building containing 3 dwelling units with detached garage at the rear. The existing developments in the surrounding context are described as follows:

 

East

Immediately to the east of the site is a pair of part 1- and part 2-storey semi-detached dwellings (256 and 258 Clovelly Road).

 

A multi-storey hotel accommodation and a 2-storey retail building are located at the south-western corner of the intersection between Clovelly Road and Arden Street (272-282 and 266-270 Clovelly Road).

 

West

The site is adjoined by a 2-storey residential flat building on its western boundary (250-252 Clovelly Road). Further to the west are two x part 3- and part 4-storey residential flat buildings.

 

North

A group of semi-detached commercial buildings are located on the northern side of Clovelly Road near the junction with Arden Street (305-317 Clovelly Road). The building at 317 Clovelly Road is listed as a heritage item (Inventory No. 161 – “Pohills Corner” Inter-war period commercial / residential building, 1926) under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

A licensed club is located at the north-eastern corner of the intersection between Clovelly Road and Knox Street, which is listed as a heritage item under the LEP (263-269 Clovelly Road, Inventory No. 159 – Clovelly RSL & Air Force Club, formerly Kings Theatre, 1939). 

 

 

The locality is predominantly characterised by lower density detached and semi-detached dwellings interspersed with commercial premises and infill residential flat buildings.

 

Figure 1 Existing residential flat building on the subject site as viewed from Clovelly Road (middle)

Figure 2 Rear elevation of the existing building on the subject site as viewed from Dans Avenue

Figure 3 Adjoining residential flat building at 250-252 Clovelly Road (middle)

Figure 4 Adjoining semi-detached dwellings at 256-258 Clovelly Road (middle, hidden behind vegetation)

 

3.      The Proposal

 

The proposed development includes the following components:

 

·      Demolition of all existing structures on the site.

·      Construction of an attached dual occupancy comprising two x 4-bedroom dwellings of part 2- and part 3-storey in height.

·      Construction of a double garage fronting Dans Avenue for each of the dwellings.

·      Installation of an in-ground swimming pool for each of the dwellings.

·      General landscape works.

·      Torrens Title subdivision of the site into 2 allotments:

 

-      Proposed Lot A (western allotment) will have a land area and frontage width of 254.25m2 and 7.010m respectively.

-      Proposed Lot B (eastern allotment) will have a land area and frontage width of 254.25m2 and 7.010m respectively.

 

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

 

4.1    Proposed variations to the development standards

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). SEPP 1 Objections have been submitted to Council.

 

 

(i)     Minimum allotment sizes 

Pursuant to Clause 20B(1) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), the minimum allotment size for allotments resulting from the subdivision of land within Zone No. 2A is 400m2, and each allotment must have a frontage of at least 12m.

 

Clause 20B(4) further provides that the minimum allotment size for an attached dual occupancy within Zone No. 2A is 450m2, and the allotment must have a frontage of at least 15m.

 

The application proposes Torrens Title subdivision of the site into two allotments, each of which will have a land area and frontage width of 254.25m2 and 7.0m respectively. Each proposed land parcel will depart from the allotment area and frontage width development standards by 145.75m2 (36.4% variation) and 5m (41.7% variation) respectively.

 

The site, which is proposed to accommodate an attached dual occupancy, currently has a total frontage width of 14.0m, and falls short of the LEP standard by 1m (6.7% variation).

 

The proposed variations are summarised in the table below:

 

 

Allotment area (m2)

Frontage width (m)

LEP standard for subdivision

400m2

12m

Proposed development

254.25m2

7m

Deviation from LEP standard

145.75m2 (36.4%)

5m (41.7%)

LEP standard for minimum allotment size for attached dual occupancy

450m2

15m

Existing site area / frontage

508.5m2

14m

Deviation from LEP standard

N/A

1m (6.7%)

 

(ii)    Floor space ratio

Pursuant to Clause 20F(1) of the LEP, the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No. 2A is 0.5:1 or 127.1m2 gross floor area (GFA) for each dwelling. Each of the proposed dwellings has an FSR of 0.65:1 or 164.9m2 GFA, and exceeds the development standard by 0.15:1 or 37.8m2. The proposal entails a variation to the standard by 29.7%.

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio (FSR)

Gross floor area (GFA)

Proposed floor space for each dwelling

0.65:1

164.9m2

LEP standard

0.5:1

127.1m2

FSR / GFA in excess of LEP standard

0.15:1 (29.7%)

37.8m2 (29.7%)

 

(iii)   Building heights

Clause 20G(3) specifies a maximum external wall height of 7m in Residential 2A Zone. The proposed external wall height amounts to a maximum of 7.3m (as measured from existing ground level to the underside of the gutter of the skillion roof), and exceeds the LEP standard by 0.3m. This represents a variation to the development standard of 4.3%.

 

4.2    Assessment against planning principle

In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objections, 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 minimum allotment size standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

“To establish minimum requirements for the subdivision of land within residential zones in order to protect and improve local amenity.”

 

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

 

“To operate together with controls for building height and landscaped area to limit the size, scale and site coverage of a building having regard to the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area.”

 

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

 

“To operate together with controls for floor space ratio and landscaped area to limit the size, scale and site coverage of a building having regard to the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area.”

 

(i)     Minimum allotment sizes – land subdivision in 2A zone

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the minimum allotment size requirement for land subdivision:

 

The subject proposed development will provide two lots that each measure 254m2 in area with frontages of approximately 7m each.

 

The vast majority of lots within the immediate area around the site have lot widths of approximately 7m and that these narrower lots measure between 227m2 and 289m2 in area. There are some larger lots that contain residential flat buildings, however single dwelling houses is the predominant form of development in the area and given the zoning of the land in the area, the single dwellings should be used to gauge the acceptability of the proposal.

 

Consequently the proposed subdivision pattern is entirely consistent with the surrounding built form and with the desired future character of the area.

 

In terms of amenity, the subject dwellings will provide very good amenity, whilst ensuring that the amenity of surrounding residents is not significantly impacted. The subject dwellings will provide ample internal and external living spaces, good access to natural light, cross ventilation and off street parking within a suitably designed building. No neighbour will be significantly adversely affected with respect to loss of solar access, privacy or views.

 

Consequently the proposal will benefit local amenity.

 

The proposed works will replace an existing prohibited use.

 

The proposed works will comply with the principal built form planning controls applying to the site.

 

For these reasons, it is considered that compliance with the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in this instance.

 

In assessing the Torrens Title subdivision element of the proposal, it is important to consider the background reviews of a number of strategic and statutory components of the LEP that Council has undertaken in adopting the current development standards embodied in RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The key rationale behind the allotment size requirements relating to the subdivision of land is outlined in the “Dual Occupancy and Subdivision Review Issues Paper”, prepared by Council’s Strategic Planning Section in 2005. The relevant discussions are extracted below:

 

Section 2.3 Implications of Survey for Attached Dual Occupancies

The survey identified that under the current LEP provisions on average, more than 50% of properties in Randwick City’s Residential 2A zone have the potential to build an attached dual occupancy as they have an area of greater than 450m2 and a frontage of greater than 12m. Over 8000 properties have greater than 450m2, however, when measured against a minimum 12m frontage, this reduces to approximately 7200 of the 14200 properties, which could develop an attached dual occupancy, resulting in a potential for over 7000 new dwellings across Randwick 2A zones. Should capacity be realised, this would cause enormous pressure on existing infrastructure, Council services and parking provisions in these 2A zones and would also potentially have negative environmental and amenity impacts.

 

Section 4.3 Potential Strata Subdivision of Attached Dual Occupancy Development

The LEP currently does not permit the subdivision of attached dual occupancies, including Torrens and strata subdivision. Strata subdivision would permit a separate owner for each dwelling in an attached dual occupancy. This inability to subdivide dual occupancies is an investment disincentive as it allows only rental or family use. It is anticipated that if subdivision were to be permitted, the number of attached dual occupancy development applications would increase substantially.

 

The significant issue arising from any introduction of strata subdivision relates to the potential increase in applications and thus the impact on the locality. Strata subdivision offers incentive for dual occupancies to develop on properties that already meet the minimum requirements to build an attached dual occupancy.

 

If strata subdivision was permitted, under the current provisions, this would enable approximately 50% of the Residential 2A lots, or approximately 7200 properties to develop an attached dual occupancy, as seen in Figure H. These 7200 properties, which are larger than 450m2 and have a frontage of greater than 12m, already have the opportunity to build a dual occupancy (but not to subdivide). Even with the proposed increase in the frontage to 15m, approximately 4500 properties could subdivide if the provisions for strata / Torrens were changed (approximately 30% of 2A properties).

The cumulative impacts of this level of dual occupancy development would have significant consequences in terms of intensity of occupation of areas, mature vegetation, pressure on on-street parking and on the established character of many areas.

 

A balance of incentive and restriction for dual occupancy already exists. Currently, there is significant attached dual occupancy development potential, however, the degree to which this form of development is occurring is restricted by the limited investment potential. The restriction also ensures that population increase is not focussed broadly through the suburbs but rather that population is appropriately located and linked to transport and service nodes as provided in the town centre. The focus is on reasonable opportunities for this type of housing where a good standard of design can be met, and to focus substantive density increases in the generally more accessible locations.

 

Section 4.4 Cumulative Impacts of Attached Dual Occupancy Development

Though similar in scale, dual occupancies often have greater potential impacts than a dwelling house due to higher occupancy rates on the same land. These relate to:

 

Loss of on-street car parking

Increased traffic

Reduced streetscape aesthetics and amenity

Reduced public safety

Increased impervious areas

Loss of significant backyard vegetation.

 

Given these potential cumulative impacts of new dual occupancies these should be supported as one form of housing choice, but not be a major source of new housing. The current provisions allow for approximately 50% of 2A properties to develop an attached dual occupancy. Reasonable opportunities for attached dual occupancy development should be balanced with protecting environmental impacts, managing amenity impacts on adjoining properties and encouraging dual occupancy as a housing choice.

 

Note: RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) has increased the minimum frontage requirement for the construction of an attached dual occupancy from 12m to 15m.

 

It is considered that the full compliance with the minimum allotment size requirements relating to land subdivision is reasonable and necessary in this case for the following reasons:

 

-      The proposed allotment area and frontage width of 254.25m2 and 7m respectively are substantially short of the development standards stipulated in the LEP, and are not considered to be consistent with the predominant subdivision pattern in the locality.

 

The Dual Occupancy and Subdivision Review Issues Paper states that in the northern suburbs of Randwick City, including Clovelly, Coogee, South Coogee, Kensington, Kingsford and Randwick, the median allotment size and frontage of 2A zoned land (excluding battle-axe and corner allotments) are approximately 485m2 and 12.5m respectively. The proposed allotment area and frontage width represent a significant 47.6% and 44.0% departure from the above median figures.

 

A more localised analysis of the subdivision pattern of the urban blocks within approximately 200 to 250m from the site has been undertaken (refer to the map below). The study area aims at including the street blocks on either side of Clovelly Road (as the main collector road in the locality) within walking distance from the site and predominantly zoned Residential 2A. The areas to the north of Clovelly Road are classified as being within the suburb of Clovelly. The areas to the south of Clovelly Road are classified as being within Coogee.

 

In the map below, allotments with a land area of less than 260m2 and/or with a primary street frontage of less than 8m have been selected as the benchmark thresholds, as they resemble the proposed subdivision size.

 

Map 1 Allotments with less than 260m2 site area and/or 8m frontage (in dark red colours) within 200-250m from the subject site (study area boundary shown in bold lines, the subject site is denoted by “X”).

 

Note: for the purpose of this exercise, the 3 land parcels constituting 15 Division Street are counted as one allotment. Similarly, the 2 land parcels constituting 31 Brook Street are counted as one allotment.

 

 

The analysis shows that the study area contains a total of 243 allotments zoned Residential 2A, 106 of which (43.6%) have a land area of less than 260m2 and/or a frontage width of less than 8m.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objection argues that there are a number of allotments on Clovelly Road between Arden and Knox Streets, which have a land area of between 227m2 and 289m2 and a frontage width of approximately 7m. However, the SEPP 1 Objection does not take into consideration the subdivision pattern in the wider context of the Coogee and Clovelly suburbs. Specifically, the arguments presented narrowly focus on the immediate vicinity of the site, without acknowledging that the majority of allotments in the urban blocks within reasonable walking distance from the site have a significantly larger land area and frontage than the proposal. Consequently, it is not considered that the proposal is consistent with the predominant subdivision pattern in the locality as described above.

 

-      The approval of the subdivision proposal, which does not meet the minimum land size of 400m2 and frontage width of 12m, will facilitate other similar non-compliant subdivisions in the locality.

 

As demonstrated in Map 1, there is a large number of 2A zoned allotments in the locality having land area and frontage that are larger or at least commensurate with those of the subject site.

 

The “Review of Dual Occupancy Development” report prepared by the Strategic Planning Section which was presented to the Health, Building and Planning Committee Meeting on 12 July 2005 has highlighted the rationale behind the 400m2 land area and 12m frontage requirements: 

 

Subdivision of Land – allotment size and frontage requirements

It is clear that both the minimum frontage together with minimum allotment size, are key elements for the subdivision of land. The minimum frontage resulting from subdivision is a key element in maintaining or changing the subdivision pattern and thus the streetscapes of Randwick. The 12m minimum frontage is based on the minimum required to enable a well designed building to present to the street while meeting the required side setbacks, car parking, windows, building entries and other DCP controls and thus, to achieve a quality design outcome. Any larger minimum frontage would create an unreasonable restriction on the subdivision of land for a single dwelling house whilst any smaller frontage could be incompatible with the existing subdivision patterns and quality building design.

 

Assessment indicates that the 400m2 allotments can accommodate a single dwelling closer to modern proportions whilst meeting the general requirements of good design, including streetscape impact and sufficient parking provision, whilst providing a slightly higher opportunity for subdivision in the low density residential areas.

 

The subdivision proposal, if approved, will create a planning precedent that encourages other similar subdivisions in the locality. This expected precedent is poor and undesirable as the resultant subdivision would not enable proper streetscape presentation, parking design, site landscaping, side setbacks and internal dimensions for future dwelling house developments.

 

-      The intention of the Residential 2A zone is to provide a low density residential environment. As discussed above, the proposal will facilitate other considerably smaller subdivisions, where the resultant dwelling house built forms are expected to generate cumulative adverse implications on the streetscape, on-street parking and neighbourhood amenity.

 

The subject subdivision proposal will not contribute to maintaining the desirable attributes of the low density residential environment and protecting the amenity of existing residences, and therefore will not comply with the zoning objectives stipulated in the LEP.

 

Furthermore, the subdivision proposal will not satisfy the purpose of the LEP subdivision standard, which is to “protect and improve local amenity”; and accordingly the SEPP 1 Objection cannot be supported.

 

There is no compelling evidence presented in the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection to satisfactorily demonstrate that the development, by way of the considerably smaller allotment sizes, would maintain the desirable attributes of the locality and protect the amenity of existing residences.

 

The SEPP 1 Objection at best describes that the proposed building works will offer good internal amenity, and will not result in significant environmental harm to the immediate adjoining neighbours. However, it has not attempted a strategic overview of the wider planning and urban design implications on the locality in the light of the potential cumulative impacts created by the precedent for considerably smaller subdivisions.

 

Based on the above, it is considered that the strict compliance of the development standard in question is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted subdivision controls. A special condition is therefore recommended to delete the subdivision component from the proposal.

 

(ii)    Minimum allotment sizes – attached dual occupancy development

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the minimum allotment size requirement for erection of an attached dual occupancy:

 

The subject proposed development will provide two lots that each have frontages of approximately 7m each.

 

The vast majority of lots within the immediate area around the site have lot widths of approximately 7m. There are some larger lots that contain residential flat buildings, however single dwelling houses is the predominant form of development in the area and given the zoning of the land in the area, the single dwellings should be used to gauge the acceptability of the proposal.

 

Consequently the proposed subdivision pattern is entirely consistent with the surrounding built form and with the desired future character of the area.

 

In terms of amenity, the subject dwellings will provide very good amenity, whilst ensuring that the amenity of surrounding residents is not significantly impacted. The subject dwellings will provide ample external and internal living spaces, good access to natural light, cross ventilation and off street parking within a suitably designed building. No neighbour will be significantly adversely affected with respect to loss of solar access, privacy or views.

 

Consequently the proposal will benefit local amenity.

 

The proposed works will replace an existing prohibited use.

 

The proposed works will comply with the principal built form planning controls applying to the site.

 

For these reasons it is considered that compliance with the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in this instance.

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory in this regard and compliance with the allotment size (for the erection of an attached dual occupancy) development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary for the following reasons:

 

The rationale behind the land size and frontage width requirements relating to the construction of an attached dual occupancy is outlined in the “Dual Occupancy and Subdivision Review Issues Paper”, prepared by Council’s Strategic Planning Section in 2005. The relevant discussions are extracted below:

 

Section 4.1

Attached dual occupancies provide two dwellings within the one building. These can be more affordable while also retaining a similar form to that provided by a single dwelling house. One of the advantages of attached dual occupancies is that they have minimal impact on the subdivision pattern and thus any established character of an area. This type of development, when well designed and integrated, can respond to the streetscape and density of the low scale residential zones, presenting in a similar bulk, scale and form.

 

Notwithstanding the need for housing choice and the changes in housing needs, the impact of dual occupancy development is more significant than single dwelling houses.

 

Section 4.4

Though similar in scale, dual occupancies often have greater potential impacts than a dwelling house due to higher occupancy rates on the same land. These relate to:

 

Loss of on-street car parking

Increased traffic

Reduced streetscape aesthetics and amenity

Reduced public safety

Increased impervious areas

Loss of significant backyard vegetation

 

In the context of the underlying reasons behind the allotment width requirement as stated above, the proposed development scheme is considered to be satisfactory for the following reasons:

 

-      The subject site is located within the urban block defined by Clovelly Road, Arden Street and Dans Avenue. The site has dual frontages to Clovelly Road and Dans Avenue. At present, the northern side of Dans Avenue is predominantly characterised by parking and access facilities to properties with primary frontage to Clovelly Road. The development scheme will provide double garages for each of the proposed dwellings that are accessible from Dans Avenue, consistent with the established development pattern and character of the urban block.

 

The proposal has included 2 car spaces for each of the 4-bedroom dwellings and fully complies with the parking rates specified in the DCP. The anticipated parking demand from the development is catered for by the on-site garage facilities. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to engage in significant competition with the kerb side parking in the area or create adverse traffic impacts.

 

-      The design has maintained an active frontage to Clovelly Road, where the northern façade is articulated by habitable room windows that overlook the public domain. The development will provide adequate casual surveillance to the primary street frontage and enhance public safety.

 

-      The proposal fully complies with the landscaped area and permeable surface requirements stipulated in the LEP and DCP. The design scheme has reserved adequate deep soil areas, which will allow perimeter planting to establish a landscape ambience to the development. In addition, a specific condition has been recommended to require the planting of a medium sized canopy tree in the rear courtyard of each proposed dwelling to visually soften the building structures.

 

-      Despite the minor shortfall in frontage width of 1m, the proposed dwellings have appropriate internal dimensions and are capable of accommodating 4 bedrooms. The configuration of the floor space will offer a satisfactory level of amenity to the occupants.

 

-      The departure from the frontage width development standard of 1m is considered to be minor in nature and will not result in any material adverse impacts on the streetscape or the amenity of the adjoining premises.

 

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

 

(iii)   Floor space ratio

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

 

The built form will be 2-storeys in scale and similar in bulk and scale to surrounding built forms.

 

The building height, setbacks and overall bulk will not appear out of place in the street.

 

It is also important to consider here that when the site is subdivided to Torrens Title dwellings that the proposal will comply with Council’s [DCP] FSR controls which allow FSR of 0.65:1 for single dwelling houses. The proposal provides an FSR of 0.65:1 on each proposed lot.

 

The built form is entirely reasonable, and no adverse impact can be found with respect to this non-compliance.

 

It is considered that the proposed floor space is satisfactory and compliance with the FSR development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary for the following reasons:

 

-      The subject locality is predominantly characterised by one- and two-storey detached and semi-detached dwellings, interspersed with in-fill residential flat buildings and commercial developments at the street corners. The design scheme will maintain a 2-storey scale to Clovelly Road where the first floor level resembles a loft structure that is setback from the external wall alignments below. The proposed development has a height and form, which are compatible with other semi-detached dwellings in the surrounding environment, and will not detract from the prevailing residential character of the locality.

 

-      The maximum ridge height of the existing building on the site is RL55.92. The proposed ridge heights over the first and ground storeys are approximately RL54.99 and RL52.97 respectively.

 

The adjoining buildings at 250-252 (uphill neighbour) and 256-258 (downhill neighbour) Clovelly Road have ridge heights of RL57.49 and RL53.80 respectively. The streetscape elevation demonstrates that the height and scale of the development will be compatible with the adjoining residential buildings and will not form a dominant feature in the streetscape.

 

-      The development adopts a contemporary design and is articulated by window openings, staggered wall planes and a combination of modern finishes, which will minimise the visual scale and bulk of the structures. Furthermore, the built form has incorporated suitable stepping that follows the topography of the site.

 

-      The proposal utilises a combination of skillion and flat roof forms, which will minimise the overall height and profile of the building and associated shadow impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

-      The design scheme has reserved adequate deep soil areas, which will allow perimeter planting to establish a landscape ambience to the development. In addition, a specific condition has been recommended to require the planting of a medium sized canopy tree in the rear courtyard of each proposed dwelling to visually soften the building structures.

 

-      The proposed development will improve the Clovelly Road streetscape by replacing an existing aged building with two attached contemporary residences, which will provide appropriate internal amenity in terms of natural lighting, ventilation and open space provision. The proposal represents an orderly and economic use of the land for urban consolidation. The proposed floor space and resultant height are justified by the site’s proximity to the local shopping strip and public transport services in Clovelly Road. 

 

-      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 or privacy, subject to the recommended conditions.

 

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

 

(iv)   External wall height

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the external wall height standard:

 

The built form will be 2 storeys in scale and appearance. This is consistent with the built form of surrounding single dwellings. Clearly a 7m wall height control suggests that a 2 storey building is appropriate to the site. The areas of non-compliances are very minor and result due to the topography of the site. To provide a completely complying 2 storey built form on a site with a slope such as here would be extremely difficult to achieve.

 

The built form is entirely reasonable.

 

In terms of amenity, the minor non-compliances in maximum wall height do not result in any material impact on overshadowing and there is no loss of any view.

 

It is considered that the proposed design is satisfactory and compliance with the external wall height development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary for the following reasons:

 

-      The extent of deviation from the external wall height standard, being 300mm, is minor in nature and will not result in any material streetscape or amenity impacts on the surrounding areas.

 

-      The non-compliance is mainly attributed to the sloping topography of the site. However, the built form has incorporated suitable stepping that follows the natural gradient of the land.

 

-      The maximum ridge height of the existing building on the site is RL55.92. The proposed ridge heights over the first and ground storeys are approximately RL54.99 and RL52.97 respectively.

 

The adjoining buildings at 250-252 (uphill neighbour) and 256-258 (downhill neighbour) Clovelly Road have ridge heights of RL57.49 and RL53.80 respectively. The streetscape elevation demonstrates that the height and scale of the development will be compatible with the adjoining residential buildings and will not form a dominant feature in the streetscape.

 

-      The proposal adopts a combination of skillion and flat roof forms, which will minimise the overall height and profile of the building and associated shadow impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

-      The facades of the dwelling are articulated by window openings, staggered wall planes and combination of modern finishes, which will minimise the visual bulk and scale of the structures.

 

-      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 or privacy, subject to the recommended conditions.

 

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Comments:

The variations from the FSR, external wall height and allotment size for attached dual occupancy 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 development works would promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental or social impacts.

 

However, the variation from the allotment size requirements for land subdivision will establish an undesirable precedent for significantly smaller subdivisions and will not promote the orderly and economic use of land in the locality. The subdivision element of the proposal does not satisfy the relevant objectives of Residential 2A Zone and the purpose of the development standard in that it will not protect the desirable attributes and amenity of the wider locality. Therefore, a special condition is recommended to delete the subdivision component from the proposal.

 

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 relating to FSR, external wall height and allotment size for attached dual occupancy 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.

 

However, as discussed above, it is considered that the strict application of the subdivision development standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted subdivision controls.

 

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 relation to FSR, external wall height and allotment size for attached dual occupancy is unreasonable and unnecessary as the design scheme will achieve the underlying purposes of the standards.

 

However, as discussed, it is considered that the strict compliance of the subdivision development standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted subdivision controls.

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 development standards in question is relevant to the subject proposal. As discussed above, the proposal is considered to satisfy the underlying purposes of the FSR, external wall height and allotment size for attached dual occupancy standards.

 

In relation to the minimum allotment size for subdivision, it is considered that only through strict compliance with the numerical development standard would a satisfactory development outcome be achieved, with the underlying purpose of the control satisfied. 

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 with the FSR, external wall height and allotment size for attached dual occupancy standards in this particular instance is unreasonable. The proposed built form and scale are compatible with the surrounding residential premises and represent a suitable infill development. The building structures are considered to satisfy the purposes of the aforementioned development standards.

 

However, the proposed subdivision will create an undesirable precedent that facilitates significantly smaller subdivisions, which will in turn intensity future developments in the 2A zone incrementally. The resultant built forms on such smaller lots are anticipated to result in cumulative adverse implications on the streetscape, kerb-side parking, site landscaping and neighbourhood amenity. Accordingly, the strict compliance of the subdivision standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality.

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 development standards in question have not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council. 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 current RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) has maintained the Residential 2A zoning for the site. The existing Residential A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality.

 

5.      Site History

 

5.1    Previous development application relating to the site

DA/58/2010

Demolition of existing structures on site and construction of an attached dual occupancy comprising 2 x part 2- and part 3-storey dwellings, double garages, swimming pools and Torrens Title subdivision into 2 allotments.

 

The application was withdrawn on 19 February 2010.

 

The footprints and layout of the previous development scheme are similar to those of the current proposal. However, the tilted skylight feature in the previous application has been deleted to reduce visual bulk and scale.

 

5.2    Plan amendments

16 April 2010

Amended plans and additional information, including SEPP 1 Objections to floor space ratio and building height controls, draft subdivision plan, colour scheme and details showing the height and profile of side boundary fencing were submitted.

30 July 2010

A SEPP 1 Objection to allotment size requirement was submitted.

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The subject application was notified from 2 to 17 March 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:

 

·      250-252 Clovelly Road, Coogee

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The proposal involves excavation along the western property boundary and would result in subsidence and damage to the adjoining building and side fencing at 250-252 Clovelly Road.

Standard conditions are recommended to ensure that suitable soil retention and site management measures are implemented during the construction phase of the development. A further condition is recommended to require a dilapidation report to be prepared to provide a basis for monitoring any construction related damage to the adjoining properties.

 

Disputes relating to fences on the common boundaries between property owners fall within the jurisdiction of the Dividing Fences Act. In this instance, it is not considered appropriate for Council to nominate cost responsibilities for any reconstruction of fencing necessitated by the development works through the imposition of a condition of consent. However, a standard condition is recommended to stipulate the maximum height of any proposed new side fencing.

The development scheme does not satisfy the Council’s minimum allotment width requirements.

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

The proposed building height and scale are not compatible with other existing dwellings in the locality.

The proposed height, scale and massing of the development are considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

The approval of the subject application will create an undesirable planning precedent for similar developments in the locality.

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

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

Development Engineer and Landscape Development Officer

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

 

Landscape Comments

Within individual trees squares on Council’s Clovelly Road footpath, there is a row of three, 6 metre tall Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palms), being one in line with the western site boundary, one located centrally across the width of the site, and another towards the eastern site boundary.

 

All three are in good health and condition, are covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to their location on public property, and are part of a single species avenue planting on both sides of the street in this section of Clovelly Road, which are seen to provide a positive a strong visual contribution to this major streetscape.

 

Whilst there is no external works proposed along this frontage, in recognition of their significance to the area, protection measures (as well as a refundable bond) will need to be imposed to ensure their preservation, with fencing not able to be provided due to a lack of available space and access reasons.

 

There was some vegetation observed growing within the narrow side setback, about halfway along the length of the eastern boundary, including one established Persea amercianna (Avocado Tree), of approximately 8 metres in height.

 

Whilst performing an effective screening function between the subject dwelling and adjoining site to the east, 256-258 Clovelly Road, which benefits both properties, there is insufficient space to accommodate their future growth requirements both above and below ground, and are actually exempt from the provisions of Council’s TPO due to their inappropriate location within 2 metres of the subject dwelling.

 

Further, as they will be directly and heavily impacted by demolition works, as well as the proposed reduction in existing ground levels and actual construction of Dwelling A, their retention will not be physically possible, with consent granted for their removal.

 

Beyond the rear (southern) boundary, within Council’s Dans Avenue nature strip, to the east of the existing double width vehicle crossing, there is a 4m x 4m Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) which appeared in good condition and fair health, with its leaf discolouration possibly an indication of nutrient deficiency or viral infection.

 

Regardless, it is still covered by the TPO due to being a public tree, and the same as what was described for the Palms on the main frontage, is part of an avenue planting of this species in this street which improves the appearance and amenity of the area.

 

The plans show the construction of two new vehicle crossings, occupying virtually the full width of this site, and as the tree could not be retained while proceeding with construction as shown, its removal has been indicated, with the plans and southern elevation both showing that two new street trees will be planted in 1.5m wide nature strips in line with both the eastern and western boundaries.

 

It must firstly be noted that Council has no reason at all to consider removal of this public tree at this point in time, but there is also no option for a re-design that would accommodate its retention given the need to comply with Council’s minimum size requirements for double-width enclosed garages, as well as the need to provide pedestrian access off this frontage.

 

But by the same token, as it is not an overly significant tree in anyway, it should not prevent the proposal in this case, with conditions requiring that the applicant cover Council’s cost for removal, as well as a loss of amenity charge together with providing two replacement trees upon completion using more upright species than Bottlebrush’s so as to avoid line of sight issues given their close location to adjoining garages/crossings.

 

This proposal exceeds Council’s numerical controls for this type of development in the 2A Zone, by dedicating 54% of the total site area for landscaping purposes, with 30% of the site to be retained as deep soil, and while the submitted landscape plan nominates the use of purely native coastal species throughout both properties, in order to reduce the visual dominance of this proposal on those residents on the opposite (southern) side of Dans Avenue, as well as to cater to the amenity needs of future occupants, Council requires that a medium sized feature tree be incorporated into the rear yard of each site.

 

Drainage Comments for Subdividing into 2 Lots

Should the application for subdividing the site into 2 Lots be approved then onsite detention is not required and stormwater runoff for each dwelling shall be piped to a sediment/silt arrestor pit that drains to a 5 m2 base infiltration area/rubble pit. An over flow pipe shall be provided from the silt arrestor pit that drains to Council’s kerb and gutter (or underground drainage system).

 

The requirement for an infiltration/rubble pit will not be enforced should the ground conditions preclude the construction of the infiltration pit (i.e. rock and/or the water table is near the surface). If the infiltration area is not constructed (due to demonstrated unsuitable ground conditions), all site stormwater shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter via a sediment/silt arrestor pit.

 

Comments:

The Development Engineer has advised that where the Torrens Title subdivision is not supported, on-site detention will be required to be provided. Accordingly, appropriate stormwater management conditions have been included in the “Recommendation” section of this report.

 

8.      Master Planning Requirements

 

The subject site has a land area of only 508.5m2 and a master plan is not required.

 

9.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

9.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 (Consolidation)

The site is located within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). Pursuant to the land use table of Clause 10(3), attached dual occupancy is permissible with development consent. The relevant zoning objectives stipulated under Clause 10(1) are addressed as follows:

 

(a)    To provide a low density residential environment

(b)    To maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas

(c)    To protect the amenity of existing residents

The design of the attached dual occupancy is sympathetic to the character of the Clovelly Road and Dans Avenue streetscape. The proportions, massing and built form proposed are considered to be compatible with the lower density character of the locality. The development scheme will not result in a significant impact on the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy. 

 

However, the proposed allotment area and frontage are substantially short of the subdivision development standard stated in the LEP, and are not considered to be consistent with the predominant subdivision pattern in the locality. The proposed subdivision, if approved, will facilitate other considerably smaller subdivisions and hence incrementally intensify development density in the area, where the resultant built forms on such allotments will result in cumulative adverse impacts on the streetscape, on-street parking and neighbourhood amenity.

 

The subdivision component of the application is therefore not considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the low density residential environment, or protect the amenity of the existing residences. A special condition is recommended to delete the subdivision component from the proposal.

 

(e)    To encourage housing affordability

The proposed dual occupancy dwellings will broaden the type of housing available in the locality and are not considered to result in significant adverse impacts on housing affordability. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this regard and will comply with the requirements of the SEPP (Affordable Housing).

 

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

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

20B Minimum allotment sizes

(1) Minimum allotment size resulting from subdivision:

Land area 400m2

Frontage 12m

 

Lot A (western allotment):

254.25m2, 7.0m

Lot B (eastern allotment):

254.25m2, 7.0m

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

(4) Minimum allotment size for attached dual occupancy:

Land area 450m2

Frontage 15m

 

Land area:

508.5m2

Frontage:

14.0m

Yes

 

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

20E Landscaped area

(1) Minimum 40% of site

254 (western dwelling):

54.1%

254A (eastern dwelling):

54.1%

Yes

 

 

Yes

(3) Landscaped areas over basement or podium less than 50% of provision

0% over basement or podium

Yes

20F Floor space ratio

(1) Maximum 0.5:1

254 (western dwelling):

0.65:1 (164.9m2 GFA)

254A (eastern dwelling):

0.65:1 (164.9m2 GFA)

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

20G Building heights

(1) Maximum height 9.5m

7.5m

Yes

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

7.3m

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

40 Earthworks

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

Excavation:

Maximum 1400mm (dwelling) - 1600mm (pool)

Backfilling:

Maximum 800mm

Satisfactory, refer to comments below

 

Earthworks

The proposal involves excavation of up to 1400mm in order to create a levelled platform for accommodating the lower ground floor. The above works will require the construction of various retaining walls in the front and side setback areas of the site. Notwithstanding, the retaining wall structures are generally sunken below the Clovelly Road footpath and will not be prominently visible from the public domain. The landscape plan shows the provision of shrub planting to screen the blank walling. Therefore, this element of the proposal is not considered to result in detrimental impacts on the surrounding areas.

 

The proposal also requires excavation of up to 1600mm for the in-ground swimming pool. The excavation will not require any significant retaining wall structures that are visible from the street or the neighbouring properties.

 

The development scheme also requires backfilling of up to 800mm to provide adequate soil depth for the front planter boxes. The extent of the backfilling is considered to be minor in nature and will not result in detrimental visual impacts on the public and private domain.

 

Standard conditions are recommended to require adequate soil retention measures to be undertaken during works on the site. Subject to the above conditions, the development is not considered to result in detrimental impacts on drainage and soil stability in the area.

 

9.2    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

(i) Low-rental residential building

The existing flat building has not been Strata subdivided and currently contains 2 x 2-bedroom and 1 x 1–bedroom rental units.

 

Clause 47 defines a low-rental dwelling as “a dwelling that (at any time in the 24 month period prior to the lodgement of a development application to which this Part applies) was let at a rental not exceeding the median rental level for that time (as specified in the Rent and Sales Report) in relation to a dwelling of the same type, having the same number of bedrooms and located in the same local government area”.

 

A comparison of the weekly rental charged for the existing dwelling units and the median rental for 2–bedroom flats within the Randwick LGA is provided below:

 

 

Median rental for 2-bedroom units in Randwick LGA (Rent and Sales Report)

Rental charged

March Quarter 2008

$430

$520 - $550

June Quarter 2008

$450

September Quarter 2008

$443

December Quarter 2008

$450

March Quarter 2009

$450

June Quarter 2009

$450

September Quarter 2009

$450

December Quarter 2009

$470

March Quarter 2010

$480

 

A comparison of the weekly rental charged for the existing dwelling unit and the median rental for 1-bedroom flat within the Randwick LGA is provided below:

 

 

Median rental for 1-bedroom unit in Randwick LGA (Rent and Sales Report)

Rental charged

March Quarter 2008

$350

$385

June Quarter 2008

$365

September Quarter 2008

$360

December Quarter 2008

$370

March Quarter 2009

$370

June Quarter 2009

$380

September Quarter 2009

$380

December Quarter 2009

$390

March Quarter 2010

$400

 

Based on the above, it is established that the existing studio unit is a low rental dwelling as defined in the SEPP. The existing development is therefore a low-rental residential building. The proposed development will result in the loss of one low rental dwelling.

 

(ii) Matters for consideration

In determining a development application for demolition of a low-rental residential building, Council is to take into account the guidelines stated under Clause 50(2), which are addressed as follows:

 

(a)    Whether there is likely to be a reduction in affordable housing on the land to which the application relates.

 

Comments:

The lower rentals of the existing dwelling units are a result of the age and relative poor condition of the building, and should not be construed as a true reflection of the real market rental values that would normally be expected for the Coogee areas. The loss of 1 dwelling is not considered to result in a major reduction in the availability of low cost accommodation in the Coogee locality as a whole.

 

(b)    Whether there is available sufficient comparable accommodation to satisfy the demand for such accommodation.

 

Comments:

Whilst the proposal will entail the loss of low cost rental accommodation, the degree of the impact is considered to be minor given that only one dwelling unit is involved. As will be discussed in the following paragraphs, the provision of a monetary contribution will assist in the delivery of alternate affordable housing by the State Government.  

 

(c)    Whether the development is likely to cause adverse social and economic effects on the general community.

 

Comments:

The loss of 1 low-cost rental dwelling is not considered to result in a significant social or economic impact on the Coogee locality.

 

(d)    Whether adequate arrangements have been made to assist the residents (if any) of the building likely to be displaced to find alternative comparable accommodation.

 

Comments:

No assistance to the existing residents is proposed. However, the imposition of a condition requiring monetary contribution (under Clause 51 of the SEPP) would assist the NSW Department of Housing in providing alternate low cost rental accommodation to the community.

 

(e)    The extent to which the development contributes to any cumulative loss of affordable housing in the local government area.

 

Comments:

It is considered that the loss of 1 low cost rental dwelling will not create a significant cumulative impact upon the suburb of Coogee or the Randwick Local Government Area as a whole.

 

(f)    The structural soundness of the building, the extent to which the building complies with any relevant fire safety requirements and the estimated cost of carrying out work necessary to ensure the structural soundness of the building and the compliance of the building with the fire safety requirements.

 

Comments:

The existing building is aged and will require significant upgrade and refurbishment to attain the current living standard. The complete redevelopment of the site represents a more economic and effective solution to providing high amenity dwellings in the area.

 

(g)    Whether the imposition of a condition requiring the payment of a monetary contribution for the purposes of affordable housing would adequately mitigate the reduction of affordable housing resulting from the development.

 

Comments:

The imposition of a condition requiring monetary contribution (under Clause 51 of the SEPP) would assist the NSW Department of Housing in providing alternate low cost rental accommodation to the community.

 

(h)    In the case of a boarding house, the financial viability of the continued use of the boarding house.

 

Comments:

Not applicable.

 

(iii) Monetary contribution calculations

Pursuant to Clause 51 of the SEPP, the following monetary contribution is payable to Council:

 

C = L x R x 0.05

 

Where:

C = contribution payable

L = total number of bedrooms in a low rental dwelling that will be lost by the proposed development

R = replacement cost calculated as the average value of the first quartile of sales of strata properties in the local government area in which the development is to take place, as specified in the 4 most recent editions of the Rent and Sales Report

 

Calculations:

 

Number of bedrooms lost L

Studio dwelling: 1 bedroom

 

Replacement cost R

 

Sales price (1st quartile): Strata – Dec Quarter 2009 - Randwick

$484000

Sales price (1st quartile): Strata – Sept Quarter 2009 - Randwick

$455000

Sales price (1st quartile): Strata – Jun Quarter 2009 - Randwick

$440000

Sales price (1st quartile): Strata – Mar Quarter 2009 - Randwick

$427000

Replacement cost R

$451500

 

Contribution payable C

1 x 451500 x 0.05 = $22,575

 

The above contribution will be required by a special condition of consent.

 

9.3    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied with BASIX Certificates Nos. 293159S_02 and 293204S_02. The commitments listed in the above certificates 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) Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

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

 

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

No. 254 (western dwelling):

54.1%

No. 254A (eastern dwelling):

54.1%

Complies.

S1

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

No. 254:

Over 25m2

No. 254A:

Over 25m2

Complies.

S1

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

No. 254:

11m x 7m, moderate gradient

No. 254A:

11m x 7m, moderate gradient

S1

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

Not applicable.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

No. 254:

30.1%

No. 254A:

29.8%

Complies.

 

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of 254.25m2 in area is a maximum floor space ratio of 0.65:1. 

No. 254:

0.65:1

No. 254A:

0.65:1

Refer to discussions in the “SEPP 1” section of this report.

 


Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

7.3m

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

S1

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

Garages: maximum 3.2m, complies.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

Excavation:

Maximum 1400mm (dwelling) - 1600mm (pool)

Backfilling:

Maximum 800mm

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

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

The proposal involves excavation within 900mm and 4000mm from the side and rear boundaries respectively.

 

Notwithstanding, the retaining wall structures are generally sunken below the Clovelly Road footpath and will not be prominently visible from the public domain. The landscape plan shows the provision of shrub planting to screen the blank walling.

 

Standard conditions are recommended to require adequate soil retention measures to be undertaken during works on the site. Subject to the above conditions, the development is not considered to result in detrimental impacts on drainage and soil stability in the area.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

S4

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

Not applicable.

S5

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

Not applicable.

 

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

4.5m from Clovelly Road, consistent with the front wall alignments of the adjoining properties at 250-252 and 256-258 Clovelly Road. Complies.

S2

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

14.3m to dwellings

0m to garages

The provision of parking facilities fronting Dans Avenue is consistent with the existing development pattern. Complies.

S3

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

Lower ground floor:

1000mm, complies.

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Ground floor:

1500mm, complies.

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

First floor:

2400mm

The first floor bedrooms of both dwellings occupy a relatively limited building footprint area and are stepped in approximately 700mm from the ground floor front walls below. The 2400mm side setbacks will further reduce the scale and massing of the topmost storey.

 

The proposed built form and setbacks are considered to minimise the visual prominence of the first floor level. There are adequate spatial separation between the bedrooms and the adjoining dwellings. Therefore, the loft bedroom elements are not considered to result in detrimental visual or amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties. 

 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Refer to comments below.

S1

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

S1

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

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

A standard condition is recommended to ensure the development works comply with the Building Code of Australia.

 

The Objective of the DCP is to ensure that the design of new buildings protects the visual and acoustic privacy of the occupants and neighbours.

 


Ground floor side windows

The side facades of the development do not contain excessive window openings.

 

There are windows attached to Bedrooms 3 of both dwellings. The bedrooms are low intensity use areas within the dwellings. Accordingly, the bedroom windows are not considered to result in detrimental privacy impacts on the neighbours.

 

Windows 14, 15 and 16 of both dwellings are attached to the void areas and will not enable direct overlooking.

 

A special condition is recommended to require the bathroom windows on the ground floor level to be constructed with obscured glazing to minimise privacy impacts.

 

First floor side windows

There is a bathroom window on the side elevations of the first floor level. A special condition is recommended to require these windows to be constructed with obscured glazing to minimise privacy impacts.

 

Safety & Security

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

Complies.

S1,3

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

Bedroom windows, complies.

S2

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

To be required by condition.

 

Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

2 x 4-bedroom dwellings: 2 double garages are provided. Complies.

S1

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

Satisfactory.

S1

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

Driveway widths 5.2m, setback 1m from side boundaries. Complies.

S1

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

Driveway widths 5.2m. Refer to comments below.

S1

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

Satisfactory.

S1

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

Garages have nil setbacks from Dans Avenue Boundary. Refer to comments below.

S2

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

Complies.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

74%. Refer to comments below.

The Objectives of the DCP are to ensure that on-site parking facilities provide safe and convenient access and are not visually obtrusive.

 

The proposed double garages have a total width of 10.4m (5.2m each) and occupy approximately 74% of the Dans Avenue frontage. The parking facilities have nil setback from the street boundary. The above elements do not meet the DCP preferred solution. Notwithstanding, the proposal is considered satisfactory for the following reasons:

 

·      At present, the northern side of Dans Avenue is characterised by high fencing and parking and access facilities for a number of residential developments with primary frontage to Clovelly Road. The provision of double garages is not considered to detract from the streetscape amenity of Dans Avenue.

 

Northern side of Dans Avenue looking uphill

 

·      The width of the driveways is necessary to maintain efficient manoeuvring of vehicles and clear sightlines for drivers and pedestrians. 

 

·      The proposal has reserved nil setback between the garage and the Dans Avenue boundary. Notwithstanding, the driveways have a suitable width and will enable satisfactory sightlines for drivers and pedestrians. Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the design scheme and raised no objections on safety grounds, subject to standard alignment level conditions.

 

Fences

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

 

 

 

Not applicable.

S1

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

 

 

 

 

The design scheme proposes solid masonry fence on the Clovelly Road frontage. The fence has a maximum height of approximately 1200mm and is stepped to follow the site topography. A standard condition is recommended to ensure that the solid portion of the front fence does not exceed 1200mm, with any timber slats above to be of an open design.

 

The proposal includes 1800mm high gates adjacent to the garages on the Dans Avenue boundary. Given that Dans Avenue represents the secondary frontage to the site, the height and form of the gate will ensure safety and security of the dwellings and are considered to be satisfactory.

S1

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

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Refer to the “SEPP: BASIX” section of this report.

S2

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

The majority of the rear courtyards of both proposed dwellings will be overshadowed between 9am and 3pm on 21 June. Refer to comments below.

S2,8

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

The north-facing windows of the proposed dwellings will receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 21 June. Complies.

S9

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

The site has a north-south orientation and the proposed building height is commensurate with those of the adjoining developments. The proposal is considered to maintain at least 3 hours of direct sunlight to the roof areas of the adjoining buildings between 9am and 3pm on 21 June. Complies.

S9

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

The north-facing windows of the adjoining developments will receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight on 21 June. Complies.

S9

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

Refer to comments below. 

 

The key Objectives of the DCP aim to promote energy efficiency in the design and use of housing, as well as to protect solar access to the neighbouring developments.

 

Solar access to rear courtyards of proposed dwellings

Based on the submitted shadow diagrams, the majority of the rear courtyards of both dwellings will receive less than 3 hours of sunlight on 21 June and will not meet the preferred solution.

 

The land falls significantly from the front to the rear with a level difference of approximately 4m. Despite the north-south orientation of the site, the principal private open space will be overshadowed by the proposed dwellings as well as the adjoining residential developments. The shadow impacts will be accentuated by the sloping site topography.

 

The proposed building height is substantially compliant with the LEP standard. The building form and massing appropriately follow the gradient of the land. It is considered that the design scheme has already maximised solar access to the rear private open space given the existing site constraints and satisfies the objectives of the DCP control.

 


Solar access to rear courtyards of adjoining residential developments

Based on the shadow diagrams, the majority of the rear open space of the adjoining properties at 250-252 and 256-258 Clovelly Road will receive less than 3 hours of direct sunlight on 21 June.

 

The diagrams have demonstrated that the development will generate minimal increase in overshadowing on both adjoining properties on the winter solstice:

 

·      At 9am, one of the east-facing windows on the first floor level of the residential flat building at 250-252 Clovelly Road will become overshadowed. However, the shadow will cast onto less than 50% of the surface area of that window.

·      At noon and 3pm, additional shadows will be cast onto the side walk areas of the semi-detached dwelling at 256 Clovelly Road. No additional impacts on the western windows will result. The majority of the additional shadows are created by the rear double garages, and will fall onto the road reserve.

 

It is considered that the shadow conditions relating to the adjoining private open space are attributed to the same constraints that confront the subject site, being the topography of the land and the shadow impacts created by the dwellings in question as well as their immediate neighbours. However, the existing north-facing windows of the adjoining premises will continue to receive satisfactory sunlight throughout the day on 21 June.

 

Given that the proposed development will not result in any material additional impacts on the adjoining properties, the proposal is considered to satisfy the objectives of the DCP control.

 

10.2  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 $100001 - $200000

------

0.5%

------

Development cost more than $200000

$496,000

 

1.0%

$4,960

 

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.

 

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

Not applicable.

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

Appropriate standard conditions are recommended to address the relevant clauses of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.  

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, subject to the recommended conditions.

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 building structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

 

However, the proposed subdivision is not supported as it is not consistent with the predominant pattern in the locality, and will create an undesirable planning precedent. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory subject to a condition that requires deletion of the subdivision component.

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, subject to compliance with the conditions of consent.

 

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 design of the attached dual occupancy is sympathetic to the character of the Clovelly Road and Dans Avenue streetscape. The proportions, massing and built form proposed are considered to be compatible with the lower density character of the locality. The development scheme will not result in a significant impact on the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy. The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to the non-compliance with the development standards relating to floor space ratio, external wall height and allotment size for attached dual occupancy are considered to be well founded.

 

However, the proposed allotment area and frontage are substantially short of the subdivision development standards stated in the LEP, and are not considered to be consistent with the predominant subdivision pattern in the locality. The proposed subdivision, if approved, will facilitate other considerably smaller subdivisions and hence incrementally increase development density in the area, where the resultant built forms on such lots will result in cumulative adverse impacts on the streetscape, on-street parking, landscaping and neighbourhood amenity.

 

The subdivision component of the application is therefore not considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the existing low density residential environment, or protect the amenity of the existing residences. The SEPP 1 Objection relating to variations from the subdivision control has not presented appropriate evidence to demonstrate satisfaction of the zoning objectives and purpose of the development standard, and accordingly is not considered to be well founded. A special condition is recommended to delete the subdivision component from the proposal.

 

Subject to deletion of the subdivision element and compliance with the recommended conditions, the application is considered to be satisfactory and is 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 20B(4), 20F(1) and 20G(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan (1998) (Consolidation), relating to allotment size for attached dual occupancy development, 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 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. 123/2010 for demolition of existing structures on site, construction of an attached dual occupancy comprising 2 x 4-bedroom dwellings with double garages and swimming pools at 254 Clovelly Road, subject to the following conditions:

 

Conditions of Consent

 

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

 

 

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

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared By

1001-DA-01(C)

13/4/10

16 April 2010

Martin + Spork Pty. Ltd.

1001-DA-02(C)

13/4/10

16 April 2010

1001-DA-03(B)

22/2/10

25 February 2010

1001-DA-04(B)

22/2/10

25 February 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:

 

2.       This proposed subdivision of the subject site is not approved and must be deleted from the plans and documentation submitted for the construction certificate.

 

3.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be consistent with the submitted “Proposed Colour Scheme”, undated, and stamp-received by Council on 16 April 2010.

 

The external walls and claddings are to be finished with neutral colours (such as white, off-white, sand, earth, grey and the like). The use of saturated or primary colours or reflective paints is prohibited by this consent.

 

4.       The colour and finishing of the metal roof sheeting shall be designed to minimise light reflection to the surrounding areas. Details demonstrating compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

5.       The rooftop areas over Bedroom 4/Study, which are adjacent to Bedroom 2 at first floor level of both proposed dwellings, shall be designed and constructed so that they are non-trafficable. The above areas shall not be converted to balconies without the written consent from Council.

 

6.       The windows attached to the first floor ensuite and the ground floor bathroom areas on the side elevations of the building shall be constructed with obscured or translucent glazing. Details demonstrating compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

7.       The maximum ridge height over the first floor bedroom areas shall not exceed RL55.00 AHD. The maximum ridge height over the ground floor bedroom areas shall not exceed RL53.00 AHD. Details demonstrating compliance shall be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

8.       The fence on the Clovelly Road alignment shall have a maximum height of 1800mm, as measured from the footpath level, and be designed so that the upper two-thirds of the fence (excluding any piers or posts) is at least 50% open, to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the streetscape.

 

9.       Fences located on the side or rear boundaries of the site shall not exceed a maximum height of 1800mm, measured above the existing ground levels.

 

On sloping sites or at changes in ground levels, the maximum height of the fence may exceed the abovementioned specified height by up to 150mm maximum adjacent to any required ‘step-downs’ or changes in ground level.

 

The applicant and owner are advised that the relevant provisions of the Dividing Fences Act 1991 are to be satisfied accordingly and any necessary approvals or agreements are to be obtained from the owner/s of the adjoining land beforehand.

 

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

 

11.     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.

 

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

 

13.     The external walls of the building must be located not less than 900mm from the side property boundaries.

 

14.     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.

 

15.     External 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.

 

16.     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.

 

17.     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 is applied to mitigate the loss of low cost rental accommodation:

18.     A monetary contribution of $22,575 is required for the purpose of mitigating the loss of low-rental accommodation on the site caused by the development, pursuant to Clause 51 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) Affordable Rental Housing 2009. The contribution must be paid in full to Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate relating to the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

20.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $496,000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $4,960.

 

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:

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     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)

 

24.     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 has 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 condition has been applied to ensure that adequate drainage is provided from the premises and to maintain adequate levels of health and amenity in the locality:

 

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

 

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

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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).

 

28.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

 

31.     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.

 

32.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

34.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·          Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

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

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

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

 

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

 

37.     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 those works.

 

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

 

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

·          Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

39.     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 terraced dwellings),

·          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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

41.     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.

 

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

 

43.     Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents and the relevant 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, prepared by a suitably qualified person is to be implemented throughout the works, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of works.

 

The Construction Noise Management Plan is to be prepared in accordance with the NSW DECC Construction Noise Guideline.

 

44.     A Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate or compliance certificate is to be obtained at the following stage/s of construction to demonstrate compliance with the approved setbacks, levels, layout and height of the building to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

·        prior to construction of the footings or first completed floor slab (prior to the pouring of concrete),

·        upon completion of the building, prior to issuing an occupation certificate.

 

The survey documentation must 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.  

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

47.     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.

 

48.     Sediment and erosion control measures must be provided in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

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.

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure compliance with the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and to maintain public safety and amenity:

 

50.     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.

 

51.     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.

 

52.     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.

 

53.     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.

 

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:

 

 

54.     The 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.

 

55.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

●        before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

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

 

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

 

58.     A demolition and construction Waste Management Plan (WMP) must be development and implemented for the development, to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the commencement of works.

 

The Waste Management Plan must provide details of the type and quantities of demolition and construction waste materials, proposed re-use and recycling of materials, methods of disposal and details of recycling outlets and land fill sites.

 

Where practicable waste materials must be re-used or recycled, rather than disposed and further details of Council's requirements including relevant guidelines and pro-forma WMP forms can be obtained from Council's Customer Service Centre or by telephoning Council on 9399 0999.

 

Details and receipts verifying the recycling and disposal of materials must be kept on site at all times and presented to Council officers upon request.

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

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

 

59.     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:

 

60.     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 new concrete vehicular crossings and laybacks at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

b)   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.

 

c)   Construct a concrete footpath along the remainder of the Dans Ave site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

61.     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.

 

62.     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:

 

63.     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:

 

Clovelly Rd Frontage - match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

Dans Ave Frontage - 100mm above the top of the kerb at all points opposite the kerb, along the full site frontage.

 

64.     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.

 

65.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $1234.00 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:

 

66.     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.

 

67.     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.

 

68.     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.

 

69.     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.

 

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

 

70.     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 issue, 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.  This may involve either connection to the Council's street gutter, or into a Council stormwater pit.  Note:  All proposals should indicate the location of the closest Council stormwater pit and line regardless of the point of discharge.  This information can be obtained by a visual inspection of the area and perusing Council's drainage plans.

 

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.

 

71.     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.

 

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

 

·      The kerb and gutter or drainage system opposite either site frontage; OR

·      A suitably sized infiltration system.

 

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

 

74.     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.

 

75.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

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

 

79.     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 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).

 

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

 

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

 

82.     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.

 

83.     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.

 

·      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.

 

84.     Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, 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 system and/or infiltration system is maintained and that no works which could affect the design function of the detention system are undertaken without the prior consent (in writing) from Council. Such restriction and positive covenant shall not be released, varied or modified without the consent of the Council.

 

Notes:

 

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

 

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

 

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:

 

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

·      Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·      Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

·      Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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 to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

The following condition is applied to provide adequate provisions for waste management:

 

87.     Prior to the Principal 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 2 dwellings.

 

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

 

88.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan by Martin + Spork Pty Ltd, drawing number 1001-DA-03, revision B, dated 22/2/10, subject to the following changes being shown on an amended plan, prior to the commencement of any site works, which must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, and includes:

 

·      Inclusion of 1 x 100 litre (pot/bag size at the time of planting) native coastal tree within the rear yard of each proposed dwelling, selecting those species which will attain a minimum height of 5 metres at maturity, and must be sited a minimum distance of 2.5 metres from any physical part of a permanent building;

 

·      The grassed verge on Council’s Dans Avenue frontage must extend for a distance of 1500mm off both the eastern and western site boundaries so as to accommodate the new street tree plantings upon completion.

 

89.     The PCA must ensure that the landscaping is completed in accordance with the approved plan, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, with the applicant/owner required to ensure the landscaping is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

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

 

Removal of Council’s Street Tree

 

91.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $806.50 (including GST), being to cover the costs for:

 

a. Council to remove the existing street tree, Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) from Council’s Dans Avenue nature strip, to the east of the existing vehicle crossing, prior to the commencement of site works, in order to accommodate the proposed double width crossing and garages as shown;

 

b.       Council to supply and install 2 x 25 litre street trees, Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia), being one each in line with both the eastern and western site boundaries, at the completion of all works ($214.50);

 

c.       A loss of amenity fee in order to compensate Council and the community for the loss of this established public tree for no other reason than to accommodate the development of private property as shown.

 

The contribution shall 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 also be required to contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 (quoting the receipt number), and giving at least four working weeks notice to arrange for removal of the existing street tree, prior to the commencement of any site works, as well as planting of the replacement street trees upon completion of all site works.

 

Removal of trees within the site

 

92.     Approval is granted for the removal of all existing vegetation within the site where necessary in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown, including the Persea americanna (Avocado Tree), located within the narrow side setback, about halfway along the eastern boundary, as it is already exempt from the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to its inappropriate location near the existing dwelling, and will also be in direct conflict with the proposed work as shown, and is subject to full implementation of the approved landscaping.

 

Protection of Council’s Palm Trees

 

93.     In order to ensure retention of the row of three Archontophoenix cuninghamiana (Bangalwo Palms) located within Council’s Clovelly Road footpath, being one in line with the western site boundary, one centrally across the width of the site and one towards the eastern site boundary 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 crowns to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed over public property along this frontage must be done so an equal distance between any of the palms so as to minimise root damage.

 

c.       The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to these palm 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.

 

d.       All Site Management Plans must acknowledge that 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 over any of these tree squares or around their trunks.

 

e.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $2,000.00 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 these public palm trees.

 

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 palms 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 MATTERS:

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

A4      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

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP65/10

 

 

Subject:                  350 Maroubra Road, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/782/2009/A

Author:                   David Mooney, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(2) modification for extension of external blade walls, addition of lift with associated internal and external changes, increase in size of garage accessed off Maroubra Road to double garage, alteration to windows and a new fence at the Storey Street elevation

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Antonius and Associates

Owner:                         Patria Calligeros

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This section 96(2) application is referred to Council because the original development application was determined by Council.

 

The proposed modification involves extension of external blade walls, addition of lift with associated internal and external changes, increase in size of garage accessed off Maroubra Road to double garage, alteration to windows and a new fence at the Storey Street elevation.

 

The original approved development application involves demolition of the existing building and construction of a dual occupancy over 4 levels. Vehicular access is off Maroubra Road and Storey Street. The proposal includes a pool.

 

The site is located on the northern side of Maroubra Road, Maroubra, opposite the Malabar Road junction. The site is 473.2m² with 12.19m frontage to Maroubra Road. There is laneway access to the rear off Storey Street.

 

The modification was advertised and notified in accordance with Council policy. There were no submissions.

 

The proposal satisfies the environmental and planning assessment requirements that apply and the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The proposed modification

 

The proposal is a section 96 modification of the approved development by extension of external blade walls, addition of lift with associated internal and external changes, increase in size of garage accessed off Maroubra Road to double garage and alteration to windows. The proposal was amended by submission of plans 27 may 2009 for a new gate and fence at the Storey St elevation. The amended plan was not renotified because the proposed fence complied with the DCP preferred solutions and there was unlikely to be a significant impact on the neighbouring dwellings.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located on the northern side of Maroubra Rd, Maroubra, opposite the Malabar Rd junction. The site is 473.2m² with 12.19m frontage to Maroubra Rd. There is laneway access to the rear off Storey St. The southern 2/3rds of the lot has a moderate 1 in 10 slope on a southerly aspect. The northern 1/3rd has a severe 1 in 2 slope on a southerly aspect.

Figure 1 – An aerial view of the site and surrounds

4.    Site History

 

The original development application was approved by Council 9 March 2010. The original proposal involved demolition of existing building and construction of 4 level attached dual occupancy with lower level garage accessed from Maroubra Road, additional garage accessed from Storey Street, swimming pool and associated works. There was a SEPP 1 objection to the development standard for floor space ratio.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The modification application was notified in accordance with Council policy. There were no submissions.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

Development Engineer

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Job No 2009:699 Sheets A01 –A06 Rev B by Antonius & Assoc P/L stamped by Council 23/4/10.

 

The modifications include increasing the size of the garage off Maroubra Road into a 2 car garage.

 

The assessing officer is advised that Development Engineering has no objection to the proposed modifications and that there are no amended/additional development Engineering conditions regarding the Section 96 application.

 

7.    Section 96 Assessment

 

The application was lodged under Section 96(2) of the Act. The proposed modification satisfies the Section 96 threshold and is substantially the same as was originally approved.

 

8.    Section 79C 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.

 

Garage

The modification increases the size of the garage facing Maroubra Rd from a single to a double garage. The modification requires more excavations into the site, and a double width garage door. The wider garage door would still be nicely positioned behind the primary façade of the upper balconies, and the bulk of garage would be excavated into the site. There is no material increase in the impact to the character of the building or the streetscape and the proposal continues to satisfy relevant LEP and DCP assessment criteria.

 

Blade Walls

The modification proposal adds short blade walls extending past windows and doors that are close to the boundaries; ostensibly to provide fire protection in accordance with the Building Code of Australia (BCA). There is no material increase in the impact of the development on the character of the building or the amenity of adjoining dwellings. The proposal continues to satisfy the relevant LEP and DCP assessment criteria.

 

Lift

The proposal includes a new lift. Modern domestic lifts do not require a lift tower and while it requires a slight increase in the building footprint there are no material increase in the impacts of the development on the character of the building or the amenity of the adjoining dwellings. Lift towers are excluded from floor space ratio calculations. The proposal continues to satisfy the relevant LEP and DCP assessment criteria.

 

Windows

The modification involves a reduction in the size or elimination of some windows. There are no material impacts on the character of the building or the amenity of the neighbours.

 

Fences

The modification includes a new gate and fence to 1.8m high at and behind the building line at the Storey St frontage of the approved development. The fence satisfies the requisite ‘open-ness’ criteria in the relevant DCP preferred solutions and is acceptable.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

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 modification involves extension of external blade walls, addition of lift with associated internal and external changes, increase in size of garage accessed off Maroubra Road to double garage, alteration to windows and a new fence at the Storey St elevation.

 

The original approved development application involves demolition of the existing building and construction of a dual occupancy over 4 levels. Vehicular access is off Maroubra Road and Storey Street. The proposal includes a pool.

 

The site is located on the northern side of Maroubra Road, Maroubra, opposite the Malabar Road junction. The site is 473.2m² with 12.19m frontage to Maroubra Road. There is laneway access to the rear off Storey Street.

 

The modification was advertised and notified in accordance with Council policy. There were no submissions.

 

The proposal satisfies the environmental and planning assessment requirements that apply and the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 


 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority grant consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No DA/782/2009/A for extension of external blade walls, addition of lift with associated internal and external changes, increase in size of garage accessed off Maroubra Road to double garage, alteration to windows and a new fence at the Storey St elevation at 350 Maroubra Road, Maroubra in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition No 1 to read:

 

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered A-03, A-04 and A-05, dated October 2009 and received by Council on 29 October 2009, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the Section 96 plans stamped received by Council 23 April 2010 and 26 May 2010 only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:      

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP66/10

 

 

Subject:                  72 Denning Street, South Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/739/2009/A

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     S96 modification for relocation of water tanks to northern side, carspace storage created by additional excavation, addition of sauna & study on lower ground floor with new window, reduction in size of rumpus & living rooms with increase in setbacks

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                CM Hairis Architects

Owner:                         Ms M Falinski

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to Council for consideration as the original application which detailed the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new part two (2) part three (3) storey dwelling house with lower level garage with terrace above and rear swimming pool was approved at the Planning Committee meeting of 11 May 2010.

 

The application seeks to modify the approved development by increasing the floor area in the garage and lower ground floor level to provide for more carspace, a new study room and sauna respectively. The application also reduces the floor area of the living room on the ground floor as well as its associated balcony.

 

The main issue is the increase in floor area arising from the proposed extensions to the garage and lower floor level which amounts to 23.2 sqm and results in an FSR of 0.84:1. The original DA was approved at an FSR of 0.78:1 which exceeded the maximum FSR control of 0.6:1 prescribed in the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual occupancies for dwelling houses in a residential 2A zone. The increase in floor area is considered reasonable and acceptable as it comprises enlargement of approved sub-floor areas to create additional functional floor space and does not involve any increase in the approved building envelope, form and height.  The modifications will not result in any additional shadow, privacy and view impacts on neighbouring properties. Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard given its compliance with the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

The proposed modifications satisfy the matters for consideration under Sections 79C and 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended. The proposed modifications satisfy the relevant legislation, State policies and local planning controls, and are recommended for approval, subject to amended conditions to the original consent.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The Section 96 application is for the following amendments to the approved DA:

 

Garage Level

·      Relocate rainwater tanks to the northern side

·      Increase floor area by 8 sqm by extending the approved carspace and storage area.

 

Lower Ground Floor

·      Add new study (with high level window on north elevation) and add sauna behind bathroom yielding a total increase of 17 sqm

·      Reduce area of rumpus room by increasing the setback to glass line

 

Ground Floor

·      Reduce area to living room by increasing setback to glass line

·      Reduce are of living room balcony by increasing setback to edge of balcony

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Denning Street between Garie Place and Bedford Place in South Coogee and is presently occupied by an existing single storey brick dwelling with detached garage. The site rises steeply from Denning Street toward the rear. The site has a frontage width of 10.06m, a side boundary depth of 38.19m and has an overall site area of 383.28m². Neighbouring the property to the north is a part two (2) and three (3) storey rendered residential dwelling. To the south is a single storey brick dwelling house. To the rear is a four (4) storey residential flat building. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists predominantly of detached residential dwellings ranging from single to three (3) storeys and some residential flat development. The dwellings along the western side of Denning Street are elevated above street level and the street itself slopes west to east, toward Pearce Street.

 

Generally, the immediate locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of single dwellings houses and multi unit housing development.

 

4.    Site History

 

Approval was granted at the Council Meeting of the 11th May 2010 for the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new part two (2) part three (3) storey dwelling house with lower level garage with terrace above and rear swimming pool.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Notification. No response has been received.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

6.1    Development Engineering Comments

Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

“A Section 96(2) application has been received for modification of the existing approved development including the relocation of water tanks to northern side, additional carspace storage created by additional excavation, addition of sauna and study on lower ground floor with new window, reduction in size of rumpus and living rooms with increase in setbacks

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Architectural Plans by C.M. Haris Architects dated 21st May 2010;

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by C.M. Haris Architects dated May 2010;

 

Additional carspace Comments

 

The additional carspace located at the rear of the proposed garage is 3.2m wide which complies with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 (minimum 3.0m required). There is a conflict with the opening doors to the tank room with vehicles wishing to use the carspace at this location but as the carspace is over-compliant in width Development Engineering is satisfied that a car parked in this space will not totally block access to the tank room although the situation is restrictive and could be improved by the installation of a sliding door at this location. It is recommended that such a condition be inserted in any consent.

 

Additional excavation Comments

 

As the applicant is proposing to increase the extent of the excavation with this proposal with the provision of an additional carspace and sauna and study there is an increased likelihood that seepage water on the site will be encountered. It is recommended therefore that an additional conditional requiring the basement structures to be suitably tanked and waterproofed be added to the consent.

 

As long as Development Engineering conditions are adopted there are no objections from Development Engineering to the Section 96 application.

 

Should the Section 96(2) application be approved the following additional conditions shall apply:”

 

7.      Section 96 Assessment

 

Under the provisions of Section 96(2), a consent authority may modify a development consent if it is satisfied that the development to which the development as modified is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted; and has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modifications.

 

7.1      Substantially the same

The proposed modification relating primarily to addition of carspace, study room and sauna to the approved development and some reduction in rumpus and living areas will not result in any appreciable additional impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and will not alter the proposal from that originally approved. The changes to the approved development results in a development that is substantially the same as that originally approved.

 

8.      Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The site is zoned 2A Residential 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 10 Zone No 2A

·      Clause 40 Excavation and filling of land

 


Clause 10 Zone No 2A

The relevant objectives of Zone No 2A are:

 

(a)    To provide a low density residential environment

 

(b)    To maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas

 

(c)    To protect the amenity of existing residents

 

The proposed modifications to the approved scheme are consistent with the general aims of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2A zone (as specified above) in that the proposed addition and built form will not maintain the character and attributes of the existing residential area and will not adversely impact upon the amenity, character and environmental qualities of adjoining and surrounding development in the locality.

 

Clause 40 Excavation and filling of land

Clause 40 of the RLEP contains provisions for undertaking of excavation and filling of land. The original application was sufficient in addressing the provisions of Clause 40 in that suitable conditions were imposed to ensure that adjoining properties are adequately supported and no damage is caused to the adjoining properties as a result of works requiring substantial excavation and retaining of the site. As identified in the original assessment, whilst extensive excavations up to 3.2m will occur at the lower floor garage level, the excavations resolve the steeply sloping topography and considered to be acceptable given that building height and scale are appropriate for the topography and compatible with other buildings nearby

 

The proposed modifications, whilst involving an increase in excavation internally into the slope of the subject site to provide for additional predominantly basement and sub-basement floor areas, will maintain the integrity of the topography and site. Accordingly, the Section 96 modification will not significantly alter the original approved development and will not change the drainage patterns of the site or result in soil instability and will not adversely impact upon the scenic quality of the site and locality.

 

Accordingly, the current application is acceptable in relation to the provisions of Clause 40.

 

8.2      State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

The original development application was accompanied by a BASIX Certificate. The proposed modifications do not significantly alter the approved built form, floor space or window configuration. Therefore, no amended BASIX Certificate is required for the subject proposal.

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

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

The DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies is applicable to the proposed modifications. The relevant provisions of the DCP are addressed as follows:

 

Floor area

The DCP Objective for floor area is to ensure developments are not excessive in bulk or scale, but are compatible with the existing character of the locality.

 

The preferred solution for an allotment of 383m2 in area is an FSR of 0.6:1, which equates to m2 gross floor area.

 

The original approved proposal has an FSR of 0.78:1. The current proposal will increase the GFA by 23.2 sqm to a proposed FSR of 0.84:1. The modified development will depart from the DCP preferred solution by 0.06:1.

 

The increased floor space is the direct result of an enlarged sunken garage and lower ground storey floor plate via excavation and creation of a study and sauna which will now be included in GFA calculations. There will be some minor reductions in floor area of the ground level above. The overall approved building envelope, form and height will not be altered as a result of the modifications. The modifications will not result in any additional shadow impacts on the neighbouring properties. Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard given its compliance with the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

Earthworks

The Performance Requirement of the DCP is to ensure the location and design of development relate to the topography of the site with minimal cut and fill.

 

The current proposal involves excavation of the approved sub-floor areas to create additional functional floor space at the garage and lower ground level. The depth of excavation is approximately 510mm.

 

The excavation area in question will not visible from the street or the neighbouring dwellings. It will not result in any changes to the approved building envelope, form and height. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.

 

Privacy

The Objective of the DCP is to ensure that new buildings and additions meet occupants’ and neighbours’ requirements for visual and acoustic privacy.

 

The subject application proposes the installation of a high sill window on the northern wall of the proposed study room. Due to the sunken nature of the study room in a sub-floor area, the new window will lower than the natural ground level of the adjoining land such that it will have no impact on privacy of the adjoining property at No. 70 Denning Street.

 

10.    Section 79C 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

Not Applicable

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

Refer to the “DCP- Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies” section of this report.

 

 

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

Not applicable.

 

 

 

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 proposed development is consistent with the predominant 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 has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land uses 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

No submissions have been received in relation to the proposed development.

 

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. Accordingly, the proposal is considered satisfactory in public interest terms.

 

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 modifications proposed as part of this application do not substantially alter the form and nature of the approved development.

 

The likely impacts of the amended proposal have been considered in accordance with Section 79C of the Act, the provisions of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and it has been demonstrated that the proposal generally complies with the preferred solutions/performance requirements of this DCP.

 

Having regard to the provisions of Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the proposed modifications are considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted.

 

Approval of the modification will not result in any significant environmental impact and will not detract from the integrity of the development nor its relationship with adjoining development. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify Development Consent No. 739/2009 for relocation of water tanks to northern side, carspace storage created by additional excavation, addition of sauna and study on lower ground floor with new window, reduction in size of rumpus and living rooms with increase in setbacks, at No. 72 Denning Street, Coogee, in the following manner:

 

A.     Amendment of Condition No. 1 to make reference to the Section 96 drawings, which will read as follows:

 

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plan numbered 02a, dated 12/10/2009 and received by Council on 13 October 2009, and plans numbered 03b, 04b and 05b, dated 12/10/2009 and received by Council on 2 March 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the Section 96 plans numbered 01 and 02 both Revision a, both dated 21 May 2010, and stamped received by Council on 21 May 2010, only in so far as they relate to the modifications detailed in the Section 96 applications, and highlighted on the Section 96 plans as amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans.

 

B.     Add conditions as follows:

 

           61.    As the above site may encounter seepage water within the depth of the basement excavation, the basement garage and 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 garage (to ensure that the basement will not dam or slow the movement of the ground water through the development site).

 

c)        Seepage water must not be collected and discharged from the site.

 

           62.    The doors to the tank room on the garage level shall be altered to be of sliding configuration to avoid conflict with vehicles using the adjacent carspace. Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP67/10

 

 

Subject:                  88-102 Moverly Road, South Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/77/2008/C

Author:                   Frank Ko, Executive Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(AA) Modification of approved development to alter the wording of Conditions 4B, 12 & 27(b) to reflect the intended stages of the development

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Mirvac Projects Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Mirvac Projects Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

This application is referred to Council because it comprises modifications to development consent under Section 96(AA) being modifications to an original development application determined by the Land and Environment Court.

 

The Court approved development (DA No. 77/2008) involves a Stage 1 development pursuant to Section 83C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) comprising a Stage 1 concept plan of a residential development, bulk earthworks, provision of infrastructure, and subdivision into 10 super-lots in the Endeavour House site. The original development application was approved on 5 February 2009 subject to 89 conditions of consent.

 

The subject application seeks consent to modify Conditions 4B, 12 and 27(b) of the original consent to reflect the intended stages of the development.

 

The subject application was not required to be advertised or notified to surrounding properties as the proposed modifications will be of minimal environmental impact as provided for under Clause 117 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (See Section 5 below).

 

Accordingly, the proposed modifications are considered to be substantially the same development as that previously approved and will not result in any significant additional impacts upon the amenity of surrounding properties or the visual character of the locality. 

 

The proposed modifications to Conditions Nos. 4B, 12 and 27(b) are recommended for approval.

 

2.      The Proposal

 

The subject application is made pursuant to Section 96(AA) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify the Development Consent as follows (new/amended/deleted text in bold italics) :

 

2.1    Amend Condition 4B to read as follows:

 

4B.   Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate for any dwelling erected upon the land the developer must have completed the construction of the public pedestrian accessway referred to in condition 4A(b) above.

 

        Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate for any dwelling erected upon the land in Stage 4 the developer must have completed the construction of the public pedestrian accessway referred to in condition 4A(a) above.

 

The original condition No. 4B reads as follows:

 

4B.   Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate for any dwelling erected upon the land the developer must have completed the construction of the public pedestrian access ways referred to in condition 4A above.

 

Applicant’s justification:

The applicant advises that the intention is to construct the pedestrian accessway from the internal road of Endeavour House site to No. 132 Moverly Road as part of the Stage 4 works due to extensive staged civil infrastructure works required within the site and no public access will be available until such time as the internal road in Stage 4 is constructed.

Council’s comment:

The modification to condition No. 4B is considered to be reasonable as it represents a logical progression of development to complete as an integral part of the Stage 4 works.

 

2.2    Amend Condition 12 to read as follows:

 

12.   All internal roads within the development site shall be dedicated to Council, at no cost to Council, following construction of the roads to Council’s design standards and specification. Council will accept certain works to be bonded on application for a subdivision certificate for each stage including footpaths and crossovers, verge landscaping, temporary construction access and final road seal. The value of the bond will be 150% of the cost to complete the works. Footpaths, crossovers and verge landscaping works are to be completed prior to the issue of occupation certificate for each house within each stage.

 

The original condition No. 12 read as follows:

 

12.     All internal roads within the development site shall be dedicated to Council, at no cost to Council, following construction of the roads to Council’s design standards and specification.

 

Applicant’s justification:

The applicant advises that the amendment to this condition is requested to accommodate the staged nature of the works across the site and will ensure that the intent and outcome of the original condition No. 12 is not compromised.

 

Council’s comment:  

Council’s Development Engineer Coordinator does not object in principle to the proposed amendments. The Development Engineer recommends that the following condition of consent be adopted, however, because it gives greater surety to Council with respect to the adequacy of the bond, (being measures against Council’s adopted rates), and greater surety on timing of the works.

 

The last sentence of the recommended condition below is considered to give greater clarity to the timing for verge, footpath and driveway crossover works.

 

12.      All internal roads within the development site shall be dedicated to Council, at no cost to Council, following construction of the roads to Council’s design standards and specification. Council will accept certain works to be bonded on application for a subdivision certificate for each stage including footpaths and crossovers, verge landscaping, temporary construction access and final road seal. The value of the bond will be 150% of the cost to complete the works, such cost to be based on Council’s adopted unit rates for civil construction works. At the time of lodging the bonds an indicative time frame for completion of all bonded works must be provided to Council for approval. Bonded works must be completed in general compliance with the agreed time frame unless prior approval is granted in writing by Council. Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate for a particular house within a stage, (interim or final), the applicant must have completed the footpaths and verge landscaping works fronting the subject house, and must have constructed the vehicular crossing serving the subject house. All works must be to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and Council.

2.3    Amend Condition 27(b) to read as follows:

 

27(b)      The applicant must design and construct channelisation traffic facilities on Moverly Road at its intersection with Macleay Street and Byrne Avenue. The traffic facilities shall achieve a reduction of vehicle speeds by narrowing the carriageway and deflecting the traffic (if design permits). The channelisation is to be achieved with concrete traffic islands, line marking and signs but is to minimise the loss of parking. The traffic facility shall be designed to accommodate all existing vehicle manoeuvres. The design shall be in accordance with relevant traffic facility design guidelines and Randwick City Council standards. The applicant must contact Randwick Council’s Manager Integrated Transport prior to undertaking any investigation/design work to obtain Randwick Council’s requirements for the traffic facilities. Design plans for the traffic facilities must be submitted to Randwick Council for approval, and be approved prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate for any Stage 1 works and must be constructed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the final stage of development.

 

The developer shall be responsible for all public utility adjustment/relocation works and costs, necessitated by the above work. These works shall be undertaken as required by the relevant public utility authorities and/or their agents.

 

The original condition No. 27(b) reads as follows:

 

27(b).     The applicant must design and construct channelisation traffic facilities on Moverly Road at its intersection with Macleay Street and Byrne Avenue. The traffic facilities shall achieve a reduction of vehicle speeds by narrowing the carriageway and deflecting the traffic (if design permits). The channelisation is to be achieved with concrete traffic islands, line marking and signs but is to minimise the loss of parking. The traffic facility shall be designed to accommodate all existing vehicle manoeuvres. The design shall be in accordance with relevant traffic facility design guidelines and Randwick City Council standards. The applicant must contact Randwick Council’s Manager Integrated Transport prior to undertaking any investigation/design work to obtain Randwick Council’s requirements for the traffic facilities. Design plans for the traffic facilities must be submitted to Randwick Council for approval, and be approved prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate for any Stage 1 works and must be constructed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for any Stage 2 application.

 

The developer shall be responsible for all public utility adjustment/relocation works and costs, necessitated by the above work. These works shall be undertaken as required by the relevant public utility authorities and/or their agents.

 

Applicant’s justification:

The applicant advises that an agreement will be reached with Council as soon as possible as to the extent of works and the works will be completed prior to completion of the last stage of the residential development, however, Mirvac seeks this amendment to ensure that in the event there are delays in reaching agreement with Council’s Traffic Committee, it does not impact on the development activities and construction program within the Endeavour site. However, the condition still retains its relevance, by enforcing completion of the traffic channelization before an Occupation Certificate can be issued on the final stage of development.

 

Council’s comment:

The process of gaining approval and agreeing on costs for installation of the approved channelisation has involved a protracted series of meetings and subsequent design amendments.  Delaying the installation of the channelisation is supportable subject to traffic safety not being compromised as part of this process.

 

The recommended condition below sets the issuing of an Occupation Certificate for Stage 4 as the absolute deadline for construction of the channelisation and requires the applicant to install temporary signage/linemarking to address traffic safety concerns.

 

27(b)  The applicant must design and construct channelisation traffic facilities on Moverly Road at its intersection with Macleay Street and Byrne Avenue. The traffic facilities shall achieve a reduction of vehicle speeds by narrowing the carriageway and deflecting the traffic (if design permits). The channelisation is to be achieved with concrete traffic islands, line marking and signs but is to minimise the loss of parking. The traffic facility shall be designed to accommodate all existing vehicle manoeuvres. The design shall be in accordance with relevant traffic facility design guidelines and Randwick City Council standards. The applicant must contact Randwick Council’s Manager Integrated Transport prior to undertaking any investigation/design work to obtain Randwick Council’s requirements for the traffic facilities. Design plans for the traffic facilities must be submitted to Randwick Council for approval, and be approved prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate for any Stage 1 works. The channelisation works shall be constructed as soon as practicable however they must be completed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for any house within Stage 4 of the development. To ensure that traffic safety conditions are not compromised as a result of occupation certificates being issued prior to construction of the channelisation, the applicant must install and maintain appropriate signage and undertake linemarking as required by Council’s Manager Integrated Transport. The required signage and linemarking must be in place at the time of issuing of an Occupation Certificate for any Stage 1 dwelling.

 

The developer shall be responsible for all public utility adjustment/relocation works and costs, necessitated by the above work. These works shall be undertaken as required by the relevant public utility authorities and/or their agents.

 

3.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The Endeavour House site is located on the western side of Moverly Road immediately to the rear of the existing residential properties fronting Moverly Road from Latham Park to Jacaranda Place. Apart from these residential properties on the western side of Moverly Road, the site is bounded almost entirely on all sides by low density residential properties (predominantly dwelling houses) within the adjoining Moverly Green complex. 

 

The Endeavour House site has an area of approximately 6.74 ha and, prior to demolition, contained 4 large buildings formerly used for housing of Defence personnel. Apart from the 4 large buildings, the site also contains several small buildings, walkways, car parks and other minor structures.

 

Vehicular access to the Endeavour House site is available via a single entry road from Moverly Road. All future residential allotments within the Endeavour House site will be served by a hierarchy of internal roads comprising Primary Access Street and Local Access Streets.

 

Pedestrian access into the Endeavour House site will be available via four public pathways (i.e. entry road reserve, an existing footpath in the north-western section of the site linking into Tallow Place and two recent approved pathways through No. 132 Moverly Road to the east and No. 11 Grevillea Place to the west). Internal pedestrian access to residential allotments will be available via 1.2m wide pedestrian pathways within all road reserves of the Primary Access Street and Local Access Street.

 

A central open space will be provided in the centre of the whole site containing plantings and passive recreation area including a playground area and barbeque facility for use by the local community.

 

4.      Application History

 

On 5 February 2009, the Land and Environment Court approved DA No. 77/2008 for a Staged 1 development pursuant to Section 83C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) comprising a Stage 1 concept plan of a residential development, bulk earthworks, provision of infrastructure, and subdivision into 10 super-lots in the Endeavour House site.

 

A Section 96(AA) application (DA/77/2008/A) to modify condition No. 11 to alter the width of grass verges and footpaths within designated road reserves adjoining the proposed central open space of the approved development was approved at the Ordinary Council meeting on 23 February 2010.

 

A Section 96(AA) application (DA/77/2008/B) to alter the staging of works, bonding of works, issuing a subdivision certificate and correct errors in conditions was approved at the Ordinary Council meeting on 23 February 2010.

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

Section 96AA (1) of the EP&A Act states that “A consent authority may, on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by the Court and subject to and in accordance with the regulations, modify the development consent, if (among other things): (b) it has notified the application in accordance with: (i) the regulation, if the regulations so require”.

 

The relevant regulation governing public consultation for Section 96AA applications is Clause 117 – Public participation – applications for modification of development consents involving minimal environmental impact. Clause 117 Sub-clause (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 states as follows:

 

“This clause applies to an application under section 96(1A) of the Act or under section 96AA of the Act in respect of modification which, in the opinion of the consent authority, is of minimal environmental impact.”

 

Under Council’s DCP - Public Notification, Section 96 (1A) applications (modifications with minimal environmental impacts) do not require to be advertised and notified. Accordingly, by that very fact, and having regard to the wording of Clause 117 (1), Section 96 (AA) applications involving modifications of minimal environmental impacts do not require advertising and notification. As discussed in relevant sections of this report, the proposed modifications sought under the subject Section 96(AA) application will have minimal environmental impacts as the proposed changes to Conditions Nos. 4B, 12 and 27 relate primarily to the logistics associated with the staged delivery of the development and the implementation of the development consents issued by Council in respect of Stages 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B and the two pedestrian accessways.

 

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:-

 

6.1    Environmental Health Comments

No referral/comment in relation to health and building issues is required for this application.

 

6.2    Development Engineering Comment

The subject Section 96 Application has been reviewed by Council’s Development Engineer and the relevant comments have bee included in Section 2 of this report. 

 

7.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

7.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998

The proposed modifications will not change the approved floor space, heights and landscaped area provision of the original development. Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory having regard to the provisions of the LEP.

 

8.      Policy Controls

 

The proposed modifications will have no impact in terms of the original DA's compliance with relevant policy controls as the proposed changes relate to the staged delivery of the development and the implementation of the development consent issued by Council in respect of Stages 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B and two pedestrian accessways. 

 

9.      Section 96 Assessment

 

Under the provisions of Section 96(AA), a consent authority may modify a development consent if it is satisfied that the development to which the development as modified is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted; and has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modifications.

 

9.1      Substantially the same

The proposed modifications are considered minor and of minimal environmental impact such that the original development, as proposed to be modified, will be substantially the same development as that for which consent was originally granted. Specifically, the proposed modifications sought in this Section 96 AA application will not be inconsistent with the Court approved Stage 1 development application.

 

9.2      Consideration of submissions

As indicated in Section 5 above, the subject application, being a Section 96(AA) application with minimal environmental impacts is not required to be advertised and notified pursuant to Clause 117 (Public participation – applications for modification of development consents involving minimal environmental impact), Sub-clause (1),  of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000.

 

10.      Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

The site remains suitable for the original approved development and will not be detrimentally affected by the proposed s96 modifications. The suitability of the site for approved development has been extensively addressed and assessed in the original determination of the DA.

 

11.    Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 5a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development.

Outcome 11:      A healthy/sustainable environment.

Direction 11a:    Council is a leader in fostering sustainable practices.

 

12.    Conclusion

 

The proposed modifications to the original development consent satisfies Section 96(AA) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and approval of the modification will not result in any significant additional impacts upon the amenity of the surrounding development or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable and within public interest.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the responsible Consent Authority grant consent under Section 96(AA) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No DA/77/2008 to amend the wording of Conditions 4B, 12 and 27(b) to reflect the intended stages of the development at 88-102 Moverly Road, South Coogee, in the following manner: 

 

1.     Amend Condition No. 4B to read as follows:

 

4B.       Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate for any dwelling erected upon the land the developer must have completed the construction of the public pedestrian accessway referred to in condition 4A(b) above.

 

           Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate for any dwelling erected upon the land in Stage 4 the developer must have completed the construction of the public pedestrian accessway referred to in condition 4A(a) above.

 

2.     Amend Condition No. 12 to read as follows:

 

12.       All internal roads within the development site shall be dedicated to Council, at no cost to Council, following construction of the roads to Council’s design standards and specification. Council will accept certain works to be bonded on application for a subdivision certificate for each stage including footpaths and crossovers, verge landscaping, temporary construction access and final road seal. The value of the bond will be 150% of the cost to complete the works, such cost to be based on Council’s adopted unit rates for civil construction works. At the time of lodging the bonds an indicative time frame for completion of all bonded works must be provided to Council for approval. Bonded works must be completed in general compliance with the agreed time frame unless prior approval is granted in writing by Council. Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate for a particular house within a stage, (interim or final), the applicant must have completed the footpaths and verge landscaping works fronting the subject house, and must have constructed the vehicular crossing serving the subject house. All works must be to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and Council.

 

3.     Amend Condition No. 27(b) to read as follows:

 

27(b). The applicant must design and construct channelisation traffic facilities on Moverly Road at its intersection with Macleay Street and Byrne Avenue. The traffic facilities shall achieve a reduction of vehicle speeds by narrowing the carriageway and deflecting the traffic (if design permits). The channelisation is to be achieved with concrete traffic islands, line marking and signs but is to minimise the loss of parking. The traffic facility shall be designed to accommodate all existing vehicle manoeuvres. The design shall be in accordance with relevant traffic facility design guidelines and Randwick City Council standards. The applicant must contact Randwick Council’s Manager Integrated Transport prior to undertaking any investigation/design work to obtain Randwick Council’s requirements for the traffic facilities. Design plans for the traffic facilities must be submitted to Randwick Council for approval, and be approved prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate for any Stage 1 works. The channelisation works shall be constructed as soon as practicable however they must be completed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for any house within Stage 4 of the development. To ensure that traffic safety conditions are not compromised as a result of occupation certificates being issued prior to construction of the channelisation, the applicant must install and maintain appropriate signage and undertake linemarking as required by Council’s Manager Integrated Transport. The required signage and linemarking must be in place at the time of issuing of an Occupation Certificate for any Stage 1 dwelling.

 

The developer shall be responsible for all public utility adjustment/relocation works and costs, necessitated by the above work. These works shall be undertaken as required by the relevant public utility authorities and/or their agents.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP68/10

 

 

Subject:                  13-15 Botany Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/850/2008/D

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     S96(2) Modification - alteration to carparking & driveway, and privacy screens & openings, internal reconfiguration, additional landscaping to northern boundary, alteration to some balconies, to southern extension of some units & to fire stairs, addition of roof terraces to units 301 and 302, alteration to roof, skylights & to some exterior materials & relocation of mechanical exhaust

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                IWD No. 2 Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Doonside Properties Pty Ltd - GLENO

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The Section 96 application is referred Council for determination as the original application was determined by the Planning Committee at its meeting of 24 March 2009. The approved development comprises the demolition of existing structures on the site, site remediation, and construction of 53 residential units in a part 3, part 4 storey building with basement parking for 70 vehicles, strata subdivision and associated site works.

 

The Section 96(2) application will modify the approved development primarily for the following changes:

 

·           addition of roof terraces to units 3.01 and 3.02,

·           addition of one new adaptable dwelling unit thus increasing the number of proposed dwellings from 53 to 54

·           alteration to visitor/carwash carparking allocation and driveway

·           provision of additional landscape planting on northern boundary

·           alteration and addition of privacy screens to relevant 

·           alteration to size of select balconies

·           alterations to and additions of skylights

·           relocation of mechanical exhaust

·           internal alterations including:

 

o   provision of a new voids for additional solar access to the relevant dwelling units

o   deletion of the redundant voids to relevant dwelling units

o   straightening of the splayed treatment of internal dividing walls to relevant dwelling units

o   conversion of sections of breezeways into floor space for relevant adjoining dwelling units

o   alteration to fire stairs

 

The Section 96 application was notified to surrounding properties and advertised. One submission was received which is addressed in the relevant section below.

 

The Section 96 proposal will result in an increase in floor area by 91.05 sqm yielding an FSR of 1.312:1 compared with the maximum FSR standard of 0.9:1 under Clause 20F of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation). The original proposal has an approved FSR of 1.29:1. The increase arises primarily from the conversion of breezeway corridor space into internal floor areas of units and the creation of new voids for relevant dwelling units. The increase in FSR is considered reasonable and acceptable as the increase occurs internally largely as a result of conversion of breezeways and provisions of voids to adjoining units such that the envelope of the approved building remains predominantly intact.  Furthermore, the proposed increase in FSR will not result in any detrimental amenity impact in terms of solar access, privacy, views and visual bulk and scale to adjoining and surrounding properties with the proposed builtform remaining unchanged and consistent with the height, bulk and scale of existing development in the locality. Additionally, the proposed FSR modification will not be inconsistent with the underlying LEP objective of the building height standard.

 

The proposed Section 96 will also result in an increase in building height arising from the proposed staircase enclosures adjoining the new roof top terraces for units 3.01 and 3.02. The breach in height will be 1.8m above the maximum building height standard of 12m prescribed in Clause 20G of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation). The original proposal was approved at a maximum building height of 12.5 metres. The additional building height is considered reasonable and acceptable as it will be confined to two small section of the roof space which will not be visible from the street level as the enclosures will be well setback behind the main building line; the proposed stair-case enclosures and their associated roof top terraces will not give rise to any amenity impacts to adjoining properties; and proposed building height modification will not be inconsistent with the underlying LEP objective of the building height standard.

 

Overall, the proposed modifications do not give rise to additional amenity impacts as the modifications essentially will be contained within the approved footprint and building envelope under the original DA which will be largely maintained. Accordingly, the proposed modification is considered to be substantially the same development as that previously approved and will not result in any significant additional impacts upon the amenity of either existing properties in the locality or the visual character of the locality. 

 

The Section 96 proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria, objectives and controls of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing with the exception of FSR and building height which has been addressed as part of the merit assessment of variations to the maximum FSR and building height standard of the Randwick LEP 1998. 

 

Approval, subject to conditions, is recommended.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The subject proposal is made pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify Development Consent No. 850/2008. The Section 96 proposal is for the following:

 

Basement

·      reduction in the number of carwash bays to comply with DA condition No. 96 which reads as follows;

 

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

 

a)       The car washing bays must be drained to sewer to the requirements of Sydney Water and proof of compliance is to be submitted to the certifying authority, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the proposed development.

 

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

 

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

 

          d)       The car washing bays must be constructed with a minimum 20mm bund around the perimeter of the car washing bays (or equivalent)

 

          e)       A water tap shall be located adjacent to the car washing bays.”

 

·      provision of seven (7) visitor parking spaces (i.e. 3 shared carwash bays and 4 dedicated visitor spaces); and

·      provision of a 5.5m wide driveway to comply with DA condition No. 67 which reads as follows:

 

“67.    The driveway opening at the Waratah Avenue site frontage must be a minimum of 5.5 metres wide. The internal driveway must be a minimum 5.5m wide (clear width) for the first 6 metres inside the property so as to allow entering & exiting vehicles to pass within the site. The internal driveway/ramp must be designed for two way traffic movements at all points along the driveway/ramp. The plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.”

 

Ground Floor

·       internal replanning of Units G03 and G04;

·       relocation of ramp/stair access from Botany Street to the main lobby;

·       Unit G05 no longer an adaptable unit;

·       internal replanning of Units G05 to G12 inclusive;

·       new adaptable one (1) bedroom unit proposed (Unit G13);

·       previous Unit G13 renamed Unit G14;

·       privacy screen provided to Unit G04 private open space;

·       relocation of door to Waratah Street lobby to allow a new security entrance to Unit G05; and

·       provision of landscaping along the site’s northern boundary, to be planted following the finalisation of demolition works, so that the vegetation will reach maturity at the completion of the construction works.

 

First Floor

·       internal replanning of Units 1.03 and 1.04 and enlargement of their balconies from a depth of 1.2m to a depth of 1.5m;

·       reduction in the size of the secondary balcony to Unit 1.01 to allow the provision of a void to provide for additional solar access to the bedrooms of the units below;

·       deletion of the redundant voids to the ground floor level, at the southern side of Units 105 to 116 inclusive;

·       balcony to Unit 117 enlarged;

·       provision of new internal landscaped voids to Units 107, 109, 110, 112, 113, 115 and 116 with minor southern extension within the building envelope, to accommodate the voids;

·       straightening of the splayed treatment of internal dividing walls to Units 107 to 118 inclusive;

·       northern privacy screens to Units 105 to 118 inclusive removed and replaced with balustrades;

·       new obscure louvred window on the eastern side of Unit 118; and

·       screen indicated on the western elevation.

 

Second Floor

·       internal replanning of Units 2.03 and 2.04 and enlargement of their balconies from a depth of 1.2m to a depth of 1.5m;

·       reduction in the size of the secondary balcony to Unit 2.01 to allow the provision of a void to provide for additional solar access to the bedrooms of the units below;

·       northern privacy screens to Units 205 to 218 inclusive removed and replaced with balustrades;

·       provision of internal voids to Units 207, 209, 210, 212, 213, 215 and 216 with minor southern extension within the building envelope, to accommodate the voids;

·       adjustment to the southern voids to Units 207 to 216 inclusive;

·       new obscure louvred window on the eastern side of Unit 218; and

·       straightening of the splayed treatment of internal dividing walls to Units 207 to 218 inclusive;

·      northern privacy screens to Units 205 to 218 inclusive removed and replaced with balustrades; and

·      windows provided to Unit 205 and 206 bathrooms.

 

Third Floor

·      internal replanning to accommodate an internal spiral stair in Units 301 and 302;

·      increase to depth of western balconies to Units 301 and 302;

·      reduction in the size of the secondary balcony to Unit 3.01 to allow the provision of a void to provide for additional solar access to the bedrooms of the units below; and

·      adjustment to the western alignment of the fire stair, to bring it into alignment with the western walls of Units 301 and 302.

 

Roof Level

·      provision of centralised roof terraces to Units 301 and 302 with a 1.8m high screen fence, 1.1m high balustrades and 1.8m high stair enclosures  approximately 1.6m by 1.6m ;

·      relocation of mechanical exhaust to accommodate new roof terraces;

·      provision of new voids and adjustment of skylights;

·      change to extent of roof in south eastern corner; and

·      provision of gas boosted solar hot water system.

 

Elevations

·      adjustment to window and door placements to correspond with floorplans; and

·      use of brick veneer where indicated.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is known as Nos. 13, 15 & 17 Botany Street, Randwick. The site is located on the north-east corner of the Botany Street and Waratah Avenue intersection. The site comprises Lot 1, Section 2 in Deposited Plan 3496 (No. 17 Botany Street) and Lots 2, 3, 35, 36, 37 and 38, Section 2 in Deposited Plan 3496 (being 13 & 15 Botany Street).

Figure 1 : Aerial view of subject site.

The western boundary of the site fronts Botany Street and has a length of 36.60m. The site has a frontage to Waratah Avenue (the southern boundary) of 90.55m. The northern (rear) boundary is 88.65m in length. The eastern boundary has a length of 36.56m.

 

The overall site is generally rectangular in shape and has a total area of 3,277m².

 

The site slopes gently from the eastern boundary rising up to the western boundary, with a difference in height of approximately 1m over the 90m length of the site. There is also a mild slope from the southern boundary rising up to the northern boundary with the approximate difference in height being 600m between these two boundaries.

 

The site currently accommodates a single storey brick ‘Federation Queen Anne’ style dwelling with slate roof on the corner of Botany Street and Waratah Ave, and a series of buildings used as part of the operations of the Randwick Veterinary Hospital and Eastern Suburbs Dog and Cat Boarding and Grooming. The buildings include an office, garage and numerous sheds and stables. The structures are primarily constructed of timber with metal roofing.

 

The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of residential flat buildings and semi-detached and free standing dwellings of varied ages and architectural styles.

 

Adjoining the site to the north at No. 11 Botany Street is a four storey brick residential flat building that is orientated east to west.

 

Located opposite the site on the western side of Botany Street are 3 storey residential flat buildings of varying ages and architectural styles. The buildings at No. 18 and No. 16-14 Botany Street have a painted brick finish while the buildings at No. 12 and No. 20 Botany Street have a red face brick finish.

 

To the rear, the site adjoins a 3 storey brick residential flat building at No. 2 Silver Street, and three, late Victorian houses at No. 4, 6 and 8 Silver Street that are listed as heritage under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

Adjoining the subject site to the east is a 4 storey ‘1970’s’ style residential flat building at No. 9 Waratah Avenue. The driveway of No. 9 is located along their western boundary, immediately adjoining the subject site. To the east of the building at No. 9 is a more recent 3 storey residential unit complex with pitched roof and basement carpark.

 

Located opposite the site on the southern side of Waratah Avenue is a row of free standing and semi-detached residential dwellings. The corner property (south east corner of the Botany Street and Waratah intersection) addresses Botany Street and accommodates a semi-detached, single storey brick dwelling and is known as No.19 Botany Street. There is a small addition at the rear of this site which forms a dual occupancy and is known as 2 Waratah Avenue. No 4 Waratah Avenue accommodates a 1 and 2 storey brick dwelling while No 6 and No. 8 accommodate single storey freestanding brick dwellings. Located between Nos. 10 and 22 Waratah Avenue is a series of semi-detached single storey brick dwellings.

 

The site is located in close proximity to Writtle Park to the south on Botany Street, and the commercial precinct on Belmore Road and Alison Road to the north-east. Randwick Racecourse is located two blocks to the west. The University of NSW and the Prince of Wales Hospital are located further to the south.

 

 

4.    Site History

 

The original development (DA/850/2008) was approved by Council at its meeting on 24 March 2009 and comprises the demolition of existing buildings and construction of 4 storey mixed use development comprising 2 commercial tenancies, 2 home offices and 21 basement and ground level carpark spaces and 13 residential units above.

 

A Section 96 application (DA/850/2008/A) for changing the internal layout of the approved dwelling units, providing 1 additional basement carparking space, converting a part of the basement storage area into a bicycle storage space and adjusting the  basement garbage area, was approved on 16 June 2009.

 

A further Section 96 application (DA/850/2008/B) for altering the internal layout of units, increasing the gross floor area by approximately 118m2; modifying window and door openings and adding juliette balconies was approved by Council at its meeting on 25 August 2009.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP - Notification. One submission was received from a resident/owner of the adjoining residential flat building at No 11 Botany Street (the adjoining building to the north) raising the following concern:

 

·      Loss of privacy due to removal of north-facing privacy screen to unit 301 and inadequate north-facing planter box to unit 303

 

Comment: in order to maintain the privacy of the objector’s property, the proposed deletion of the north-facing privacy screen to unit 301 is not supported A condition requiring the subject privacy screens to be retained will be applied. The separation distance between the objector’s property and the balcony of unit 3.03 is 11m which is in excess of the minimum separation distance required for privacy between buildings. The objector has requested appropriate landscape plantings be installed between the two properties to ensure privacy. Accordingly, a condition will be applied requiring an increase in the width and depth of the proposed planter box along the northern edge of the north-facing balconies of unit 3.03 and the installation and maintenance of suitable medium height hardy species in the subject planter boxes.

 

The applicant has advised that it would be agreeable to a condition requiring that, at the completion of demolition works, mature tall Grevilleas, of a height of between 1.5m and 2m, will be planted along the northern boundary, at a spacing of 1.5m between the centres of the trunk of each plant. A condition will be applied should approval be granted.

 

·      Addition of roof terraces to unit 3.01 and 3.03 breaches height limit. 

 

Comment: The addition of two roof terraces to units 3.01 and 3.02 will result in a breach of the 12m height limit by a max 1.8m in the form of two stair enclosures over the new spiral staircase linking the roof terraces to their respective living rooms below. As assessed in section 7 below, the breach in height limit is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·      The breach is localised to two minor areas covering the two stair-cases each approximately 1.6m by 1.6m.

·      The stair-case  enclosures are well setback behind the main building line (8.5m from the northern for unit 3.01 and 11.5m from the southern building line for unit 3.02, and 6m from the western building line for both units)  such that they would be imperceptible from the Botany and Waratah Street level.

·      The proposed stair-case enclosures and their associated roof top terraces will not give rise to any overshadowing and overlooking impacts as they are setback by 15m (well in excess of the minimum separation distance) from the closest residential property being the objector’s property at No. 11 Botany Street.

 

Furthermore, a condition will be applied requiring all privacy screen elements to these roof top terraces to be constructed in suitably framed opaque glass to ensure a “light-weight” visual effect.

 

·      Potential detrimental impacts of mechanical exhaust from carpark.

 

Comment: The submitted plans show the carpark mechanical exhaust riser and outlet located in the centre of the proposed building adjacent to the stair enclosure to unit 3.02 which is located 22m way from the closest residential property being the objector’s property at No. 11 Botany Street. Notwithstanding this, a condition requiring the mechanical exhaust system to be design in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard to ensure the amenity of adjoining properties will be applied.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

6.1    Environmental Health and Building Comments

No objections in relation to health and building issues are raised to the application.

 

6.2    Development Engineer Comments

The Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

“An application has been received to modify development consent for a residential flat building at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Project No 2008109 Drwg No’s DA10P18, DA11P20, DA30F & 42P9 by Jackson Teece stamped by Council 5 Mar 2010.

 

The modifications to the development consent includes increasing the total number of units from 53 (11x1bed, 23x1bed + study, 17x2 bed+study & 2x3bed) to 54 (12x1bed, 23x1bed + study, 18x2 bed+study & 1x3bed) and the proposed reduction of 12 visitor car spaces to 5 and the re-allocation of 7 visitor car spaces to units within the development site.

 

The approved DA was approved with 1 deficient car space (70 provided – 71 required) and the proposed amendments with 54 units would require 72 spaces.

 

The assessing officer should liaise with Planning Officer - Wendy Wang to confirm that an additional car space has been approved as part of the previous S96 application (850/2008/C) as the applicant has stated that 71 spaces are now being provided

 

Comment: An additional carparking was provided for under the previous Section 96 application (DA/850/2008/C) (see Section below regarding compliance with the residential component of the proposal).

 

Development Engineering agrees that managing of visitor car spaces for their intended purposes may prove difficult and would not object to partial re-allocation of visitor spaces to specific units.

 

Considering that Council’s DCP-parking requires 1 space per 4 dwellings or part thereof Development Engineering considers a visitor allocation of 1 space per 8 dwellings as acceptable in this case. This would calculate to a total of 7 visitor car spaces being provided which is reducing the visitor car space allocation by nearly 50%. The assessing officer may consider including the following condition:

 

The applicant is to provide a total of 7 visitor car spaces for the development, in which 3 can be car washing. Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate the visitor car spaces are to be clearly signposted.

 

Comment : As assessed in Section 8 below, notwithstanding the advice of the development engineer, it is considered that it would be more appropriate that 10 carspaces be retained for visitor use (ie., three more above that recommended by Council’s development engineer) to ensure that adequate spaces are made available on-site for visitors in the public interest. A condition to this effect will be applied. Accordingly, the reallocation of two carspaces to residential dwelling units is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

The assessing officer is also advised that the driveway gradients shown on these submitted plans formed part of S96 application 850/2008/C in which the driveway grades shown were not supported and the following grades were recommended:

 

1:20 for the first 5m’s inside the property from the Waratah Avenue frontage.

1:8 for the next 12m’s then a transition of 1:10 for the last 2m’s into the basement car park.

 

Comment : These gradients have now been applied as part of the approval granted to a previous Section 96 application (DA/850/2008/C). Accordingly, the recommended driveway gradients have been applied for the proposed development.

 

6.3    Heritage Comments

Council’s heritage planner has advised that no further heritage comments and requirements are applicable for the Section 96 proposal as the amendments are generally internal with no changes to the main building envelope consistent with the original approved DA.

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

7.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The subject site is zoned Residential 2C (Residential C Zone). The proposal is permissible with development consent. The following relevant clauses apply to the site:

 

·      Clause 9 Objectives

·      Clause 12 Zone No 2C

·      Clause 20G Building Heights

·      Clause 43 Heritage Conservation

 

Clause 9 - Objectives

Clause 9 of RLEP 1998 requires Council to consider the aims of the LEP and Zone objectives prior to determining any DA on land to which the RLEP applies. The Section 96 proposal will not compromise the aims of the LEP in relation to aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality and provide a variety of housing types that does not compromise the amenity of the residential area, consistent with the zone objectives.

 

 

Clause 12 Zone No 2C

The relevant objectives of Zone No 2D are:  

 

(a)    To provide for a medium density residential environment

(b)    To maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas

(c)    To protect the amenity of existing residents

(e)    To encourage housing affordability

 

The proposed modifications to the approved scheme are consistent with the general aims of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2C zone (as specified above) in that the proposed modification will not result in a built form that will adversely impact the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

Clause 20F Floor Space Ratios

Clause 20G of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) prescribes a maximum FSR of 0.9:1 for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, on sites greater than 700m2 in the 2C Zone. The original proposal was approved at a maximum FSR of 1.26:1 pursuant to a SEPP 1 Objection which was duly assessed and found acceptable. A subsequent approval for a Section 96 application (DA/850/2008/B) resulted in an increase in the approved FSR to 1.29:1.

 

The current Section 96 application involves a further increase in FSR to 1.312:1 as a result of an increase in floor area by 91.05 sqm arising from the following amendments:

 

·              Conversion of part of the breezeway along the southern side of the Waratah Avenue “wing” into floorspace associated with the adjoining apartments; and

·              Provision of voids within the centre of many of the units in the Waratah Street wing.

 

The original non-compliance in FSR was addressed pursuant to a SEPP 1 Objection, as part of the original assessment, such that a SEPP 1 objection is not required for the current increase in FSR as the application has been submitted and assessed as a S96 application. An assessment of the merits of this increase in FSR indicates that the increase is reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·      The increase occurs internally as a result of conversion of breezeways and provisions of voids to adjoining units such that there has been no increase in the envelope of the approved building in terms of the approved walls and their approved setbacks from all boundaries. 

 

·      The proposed increase in FSR will not result in any detrimental amenity impact in terms of solar access, privacy, views and visual bulk and scale to adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

·      The increased density is not considered excessive as the proposed builtform remains unchanged and remains consistent with the height, bulk and scale of existing development in the locality as that originally approved for the subject site. In particular, the scale of the development remains consistent with that of existing residential flat buildings and multi-unit development in the immediate area.

 

·      The increased floor area will not result in any changes to the setback of the approved development.

 

·      The proposed FSR modification will maintain compliance with the minimum landscaped area requirements in LEP 1998.

 

·      The proposed modifications are considered to be consistent with the underlying objective of the FSR standard.

 

Clause 20G Building Heights

Clause 20G of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) prescribes a maximum building height standard of 12m for the subject site. The original proposal was approved at a maximum building height of 12.5m subject to a SEPP 1 Objection which was duly assessed and found acceptable. The addition of two roof terraces to units 3.01 and 3.02 in the current section 96 application will result in a breach of the 12m height limit by a max 1.8m in the form of two stair enclosures over the new spiral staircase linking the roof terraces to their respective living rooms below.

 

The original non-compliance in building height was addressed pursuant to a SEPP 1 Objection, as part of the original assessment, such that a SEPP 1 objection is not required for the current increase in height as the application has been submitted and assessed as a S96 application. Nevertheless, the breach in the height limit under this Section 96 application is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·      The breach is localised to two minor areas (approximately 1.6m by 1.6m) over two new internal stair-cases in units 3.01 and 3.02.

 

·      The stair-case  enclosures are well setback behind the main building line (8.5m from the northern building line for unit 3.01, and 11.5m from the southern building line for unit 3.02, and 6m from the western building line for both units)  such that they would be imperceptible from the Botany and Waratah Street level.

 

·      The proposed stair-case enclosures and their associated roof top terraces will not give rise to any overshadowing and overlooking impacts as they are setback by 15m (well in excess of the minimum separation distance) from the closest residential property being the objector’s property at No. 11 Botany Street.

 

·      The proposed increase in height will not affect the compliant landscaped area and approved setback of the existing development.

 

·      The proposed modifications are considered to be consistent with the underlying objective of the building height standard.

 

Furthermore, a condition will be applied requiring all privacy screen elements associated with these roof top terraces to be constructed in suitably framed opaque glass to ensure a “light-weight” visual effect.

 

Clause 43 Heritage Conservation

Clause 43 of RLEP 1998 relates to heritage items and heritage conservation areas. The subject site is within the vicinity of three heritage items which are located adjacent to the northern boundary of the subject site comprising No. 4, 6 and 8 Silver Street which are a group of 3 x single storey late Victorian cottages. Council’s heritage planner has assessed the application and advised that no further heritage comments and requirements are applicable for the Section 96 proposal as the amendments are generally internal with no changes to building envelope. Furthermore, the proposal does not seek to modify any of the conditions of consent imposed by Council in relation to heritage conservation.

 

 

 

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

Pursuant to Clause 30 of the SEPP, the consent authority may refer a proposed Section 96 modification to the relevant design review panel. The Section 96 application was referred to the Design Review Panel in April 2010 following which the applicant submitted amended plans which came before the Panel in July 2010. The Panels comments basically comprise two categories, the first are comments that reflect on-going issues that the Panel has continually raised from the DA and the second are comments that raise issues directly related to the Section 96 changes at hand.

 

On-going issues carried on from DA stage

·      Need for commercial uses on the Botany Street frontage.

·     

·      Provision of individual dedicated access between all ground floor units and the basement carpark

·      Increase in landscaped area and retaining trees in the eastern end

·      Landscape area allocated to dwelling units

·      Realignment of driveway

 

 

The above listed issues are issues that are not relevant to the Section 96 application (ie., they are not issues arising from specific changes under the current Section 96 application) but rather are mainly issues that have been raised by the Panel in the original DA. Accordingly, it would be unreasonable to require the applicant to amend the approved development to address these issues as they are beyond the scope of the Section 96 application. 

 

Issues specific to the Section 96 application

·      The use of copper coloured powder coated aluminium instead of real copper for the screen wall in the Waratah Street elevation will not achieve a natural effect.

 

Council’s Comment: The applicant advises that the essence of the Waratah Street screen proposed under the current Section 96 application will be the same as that approved. The screen will remain predominantly twisted elements, not standard louvres as the Panel suggests. The current Section 96 Application proposes only to change the material of the screen from copper to anodised or powdercoated to match copper finish. The applicant advises that the use of anodized or powder coated copper finish would have similar visual effect as original copper. Details in relation to the screen were submitted on 27 April 2010. A condition will be applied requiring additional privacy and solar protection measures for the top floor units.

 

·      The void/lightwell adjoining the southern breezeway provided remains problematic with regard to light spill at night between apartments.   

 

Council’s Comment: The applicant has advised that amended Section 96 Drawing Nos. DA40, DA41 and DA50 provides additional detail in relation to the provision of privacy screens, solid elements and opaque glass louvres within the voids, to ensure that light and ventilation are achieved whilst minimising noise and visual privacy impacts.

 

·      Clerestorey windows for the top floor apartments need to be provided. 

·      The proposed installation of skylights inadequate in terms of shading and ventilation capability.  

 

Council’s Comment: The applicant advises that the provision of clerestory windows for top floor units will necessitate increasing the height of the roof of the building, which was not considered feasible, as it is preferable to retain the approved height at the site. Notwithstanding this, proposal has been amended to provide skylights above the kitchens of Units 2.08, 2.11, 2.14 and 2.15 so as to achieve the Panel's solar access objective. These are operable windows and will be provided with an internal blind and a condition of consent can be imposed to this effect.

 

·      No clothesline provided in the western end.

 

Council’s Comment: The proposal incorporates several clotheslines towards the northern and eastern ends of the site. These provisions are considered adequate.

 

·      The north elevation glazing to living rooms does not indicate good ventilation options or security and ventilation capabilities. While awning windows added on the north façade are  now satisfactory, these need to be carried through to the western elevation also.

 

Council’s Comment: The Panel supports the provision of awning windows on the northern elevation and requests that this is carried through to the western elevation. The applicant has advised that the Section 96 drawing No. DA31 indicates the provision of awning windows to the glazed stairwell. A condition will be applied requiring additional awning windows to be provided above the sliding balcony doors of the west-facing units.

 

·      The south side of the ground floor units remains deeply recessed, and is likely to be gloomy and unwelcoming. The voids over, if there are any, and not adequately shown

 

Council’s Comment: There will be changes to the southern building line involving conversion of part of the breezeway along the southern side of the Waratah Avenue “wing” into floorspace associated with the adjoining apartments. This will result in marginal recessing to the southern building line of the proposed development however, these will be minor and will not differ significantly from the approved recessed southern building line. Accordingly, due to the marginal change in the southern building line under the current Section 96 proposal, it would be unreasonable to require the applicant to delete the recessed configuration as such a requirement would entail major changes to not only the design but also the floor area and landscaping of the proposed development along this southern frontage beyond the scope of the Section 96 application. Notwithstanding this, the applicant advises that the ground floor units will receive adequate degree of solar access during the day as well as natural daylight as the extent of the overhang is not excessive. The inclusion of void lighting and vegetation will further ensure a high level of amenity for these south-facing ground floor units.

 

·      the top floor west facing elevation to Botany Street would benefit from a more solid treatment, to give better privacy and solar controls for the future inhabitants. Currently there is far too much glazing. There should be more solid/private balustrades, particularly to the street frontages.

 

Council’s Comment: The applicant advises that the Botany Street elevation has been approved under the original DA with extensive solid areas with the added use of open balustrades to provide visual relief and articulation of this elevation. Similarly, the Waratah Street elevation contains the feature screen, and no modifications are proposed to its appearance. As discussed above, the top floor units within the Botany Street unit achieve good solar control due to the generous roof overhang. However, should Council consider it necessary, a condition can be imposed requiring additional screening to be provided. The applicant’s advice is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

·      roof design, including incorporating skylights/ highlights

 

Council’s Comment: The section 96 plans have been amended to provide for skylights throughout relevant parts of the building which will improve solar access and sustainability (see Drawing Nos. DA14 and DA15). Furthermore, sun access diagrams lodged with the application indicate adequate solar penetration into recessed units which will further mitigate against any perceived deficiency in solar access to these units.

 

·      the upper one bed apartments could all have more sunlight above the balcony /living room

 

Council’s Comment: Amended plans have been lodged indicating additional ventilating skylights above the kitchens in the upper floor level of the Part 3 storey section of the building to achieve additional solar access.

 

·      window and door operation, including the windows and doors behind all screens. All windows need to consider providing good options for ventilation, while considering security. More (and consistent) information needs to be provided regarding the bedrooms along the walkways to Waratah Street

 

Council’s Comment: The original proposal and subsequent section 96 approved modifications incorporated a range of window and door operations (ie sliding doors, sliding and awning windows) to allow for use in varying weather conditions. This is also reflected in the current Section 96 drawings Nos. DA 13, DA30 and DA50. Accordingly, this issue has been satisfactorily addressed.

 

·      Overlooking and light spill issues between apartments, access balconies and light wells are still of concern and a more compact apartment building layout should be investigated to improve amenity, sun access, privacy and circulation.

 

Council’s Comment: This issue has been addressed in the amended plans submitted to Council on 27 April 2010. The plans (DA Nos. DA40, DA41 and DA50) include additional detail in relation to the treatment of the voids, with solid elements/ledges, opaque glass louvres and timber privacy screens, so as to allow for light and ventilation whilst managing potential lightspill and privacy issues.

 

·      Inadequate information of proposed screens on all facades, including privacy, material and operation

 

Council’s Comment: The applicant has provided additional details in relation to the proposed screens on the Waratah Street façade which will be anodised or powdercoat to match copper finish. Other screen elements have been adequately annotated to indicate that their visual impact will appropriate in the streetscape.

 

·      Bin areas for the ground floor units could be incorporated in the southern courtyards.

 

·      Council’s Comment: A condition for bin areas to be provided in the southern courtyards will be applied.

 

·      The stairs from the car park have been removed however the clear break between the east and west wings has not been achieved.

 

Council’s Comment: The applicant advises that the Section 96 application does not alter the treatment of the development at the junction of the Botany and Waratah Street buildings. Notwithstanding this, a glazed wall extending the full height of the building is provided at this junction, to delineate between the two (2) forms as shown in drawings Nos. DA15 and DA30. The applicant’s advice is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

·      The common stairs seem to have too much glazing, without any opening windows indicated.

 

Council’s Comment: Pivot openable awning windows are provided to the western stair which is primarily a fire stair to facilitate vertical cross ventilation as indicated in drawing Nos. DA14 DA31 and DA41.

 

Overall, Council’s assessment of, and comments to, specific issues raised by the Panel as detailed above have addressed the Panel’s concerns adequately. In a number of instances, the Panel has raised issues that were not relevant to the changes sought under the subject Section 96 application (eg. introducing commercial uses on the Botany Street frontage, provision of individual dedicated access between all ground floor units and the basement carpark, altering the setback of the southern building line, increasing the landscaped area at the eastern end, altering the driveway alignment and retaining trees in the eastern aspect). However, issues raised directly in relation to the Section 96 modifications have been adequately addressed by the applicant through amended plans.

 

7.3      State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

SEPP: BASIX came into force for all new dwellings, dual occupancies and multi-unit housing developments where the development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2004. Conditions 3 to 6 of the original consent contained provisions to require compliance with the commitments in the BASIX Certificate. A BASIX certificate has been provided with for the amended Section 96 plans consistent with the requirements of these conditions.

 

8.       Policy Controls– Section 79C(1)(a)

 

DCP – Multi-unit Housing

Although the approved development included a range of departures from certain provisions of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing, the proposed modifications to the approved development do not give rise to any additional areas of non compliance with the exception of the FSR and building height control, the merits of which have been assessed as variations from the Randwick LEP 1998 standards under  Section 7.1 above.

 

DCP - Carparking

The approved development contains 71 carspaces provided for in the basement carpark.

 

The modifications to the development consent includes increasing the total number of units from 53 to 54 (12x1bed, 23x1bed + study, 18x2 bed+study & 1x3bed). Accordingly the new carparking requirement for the 54 units will be 71.6 (or 72) car parking spaces, including 13.5 visitor and 58.1 resident spaces.

 

As the approved proposal provides 71 car parking spaces, there will be a deficient by one (1) space. The applicant advises that the shortfall of 1 carparking space is warranted for the following reason:

 

·           Council initially approved the original DA with a one (1) space deficiency, as detailed in Council’s the original assessment report above;

·           if the individual resident and visitor parking components are rounded down, as is permitted in the DCP, the proposal would be required to provide 70 parking spaces, and would therefore comply; and

·           The existing two driveways will be rationalised by the development, which will result in one driveway. The removal of one driveway allows for additional onstreet parking on Botany Street;

·           The site is within walking distance of bus services, making the site easily accessible by public transport; and

·           The proposal also includes 24 bicycle racks, which encourages bike use rather than private motor vehicles.

 

The applicant’s justification is considered reasonable and acceptable when it is considered also that the shortfall in carparking is minor, amounting to one carspace which can be readily off-set by the availability of one carparking space resulting from the reduction in the number of driveways as well as the ready availability of existing public bus services on Botany Street and nearby Alison Road. 

 

The applicant further submits in the current Section 96 application that approved allocation of 12 visitor spaces be reduced to 5 visitor spaces (with the remaining former visitor spaces to be allocated to the larger ground floor units) as the applicant believes that the provision of 12 visitor spaces is excessive.

 

Council’s development engineer has advised that “Development Engineering agrees that managing of visitor car spaces for their intended purposes may prove difficult and would not object to partial re-allocation of visitor spaces to specific units. Considering that Council’s DCP-Parking requires 1 space per 4 dwellings or part thereof Development Engineering considers a visitor allocation of 1 space per 8 dwellings as acceptable in this case. This would calculate to a total of 7 visitor car spaces being provided which is reducing the visitor car space allocation by nearly 50%.”

 

Notwithstanding the advice of the development engineer, it is considered that it would be more appropriate that 10 car spaces be retained for visitor use (ie., three more above that recommended by Council’s development engineer) to ensure that adequate spaces are made available on-site for visitors in the public interest. Accordingly, the reallocation of two car spaces to residential dwelling units is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

9.      Section 96 Assessment

 

Under the provisions of Section 96(2), a consent authority may modify a development consent if it is satisfied that the development as proposed to be modified is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted; and has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modifications.

 

9.1      Substantially the same

The proposal does not involve any major changes to the approved built form, floor space or carparking provision on site. Therefore, the modifications are considered to be substantially the same for which the consent was originally granted for the following reasons:

 

a.     The proposed Section 96 modification will not increase the visual bulk and scale of the approved development as the increase in building height occurs on the proposed roof-top stair enclosures, well setback from the main building line. Furthermore, the increase in floor area occurs internally with no increase in the footprint and minimal changes to the building envelope of the approved  development.

 

b.     The amenity impacts of the proposal in terms of privacy, solar access and views remain essentially the same as the approved development.

 

c.     The proposed Section 96 modifications remain consistent with the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings, and the Residential Flat Design Code guidelines in terms of layout, orientation, weather protection and amenity for future users of the proposed development.

 

 

9.2      Consideration of submissions

As indicated in Section 5 above, the application was advertised and notified to the owners/occupiers of adjoining properties on 17 March 2010 to 31 March 2010, in accordance with the provisions of Councils DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. One submission was received in response to the notification/advertising of the application which has been addressed in Section 5 above.

 

10.      Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

 

 

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

Not applicable.

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

Refer to the “DCP- Multi-unit Housing” section of this report.

 

 

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

Not applicable.

 

 

 

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 proposed development is consistent with the predominant 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 has previously been approved for multi-unit housing development under DA/850/2008. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land uses 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

One submission has been received in relation to the proposed development which has been addressed in Section 5 of 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. Accordingly, the proposal is considered satisfactory in public interest terms.

 

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 modification to the original development consent satisfies Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and approval of the modification will not result in any significant additional impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable.

 

The proposal will comply with the relevant standards of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) with the exception of the FSR and Building Height standards. The variations from these standards, and the merits thereof, have been assessed in relevant sections of this report and found to be reasonable and acceptable.

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and objectives and performance requirements of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP. The proposal contains minor variations in relation to the numerical requirements of the DCP – Parking which have been addressed and found acceptable in the relevant section of this report.

 

Approval of the modification will not result in any significant environmental impact and will not detract from the integrity of the development nor its relationship with adjoining development. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the responsible Consent Authority grant consent under Section 96AA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No DA/850/2008 for permission to modify approved development by alteration to carparking and driveway, internal reconfiguration, alteration to privacy screens, alteration to openings, additional landscaping to northern boundary, alteration to some balconies, alteration to southern extension of some units, alteration to fire stairs, addition of roof terraces to units 301 and 302, alteration to roof, relocation of mechanical exhaust, alteration to skylights and to some exterior materials at 13-15 Botany Street, Randwick, in the following manner: 

 

A         Amend Condition 1 to read:

 

 

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

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared by

DA00B

September, 2008

24 Nov 2008

Jackson Teece Architects

DA01B

August, 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA02B

September, 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA32B

August, 2008

24 Nov 2008

LA01

07.11.2008

24 Nov 2008

Taylor Brammar Landscape Architects

LA02

07.11.2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-C100

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

Henry & Hymas

DA-C101

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-C102

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-C200

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-C210

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-C211

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-SE01

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA-SE02

Nov 2008

24 Nov 2008

DA10C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

Jackson Teece Architects

DA11C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA12C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA13C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA14C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA15C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA20C

August, 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA21B

Nov 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA22C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA23C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA30C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA31C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA40C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA41C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

DA42C

August 2008

15 Jan 2009

 

the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the following: 

 

·      Section 96 ’A’ plans numbered DA10, DA11, DA12, DA13 & DA14, dated 02.06.09 and received by Council on 5th June 2009

·      Section 96 ’B’ plans numbered DA11, DA12, DA13, DA14, Issue D, & DA30, DA31, Issue E, all dated August 2008  and received by Council on 30th June 2009,

·      Section 96 ‘C’ plans numbered as follows:

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared by

DA11-Issue P20

00.00.10

22 February 2010

Jackson Teece Architects

DA30-Issue F

22 February 2010

22 February 2010

DA10-Issue E

12 March 2010

12 March 2010

DA42- issue G

11 March 2010

12 March 2010

 

·      Section 96 ‘D’ plans numbered as follows:

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Prepared by

DA10-Issue F

22.04.10

10 August 2010

Jackson Teece Architects

DA11-Issue K

10.08.10

10 August 2010

DA12-Issue H

10.08.10

10 August 2010

DA13-Issue H

10.08.10

10 August 2010

DA14- Issue H

10.08.10

10 August 2010

 

DA15- Issue F

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

DA30- Issue H

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

DA31- Issue G

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

DA40- Issue G

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

DA41- Issue G

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

DA42- Issue H

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

DA50- Issue A

22.04.10

10 August 2010

 

 

only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 applications, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

Add Conditions as follows:

 

119.    The applicant is to provide a total of 10 visitor car spaces for the development, in which 3 can be car washing. Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate the visitor car spaces are to be clearly signposted.

 

120.    A north-facing privacy screen along the edge of the third floor north-facing balcony to unit 301 shall be installed and details are to be included in any construction certificate for the development.

 

121.  The following amendments to the proposal shall be undertaken:

 

·      Installation of awning windows above the sliding balcony door  of west-facing units

·      Increase the width and depth of the planter box along the northern edge of the north-facing balconies of unit 3.03 to 500mm and 600mm respectively and details of appropriate plantings to provide privacy screening

·      Provision of privacy and solar protection measures for the top floor units comprising a suitable screen 700mm in vertical length attached to the whole length of the eaves of the roof on the west elevation and opaque treatment to the bottom half of all west-facing glazed doors to the top floor units in the west elevation.

·      Provision of privacy screen elements to the new roof top terraces that are suitably light and low-profiled.

·      Installation of bin enclosures of suitable and compatible design and façade in the southern courtyard  

 

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.

 

122.    At the completion of demolition works, and prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, mature tall Grevilleas, of a height of between 1.5m and 2m, shall be planted along the northern boundary, at a spacing of 1.5m between the centres of the trunk of each plant.

 

123.    Planting shall be installed in the planter box along the northern edge of the north-facing balconies of unit 3.03 in accordance with the approved documentation, prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, and must be maintained in accordance with these plans.

 

124.    The design and construction of the discharge of mechanical ventilation and exhaust systems are required to satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS 1668 and details are to be provided in the relevant plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP69/10

 

 

Subject:                  495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

Folder No:                   DA/67/2009/A

Author:                   Frank Ko, Executive Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 (1A) application to correct the description of work; and modify deferred commencement condition 2 to allow work to start prior to registration of the VPA on the title

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                Opera Architects

Owner:                         La Chappell Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The subject Section 96 application has been referred to Council for determination as the proposal relates to a separate item (i.e. execution of the Voluntary Planning Agreement) to be considered by Council at the same meeting.

 

The original application for the construction of a part 4/part 7 storey mixed use building containing a supermarket and 13 retail tenancies at ground floor level, 111 residential dwellings on floors above and 3 levels of basement parking for 288 vehicles was approved at the Planning Committee Meeting on 10 November 2009 subject to deferred commencement conditions.

 

The subject application under the provisions of Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (as amended) proposes the modification of a deferred commencement condition to allow works to start prior to the registration of the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) on the title.

 

The subject application, being a Section 96(1A) application, was not required to be notified under Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification.

 

The proposed modifications to the approved development has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998 and Development Control Plan – Matraville Town Centre as well as the heads of consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (as amended).

 

The proposed modifications are minor and of a procedural nature in order to allow work to begin on the development. The development of this site is key to the economic viability of the Matraville Town Centre and should not be unnecessarily delayed.

 

2.         The Proposal

 

The subject application seeks consent for the following modifications:

 

1)       Correction to the “Description of Works” as shown on the front page of the Notice of Determination. The description refers to 108 dwellings whereas the approved plans cover 111 dwellings.

 

2)       Modify Deferred Commencement Condition No. 2 relating to the registration of the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the dedication of a single bedroom dwelling to Council.

 

The applicant has also suggested that a new condition to be inserted in the Development Consent Conditions that read as follows:

 

“The registration of the VPA on the title of the subject land prior to the issue of the occupation certificate.”

 

The reasons for requesting the above modification is to allow work to start on the project earlier than would be the case if the applicant had to wait for the registration of the VPA on the title. The insertion of new condition in the consent will ensure that the VPA is registered on the title.

 

3.         The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the south-eastern corner of Daunt Avenue & Bunnerong Road, and has a total area of 5,663sqm. The site is occupied by a two-storey building formerly occupied by Australia Post at No. 495 Bunnerong Road and a large metal building occupied by a liquor retail store at No. 497-503 Bunnerong Road.

 

The surrounding area comprises predominantly retail/commercial uses within the Matraville Town Centre. To the west on the opposite side of Bunnerong Road is an existing shopping strip comprising predominantly two-storey shops and residential dwellings above. To the north on the opposite side of Daunt Avenue are predominantly residential flat buildings. Adjoining the site to the east is a mix of one or two storey dwelling houses fronting Daunt Avenue & Pillars Place and a public park. To the south, is a four storey mixed use building and further south is a church.

 

4.         Application History

 

The original application for the construction of a part 4/part 7 storey mixed use building containing a supermarket and 13 retail tenancies at ground floor level, 111 residential dwellings on floors above and 3 levels of basement parking for 288 vehicles was approved at the Planning Committee Meeting on 10 November 2009 subject to deferred commencement conditions.

 

A draft VPA for the proposed development at Nos. 495-503 Bunnerong Road and an accompanying explanatory note have been placed on public exhibition at Council since 28 July 2010 and the exhibition period will end on the close of business on 24 August 2010.

 

5.         Community Consultation

 

The subject application, being a Section 96(1A) application, was not required to be notified under Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification.

 

6.         Technical Officers Comments

 

The application is not required to be referred to the technical officers as the proposal relates to the correction of the description of works and implementation of the VPA.

 

7.         Section 79C 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.

 

a.        Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998

The proposed modifications will not alter the compliance of the development with the relevant clauses of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

b.        Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

Not applicable.

 

c.         Development Control Plan – Matraville Town Centre (DCP)

The proposed modifications will not alter the compliance of the development with the relevant provisions of the DCP.

 

8.         Section 96 Assessment

 

Under the provisions of Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the following criteria has been complied with:-

 

 

 

 

Comment

(a)   it is satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental impact, and

The proposal relates to the correction of the description of works and implementation of the VPA and therefore will not result in any environmental impact.

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

The proposed modifications are minor in nature and represent substantially the same development as the original.

(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

The proposed modifications are minor and do not require to be notified under Council’s Development Control Plan for Public Notification.

 

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

Not applicable.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

Key Action:       Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modifications to the approved development has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Randwick LEP 1998 and Development Control Plan as well as the heads of consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended. The proposed modifications are minor and will not result in any adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining neighbours or the character of the streetscape. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.       That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify development consent No. DA/67/2009 for permission to correct the description of work and modify deferred commencement condition No. 2 to allow work to start prior to registration of the VPA on the title for the development at Nos. 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville, in the following manner:

 

·        Amend Deferred Commencement Condition No. 2 to read:

 

2.     The execution of the VPA by the Council and the Applicant.

 

·        Add Deferred Commencement Condition Nos. 2A and 2B that reads as follows:

 

2A.   Lodgement of the executed VPA with Land and Property Management Authority for registration.

 

2B.   The applicant must produce details of the lodgement of the VPA with Land and Property Management Authority within 35 days of lodgement.

 

·        Add Condition No. 130 that reads as follows:

 

130.  The VPA must be registered on the title of the subject land prior to the issuing of either an interim or final occupation certificate.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP70/10

 

 

Subject:                  Voluntary Planning Agreement - 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

Folder No:                   DA/67/2009

Author:                   Frank Ko, Executive Planner     

 

Introduction

 

Development Application No. 67/2009 for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a mixed residential and retail/commercial development comprising part 4 to part 7 storey buildings containing 111 dwellings, ground floor retail space and associated ground level and basement car parking at Nos. 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville was considered by the Council on 10 November 2009. At the meeting, Council resolved to grant a Deferred Commencement Consent subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The making of a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) to the satisfaction of the Council generally in accordance with the letter of offer accompanied with the DA and annexed to this development consent providing for the dedication of 1 x 1 bedroom affordable dwelling (i.e. Apartment No. A3 at first floor level) to Council.

 

2.       The registration of the VPA upon the title to the land subject of this determined development application.

 

3.       Council has acknowledged compliance with this condition in writing.

 

Issues

 

Section 93G of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) provides that a planning agreement cannot be entered into unless public notice has been given of the proposed agreement and made available for inspection by the public for a period of not less than 28 days.

 

A draft VPA for the proposed development at Nos. 495-503 Bunnerong Road and an accompanying explanatory note have been placed on public exhibition at Council since 28 July 2010 and the exhibition period will end on the close of business on 24 August 2010. A copy of the draft VPA and explanatory note is attached below.

 

Whilst the public exhibition of the draft VPA will end before the commencement of the Ordinary Council meeting on 24 August 2010, any submission received by Council before the close of business on 24 August 2010 will be reported as an addendum to this report. The owner of the subject site indicated that they are ready to commence the development, but due to the formalities associated with the VPA process, the start of the development will be delayed. As the site is key to the economical viability of the Matraville Town Centre, it is appropriate that this matter be considered at the earliest opportunity by Council.

 

The draft VPA is consistent with the provisions of Council’s Planning Agreements Policy in that it involves specific purposes listed in clause 2.4 of this Policy, namely, that it would provide affordable housing so that a socially diverse population can be maintained and it would secure planning benefits for the public.

 

The proposed agreement also satisfies the acceptability test set out in clause 2.5 the Planning Agreements Policy through:

 

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

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

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

 

Relationship to the City Plan

 

The relationship to the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5: Excellence in urban design and development. 

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Public exhibition of the draft VPA relating to the proposed development at Nos 495-503 Bunnerong Road has been appropriately undertaken pursuant to Section 93G of the EP&A Act. Accordingly, the VPA has been duly processed and is now acceptable and ready to be entered into between the applicant and Council.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     Council enter into the Voluntary Planning Agreement relating to the proposed development under DA No. 67/2009 at Nos 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville as publicly exhibited from 28 July to 24 August 2010.

 

b)     the Mayor and the General Manager be authorised to make minor drafting changes to the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) as required, prior to its execution.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) DA/67/2009, 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

 

 

 

 


Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) DA/67/2009, 495-503 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

Attachment 1

 

 











Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP71/10

 

 

Subject:                  Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP1) from 1 July to 31 July 2010

Folder No:                   F2008/00122

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The NSW Department of Planning (DOP) released a Planning Circular in November 2008 advising Councils to adopt additional procedures in relation to the administration of SEPP No.1. The additional measures are largely in response to the ICAC inquiry into Wollongong City Council. Those additional measures are:

 

1)     Establishment of a register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP 1;

2)     Requirement for all development applications where there has been a variation greater than 10% in standards under SEPP 1 to be determined by full council (rather than the general manager or nominated staff member);

3)     Providing a report to Council on the development applications determined where there had been a variation in standards under SEPP 1;

4)     Making the register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP 1 available to the public on council’s website.

 

This report is in response to point 3) above. A table is attached to this report detailing all SEPP 1s approved in the period from 1 to 31 July 2010.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4b:      New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Department of Planning (DOP) released a Planning Circular in 2008 advising of additional requirements Councils are required to adopt in relation to SEPP 1 objections. This report is in response to one of those requirements whereby a report is provided to Council on the development applications determined where there had been a variation in standards under SEPP 1. 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

A3 of SEPP1 Register

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP72/10

 

 

Subject:                  Draft Prince Henry Centre Plan of Management for Exhibition Purposes

Folder No:                   F2010/00298

Author:                   Ting Xu, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Executive Summary

 

The Prince Henry Centre (the Centre) has a “community land” classification under the Local Government Act 1993 (the LG Act). The LG Act requires that community land be used and managed in accordance with a Plan of Management prepared and adopted by a council. This draft Plan of Management (the draft Plan) has been prepared to comply with the above requirement.

 

The draft Plan recognises the Centre’s valuable role in facilitating the cultural and community needs of our residents and more importantly, provides a clear and practical framework for utilising, managing and maintaining the Centre.

 

This report seeks the endorsement of the Council to exhibit the draft Plan and undertake public consultation and a public hearing as required by the LG Act.

 

Background

 

The Centre is located at the eastern part of the Prince Henry site, known as 2 Coast Hospital Road, Little Bay. It covers an area of approximately 9,230 m2 and is currently zoned 6A (open space) under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

The Centre was dedicated to the Council by Landcom in May 2009 as part of a major residential development undertaken on the former Prince Henry Hospital site. The Council owns and manages the Centre.

 

The Centre is a uniquely sited sustainable building with considerable architectural quality and offers a variety of venues (e.g. auditorium, multi purpose rooms, amphitheatre, future Café, etc.) to support cultural and community activities. Commercial uses, such as corporate/private functions and conferences, and the Café will reinforce and support the cultural/community uses of the Centre.

 

The Draft Plan of Management

 

The draft Plan has been prepared in accordance with the LG Act/Regulation and aims to achieve the following objectives:

 

§ to assist the community in understanding the role of the Centre, the facilities and amenities provided and the opportunities to use and enjoy the Centre over time;

§ to meet the Council’s obligations under Chapter 6 of the LG Act in respect to public land management;

§ to enable the Council to renegotiate or enter into contracts, leases, licences and hire agreements for the Centre in relation to the provision of services and utilities; and

§ to provide for an effective program of asset management, maintenance and improvements to the Centre.

 

As required under the LG Act, the draft Plan contains a detailed description of the land and building, authorises the current and future uses of the Centre, specifies the scale and intensity of any permitted use/development and categorises the land as “general community use”.

 

The draft Plan covers a variety of key operational issues, including access, architectural integrity, asset management, environmental sustainability, landscaping, operational management, safety/security and waste management. Management strategies and performance measures have been developed in terms of these issues to:

 

§ maintain the building’s interior and exterior design principles and styling characteristics as it applies to furniture and fittings;

§ maintain the asset condition of the building to acceptable industry standards;

§ preserve the integrity of the landscape design and planting features and ensure the green roof, bio-retention swale and surrounding landscaped areas are well maintained;

§ manage, coordinate and market events and activities and enhance social interaction with the community;

§ enhance an accessible environment and provide clear signage, convenience for people with disabilities and sufficient and secure emergency accesses;

§ provide a safe environment for staff, visitors and users of the Centre; and

§ optimise the environmentally sustainable operation of the Centre.

 

Consultation

 

A consultation strategy has been prepared to ensure that all interested stakeholders will have an opportunity to comment on the draft Plan. Consultation will include:

 

§ notices in the local newspaper and on Council’s website

§ exhibition of the draft at Council’s Administration Building and Bowen, Randwick and Malabar Libraries

§ direct notification to:

ü adjoining residents and land owners;

ü interest groups, e.g. community groups;

ü precinct committees; and

ü Chamber of Commerce.

§ presentations and attendance at the La Perouse precinct committee meeting.

 

The LG Act requires the Council to publicly exhibit the draft Plan for a minimum of 28 days, with an additional 14 days after the exhibition period for lodging submissions.

 

A public hearing is also required under section 36 (4) of the LG Act, because the Plan will be introducing a “general community use” categorisation to the land.

 

Submissions received and any amendments required to the draft Plan will then be reported back to the Council.

 

Relation to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:        A vibrant and diverse community

Direction 2a:     New and updated community facilities that are multi purpose and in accessible locations.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The draft Plan has been prepared in-house in consultation with the Prince Henry Centre Manager, City Service officers and other relevant staff. A small budget of $2,000 is allocated to cover the costs for exhibition, consultation, public hearing and finalisation/printing of the Plan.

 

Conclusion

 

The draft Plan provides clear guidelines, requirements and strategies for utilising and managing the Centre. The implementation of the Plan will ensure that this valuable asset continues to be maintained to a high standard and retains its importance as a vibrant and active space, to meet the cultural and community needs of our residents across the City.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council:

 

a)     endorse the attached draft Prince Henry Centre Plan of Management for public exhibition and a public hearing;

 

b)     agree that the Director City Planning may make minor modifications to rectify any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors as required in preparing the Plan of Management for public exhibition.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DRAFT Prince Henry Centre Plan of Management, August 2010.

Included under separate cover

 

 

  


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

General Manager's Report No. GM37/10

 

 

Subject:                  Review of the 2009-13 Management Plan - June 2010 Quarterly Report

Folder No:                   F2009/00052

Author:                   Anne Warner, Coordinator Integrated Planning     

 

Introduction

 

The purpose of this Report is to update Councillors and the community on the implementation of the 2009-13 Management Plan.

 

Issues

 

This is the June 2010 Quarterly Review of the 2009-13 Management Plan. Under the Local Government Act 1993, there is the requirement that a Report must be provided after the end of each quarter, detailing the extent to which performance indicators and targets set by Council’s Management Plan have been achieved during the quarter.

 

The June Quarterly Report is presented in two parts. The first outlines some of the highlights for the Quarter, while the second provides comments for each of the 2009-10 Management Plan actions.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1a:      Council has a long term vision based on sustainability.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The purpose of the June Quarterly Report is to inform and update Council and the community on the progress of all actions as set out in the adopted Management Plan 2009-13. In addition, given that the Management Plan is based on the 20 year Randwick City Plan and that Council’s reporting format is based on outcomes rather than organisational structure, the June Quarterly Report also provides a level of accountability against our long term vision for the City of Randwick.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the information contained in the June 2010 Quarterly review of the 2009-13 Management Plan be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Highlights of the RCC Quarterly Report June 2010

 

2.

RCC June 2010 Quarterly Report

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Highlights of the RCC Quarterly Report June 2010

Attachment 1

 

 

Highlights of the Randwick City Council Quarterly Report June 2010

 

The following highlights are outlined as per the themes and respective outcomes of the 20 year Randwick City Plan.

 

RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT

»        Leadership in Sustainability

 

·      The Draft 2009‑13 Management Plan / 2010‑11 Annual Operational Plan and Budget was reported to the Council, placed on public exhibition during May and then finalised.

·      Continued work with the Consulting Councils’ Forum in implementing the outcomes of the ‘Broadening the appeal of precincts’ inter‑council conference. Provided input and advice to other councils in developing their community consultation policies.

 

A SENSE OF COMMUNITY

»        A vibrant and diverse community

»        An informed and engaged community

 

·      Moverly Children's Centre has implemented a number of sustainable initiatives involving both parents and children. The community and families have been involved in ongoing projects such as a vegetable garden and mosaics and participated in the Eco Living Fair. The Mayor launched the refurbished centre in June as part of the successful open day.

·      Inaugural 2009-2010 Cultural Community Grants Program completed.

·      Supported activities to celebrate Men’s Health Week, including health and wellbeing, mental health and physical activity.

·      Parenting calendar July‑December 2010 is complete and 1500 copies have been distributed across the LGA and throughout interagency networks. Distributed 100 Children, Families and Women's Services directories through Eastern Sydney Children Families Interagency. Implemented two first aid/CPR courses and two parenting workshops.

·      Urban Shorts Youth Film Festival: 15 entries were received this year, with four entries receiving awards. A DVD of all films has been designed and will be sent to all local schools, libraries and entrants.

·      30 community members and Randwick City Council staff experienced the Burrawang Walk in the Kamay Botany Bay National Park as part of the Council's Reconciliation Week celebrations. The walk included experienced guides and connected those non-Aboriginal participants with the area's extensive Aboriginal history.

·      A six page edition of Randwick Community News was produced for June 2010 and delivered to Randwick City's 55,000 households. This newsletter focused on activities and initiatives under the Sustaining our City program and the 3-Council Ecological Footprint Project. An insert reported back to the community on the Buildings for our Community program, including an outline of our extensive consultation campaign.

·      Significant consultations were: the second Economic Leadership Forum; the Matraville Town Centre workshops; the commencement of the consultation on Coogee Town Centre by the formation of the Coogee Town Centre Heritage Urban Design and Streetscape Study Community Working Group.

 

PLACES FOR PEOPLE

»        Excellence in urban design and development

»        Excellence in recreation and lifestyle opportunities

»        A liveable City

»        Heritage that is protected and celebrated

 

·      Under the sports field program selected fields were oversown with winter rye grass for winter sport to enhance the playing field surfaces and the resurfacing of Nagle Park and Latham Park top field was completed.

·      Construction of Bieler Reserve playground complete.

·      Refurbishment of Nagle Park amenities building including canteen, public toilets, change rooms and construction of front awning following consultation with the park's primary hirer, Randwick Junior Rugby. Refurbishment of offices and vacant room as a computer systems training room at the Council depot. Refurbishment of Snape Park amenities building and construction of front awning.

·      The Lionel Bowen Young Writers Awards was launched in April. UNSW and NIDA will both offer courses as prizes for the winners. The Soroptimists in partnership with the Library are offering a series of talks aimed at promoting and showcasing the inspirational women in our midst. The Extraordinary Women series has so far attracted speakers of high calibre including Steven Miller, Chief Librarian and Curator at The Art Gallery of NSW, Emma Buzo, Libby Hathorn and Sue Woolf. Randwick's first environmental education comic, Detective Dan and the Case of the Freaky Footprints, was developed in collaboration with Waverley and Woollahra Councils and launched on World Environment Day in June.

 

A PROSPERING CITY

»        A strong local economy

 

·      The Economic Development Committee met with stakeholders in March 2010 re the Matraville Town Centre Revitalisation Strategy. A further meeting was held in June to work through strategy and develop an action plan for the future.

·      Business Leaders Forums were held in August 2009 and June 2010. Both forums were a tremendous success with good business community attendance and very good feedback received. The Council has resolved to hold two forums a year from now on.

 

MOVING AROUND

»        Integrated and accessible transport

 

·      New ‘Walk it Off’ campaign approved and due to commence, operating in conjunction with the Council's ‘Shop Local’ initiatives. ‘Walk it Off’ encourages residents of Kingsford and Kensington to walk or cycle to their local participating cafes and restaurants where they can have a loyalty card stamped. When a resident receives six stamps they can send the card to the Council to go into prize draws at the end of the campaign in September. Local cafes and restaurants continue to be invited to participate while a letterbox drop to local residents of ‘Walk it Off’ cards has been completed. Further promotional opportunities to be carried out.

 

LOOKING AFTER OUR ENVIRONMENT

»        A healthy environment

 

·      Nagle Park Stormwater Harvesting and Reuse Project completed. It will save approximately 12 million litres of potable water per year.

·      Go Solar initiative commenced between Randwick, Waverley and Woollahra Councils offering residents special discounts on both solar hot water and solar photovoltaic panels. New project officer recruited to manage project until May 2011.

 

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

General Manager's Report No. GM38/10

 

 

Subject:                  South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club - Extension of Lease

Folder No:                   F2004/06336

Author:                   David Kelly, Manager Administrative Services     

 

Introduction

 

The current lease between Council and the South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club is due to expire on the 1st July, 2011. Council has received an approach from the South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club to extend this lease by a further twenty (20) years.

 

Issues

 

The Club is understandably anxious to resolve this matter as soon as possible in order to formulate its plans for their long term future. The lease between the parties will be drawn up by Council’s Properties Section and will be subject to the standard terms and conditions required of such leases. Expenses such as repairs and maintenance, insurance and utilities will be borne by the Club. Approval will of course be subject to agreement from the Land & Property Management Authority.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:       A liveable City.

Direction 6a:      Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Due to the peppercorn rental involved and expenses being borne by the Club, there is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club is an integral part of the Maroubra community and has been saving lives and providing our youth with a healthy lifestyle for many years now. It is important for Council to support the Club and its long term future in our area.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council agrees in principle to a twenty year extension of its lease with the South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club to 1st July 2031, subject to an updated lease between the parties being drawn up by Council’s Properties Section and approval being obtained from the Land & Property Management Authority.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

General Manager's Report No. GM39/10

 

 

Subject:                  Request for payment of travel expenses - Manager Administrative Services

Folder No:                   F2007/00626

Author:                   Ray Brownlee, General Manager     

 

Introduction

 

The Manager Administrative Services has been selected to by the Local Government Managers’ Association (LGMA) as its representative at the 2010 Local Government Exchange and Cooperation Seminar which is being held in Japan and is being hosted by the Council of Local authorities for International Relations (CLAIR).

 

Issues

 

The seminar will be held from 7-17 November 2010 and aims to raise awareness about the state of local governments both here and abroad through the exchange of information and engaging in debate on the current issues facing local governments around the world.

 

As the cost of attending this seminar will be substantial, the Manager Administrative Services has requested Council’s assistance in paying the cost of the return airfare to Tokyo.  Quotations have been sought and the cheapest airfare is being offered by Japan Airlines for $1,772.00.  All other expenses for the trip will be met by either CLAIR or the Manager Administrative Services.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in sustainability.

Direction 1b:      Council is a leader in the delivery of social, financial and operational activities.

Strategy:          Maintain a high performing workforce that is responsive to the needs of the organisation.

 

Financial impact statement

 

If the report recommendation is adopted, the cost involved will be funded from the staff development budget for 2010-11.

 

Conclusion

 

This is a rare and exciting opportunity for the Manager Administrative Services and a unique learning experience. The Manager Administrative Services will return to Council with a heightened awareness of international trends and issues facing local governments around the world, which will, in turn return benefits to Council. For this reason, it is recommended that the Manager Administrative Services’ request for assistance with the cost of the return airfare to Japan, be supported.

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council agrees to pay the cost of the return airfare to Tokyo in the amount of $1,772.00 to enable the Manager Administrative Services to attend the 2010 Local Government Exchange and Cooperation Seminar (which is being held in Japan from 7-17 November 2010) as the LGMA’s representative.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS18/10

 

 

Subject:                  Buildings for our Community Program - Pioneers Park amenities building (upper field) project reschedule

Folder No:                   PROJ/10552/2010

Author:                   Hayley Segedin, Acting Buildings for our Community Projects Coordinator     

 

Introduction

 

Randwick City Council is proposing to construct a new amenities building at the upper field of Pioneers Park, Malabar.

 

This project is to be mostly funded by Council, and is included in Year 3 (2012-13) of Council’s adopted Building Program.

 

Council has also received grant funding from the NSW Community Building Partnership Program towards this project however this funding is to be expended by December 2010.

 

The purpose of this report is to inform Council that funding under the Buildings for our Community Program for this project is to be brought forward to Year 1 (2010-11).

 

Issues

 

The NSW Community Building Partnership Program

In 2009, the NSW Government announced a Community Building Partnership funding program for local community projects across NSW.

 

Council, on behalf of the Maroubra Saints Junior Australian Football Club and the South East Junior Cricket Association, applied for grant funding to assist in building a new amenities facility for the upper field of Pioneers Park, Malabar. The Council report outlining details of the submission is attached to this report - attachment 1.

 

The proposed building includes a canteen, storage space, change rooms, public toilets, small meeting room and shade/shelter for spectators.

 

The Community Building Partnership Program granted Council $100,000 towards the project.

 

The program has a list of criteria including three of the following requirements:

 

·           Projects must deliver positive results for their community, through job creation and community, social, recreational or environmental outcomes.

 

·           Applications from local Councils require a commitment of matching funding by the Council.

 

·           Projects must be ready to commence by late 2009 and be completed before the end of December 2010.

 


Randwick City Council Building Program

In 2010, Council adopted the Building Program in which the Pioneers Park amenities building project is scheduled for Year 3 (2012-13).

 

The funding also allows for the renovation of the existing amenities building located at the lower field of the park.

 

The breakdown of funding for these works is listed below:

 

Year

Building

Project

Building Levy

Grants

Total

Year 3

 

2012-13

Pioneers Park Amenities Buildings

Construct new amenities building with toilets, showers and change rooms on the top field.

 

Upgrade/reconstruct the bottom field change rooms, shower areas, toilets, kiosk and security lighting.

 

$753,000

$100,000

$853,000

 

It was anticipated that Council would attract a total sum of $255,000 in grant funding, however at this stage Council has confirmed funding of $100,000 which is from the Community Building Partnership Program.

 

The Maroubra Saints Junior Australian Football Club has offered a $50,000 contribution towards this project from fundraising initiatives held by the Club, however as discussed with the Club, Council officers are not in favour of accepting funds directly from local clubs.

 

The project to date

At this stage, Council has received Construction Certificate approval to start construction works on the new building. Council officers are now in the process of preparing Tender documentation to engage a contractor for the works.

 

Detailed discussions have been held with Council and the Maroubra Saints Junior Australian Football Club to expand the size of the proposed building layout to accommodate a larger meeting room and change room facilities, however no arrangement has been made to fund this proposal.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:        A vibrant and diverse community.

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

Key Action:         Champion our community’s needs to other community service providers and government agencies to advocate on our community’s behalf.

 

Financial impact statement

 

In order to utilise the Community Building Partnership Program grant, it is proposed that $500,000 of Council funding be brought forward to Year 1 (2010-11) of Council’s Building Program.

 

Funding will be borrowed internally from the Infrastructure Reserve and repaid from the Building Levy Reserve in 2012-13.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Government’s Community Building Partnership provides funding opportunities for local community projects across NSW.

 

Council has been granted funding of $100,000 and in accordance with the criteria outlined in the conditions of the grant, Council is required to match the funding and to ensure that the works are to be completed by December 2010.

 

In Council’s Building Program this project is scheduled for Year 3 (2012-13) and it is recommended that funds for this project be brought forward to Year 1 (2010-11).

 

The funding for the renovation works at the existing building (lower field) will remain in Year 3 (2012-13) of the building program.

 

As such, the recommended breakdown of funding is listed below:

 

Year

Building

Project

Building Levy

Grants

Total

Year 1 2010-11

Pioneers Park Amenities Building - (upper field)

Construct new amenities building with toilets, showers and change rooms on the top field.

 

 

$500,000

$100,000

 

$600,000

Year 3

2012-13

Pioneers Park Amenities Building – (lower field)

Upgrade/reconstruct the bottom field change rooms, shower areas, toilets, kiosk and security lighting.

 

$253,000

nil

$253,000

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council bring forward funding of $500,000 for the new Pioneers Park amenities building (upper field) from Year 3 (2012-13) to Year 1 (2010-11) of the Building Program, and that funding is borrowed internally from the Infrastructure Reserve and repaid from the Building Levy Reserve in 2012-13.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Council Report - NSW Community Building Partnership - Funding Program to Ordinary Council 25 August 2009

 

 

 

 


Council Report - NSW Community Building Partnership - Funding Program to Ordinary Council 25 August 2009

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS21/09

 

 

Subject:                  NSW Community Building Partnership - Funding Program

Folder No:                   F2004/06610

Author:                   Joe Ingegneri, Co-ordinator Engineering Services; Hayley Segedin, Acting Co-ordinator Landscape Design     

Introduction

 

The NSW Government has announced a $35 million Community Building Partnership funding program for local community projects across NSW. Community groups and local councils were eligible to submit applications for funding to help support local infrastructure and jobs. The NSW Community Building Partnership will invest $300,000 into building local community projects in every electoral district.

 

This report details the applications submitted by Randwick City Council.

 

Issues

 

The Community Building Partnership funding program criteria is as follows:

 

·           Projects must deliver positive results for their community, through job creation and community, social, recreational or environmental outcomes.

 

·           Applications from local councils require a commitment of matching funding by the council.

 

·           Projects must be ready to commence by late 2009 and be completed before the end of December 2010.

 

·           Applications for funding under the partnership opened on 22 June and closed on 10 August 2009.

 

Application Submissions

Randwick City Council forms part of the Coogee, Heffron and Maroubra electorates.  An application for each electorate has been submitted by Council.  The table below summarises the applications.

 

Electorate

Project Title

Total Cost

Funding Sought

Council funding

Coogee

Coogee SLSC Clubhouse  Renovation –  Stage 3 Development Works

$700,000

Up to $150,000

Match successful funding

Heffron

John Calapedos Memorial Playground Upgrade, Kensington

$140,000

$70,000

$70,000

Maroubra

Pioneers Park, Malabar - Public Amenities Facility

 

$300,000 to $600,000

$125,000

$125,000

 

Coogee SLSC Clubhouse  Renovation –  Stage 3 Development Works

This project is the final stage of a ten year renovation project of the Coogee Surf Life Saving Club (SLSC) clubhouse.

The work involves construction of a new access on the western side of the clubhouse, a new roof and general renovations.

 

Randwick Council received a written submission from the Coogee Surf Life Saving Club requesting that this project be nominated for submission under this funding program.  The funding commitment from Randwick Council for this project is to only match the approved funding.

 

John Calapedos Memorial Playground Upgrade, Kensington

This project is listed on Councils unfunded 2009-10 Capital Works Program. 

 

The scope of this project includes the supply and installation of new play equipment, wet pour rubber surfacing, provision of shade and associated works such as park furniture, planting and signage.

 

Pioneers Park, Malabar - Public Amenities Facility

This project is the construction of an amenities facility, proposed for the upper level of Pioneers Park.

 

The amenities are to include a canteen, storage space, change rooms, public toilets, small meeting room and shade/shelter for spectators.

 

Randwick Council received a written submission from the Maroubra Saints Junior Australian Football Club and the South East Junior Cricket Association requesting that this project be nominated for submission under this funding program. The funding commitment from Randwick Council for this project is to match the sought funding.

 

Discussion

The announcement by the NSW Government of the Community Building Partnership funding program occurred after Randwick Council had finalised the 2009-10 budget and capital works program.  The timing of this announcement limited the types of projects that could be “ready to commence by the end of 2009” and the available funding.

 

The funding criterion requires that Councils provide matching funds for projects.  The funds in the 2009-10 budget have all been committed.  In order to utilise this funding opportunity, it is proposed that the Council funds be sought from Council’s reserves.



Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:        A vibrant and diverse community.

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

Key Action:         Champion our community’s needs to other community service providers and government agencies to advocate on our community’s behalf.

Outcome 5:        Excellence in recreation and lifestyle opportunities.

Direction 5a:       Maximise opportunities for residents and visitors to enjoy both active and passive open space uses.

Key Action:         Prepare and implement an open space study to identify our community’s current and future recreational and lifestyle needs.

Outcome 6:        A Liveable City.

Direction 6a:       Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

Key Action:         Assets are managed strategically to deliver intergenerational equity and to meet Council’s obligation as the custodian of our community’s assets.

 

Financial impact statement

 

In order to utilise this funding opportunity, it is proposed that the Council funds required to match successful funds, be sought from Council’s reserves.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Government’s Community Building Partnership provides a grant funding opportunities for the state electorates of Heffron, Coogee and Maroubra.

 

Randwick Council has submitted applications for each electorate as summarised below.

 

Electorate

Project Title

Total Cost

Funding Sought

Council funding

Coogee

Coogee SLSC Clubhouse  Renovation –  Stage 3 Development Works

$700,000

Up to $150,000

Match successful funding

Heffron

John Calapedos Memorial Playground Upgrade, Kensington

$140,000

$70,000

$70,000

Maroubra

Pioneers Park, Malabar - Public Amenities Facility

 

$300,000 to $600,000

$125,000

$125,000

 

Recommendation

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS19/10

 

 

Subject:                  Pool Enclosure - Des Renford Aquatic Centre - Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program (Round 3)

Folder No:                   F2006/00408

Author:                   Reece Heddle, Manager Aquatic Services     

 

Introduction

 

The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government have released a third funding opportunity for Councils under the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP).

 

This funding is to be used to assist councils to build and modernise community facilities, including swimming pools, town halls, libraries, community centre’s, sports grounds and environmental infrastructure and is aimed at strengthening our communities during the economic recovery by supporting local jobs and provide long-term benefits to communities by renewing and upgrading local infrastructure.

 

Randwick City Council is eligible to apply for $176,000 funding under this funding agreement. 

 

Issues

 

The Des Renford Aquatic Centre pool enclosure project was considered to be the best option available to Council under the funding agreement criteria. This project involves completely covering an outdoor pool with a year round purpose built structure to enable the pool to be utilised for the entire year by the centres Learn to swim program. It is proposed to install a purpose built Marquee Structure 18M x 22M complete with double aluminium sliding doors at 3M intervals, a stand alone filtration and heating system on this outdoor pool to enable 12 month operation as the pool currently shares a filtration system with other pools.

 

The project once complete will enable the facility to expand its Learn to Swim program. The facility is currently unable to fit any more participants into its current year round pools and this expansion will enable more children to participate in learn to swim classes, increasing water safety, plus increase employment of both swim instructors and administration staff within the local area for many years to come.

 

Currently, 3,500 children per week are taught to swim within the current program. Unfortunately, the program is unable to increase beyond this level due to the lack of lane space available within the indoor pool facility. Currently the facility turns away in excess of 200 children per term due to the lack of space available to run swimming lessons.

 

The following financial projection indicates the increase in profit that the facility will be able to achieve from building a pool enclosure over the outdoor Wadding pool. It is assumed, based on current waiting lists and ongoing enquiries, that the pool enclosure will enable the facility to increase the "learn to swim" enrolments by one thousand students by the start of the second year of operation.

 

Income

Per Annum

Rationale

Explanation

Learn To Swim Fees (Extra)

$580,000

1000 enrolments per term @ $14.50 @ 40 weeks per annum.

 

Extra income for Learn to Swim classes.

Secondary Spend

$4,800

Industry average

Includes increase in kiosk and merchandise purchases.

Total Income

$584,800

 

 

 

Expenditure

 

Extra Expenses per annum.

Extra Staff plus on-costs

$327,489

251 hours per week plus superannuation.

Includes a dedicated lifeguard at all times, all learn to swim staff and extra administration staff required to service 1000 students.

Electricity

$12,000

New lighting requirements.

Figures based on similar outdoor facility.

Gas

$18,800

New gas heating unit operating at 80% capacity.

Based on current facility usage of indoor pools.

Water

$6,000

Increase in water usage due to increase in usage and evaporation.

Figures based on similar outdoor facility.

Chemicals

$3,600

Increase in chemical usage to maintain health department guidelines.

Figures based on average facility usage.

Maintenance

$28,300

Increase in usage of pool vacuums, grounds maintenance and other items.

Increase in breakdowns and repairs.

Other operating costs

$14,056

Increase in uniforms, cleaning materials, advertising, printing, stationary and telephones.

Based on current facility usage.

Kiosk & Merchandise costs

$2,640

Increase in costs associated with income.

Based on current facility profit margins.

Total Expenditure

$412,885

 

 

 

Income per Annum

$584,800

Average income per annum

 

Expenditure per Annum

$412,885

Average Expenditure per annum

 

Result per Annum

$171,915

Profit per annum

 

 

It is anticipated that year one of the project will result in 50% of the above profit due to a medium take up of the extended program; hence the new pool enclosure will produce $85,958 profit in year one. 

 

If council is successful in securing funding, a further $244,000 will be required by council to complete the project. Financial projections indicate that Council would be able to generate a further $171,915 per annum ongoing from year two of the project.  Therefore, the facility will achieve a pay back of the $244,000 within two years of the completion of the project as illustrated below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:    Excellence in recreation and lifestyle opportunities.

Direction 5b:  A range of cultural, sporting and leisure activities.

 

Financial Impact Statement                     

 

The Financial impact of covering the outdoor pool with a purpose built pool enclosure at Des Renford Aquatic Centre would produce an operating profit of approximately $85,958 in year one of the project and $171,915 per annum from year two of the completed project.  This will be funded an internal loan from the Infrastructure Reserve over a period of two years.

 

Conclusion

 

Currently the Learn to swim program at Des Renford Aquatic Centre is operating at capacity. Hundreds of patrons are turned away each term due to space limitations of the indoor pools.

 

Covering the outdoor Wadding pool would enable the facility to provide a comfortable environment to teach Learn to swim classes for the entire 12 months of the year. This will enable the facility to increase the Learn to swim program and provide a significant improvement to the bottom line performance of the facility.

 

If council is successful in securing funding of $176,000 under the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP), a further $244,000 will be required by council to complete the project. Financial projections indicate that Council would be able to generate a further $171,915 per annum ongoing from year two of the project and $85,958 in year one. Therefore the facility will achieve a pay back of the $244,000 within two years of the completion of the project and continue to positively affect the bottom line performance of the facility for many years to come.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That, if successful in securing funding of $176,000, Randwick City Council fund the extra $244,000 required to complete the Pool enclosure project at Des Renford Aquatic Centre by means of an internal loan of $244,000 be drawn from the Infrastructure Reserve and repaid within two years from the Des Renford Aquatic Centre Operation.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS20/10

 

 

Subject:                  Maroubra Beach - Beach Soccer

Folder No:                   F2009/08302

Author:                   Jorde Frangoples, Director City Services      

 

Introduction

 

Council has received a submission from Octagon Australia, an International Sports & Entertainment Marketing and Event company, requesting to host a World Soccer Tournament event in February 2011 at Maroubra Beach.

 

Issues

 

Mr Ricky Marcy, Event Operations Director, has advised in his submission:

 

“This event is a “made for television” event which will be broadcast on one of the free to air networks.  The participating nations will consist of 8 international teams currently playing in the Beach Soccer Worldwide Pro Tour including Australia, Brazil, Argentina, England, China, USA, Italy and Japan.  There will be 4 matches per day and every team will play everyday, 12 matches in total.”

 

The applicant has indicated in his submission that the event will attract approximately 3000/4000 people per day through ticket sales.  Entertainment will be provided during the three days and will include some music and fun activities.   

 

There will be three separate grandstands which will be joined by circular sections, so from a visual point of view it will seem as though it is one large stadium, with one of those sections to house the VIP deck.  This grandstand seating accommodates 3,250 people. The event cannot be seen by the public if you do not have a ticket.  A small amount of tickets will be available for purchase at the front gate on the day or the day prior.  

 

Mr Marcy has indicated that he has taken this event to market with ambition to find one Naming Rights sponsor and several Key Supplier sponsors.  At this stage he has had interest from a number of beer brands, but he has indicated that a lower strength beer would be looked upon more favourably.

 

Council’s policy does not permit the consumption of alcohol on any of our beaches. However, should Council permit the provision of alcohol at this event contrary to the current prohibition, sufficient alcohol harm minimisation measures would be required to be implemented by the event organiser to the satisfaction of Council and Police, including the fulfillment of any requirements for the sale and supply of alcohol under the Liquor Act 2007.

 

The duration of the event is three (3) days – Friday, Saturday and Sunday but construction of the grandstand would need to start on the Monday prior. 

 

Council’s Aquatic Manager has been consulted and advised in relation to this event.    Agreement has been obtained that the most favourable location for this event is north of the Maroubra Surf Life Saving Club. 

 

Council has advised the organisers of this event that we have two sets of nippers (Maroubra and South Maroubra Surf Life Saving Clubs) on Sunday of the event and they will need to accommodate these activities on this day.  

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in recreation and lifestyle opportunities.

Direction 5b:      A range of cultural, sporting and leisure activities. 

 

Financial impact statement

 

Council will generate income from fees and charges applicable to this event.

 

Conclusion

 

This event would provide local residents and visitors alike an opportunity to experience significant beach related sporting events in their local area and would provide extra income to the local businesses.     

 

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     the applicant be advised that Council gives its “in principle approval” to the event subject to the applicant complying with any conditions of approval that may be imposed once the event is processed.

 

b)     no alcohol to be allowed at the event.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Map of Stadium at Maroubra Beach for Beach Soccer

 

 

 

 


Map of Stadium at Maroubra Beach for Beach Soccer

Attachment 1

 

 

 



Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS21/10

 

 

Subject:                  Coral Sea Park - proposed new sportsfield lighting project

Folder No:                   F2010/00292

Author:                   Hayley Segedin, Acting Buildings for our Community Projects Coordinator     

 

Introduction

 

Randwick City Council is proposing to install new sportsfield lighting at Coral Sea Park, Maroubra.

 

The Maroubra United Soccer Club has received a grant from the NSW Community Building Partnership Program towards this project and the funding is to be expended by December 2010.

 

This grant will cover only part of the overall project cost, and this report is to inform Council that the remainder of the funds will be brought forward from Council’s 2011-12 Sportsfield Program to fund the new lighting project.

 

Issues

 

The NSW Community Building Partnership Program

In 2009, the NSW Government announced a Community Building Partnership funding program for local community projects across NSW.

 

The Maroubra United Soccer Club applied for grant funding to assist in replacing the existing lighting with new sportsfield lighting at Coral Sea Park, Maroubra.

 

The Community Building Partnership Program granted the Maroubra United Soccer Club $38,000 towards the project.

 

The program has a list of criteria which include three of the following requirements:

 

·           Projects must deliver positive results for their community, through job creation and community, social, recreational or environmental outcomes.

 

·           Applications from local Councils require a commitment of matching funding by the Council.

 

·           Projects must be ready to commence by late 2009 and be completed before the end of December 2010.

 

Details of the project

It is proposed that new sportsfield lighting installed across Coral Sea Park will provide lighting to the dark areas of park which are currently unusable and dangerous at night.

 

Various areas of the park are currently under utilised on training nights due to these areas having little or no light rendering them unusable during the night.

 

The new lighting will also address the shortage of sporting fields currently available within Council’s local government area and will provide for night coaching, training and fitness purposes.

 

By increasing the available park area for night usage, the Soccer Club will be in a better position to attract local children and community members to get involved in recreational sporting, training and fitness activities.

 

The new lighting will provide an acceptance playing and training standard and installed to the relevant Australian Standards. This is essential to sustain adequate coaching, training, and fitness activities undertaken by the Soccer Club.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:        A vibrant and diverse community.

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

Key Action:         Champion our community’s needs to other community service providers and government agencies to advocate on our community’s behalf.

 

Financial impact statement

 

In order to utilise the Community Building Partnership Program grant, it is proposed that $100,000 of Council funding be brought forward from the 2011-12 Sportsfield Program to fund the new lighting project.

 

Funding will be borrowed internally from the Infrastructure Reserve and repaid from the 2011-12 Sportsfield Program.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Government’s Community Building Partnership provides funding opportunities for local community projects across NSW.

 

The Maroubra United Soccer Club has received a grant of $38,000 towards new lighting at Coral Sea however this grant will not cover the full project cost.

 

In accordance with the criteria outlined in the conditions of the grant, Council is required to match the funding and to ensure that the works are to be completed by December 2010.

 

The clubs aims to provide a community service in educating the youth of the Maroubra area to become responsible community citizens through sport, in particular children/youth from the Lexington Place area.  Specifically, the club offers registration, boots etc. free of charge to some of the local youth.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council brings forward funding of $100,000 from the 2011-12 Sportsfield Program to part fund the Coral Sea sportsfield lighting project, and that funding is borrowed internally from the Infrastructure Reserve and repaid from the 2011-12 Sportsfield Program.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS22/10

 

 

Subject:                  Formal Amalgamation of Randwick and Botany SES Units

Folder No:                   F2004/07606

Author:                   Peter Stone, Manager Infrastructure Services     

 

Introduction

 

Randwick City Council presently provides SES services to the Botany Bay City Council area since deregistration of the Botany SES unit.

 

Issues

 

The Director General (position is now Commissioner) deregistered the Botany SES Unit on 8 August 2006 and approximately 15 Botany Bay SES members joined Randwick City Council’s SES Unit which is situated at 192 Storey St Maroubra (Works Depot).

 

Randwick City Council and the SES have provided funds to enlarge its headquarters at the Works Depot, purchased extra small plant and an extra service vehicle to cater for the expanded membership.

 

Botany Bay City Council proposes to transfer ownership of their SES service vehicle, a Holden Rodeo Ute and small plant as part of the official amalgamation. Council staff has inspected the fleet and plant that is on offer and it was agreed that it is in working order and would not be a liability to Randwick City Council.

 

Randwick City Council has embarked on a program of Shared Services and resource sharing over the past number of years.  Botany Bay City Council proposes to enter into a formal cost sharing agreement with Randwick City Council and this is presently being negotiated with staff from both councils. The transfer of the ownership of vehicles and small plant from Botany Bay City Council is dependent on this cost sharing agreement.

 

There is no proposal to change the name of the current “Randwick” SES unit, unless volunteers in the unit wish to.  If the SES unit name is to change, a report will be forwarded to Council.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:       A vibrant and diverse community.

Direction 2c:      Strong partnership between the council groups and government agencies.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Botany Council will fund a portion of the operating costs of the local unit, hence, there will be a positive financial input for Randwick City Council.

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

Between August 2006 and June 2007 the neighbouring SES Units of Randwick, Waverley/Woollahra and Marrickville initially provided SES support for the Botany Bay City Council as required. The sole responsibility for response devolved to Randwick SES around June 2007 due to the Units close proximity to the Botany Bay City LGA and the fact that the majority of members from the former Botany SES Unit had joined the Randwick SES Unit.

 

Randwick City Council will continue to provide response services into the future and subsequently should enter into a cost sharing agreement with Botany Bay City Council.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the General Manager be authorised to negotiate and sign the formal cost sharing agreement with Botany Bay City Council.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF37/10

 

 

Subject:                  2009-10 Financial Statements (Unaudited)

Folder No:                   F2009/00341

Author:                   Caroline Foley, Manager Corporate & Financial Planning     

 

Introduction

 

As per Section 416 (1) of the Local Government Act 1993, a Council’s financial statements for the year must be prepared and audited within four months after the end of the year concerned.

 

 The statutory process that must be followed is:

 

1.     The financial statements must include statements made by resolution of the Council and signed by the Mayor and at least one other Councillor as well as the General Manager and the Responsible Accounting Officer.

 

2.     The financial statements must then be referred to the Council’s Auditors and, once audited, they must be included in the Council’s Annual Report.

 

3.     Copies of the audited financial statements must be forwarded to the Division of Local Government by 7 November 2010.

 

4.     As soon as practicable after Council receives a copy of the Auditor’s report, the statements must be placed on public exhibition and notice given of a meeting at which Council proposes to present its audited financial statements together with the Auditor’s report. (Sec. 418 LGA).

 

Issues

 

The 2009-10 Annual Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Regulations, the Australian Accounting Standards, and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting. The unaudited Annual Financial Statements will be tabled by the Director of Governance and Financial Services.

 

Section 413(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the Council to form an opinion as to whether the Council’s Annual Financial Statements reflect a true and fair position and that they have been drawn up in accordance with the Local Government Act and associated codes and standards. Statements to this effect have been prepared (refer Attachments 1 and 2) and will be presented for signature.

 

Subsequent to these Statements being signed, the Annual Financial Statements will be referred to the Council’s Auditor, Hill Rogers Spencer Steer, for audit. On completion of the audit, further copies of the statements including the audit report will be circulated to Councillors.

 

It is proposed that the audited financial statements be presented at the Council meeting to be held on 21 September 2010.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1b:      Council is a leader in the delivery of social, financial and operational activities.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Council is in a strong and stable financial position.

 

Conclusion

 

The Director Governance and Financial Services, as the responsible accounting officer, advises that the financial position is satisfactory.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     in relation to the financial statements required in accordance with Section 413(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993:

 

i)        Council resolve that in its opinion the General Purpose Financial Statements, Special Purpose Financial Statements and Special Schedules for the year ended 30 June 2010:

 

a.  have been properly drawn up in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Regulations there under, the Australian Accounting Standards and professional pronouncements, and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting;

 

b.  to the best of the Council’s knowledge and belief the statements present fairly the Council’s operating result and financial position for the year and accords with the Council’s accounting and other records; and

 

c.  the Council is unaware of any matter that would render the financial statements false or misleading in anyway.

 

ii)       The Statement by Councillors and Management for both the General Purpose Financial Statements and Special Purpose Financial Statements be signed by the Mayor, another Councillor, the General Manager and the Responsible Accounting Officer.

 

b)     the financial statements be referred to the Council’s Auditors for audit.

 

c)     Council adopt the date of receipt of the Auditor’s Report as the appropriate “authorised for issue” date relating to the Annual Financial Statements.

 

d)     arrangements be made to place copies of the audited financial statements on public exhibition and the necessary advertisements be published.

 

e)     a copy of the audited financial statements be forwarded to the Division of Local Government.

 

f)     the audited financial statements be presented at a meeting of Council to be held on 21 September 2010 in accordance with Section 418 of the Local Government Act, 1993.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Statement by Councillors and Management - General Purpose Financial Statement 2009-10

 

2.View

Statement by Councillors and Management - Special Purpose Financial Statement 2009-10

 

3.

2009-10 Draft Financial Statements will be tabled at the meeting by the Director Governance and Financial Services

 

 

 

 


Statement by Councillors and Management - General Purpose Financial Statement 2009-10

Attachment 1

 

 

 



Statement by Councillors and Management - Special Purpose Financial Statement 2009-10

Attachment 2

 

 

 



Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF38/10

 

 

Subject:                  Affixing of the Council Seal

Folder No:                   F2004/06336

Author:                   Sharon Plunkett, Property Coordinator     

 

Introduction

 

Clause 400 (Part 13) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that the Seal of the Council must not be affixed to a document unless the document relates to business of the Council and the Council has resolved (by resolution referring to the document) that the Seal be so affixed.

 

Issues

 

It is necessary for the Council’s Seal to be affixed to the signing of agreements between Council and:

 

1.     Junction Neighbourhood Centre Inc. Y0005718 in relation to a lease of Suites 1 & 2 Bowen Library, 669-677 Anzac Parade, Maroubra.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:       A Liveable City

Direction 6a:      Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

 

Financial impact statement

 

In signing of these agreements, Council will receive the following income:

 

1.     A lease agreement with Junction Neibhourhood Centre Inc. will generate an annual income of $27,047.00 exclusive of GST.

 

Conclusion

 

As Clause 400 (part 13) of the Local Government (General) Regulation requires that the Council pass a resolution authorising the Affixing of the Seal, it is necessary for this action to take place to facilitate legal formalities.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the Council’s Seal be affixed to the signing of agreements between Council and:

 

1.     Junction Neighbourhood Centre Inc. Y0005718 in relation to a lease of Suites 1 & 2 Bowen Library, 669-677 Anzac Parade, Maroubra.

 

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF39/10

 

 

Subject:                  Investment Report - July 2010

Folder No:                   F2004/06527

Author:                   Greg Byrne, Manager Financial Operations     

 

Introduction

 

The Local Government (General) Regulation requires that the Responsible Accounting Officer provide a written report to the ordinary meeting of the Council giving details of all monies invested and a certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

Issues

 

Council is authorised by s625 of the Local Government Act to invest its surplus funds. Funds may only be invested in the form of investment notified by Order of the Minister dated 31 July 2008. The Local Government (General) Regulation prescribes the records that must be maintained in relation to Council’s investments.

                         

The table in this report titled “Investment Register–July 2010” outlines the investment portfolio held by Council as at the end of July 2010. All investments have been made in accordance with the Act, Regulations and Council's Investment Policy.

 

Investment Commentary

The size of the investment portfolio may vary significantly from month to month as a result of cash flows for the period. Cash outflows (expenditure) are typically relatively stable from one month to another. Cash inflows (income) are cyclical and are largely dependent on the rates instalment due dates and the timing of grant payments including receipt of the Financial Assistance Grant.

 

Expenditure during the period was incurred for capital works, payroll and miscellaneous expenses. Main income sources were rates income, grants and miscellaneous fees and charges.

 

The investment portfolio decreased by $1.764 million during July 2010. The decrease is representative of negative cash flow for the month as expenditure exceeded income. There was an unrealised capital gain on investments for July of $142,873.13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The above graph illustrates the movement in the investment portfolio from July 2004 to July 2010. Peaks are representative of the rates instalment periods.

 

 

The above graph illustrates the movement in the investment portfolio for the past twelve months.

 

The investment portfolio is diversified across a number of investment types and is spread across a number of financial institutions. The various investment types may include managed funds, term deposits, rolling rate investments, floating rate notes and on‑call accounts.

 

The following graph indicates the allocation of investment types held at the end of July 2010.

 

 

The investment portfolio is regularly reviewed in order to maximise investment performance and minimise risk. Comparisons are made between existing investments with available products that are not part of Council's portfolio. Independent advice is sought on new investment opportunities.

 

The following graph shows the investment returns achieved against the UBS Bank Bill Index and the official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate for the period September 2004 to July 2010.

 

 

 

The following graph shows the investment returns achieved against the UBS Bank Bill Index and the official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate for the previous twelve months.

 

 

Investment performance for the financial year to date has been above the industry benchmark UBS Australian Bank Bill Index with an average return after fees of 5.31%, compared with the benchmark index of 4.83%.

 

The official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate remained unchanged at 4.50% at the July 2010 meeting (N.B The RBA rates continued to remain unchanged at the August 2010 meeting.)

 

Ministerial Investment Order

In late 2007, the NSW Government commissioned a review of NSW local government investments. The review, known as the Cole Report included eight recommendations that were all adopted by the NSW Government and incorporated into the latest Ministerial Investment Order dated 31 July 2008.

 

The Ministerial Investment Order includes transitional arrangements that allow councils to continue to hold investments that were made in compliance with the previous Ministerial Order dated 15 July 2005. Council’s investment portfolio contains a number of investments that fall into this category including both Managed Funds and Structured Products.

 

Managed Funds

The investment portfolio includes $5.539 million in managed funds. The following table depicts the latest information in respect to these products.

 

Investment

Product Type

Credit

Rating

Par Value

Market Value

LGFS Fixed Outperformance Cash Fund

Floating Rate Fund

A

3,014,423

3,014,423

Blackrock

Care & Maintenance Fund

Collective Investment

Not Rated

2,525,312

2,531,163

 

The LGFS Fixed Outperformance Cash Fund pays a floating rate return of 0.50% above the 90day BBSW index.

 

The Blackrock Care & Maintenance Fund was created following the closure of the Blackrock Diversified Credit Fund. This new fund is referred to as a “Collective Investment” and is closed to any new deposits or withdrawals. Proceeds of the fund are distributed to investors as the underlying investments reach maturity or the fund manager considers it an opportune time to sell the investments at current market rates.  The purpose of the fund is to limit the financial losses that would have occurred if the underlying assets were sold at market prices at the time that the original fund was wound up.

 

Structured Products

The investment portfolio includes $2.00 million in structured products. The following table depicts the latest information in respect to these products. The risk rating is assigned by Council’s investment advisor. 

 

Investment

Product Type

Credit

Rating

Par Value

Market Value

Risk Rating

Maturity Date

CBA

Shield Series 21

Capital Protected Note

AA

1,000,000

1,197,120

Low

28/02/11

Longreach

Series 33 (STIRM)

Capital Protected Note

A+

1,000,000

1,175,100

Low

10/05/13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

2,000,000

2,372,220

 

 

 

Floating Rate Notes

The investment portfolio includes $8.00 million in floating rate notes (FRN). The Royal Bank of Scotland FRN was purchased at a capital price of $2,025,000.00. The premium of $25,000 is being amortised on payment of the quarterly coupons, with the amortised amount for the 2009/10 year being $7,875.28 bringing the book value to $2,017,125.

 

The Deutsche Bank FRN was purchased at a capital price of $1,950,840. The discount of $49,160 is being amortised on payment of the quarterly coupons, with the amortised amount for 2009/10 year being $10,731 bringing the book value to

$1,961,571.  A further amount of $3,656 was amortised during July.

 

The overall realised gain for the life to date of both FRN’s is $6,512.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1c:      Long term financial viability is achieved.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Funds are invested with the aim of achieving budgeted income in 2010-11 and outperforming the UBS Australian Bank Bill Index over a 12 month period.  The budget provision for income from this source is $2,056,772.00. Investment income to 31 July 2010 amounted to $188,932.59

 

 

Following is the detailed Investment Report – July 2010


Conclusion

 

All investments as at 31 July 2010 have been made in accordance with Council Investment Policy. All investments meet the requirements of s625 of the Local Government Act and the Local Government (General) Regulation.

 

Changes to the economic climate and financial markets are being closely monitored. Appropriate adjustments to the investment strategy will continue to be made as required.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the investment report for July 2010 be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council

24 August 2010

 

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM39/10

 

 

Subject:                  Motion Pursuant to Notice from Cr Matson - Proposal to Upgrade Marine Reserve to Marine Sanctuary

Folder No:                   F2005/00624

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward     

 

 

That the General Manager arrange for Mr David Hempton to brief Councillors on his proposal to upgrade the local marine reserve to a marine sanctuary and to bring a report back to Council following the briefing session with a recommendation on the possible adoption of a relevant Council policy and objective.