Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 7 December 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee

7 December 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Planning Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 7 December 2010 at 6:00pm.

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor (M Matson), Andrews, Belleli, Bowen, Hughes (Deputy Chairperson), Matthews, Nash, Notley-Smith, Procopiadis, Seng (Chairperson), Smith, Stevenson, Tracey, White and Woodsmith.

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members.

 

NOTE:    At the Extraordinary Meeting held on 28 September 2004, the Council resolved that the Planning Committee whose membership consists of all members of the Council be constituted as a committee with full delegation to determine matters on the agenda.

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 9 November 2010

 

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

 

Urgent Business

 

Development Application Reports

D94/10      34 Milford Street, Randwick (Deferred)

D95/10      19 Franklin Street, Matraville (Deferred)

D96/10      77-97 Alison Road, Randwick

D97/10      554 Bunnerong Road, Matraville

D98/10      35 Napier Street, Malabar

D99/10      51 Knox Street, Clovelly

D100/10    23 Cuzco Street, South Coogee

D101/10    189 Fitzgerald Avenue, Maroubra

D102/10    169-181 Dolphin Street, Coogee (Mid Level)

D103/10    5 Nagle Avenue, Maroubra

D104/10    151 Belmore Road, Randwick

D105/10    359 Malabar Road, Maroubra 

D106/10    15B Snape Street, Maroubra

D107/10    29 Hinkler Street, Maroubra

 

Miscellaneous Report

M21/10     Randwick Landscape Elements/Retaining Walls and Stairs    

 

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee

7 December 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D94/10

 

 

Subject:                  34 Milford Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/964/2009

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Introduction

 

The Development Application No. 964/2009 seeks approval for the demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a part 3- and part 4-storey residential flat building consisting of 2 x 1-bedroom units and 2 x 3-bedroom units, car parking for 7 vehicles and associated landscape works (SEPP 1 Objections for FSR and external wall height). The application was lodged with Council on 22 December 2009.

 

The application was reported to the Planning Committee meeting held on 20 July 2010 with a recommendation for approval. At the meeting, it was resolved that:

 

RESOLUTION: (Notley-Smity/Matson) that the application be deferred for mediation.’

 

A mediation session was organised for 9 September 2010. However, the owners of the development site did not attend and their architect at the mediation session was unable to act on their behalf. As such the mediation did not proceed.

 

The application was subsequently reported back to Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 21 September 2010, which resolved that:

 

RESOLUTION: (Notley-Smith/Nash) that the application be deferred again for mediation between the applicant and objectors.’

 

Issues

 

Results of mediation sessions

A second mediation session was held on 1 November 2010. During the meeting, it was agreed that the session be adjourned and reconvened after a one-week period. This was to allow the architect and applicant to consider possible re-design of various aspects of the proposed development.

 

The reconvened mediation session was held on 10 November 2010. There was no agreement between the parties at the conclusion of the session. However, the applicant did offer a number of amendments to the proposal that were not agreed to by the objectors as they did not go far enough to address their concerns. The applicant has incorporated these amendments into a set of plans that have been provided to Council. This set of plans is not included in the recommendation. However, should Council wish to approve the application with these amended plans, they are available to be substituted. The amendments include the following

 

·           Feature tree to front garden deleted;

·           Kitchen bay cut back by 230mm;

·           Front balconies cut back by 865mm at west end and 1000mm at eastern end;

·           Bathroom bay cut back by 230mm;

·           Rear balconies cut back by 200mm;

·           Resulting reduction in FSR from 0.71:1 to 0.7:1;

·           Skylights added to south (front), north (rear) and east balconies to reduce apparent bulk.

·           Egress stair flipped to allow for reduced roof height over stair;

·           Lower roof over egress stair – translucent;

·           Stairs from basement along western boundary pulled back to minimise excavation along boundary;

 

In view of the inability to reach agreement despite the time and resources already committed in organising the series of mediation meetings, as well as the lengthy time the application has been with Council (some 11 months), the application is referred to the Planning Committee for its consideration and determination.

 

Additional submissions

A total of two (2) additional submissions have been received following the Planning Committee meeting on 20 July 2010. The issues raised are addressed as follows:

 

1 Judge Street, Randwick

-    Excessive wall height

-     Excessive balcony sizes

-     Overshadowing

-     Loss of privacy

-     Non compliance with Council’s planning controls

-     Overdevelopment

-     Excessive FSR

-     View loss

-     Inconsistency with streetscape

-     Parking and traffic generation

-     Excavation problems

 

Comments:

All of the above issues have already been fully addressed in the officer’s report presented to the Planning Committee on 20 July 2010. The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to the non-compliance with the floor space ratio and external wall height standards are considered to be well founded. The proportions and massing of the building are satisfactory and will not detrimentally impact on the streetscape. The development scheme will not result in unreasonable impacts on the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, traffic generation, view sharing, solar access and privacy. Specific conditions have also been recommended to ensure the earthworks are undertaken in a proper manner.

 

Anonymous submission

-     The proposal will significantly overshadow the residential dwelling at 1 Coogee Street. This issue has not been addressed in the original assessment report.

 

Comments:

Based on the shadow diagrams, the existing shadow situation of the detached dwelling at 1 Coogee Street on 21 June is as follows:

 

9 am

The northern elevation and rear courtyard are overshadowed by 30 Judge Street

12 noon

The majority of the rear courtyard is overshadowed by 30 Judge Street

3 pm

Direct sunlight is available to the whole of the rear courtyard

 

The proposed development will cast shadows on the entire rear courtyard of 1 Coogee Street at 3pm on 21 June. The development has no impacts on this dwelling at 9am and 12noon. 

 

However, given the rear open space of 1 Coogee Street will have its solar access further reduced on 21 June by the development (resulting in substantial overshadowing on the open space between 9am and 3pm on 21 June); the proposal does not technically meet the numerical requirements of the DCP – Multi Unit Housing.

 

An assessment has been made against the planning principle established in the Land and Environment Court case, The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010], NSWLEC 1082:

 

Where guidelines dealing with the hours of sunlight on a window or open space leave open the question what proportion of the window or open space should be in sunlight, and whether the sunlight should be measured at floor, table or a standing person’s eye level, assessment of the adequacy of solar access should be undertaken with the following principles in mind, where relevant:

 

·       The ease with which sunlight access can be protected is inversely proportional to the density of development. At low densities, there is a reasonable expectation that a dwelling and some of its open space will retain its existing sunlight. (However, even at low densities there are sites and buildings that are highly vulnerable to being overshadowed.) At higher densities sunlight is harder to protect and the claim to retain it is not as strong.

 

The subject site and the surrounding properties that will be affected by overshadowing from the proposed development are zoned Residential 2B under RLEP 1998. The primary objective of the 2B zone aims at enabling a medium density residential environment.

 

As has been discussed in the original assessment report, the proposed building height and scale are considered to be compatible with the surrounding environment and are suited to the site’s highly accessible location. The proposal represents a reasonable attempt to realise the full development potential of the site and will contribute to the diversity and affordability of housing in the locality.

 

Given the zoning provisions contained in the LEP envisage a medium density housing form, and that there are other similarly scaled residential flat buildings in the area, it is considered highly difficult to retain solar access to the courtyard of the dwelling at the corner of Coogee and Judge Streets at 3pm, especially when it occupies a downhill position as compared to the subject site.  

 

·       The amount of sunlight lost should be taken into account, as well as the amount of sunlight retained.

 

The proposal will not have any shadow impacts on 1 Coogee Street at 9am and 12noon. It should be noted that the western elevation of the dwelling in question will enjoy adequate direct sunlight throughout the day in mid winter. The overshadowed condition of the rear courtyard is primarily attributed to the height and bulk of the existing residential flat building at No. 30 Judge Street.

 

Given that 1 Coogee Street is located to the south-east of the site and occupies a downhill position, the proposed shadow impacts are not considered to be unreasonable.

 

·       Overshadowing arising out of poor design is not acceptable, even if it satisfies numerical guidelines. The poor quality of a proposal’s design may be demonstrated by a more sensitive design that achieves the same amenity without substantial additional cost, while reducing the impact on neighbours.

 

The proposed design is considered to be satisfactory and will not result in detrimental streetscape impacts. The shadows created by the development are not a result of poor design and site planning.

 

·       For a window, door or glass wall to be assessed as being in sunlight, regard should be had not only to the proportion of the glazed area in sunlight but also to the size of the glazed area itself. Strict mathematical formulae are not always an appropriate measure of solar amenity. For larger glazed areas, adequate solar amenity in the built space behind may be achieved by the sun falling on comparatively modest portions of the glazed area.

 

As discussed, the western elevation of the dwelling at 1 Coogee Street will enjoy adequate direct sunlight throughout the day in mid winter.

 

·       For private open space to be assessed as receiving adequate sunlight, regard should be had of the size of the open space and the amount of it receiving sunlight. Self-evidently, the smaller the open space, the greater the proportion of it requiring sunlight for it to have adequate solar amenity. A useable strip adjoining the living area in sunlight usually provides better solar amenity, depending on the size of the space. The amount of sunlight on private open space should ordinarily be measured at ground level but regard should be had to the size of the space as, in a smaller private open space, sunlight falling on seated residents may be adequate.

 

The rear courtyard of 1 Coogee Street will be substantially overshadowed throughout the day on 21 June. Nevertheless, a strip of land within the courtyard that is adjacent to the rear elevation of the dwelling will receive sunlight at 12 noon. The overshadowed condition of the rear courtyard is primarily attributed to the existing development context, being the height and bulk of the residential flat building at No. 30 Judge Street, as well as the sloping topography of the area. Given that 1 Coogee Street is located to the south-east of the site and occupies a downhill position as compared to the site, the proposed shadow impacts are not considered to be unreasonable.

 

·       Overshadowing by fences, roof overhangs and changes in level should be taken into consideration. Overshadowing by vegetation should be ignored, except that vegetation may be taken into account in a qualitative way, in particular dense hedges that appear like a solid fence.

 

The submitted shadow diagrams show the impacts generated by the existing and proposed building structures. It is noted that the rear courtyard of 1 Coogee Street presently contains various vegetation, which would contribute to additional shadows.

 

·       In areas undergoing change, the impact on what is likely to be built on adjoining sites should be considered as well as the existing development.

 

The locality is currently under transition where the older building stock are being renovated or replaced with new residential developments.

 

-     The stairs within the public pathway at the rear of the property linking Pitt with Judge Streets should be converted to a ramp.

 

Comments:

This matter relates to Council’s property and is not relevant to the assessment of the subject development proposal.

 

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

 

In accordance with Council’s resolution at its Ordinary Meeting on 21 September 2010, two mediation sessions were held on 1 and 10 November 2010. No agreement has been reached between the parties at the conclusion of the mediation process. The application is therefore referred back to the Planning Committee for its consideration and determination.

 

The proposal has been assessed by the planning officer as being satisfactory, and will not result in unreasonable impacts on the streetscape and the amenity of the adjoining and surrounding residential properties. The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to the attached conditions of consent.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 32(1) and 33(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio and external wall height respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the adjoining premises and the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 964/2009 for demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a part 3 and part 4-storey residential flat building consisting of 2 x 1-bedroom units and 2 x 3-bedroom units, car parking for 7 vehicles and associated landscape works, at No. 34 Milford Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

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

 

 

 

 

Plan Number / Title

Dated

Received

Prepared By

Dwg 0.1 (DA)

10.12.09

10 May 2010

Hill Thalis Architecture + Urban Projects Pty. Ltd.

Dwg 1 (DA)

10.12.09

10 May 2010

Dwg 2 (A2)

31.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.1 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.2 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.3 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 4 (A2)

30.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 4.2 (A1)

25.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 5 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 6 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 7 (A2)

31.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 8.1 (A1)

25.03.10

10 May 2010

Detail Study – Privacy Screens (Issue A)

23 March 2010

10 May 2010

Detail Study – Permeable Gabion Walls (Issue A)

23 March 2010

10 May 2010

 

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

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AMENTITY:

 

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

 

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

 

3.       A minimum of two (2) bicycle parking spaces are to be provided within the proposed development. The design and construction of the bicycle parking facilities are to be compliant with Australian Standard 2890.3: Bicycle Parking Facilities. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate application.

 

4.       The proposed Albizia julibrissin “Rosea” tree (Silk Tree) located adjacent to the south-western corner of the building shall be deleted, in order to minimise obstruction of distant views from the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street. Details demonstrating compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

5.       The reflectivity index of glass used in the external facades of the development must not exceed 20 per cent. Details of compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

6.       Suitable security lighting is to be installed in the main pedestrian entry path adjacent to the western boundary of the site. The above lighting devices shall be low level lighting where the light source is positioned no higher than 1200mm above the finished ground level, and is to be directed towards the ground. Details are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

7.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4282-1997: Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting, so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents or motorists and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

14.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $1,478,503, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $14,785.03.

 

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

 

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

 

The following condition is applied to provide adequate provisions for parking to the development:

 

15.     Public access to the visitor’s car parking space is to be maintained at all times and an intercom system is to be provided adjacent to the vehicular entrance to the car park, together with appropriate signage providing instructions for use. The visitor parking space is to be clearly signposted.

 

The following condition is applied to promote occupant safety:

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

36.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer or suitably qualified and experienced building surveyor shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works detailing the current condition and status of all buildings, including ancillary structures (i.e. including dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc.) located upon the adjoining premises at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

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

 

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

 

38.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to occupation of the building, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural design requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       effectively support  the excavation and building; and

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

 

Notes

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction;

·       details and methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·           construction noise and vibration management;

·           construction traffic management provisions.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

 

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

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

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

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

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

·       Revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

§   Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

§   Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

§   Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

§   WorkCover NSW – Guidelines and Codes of Practice

§   Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

§   Details of hazardous materials, including asbestos

§   Method/s of demolition and removal of asbestos

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

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

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

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

§   Date the demolition and removal of asbestos will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

a)   $5000.00   -      Damage/Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

a)   Construct a full width heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

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

 

c)   Reconstruct and regrade the Council concrete footpath along the full Judge Street site frontage to meet the new Council driveway levels.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

55.     The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway.

 

56.     The applicant shall note that all external work, carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council's Policy for "Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works". An application for the cost of the Council civil works is to be submitted to Council at the completion of the internal building works. An application fee shall be payable to Council for the quotation of the required works. The applicant may elect to use his contractor for the required works, subject to Council approval, however a design and supervision fee based on the lowest quotation from Council's nominated contractor will be required to be paid prior to the commencement of any works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Milford Street Frontage - match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

Judge Street Frontage – Driveway Entrance shall be RL 39.65 AHD

 

Note: This will require the reconstruction of the council footpath along the Judge St frontage.

 

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

 

60.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer has been issued at a prescribed fee of $1,344.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

                                         

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

 

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

 

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

 

66.     The applicant shall meet the full cost for the overhead power lines/cables that run from the Power Poles in the Council passageway adjacent to the northern rear boundary of the development to the Power Pole on the eastern side of Judge Street (across the Judge St carriageway) to be relocated underground. These power lines/cables are to be located underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate.

 

Note: It is recommended that the applicant liaise with the relevant service utility authority in regards to the indicative costings and scope of works prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      The kerb and gutter or drainage system at either site frontage of the property; OR

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

75.     Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas to be dedicated as common property.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·      prior to stormwater discharging into any absorption/infiltration system.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

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

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

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

 

84.     One covered car washing bay shall be provided for this development.

 

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

 

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

 

c)       The car washing bay may be located within the visitor parking spaces provided they are signposted with ‘Exclusive Carwash Bay Use Sat 2:00pm – 5:00pm and Sunday 10:00am – 2:00pm, Visitor parking at other times’

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

b)   Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

c)   Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

f)   Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Notes:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

89.     If any temporary dewatering of the site is required to facilitate construction of any part of the basement car park and/or detention tank a licence under Part V of the Water Act 1912 will be required. The licence must be obtained from the NSW Department of Water and Energy prior to installation of the works. A copy of the license agreement must be forwarded to Council prior to any dewatering being undertaken.

 

90.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to any proposed discharge of groundwater into Council’s drainage system external to the site, in accordance with the requirements of Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

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

 

91.     The garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a minimum of 4 x 240 litre bins (2 garbage bins & 2 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins. Details showing compliance with this requirement are to be shown on the plans submitted to the certifying authority for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

93.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

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

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

95.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan and Plant Schedule + Images by Jane Irwin Landscape Architecture, drawings L01 & L02, issue C, dated 05.05.10; however, the following changes must be made on an amened plan, which is to be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the commencement of any site works:

 

a.     Additional notation showing soil and mulch details, irrigation details, edging, paving, fencing details, surface finishes, retaining wall details, and any other landscape elements in sufficient detail to fully describe the proposed landscape works;

 

b.     The ‘mixed shrub planting’ proposed between the sandstone gabion wall and eastern site boundary, along the length of the Judge Street frontage, must select species that will not encroach onto the pedestrian footpath and cause an obstruction or require regular maintenance or trimming;

 

c.     Clarification on exactly what species are to be planted where, including quantity, spacing, maintenance practices such as hedging or similar;

 

d.     All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape plans;

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

96.     The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved documentation, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate and shall be maintained in accordance with those plans.

 

Judge Street Verge

 

97.     Rather than re-turfing the sloping Judge Street verge, Council requires that low growing, low maintenance native species be provided in this area in order to soften the appearance of the proposed gabion walls and proposed building, and to generally improve and enhance presentation of the development to the public domain/streetscape.

 

98.     The applicant’s Landscape Architect will need to prepare a separate planting plan for this area showing the following:

 

·      Selection of either Lomanda ‘Tanika’ or ‘Katrinus’; or; Dianella ‘Little Jess’ or ‘Breeze’, either singularly or in an arrangement that is acceptable to Council, and may also incorporate native ground covers;

 

·      A planting rate of 9-Viro tubes or 6 x 140mm pots per square metre;

 

·      For line of sight reasons, all species within a distance of 1.5 metres from the vehicle crossing must be those that will not exceed 600mm in height at maturity;

 

·      Minor re-grading of this area will need to be performed in order to provide a smooth transition between the footpath level and back of kerb;

 

·      A total of four 25 litre/300mm (pot size at the time of planting) Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s), spaced evenly along this frontage, comprising two each to the south and north of the vehicle crossing, installed a distance of 3.5 metres from the edge of the crossing, which are also to be staked and tied.

 

This Planting Plan must be submitted to, and be approved by, Council’s Director of City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to the Certifying Authority issuing a Construction Certificate for the development, with all costs associated with this work to be borne wholly by the applicant.

 

A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $2,000.00 shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and completion of this external landscape works.

 

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

 

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

 

Removal of Council’s Street Trees

 

99.     Approval is granted for the applicant to remove and dispose of (at their own cost) the row of small trees along the Judge Street verge, being the two Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) to the south of the existing vehicle crossing, and then to its north, the Hibiscus species (Hibiscus), another Weeping Bottlebrush and a Tristaniopsis laurina (Watergum), and must satisfy themselves as to the location of all site services prior to the commencement of any works on public property.

 

Removal of trees within site

 

100.    No objections are raised to removing any existing vegetation within the site where necessary as part of the proposed works, as all were observed to be insignificant, and too small to be covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO), but is subject to full implementation of the approved landscape works both within the site and externally.

 

Pruning of neighbouring trees

 

101.    Permission is granted for the selective and minimal pruning of only those lower order branches in the upper canopy, and on the eastern aspects, of the two Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s), which are located on the adjoining property to the west, 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary, only where they need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the trees or conflict with scaffolding or similar during the course of works.

 

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

 

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

 

Protection of neighbouring trees

 

104.    In order to ensure retention of the two Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) located beyond the western site boundary, within the adjoining property at 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       In order to maintain the integrity of the soil profile as well as the on-going stability of these two trees, temporary shoring (to the satisfaction of the PCA) must be provided along the western boundary, extending for a distance of 2 metres to the north and south of both their trunks, for the time between when the existing common boundary wall/fence is demolished and the new wall is constructed.

 

c.       Any roots encountered during this process that need to be cut must be done so by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

Protection of public trees

 

105.    The applicant must also ensure retention of the three Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia’s) located in the pedestrian walkway, within a narrow garden bed, adjacent the northern site boundary in good health as part of this application, with no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble around their bases, with any roots that need to be cut for the proposed sandstone gabion wall to be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

A3.     The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Development Application Report No. D44/10

 

 

 

 


Development Application Report No. D44/10

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D44/10

 

 

Subject:                  34 Milford Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/964/2009

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 


Development Application Report No. D44/10

Attachment 1

 

 

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

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                J and D Mavrodontidis

Owner:                         J and D Mavrodontidis

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

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

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, rear boundary

15.235m

 

Southern, Milford Street boundary

12.955m

 

South-eastern corner splay

3.285m

 

Eastern, Judge Street boundary

30.555m

 

Western, side boundary

33.005m

 

 

 

499.5m2

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

 

3.      The Proposal

 

The proposed development includes the following components:

 

·      Demolition of all existing structures on site.

·      Site modification and earthworks.

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

·      General landscaping.

 

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

 

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

 

(i)     Floor space ratio

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

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio (FSR)

Gross floor area (GFA)

Proposed FSR / GFA

0.71:1

356.5m2

Permissible FSR /  GFA

0.65:1

324.7m2

FSR / GFA in excess of LEP standard

0.06:1

31.8m2

 

(ii)    Building heights

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

 

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

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

External wall height

Proposed development

9.5m

Permissible height

7.5m

Building height in excess of LEP standard

2.5m

(which equates to 33.3% variation to the standard)

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Floor space ratio

Page 3

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

 

Page 5

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

 

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

 

External wall height

Page 3

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

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

 


Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

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

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

5.      Site History

 

5.1    Restrictive covenant

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

5.2    Previous development consents relating to the site

There are no recent development approvals relating to the site.

5.3    Plan amendments

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

 

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

·      Deletion of western blade walls to the front balconies.

·      Provision of privacy screens to the rear balconies.

·      Addition of skylight over the top floor living areas.

·      Addition of external blinds to eastern windows.

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

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

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

 

·      22 Clyde Street, Randwick

·      24 Clyde Street, Randwick

·      1 Coogee Street, Randwick

·      3 Judge Street, Randwick

·      4 Judge Street, Randwick

·      6 Judge Street, Randwick

·      7 Judge Street, Randwick

·      1/7B Judge Street, Randwick

·      2/7B Judge Street, Randwick

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

·      12/7B Judge Street, Randwick

·      20 Milford Street, Randwick

·      24 Milford Street, Randwick

·      26 Milford Street, Randwick

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

·      30 Milford Street, Randwick

·      32 Milford Street, Randwick

·      20 Pitt Street, Randwick

·      31 Pitt Street, Randwick

·      33 Pitt Street, Randwick

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

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

·      Randwick Precinct Committee

·      1 x anonymous submission

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

Issues

Comments

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

 

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Development Engineer and Landscape Development Officer

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

 

Landscape Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

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

 

Parking provision

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

 

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

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

Visitor Parking    =      4 x 0.25 spaces         = 1 space

 

Total required is 6 spaces and 7 spaces are proposed.

 

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

 

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

 

Service Authority Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Given that the proposed works will be in excess of $2 million the applicant will be required to meet all costs associated with replacing the overhead wires with underground cables in the vicinity of the development site.

 

An inspection of the site revealed that there is overhead powerlines which run adjacent to the northern rear boundary along the Council passageway over and across Judge Street to its eastern side. Consequently, the applicant will need to underground all electricity and telecommunication cables/wires that service the development site as well as those that cross the Judge Street carriageway from the power poles located in the Council passageway at the rear of the site. These cables are to be located underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority

 

7.2    Building Surveyor

The comments provided by Council’s Building Surveyor are extracted below:

 

BCA Building Classification

Class - 2 (Residential Units)

Class - 7a (Car park)

 

Background

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

 

Key Issues

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Noise:

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

 

Site Management:

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

 

Access for people with a disability:

Although access and facilities for people with disabilities is not required under the Building Code of Australia, wherever practicable the entrance to a multi unit housing development should aim to facilitate some degree of accessibility to the building. In this regard there is a lft poroposed from the basement carpark to all units.

 

8.      Master Planning Requirements

 

The subject site has a land area of only 499.5m2 and a master plan is not required.

 

9.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

9.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998

The Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) was gazetted on 15 January 2010. Clause 7 of the Consolidation LEP requires that a development application lodged but not finally determined prior to the appointed day will continue to be assessed and determined under the provisions of the RLEP 1998. The subject application was lodged on 22 December 2009 and is therefore subject to the savings provision. Furthermore, when determining an application to which Clause 7 applies, the consent authority must have regard to the provisions of the new plan as if it had been exhibited under the Act but had not been made.

 

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

 

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

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

21 Subdivision

Subdivision permissible with development consent

The proposal does not include Strata subdivision.

Not applicable

31 Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of site area (or 249.8m2)

66.9% (334.5m2)

Complies

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or basements not exceeding 50% of total provision

50% of required landscaped areas are provided on deep soil (167.3m2)

Complies

32 Floor space ratio

(1) Maximum 0.65:1 (or 324.7m2 GFA)

0.71:1 (356.5m2 GFA)

Does not comply, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

33 Building heights

(1) Maximum building height 9.5m

Maximum 9.5m

Complies

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

Maximum 9.5m (western elevation)

Does not comply, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

40 Excavation and filling of land

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

The proposal requires significant excavation to accommodate a semi-basement car park.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the application and raised no objections on engineering or safety grounds.

 

Specific conditions are recommended to ensure that suitable retaining walls and protection measures are implemented during works on the site.

 

The proposal is not considered to adversely impact on the drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to the recommended engineering and construction management conditions.

Complies, subject to conditions

 

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

The proposed development is consistent with the general aims and zoning objectives prescribed under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

9.3    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 65 Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

SEPP No. 65 applies to the subject proposal and the application was referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) for comments. The Design Quality Principles prescribed in the above SEPP and the comments provided by the Panel are addressed as follows:

 

Principle 1 Context

DRP comments:

 

Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

A comprehensive urban analysis has been provided.

 

The site is on the corner of Milford and Judge Streets overlooking the Coogee basin and is within close proximity to Randwick’s main shopping centre. The area is well serviced with public facilities, open space and transport. 

 

The context is diverse but predominantly apartment buildings varying from 2 to 8 storeys and large houses. The applicant notes that “the proposal forms a transition between the predominant scales found in the vicinity and mediates the scale of the apartment building immediately to the east.”

 

The principal building alignment to Milford Street is consistent with generous garden setbacks of the neighbours. On the north boundary of the site there is a public walkway and to Judge Street to the east there is a large setback due to an existing covenant.

 

Comments:

At present, the locality is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments varying from single to three or more storeys in height. The proposal has a height and scale, which are compatible with the existing residential flat developments in the surrounding built environment, and do not detract form the prevailing character of the locality.

 

Principle 2 Scale

DRP comments:

 

The Scale of the Proposal

The existing house is to be demolished and the new building will have a smaller footprint. The proposed development has scale and proportion that is comparable and appropriate to some of the larger houses and small apartment buildings in the vicinity.

 

The Location Analysis provided by the Applicant shows that due to the extremely steep topography many of the surrounding buildings in the area, including houses, have a very prominent east elevation. Sandstone retaining walls and excavated face stone are common in the area and commonly serve as building platform plinths. The proposal successfully uses this reference for the enclosure of the car parking.

 

Comments:

The proposed building is considered to be of an adequate scale given the varying heights of existing buildings along Milford and Judge Streets, and is suitable to the corner location of the site. The facades of the building have incorporated appropriate modulations and contemporary design elements, which will reduce the visual bulk and scale of the structures as viewed from the public and private domain. 

 

Principle 3 Built form

DRP comments:

 

The Built Form of the Proposal

The built form has been placed on the site to generally conform to the setback controls. The proposed building pulls back from the Milford Street neighbour creating an improved northern aspect and views for that neighbour.

 

The base of the building is expressed as a gabion wall to be filled with stone from the site. It is built to the street alignment which is a common condition to the street however the 300 thick gabion wall will be more open allowing light and ventilation to enter the car park area. The Panel considers that this is a very good solution and, with the proposed landscaping, will be a positive addition to the streetscape.

 

The Panel considers that the proposed building is well mannered and proportioned however a small reduction to the height of the west projecting kitchen and bathroom roofs could be achieved.

 

Comments:

The revised drawings have reduced the ridge height of the projecting kitchen and bathroom areas on the western elevation by approximately 400mm.

 

The proposed built form has incorporated staggered wall planes, balconies, screening devices and a combination of surface finishes, which will appropriately articulate the building facades and create visual interest. The podium structures are enclosed by gabion walls, which will enable natural lighting and ventilation of the parking facility and provide a high quality presentation to the street, without resulting in adverse visual impacts.

 

Principle 4 Density

DRP comments:

 

The Proposed Density

The proposed density is considered appropriate as the bulk and scale of the building create no negative impacts. The new apartments have the potential for high amenity and the project adds variety to the area’s housing stock.

 

Comments:

The proposed housing density is justified by the site’s proximity to major activity nodes, including the Randwick town centre, Prince of Wales Hospital and the University of New South Wales campus, as well as public transport services along Avoca Street and Carrington Road. The proposal is considered to introduce a suitable amount of residential population to a locality, which is highly accessible to retail, commercial, community and public transport services.

 

Principle 5 Resource, energy and water efficiency

DRP comments:

 

Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

The proposal has the potential to have high environmental performance due to access to natural light and ventilation, good orientation and appropriate shading.

 

The Panel recommends a reduction in the amount of fixed glass to the east by adding some operable segments and the addition of a clerestory skylight to the dining area of the top floor apartment in order to capture winter sunlight.

 

Apartment 3 living room could benefit from a window beside the sliding door so that ventilation can be achieved without compromising security.

 

Comments:

·      The revised drawings have included external blinds over the east-facing living room windows for Apartments 3 and 4 to minimise heat intake.

 

·      A skylight has been added over the living areas of the top floor Apartment 4 to improve natural lighting.

 

·      The horizontal sash windows to the kitchen as well as the south-facing casement windows to the living areas of Apartments 3 and 4 are operable and will allow cross-ventilation.

 

·      Each dwelling unit is provided with generous window openings to maximise natural lighting and ventilation.

 

Principle 6 Landscape

DRP comments:

 

The Proposed Landscape

The proposal creates good landscape opportunities (exceeding the landscape and deep soil controls) and the landscape design is well considered. Garden apartments have private gardens on title and communal gardens occupy the ground level which is elevated above Milford and Judge Streets.

Consideration could be given to more screen planting along the west boundary, particularly to the northern portion of the site.

 

Comments:

The revised drawings have included additional screen planting adjacent to the western boundary to improve privacy protection for the neighbouring dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

The design scheme has reserved adequate deep soil planting areas along the front, rear and side common boundaries of the site. The development will provide a suitable landscape setting that softens the building structures on site and contributes to the amenity of the neighbours and the street.

 

Principle 7 Amenity

DRP comments:

 

The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

Privacy, views, orientation, internal planning arrangements and opportunities for cross ventilation and natural light have been well resolved and the proposal has the potential to deliver high quality living spaces and good neighbourhood built form relationships.  

 

The entry/laundry area could be increased in the northern garden apartment.

 

Comments:

·      The main entry to Apartment 2 on the ground floor level has been widened as per the DRP recommendation.

 

·      Each dwelling has direct access to a private balcony or terrace from the main living areas.

 

·      The proposed units provide operable windows on more than one elevation with a separation distance of less than 18m. The dwellings are considered to provide adequate natural cross-ventilation.

 

·      Each of the proposed units will receive direct sunlight for at least the morning periods throughout the year.

 

Principle 8 Safety and security

DRP comments:

 

The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

Satisfactory.

 

Comments:

The proposed balconies and windows will provide suitable casual surveillance to Milford and Judge Streets as well as the public footpath to the north of the site.

 

Principle 9 Social dimensions

DRP comments:

 

Social issues

The local area has high amenity and access to public transport, parks, shopping, work opportunities, education and health facilities therefore it is appropriate that a reasonable density is achieved for this site.

 


Comments:

The proposed dwelling mix has included both one-bedroom and three-bedroom units, which can cater for different household types and needs.

 

Principle 10 Aesthetics

DRP comments:

 

The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The current proposal is of good design.

Screening elements need detail development and the Applicant should submit large scale wall sections to fully describe the design intent.

 

Comments:

Satisfactory.

 

A further submission from 32 Milford Street was received on 5 July 2010. The submission has raised issues relating to the comments made by the Design Review Panel. The concerns of the submission are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The DRP has not undertaken an accurate site analysis in that the locality is dominated by medium sized Californian bungalows, and is not “predominantly apartment buildings varying from 2 to 8 storeys”. The information contained in the site analysis is misleading.

 

The DRP’s site analysis has not made reference to the local heritage items in Milford Street, and how they contribute to the character of the locality.

Council’s assessment officer has reviewed the development application and supporting drawings and documents, and has undertaken inspections of the subject site, neighbouring properties and the surrounding areas.

 

It is noted that the locality is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments varying from single to three or more storeys in height. There is a number of local heritage items (listed under RLEP 1998) in the western section of Milford Street. They are located over 95m from the subject site.

 

The assessment officer has carried out an independent assessment of the proposed development having regard to the submitted information, the relevant planning controls, the DRP comments, Council’s internal engineering referral comments, information collected during site inspections and the merits of the proposal.

 

The DRP is not an approval body and the comments provided are advisory in nature.

The setback to the proposed front balconies does not respect the streetscape pattern and will result in detrimental amenity impacts on 32 Milford Street.

The proposed front setback to the development is considered by the assessment officer to be satisfactory. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The DRP should have regard to the potential impacts of the external wall heights on the views, privacy and solar access of 32 Milford Street when undertaking their site analysis.

 

 

 

 

It is considered that the proposed external wall height is satisfactory and will not result in unreasonable impacts on the streetscape or the amenity of the surrounding properties. The details of the assessment are provided under the “SEPP 1” and “DCP” sections of this report.

 

The DRP is not an approval body and the comments provided are advisory in nature.

The DRP should have informed the owners of 32 Milford Street about the outcome of their assessment.

Council’s DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans does not stipulate public notification of the outcome of the DRP assessment.

 

However, a copy of the DRP comments is placed on the development application file and will be available for public inspection via a formal Access to Information Application.

The DRP comments have not addressed the proposal’s non-compliance with the Council’s wall height, FSR and setback controls, and how these breaches impact on the amenity of 32 Milford Street.

The proposal contains a number of departures from the numerical controls stated in the LEP and DCP. However, the height, scale, floor space and setbacks of the proposed residential flat building are considered to be satisfactory. The development will not result in unreasonable impacts on the amenity of 32 Milford Street. Refer to the “SEPP 1” and “DCP” sections of this report for details.

The proposed rear balconies will overlook the courtyard of 32 Milford Street.

The revised design scheme has incorporated screening devices in the rear balconies to minimise privacy impacts on the neighbours. Additionally, the landscape plan shows the provision of adequate planting to enhance screening and privacy protection.

The proposed rear setback will adversely impact on the privacy of 31 and 33 Pitt Street as well as the views from 28 Milford Street.

The proposed rear setback is not considered to result in detrimental privacy impacts on 31 and 33 Pitt Street, given the significant separation distance between the site and the abovementioned properties, as well as the proposed privacy screens attached to the rear balconies.

 

The proposed design is considered to have achieved suitable view sharing with the neighbouring properties. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The design revision to the proposal, including reduction in the height of the roof over the kitchen and bathroom areas, has not been notified to the surrounding residents.

At Council’s request, the applicant has submitted amended plans that include various design revision to the proposal, including reduction in roof height above the western kitchen and bathroom areas, deletion of the western blade wall of the front balconies, increased setback to the front balconies and other minor changes.

 

The revised proposal has not been re-notified as the changes will improve the amenity of the neighbouring properties.

The DRP has not considered the community objections to the proposal.

The submissions received have been considered and addressed by the assessment officer. Refer to the “Community Consultation” section of this report for details.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by BASIX Certificate numbered 285677M. The commitments listed on the BASIX Certificate will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

10.    Policy Controls

 

10.1  Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Multi Unit Housing

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

 

Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

A detailed site analysis has been submitted with the development application.

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

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

The subject site is generally rectangular in configuration and is located at the corner of Milford and Judge Streets. The allotment has frontage widths of 12.955m and 30.555m to Milford and Judge Streets respectively. Satisfactory. 

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

The proposed building is suitably articulated and addresses both street frontages.

Height

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

 

 

A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted for non-compliance with the external wall height standard stated in the LEP. The Objection has been assessed and is considered to be well founded. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

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

 

The building bulk is suitably distributed over an architectural form that creates visual interest in terms of articulation and façade treatment. The proposal is considered to have minimised streetscape and amenity impacts.

Building Setbacks P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

Front wall: 10.1m

Front balcony: 7.6m

 

The front setback of the adjoining properties on the northern side of Milford Street are as follows:

No. 32: 9.0m (survey plan)

No. 30: 7.65m (survey plan)

No. 28: approx. 4.6m (Council’s GIS)

No. 26: approx. 4.5m (Council’s GIS)

 

The existing dwelling on site is setback approximately 9.2m to 9.6m from the boundary. The proposal has increased the setback between the building front walls and the Milford Street alignment as compared to the existing dwelling on site.

 

It is noted that the front balconies will protrude forward of the front wall alignment of No. 32 Milford Street by approximately 0.4m to 2.4m (refer to drawing number dwg 3.1). Notwithstanding, the balconies are partially open and will not adversely accentuate the perceived visual bulk. The side elevations of the balconies do not incorporate any privacy screens, with the exception of balustrades, to maintain a sense of openness and minimise obstruction of sightlines and views from No. 32 Milford Street.

 

Given the corner location of the site, the configuration and siting of the building will appropriately address both street frontages and are considered to be satisfactory from an urban design perspective.

P2  Side boundary setbacks

Side setbacks to ensure:

§ Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

§ Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

§ Landscaping and private open space provided.

§ Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

S2  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 4 metres.

No part closer than 2.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

Eastern boundary

Building: 1.5m to 1.8m

Car park: 0m

 

The eastern boundary setback does not meet the preferred solution.

 

However, it should be noted that the site is a corner allotment with dual frontages to Milford and Judge Streets. The development provides a suitable architectural response to the corner location and appropriately addresses both frontages.

 

Due to the topography of the site, a podium containing car parking facilities will be constructed to provide a levelled platform for accommodating the flat building. The podium will be built up to the Judge Street boundary.

 

The proposal will utilise gabion walling comprising galvanised mesh filled with rocks and rubbles from site excavation to enclose the semi-basement car park. The submitted drawings have clearly demonstrated that the above wall treatment will provide a natural appearance to the street frontages.

 

Given that the building will be setback a minimum of 1.5m from the edge of the podium, the development will maintain a human scale to the footpaths and will not result in detrimental impacts on the visual quality and amenity of the public domain.

 

Therefore, the proposed eastern setback is considered to be satisfactory.

 

Western boundary

3.1m to 4m

The western boundary setback meets the preferred solution.

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

Ensure that:

§ Solar access and overshadowing are minimised.

§ Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

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

§ Building built across site.

S3  Zone 2B

Minimum average setback 6 metres.

No part closer than 4.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

Balcony: 3.3m

Wall: 4.6m

 

The proposal does not meet the preferred solution.

 

The northern boundary of the site adjoins a 3.66m wide public walkway. The building separation between the subject development and the nearby properties at No. 31-33 Pitt Street will be effectively increased by this walkway.

 

The proposed rear facing balconies are attached to bedrooms, which are low intensity use areas within the dwellings. Privacy screens will also be installed to minimise direct overlooking.

 

In addition, the landscape plans show the planting of (from west to east) an olive tree (mature height 9m/spread 3.5m), a lemon tree (4m/3m) and a cheese tree (8m/6m). The above canopy trees will further enhance the privacy of the courtyard areas of No. 31-33 Pitt Street.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

P4  General

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

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

Satisfactory.

Density

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

 

The proposed density and FSR are considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

Fences

P1  Fences to be/have:       

§ consistent with streetscape;

§ Entrances highlighted; and

§ Planting used to soften and provide privacy.

 

S1 Solid front fences no higher than 1.2 metres. May increase to 1.8 metres when 50 % transparent.

 

 

The proposed fencing to be installed above the edge of the car parking podium has a height of approximately 1m and is approximately 50% transparent. Satisfactory.

Landscaping and Private Open Space

P1  Landscaped Areas

Areas are sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

S1 Minimum for landscaped area 2 metres.

Satisfactory.

P2 Areas around multi-unit buildings are communal open space and not divided up for allocation to individual units.

 

Communal gardens are provided along all four property boundaries of the site. Communal open space and clothes drying area are provided adjacent to the western side boundary. Satisfactory.

P3  Private Open Space

Provides privacy for its users, is readily accessible, and provides opportunities for outdoor recreation / living.

 

Satisfactory.

P4 Is located in front of the building only where setback and fence design sympathetic.

 

The private open space (in the form of terraces and balconies) of the southern apartments is located to the front of the building. However, adequate planting and privacy screens have been incorporated in the design to improve the living amenity.

P6  Flats and apartments

Each dwelling has direct access to an area of private open space.

S6 Minimum of 8 m2 and minimum dimension of 2 metres.

Satisfactory.

Privacy

P1  Visual Privacy

Windows and balconies of main living areas are located to avoid overlooking windows in adjoining dwellings and private open space.

 

S1 Offset, angle or screen windows with less than 10m separation. Sill level of 1.6 metres above floor level.

 

The western elevation of the building contains kitchen, toilet and bathroom windows and a semi-open stairwell.

 

Windows

The revised drawings propose the use of obscured glazing for the bathroom windows. The lower sash of the toilet windows will be constructed with obscured glazing.

 

The amended plans also show the use of obscured glazing for the operable sashes of the kitchen windows.

 

The above measures are considered to have minimised direct overlooking into the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

Stairwell

The proposed stairwell is setback 4m from the common boundary. It is also semi enclosed by full height tubular privacy screens. The landscape plan also shows the planting of a row of canopy trees adjacent to the rear courtyard of No. 32 Milford Street, which will reach up to 8m to 15m in height at maturity.

 

The above design measures will minimise direct and oblique overlooking into the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

The proposed rear facing balconies are attached to bedrooms, which are low intensity use areas within the dwellings. Privacy screens will also be installed to minimise direct overlooking.

 

In addition, the landscape plans show the planting of (from west to east) an olive tree (mature height 9m/spread 3.5m), a lemon tree (4m/3m) and a cheese tree (8m/6m). The above canopy trees will further enhance the privacy of the courtyard areas of No. 31-33 Pitt Street.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered satisfactory in this regard.

P3  Acoustic Privacy

Building layout and design minimises noise transmission of noise. Quiet areas separate noise-generating activities.

 

The primary living room windows are oriented away from the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street. Only kitchen and toilet windows are provided on the western elevation.

 

Although the stairwell and lift lobby are accommodated in the western elevation, the building contains only 4 dwellings and will not generate excessive pedestrian traffic. It should be noted that the ground floor level of the development is at least 1m below the side walk level of No. 32 Milford Street. Furthermore, screen planting will be provided along the western boundary of the site.

 

The principal private open space (living room balconies and terraces) of the development is oriented towards the public domain and is not located immediately adjacent to the adjoining dwelling.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered to have minimised noise impacts on the neighbours and is satisfactory in this regard.

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

A standard condition is recommended to require compliance with the Building Code of Australia.

View Sharing

P1 Design and location of buildings considers surroundings for assessing impact on views.

 

Refer to discussions below.

P2 Development minimises effects on views and shows how view loss is minimised.

 

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

Design, orientation, siting and landscaping minimises loss of solar access.

 

Refer to comments below.

P1.1  Solar access to existing solar collectors maintained between 9am and 3pm.

 

The northern roof pane of the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street will receive more than 3 hours of direct sunlight on the winter solstice.

P1.2 Living areas of neighbours’ dwellings receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

No. 32 Milford Street

The principal living room windows of No. 32 Milford Street are oriented to the north and will not be impacted by the proposal. The shadow diagrams provided by the applicant have been checked and demonstrate that the existing east-facing lounge window will not be impacted at 9am on the winter solstice.

No. 7 Judge Street

There will be no shadow impacts on No. 7 Judge Street on the winter solstice.

No. 30 Clyde Street

There will be minimal shadow impacts on the western façade of No. 30 Clyde Street at 3pm on the winter solstice.

The proposal will comply with the DCP performance requirement.

P1.3 Neighbour’s principal private outdoor open space receives 3 hours of sunlight over at least 50% of its area throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

The rear private open space and swimming pool areas of No. 32 Milford Street will not be impacted by the proposal.

 

The development will not overshadow the principal private open space of the surrounding properties for more than 3 hours on the winter solstice.

 

Satisfactory.

P4  Building Layout, Design and Construction

Protect from prevailing strong winds and adverse weather.

§ Living areas are orientated to the north.

§ Larger windows are located on the north.

S4 75% of dwellings achieve 3.5star Nat HERS rating or equivalent.

No dwelling achieves less than 3 stars. The Anthers rating for each dwelling (on a typical unit basis) is provided with the application.

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

P5 Buildings have roofs with pitch suitable for solar collectors.

S5  Adequate area of roof between 45 degrees east and 45 degrees west or north, and a slope between 15 and 55 degrees to the horizontal for installation of solar collectors.

The proposed roof design will not preclude the installation of solar collectors in the future.

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

The main entry to the building is not directly visible from the street. However, there is a well defined pathway connecting the public footpath to the lift lobby.

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

The development scheme proposes the use of gabion walls to enclose the semi-basement car park. The design will achieve a satisfactory streetscape outcome. Refer to the “SEPP 1” and “SEPP 65” sections of this report for details.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

Perforated mesh garage door is proposed. Satisfactory. 

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

To be required by condition.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

To be required by condition.

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

To be required by condition.

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

To be required by condition.

Parking

Required On-site Parking

1 bedroom dwelling

1 space per  dwelling

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

3 or more bedroom   

1.5 spaces per dwelling

Visitor parking is 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

The proposed car parking facilities satisfy the requirements of the Parking DCP. Refer to the “Parking DCP” section of this report for details.

P1 Garages and parking structures do not dominate the street frontage.

 

The development scheme proposes the use of gabion walls to enclose the semi-basement car park. The design will achieve a satisfactory streetscape outcome. Refer to the “SEPP 1” and “SEPP 65” sections of this report for details.

P2 Parking spaces for people with a disability provided as required (refer to dwelling number requirements in P1 and P2 Barrier Free Access.

 

Not applicable.

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

To be required by condition.

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

S2 Vehicles enter with a single turn and leave in no more than 2 turns.

Satisfactory.

P3 Driveways and access roads avoid a ‘gun barrel’ effect.

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Satisfactory.

P4 Space between boundaries and driveways, access ways and parking spaces enables landscaping and planting.

S4 Driveways have a minimum width of 3 metres and is at least 1 metre from any side or rear fence.

Satisfactory in terms of safety and manoeuvring efficiency.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

Satisfactory.

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

S6  Driveway gradients do not exceed 1 in 6 or 1 in 5 for ramps over 20m.

Satisfactory subject to condition.

Storage

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

S1 10m2 of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1m. At least 50% of storage space is within dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area. Storage facilities may be in basement areas, or attached to garages.

The proposal has included adequate storage units for each dwelling in the semi-basement car park. 

Barrier-Free Access

P1 Design must provide access for people with special access needs as required (foyer parking open space).

S1 Publicly accessible areas comply with the Building Code of Australia for access and mobility.

A standard condition is recommended to address this matter.

P2  Dwelling requirements:

  0 – 14 dwellings    0

15 – 29 dwellings    1

30 – 44 dwellings    2

45 – 60 dwellings    3 so on…

The requirements of AS1428.1 and AS 4299 are to be considered.

 

Not applicable.

P3 Dwellings for people with a disability have corresponding parking space.

 

Not applicable.

P4 Passenger lifts provide access for people with a disability to common and parking areas.

 

A passenger lift is provided in the development, which can provide access for people with disabilities to the common and car parking areas.

Utilities/Site Facilities

P1 Mailboxes provided in accordance with Australia Post.

 

To be required by condition.

P2 Provisions for a single common TV and radio reception device.

 

To be required by condition.

P3 Electrical reticulation underground and mater boxes placed in positions acceptable to Energy Australia.

 

To be required by condition.

P4 Reticulated gas to a meter for each dwelling and service points for cooking and heating in units.

 

To be required by condition.

P5 Water and sewerage provided in accordance with requirements of Sydney Water.

 

To be required by condition.

P6 Telephone lines provided in accordance with the service provider.

 

To be required by condition.

P7 Internal laundry to each dwelling, communal clothes drying made available and screened from the street.

 

Satisfactory.

Waste Minimisation and Management

P1 Waste collection and separation facilities for each dwelling.

S1 Each kitchen has a waste cupboard for separation of recycling materials, with adequate storage for one day’s waste.

Satisfactory.

P2 Waste storage to be provided in a centralised position that has easy access for moving bins to the street for collection.

 

Satisfactory.

P3 The location and design of waste facilities does not visually detract from the development or the streetscape.

S3 Waste facilities not to be located between the front building alignment and the road.

The proposed waste storage areas are contained within the semi-basement car park.

 

View sharing

The proposed development is considered to result in varying degree of impacts on the views currently available to the adjoining and nearby properties at Nos. 26 to 30 Milford Street.

 

At Council’s request, the applicant has installed height poles at each critical corners of the proposed building to depict the overall height and form of the development, with a view to providing an accurate basis for view loss analysis. Council’s assessment officer as well as the architect undertook inspections and photographic recording of the neighbouring properties at Nos. 28, 30 and 32 Milford Street on 22 April 2010. The height poles were dismantled on the following day as the roof tiles have been temporarily removed to facilitate their installation. Following the inspections, the architect submitted photomontage images and analyses demonstrating the anticipated impacts on each of the above properties.

 

On 7 May 2010, the owner of No. 26 Milford Street lodged a submission with Council raising issues of view loss impacts, after the height poles had already been dismantled. Notwithstanding, the assessment officer has undertaken an inspection of this property and the potential view loss impacts are analysed below.

 

The photomontages prepared by the architect have been extracted below to demonstrate the anticipated impacts from the development. Please note that:

 

·      Red hatchings: represent the alignment of the proposed external walls

·      Orange hatchings: represent the alignment of the proposed balconies attached to the street and rear façades of the building

 

The following paragraphs provide a four-step analysis of view loss established in the NSW Land and Environment Court case Tenacity v Warringah Council (2004):

 

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

 

The existing views currently available to the neighbouring properties in question are described below:

 

No. 26 Milford Street

Current views:

Views from the east-facing windows attached to the upper floor lounge room area. They consist of panoramic views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley. The views are obtained from both a sitting and standing position.

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the proposed building height and front setback, it is anticipated that no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views, will result.

Current views:

Views from the front balcony on the upper floor level looking south-east. They consist of panoramic views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley. The views are obtained from both a sitting and standing position.  

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the proposed building height and front setback, it is anticipated that no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views, will result.

Current views:

Views from the east-facing bedroom window on the upper floor level. They consist of panoramic views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley, which are obtained with a person sitting or standing close to the window panes, as the window mullions and sashes contribute substantially to view restrictions.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that a minor portion of the distant buildings and vegetation will be obscured following the development. However, none of the significant elements, such as water views, will be affected.

Current views:

Views from the east-facing sunroom window in the rear section of the upper floor level. They include oblique views of the sky-water interface and the northern part of Coogee Valley.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that the proposed building will become visible from this window. However, none of the significant elements of the views, including the sky-water interface, will be affected.

Current views:

Views from the rooftop terrace above the front garage looking east. They consist of broken sky-water interface and distant buildings punctuated by existing vegetation in the locality.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that the proposed building will not affect any part of the sky-water interface currently obtainable from the rooftop terrace. 

 


 

No. 28 Milford Street

Location plan

Current views:

The existing views currently obtained from the east-facing lounge room window (Window 1 as indicated in the location plan above) primarily consist of distant vegetation and buildings and the skyline. The views are obtained at both a standing and sitting position.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that up to half of the district views will be obscured. The rear section of the proposed building will be visible from this window.

 

Current views:

The existing views currently obtained from the east-facing window attached to the rear living room (Window 2 as indicated in the location plan above) consist of a small portion of the filtered, distant sky-water interface broken by existing buildings in the Coogee Bay area, as well as district views of buildings and vegetation. The limited water views are obtained generally at a standing position.

Anticipated impacts:

The sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development.

Current views:

The existing views currently obtained from the east-facing window attached to the rear living room (Window 3 as indicated in the location plan above) consist of a small portion of the filtered, distant sky-water interface broken by existing buildings in the Coogee Bay area, as well as district views of buildings and vegetation. The limited water views are obtained generally at a standing position.

Anticipated impacts:

The sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development.

 

No. 30 Milford Street

Location plan

Overall view of the windows within the bedroom

Close-up view obtained from the windows

Current views:

The east-facing windows attached to the first floor master bedroom currently enjoy horizon views of the sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley. The views are obtained at both a standing and sitting position.

 

 

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the photomontages and height poles, it is anticipated that a small portion of water views will be obscured following the development. However the majority of the sky-water interface will be retained.

 

No. 32 Milford Street

Location plan – front verandah

 

 

Current views:

At present, oblique horizon views of the sky-water interface as well as district views of Coogee Valley are obtained from the front verandah looking towards the south-east. The views are obtained generally at a standing position, and to a lesser extent, at a sitting position, depending on the height of the person.

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the photomontages and height poles, it is anticipated that approximately 40% of the horizon views will be obscured following the development.

Location plan – study room

Note: the red hatchings represent alignment of the external walls; the orange hatchings represent alignment of the front balconies; the white arrow denotes the key water views currently obtainable

Current views:

The views currently obtained with a person standing at the side door of the study room include:

·      Filtered water views punctuated by existing vegetation in the locality, obtained with a person standing and facing east.

·      Partial sky-water interface views punctuated by existing vegetation on the subject site and the verandah columns, obliquely obtained with a person standing and facing south-east.

Anticipated impacts:

Based on the photomontages and height poles, it is anticipated that the majority of the filtered water views to the east will be obscured. However, the broken sky-water interface views towards the south-east will remain intact.

Location plan – secondary bedroom

 

Note: the red hatchings represent alignment of the external walls; the orange hatchings represent alignment of the front balconies; the black arrows denote the key water and district views currently obtainable

Current views:

The existing views obtained from a person standing at the doorway to the secondary bedroom consist of:

·      Filtered water views punctuated by existing vegetation in the locality towards the east.

·      Oblique sky-water interface views punctuated by the verandah columns towards the south-east.

·      Oblique district views of Coogee Valley towards the south-east.

Anticipated impacts:

It is anticipated that the existing filtered water views towards the east will be obscured following the development. However, the oblique, broken sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley will remain intact.

 

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

 

No. 26 Milford Street

First floor lounge room windows

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

First floor front balcony

Views obtained primarily across the side boundary and to a minor extent from the front boundary;

Standing and sitting views

First floor bedroom windows

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

First floor rear sunroom windows

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Primarily standing views

Roof top terrace above front garage

Views obtained primarily across the side boundary and to a minor extent from the front boundary;

Standing and sitting views

No. 28 Milford Street

Lounge room window (Window 1)

District views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

Rear living room window (Window 2)

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing views

Rear living room window (Window 3)

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing views

No. 30 Milford Street

Upper floor master bedroom window

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing and sitting views

No. 32 Milford Street

Front verandah

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Primarily standing views (and to a lesser extent sitting views depending on the height of the person)

Study room

Views obtained across the side boundary;

Standing views

Secondary bedroom

Views obtained across the side and front boundaries;

Standing views

 

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

 

Location

Extent of impact

No. 26 Milford Street

First floor lounge room windows

It is anticipated that there will be no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

First floor front balcony

It is anticipated that no material impacts on any significant elements of the views, including water views, will result. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

First floor bedroom windows

It is anticipated that a minor portion of the distant buildings and vegetation will be obscured following the development. However, none of the significant elements, such as water views, will be affected. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

First floor rear sunroom windows

It is anticipated that the proposed building will become visible from the windows. However, none of the significant elements of the views, including the sky-water interface, will be affected. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

Roof top terrace above front garage

It is anticipated that the proposed building will not affect any part of the sky-water interface currently obtainable from the rooftop terrace. The impact is considered to be negligible.

 

No. 28 Milford Street

Lounge room window (Window 1)

It is anticipated that up to half of the district views will be obscured. Notwithstanding, the views in question are not highly scenic or iconic in nature and consequently the degree of impact is considered to be minor.

 

Rear living room window (Window 2)

The existing sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development. The sky-water views in question are highly restrictive in nature given its limited horizontal span and water contents. The views are also broken by distant buildings. As a result, the degree of the impact is considered to be moderate in nature.

 

Rear living room window (Window 3)

The existing sky-water interface will be completely obscured following the development. The sky-water views in question are highly restrictive in nature given its limited horizontal span and water contents. The views are also broken by distant buildings. As a result, the degree of the impact is considered to be moderate.

 

No. 30 Milford Street

Upper floor master bedroom window

It is anticipated that a small portion of water views will be obscured following the development. However, the vast majority of the horizon and water views will remain intact. The degree of the impact is therefore considered to be minor.

 

No. 32 Milford Street

Front verandah

It is anticipated that approximately 40% of the horizon views will be obscured following the development. The remaining sky-water interface as well as the distant Coogee Valley will remain clearly visible. The degree of the impact is considered to be moderate.

 

Study room

It is anticipated that the majority of the filtered water views to the east will be obscured. However, the broken sky-water interface views towards the south-east will remain intact. The degree of the impact is considered to be minor.

 

Secondary bedroom

It is anticipated that the existing filtered water views towards the east will be obscured following the development. However, the oblique, broken sky-water interface and district views of Coogee Valley will remain intact. The degree of the impact is considered to be minor.

 

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

 

·      Based on the above analysis, it is anticipated that the proposed development will not result in any material impact on the scenic views currently obtained from No. 26 Milford Street, which is located on the uphill side and separated from the subject site by three residential allotments.

 

·      The proposed development will completely obscure the distant water views currently obtained from the east-facing living room windows in the rear section of the dwelling at No. 28 Milford Street.

 

It is considered unreasonable to refuse the development application on the grounds of view loss from the aforementioned windows, where the views in question are highly limited in horizontal span and are significantly restricted by distant buildings and vegetation. The water contents are limited in extent and are not considered to be iconic in nature as defined in the planning principle.

 

Moreover, the views are obtained across the side boundaries of three downhill properties, being Nos. 30, 32 and 34 Milford Street, which have only been made possible by the extension of the dwelling towards the northern boundary with minimal rear setback untypical of the development pattern in the locality.

 

·      The proposal will also have a minor impact on the water views currently available to the upper floor master bedroom of the dwelling at No. 30 Milford Street.

 

The existing views are obtained across the side boundaries of both Nos. 32 and 34 Milford Street, which by virtue of the planning principle, are much more difficult to retain. Additionally, the views are obtained from the bedroom area, which is a less intensely used space within the dwelling and should be given less weight as compared to those that are captured from the principal living rooms. Regardless of the above, the vast majority of the sky-water interface and general water views will remain unaffected by the proposal.

 

·      At present, there are a number of areas within the dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street that enjoy scenic water views.

 

The most significant impact relates to the loss of approximately 40% of the sky-water interface views currently captured from the front verandah of the dwelling. The remaining water and district views will remain intact. It should be noted that part of the views anticipated to be lost are filtered by existing foliage within the side walk areas of Nos. 32 and 34 Milford Street. They are obtained over the front hipped roof of the existing dwelling house on the subject site.

 

The retention of the remaining water and district views is made possible by the proposed 3.1m to 4.0m western side setback as well as the staggered front wall arrangement proposed for the flat building. The architect has submitted a photomontage model based on a hypothetical development for a first floor addition to the existing dwelling house with a standard side setback of 900mm. The analysis clearly demonstrates that the existing water and horizon views from the verandah of No. 32 will be substantially obscured by a typical first floor addition.

 

Standing view from the front verandah of No. 32 Milford Street looking south-east across the side boundary, based on a hypothetical first floor addition to the existing dwelling house on the subject site

 

The study room and secondary bedroom in the front section of the dwelling presently enjoy oblique sky-water interface views and filtered water views through the gaps between the verandah columns when a person is deliberately standing close to the side doors to the above areas. The submitted photomontages have demonstrated that the development will retain the identified sky-water interface views despite their obliqueness and restricted nature.

 

The development scheme has reserved additional landscaped areas beyond the minimum requirements stipulated in the LEP. The substantial western side setback also assists in opening up view corridors from the front verandah of No. 32 Milford Street. The revised drawings show that the side elevations of the proposed front balconies will remain open, with the exception of the balustrades, which will enhance a sense of openness to the neighbour. It is considered that the proposed architectural design is skilful and contributes to the minimisation of view loss impact.

 

The landscape plans show the planting of an Albizia julibrissin ‘Rosea’ (silk tree) in the front setback area of the subject site. This feature tree is capable of reaching a mature height and spread of 5m and 4m respectively. This tree has the potential to obstruct views from the front verandah of No. 32 Milford Street and a special condition is recommended to require its deletion from the landscape plan.

 

·      It is acknowledged that the proposed development contains deviations from the FSR and external wall height standards contained in the LEP. Notwithstanding, as is discussed in the body of this report, the proposal has adopted a form and scale that are suitable to the corner location of the site. The development will not constitute a dominant or intrusive element in the area given the existing diversity of housing form, nor will it result in unreasonable overshadowing or privacy impacts. Overall, the proposed development is considered to be reasonable and satisfies the broad performance requirements of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP. The proposed works represent a reasonable attempt to realise the permissible development potential of the land having regard to its 2B zoning.

 

Therefore, the intrusion of the views is justified when considering the architectural merits and view retention measures of the proposal. It is considered that the potential view loss is reasonable in this instance.

 

10.2  Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Parking

The DCP specifies the following car parking rates for multi-unit housing:

 

 

Rate

Required

Proposed

Resident

1 space per 1-bedroom unit

1.5 spaces per 3-bedroom unit

5

6

Visitor

1 space per 4 dwellings or part thereof

1

1

Bicycle

1 space per 3 units, plus 1 visitor space per 10 units

2

To be required by condition

Car wash bay

1 space per 12 dwellings

Nil

Nil

Total car parking

 

6

7

 

The proposed development complies with the parking rates specified in the DCP. A special condition is recommended to ensure suitable bicycle parking facilities are provided on the site.

 

10.3  Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200000

$1,478,503

 

1.0%

$14,785.03

 

11.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Relationship to City Plan

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

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

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 


Conclusion

 

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

 

The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to the non-compliance with the floor space ratio and external wall height standards are considered to be well founded. The development scheme will not result in unreasonable impacts on the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, view sharing, solar access and privacy.

 

The design will be compatible with the streetscape character of Milford and Judge Streets. The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes proposed are considered to be satisfactory.

 

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

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 32(1) and 33(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio and external wall height respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the adjoining premises and the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 964/2009 for demolition of existing structures on site and construction of a part 3 and part 4-storey residential flat building consisting of 2 x 1-bedroom units and 2 x 3-bedroom units, car parking for 7 vehicles and associated landscape works, at No. 34 Milford Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

REFERENCED PLANS:

 

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

 

Plan Number / Title

Dated

Received

Prepared By

Dwg 0.1 (DA)

10.12.09

10 May 2010

Hill Thalis Architecture + Urban Projects Pty. Ltd.

Dwg 1 (DA)

10.12.09

10 May 2010

Dwg 2 (A2)

31.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.1 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.2 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 3.3 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 4 (A2)

30.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 4.2 (A1)

25.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 5 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 6 (A3)

03.05.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 7 (A2)

31.03.10

10 May 2010

Dwg 8.1 (A1)

25.03.10

10 May 2010

Detail Study – Privacy Screens (Issue A)

23 March 2010

10 May 2010

Detail Study – Permeable Gabion Walls (Issue A)

23 March 2010

10 May 2010

 

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

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AMENTITY:

 

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

 

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

 

3.       A minimum of two (2) bicycle parking spaces are to be provided within the proposed development. The design and construction of the bicycle parking facilities are to be compliant with Australian Standard 2890.3: Bicycle Parking Facilities. Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate application.

 

4.       The proposed Albizia julibrissin “Rosea” tree (Silk Tree) located adjacent to the south-western corner of the building shall be deleted, in order to minimise obstruction of distant views from the adjoining dwelling at No. 32 Milford Street. Details demonstrating compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

5.       The reflectivity index of glass used in the external facades of the development must not exceed 20 per cent. Details of compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

6.       Suitable security lighting is to be installed in the main pedestrian entry path adjacent to the western boundary of the site. The above lighting devices shall be low level lighting where the light source is positioned no higher than 1200mm above the finished ground level, and is to be directed towards the ground. Details are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

7.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4282-1997: Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting, so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents or motorists and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

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

         

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

14.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $1,478,503, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $14,785.03.

 

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

 

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

 

The following condition is applied to provide adequate provisions for parking to the development:

 

15.     Public access to the visitor’s car parking space is to be maintained at all times and an intercom system is to be provided adjacent to the vehicular entrance to the car park, together with appropriate signage providing instructions for use. The visitor parking space is to be clearly signposted.

 

The following condition is applied to promote occupant safety:

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

36.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer or suitably qualified and experienced building surveyor shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works detailing the current condition and status of all buildings, including ancillary structures (i.e. including dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc.) located upon the adjoining premises at No. 32 Milford Street.

 

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

 

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

 

38.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to occupation of the building, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural design requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       effectively support  the excavation and building; and

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

 

Notes

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction;

·       details and methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·           construction noise and vibration management;

·           construction traffic management provisions.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

 

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

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

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

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

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

·       Revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

§   Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

§   Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

§   Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

§   WorkCover NSW – Guidelines and Codes of Practice

§   Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

§   Details of hazardous materials, including asbestos

§   Method/s of demolition and removal of asbestos

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

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

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

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

§   Date the demolition and removal of asbestos will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Security Deposit Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

a)   $5000.00   -      Damage/Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

a)   Construct a full width heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

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

 

c)   Reconstruct and regrade the Council concrete footpath along the full Judge Street site frontage to meet the new Council driveway levels.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

55.     The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway.

 

56.     The applicant shall note that all external work, carried out on Council property, shall be in accordance with Council's Policy for "Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works". An application for the cost of the Council civil works is to be submitted to Council at the completion of the internal building works. An application fee shall be payable to Council for the quotation of the required works. The applicant may elect to use his contractor for the required works, subject to Council approval, however a design and supervision fee based on the lowest quotation from Council's nominated contractor will be required to be paid prior to the commencement of any works.

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

Milford Street Frontage - match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

Judge Street Frontage – Driveway Entrance shall be RL 39.65 AHD

 

Note: This will require the reconstruction of the council footpath along the Judge St frontage.

 

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

 

60.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer has been issued at a prescribed fee of $1,344.00 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

                                         

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

 

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

 

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

 

66.     The applicant shall meet the full cost for the overhead power lines/cables that run from the Power Poles in the Council passageway adjacent to the northern rear boundary of the development to the Power Pole on the eastern side of Judge Street (across the Judge St carriageway) to be relocated underground. These power lines/cables are to be located underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate.

 

Note: It is recommended that the applicant liaise with the relevant service utility authority in regards to the indicative costings and scope of works prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      The kerb and gutter or drainage system at either site frontage of the property; OR

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

75.     Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas to be dedicated as common property.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

Notes:

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·      prior to stormwater discharging into any absorption/infiltration system.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      A sign adjacent to the pit stating:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Notes:

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

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

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

 

84.     One covered car washing bay shall be provided for this development.

 

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

 

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

 

c)       The car washing bay may be located within the visitor parking spaces provided they are signposted with ‘Exclusive Carwash Bay Use Sat 2:00pm – 5:00pm and Sunday 10:00am – 2:00pm, Visitor parking at other times’

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

b)    Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

c)    Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

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

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

f)     Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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

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

 

Notes:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

89.     If any temporary dewatering of the site is required to facilitate construction of any part of the basement car park and/or detention tank a licence under Part V of the Water Act 1912 will be required. The licence must be obtained from the NSW Department of Water and Energy prior to installation of the works. A copy of the license agreement must be forwarded to Council prior to any dewatering being undertaken.

 

90.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to any proposed discharge of groundwater into Council’s drainage system external to the site, in accordance with the requirements of Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

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

 

91.     The garbage room areas will have to be designed so as to be able to contain a minimum of 4 x 240 litre bins (2 garbage bins & 2 recycle bins) whilst providing satisfactory access to these bins. Details showing compliance with this requirement are to be shown on the plans submitted to the certifying authority for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

93.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

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

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

95.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan and Plant Schedule + Images by Jane Irwin Landscape Architecture, drawings L01 & L02, issue C, dated 05.05.10; however, the following changes must be made on an amened plan, which is to be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the commencement of any site works:

 

a.     Additional notation showing soil and mulch details, irrigation details, edging, paving, fencing details, surface finishes, retaining wall details, and any other landscape elements in sufficient detail to fully describe the proposed landscape works;

 

b.     The ‘mixed shrub planting’ proposed between the sandstone gabion wall and eastern site boundary, along the length of the Judge Street frontage, must select species that will not encroach onto the pedestrian footpath and cause an obstruction or require regular maintenance or trimming;

 

c.     Clarification on exactly what species are to be planted where, including quantity, spacing, maintenance practices such as hedging or similar;

 

d.     All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm and all lawn areas must have a minimum soil depth of 300mm. Planter box details shall be submitted with the detailed landscape plans;

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

96.     The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved documentation, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate and shall be maintained in accordance with those plans.

 

Judge Street Verge

 

97.     Rather than re-turfing the sloping Judge Street verge, Council requires that low growing, low maintenance native species be provided in this area in order to soften the appearance of the proposed gabion walls and proposed building, and to generally improve and enhance presentation of the development to the public domain/streetscape.

 

98.     The applicant’s Landscape Architect will need to prepare a separate planting plan for this area showing the following:

 

·      Selection of either Lomanda ‘Tanika’ or ‘Katrinus’; or; Dianella ‘Little Jess’ or ‘Breeze’, either singularly or in an arrangement that is acceptable to Council, and may also incorporate native ground covers;

 

·      A planting rate of 9-Viro tubes or 6 x 140mm pots per square metre;

 

·      For line of sight reasons, all species within a distance of 1.5 metres from the vehicle crossing must be those that will not exceed 600mm in height at maturity;

 

·      Minor re-grading of this area will need to be performed in order to provide a smooth transition between the footpath level and back of kerb;

 

·      A total of four 25 litre/300mm (pot size at the time of planting) Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s), spaced evenly along this frontage, comprising two each to the south and north of the vehicle crossing, installed a distance of 3.5 metres from the edge of the crossing, which are also to be staked and tied.

 

      This Planting Plan must be submitted to, and be approved by, Council’s Director of City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to the Certifying Authority issuing a Construction Certificate for the development, with all costs associated with this work to be borne wholly by the applicant.

 

A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $2,000.00 shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and completion of this external landscape works.

 

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

 

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

 

Removal of Council’s Street Trees

 

99.     Approval is granted for the applicant to remove and dispose of (at their own cost) the row of small trees along the Judge Street verge, being the two Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) to the south of the existing vehicle crossing, and then to its north, the Hibiscus species (Hibiscus), another Weeping Bottlebrush and a Tristaniopsis laurina (Watergum), and must satisfy themselves as to the location of all site services prior to the commencement of any works on public property.

 

Removal of trees within site

 

100.    No objections are raised to removing any existing vegetation within the site where necessary as part of the proposed works, as all were observed to be insignificant, and too small to be covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO), but is subject to full implementation of the approved landscape works both within the site and externally.

Pruning of neighbouring trees

 

101.    Permission is granted for the selective and minimal pruning of only those lower order branches in the upper canopy, and on the eastern aspects, of the two Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s), which are located on the adjoining property to the west, 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary, only where they need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the trees or conflict with scaffolding or similar during the course of works.

 

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

 

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

 

Protection of neighbouring trees

 

104.    In order to ensure retention of the two Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) located beyond the western site boundary, within the adjoining property at 32 Milford Street, against the common boundary in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       In order to maintain the integrity of the soil profile as well as the on-going stability of these two trees, temporary shoring (to the satisfaction of the PCA) must be provided along the western boundary, extending for a distance of 2 metres to the north and south of both their trunks, for the time between when the existing common boundary wall/fence is demolished and the new wall is constructed.

 

c.       Any roots encountered during this process that need to be cut must be done so by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

Protection of public trees

 

105.    The applicant must also ensure retention of the three Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia’s) located in the pedestrian walkway, within a narrow garden bed, adjacent the northern site boundary in good health as part of this application, with no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble around their bases, with any roots that need to be cut for the proposed sandstone gabion wall to be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

7 December 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D95/10

 

 

Subject:                  19 Franklin Street, Matraville

Folder No:                   DA/204/2010

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Introduction

 

Development Application No. 204/2010 seeks approval for the demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and construction of an attached dual occupancy accessed from Franklin Street.

 

The application was lodged with Council on 20 March 2010 and reported to the Planning Committee meeting held on 12 October 2010 with a recommendation for refusal. At the meeting, it was resolved that:

 

RESOLUTION: (Belleli/Matthews) that the application be deferred to enable the applicant to submit amended plans.’

 

Issues

 

Following consultation between Council and the applicant, amended plans were received on 24 November 2010.

 

The proposed amendments are summarised as follows:

 

·           The garages were recessed and reduced in width to minimise the dominance of the parking structures.

·           Compliant setbacks of 900mm at the ground floor have been provided to the eastern and western sides of the site.

·           Additional landscaping provided to the front of the site.

·           The upper floor has been provided with framed balconies fronting Franklin Street with additional screening and glass balustrading to create visual interest.

·           The roof has been framed to create a building which reads more distinctly as two elements.

·           Additional information of proposed colours and materials has been provided to indicate that the variation in finishes will create additional visual interest and serve to break down the massing of the building.

 

The amended proposed now meets the stated and underlying objective of the development standard and the SEPP1 Objection is wellfounded.

 

The application is now recommended for approval based on the revised plans and subject to the relevant 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 proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site and generally complies with the standards, aims and objectives contained in the RLEP.

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and the objectives of the 2A zone and performance requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality

 

The SEPP No. 1 objection lodged in respect to the non-compliance with respect to floor space ratio is considered to be well founded. The proposal will not have a significant adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding development in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy.

 

The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes proposed are considered to be satisfactory. The design carries satisfactory architectural merits and will not unduly detract from the characteristics of the existing streetscape. 

 

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

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20F(1) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to maximum floor space ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 204/2010 for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new two storey dual occupancy at 19 Franklin Street, Matraville, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 13/10A, sheets 1 of 2 and 2 of 2, dated 23/11/10 and received by Council on 24 November 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be implemented substantially in accordance with the external colours and finishing schedule dated 23 November 2010 and received by Council on 24 November 2010 and be compatible with the adjacent development to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

7.       No cooking facilities or sanitary fittings other than those indicated on the approved plans are to be installed in the premises without the prior written consent of the Council.

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

10.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $420000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $4200.

       

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

 

a)   a construction certificate being issued

 

for the proposed development. The development is subject to an index to reflect quarterly variations in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the date of Council’s determination to the date of payment.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

13.     The following provisions are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant BASIX Certificate and details are to be included in the Construction Certificate documentation (as applicable), to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority:

 

·           Stormwater management (i.e. rainwater tanks)

·           Water efficiency (i.e. triple A rated taps and showers, dual flush toilets and water re-use)

·           Landscaping provisions

·           Thermal comfort (i.e. construction materials, glazing and insulation)

·           Energy efficiency (i.e. cooling & heating provisions and hot water systems)

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

17.     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).

 

18.     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.

19.     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).

 

20.     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”.

 

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

 

Details of the Licensed Building Contractor (and a copy of 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.

 

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

 

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

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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.

 

25.     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:

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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.

 

30.     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.

31.     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.

 

 

32.     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.

 

33.     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.

 

34.     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.  

 

35.     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.

 

36.     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.

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

39.     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.

 

a)       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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

40.     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:

 

41.     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.

 

42.     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.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

 

43.     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)   $1000.00   -      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:

 

44.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate the applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

 

a)   Construct a new concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site at the western end of the site.

b)   Construct a concrete footpath along the full site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

45.     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.

 

46.     All external civil work to be carried out on Council property (including the installation and repair of roads, footpaths, vehicular crossings, kerb and guttering and drainage works), must be carried out in accordance with Council’s Policy for “Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works” and the following requirements:

 

a)       All work on Council land must be carried out by Council, unless specific written approval has been obtained from Council to use non-Council contractors.

 

b)       Details of the proposed civil works to be carried out on Council land must be submitted to Council in a Pre-paid Works Application Form, prior to issuing an occupation certificate, together with payment of the relevant fees.

 

c)       If it is proposed to use non-Council contractors to carry out the civil works on Council land, the work must not commence until the written approval has been obtained from Council and the work must be carried out in accordance with the conditions of consent, Council’s design details and payment of a Council design and supervision fee.

 

d)       The civil works must be completed in accordance with Council’s conditions of consent and approved design and construction documentation, prior to occupation of the development, or as otherwise approved by Council in writing.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for future civil works in the road reserve:

 

47.     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:

 

Eastern Driveway – RL 14.50 AHD

 

Western Driveway – RL 14.40 AHD

 

Pedestrian Entrances – RL 14.45AHD

 

48.     The design alignment levels issued by Council must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

49.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $697.00 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.

50.     The top of footings of any structures constructed on the boundary alignment must be at least 150mm below the alignment level as specified for the vehicular access. 

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate consideration for service authority assets:

51.     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.

 

52.     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.

 

53.     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.

 

54.     A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.

 

Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to the Building Developing and Plumbing section of the website www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to “Water Servicing Coordinator” under Developing Your Land” or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will advise of water and sewer infrastructure to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator, since building of water/sewer infrastructure can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Notice must be issued to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the construction certificate being issued.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for drainage and associated infrastructure:

 

55.     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.

 

56.     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.

 

57.     As the subject development site falls away from Franklin Street, all site stormwater must be discharged either:

 

 

1.  To council’s street drainage system in Kemp Ave by gravity via a private drainage easement through an adjoining private property (or properties); OR

2.  To an infiltration system designed in accordance with Council's requirements (subject to a satisfactory Geotechnical Engineers report).

 

Should the applicant demonstrate that all reasonable attempts to procure a private drainage easement/s have failed, and the ground conditions preclude the use of infiltration, a pump system may be permitted. The pump 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.

 

58.     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 in10 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.

 

59.     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.

 

60.     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.

 

61.     The detention area/infiltration system must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure it functions as required by the design.

 

62.     The maximum depth of ponding in above ground detention areas (and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage) shall be as follows:

 

a.  150mm in uncovered carparking areas (with an isolated maximum depth of 200mm permissible at the low point pit within the detention area).

b.  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)

c.  600mm in landscaped areas where the side slopes of the detention area have a maximum grade of 1 in 10.

d.  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.

 

63.     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.

 

64.     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).

65.     A childproof and corrosion resistant fastening system shall be installed on access grates over pits/trenches where water is permitted to be temporarily stored.

 

66.     A `V' drain is to be constructed along the perimeter of the property, where required, to direct all stormwater to the detention/infiltration area.

 

67.     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.

 

68.     A sediment/silt arrester pit must be provided:-

 

a.  within the site at or near the street boundary prior to the site stormwater discharging by gravity to the kerb/street drainage system; and

b.  prior to stormwater discharging into any absorption/infiltration system.

The sediment/silt arrester pit shall be constructed in accordance with the following requirements:-

 

·      The base of the pit located a minimum 300mm under the invert level of the outlet pipe.

 

·      The pit constructed from cast in-situ concrete, precast concrete or double brick.

 

·      A minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes located in the walls of the pit at the floor level with a suitable geotextile material with a high filtration rating located over the weep holes.

 

·      A galvanised heavy-duty screen located over the outlet pipe/s (Mascot GMS multipurpose filter screen or equivalent).

 

·      The grate being a galvanised heavy-duty grate that has a provision for a child proof fastening system.

 

·      A child proof and corrosion resistant fastening system provided for the access grate.

 

·      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.

 

69.     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 linen plans shall indicate the location and dimensions of the detention/infiltration areas.

c.     The works as executed drainage plan and hydraulic certification must be submitted to Council prior to the “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” being executed by Council.

 

70.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the applicant shall submit to Council, a works-as-executed drainage plan prepared by a registered surveyor and approved by a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer. The works-as-executed drainage plan shall be to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and shall include the following details:

 

a.    The location of the detention basin with finished surface levels;

b.    Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

c.    Volume of storage available in the detention areas;

d.    The location, diameter, gradient and material (i.e PVC, RC etc) of all stormwater pipes;

e.    The orifice size(s) (if applicable);

f.    Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

g.    Details of any pumping systems installed (including wet well volumes).

 

71.     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 conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for waste management:

 

72.     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 dual occupancy

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for landscaping and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

73.     Prior to the commencement of site works, the PCA must ensure that a landscape plan prepared by a qualified professional in the Landscape/Horticultural industry (must be a registered member of either AILDM or AILA) is submitted and approved, and must include the following:

 

a)      A Planting Plan & Plant Schedule which includes proposed species, botanic and common names, pot size at the time of planting, quantity, location, dimensions at maturity, maintenance practices (hedging, shaping etc), as well as any other landscape details to describe the proposed works;

 

b)      Any other landscape details in order to fully describe the proposed works, such as fencing, screening, soil, mulch, gravel/pebbles, paving, stepping stones, retaining walls, surface treatments etc;

 

c)      A predominance of species that can withstand poor quality sandy soils and require minimal water for survival;

 

d)      Incorporation of at least 1 x 25 litre/300mm (pot size at the time of planting) feature/accent species within the front gardens of each dwelling, selecting those species which will attain a minimum of 4 metres at maturity;

 

e)      Inclusion of at least 1 x 100 litre (semi-advanced) native tree species within the rear portion of each proposed dwelling, near the rear (southern) boundary, selecting those which will attain a minimum height at maturity of between 4-7 metres;

 

f)      Provision of a 1.5 metre wide, deep soil garden bed along the length of the rear (southern) boundary of both properties, to which a continuous evergreen hedge shall be planted, using a species which will attain a minimum height of 2.0 metres at maturity.

 

74.     The PCA must ensure that the landscaping is installed in accordance with the approved documentation, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, with the applicant/owners required to maintain the landscaping in accordance with this plan, for the life of the development.

 

75.     The nature-strip upon Council's footway shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu Turf or similar. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

Removal and replacement of Council’s Street Tree

 

76.     The applicant must submit a total payment of $1,424.50 (including GST), being the cost for Council to:

 

a.       Remove the existing Harpephyllum caffrum (Kaffir Plum) located on Council’s Franklin Street verge, centrally across the width of the site, due to existing poor condition, invasive and aggressive root system, as well as well as to accommodate the most western vehicle crossing as shown; and

 

b.       Supply and plant 2 x 25 litre street trees, Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum), on Council’s Franklin Street verge, comprising one located centrally between both vehicle crossings, and one beyond the western site boundary, in front of the adjoining property at 17 Franklin Street, at the completion of all works.

 

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 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 for planting of the replacement street trees upon completion.

 

Removal of trees within the site

 

77.     Approval is granted for removal of the two established trees located centrally in the rear yard, halfway across the width of the site, being a Liquidambar styraciflua (Liquidambar), closest to the southern edge of the existing dwelling, and then to its south, close to the southern site boundary, a Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak), as both are already in poor condition due to recent damage to their canopies, are located too close to each other to allow for their future growth habits, will grow too large for the rear yard of proposed Unit 2, and will also restrict solar access, all of which will affect the level of amenity provided to future occupants.

 

78.     Approval is also granted for removal of the Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located in the rear yard, along the western boundary, towards the southwest corner of the site, in order to accommodate construction of the new retaining wall/fence and the 5,000 litre underground rainwater tank immediately to its east.

79.     The approvals described above are subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan.

 

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.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Development Application Report No. D78/10

 

 

 

 


Development Application Report No. D78/10

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D78/10

 

 

Subject:                  19 Franklin Street, Matraville

Folder No:                   DA/204/2010

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Environmental Planning Officer     

 


Development Application Report No. D78/10

Attachment 1

 

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a new two storey dual occupancy

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                Mr I Vucetic

Owner:                         19 Franklin Street Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The subject proposal is referred to the Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Andrews, Mathews and Smith.

 

The proposal details demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and construction of an attached dual occupancy accessed from Franklin Street.

 

The application was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 1–16 April 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process.

 

The site is within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). Although dual occupancies are permissible with consent within Residential 2A Zones, it is considered that the proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings and existing streetscape. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

The proposal complies with the maximum building height, external wall height and landscaped area controls of the RLEP 1998.

 

Pursuant to Clause 20F(1) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), 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 286.9m2 gross floor area (GFA). The proposal has an FSR of 0.54:1 or 309.85m2 GFA. 

 

The proposal exceeds the maximum floor space ratio control. As such, the applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 1 – Development Standards justifying that the above breaches will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area.

 

Notwithstanding the minor deviation from the numerical standard, the proposal fails to address the underlying purposes of the standard in that the proposal does not reflect satisfactory building mass and distribution of bulk and scale. The proposed dual occupancy is not considered to be compatible with the surrounding development and streetscape and would unduly impact upon the amenity presently enjoyed by neighbouring properties. The SEPP No. 1 Objection has been assessed and is not supported as it is considered that applicant’s arguments for a SEPP 1 objection are not well founded.

 

The proposal does not demonstrate consistency with the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP and will result in unreasonable adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining dwellings and the character of the locality.

 

The proposed development does not satisfy the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, and is therefore recommended for refusal.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal details demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and construction of an attached dual occupancy and associated landscaping works.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is known as Lot 6 in DP 35416 at 19 Franklin Street in Matraville and is located on the southern side of Franklin Street. The site is presently occupied by an existing single storey brick dwelling house.  The site has a frontage width of 15.85m to Franklin Street, side boundary depths of 38.24m and has an overall site area of 573.8m². Neighbouring the property to the east, and west are single storey dwellings, to the south is a double storey dwelling, and to the north is Franklin Street.  The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of single and double storey dwelling houses and attached dual occupancies, with retail and commercial properties further to the west toward the Bunnerong Road intersection. Refer to table below for photographs of the site and surrounds.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing building

2. Adjoining dwelling to the east

3. Dwellings across Franklin Street

4. Dual occupancy further to the east

 

4.    Site History

 

There is no site history relevant to this application.

 

4.1      Application History

The subject application was lodged on 20 March 2010. Following preliminary assessment, a number of issues with regard to the design of the building were identified. The applicant was notified in writing of the changes required to ensure development in the street is not excessive in bulk and scale, with reasonable setbacks maintained. Changes are summarised below: 

·      Amended plans reflecting a reduction in the overall bulk and scale of the building achieved by setting the first floor further back off the street, increasing side setbacks at the ground and first floors as building to both eastern and western side boundaries is not supported. 

·      The proposed FSR, at 62.3sqm over the RLEP control would not be supported in its current form and the overall design should be revised to minimise excess floor space/bulk and scale. 

 

Revised plans were subsequently received by Council on 4 August 2010 detailing the modifications above and form the subject of the current assessment.

 

5.    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted with the development application. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the following matters are addressed:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted with the development application. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the following matters are addressed:

 

The proposal seeks to vary any development standards contained with Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) as follows: 

 

·      Floor Space Ratio (Clause 20F)

 

Pursuant to Clause 32(1) of RLEP 1998, the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No. 2A is 0.5:1 or 286.9m2 gross floor area (GFA). The proposal has an FSR of 0.54:1 or 309.85m2 GFA. 

 

In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection, the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 have been addressed. The case has established that the upholding of a SEPP 1 objection is a precondition which must be satisfied before a proposed development can be approved by the consent authority:

 

Matter 1

The Court must be satisfied that “the objection is well founded” (clause 7 of SEPP 1). The objection is to be in writing, be an objection “that compliance with that development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case”, and specify “the grounds of that objection” (clause 6 of SEPP 1).

 

·      Comments:

The stated purpose of the FSR standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

“To establish reasonable upper limits for development in residential, business, industrial and special uses zones through a limit on the amount of floor space that can be provided. This will help to reduce the potential for adverse impact on nearby and adjoining development while still providing for reasonable levels of development and redevelopment.”

 

Floor space ratio

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following key justifications for the variations to the standard:

·      The proposal is consistent with new development in the area

·      The proposal will achieve the objectives of the clause despite non-compliance with the floor space ratio control

·      The proposed design represents a building of moderate bulk and scale

·      The building has been provided with reasonable articulation of the facades

·      The north/south orientation results in minor overshadowing to the adjoining premises due to the increase in floor space.

 

Assessment Officer Comments: It is considered that the proposal is unsatisfactory and compliance with the purpose of the development standard should be required for the following reasons:

 

·      Notwithstanding the minor deviation from the numerical standard, the proposal fails to address the underlying purposes of the standard in that the proposal does not reflect satisfactory building mass and distribution of bulk and scale.

·      The proposal lacks visual interest and building articulation further exacerbating the appearance of excessive bulk and scale.

·      The proposal’s height, bulk, scale, built form and design will have an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of proximity to the side boundaries, overbearing bulk and scale, and is generally that regard is not compatible with the scale of residential development in the established streetscape.

·      The proposed dual occupancy does not carry satisfactory architectural merit, or represent a high quality treatment to enhance the visual amenity of the surrounding residential area. More refined articulation of facades and strategic use of recessed areas, height and setback variations, balconies and various roof forms would have been effective in improving the appearance of the proposal.

·      The development will be visually intrusive and form a dominant element in the streetscape and subsequently detract from the prevailing character of the locality.

·      The proposed bulk would set a poor precedent for future development in the area.

·      The built form, proportions, massing and landscaped area allocation are not considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the existing low density residential environment, or protect the amenity of the existing residences.

·      The proposal involves garages that dominate the frontage and that are sited to the side boundaries, resulting in a presentation to the street that does not reinforce the character of the streetscape and pattern of side setbacks. 

 

The SEPP 1 Objection relating to variations from the floor space ratio 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) Conclusion

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 objection does not adequately address the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The objection fails to justify that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of each case. The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

Matter 2

The Court must be of the opinion that “granting of consent to that development application is consistent with the aims of this Policy as set out in clause 3” (clause 7 of SEPP 1).

 

The aims and objects of SEPP 1 set out in clause 3 are to provide “flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act”. The last mentioned objects in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are to encourage:

 

“(1) the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(2) the promotion and coordination of the orderly and economic use of developed land.”

 

The variation from the standard for FSR is inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as it would detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act embodied in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii). In this respect the proposed development would not represent an orderly and economic development of the subject land.

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development it will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings and existing streetscape. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

Matter 3

The Court must be satisfied that a consideration of the matters in clause 8(a) and (b) of SEPP 1 justifies the upholding of the SEPP 1 objection. The matters in clause 8(a) and (b) are:

 

“(a) whether non-compliance with the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and

(b) the public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument”.

 

The proposed development and variations from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, as discussed above, it is considered that the strict application of the floor space ratio 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 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:

The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

 

Second

A second way is to establish that the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is relevant to the subject development.

 

Third

A third way is to establish that the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

 

Comments:

 

The proposal will create an undesirable precedent for the built form of future development in the area, and is anticipated to result in cumulative adverse implications on the streetscape 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 standard in question has 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 existing Residential 2A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low density residential development. 

6.    Community Consultation

 

The application was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 1 – 16 April 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process.

 

6.1      Support

No letters of support were received.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers, including where necessary external bodies and the following comments have been provided:-

 

Development Engineers

The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineers for comment. No objections were raised subject to conditions with any approval. The following comments were made:

 

An application has been received for the demolition of the existing residence and the construction of an attached dual occupancy at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Drwg No 13/10 by P Banfield dated 16/3/10

 

Landscape Comments

Despite not being accurately represented on the submitted plans, on Council’s Franklin Street verge, located centrally across the width of the site, there is one mature Harpephyllum caffrum (Kaffir Plum) of approximately 8 metres in height, with a broad, and low spreading canopy of about 12 metres across, which spans almost the full width of this site, and is also covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to its location on public property.

 

Despite appearing in good health, the inspection revealed it is in poor condition due primarily to an included branch union between the two main leaders near ground level (one leading to the northwest and one leading to the southeast), which is already deemed to pose a serious threat of failure as it could split at this junction at any time, with numerous lower growing branches also having been previously pruned off in order to maintain pedestrian access, as well as to avoid damage by passing trucks, and due to its naturally occurring habit, will be an ongoing maintenance issue for its life-term.

 

The plans appear to show that it will be retained, and while the existing crossing to its east, along the eastern boundary will remain in-situ, a new front masonry fence will be built to its south, and a new crossing to its west, along the western boundary, which would cause the removal of a significant portion of its root system due to excavations finishing only 1.5m from its trunk, which would ultimately lead to poor health, instability and likely, death.

 

Due to the structural faults described above, as well as the extent of pruning that would be required from both its eastern and western aspects in order to provide the necessary clearances for vehicles and line of sight, which would significantly affect its form and appearance, as well as the damage that would be caused to its root system due to numerous roots already being evident at surface level throughout this area, there is no way that Council could allow this tree to remain while proceeding with the proposed works as shown.

Further, this species is included on Council’s Invasive and Aggressive Rooted Street Tree Register, which contains a short list of problematic tree species which are regularly responsible for causing costly damage to both private and public infrastructure, with Council actively seeking their removal wherever possible, so that hey may be replaced with more favourable, native species selected from Council’s Street Tree Masterplan.

 

Council’s Tree Management Officer was consulted on the status of this particular tree, and following a site inspection, confirmed by e-mail (refer TRIM D 01019849) that approval should be granted for its removal, subject to the applicant covering all relevant costs, and while its loss will be noticeable in the streetscape due to the sheer volume and size of its canopy, due to all the issues described above, retention is not an option that Council could consider, with a loss of amenity fee not to be charged in this instance.

 

In the rear yard, halfway across the width of the property, and roughly centrally located in this rear portion, there is a 6 metre tall Liquidambar styraciflua (Liquidambar), closest to the southern edge of the existing dwelling, and then to its south, close to the southern site boundary, a 10 metre tall Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak), which upon completion, would both be located wholly within the private open space of proposed Unit 2.

 

The health and appearance of both trees has been compromised from recent land clearing and pruning, with numerous stubs left throughout their canopies, and as all lower growing limbs have been removed to a height of several metres above ground level, they no longer provide any meaningful screening of the adjoining two storey dwelling to the south.

 

Both of these species are also regarded as having problematic root systems, and given the large size they can attain at maturity, their close proximity to each other, excessive leaf fall, and ability to heavily restrict solar access, would seriously impact the useability of this area of private open space and the amenity of occupants if they were retained.

 

They are deemed inappropriate for retention as part of this proposal, and should be removed and replaced with trees and landscape works which are more suitable for the space available and that will more effectively cater to the needs of future occupants.

 

The only other vegetation within this property was observed to be in the rear yard, along the western boundary, towards the southwest corner of the site, where there is a 6 metre tall Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm), which appeared in good health and condition, is also covered by the TPO.

 

A new retaining wall/fence is proposed along the western boundary, as well as a 5,000 litre underground rainwater tank to be installed immediately to its east, both of which would involve significant excavations that would affect its health and stability, with conditions allowing its removal, subject to replacement planting being undertaken in this specific area of the site.

 

While this application complies with the numerical controls for this level of development in this Zone, the submitted landscape plan is completely inadequate to make any meaningful contribution to site amenity or improve the appearance of the works in relation to the street or neighbours in anyway, with conditions requiring that in recognition of the increase in size of this building, a higher level of detail and treatment be provided.

Drainage Comments

Onsite detention of stormwater is required for this application.

The Planning Officer is advised that the submitted drainage plans should not be approved in conjunction with the DA, rather, the Development Engineer has included a number of conditions in this memo that relate to drainage design requirements. The applicant is required to submit detailed drainage plans to the PCA for approval prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

The Development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned Residential 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent. The proposal falls under the definition of “attached dual occupancy” as outlined in the RLEP 1998 and is permissible within the Zone 2A.

The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 10 – Zone No 2A (Residential 2A Zone)

The relevant objectives of Zone No 2A are:

 

(a)  To maintain the character of established residential areas, and

 

(c)  To enable redevelopment for low density housing forms, including dwelling houses, dual occupancy, semi-detached housing, and the like, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed built form will compromise the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

The following clauses of LEP 1998 are relevant to the proposed development. Areas of Non-compliance are the subject of a SEPP 1 objection and are discussed under the SEPP 1 section of this report.

 

Clause 20B – Minimum allotment sizes

Clause 20B(4) of the RLEP states that the minimum allotment size for the erection of an attached dual occupancy within Zone No 2A is 450 square metres and the allotment must have a frontage of at least 15 metres.

 

The subject site has an overall site area of 573.8m 2 and a site frontage of 15.85m and therefore, complies.  It should be noted, however, the minimum frontage requirement for the erection of dual occupancy development within 2A residential zones has been increased to from 12m to 15m under the new RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) to allow better presentation to the street and encourage compliant side setbacks to minimise impact to adjoining properties.

 

Clause 20E - Landscaped Area

Clause 20E(1) of the RLEP 1998 states that a minimum of 40% of the site area must be provided as landscaped area for areas zoned 2A.

 

Clause 20E(3) states that landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas must not exceed 50% of the landscaped area requirements specified in subclauses (1).

 

The proposal has 41% of the site as landscaped area and no landscaping is to be provided over podium areas. The proposal therefore complies with this Clause.

 

Clause 20F – Floor Space Ratio

Clause 20F(1) of RLEP 1998 states that the maximum floor space ratio for land zoned 2A is 0.5:1.

 

Pursuant to Clause 20F(1) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), 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 286.9m2 gross floor area (GFA). The proposal has an FSR of 0.54:1 or 309.85m2 GFA. 

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under SEPP No. 1 – Development Standards justifying that the above breach will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. The objection has been assessed in section 5 of this report.

 

Clause 20G – Building Height

Clause 20G(1) of RLEP 1998 imposes a maximum overall building height of 9.5 metres for buildings on land zoned 2A and 2B, and 12 metres for buildings on land zoned 2C. 

 

Clause 20G(3) also imposes a maximum external wall height of 7 metres for buildings on land zoned 2A and 2B, and 10 metres for buildings on land zoned 2C. 

 

The proposal has a maximum overall building height of 7.6m and a maximum external wall height of 7m. Complies.

 

8.2      State Environment Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

The proposal is for additions to a dwelling and the applicant has provided a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP. The provision of a certificate indicates that compliance with the current targets set for energy and water conservation have been met by the development. The certificate also identifies the measures to be shown on Development Application plans to ensure these targets are maintained through to construction.

The plans have been checked and they are consistent with the requirements indicated on the submitted BASIX certificate for DA stage. Standard conditions of consent requiring the continued compliance of the development with the SEPP: BASIX have been included in the recommendation section of this report.

 

9.    Policy Controls

 

9.1      Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies states that a proposal is deemed to satisfy the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP if it complies with the corresponding Preferred Solutions.  Therefore, the 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.

41% of the site is landscaped area. Complies

S1

A minimum of 25m² of useable private open space is to be provided.

The rear yard has an area of over 54sqm. 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.

The above area has dimensions of 9.5m x 7m. Complies

S1

Private open space in the front yard area is located behind the building line.

The above area is located in the rear yard.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

25% of the site is permeable. Complies

 

The Objectives of the DCP with regard to landscaping are that existing significant trees and landscaping are retained and enhanced; dwellings are provided with usable outdoor recreation space; storm water management and the appearance, amenity and energy efficiency of the dwelling is improved through integrated landscape design; and the native wildlife populations are preserved and enhanced through appropriate planting of indigenous vegetation.

 

Comment: Not withstanding the proposals compliance with the numerical controls as contained in the DCP, it is considered that the residual open space is not successfully utilised and opportunities for more effective landscaped area provision have not been fully explored.

 

Particular reference is made to the proposed driveway configuration and landscaping provision forward of the building line. It is considered that a more effective driveway design, tapering toward the street would allow for more areas capable of accommodating meaningful planting/landscaping which would in turn serve to soften the appearance of the development and is conducive to the visual amenity of the proposed dwelling as well as that of the surrounding streetscape.

 

The design scheme has not maximised the site opportunities in reserving adequate landscaping to the street, which would otherwise be effective in allowing perimeter planting to establish a landscape ambience to the development.

 

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The subject site has an overall site area of 573.8m2. The preferred solution for an allotment of this area is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 applies. 

The proposed FSR is 0.54:1. Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

 

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP are that developments are not excessive in bulk or scale; are compatible with the existing character of the locality; and minimise adverse effects of bulk on neighbours and the street.

 


Height, Form & Materials

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The proposed dwelling has a maximum external wall height of 7m. Complies.

S1

External wall height of buildings or additions to the rear does not exceed 3.5 m.

Not applicable.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

Not applicable.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

The proposal is set to the eastern and western side boundaries of the subject site. Does not comply – see assessment below. 

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

The proposed dwelling is 10m – 12m from the rear boundary. Complies.

S4

The length of a second storey portion is no greater than 12m at less than 1.5m from a southern boundary.

The entire southern elevation of the proposed dwelling is at least 10m from the southern (rear) boundary. Complies.

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.

 

The Objectives of the DCP are that developments should not be excessive in height and scale and be compatible with the existing character of the locality; to ensure impacts in terms of privacy, natural light and views are minimised; and with respect to additions that they not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling.

 

Comment: The development attempts to adopt a symmetrical contemporary design, featuring a klip-lock roof behind a parapet wall. The building, however, lacks refinement and articulation through appropriate use of window openings and staggered wall planes. The lack of depth in the elevations exacerbates the appearance of excessive visual scale and bulk of the structures.

 

The development will be visually intrusive and form a dominant element in the streetscape, subsequently detracting from the generally open nature featured in the prevailing character of the locality. It is noted that the majority of the surrounding allotments have been provided with ample side setbacks.

 

The proposed bulk would set a poor precedent for future development in the area, resulting in built form, proportions, massing and landscaped area allocation which do not maintain the desirable attributes of the existing low density residential environment, or protect the amenity of the existing residences.

 


Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

The proposed dwelling is set back 6m – 7m from the front boundary and is generally consistent with the setbacks of adjoining dwellings. Complies.

S2

No part of the building is closer than 4.5m from rear boundary.

The proposed dwelling is 10m – 12m from the rear boundary. Complies.

S3

Side setbacks be 900mm for any part of the building at ground level.

The proposal is set to the eastern and western side boundaries of the subject site. Does not comply – see assessment below. 

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

The proposed development is set back 1.53m from the side boundaries. Complies.  

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

Not applicable.

 

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP seek to ensure that there is adequate access to sunlight, daylight and fresh air to building occupants and neighbours; and with respect to front boundary setbacks the proposal generally conform to the adjoining development or dominant streetscape.

 

Comment: The proposed development is set to the eastern and western side boundaries (garages only) at the ground floor. The remaining habitable ground and first floor areas have been provided with a side setback of 1530mm from the side boundaries. The proposal does not meet the preferred solution of 900mm with regard to side setbacks at the ground floor (garages only) of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. The development does not meet the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP in that the proposed built form, involving garages that dominate the frontage and that are sited to the side boundaries, result in a presentation to the street that does not reinforce the dominant character of the streetscape and pattern of side setbacks. 

 

Planning principle for development on boundaries

The planning principle established by the Land and Environment Court in Galea v Marrickville Council [2005] NSWLEC 113 is applied to assess the reasonableness of the proposal with regard to side setback. The following paragraphs provide an assessment of the proposal in accordance with the five (5) step process established in the proceedings.

 

[Step 1] Is the street characterised by terrace housing?

 

Building to the boundary is likely to be appropriate in streets where the existing form of development is terrace houses or villa home, where building to the boundary follows the existing pattern of development.

 

This section of Franklin Street is predominantly residential in character and consists of a mixture of single and double storey dwelling houses, as well as double storey dual occupancies to the east, with retail and commercial properties further to the west toward the Bunnerong Road intersection. The prevailing and established character of the surrounding area features relatively open front yards and dwellings with generous front and side setbacks.

 


[Step 2] What is the height and length of the wall on the boundary?

 

Short lengths of single storey walls (such as garages) are usually acceptable on the boundary.

 

The proposed 3.3m high garages set to the eastern and western side boundaries of the subject site have lengths of 6.5m, extending along the side boundary over a section comprised entirely of unarticulated wall. The garages extend toward the rear of the site from the building line and are located adjacent to a paved driveway to the east, and the eastern elevation of the dwelling to the west.

Notwithstanding this, the non compliance with regard to side setbacks at both ground and first floor results in a cumulative effect of exacerbating the appearance of excessive bulk and scale when viewed from the street. The proposed distribution of building mass is not in keeping with the open nature of the surrounding development.

 

[Step 3] Has the applicant control over the adjoining site(s) or the agreement of their owners?

 

The applicant does not have control over the adjoining sites.

 

[Step 4] What are the impacts on the amenity and/or development potential of adjoining sites?

 

Building to the boundary may be appropriate, even where the above tests are not answered favourably, provided it can be shown that a wall on the boundary does not diminish the amenity or the development potential of the adjoining site.

 

Although no windows have been proposed for these areas of non-compliance, the proximity of the dwelling to the side boundaries and dwellings on the adjoining sites will result in serious issues with future maintenance of these elevations. The nil setbacks also place unreasonable restrictions on future development potential on the adjoining sites to the east and west, limiting their opportunities to provide windows and other openings at otherwise reasonable and compliant setbacks on their own allotments.

 

Further, the non-compliant side setbacks combined with the lack of articulation to the elevations exacerbates the appearance of excessive visual scale and bulk of the structures.

 

The resultant development will be visually intrusive and form a dominant element in the streetscape, subsequently detracting from the generally open nature featured in the prevailing character of the locality. It is noted that the majority of the surrounding allotments have been provided with ample side setbacks.

 

The proposed bulk would set a poor precedent for future development in the area, resulting in built form, proportions, massing and landscaped area allocation which do not maintain the desirable attributes of the existing low density residential environment, or protect the amenity of the existing residences.

 

[Step 5] Are there arrangements in place for the maintenance of the wall or gutters?

 

The question of maintenance should be considered at the time of the development application to avoid disputes later.

 

The proposed development features a rainwater head and downpipe attached to the parapet roof. It is envisaged that maintenance of the gutter will be able to be carried out from the subject site and can be accessed from the roof of the garage. However, maintenance of the eastern and western elevations can only be carried out from the adjoining properties.

 

Conclusion:

For the development to provide reasonable amenity, the coordinated development of a group of dwellings would be required. Where the wall of a dwelling is built on the side boundary, the adjoining dwelling should either be built on the boundary (as in town houses and villa homes) or alternatively it should be built a sufficient distance from the boundary to provide a useable outdoor area. In this instance, building on the boundary is considered to be inappropriate and visually compromises the established streetscape. 

 

With consideration of the DCP requirements and the above assessment in accordance with the Galea v Marrickville Council planning principle, it is deemed that the impacts of the proposed development are unreasonable and will result in adverse impacts to the amenity of the surrounding properties. The proposed development contravenes the relevant planning principles in the provision of good amenity and does not satisfy the relevant objectives of the Development Control Plan for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). 

 

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.

There will not be any significant loss of privacy to the adjoining properties in that most of the upper level windows serve bedrooms and bathrooms, which are not considered to be rooms of high intensity usage. Further, the proposal has been provided with compliant side setbacks at the first floor to endure direct view into adjoining sites is restricted. 

S1

Direct view into open space of an adjoining dwelling is obscured or screened within 9m and is beyond a 45 degree angle.

No objections are raised with regard to privacy from the adjoining dwellings as there are minimal opportunities for overlooking given the living areas are located at the ground floor. Proposed windows at the ground floor of the dwelling are adequately offset from those windows of the adjoining dwellings and partially screened by existing dividing fences and therefore will not adversely affect the privacy of the adjoining dwellings.

S1

Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more or fixed obscure glazing below that height.

See assessment above.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Conditioned to comply with the BCA.

 

The Objective of the DCP is to ensure that new buildings and additions meet the occupant and neighbours requirements for visual and acoustic privacy.

The proposal has modestly sized openings to the first floor that are acceptable and compatible for the surrounding residential area.

Overall, the location and design of proposed windows to the dwelling are sympathetic to the privacy needs of adjoining dwellings and satisfactorily address the relevant objectives and preferred solutions of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

Safety & Security

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

The proposed front door faces the street. Complies.

S1,3

Dwellings have at least one habitable room window overlooking the street.

The proposed dwelling has windows that overlook the street (master bedroom). Complies.

S2

A Council-approved street number is conspicuously displayed at the front of the dwelling or front fence.

Suitable condition included.

 

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP seek to ensure that a safe physical environment and crime prevention is promoted through design, including that buildings are designed to face the street and other public areas to provide for surveillance; dwellings and their entrances are readily identifiable by street numbering and design of front fences; and landscaped areas allows for safe access to the dwelling.

 

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.

The proposed dwelling has parking for 2 cars. Complies.

S1

Car parking spaces have a minimum dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m.

The dimensions of the parking spaces are 5m x 6.14m. Complies.

S1

Driveways have minimum width of 3m and are set back at least 1m from the side boundary.

The proposed driveways are 3.2m wide and is set back to the eastern and western boundaries. Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

Driveways have a maximum width of 3m at the property boundary.

The proposed driveways are is 3.2m wide at the front boundary. Does not comply – see assessment 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.

The proposed driveway gradient is less than 1 in 8. Complies.

S1

With respect to garages and carports to rear lanes these should be set back 1m to improve pedestrian visibility.

Not applicable.

S2

Parking and access is provided from the rear of the allotment where possible.

Not applicable.

S2

Garages and carports located behind the building line where parking only available from the front of the site.

The proposed garage is located behind the building line. Complies.

S2

Driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment

The proposed parking structures occupy 69% of the width of the site frontage. Does not comply – see assessment below.

 

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP include that car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive and do not detract from the appearance of the dwelling and the streetscape; and structures are compatible in scale, form, materials and finishes with the associated dwelling.

 

Comment: The proposed parking structures and driveway configuration is not effective in minimising unnecessary areas occupied by concrete/pavers. The current design, with two individual driveways servicing each half of the dual occupancy diminishes the potential for effective landscaping provision forward of the building line.

 

Further, the garages are sited to the eastern and western side boundaries and result in a presentation to the street dominated by parking structures. The design of the garages are not considered to integrate well with the building, are visually obtrusive and does not effectively reinforce the character of the streetscape and pattern of side setbacks. 

 

The proposal therefore does not meet the relative objectives and performance requirements of the DCP with respect to garages and driveways.

 

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 proposed front fence has a height of 1m. Complies.

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.

Not applicable.

 

Generally, the Objectives and Performance Requirements for fences in the DCP are to ensure that front fencing is integrated with the streetscape and is compatible with the appearance of the dwelling and any established local fence form and material.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

New dwellings comply with a minimum of 3.5 stars on the NatHERS.

See BASIX

S2

Private open space receives at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The rear yard will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

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 proposal includes north-facing windows that will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

S9

Solar access to existing or future solar collectors on adjacent buildings is maintained between 9am and 3pm each throughout the year.

The proposal will not overshadow solar collectors on adjoining properties. 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 proposal will not reduce solar access to less than 3 hours on north-facing windows. Complies.

S9

Principal outdoor recreation space of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight over part of its area between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.  If currently less than 3 hours, it is not further reduced.

The proposal will not reduce solar access to private open space to less than 3 hours. Complies.

 

The overall Objectives of the DCP seek to ensure that development promotes and has regard to the concept of Ecologically Sustainable Development. In this respect the objectives promote energy efficiency in design and construction; encourage the use of appropriate resources and passive solar design; and protect solar access enjoyed by the adjoining premises.

 

9.2      Development Control Plan – Parking

The DCP – Parking requires carparking to be provided for dwelling houses and attached dual occupancies at a rate of 1 space per dwelling with two or less bedrooms and 2 spaces per dwelling with 3 or more bedrooms. The proposal provides 2 parking spaces to each dwelling in the form of a single garage and hardstand carspace. Therefore complies with parking requirements for dual occupancies. The proposal has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineers and no objections were raised on traffic or safety grounds.

 

9.3      Section 94A Contributions

In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council.

 

Section 94A Contributions

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost More than $200,000

$420000

1.0%

$4200.00

Must be paid in cash, bank cheque or by credit card

 

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

Environmental Planning Instruments

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” section of this report.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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, which are otherwise not addressed in this report, are discussed in the paragraphs below.

 

The proposed dual occupancy is not considered to be compatible with the surrounding development and streetscape and would unduly impact upon the amenity presently enjoyed by neighbouring properties.

Section 79C(1)(c) – The suitability of the site for the development

The site is located in close proximity to local services and public transport. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and associated structures. However, the site is not considered suitable for the proposal in its current form.

Section 79C(1)(d) – Any submissions made in accordance with the EP&A Act or EP&A Regulation

No submissions were received. 

Section 79C(1)(e) – The public interest

The proposal will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings and existing streetscape. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to be in the public interest.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design.

Direction(4b):    Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Development for the purpose of an attached dual occupancy is permissible with the consent of within Residential 2A Zones. However, it is considered that the proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development it will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings and existing streetscape. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

The SEPP 1 Objection relating to variation from the floor space ratio 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.

 

The proposal fails to address the underlying purposes of the standard in that the proposal does not reflect satisfactory building mass and distribution of bulk and scale. The proposed dual occupancy is not considered to be compatible with the surrounding development and streetscape and would unduly impact upon the amenity presently enjoyed by neighbouring properties.

 

The proposal does not demonstrate consistency with the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and will result in unreasonable adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining dwellings and the character of the locality.

 

The proposed development does not satisfy the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended and is therefore recommended for refusal for the reasons outlined in the recommendation below.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.      That Council does not support the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20F(1) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to floor space ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development does not comply with the objectives of the above clauses, and will adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.      That Council, as the consent authority, refuses development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 204/2010 for for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new two storey dual occupancy at 19 Franklin Street, Matraville  for the following reasons:

 

1.       The proposal does not satisfy the relevant objectives of the Residential 2A Zone as set-out in the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

2.       The proposal does not satisfy the objectives of Clause 2.4.1 of the Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies with respect to appropriate site analysis in that it does not reflect a design and scale which is in keeping with the streetscape and desired future character of the neighbourhood. 

 

3.       The proposal does not satisfy the objectives and performance requirements for height, form and materials set-out in Clause 4.3 of Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

4.       The proposal does not satisfy the objectives and performance requirements for garages, carports and driveways set-out in Clause 4.7 of Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

5.       The proposal does not satisfy the objectives or performance requirements for building setbacks set-out in Clause 4.4 of Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee

7 December 2010

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D96/10

 

 

Subject:                  77-97 Alison Road, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/851/2010

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     "Future Music Festival" at Randwick Racecourse on 12 March 2011 catering for approximately 42,000 people between the hours of 12 noon to 10 pm (Heritage Conservation Area)

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Future Events Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Mr P F P Whelan & Mr K A Murray

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application seeks consent for a one day music event at Randwick Racecourse known as The Future Music Festival. It is proposed to take place on Saturday 12 March 2011 between 12 midday and 10pm and cater for 42,000 patrons.

 

Two key elements to the proposed 2011 event which differ from the approved 2010 event are:   

 

·           An increased of capacity to 42,000 patrons

·           Enlarged event grounds with the addition of 10,000sqm in section ‘Z2’ as indicated on the event map.

 

The application was lodged on 30 September 2010 and notified to the surrounding properties and advertised in the local newspaper for 14 days from 13 October to 27 October 2010. Six (6) submissions were received raising predominantly issues relating to the organisation of the event based upon experience from last year’s event. These included requests for better traffic and transport arrangements, better policing of the event to deter antisocial and criminal behaviour of event goers, better co-ordination of post-event clean-up, and monitoring of supply of alcohol. Other concerns regarding excessive noise, rowdy drunken and drug-affected behaviour, vandalism, trespassing, intimidation, and other general anti-social behaviour have been raised. Conditions to address these concerns will be applied in addition to plans and strategies already in place to further improve the security and control of the event.

 

The event for 2011 is proposed with a crowd capacity of 42,000 compared with the restriction of 38,000 people for the 2010 event. The applicant advises that the increase in numbers (additional 4000 patrons) is necessary for the following reasons:

 

·           It allows for additional income required to fund the traffic, transportation, pedestrian and resident action plans for the event, which, while being of a high standard and operational improvement, is extremely costly to the event.

·           There have been significant infrastructure improvements to the Racecourse since the 2009 event, including a new taxi terminus and new bus terminus located within the boundaries of the Racecourse. These improvements provide for much better crowd management off Alison Road, allowing for quicker dispersion of crowds and therefore reducing the impact on the local community.

·           Future Entertainment and the AJC are committed to delivering the very best of standards and improvements on years to year operations. Approval of the application would result in a more successful world class festival at the Royal Randwick Racecourse.

·           Public transport statistics indicate an increase in the ability to transport patrons to and from the event.

·           The Future Music Festival is now entering its 6th year and more effective and efficient access to and from the site has resulted in a noticeable reduction in the impact on local residents and the amenity of the local area overall.

 

Having regard to the applicant’s reasons, the increase in the number of patrons and event area is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following additional reasons:

 

·           The increase is not considered excessive amounting to an additional 4,000 people who can be catered for under improved operational measures proposed for the 2011 event as discussed in the report below.

·           In an event de-brief held after the 2010 event, it was generally noted that the comprehensive traffic, transportation, pedestrian and resident action plans put in place for the 2010 event resulted in significant improvements in security, traffic and crowd behaviour over that of previous years such that an increase of 4,000 people under similar and improved measures for the 2011 event can be accommodated.

·           The request for additional patron numbers has not been objected to by the NSW Police Service The application was referred externally to both the NSW Police Service (Eastern Beaches) and the RTA for comments. All comments have been received and appropriate conditions will be applied in line with these and other internal comments should approval be granted for the event. In particular, the police have requested for appropriate strategies to be included as conditions of consent for this year’s event to ensure that security is improved and potential criminal activities minimised.

 

The recommendation is for approval with conditions including new and improved measures to traffic, transportation and security.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal is for a music festival for approximately 42,000 people at the Royal Randwick Racecourse grounds on Saturday, 12 March 2011, commencing from 12.00noon to 10.00pm. The application is only for the one designated day in 2011.

 

The proposal also involves the erection of temporary structures comprising primarily performance stages. It is not proposed to carry out any permanent building works.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

Randwick Racecourse is bounded by Alison Road, Wansey Road, High Street and the rear of predominately residential properties fronting Doncaster Avenue. The Racecourse is surrounded by residential areas containing the broad spectrum of housing types. The main University of NSW campus and Centennial Park are also in close proximity to the site. Figure 1 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area.

Figure 1 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area

4.    Site History

 

A large number of Development Applications concerning the various parts of the Racecourse have been submitted and approved in the last decade. The following previous music events are noted:

 

·           Development Application No. 771/2000 for a major Olympic promotional activity (Coca Cola Redfest) for maximum of 30,500 people including installation of temporary works on 15 September 2000 from 3pm to 11pm was approved under delegated authority on 11 September 2000.

·           Development Application No. 904/2005 for a music festival with approximately 10,000 people was approved under delegated authority on 2 February 2006 subject to conditions.

·           Development Application No. 74/2007 for a music festival with approximately 15,000 people was approved under delegated authority on 14 March 2007 subject to conditions.

·           Development Application No. 987/2007 for a music festival with approximately 35,000 people was approved under delegated authority on 5 March 2008 subject to conditions.

·           Development Application No. 694/2008 for a music festival with approximately 35,000 people was approved under by the Land and Environment Court on 25 February 2009 subject to conditions.

 

·           Development Application No. 873/2009 for a music festival with approximately 38,000 patrons was approved by the Planning Committee on 9 February 2010 subject to conditions.

 

·           Development Application No. 850/2010, a Part 3A project was lodged on 29 September 2010 and is currently under assessment for the following works: -

 

-    Demolition of the Randwick Pavilion, Teahouse and Paddock Stand

-    Excavation and site works and construction of a new 7 level above ground       level grandstand with basement

-    Construction of an amphitheatre parade ring

-    Construction of a new three (3) storey Owners and Trainers pavilion

-    Construction of a single storey amenities block

-    Refurbishment if the QE11 Stand

-    Modification of the junction of the Official Stand to the QE11 Stand

-    Adaptive-reuse of the Swab building, and

-    On-site landscape works

 

DA/850/2010 is not anticipated to impact the assessment and operation of the 2011 Future Music Festival. 

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification 1998 from 13 October – 27 October 2010. As a result, and six (6) submissions were received raising the following issues (many of the issues raised are shared between the individual objections and will be grouped below to avoid repetition):

 

 

 

 

Issue

Comment

Requests better policing of the event with added security measures to effectively control and facilitate effective dispersal of crowds.

The current proposal is not seeking an increase in closing time to that granted for the event in previous years. Additional emphasis has been provided in the current proposal to improve egress strategy after the event including, but not limited to:

·      Use of an Integrated Ticket Transport Strategy to encourage use of public transport to and from the event and thus minimise impact/exposure to local residential area.

·      Traffic management planning to manage all event generated pedestrian movements, event generated bus movements  and private vehicles and non-event generated traffic flows to allow for smooth and safe egress

·      Additional pedestrian control and infrastructure detail at Doncaster and Alison Roads, with revised management strategies and additional rostered police.

·      Extended event clearway duration.

·      Use of the bus lane along Anzac Parade as a pedestrian corridor to allow a greater ability to direct and move people from the site towards the City by foot after the event.

·      General crowd management plans that aim to significantly moderate behaviour and reduce nuisance to residents.

Disturbance caused by people flocking to the event and milling about the streets.

 

This issue can be addressed by measures to facilitate expedient egress of crowds away from the local residential areas around the racecourse post-event should approval be granted for the DA including:

 

·      Use of an Integrated Ticket Transport Strategy to encourage use of public transport to and from the event and thus minimise impact/exposure to local residential area.

 

·      Traffic management planning to manage all event generated pedestrian movements, event generated bus movements  and private vehicles and non-event generated traffic flows to allow for smooth and safe egress

 

·      Use of the bus lane along Anzac Parade as a pedestrian corridor to allow a greater ability to direct and move people from the site towards the City by foot after the event.

 

·      General crowd management plans that aim to significantly moderate behaviour and reduce nuisance to residents.

Noise levels still unsatisfactory

An acoustic report has been submitted with the application which includes recommendations to ensure relevant standards and acoustic amenity is maintained during the event. Council’s Environmental Health Officer has assessed the report and advises that the report is acceptable subject to appropriate conditions to ensure the noise associated with the proposal is maintained at a reasonable level and that the nearby likely affected residents are provided with the details of the proposal including the appropriate contact details should they wish to make any complaints or have any further enquires regarding the proposed event.

Crowds moving onto other venues in surrounding suburbs during and after the event causing disturbance and anti-social behaviour.

The applicant advises that the proposed event will further refine the crowd ingress and egress measures to minimise impacts on surrounding residential areas including increasing public awareness of the dedicated High Street and Alison Road access points and use of the bus lane along Anzac Parade as a pedestrian corridor to allow a greater ability to direct and move people from the site towards the City by foot after the event.

Control of alcohol sales required including cessation of alcohol service at 9pm and use on non-glass containers.

Conditions will be imposed upon any consent including limiting alcohol sales to 2 drinks per person per sale and terminating alcohol sales one hour before closing (ie 9pm). This will be in addition to other controls established as a matter of course by the applicable liquor license.

 

Pedestrian movement impact upon traffic needs to be better managed especially crowds crossing Alison Road at ingress and egress times.

 

Conditions can be applied should approval be granted for the DA to reinforce the proposed pedestrian/traffic management that which does not involve the closure of Alison Road and that uses the bus lane along Anzac Parade as a pedestrian corridor to allow a greater ability to direct and move people from the site towards the City by foot after the event.

 

New access arrangement for on-site parking will result in unacceptable impacts to residents.

The application has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineers, Integrated Transport Committee, and the RTA. No objections have been raised with regard to the submitted traffic management plan and suitable conditions have been included to ensure the safety and convenience of event goers and residents is maintained.

Anti social behaviour including (including, public urination, vandalism and public fornication) in residential areas.

As required in the 2010 event, the applicant can be required to provide enhanced measures including improved toilet facilities, limitation of alcohol sales, increased mobile patrol, restriction of hours and elimination of “pass-outs” should approval be granted for the DA.

Noise issues.

Conditions will be applied to any consent to control noise levels. Restrictions upon hours of operation will also control the times at which noise occurs.

Excessive alcohol consumption leading to intoxication/drug use by event goers 

 

 

 

Conditions will be imposed upon any consent including limiting alcohol sales to 2 drinks per person per sale and terminating alcohol sales one hour before closing (ie 9pm). This will be in addition to other controls established as a matter of course by the applicable liquor license.

 

The 2011 even will also feature strong police presence and the applicants have agreed to use of specialist NSW Police resources at the event in addition to a significant user charges policing commitment financed by the event promoter.

The venue is not suitable for events such as Future Music Festival and should be relocated to a non residential area.

The site is a major recreation facility that is suitable for such events subject to complying with the relevant assessment criteria.

Extensive littering of nearby private buildings and post event clean up must be improved.

Suitable conditions have been imposed to the consent specifying a cleanup area and applying a security deposit bond to ensure suitable cleanup is provided.

Anti social behaviour including (including, public urination, vandalism and public fornication) in residential areas.

As required in the 2010 event, the applicant can be required to provide improved measures including better toilet facilities not permitted for “pass-outs”; limitation of alcohol sales, increased mobile patrol, restriction of hours and elimination of “pass-outs” should approval be granted for the DA.

 

The proposed increase in patron numbers (to 42,000) is excessive and should be reduced to be in line with Centennial park events and the previous Future Music Festival in 2010 (38,000).

A number of strategies have been agreed upon for the 2011 event between Future Entertainment, the AJC, and the NSW Police to enhance the security of the event and the safety of event patrons whilst attempting to minimise the disruption to the community. It is considered that the event organisers have, in collaboration with the New South Wales Police; adequately developed improved strategies more effectively address previous concerns regarding security and potential criminal activity. The most notable of these strategies is the agreed NSW Police resource commitment to the event which, along with security and traffic management contractors, is considered sufficient within normal operational parameters, to manage an event crowd not exceeding 42,000 persons.

 

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      Development Engineers

The application has been referred to the Development Engineer for comment, conditions have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted. The following comments were received:

 

The application seeks consent for a one day music event at Randwick Racecourse known as The Future Music Festival. It is proposed to take place on 12 March 2011 between noon and 10pm and cater for 42,000 people. This event has occurred at this site annually since 2006 but with generally increasing numbers of patrons.

 

The application seeks consent for a one day music event at Randwick Racecourse known as The Future Music Festival. It is proposed to take place on Saturday 12 March 2011 between 12 midday and 10pm and cater for 42,000 patrons.

 

Two key elements to the proposed 2011 event which differ from the approved 2010 event are:   

 

·           An increase of capacity to 42,000 patrons

·           Increase event grounds with the addition of 10,000sqm in section ‘Z2’ as indicated on the event map.

 

The application was lodged on 30 September 2010 and notified to the surrounding properties and advertised in the press for 14 days from 13 October to 27 October 2010. Six (6) submissions were received raising predominantly issues relating to the organisation of the event based upon experience from last year’s event. These included requests for better traffic and transport arrangements, better policing of the event to deter antisocial and criminal behaviour of event goers, better co-ordination of post-event clean-up, and monitoring of supply of alcohol. Other concerns regarding excessive noise, rowdy drunken and drug-affected behaviour, vandalism, trespassing, intimidation, and other general anti-social behaviour have been raised. Conditions to address these concerns will be applied in addition to plans and strategies already in place to further improve the security and control of the event.

 

The event for 2011 is proposed with a crowd capacity of 42,000 compared with the restriction of 38,000 people for the 2010 event. The applicant advises that the increase in numbers (additional 4000 patrons) is necessary for the following reasons:

 

·           It allows for additional income required to fund the traffic, transportation, pedestrian and resident action plans for the event, which, while being of a high standard and operational improvement, is extremely costly to the event.

 

·           There have been significant infrastructure improvements to the Racecourse since the 2009 event, including a new taxi terminus and new bus terminus located within the boundaries of the Racecourse. These improvements provide for much better crowd management off Alison Road, allowing for quicker dispersion of crowds and therefore reducing the impact on the local community.

 

·           Future Entertainment and the AJC are committed to delivering the very best of standards and improvements on years to year operations. Approval of the application would result in a more successful world class festival at the Royal Randwick Racecourse.

 

·           Public transport statistics indicate an increase in the ability to transport patrons to and from the event.

 

·           The Future Music Festival is now entering its 6th year and more effective and efficient access to and from the site has resulted in a noticeable reduction in the impact on local residents and the amenity of the local area overall.

 

Having regard to the applicant’s reasons, the increase in the number of patrons and event area is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following additional reasons:

 

·           The increase is not considered excessive amounting to an additional 4,000 people who can be catered for under improved operational measures proposed for the 2011 event as discussed in the report below.

 

·           In an event de-brief held after the 2010 event, it was generally noted that the comprehensive traffic, transportation, pedestrian and resident action plans put in place for the 2010 event resulted in significant improvements in security, traffic and crowd behaviour over that of previous years such that an increase of 4,000 people under similar and improved measures for the 2011 event can be accommodated.

 

·           The request for additional patron numbers has been determined following close consultation between the NSW Police Service

 

The application was referred externally to both the NSW Police Service (Eastern Beaches) and the RTA for comments. Both the Police and the RTA provided minimal comments and raised no objections to the proposal.

 

Council’s Manager Integrated Transport Comments

I provide the following comments relating to the submission to hold the Future Music Festival 2011 at Randwick Racecourse on 12 March, 2011. 

 

I refer, in particular, to the submission entitled, “APPENDIX D Traffic” (dated 22 September 2010) as prepared by Events and Sports Projects Australia.

 

In principle, no objections are raised to the holding of the event, provided traffic management is implemented in accordance with the submitted documentation, noting the following points which either require clarification or some alterations (the numbering used is identical to the applicant’s paragraph numbering utilised in their report):

 

1.5     the proposal will be placed before the December 2010 meeting of the Randwick Traffic Committee (not the October meeting).

 

1.7     under the heading, “Event Transportation” it is noted that “event organisers are currently considering a Full Integrated Transport / Gate Ticket”.   This arrangement must be put in place for the event.

 

3.2     sub point 6 – clarification is requested as to why an earlier closure of Doncaster Avenue is being considered.

 

sub point 18 – private use of the public road in Wansey Road, for bump-in / bump-out purposes before and after the event, must be paid for by the applicant, in accordance with Council’s 2009/10 Fees & Charges.

 

        sub point 35 – clarification of this sub point is requested.

 

4.4     No objection is raised as to the use of the STA’s bus roadway, parallel to Anzac Parade, as a pedestrian corridor during egress from the event, however this should be negotiated with the State Transit Authority.

 

5.2   typo – should read twelve midnight, and not twelve noon.

 

7.7     sub point 1 – as noted previously, Council’s Fees must be paid for the bump-in / bump-out clearway requested.

 

7.7     sub point 4 – reference is made to parking meters but there are no parking meters at this location.  Clarification required.

 

7.14    Information on proposed disabled parking locations must be provided to Council’s satisfaction, prior to the event.

 

Regarding the specific Traffic Control Plans (TCPs) I provide the following comments:

 

Re TCP 2a, 2b, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8a, 8b and 9

- pedestrian and cyclist access for the public is to be maintained to the Alison Road and Wansey Road shared bicycle / pedestrian paths, whilst conditions permit.

Re TCP 6

– it is recommended that Gate 8 be utilised for the bump-in / bump-out process (outside Clearway hours) instead of Wansey Road, Randwick.

Re TCP 8a and 8b

– it should be noted that Council’s Fees will apply for the private use of Wansey Road, during bump-in / bump-out prior to and after the event.

Re TCP 8b

– it is considered that egress to Wansey Road be restricted to a left turn only so that local residential streets do not experience heavy traffic flows up to midnight.

Re TCP 9

– consideration should be given to the proposed shuttle buses picking up in High Street and then utilising the Racecourse High Street gate to effect a U-turn to return directly to Anzac Parade.

 

- Typo – at the bottom of the image, the words “Baker Street” should be “    Barker Street’.

Re TCP 10

– again, it is suggested that the option of turning the buses around within the slip lane, ingress lane and egress lanes of the High Street gate, should be closely examined in order to improve turnaround times and reduce the bus load on the nearby residential streets, (High Street, Botany Street and Barker Street).

Re TCP 16

– the message proposed for the VMS indicates a closure until 12.30pm – this should read as 12 midnight.

Re TCP 8c

– Wansey Road vehicles accessing the infield road at Gate 10 should turn right in only and left out only, to minimise traffic flows on residential streets.

 

It should be noted that skip bins or similar facilities are NOT to be placed in the parking lanes of any public roads, as occurred last year.

 

Consideration will be given to the applicant being required to fund “user pays” parking patrols to ensure adequate coverage of the parking restrictions in the local area.

 

The applicant is to arrange for appropriate notices to be erected at bus shelters, up to two weeks prior to the event, to inform regular bus patrons that their bus services, and access to their regular bus stops, may be affected on the day of the event.

 

General Comments

This report only focuses on traffic and operational matters. The Development Engineer notes that this application has been referred to both Council’s Coordinator Rangers and Coordinator Regulatory Projects. The Coordinator Regulatory Projects has imposed a condition requiring payment of a security bond.

 


6.2      Environmental Health Services

The application has been referred to Environmental Health Services for comment, conditions have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted. The following comments were received:

 

Environmental Health Comments

 

The Proposal

Application has been received for a music event to be held at the AJC on 12th March 2011 for 42,000 patrons.

 

Key Issues

The major change to the proposed event is an increase in patrons from 38,000 to 42,000. In terms of capacity of the racecourse it is not anticipated this increase will adversely impact the amenity impact provided, the event is appropriately managed.

 

Food Safety

All temporary food stalls shall be registered with Council. Suggested conditions are listed below for inclusion on any proposed approval.

 

Acoustics

Noise from the music being played during sound tests and during the event has the potential to create an offensive noise and pollution.  A noise management plan has been prepared and submitted with this application. In an effort to minimise the acoustic impacts from the music being played at the event, appropriate conditions are provided for inclusion on any proposed approval.

 

Proposed patron numbers have been increase, however in terms of the proposed increase noise associated with patrons is a management issue.   

 

The Police have consulted with the applicant on issues of patron management and a number of agreed strategies have been proposed to minimise the impacts on surrounding areas. The agreed measures of patron management include:

 

·      Increased CCTV coverage; stringent conditions of entry;

·      licensing agreement on the supply of alcohol;

·      and the resource commitment of Police/security staff

 

The proposed strategies and Police presence is considered appropriate and necessary to control  the behaviour of patrons of this size.

 

Notification of nearby residents informing them of the event with contact details should any complaints arise have been required as part of this report and recommended conditions.

 

Noise testing to ensure compliance with recommended conditions prior to the event has also been required as part of the conditions recommended.

 

It should be noted that events of such size and nature may cause amenity disturbance to surrounding environment, however proposed conditions incorporating appropriate noise management of the event is considered appropriate to minimise amenity impact provided recommended acoustic measures are implemented.

 

Should the application be recommended for approval, the appropriate nominated conditions shall be included.

 

 


6.3      Building Services

The application has been referred to Building Services for comment, conditions have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted including that the application is subject to the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations 2000, having regard to the erection of temporary structures.

 

6.4      Heritage

The application has been referred to Council’s Heritage Planner for comment, conditions have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted. The following comments were received:

 

Randwick Racecourse together with a number of properties on the eastern side of Doncaster Avenue, comprise the Randwick Racecourse Conservation Area.  The Members’ Stand within the site is also listed as a heritage item. 

 

The application proposes the staging of an event within the Racecourse site.  The “Future Music Festival” is to be held on 12 March 2011, catering to a capacity of 42,000 patrons.  The event has been running for 5 years and has grown from an attendance of 10,000 people in 2006, to 38,000 in 2010.  It is noted that works carried out on the site over the last year have improved public transport access to the site.  The event is to be held within the “Spectator Precinct” and “Midfield/Infield” areas of the site.  The Midfield/Infield is in the centre of the tracks themselves.  The Spectator Precinct is bounded by Alison Road, the former tramway/busway reserve and the track itself.  This area includes the Members’ Stand, as well as the Totaliser Building and the Tea House.  The event areas are to be separated from the remainder of the site by temporary fencing, with a temporary overground access between them, across the tracks, as well as the existing underground access. 

 

The application has been accompanied by a Statement of Environmental Effects and an Operational Plan, which sets out the requirements of the proposed event including installation of stages, enclosures, decking, signage, toilets, lighting, rides and vending outlets.  It appears that the event is to utilise existing toilet and bar facilities with additional temporary toilet and bar facilities and food vans brought onto the site.  It is noted that the staging of the event does not involve the carrying out of any works within the site.  It is considered that the proposed event will not impact on the heritage significance of the Racecourse site. 

 

The following conditions should be included in any consent:

 

·     The installation of temporary facilities including stages, enclosures, decking, fencing, signage, toilets, lighting, rides and vending outlets is to be carried out to ensure that there is no damage to the site, including built structures and landscape elements”.

 

6.5      NSW Roads and Traffic Authority

The application was referred to the RTA for comment and the following comments were received in a referral received by Council on 23 November 2010:

 

“The RTA has no objection to the Future Music TMP”

 

6.6      NSW Police Service – Eastern Beaches Local Command Area

The application has been referred to the NSW Police for comment. The following comments were received on 29 October 2010:

 

There has been significant consultation between the event promoter, representatives of the Australian Jockey Club and the Eastern Beaches Local Area Command (NSWP) regarding the issues of security and traffic (including pedestrian) management. This consultation process commenced in May 2010 will continue up to the event day and beyond. A number of strategies have been agreed upon between the stakeholders which will enhance the security of the event and the safety of event patrons whilst attempting to minimise the disruption to normal community life. In brief, these strategies include:

 

•      The use of print and electronic media in advance of the event to reinforce the harm minimisation message to event patrons.

•      Stringent conditions of entry to the event.

•      The use of specialist NSW Police resources at the event in addition to a significant user charges policing commitment financed by the event promoter.

•      The application of the Australian Jockey Club Act 2008 to the management of the event.

•      Various structural and space modifications to the event site.

•      Increased CCTV coverage of the event footprint.

•      The application of a Local Licensing Agreement which will strictly govern the sale and supply of intoxicating liquor at the event.

•      A comprehensive, well resourced, Traffic Management Plan including integrated public transport ticketing.

•      A NSW Police resource commitment to the event has been agreed upon between the promoter and the Police Commander, Superintendent Gavin Dengate. That resource commitment, along with security and traffic management contractors, is considered sufficient within normal operational parameters, to manage an event crowd not exceeding 42,000 persons.

 

Ultimately any decision pertaining to any aspect of the development application remains a matter for Council.

 

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 site is zoned 6A Open Space 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 43    Heritage Conservation

Clause 43 requires Council to consider the impact of proposals on, amongst other things, the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area in which a proposal is located. The proposed event will be held in the Royal Randwick Racecourse which is a heritage conservation area and the Members’ Stand within the site is also listed as a heritage item. The proposal will not involve any demolition, defacing, damage, removal or alteration to the heritage conservation area and the heritage item.  Council’s heritage planner has assessed the proposed event and advises that the proposed use and works for the event will not impact on the heritage significance of the Racecourse site subject to condition of consent. Accordingly, the proposal satisfies the provisions of Clause 43.

 

Clause 40A        Site specific development control plans

Clause 40A of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) states as follows:

 

(1)    The consent authority must not grant consent to a development application made in respect of a site area consisting of more than 10,000 square metres of land unless a site specific development control plan for the development of that land has been prepared in accordance with this clause.

 

(4)    The consent authority may waive the requirement for a development control plan, but only if it is satisfied:

 

(a)    that the proposed development is of a minor nature only or is ancillary to the current use of the land, or

 

(b)    that adequate guidelines and controls applying to the land are already in place.

The site is subject to a Development Control Plan that guides the future development of the site and as such the Site Specific Development Control Plan provision of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) has been satisfied.

 

8.    Policy Controls

 

Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 2 July 2007, is applicable to the proposal. In accordance with the Plan, the following monetary levy is required should approval be granted for the DA:

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost

$100,001 - $200,000

$120,000

0.5%

$6,000

 

Development Control Plan – Royal Randwick Racecourse

The DCP – Royal Randwick Racecourse essentially aims to provide planning and design objectives and performance criteria which will optimise, amongst other things, the thoroughbred racing, training and spectator facility of RRR to the highest quality; the economic and tourism destination of the RRR; the physical, recreational and environmental quality of the RRR while respecting its heritage significance; the role of the RRR within the metropolitan and Randwick City context and its compatibility with adjoining lands; and the role of the RRR as an open space recreation facility. Whilst the DCP primarily controls the long term design of buildings, heritage conservation, traffic and transport systems, and landscape works for the RRR, the proposed event will be consistent with relevant DCP aims and attendant performance criteria attached to these aims. In particular, the proposed event will maintain the general pattern of land uses across the site as indicated in Map 2 of the DCP in so far as these relate to non-racing recreation and entertainment events, and the traffic/transport management strategies for non-racing recreation and entertainment events.

 

9.    Environmental Assessment

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

9.1    Security and anti-social behaviour

Anti-social behaviour was a significant source of resident complaint at the previous event. Issues of concern included:

·      Drunken and rowdy behaviour in residential streets;

·      Use of foul language;

·      Intimidation and abuse of residents;

·      Vandalism to private property (vehicles and buildings);

·      Public urination;

·      Public fornication

 

A number of measures have been implemented in the 2010 event to minimise this concern. Additionally, in preparation for the 2011 festival, event promoters, representatives of the Australian Jockey Club and the Eastern Beaches Local Area Command have engaged in extensive consultations regarding the issues of security and traffic (including pedestrian) management. This consultation process commenced in May 2010 will continue up to the event day and beyond. A number of strategies have been agreed upon between the stakeholders which will enhance the security of the event and the safety of event patrons whilst attempting to minimise the disruption to the community. It is considered that the event organisers have, in collaboration with the New South Wales Police, adequately developed improved strategies (as listed in the Police’s letter to Council dated 17 October 2010, received by Council on 29 October 2010 and reproduced in Section 6.6 above) to augment the measures implemented in the 2010 event so as to more effectively address previous concerns regarding security and potential criminal activity. The most notable of these strategies is the agreed NSW Police resource commitment to the event which, along with security and traffic management contractors, is considered sufficient within normal operational parameters, to manage an event crowd not exceeding 42,000 persons.

 

Suitable conditions of consent will be applied to incorporate the Police’s advice should approval be granted for the DA.

 

9.2    Noise

An acoustic report has been submitted with this application which includes recommendations to ensure relevant standards and acoustic amenity is maintained during the event. Council’s Environmental Health Officer has assessed the report and advises that the report is acceptable subject to appropriate conditions to ensure the noise associated with the proposal is maintained at a reasonable level and that the nearby likely affected residents are provided with the details of the proposal including the appropriate contact details should they wish to make any complaints or have any further enquires regarding the proposed event should approval be granted for the DA.

 

9.3    Traffic

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the Traffic Management Plan and does not object to approval of the application subject to conditions should approval be granted for the DA.

 

9.4    Waste Management

The venue and surrounding area will be cleaned prior, after and during the event. An event contract cleaner will be appointed and a waste management plan has been submitted with the application.

 

A condition is applied requiring a security deposit bond to be lodged with Council to ensure satisfactory compliance with the submitted Waste Management Plan and satisfactory cleaning of the surrounding area within 24 hours of the close of the event should approval be granted for the DA.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:       A liveable City.

Direction 6b:     Our town centres, beaches, public places and streets are safe inviting, clean and support a recognisable image of our city.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

Approval of the application has the potential to place significant financial burden upon the Council, particularly in respect of event monitoring and additional cleanup and monitoring of the event. Conditions of consent, including security bonds, will need to be applied to minimise this should approval be granted for the DA.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development is permissible in the zone. Whilst the intensity of the temporary use is likely to be greater than the use of the Racecourse on race days as it will feature live music bands, appropriate conditions for the implementation of a range of measures and management strategies can be applied to ensure that any adverse impact upon local residents is minimised. In particular, the proposed event will have improved transportation and traffic measures to ensure smooth ingress and egress movements for the event, and improved security controls and arrangements recommended by the Police following intensive discussions between the Police and event organisers. The heritage significance of the site will not be affected and any adverse amenity impact in terms of noise and traffic are of limited duration.

 

The DA is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/851/2010 for the proposed Future Music Festival to be held on Saturday 12 March 2011 catering for 42,000 patrons at Randwick Racecourse at 77-97 Alison Road, Randwick subject to the following conditions:

 

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the details set out in the application form and accompanying Future Music Festival 2011 Operations Order submission received by Council on 30 September 2010, Noise Management Plan prepared by Andrew Rogers numbered 1084, dated 23 July 2010 and Traffic Management Plan prepared by Julian Sanderson, dated 22 September 2010, all received by Council on 30 September 2010 and any other supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

2.     The applicant must ensure that vehicles related to the event do not obstruct emergency entry/exit points, thoroughfares or fire hydrants.

 

3.     The spill of artificial lighting is to be restricted so as not to illuminate areas beyond the perimeter of the site.

 

4.     There is to be no unauthorised placement of promotional/advertising posters or brochures for this event in the Randwick City area.   

 

5.     The activity/event is restricted to the following period and numbers:

 

Date:

12 March 2011

Times:

12 Midday till 10.00pm

Maximum Patron Numbers: