Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 22 March 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 22 March 2011 at 6:00pm.

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

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

Amen”

 

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

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

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting - 22 February 2011

 

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

Address of Council by Members of the Public

Mayoral Minutes

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

 

Urgent Business

 

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting required)

In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act, the General Manager is required to keep a register of Councilor voting on planning matters. Planning matters are any decisions made in the exercise of a function of a council under the EP&A Act and include decisions relating to a development application, an environmental planning instrument, a development control plan or a development contribution plan under that Act. In addition, Randwick City Council has resolved (22 July 2008) that its register of voting include the voting on all tender matters.

CP9/11      134 Garden Street, Maroubra

CP10/11    16/90-96 Beach Street, Coogee

CP11/11    28 Marcel Avenue, Randwick

CP12/11    508-516 Anzac Parade, Kingsford

CP13/11    47 Holmes Street, Maroubra

CP14/11    9 Cook Street, Randwick

CP15/11    37 Houston Road, Kingsford

 

Director City Planning Reports

CP16/11    Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) for the month of February, 2011

CP17/11    Proposed Amendments to Council's Policy - Former Incinerator Land, Matraville

CP18/11    Cultural Community Grant Program March 2011 Assessment Round - Recommended Allocations

CP19/11    Celebrating Randwick - An Events Management Strategy

 

General Manager's Reports

Nil.

 

Director City Services Reports

Nil.

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report

GF7/11      Investment Report - February 2011  

 

Petitions

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM12/11    Motion Pursuant to Notice from Cr Stevenson - Council encouraging the elimination of bottled water.

NM13/11    Motion Pursuant to Notice from Cr Stevenson - Council report on the feasibility and cost of fencing off leash dog exercise parks  

 

Notice of Rescission Motions

NR1/11      Notice of Rescission Motion from Councillors Hughes, Matson and Woodsmith - Full and Open Competition Policy at Randwick City Council

NR2/11      Notice of Rescission Motion from Councillors Andrews, Matthews and Seng - CCTV Cameras for Maroubra Beach  

 

 

 

 

……………………………………………………

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP9/11

 

 

Subject:                  134 Garden Street, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/481/2009/B

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of approved development to alter use of first floor above garage to include bedrooms/storage.

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Santo Tanudihardjo

Owner:                         Santo Tanudihardjo

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

This section 96 modification application is referred to Council at the request of Councillors Andrews, Matthews and Belleli.

 

The approved development details ground floor alterations and additions to the rear of the existing dwelling, extension of the existing garage/workshop and provision of a new attic storage area above the modified garage.  This application was approved on 22 September 2009 under delegated authority and was subject to conditions.

 

A Section 96 ‘A’ modification was approved on 18 February 2010 to delete Condition No. 5 relating to the use of the proposed storage area in order for the upper level to be used as a storage/playroom for habitable purposes. This application was also approved under delegated authority.

 

The current modification was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 22 November 2010 to 6 December 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. Two submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process relating to privacy concerns. 

 

The proposed modification is seeking to alter the internal layout to use the first floor level above the garage as bedrooms/storage and playroom. The proposal is considered to be substantially the same development as was originally approved and satisfies Section 96 of the Act.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application is seeking to make modifications to the approved development by altering the internal layout to use the first floor level above the garage as bedrooms/storage and playroom.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Garden Street between Maroubra Road and Haig Street in Maroubra.  The subject site is currently occupied by an existing single storey dwelling with a rear outbuilding structure with garage for 2 car spaces accessed off Byng Lane.  The site has dimensions of 9.145m in width x 42.67m in depth and has an overall site area of 390.22m².

 

The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of single and two storey dwelling houses and residential flat buildings.  Adjoining the subject site to the north is a kindergarten learning centre and to the south is a single storey dwelling.

 

4.    Site History

 

The current approval details ground floor alterations and additions to the rear of the existing dwelling, extension of the existing garage/workshop and provision of a new attic storage area above the modified garage. 

 

A Section 96 modification was approved to delete Condition No.5 relating to the use of the proposed storage area in order for the upper level to be used as a storage/

playroom for habitable purposes.

 

Condition No. 5 in the approval reads as follows:

5.   The proposed storage area within the rear outbuilding must not be used for habitable purposes at any time.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The application was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 22 November 2010 to 6 December 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The following two submissions were received:

 

5.1 Objections

 

140 Garden Street, Maroubra

Issue

Comment

Privacy concerns: The expansion of use to storage/playroom and two bedrooms means numerous people will be able to occupy the premises, therefore further eroding their privacy.

 

Asking why it is necessary for the large windows to be at the rear that overlooks their yard and patio areas.  Concerns were also raised in relation to the sill height of these windows.

The use of the rear outbuilding to include bedrooms in conjunction with the play room are not considered to result in any additional unreasonable amenity impacts to the objectors property as the areas to be used are modest is size and bedrooms are considered to be low use rooms. Also, the east facing windows are highlight windows with sill heights of 1.5m.  The sill height of the windows is considered to be sufficient to address privacy concerns.  Further, the use is consistent with other outbuilding structures which face this side of Byng Lane.

 

In addition to the above, it is noted that the objectors property is located three doors down from the subject property.

 

138 Garden Street, Maroubra

Issue

Comment

Privacy concern:  Their objection relates to the east facing windows of the rear outbuilding as they will directly overlook into to their back yard, deck and living room.

The use of the rear outbuilding to include bedrooms in conjunction with the play room are not considered to result in any additional unreasonable amenity impacts to the objectors property as the areas to be used are modest is size and bedrooms are considered to be low use rooms. Also, the east facing windows are highlight windows with sill heights of 1.5m.  The sill height of the windows is considered to be sufficient to address privacy concerns. 

 

In addition to the above, it is noted that the objectors property is located two doors down from the subject property.

 

5.2 Support

No supporting letters have been received with this application.

 

 

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

No referrals were required for the assessment of this application.

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

Clause 40A(1) of RLEP 1998 provides that consent may be granted to a development application made in respect of a site consisting of more than 10,000m2 only if: (a) a Site specific development control plan has been adopted, unless the proposed development is of a minor nature only or is ancillary to the current use of the land, or adequate guidelines and controls applying to the land are already in place. The site has a land area of 390.22m² and a master plan is not required.

 

8.    Section 96 Assessment

 

In accordance with Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 the proposed changes are considered minor and will result in a development that is substantially the same as the originally approved development. As such they can be assessed under Section 96 of the Act.

 

The proposed modifications will not be alter the bulk, scale and presentation of the outbuilding structure as approved in the original consent.  The internal arrangement and function of the rooms should not result in any additional unreasonable amenity impacts to adjoining and surrounding properties.  The modified development will not detract from the environmental qualities of the area and will continue to improve the use and functionality of the subject property without compromising the amenity of surrounding dwellings.

 

Therefore, the proposed modifications are considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted.

 

9.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

9.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The site is zoned Residential 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clause of the LEP 1998 applies to the proposal:

 

Clause 11 – Zone No 2B (Residential 2B Zone)

The relevant objectives of Zone No 2B are:

 

(c)    to enable residential development in a variety of medium density housing forms where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development in the area, and

 

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

 

The proposed modification will not be altering the external building envelope or the bulk and scale of the approved outbuilding structure. The proposal is considered to be reasonable in the context of the site and will not unduly detract from the environmental qualities of the area. The modifications to the outbuilding will remain substantially the same as that approved under the original application and will continue to be commensurate with the surrounding developments. As such, the proposed modifications adequately satisfy the relevant zone objectives of this zone and will not result in unacceptable impacts to the adjoining properties.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval as it is generally consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

9.2 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan No. 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 modified development is assessed against the Preferred Solutions, and where non-compliance results, assessment is made against the relevant Objectives and Performance Requirements. 

 

Floor Area

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of this area (390.22m²) is that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6:1 applies. 

The approved FSR on the site is 0.5:1.  The proposed modifications to the attic level above will result in an additional area of 13.92m² having an FSR of 0.538:1. Comply.

 

Whilst it is noted that the proposed modifications will result in an additional area of 13.92m², the approved building envelope remains unaltered as the additional area is contained wholly within the roof form of the outbuilding structure. Therefore, it is not considered that the additional FSR will result in any unreasonable amenity impacts to the adjoining properties or streetscape.

 

Height, Form & Materials

The proposed modification does not seek to alter the overall height and scale of the approved outbuilding structure.

 

Building setbacks

The proposed modification does not seek to alter the setbacks of the approved outbuilding structure.

 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

The proposed modification does not seek to alter the approved window openings to the outbuilding structure.  It is not considered that the use of the rear outbuilding to include bedrooms in conjunction with the play room will result in any additional unreasonable amenity impacts to the adjoining and nearby properties. The areas to be used are modest is size and bedrooms are considered to be low use rooms.  Also, the windows to the eastern and western elevation are highlight windows with sill heights of 1.5m. The sill height of the windows is considered to be sufficient to address privacy impacts and the modified development is considered to be reasonable given is location to nearby multi unit housing development.

 

10. Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

Not applicable.

 

 

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

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

 

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

The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land uses and structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

 

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

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

 

10. Site Suitability

 

The proposed modification does not involve any changes to the building envelope or landscaped area provision of the approved development and will not result in any significant adverse impact on the streetscape, locality or the amenity of the neighbouring properties. Therefore, the proposed modifications are suitable for the intended residential use of the subject site.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

Conclusion

 

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

 

The likely impacts of the amended proposal have been considered in accordance with Section 79C of the Act, the provisions of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) and DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and it has been demonstrated that the proposal generally complies with the statutory controls and the relevant aims and objectives of the planning instruments.

 

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

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No. DA/481/2009 by altering the use of the first floor above the garage to include bedrooms/storage at 134 Garden Street, Maroubra,  in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

 

The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 2930 DA02 & DA03 (Issue A), dated 08/07/09 and received by Council on 16 July 2009, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the following:

 

·        Section 96 ‘A’ plans received by Council on 16 November 2009; and

 

·        Section 96 ‘B’ plans numbered DA02 & DA03 (Both Issue A), dated 08/07/2009 and received by Council on 17 November 2010, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 ‘B’ plans and detailed in the Section 96 ‘B’ application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP10/11

 

 

Subject:                  16/90-96 Beach Street, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/11/2011

Author:                   Adrian McKeown, Environmental Planning Assessment Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Enclosure of the rear balcony of Unit 16 (SEPP1 objection to floor space ratio control)

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Peter Rowley

Owner:                         Owner's Corporation SP 70357

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the proposed development exceeds the floor space ratio standard under Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) by more than 10%. The applicant submitted a SEPP1 Objection with the application on 11 January 2011.

 

The proposal is for the enclosure of the rear balcony of Unit 16. Glazing is proposed to the northern, western and southern ends of the balcony and the applicant advised on 24 February 2011 that the windows on the northern and southern ends of the balcony enclosure are to be constructed using opaque glazing.  No submissions were received regarding the application. 

 

The main issues are the impact of the proposal on the locality with regard to perceived bulk and scale, and that the enclosure of balconies to multi-unit dwellings is discouraged by the Multi-Unit Housing DCP.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

To the rear of the existing multi-unit building are located two balconies. The balconies overlook (and are overlooked by) a steeply sloping landscaped area only. It is proposed to enclose one of these balconies in order to extend the existing internal dimensions of unit No. 16 towards the west. Glazing is proposed to the northern, western and southern ends of the balcony and the applicant advised on 24 February 2011 that the windows on the northern and southern ends of the balcony enclosure are to be constructed using opaque glazing.

 

Note:

Given the minor nature of the proposed change, and that existing visual privacy levels will be increased by the propose change, it was not considered necessary to re-notify the proposal to the owners of adjoining properties.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the Western side of Beach Street, has a frontage of 52.4m, a depth of 54.3m and a site area of 2,739 square metres. The site falls towards Beach Street from the rear.  The locality is residential in nature, consisting primarily of three storey residential flat buildings.  

 

Figure 1: Aerial photo of the subject site.

 

Figure 2: The existing balcony (right of picture) beneath pergola. Proposed to be enclosed.

Figure 3: Existing balcony as viewed from within the subject unit.

 

 

 

 

Figure 4: Existing balcony – facing south.

Figure 5: Existing balcony – facing north.

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5: Similar balcony to an adjoining unit – facing north.

 

4.    Site History

 

Pathways application history

Application

Description

DA/215/2004

Withdrawn for the installation of a portable spa located in the terrace of Unit 5.

DA/350/2003

Approved for the strata subdivision of the multi unit development into 17 lots and common property.

DA/825/2000

Approved to demolish all existing buildings and to erect a three storey residential flat building with 17 x 3 bedroom units and basement level car parking for 39 vehicles.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

In accordance with the DCP – Notification, the proposal was notified for a period of 14 days notification to 31 January 2011. No submissions were received regarding the application. 

As stated above, the proposal to change glazing materials from clear to opaque glazing on the northern and southern ends of the balcony enclosure is considered to be a minor change. Consequently, it is not considered necessary to re-notify the proposed change in glazing materials to the owners of adjoining properties.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The application was not required to be referred to other relevant technical officers within Council.

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

No master planning requirements apply to the site.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

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

The proposal seeks to vary a development standard contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 objection was submitted to Council on 11 January 2011.

 

Pursuant to Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, the maximum floor space ratio for development, other than for the purpose of a dwelling house on land zoned 2B Residential is 0.65:1. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Floor Space Ratio

Proposal

1.36:1  (Existing FSR 1.35:1)

LEP development standard

0.65:1

Excess above the LEP standard

1,949.6m2 above the development standard, which equates to a proposed excess of 110%.

 

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

 

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

 

-    The additional gross floor area is marginal; and

 

-    There is no significant change to the existing floor space ratio which already exceeds the development standard.

 

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

 

-    The development standard is intended to maintain the existing medium density of the locality and it is considered that the proposed works will be consistent with this objective;

 

-    The proposal includes an increase to gross floor area of 9.9m2 only and will not add unreasonably to the bulk of the rear of the building given that the pergola is already in place;

 

-    It is considered that the development will provide additional floor space for the occupants of the unit whilst not imposing any additional unreasonable impacts on the owners of adjoining residences with regard to perceived bulk and scale, overshadowing, maximum external wall height or privacy.

 

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

·      Comments:

The variation from the floor space ratio standard is not inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as it would not detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act embodied in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii). Specifically, the resultant development would promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental or social impacts.

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of the Residential 2B Zone in that it will allow development which is ancillary to the present use of the site as a residential flat building, 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”.

 

·      Comment:

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

 


Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

The floor space ratio standard has not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

8.2             Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The following clauses of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) are applicable to the development:

 

Clause 11 - Zone No 2B (Residential B Zone)

The site is zoned 2B Residential under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.  The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will:

·      Provide for a low to medium density residential environment;

·      Maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas; and

·      Protect the amenity of existing residents.

 

Clause 20E   Landscaped area

Development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No 2B must provide a minimum of 50% of the total site area as landscaped area. As the definition of landscaped area does not include balconies, the proposed enclosure of the existing balcony will not further reduce the existing landscaped provision on the site.

 

Clause 20F   Floor space ratios

The maximum floor space ratios for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within the 2B (Residential B Zone) is 0.65:1. The proposal will increase the floor space ratio from 1.35:1 to 1.36:1 and the applicant submitted a SEPP 1 Objection on 11 January 2011 (see further discussion above).

 

Clause 20G   Building heights

The maximum height for a building, other than a dwelling house, within Zone No 2A or 2B is 9.5 metres measured vertically from any point on ground level. The proposal will not further increase the existing maximum building height and complies with the Clause.

 

8.3 Policy Controls

 

8.3.1          Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing

 

Issue Comment

 

Issue Comment

Setbacks

 

There are no proposed changes to the approved setbacks for the development.

 

Height 

 

There are no proposed changes to the approved height of the development.

 

Landscaping & Open Space 

 

 

 

The proposed development consists only of the enclosure of an existing balcony and will not affect the landscaped provision on the site.

 

Privacy

 

The proposal does not affect current levels of privacy to the locality due to the proposed structure being located within an existing balcony area and that the northern and southern ends of the balcony will be constructed using opaque glazing. The proposal will not result in any significant loss of privacy with regard to the private open spaces to neighbouring dwellings.

 

View sharing

 

The proposed amendments to the approved plans do not impose any additional bulk to the approved multi-unit dwelling which may impede existing views across the locality.

 

Solar Access & Energy Efficiency   

 

 

The proposed development should not result in any additional unreasonable impact on neighbouring dwellings with regard to overshadowing of private open spaces, north-facing living areas or potential solar collection areas.

 

Piecemeal enclosure of balconies to multi-unit dwellings discouraged

Council’s DCP includes a statement that the piecemeal enclosure of balconies on buildings, in particular where a precedent on existing buildings does not exist, is strongly discouraged.  The proposal is nevertheless supported for the following reasons:

 

·    The existing balcony is to the rear of the subject site and overlooks (and is overlooked by) a landscaped area only;

·    Proposed materials and colours are sympathetic to the existing materials on the western façade of the subject building;  and

·    The proposed enclosure of the balcony would not set an undesirable precedent for similar developments in the vicinity of the subject unit. Should the west-facing balcony to the adjoining unit also be enclosed, it is noted that neither unit is visible from adjoining properties or nearby streets meaning no impact would result on the perceived bulk and scale or architectural integrity of the building. Further, the orientation of the balconies to the rear of the residential flat building should ensure that any approval of the application would not set a precedent for the enclosure of balconies to the Beach Street and Arcadia Street frontages.

 

 

8.4    Council Policies
There are no polices applicable to the application.

 

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    The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality:

The proposed addition to the existing dual occupancy is not considered to result in unreasonable environmental impacts on the neighbouring properties and the surrounding built environment.

 

A.      Privacy

As discussed above, the development (as amended to include opaque glazing to the northern and southern ends) should not result in any adverse privacy impacts on neighbouring properties.

 

B.      Perceived bulk and scale

The proposed alterations will not unreasonably affect the perceived bulk and scale of the development as viewed from neighbouring properties and from the surrounding streetscapes. Further, approving the proposed development would not set an undesirable precedent would be set.

 

9.2    The suitability of the site for the development:

For the reasons discussed above, the development is assessed as being suitable development for the site. The proposed development would materially increase the existing building envelope however would result in a development which is suitable for the site. 

 

9.3    The public interest.

Should approval be granted for the proposal, it is considered that no unreasonable adverse impacts on surrounding properties and the locality would result. The proposed development is considered to be in the public interest and approval is recommended.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4          Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4A:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4B:        New and existing development is managed by a robust framework.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal does not comply with a relevant development standard of the RLEP however support is recommended for a SEPP 1 Objection. The proposal is consistent with the objectives and performance requirements of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP and if approved, would not result in unreasonable and significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the character of the locality; and would not set an undesirable precedent for the locality.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council support the objections under State Environmental Planning No. 1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1988, relating to Floor Space Ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the objective of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/11/2011 for the enclosure of the rear balcony of Unit 16 (SEPP1 objection to floor space ratio control) at 16/90-96 Beach Street, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA.01 (Issue A) through to DA.03 (Issue A), dated 22 December 2010 and received by Council on 11 January 2011, 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 windows on the north-eastern and south-western ends of the balcony enclosure are to be constructed using opaque glazing.  Plans are to be amended to reflect this requirement, prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

3.       The external materials, colours and finishes of the balcony enclosure are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building.

 

4.       Metal roof sheeting (if applicable) is to be pre-painted (e.g. colourbond).

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

7.       In all new and upgraded building work, external timber or metal framed and brick veneer walls and roofs are to be provided with insulation (i.e. bulk insulation and a reflective building membrane/reflective sarking/foil insulation), having a minimum total thermal resistance R–value of 3.0 in roofs and 1.5 in external walls.  The insulation and reflective building membrane is to be installed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the manufacturer’s details.

 

Details of compliance with the requirements for insulation are to be included in the construction certificate application.

 

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:

 

8.       Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

If required, absorption pits must be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed or flow onto any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance.

 

Details of any works proposed to be carried out in or on a public road/footway are to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to commencement of works.

 

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

 

9.       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.

 

10.     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).

 

11.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

14.     The relevant requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with, in accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

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

 

15.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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:

 

17.     A Certificate of Adequacy must be supplied by a professional engineer, to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. The Certificate of Adequacy shall address the structural adequacy of the existing balcony to support the proposed balcony enclosure.

 

18.     The proposed works and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials must be carried out in accordance with the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW, the NSW Department of Environment & Climate Change (formerly EPA) and Randwick City Council policies, including:

 

·          Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines & Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·          Method/s of demolition (including removal of any asbestos)

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

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

·          Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·          Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·          Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

If the work involves asbestos products or materials, a copy of the Demolition Work Plan must also be provided to Council, not less than 2 days before commencing such works.

 

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

 

20.     Building, demolition and associated site works must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements:

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

All building, demolition and site work, including site deliveries (except as detailed below)

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Additional requirements for all development, except for single residential dwellings

·   Saturdays and Sundays before or after a public holiday - No work permitted

 

An application to vary the abovementioned hours may be submitted to Council’s Manager Health, Building & Regulatory Services for consideration and approval to vary the specified hours may be granted in exceptional circumstances and for limited occasions (e.g. for public safety, traffic management or road safety reasons).  Any applications are to be made on the standard application form and include payment of the relevant fees and supporting information.  Applications must be made at least 10 days prior to the date of the proposed work and the prior written approval of Council must be obtained to vary the standard permitted working hours.

 

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

 

Noise and vibration from any rock excavation machinery, pile drivers and all plant and equipment must be minimised, by using appropriate plant and equipment, silencers and the implementation of noise management strategies.

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan, is required to be developed and implemented throughout the works, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of site works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity to the satisfaction of Council. 

 

A copy of the Construction Site Management Plan must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

The sediment and erosion control measures are to be in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be provided in the Construction Site Management Plan. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Placement of a waste skip (greater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

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

 

A4      This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards and you are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP11/11

 

 

Subject:                  28 Marcel Avenue, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/917/2010

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing garage, rear yard landscaping works, rear pergola structure and new rear swimming pool

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Erol Ozdirik - Classic Plans

Owner:                         Susan Moy

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to Council for determination at the request of Councillors Smith, Seng and Nash.

 

The application is for alterations and additions to enlarge the existing front garage/terrace area, to provide a new rear swimming pool with timber deck and landscaping works to the rear yard; and timber framed pergola. This subject site is located adjacent to the Moira Crescent Heritage Conservation Area and is in close proximity to heritage items.   

 

The proposal has been notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 28 October 2010 to 11 November 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. In response, no submissions were received.

 

The main issue is the visual impact that the garage/terrace extension will have to the front of the dwelling and upon the established street character.

 

It is recommended that the garage/terrace extension and associated works to the front of the dwelling be deleted from the plans as they are considered to be inappropriate. The proposed works to the front of the premises will add to the bulk and scale of the existing structure, will not be compatible with the prevailing character of the area as they will detract from the appearance of the existing dwelling and adjoining buildings and will have an impact on the amenity of the streetscape given its close proximity to the Moira Crescent Heritage Conservation Area and heritage items.

 

The remaining portion of the development to the rear is acceptable and is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal is for alterations and additions to enlarge the existing garage/terrace area with 500mm perimeter planter box, new stair case with roof over entry gate, to provide a new rear swimming pool with timber deck and landscaping works to the rear yard; and rear timber framed pergola.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Marcel Avenue between Fern Street & Carrington Road in Randwick. The subject site is currently occupied by an existing two storey dwelling house with single garage/terrace roof to the front of the dwelling. The site has dimensions of 13.715m in width x 37.191m in depth and has an overall site area of 273m².

 

The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of mixture of single and two storey dwelling houses and residential flat buildings. Adjoining the subject site to the east at no. 30 Marcel Avenue is a single storey dwelling and to the west at no. 26 Marcel Avenue is a residential flat building.


 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing subject dwelling.

2. The adjoining residential flat building at no. 26 Marcel Avenue.

3. The adjoining single storey dwelling at no. 30 Marcel Avenue.

4. The rear yard of the subject site.

 

4.    Site History

 

The property was the subject of a complaint to Council on 12 July 2005 from the owners of the adjoining property at 26 Marcel Avenue, Randwick with respect to unauthorised building works relating to the construction of a roof terrace above the existing garage roof. The site was subsequently inspected by Council’s Regulatory Officer and the owner was advised to cease any further work.

 

An application was refused at the 22 August 2006 Ordinary Council meeting.  The application detailed alterations to an existing unauthorised roof terrace above the existing garage at the front of the property.  The application was seeking to approve the use of the terrace and amend its design by repositioning the timber balustrade and install a planter box to the front of the garage roof.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP - Notification. No submissions were received.

 

5.1 Support

No supporting letters have been received for this application.

 


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:

 

a. Development Engineers

An application has been received for alterations and additions at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Dwg No 15/10 Sheets 1-4 by Classic Plans dated 15/10/10

 

Landscape Comments

Beyond the eastern site boundary, in the front yard of the adjoining property at no.30, there is a semi-mature Liquidambar styraciflua (Liquidambar), of around 8 metres in height, which has been heavily pruned by the neighbour/tree owner in the past, and despite its western aspect overhanging into the subject site, there are no works proposed in this corresponding area of the site, with conditions not required.

 

The provision of a planter box around the perimeter of the terrace level proposed above the new garage is supported as this will soften the appearance of the built forms on the streetscape as well as assist with integration of the dwelling into the area, with relevant conditions provided.

 

In the rear yard, along the western boundary, beyond the northwest corner of the existing dwelling, growing in a low timber planter, there is a mature Brachychiton acerifolius (Illawarra Flame Tree) of around 7-8 metres in height, which appeared in good health and condition, is covered by Council’s TPO, and is the most established tree at this site.

 

It is a desirable native species that is deemed suitable for retention in this case, not only due to its prominent summer flower displays, but primarily due to its ability to offer screening and privacy to this area of private open space by preventing overlooking from the 2-3 storey unit block to the west, No.26, which is a major benefit to occupants.

 

The plans have shown its retention, with the existing ground level around its trunk to be maintained at 65.50, and the planter widened to its east, which will benefit the tree as it will increase air and moisture availability to its root system.

 

The existing gazebo to its east will also be demolished, and the ground levels here lowered by 600mm, with the main threat being harmful root damage caused by excavations associated with in-ground pool in the northeast corner of the site, and new retaining walls and changes in level/terracing.

 

However, given the presence and location of existing walls and structures surrounding this tree, the conditions provided in this report are deemed sufficient to ensure that any negative impacts will be managed appropriately, and this tree will remain and continue to provide a positive contribution to the site and local environment.

 

To its northeast, spaced evenly across the width of the rear boundary, there are two mature Nerium oleander (Oleanders), which while also providing effective screening of the multi-storey unit block to the northeast (206 Clovelly Road), which is a highly desirable function for the occupants, this species is exempt from the TPO due to its poisonous sap, and as such, can be removed as shown, but conditions require that suitable allowances be made to accommodate replacement screen planting in the interests of amenity.

 

All other vegetation in the rear yard was observed to be insignificant, and can be removed where necessary in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown.

 

b. Heritage Planner

 

The Site and Surrounding Area

The dwelling on the site originally comprised a single storey Californian Bungalow style cottage, but has been somewhat altered including construction of an upper level addition in the late 1990s, and rendering and painting of face brickwork.  The site is adjacent to the Moira Crescent Conservation Area, including properties to the east on Marcel Avenue and properties to the south on Marcel Avenue and Moira Crescent.  The dwelling is somewhat elevated above the street with a retaining wall to the front boundary and a single garage in front of the dwelling, partly excavated into the site.  There are a number of examples of similar garages in the vicinity.

 

Proposal

The current application proposes changes to the front and rear of the site.  At the front of the site, it is proposed to widen the existing single car garage to accommodate two cars (with terrace over) and to provide new steps and entry gate and canopy.  At the rear of the site, it is proposed to provide a new swimming pool, a partially roofed paved terrace and timber deck. 

 

Submission

The application has been accompanied by a Statement of Environmental Effects which includes a section of Heritage Impact. 

 

Comments

In relation to the works at the rear of the site, the proposal will result in lowering of the natural ground level, a reduction in soft landscaped area in the rear garden and the removal of two oleanders.  The proposed changes to the rear will not impact on the streetscape of the heritage conservation area. 

 

In relation to the works at the front of the site, it is noted that the other garages in the vicinity of the site which are located within the front setback area, are of single car, not double car width.  Surrounding garages also have non-trafficable roofs only and do not provide an enclosed trafficable area.  In relation to Garages, Carports and Driveways, Council’s Development Control Plan for Single Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies has a Preferred Solution that driveways, car parking spaces and car parking structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the site.  The site has a width of 13.715m and the proposed double garage will have a width of 6.660m.  The proposed garage will therefore occupy 49% of the width of the site.  The proposed enlargement of the garage will further obscure views of the dwelling itself and increase the dominance of the garage in the streetscape of Marcel Avenue.  There are concerns that the proposed garage will be inconsistent with Council’s DCP, incompatible with existing garages in the surrounding area, and will set a poor precedent for further inappropriate garages in the vicinity of the Moira Crescent heritage conservation area.  The proposed perimeter planter box will further add to the scale and bulk of the garage. 

 

Recommendation

 

It is suggested that a meeting be organised to discuss this issue. 

 


7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

No Master Planning Requirements apply to the site.

 

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

Clause 11 - Zone No 2B (Residential B Zone)

The site is zoned Residential 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone. Subject to the deletion of the front garage/terrace extension, the remaining parts of the proposal will not compromise the desirable attributes of the residential area, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

Part 4 - Heritage Provisions

The subject site is located adjacent to the Moira Crescent Conservation Area and is in close proximity to heritage items.   

 

Part 4 of the LEP requires that Council take into consideration the likely effect of a proposed development on the heritage significance of any heritage items, or heritage conservation areas.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Planner for assessment; and it was considered that the enlargement of the existing garage/terrace will further obscure views of the dwelling, will be inconsistent with the DCP, will dominate the streetscape and will be incompatible with existing garages in the surrounding area; and therefore, should not be supported.

 

It is agreed that the proposed garage is inappropriate and will have a significant impact on the streetscape of the nearby conservation area.  It is recommended that the garage/terrace extension be deleted from the approved plans.  Provided the garage/terrace extension is deleted from the plans, no objections are raised to the remaining parts of the proposed development; and the proposal will satisfy the requirements of Part 4 - Heritage Provisions of the Randwick LEP (Consolidation).

 

8.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan No. Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 


Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

Clause

Standard

Check

y/n

Landscaping

40 % of site provided as landscaped area

Approx. 55%

Yes

25m² of private open space provided.

138.38m2

Yes

Min. dimensions of 3m x 4m & minor level change

10.09m x 13.715m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

More than 20% of the site is soft landscaped area.

Yes

Floor area

(Site area 420.3m2) maximum FSR 0.6:1 

The existing FSR on the site is not altered.

n/a

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

n/a

n/a

External wall height to the rear maximum 3.5m.

Garage – Max. 3.79m

No. See ‘Garage and Driveways’ below for discussions.

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

The cut and fill for the swimming pool is greater than 1m.

No. Suitable conditions have been included to protect the structural integrity of adjacent properties during construction.

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

There is minor excavation for the retaining walls within 900mm of the side boundaries.

No. Suitable conditions have been included to protect the structural integrity of adjacent properties during construction.

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

The excavation for the swimming pool is within 4m of the rear boundary.

No. Suitable conditions have been included to protect the structural integrity of adjacent properties during construction.

The length of a 2nd storey maximum 12m less than 1.5m from a southern boundary.

n/a

n/a

The 2nd storey addition to a semi respects the adjoining semi-detached dwelling.

n/a

n/a

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

The garage extension is sited on the front boundary alignment.

No. See Garages & Driveways below for discussion.

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

The proposed awning structure at the rear of the dwelling is setback at least 4.5m from the rear boundary.

Yes

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

The proposed awning structure at the rear of the dwelling is setback at least 900m from the side boundaries.

Yes

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

n/a

n/a

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

n/a

n/a

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

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

No windows are proposed to the development.

n/a

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

Garage roof terrace

This portion of the development is recommended for refusal.

 

Rear deck & Swimming pool

The proposed in-ground swimming pool and timber deck are setback sufficiently from the side and rear boundaries.  It is not considered that the location of the pool & deck will result in any unreasonable adverse impact upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality. The swimming pool will be used for domestic purposes and in addition, the existing fence structures to the side boundaries are sufficient in height, such that any privacy concerns of the adjoining properties will adequately be resolved.

Garage roof terrace - Recommended for refusal.

 

 

 

Rear deck & Swimming pool -Yes

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

Not required

n/a

Garages & Driveways

 

 

1 space, for dwellings with 2 bedrooms or less, or 2 spaces, for dwellings with 3 bedrooms or more.

2 car spaces

Yes

Parking spaces have a min. dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m.

5.6m x 6.25m

Yes

Driveway minimum width of 3m and side setback 1m

The driveway will have a minimum width of 3m and new portion of the driveway is setback at least 1m from the side boundary.

Yes

Driveway maximum width of 3m at the boundary.

5m

No. See Garages & Driveways below for discussion.

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

The driveway gradient does not exceed the maximum 1 in 8.

Yes

Garages and carports to rear lanes set back 1m.

n/a

n/a

Parking and access is provided from the rear.

n/a

n/a

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

The proposed garage extension and associated works to the front of the dwelling does not comply with a number of requirements in the preferred solution table.  The garage is sited to the front boundary line with a nil setback, is located in front of the building line, occupies 50.65% of the width of the site and the driveway is greater than 3m wide.

 

Also, the garage does not conform with the general setback of adjoining properties and will be a dominating structure along the streetscape. On this side of the street there are only two garage structures forward of the front building line and they are for a single garage. The garage extension and associated works to the front of the dwelling are not supported as they are considered to be out of character with the established streetscape, are excessive in bulk and scale and will be a dominating structure at the front of the dwelling; and will set an inappropriate precedent for further inappropriate garages in the vicinity of the Moira Crescent heritage conservation area.

 

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

Fences

Sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

No sandstone

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

Given that the garage/terrace extension is not recommended for approval, the alterations to part of the existing front fence which includes a new gate and entry canopy are to be deleted from the approved plans as they were designed to be integrated with the proposed garage/terrace extension.

 

Fences in front of the building line or on street frontages up to 1.8m and upper 2/3 is at least 50% open.

 


9.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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 above.

 

The proposed development is consistent with the dominant residential character in the locality. Subject to the deletion of the garage/terrace extension and associated works to the front of the dwelling, the proposal is not considered to result in detrimental social or economic impacts on the locality.

 

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

The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and associated structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

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

No submissions have been received. 

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

The proposal, subject to the deletion of works to the front of the site, promotes the objectives of the zone and will not result in any significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

Building Sustainability Index: BASIX

SEPP 2004.

 

A BASIX certificate is not required for this development application as the proposed works are to Class 10 building or structures.

 


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 garage/terrace extension is not supported as it is not within the established character of the streetscape, will obscure views of the dwellings, interrupt the established front building line and will set an inappropriate precedent for any future similar provisions in front of the existing building line.

 

The remaining parts of the proposed development to the rear of the dwelling are acceptable and are considered to satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies. The proposal is improving the amenity on the site and is consistent with the relevant purposes and objectives of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).  Subject to the deletion of the proposed front garage/terrace extension, it is not considered that the development will give rise to any significant environmental impacts on adjoining properties, or have any unreasonable adverse impacts on the visual amenity and character of the street.

 

 

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/917/2010 for the construction of a new rear inground swimming pool, rear yard landscaping works and rear pergola structure at No. 28 Marcel Avenue, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 15/10 Sheets 1 of 4 to 4 of 4, dated 15/10/10 and received by Council on 21/10/10, 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 proposed garage/terrace extension and associated works to the front of the dwelling shall be deleted from the submitted plans as they do not comply with the relevant objectives, performance requirements and preferred solutions of Part 4.7 of the Development Control Plan - Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies; and is refused on the following grounds:

 

a)     the enlargement and location of the garage/terrace extension to the front of the dwelling and up to the front boundary will increase the dominance and detract from the character of the local streetscape, will obscure views of the dwelling and will interrupt the established front building line.

 

b)     the garage/terrace extension is incompatible with existing garages in the surrounding area, and will set a poor precedent for further inappropriate garages in the vicinity of the Moira Crescent heritage conservation area. 

 

c)     The proposed perimeter planter box will further add to the scale and bulk of the garage/terrace. 

 

d)     it fails to satisfy the relevant objectives of Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) embodied in Clause 10 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, as it will not maintain the character of the area and will compromise the amenity of the residential area.

 

e)     it fails to satisfy aim (g) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 in that the development does not promote, protect and enhance the environmental qualities of the City.

 

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

 

4.       Metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. colourbond).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

7.       In all new and upgraded building work, the consumption of water shall be minimised by the use of triple A rated water efficient plumbing fixtures (taps and shower roses) and water efficient dual flush toilets.  Details of compliance are to be noted in the construction certificate plans or specifications.

 

8.       In all new and upgraded building work, external timber or metal framed and brick veneer walls and roofs are to be provided with insulation (i.e. bulk insulation and a reflective building membrane/reflective sarking/foil insulation), having a minimum total thermal resistance R–value of 3.0 in roofs and 1.5 in external walls.  The insulation and reflective building membrane is to be installed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the manufacturers details.

 

Details of compliance with the requirements for insulation are to be included in the construction certificate application.

 

9.       In all new and upgraded building work, hot water service pipes are to be provided with insulation and must also satisfy any relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and AS 3500.

 

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:

 

10.     Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

Absorption pits must be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed or flow onto any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance.

 

Details of any works proposed to be carried out in or on a public road/footway are to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to commencement of works.

 

11.     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:

 

12.     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.

 

13.     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).

 

14.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

17.     The relevant requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with, in accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

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

 

18.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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:

 

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

 

·          Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines & Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·          Method/s of demolition (including removal of any asbestos)

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

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

·          Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·          Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·          Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

If the work involves asbestos products or materials, a copy of the Demolition Work Plan must also be provided to Council, not less than 2 days before commencing such works.

 

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

 

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

 

·          Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

23.     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.

 

24.     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 a) 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.

 

25.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer, building surveyor or other suitably qualified independent person must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works, in the following cases:

 

·            excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·            new dwellings or additions to dwellings sited up to shared property boundaries (e.g. additions to a semi-detached dwelling or a terraced dwelling),

·            excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·            as otherwise may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

The report (including photographs) are required to detail the current condition and status of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon the adjoining premises, which may be affected by the subject works.  A copy of the dilapidation report is to be given to the owners of the premises encompassed in the report/s before commencing any works.

 

26.     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.

 

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

 

Noise and vibration from any rock excavation machinery, pile drivers and all plant and equipment must be minimised, by using appropriate plant and equipment, silencers and the implementation of noise management strategies.

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan, is required to be developed and implemented throughout the works, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of site works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity to the satisfaction of Council. 

 

A copy of the Construction Site Management Plan must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

The sediment and erosion control measures are to be in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be provided in the Construction Site Management Plan. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

35.     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.

 

36.     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 consideration for service authority assets:

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

39.     Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate the approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre to determine whether the development will affect any Sydney Water asset’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easement, and if further requirements need to be met. Plans will be appropriately stamped.

 

         Please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au for Quick Check agent details and Guidelines for Building Over/Adjacent to Sydney Water Assets.

 

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

 

40.     That part of the nature-strip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works 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 completed at the applicant’s expense prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

41.     Prior to the commencement of any site works, a concept landscape plan detailing the following requirements must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA:

 

a.       The Bamboo species shown in the proposed planter around the perimeter of the rear yard must be a non-invasive variety that will attain at least 3 metres in height at maturity, so as to maintain screening of the unit block at 206 Clovelly Road.

 

42.     Approval is granted for removal of the two Nerium oleander (Oleanders) in the rear yard, spaced evenly across the width of the rear (northeast) boundary, both due to accommodate works associated with the proposed pool, paving and raised planter as shown, as well as due to this species being exempt from the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to its poisonous sap.        

 

43.     In order to ensure retention of the Brachychiton acerifolius (Illawarra Flame Tree) located in the rear yard, along the western boundary, near the northwest corner of the existing dwelling in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show the retention of this tree, with the position and diameter of both its trunk and canopy to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

a.       Ground levels within the raised planter must be maintained at existing grades, and as undisturbed deep soil, with no new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar to be installed in this area.

 

b.       Any roots encountered during construction of the new retaining walls must be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

c.       This tree is to be physically protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing, which shall be located a minimum distance of 1.5 metres to its south, east and north (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), matching up with the western site boundary, in order to completely enclose this tree for the duration of works.

 

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

 

e.       In order to prevent soil/sediment being washed over its root system, erosion control measures shall be installed around the TPZ, and within the TPZ, there is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge this requirement.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Placement of a waste skip (greater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

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

 

A4      This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards and you are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A5      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP12/11

 

 

Subject:                  508-516 Anzac Parade, Kingsford

Folder No:                   DA/942/2010

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the first floor level of the existing buildings for use as a boarding house with 17 rooms and associated facilities

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                HK Archidraft Building Design

Owner:                         J G Jonson, P T Jonson, C P Jonson, H M Jonson & E Jonson

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to Council at the request of Councillors Procopiadis, Andrews and Nash.

 

The subject application seeks approval for alterations and additions to the first floor level of the existing buildings and change of use to a boarding house with 17 rooms with ancillary facilities.

 

The application was advertised and notified from 10 to 24 November 2010 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. One (1) submission was received at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The issues raised in the submission are primarily related to noise, privacy, light overspill, overshadowing, view obstruction and property devaluation.

 

The site is zoned General Business 3A and the proposed land use is permissible with Council’s consent. The site is located within the Kingsford Commercial Centre which has convenient access to local services and public transport. The combined floor area of the first level of the existing buildings is capable of supporting boarding house use. The site location and characteristics per se are considered to be suitable for the nature of the proposed use.

 

However, the proposed layout of the boarding house will result in a large number of internalised rooms, which have adverse implications on living amenity.

 

There are 6 boarding rooms that do not meet the minimum accommodation size standard (standard that cannot be used to refuse consent) stipulated under Clause 29 of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing). The SEPP operates in a manner where a development proposal complies with the standards listed under Clause 29, relating to FSR, building height, landscaped area, solar access, private open space, parking and accommodation size, the consent authority cannot refuse the application based on the aforementioned grounds. However, where there is a non-compliance with any of the standards stipulated under Clause 29, it will be capable of being used as a ground for refusal. In this instance, the sizes of those 6 rooms are not considered adequate for medium to long-term accommodation purposes and the proposal is not supported.

 

In addition, the proposal relies heavily on skylights for natural light and ventilation. However, the roof of the buildings presently contains exhaust vents that are connected to the restaurants at the ground level. These exhaust facilities have material implications on the air quality of the boarding rooms. The adequacy of the proposed method of ventilation remains questionable.

 

The majority of the boarding rooms are likely to have poor privacy and acoustic performance as their primary windows are opened onto the common hallways.

 

The proposal does not meet the requirement of Council’s waste management policy and entails a shortfall of 4 bins. Furthermore, the application does not successfully demonstrate that the site has sufficient areas for the separate storage of waste bins for both the existing commercial tenancies at ground level and the proposed boarding house. At present, the bins of the individual commercial tenancies are scattered around the rear parking area in a disorderly manner. It is likely that the proposed waste storage arrangement would worsen the current situation and detrimentally impact on the amenity and functionality of the rear service / parking areas of the site.

 

In terms of the daily operational management, it does not appear that the Managing Agent, as mentioned in the submitted Plan of Management, would be stationed within the premises even during his or her available hours (i.e. 8:30am to 6:00pm, daily) as there is no site office or reception desk proposed in the development. It is unclear as to how the boarding house will be supervised. It is also unlikely that the agent would be able to administer emergency procedures and investigate complaints as stated in the Plan of Management, especially during night hours. The submitted POM is not considered to have formulated effective and convincing methods for the day to day management of the boarding house.

 

It is considered that the layout and configuration of the boarding house in their current form would not offer a satisfactory level of amenity to the future occupants. It appears that a reduction to the number of rooms would facilitate a better design and bring the living standard to a more appropriate level.

 

Based on the current information, it cannot be established that the proposal will not result in detrimental environmental and social impacts on the locality. For the above reasons, it is recommended that the subject application be REFUSED.

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Anzac Parade, between Meeks and Rainbow Streets, and consists of the following land parcels:

 

Allotment

Street Number

Land Area

Lot B, DP 396242

No. 508 Anzac Parade

178.3m2

Lot C, DP 396242 

No. 510 Anzac Parade

173.8m2

Lot D, DP 396242

No. 512 Anzac Parade

166.4m2

Lot 4, DP 983980

No. 514-516 Anzac Parade

184.2m2

Total site area

 

702.7m2

 

At present, the site is occupied by 4 attached commercial buildings of 2 storeys in height. The ground level of the buildings accommodates two restaurants and a chemist. The first floor level contains commercial premises, including a solicitor’s office and a chiropractor practice, and also appears to include a dwelling unit.

 

Vehicular access is available to the rear of the site via a right of way that connects with Meeks Street. Hard-stand parking spaces for 8 vehicles are located at the rear of the buildings. In relation to internal pedestrian access between the buildings, Lot B, DP 396242 is burdened by a right of footway that benefits Lots C and D, DP396242.

 

The site falls within the Kingsford Commercial Centre, which is characterised by a range of commercial, retail and residential uses. The site is adjoined to the north and south by two-storey commercial buildings (No. 502-506 and No. 518 Anzac Parade respectively). To the east across the right of way is a multi-storey residential flat development (No. 42-56 Harbourne Road). To the west on the opposite side of Anzac Parade is a mixture of commercial, retail and residential premises.


 

1. Anzac Parade elevation of the existing buildings on the site (from left to right: Nos. 508, 510, 512 and 514-516)

2. The rear elevation of the existing buildings (from left to right: Nos. 512, 510 and 508) and hard stand parking area

3. The rear elevation of the existing buildings (from left to right: Nos. 514-516, 512 and 510)

4. The existing hard stand parking area, right of way and adjoining multi-storey residential flat development

 

Aerial view of the subject site and surrounding built environment

 


3.      The Proposal

 

The proposed development includes the following components:

 

·      Change of use of the first level of the buildings to a boarding house containing 17 rooms.

·      Partial demolition of the internal partitions of the first floor level.

·      Construction of an extension to the rear of the existing buildings at first level.

·      Installation of internal partitions and toilet, kitchenette and laundry facilities.

 

The proposed accommodation types are as follows:

 

·      Rooms 1 to 9, 11 to 13, 15 and 17: single room with private ensuite and kitchenette

·      Rooms 10 and 14: double room with private ensuite and kitchenette

·      Room 16: single room with kitchenette and access to shared bathroom

4.      Site History

 

4.1    Previous applications relating to the site

 

DA/111/1998

Demolition of existing structures on site and construction of an 8-storey mixed retail and residential building.

The application was approved by Council on 6 October 1998.

DA/111/1998/A

Section 96 modification to amend the conditions of consent.

The application was approved by Council on 10 October 2000.

PL/44/2010

Pre-lodgement application: alterations and additions to the first floor level of the existing buildings to create a boarding house.

 

4.2    Plan amendments

Amended plans and additional information were submitted on 7 February 2011. The revised design includes the following changes: 

 

·      Reduction to the number of boarding rooms from 18 to 17 with associated internal reconfiguration.

·      Installation of highlight windows for Rooms 9 and 13, which open onto the communal terrace.

·      Installation of air conditioning units for the boarding rooms adjacent to Anzac Parade.

·      Provision of tinted window glazing for the boarding rooms adjacent to Anzac Parade.

 

The additional documentation includes:

·      Revised plan of management and statement of environmental effects.

·      Roof plan.

·      Drawing showing kitchenette details.

·      Manufacturer’s brochures for ventilated skylights.

 

The amended development scheme forms the subject of this assessment.

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

The application was advertised and notified from 10 to 24 November 2010 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The following submission is received at the conclusion of the public consultation process:

 

·      73/42-56 Harbourne Road, Kingsford

 

The issues raised in the submission are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The proposed boarding house will result in significant noise impacts on the nearby residences.  

Noted. The submitted Plan of Management does not contain sufficient information relating to the minimisation of noise and enforcement of house rules during the night hours. The proposal is not considered to have adequately addressed potential noise issues that may impact on the nearby residential uses. Refer to the “LEP” section of this report for further comments.

The proposed boarding house will create significant privacy impacts on the nearby residences.

The nearest residential buildings are located at 42-56 Harbourne Road to the east of the site. The above property includes a 2-storey high indoor swimming pool / club house building, which directly abuts the rear boundaries of the site. The east-facing windows and deck of the proposed boarding house are provided at first floor. The residential units at 42-56 Harbourne Road are situated at higher levels. Due to the above characteristics, the proposed development will not be able to overlook the windows and balconies of the aforementioned neighbour.

The development will result in significant light overspill that adversely affects the amenity of nearby residences.

The nearest residential buildings are located at 42-56 Harbourne Road to the east of the site. The above property includes a 2-storey high indoor swimming pool / club house building, which directly abuts the rear boundaries of the site and acts as a visual buffer. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to result in significant light overspill impact on the neighbouring residences.

The development will cause unreasonable overshadowing of the surrounding areas.

The nearest residential buildings are located at 42-56 Harbourne Road to the east of the site. According to the shadow diagrams, the afternoon shadows of the development will fall upon the right of way and the western façade of the indoor swimming pool / club house building of the aforementioned property. Therefore, the development is not considered to cause unreasonable overshadowing of the nearby residential uses.

The development will obstruct views from the dwelling unit at 73/42-56 Harbourne Road.

The existing buildings on site have a height of 2 storeys. The proposal involves alterations and additions to the first floor level without increasing the maximum building height. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to obstruct any significant view corridors from the adjoining residential development at 42-56 Harbourne Road.

The proposed development will increase energy consumption.

The proposal satisfies the requirements of SEPP: BASIX.

The proposed development will reduce the values of the surrounding residential properties.

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

 

6.      Technical Officers Comments

 

6.1    Development Engineer

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

 

General Comments

Due to the insufficient or incorrect information associated with the waste management arrangements for the site and the resulting likely need for amendments Development Engineering is unable to support this application however conditions have been provided as per the assessing officer’s request.

 

Waste Management Issues

The assessing officer is advised that the submitted waste management plan is unsatisfactory and shall not be approved as part of this development consent.

 

The applicant has adopted the incorrect waste generation rate of 40L per week for boarding houses. Council’s Waste Management Guidelines for Proposed Developments specify a rate for boarding houses of 9L/occupant/day for normal garbage and 3L/occupant per day for recycling.

 

For the proposed development consisting of 17 rooms waste generation is calculated as follows:

 

Normal Garbage (weekly collection)

Amount = 9 x 17 x 7 = 1071

Number of bins = 1071/240 (standard MGB) = 4.46 = say 5 bins

 

Recyclables (fortnightly collection)

Amount = 3 x 17 x 14 = 714

Number of bins = 714/240 = 2.98 = say 3 bins

 

Total = 8 bins

 

In addition to the above, Council’s Manager of Waste Talebul Islam requested that the number of recycle bins be increased to 5 hence a total of 10 bins would be required for the development.

 

The required provision of 10 bins was forwarded to the applicant in pre-lodgement advice under PL/44/2010 and also in letter on the 30th December 2010 associated with the current application. This advice appears to have been ignored. The proposed number of 6 bins will not be adequate to cope with the waste generation of the boarding house.

 

The current waste management arrangements for the restaurants underneath have also not been explained. Development Engineering and Council’s Manager of Waste require that a separate bin area be set aside for the commercial tenancies to avoid the common problem of commercial tenancies using residential bin areas.  This has not been indicated on the submitted plans. At the time of site inspection a number of bins were observed at the rear of the shops including a large 1.1m3 bulk bin. Further details as to where these bins are proposed to be stored once the development is completed have not been provided.

 

Consolidation Comments

The site comprises of 4 separate allotments consisting of Lot B, C & D in DP 396242 and Lot 4 in DP 983980. The applicant was advised in Pre-lodgement advice that they should consider consolidating the site into one allotment. This would avoid the creation of a number of easements/rights of way. 

 

The applicant has advised that no consolidation is planned at the present time hence they will be required to create suitable rights of footway, easements for services, support and stormwater lines, as required. This shall be in the form of a ‘Plan of Survey’ to be registered prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

Development Engineering’s preference is still to consolidate the site and both options have been included in this report.

 

Parking Comments

Parking requirements for the development have been assessed taking into account Council’s DCP-Parking and State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing). The DCP calculates the parking for the site at the following rates for boarding houses and business premises:

 

Restaurants = 1 space per 40m2 for first 80m2 then 1 space per 20m2 thereafter

Business premises = 1 space per 40m2

Boarding Houses = 1 space per 10 bedrooms + 1 space for caretaker

 

Current Parking requirements-

Restaurants (Thai & Indonesian) of 205m2 = 2 + 125/20 = 8.25 spaces

Chemist = (109.95+133.02)/40 = 6.07 spaces

1st floor dwellings = 4 x 2 bedroom units = 4 x 1.2 = 4.8

Total required = 8.25 + 6.07 + 4.8 = Say 19 spaces

Total currently provided = 8

Parking Credit = 11 spaces

 

Proposed parking requirements

Boarding house of 18 rooms = 1 + 1.8 = 2.8 spaces (by DCP-Parking)

Restaurants = 8.25 spaces (unchanged)

Chemist = (109.95+133.02)/40 = 6.07 spaces (unchanged)

Total required = 2.8 + 8.25 + 6.07

 = 17 spaces

Parking credit = 11

Total required = 17-11 = 6

Total provided = 7

Complies

 

The Affordable Housing SEPP states in regulation 29(2) that consent authorities must not refuse consent on the grounds if not more than one parking space is provided for each 10 boarding rooms or part thereof.

 

The applicant does propose two of the car spaces are to be allocated to the boarding house. This is acceptable to Development Engineering and a conditioned requesting this has been added to this report.

 

The Affordable Housing SEPP also states in regulation 30(h) that consent authorities must not consent to development unless at least one parking space is provided for a bicycle and one for a motorcycle for every 5 boarding rooms. As the number of boarding rooms is 17 the proposal requires 18/5 = 3.6 = say 4 bicycle spaces and 4 motorbike spaces to be provided on the site. The submitted plans demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

Landscape Comments

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

 

Assessment Officer’s comments:

The car parking requirements for boarding houses as stipulated in SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) prevail over the provisions of the Parking DCP. A detailed assessment against the SEPP provisions is provided within the body of this report.

6.2    Building Surveyor

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

 

BCA Building Classification

Class 6 – Restaurants / Chemist shop

Class 3 - Residential units - Place of shared accommodation

 

Background

The first floor levels of the building are presently used as offices and a residence.

 

Key Issues

Noise, site management, public health, public safety and amenity, building and development control and compliance, construction site management, fire safety, access and facilities for people with a disability and DDA issues and BCA matters in relation to the united building.

 

6.3    Environmental Health Officer

The comments provided by Council’s Environmental Health Officer are extracted below:

 

Key issues

An acoustic report has not been submitted as part of this application. Appropriate construction is required to ensure road traffic noise does not impact on the amenity of the residential occupants of the development.

 

Not all the potential noise sources have been addressed as part of the submitted SEE, an acoustic report will be required prior to an occupation certificate being issued.

 

The use and the operation of the boarding house accommodation has the potential to create offensive noise and the patrons behaviours is likely to impact on the other users of the boarding house and/or the neighbouring residential properties.

 

The use of the common areas (including the shared bathroom facilities, timber deck terrace and rear area) are required to be monitored and cleaned so as to ensure the premise does not present a unsafe/unhealthy condition.

 

The use and operation of the boarding house shall be subject to a Plan of Management (PoM), which has been submitted (dated October 2010) as part of the approval. A review of the submitted PoM requires additional information. An appropriate condition will be included to ensure that this is submitted to Council prior to the Occupation Certificate being issued. 

 

7.      Master Planning Requirements

 

The site has a land area of only 702.7m2 and a master plan is not required.

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

The site is located within Zone No. 3A (General Business Zone) and boarding house development is permissible with Council’s consent. The objectives of the zone stipulated under Clause 13(1) are addressed below:

 

Objectives

Comments

(a) To maintain the viability of existing business centres, and

The proposed development will retain the existing retail tenancies at ground level of the building fronting Anzac Parade. The proposed boarding house will also introduce a resident population in close proximity to the commercial strip in Anzac Parade. Therefore, the development is considered to maintain the viability of the Kingsford Commercial Centre.

(b) To facilitate the orderly and economic development of land as business centres, for commercial, retail, residential and community purposes by:

Refer to comments below.

(i) Introducing controls for the bulk and scale of buildings, and

The proposal complies with the FSR and building height development standards stipulated in the LEP.

(ii) Encouraging economically viable retail cores which are centrally located and in close proximity to public transport, and

The proposed development will retain the existing retail tenancies at ground level of the building fronting Anzac Parade. The proposed boarding house will also introduce a resident population in close proximity to the commercial strip and public transport services in Anzac Parade. Therefore, the proposal will contribute to the economic viability of the Kingsford Commercial Centre.

(iii) Improving employment opportunities, and

The proposed boarding house will introduce a resident population on the site, which would increase demand for local services and indirectly contribute to employment opportunities.

(iv) Servicing the needs of the local and regional community, and

The proposed boarding house will provide affordable residential accommodation to the local and regional community, including students and single persons.

(v) Encouraging the provision and use of public transport, and

The proposed land use will increase demand for public transport services.

 

(vi) Providing and improving pedestrian and public open space areas for shoppers and workers, and

The development scheme will not significantly alter the Anzac Parade elevation of the existing buildings. The proposal will not adversely impact on the pedestrian amenity of Anzac Parade.

 

(vii) Maintaining and improving the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the City of Randwick, and

The application does not propose any upgrade to the Anzac Parade elevation of the existing buildings. The eastern section of the existing development will be refurbished and extended. The rear building works will not be readily visible from the public domain. The proposal is considered to maintain the existing environmental qualities of the locality.

 

(c) To minimise the impact of development on adjoining and nearby residential zones, and

The nearest residential dwellings are located to the east of the site at 42-56 Harbourne Road. The above property is an apartment complex, which includes a 2-storey high indoor swimming pool / club house building directly abutting the rear boundaries of the site. The habitable room windows and balconies of the apartment units are located at higher levels above the club house building.

 

The proposed boarding house includes an outdoor deck at first level which is oriented towards the rear service area and the western walls of the neighbouring swimming pool / club house building. This building would provide a degree of physical buffer against noise emitted from the boarding house. It is considered that passive recreational usage of the terrace, such as normal level of conversation among small groups of residents, would not result in unacceptable noise impacts on the neighbouring residents.

 

However, the submitted Plan of Management does not contain adequate information relating to the supervision and enforcement of house rules during night hours when the managing agent is not on duty. Indeed, the managing agent does not appear to station at the premises even during his or her duty hours. It remains a possibility that any spontaneous party function or irresponsible usage of the terrace would still result in material noise impacts on the nearby residents.

 

As will be discussed in the following sections of this report, the Plan of Management is considered to be ambiguous and contains management procedures that are unlikely to be implementable.

 

Therefore, the proposal in its current form is not considered to have satisfactorily addressed potential noise issues which may impact on the nearby residential uses.

 

(d) To encourage housing affordability. 

The proposed boarding house will provide affordable residential accommodation for the local and regional community.

 

 

The following clauses are applicable to the proposed development:

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

20F(3) Floor space ratios

Maximum FSR 3:1 (or 2108.1m2 GFA)

1.13:1 (or 797.2m2 GFA)

Yes

Maximum FSR for any part of the building/s used for the purposes of dwellings, multi-unit housing, group homes, boarding houses and/or serviced apartments 2:1 (or 1405.4m2 GFA)

0.55:1 (or 384.9m2 GFA)

Yes

20G(5) Building heights

Maximum 24m

As existing, approximately 9.3m

Yes

 

Clause 34 Boarding houses

This clause applies to a building or place that is used for the purpose of a boarding house and includes any vacant building or part of a building that, when last used or occupied, was used or occupied as a boarding house. The subject buildings are not being used for boarding house purposes and the provisions of Clause 34 do not apply to the proposal.

 

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

The SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) applies to the proposal. An assessment against the provisions of Clause 29 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent and Clause 30 Standards for boarding houses are provided below:

 

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

Standard

Assessment

The density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio are not more than 2.5:1 (that is, permissible residential uses FSR of 2:1 under the LEP, plus bonus FSR of 0.5:1 allowable under the SEPP).

0.55:1 (residential FSR)

Complies.

Building height if all proposed buildings comply with the maximum building height under another environmental planning instrument for any building on the land (that is, 24m).

Approximately 9.3m, complies.

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

The existing developments on the eastern side of Anzac Parade between Meeks and Rainbow Streets are generally built to the front property boundaries. The existing building currently has nil setbacks from the Anzac Parade alignment and no changes are proposed. Complies.

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

The communal room will achieve the required solar access via skylights.

Complies.

 

 

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

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

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

A communal deck of 3m (depth) x 7m (length) with an area of 21m2 is provided at the rear. Complies.

 

No resident manager is proposed.

 

 

 

If not more than:

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

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

This sub-clause is overridden by Clause 30(1)(f), which prohibits additional parking for lodgers on the site where the zone allows for multi-unit housing. Refer to the following table for further details.

 

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

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

(ii) 16 square metres in any other case.

Refer to comments below.

 

 

 

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

All proposed rooms contain private toilet and kitchenette facilities, with the exception of Room 16, which will have access to a shared bathroom. Complies.

 

Clause 29(2)(f) Accommodation Size

Room Number

Occupancy Type

Proposed Size (m2), Excluding Toilets & Kitchenettes

Compliance

1

Single room

12.66

Yes

2

Single room

12.10

Yes

3

Single room

11.38

No

4

Single room

11.38

No

5

Single room

14.63

Yes

6

Single room

11.40

No

7

Single room

13.54

Yes

8

Single room

11.40

No

9

Single room

14.63

Yes

10

Double room

19.18

Yes

11

Single room

13.18

Yes

12

Single room

18.32

Yes

13

Single room

14.63

Yes

14

Double room

19.475

Yes

15

Single room

11.73

No

16

Single room

11.40

No

17

Single room

12.55

Yes

 

As is demonstrated above, a total of 6 single rooms do not meet the standard (that cannot be used to refuse consent) for accommodation size stipulated under Clause 29(2)(f).

 

The SEPP operates in a manner where a development proposal complies with the standards listed under Clause 29, relating to FSR, building height, landscaped area, solar access, private open space, parking and accommodation size, the consent authority cannot refuse the application based on the aforementioned grounds. However, where there is a non-compliance with any of the standards stipulated under Clause 29, it will be capable of being used as a ground for refusal.

 

The deviation from the minimum accommodation size standard is not supported for the following reasons:

 

·      The sizes of the boarding rooms in question are too small considering a private kitchenette is provided within the living / sleeping area. Appropriate amalgamation of the smaller rooms or reconfiguration of the floor layout should be undertaken to provide a reasonable level of amenity for the boarders.

 

·      The proposal does not demonstrate satisfactory natural ventilation for each boarding room. The design scheme relies heavily on skylights for natural lighting and ventilation when the rooftop already accommodates exhaust vents for the existing restaurants at ground level. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details. 

 

·      The internal privacy for the individual boarding rooms has not been properly resolved as the majority of the rooms have windows opening onto common hallways. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

 

Assessment of Clause 30   Standards for boarding houses

Standard

Assessment

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

There is a communal room at level 1 of the building. Complies.

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

No boarding rooms have a floor area of more than 25m2 after deducting the toilets and kitchenette facilities. Complies.

(c) No boarding room will be occupied by more than 2 adult lodgers.

This matter could be addressed by a condition of consent. 

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

All proposed rooms contain private toilet and kitchenette facilities, with the exception of Room 16, which will have access to a shared bathroom. Complies.

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

The proposed boarding house will accommodate a maximum of 19 residents. No dwelling unit for on-site manager is required.  

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

The proposal includes 3 x “common” parking bays for the shared use by all premises within the buildings. A condition could be imposed to prohibit the provision of parking for lodgers.  

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

No boarding rooms are provided at the ground level.

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

The plans show the provision of 4 x bicycle and 4 x motorcycle parking spaces. Complies.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied with BASIX Certificates numbered A97509 (with respect to No. 508 Anzac Parade), A97523 (No. 510 Anzac Parade), A97524 (No. 512 Anzac Parade) and A97526 (No. 514-516 Anzac Parade). The commitments listed on the BASIX Certificates could be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

It is noted that BASIX Certificate No. A97526 has not been updated following the design amendment which results in the reduction of 1 boarding room. However, this matter could be rectified by a special condition that requires the submission of a revised Certificate for No. 514-516 Anzac Parade to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of any Construction Certificate.

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

9.1    Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Kingsford Commercial Centre

The Kingsford Commercial Centre DCP applies to the subject site. The provisions of the DCP primarily cater for new development or substantial redevelopment of land parcels within the Kingsford Commercial Centre.

 

The existing buildings on the site will be largely retained with the alteration and addition works being confined to the rear and the first floor level. The maximum building height will remain unchanged at 9.3m. The existing commercial uses at ground floor level fronting Anzac Parade will be retained. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the DCP.

 

9.2    Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Parking

The car parking requirements for boarding houses as stipulated in the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) prevail over the DCP controls. Refer to the “SEPP” section for further comments on this matter.

 

The following provides an analysis of the potential impacts of the development on car parking for the existing commercial uses within the buildings, which continue to be subjected to the DCP provisions.

 

At present, the existing buildings contain 2 restaurants and a chemist at ground level. It appears that the first floor level accommodates a chiropractor, a solicitor’s office and a dwelling unit; however, the tenancies and respective floor areas have not been clearly shown on the plans. A total of 8 parking bays are currently located at the rear of the site. The proposed boarding house includes ancillary motorcycle and bicycle parking facilities, which will reduce the on-site car parking to 7 spaces. The Development Engineer has provided detailed parking calculations, which are extracted under the “Technical Officers Comments” section of this report.

 

The submitted drawings show the allocation of 1 parking bay for each of the four buildings on the site (being Nos. 508, 510, 512 and 514-516). The remaining 3 parking bays will be common property to be shared among all uses on the site.

 

It is considered that the reduction of 1 off-street parking space and the proposed allocation are satisfactory for the following reasons:

 

1.  A special condition could be imposed to prohibit the allocation of any parking bays for lodgers / boarders. Contractors for the boarding house may utilise the common parking bays for short-stay loading and deliveries.

 

2.  The proposed allocation will provide 2 exclusive parking spaces for the chemist and 1 space for each of the two restaurants, which can cater for the long-stay parking needs of the operators of the existing commercial tenancies or their delivery activities.

 

·      There are a total of 3 common parking bays, which could be utilised for deliveries and loading by all uses on the site.

 

·      A significant proportion of customers to the existing commercial tenancies would be local employees or residents, who would walk to the subject premises.

 

The site is located within the Kingsford Commercial Centre and has convenient access to public transport services along Anzac Parade.

 

Accordingly, the reduction of 1 parking bay is not considered to detrimentally affect the operation of the tenancies or significantly reduce kerb side parking in the surrounding road network.

 

9.3    Randwick 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:

 

 

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$371,800

1.0%

$3,718.00

 

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.

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

The relevant clauses of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 could be addressed by Council’s standard conditions.

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 discussed in the previous sections of this report, are addressed below.

 

The site is located within Zone No. 3A (General Business Zone), which aims at allowing a mixture of commercial, retail, community and residential land uses. The proposal is for a commercial use and is not considered to generate adverse economic impacts on the locality.

 

The sizes of a number of boarding rooms do not meet the standard (that cannot be used to refuse consent) of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing).

 

The SEPP operates in a manner where a development proposal complies with the standards listed under Clause 29, relating to FSR, building height, landscaped area, solar access, private open space, parking and accommodation size, the consent authority cannot refuse the application based on the aforementioned grounds. However, where there is a non-compliance with any of the standards stipulated under Clause 29, it will be capable of being used as a ground for refusal.

 

In this instance, the sizes of those rooms are not considered adequate for medium to long-term accommodation purposes and the proposal is not supported.

 

The proposal relies heavily on skylights for natural light and ventilation. However, the roof of the buildings presently contains exhaust vents that are connected to the restaurants at the ground floor level, which have material implications on the air quality and amenity of the boarding rooms. The application does not contain sufficient information to ascertain the adequacy of the proposed method of ventilation to the rooms.

 

The privacy and acoustic performance of the majority of the boarding rooms are compromised by the locations of the primary windows, which open onto the common hallways.

 

It is considered that the layout and configuration of the boarding house in their current form would not offer a satisfactory level of amenity to the future occupants. It appears that a reduction to the number of rooms would facilitate a better design and contribute to the living standard of the accommodation.

 

Based on the current information, it cannot be established that the proposal will not result in detrimental environmental and social impacts on the locality.  

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

The site is located within the Kingsford Commercial Centre and has convenient access to local services and public transport.

 

The first floor level of the existing buildings has sufficient size for the provision of a boarding house.

 

The location and characteristics of the site per se are considered to be suitable for the nature of the proposed land use.

 

However, as will be discussed in the paragraphs below, the proposal has not demonstrated the provision of adequate waste storage facilities for both the boarding house and the existing commercial tenancies. The proposed ventilation arrangement has not considered the potential impacts of the exhaust ducts and vents required for the ground floor restaurants. The proposal has not thoroughly considered the opportunities and constraints of the site and is not considered to be satisfactory in its current form.

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

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

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

The proposal has not provided adequate evidence to justify that the development will achieve a satisfactory level of environmental and social planning outcomes in the locality. The proposed boarding house is considered to be sub-standard and is not within the public interest. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

 

10.1  Light and ventilation

The proposed development includes 9 internalised rooms (being Rooms 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 15), where the windows are opened onto common hallways and do not receive adequate direct sunlight. The design scheme attempts to address the above problem by installing ventilated skylights, which would become the sole source of natural light to these rooms. Despite the above remedial solution, the proposal is not considered to deliver a suitable level of amenity for the boarding rooms for the following reasons:

 

·           There are existing exhaust vents at the roof of the building, which connect with the restaurant premises at the ground level. The proposed ventilated skylights and light well should be positioned away from these vents to minimise odour impacts. The applicant has not submitted details of the location of the exhaust ducts and vents despite Council’s written request for such information. The drawings merely indicate that the existing mechanical exhaust ducts will be relocated as part of a future development application. Based on the information currently available, it is considered imprudent to support the proposal in its current form as potential impacts on air quality of the rooms cannot be ascertained.

 

·           Rooms 2, 3 and 7 have windows opening onto the hallway in the north-western section of the development. According to the plans, the hallway in question will be enclosed by ‘domed ventilated skylight’ above and doors. It is unclear as to how the domed skylight admits ventilation and no details have been given. Additionally, where the doorways are closed, ventilation to the corridor in question will be significantly restricted. This would in turn affect cross-ventilation to Rooms 2, 3, and 7.

 

·           The ensuites of Rooms 14 and 15 open onto a light well which is roofed by a “domed ventilated skylight”. Again, the effectiveness of air flow through the domed roof light is unclear as no design details and specification have been given.

 

·           Rooms 5 and 12 only contains south-facing windows to the hallways and do not receive adequate solar access. These rooms will rely on artificial lighting throughout the day at all times of the year.

 

·           The east-facing window to Room 11 is located directly adjacent to that of the ensuite bathroom to Room 12, and is susceptible to odour impact.

 

·           The submitted BASIX Certificates have specified the glass type required for the skylights. However, the proposal does not demonstrate how sunlight and glare via the skylights can be controlled. Given the small room sizes, glare from the summer sun could cause significant impact on the living amenity.

 

·           To improve energy efficiency and amenity, fixed or ventilated skylights should be installed above the internalised bathroom and laundry areas. This has been requested by Council but has not been incorporated in the revised drawings.

 

10.2  Visual and acoustic privacy

The majority of the boarding rooms have sash windows opening onto the circulation hallways. The plans show that the lower sashes will be constructed with obscured glazing. However, the window operation has not been clearly indicated. Where the lower sashes are operable (which are common among commercially available window products), visual privacy for the boarding rooms will be significantly compromised when the windows are opened.

 

Furthermore, the windows of the boarding rooms are located close to each other, and in a number of cases are oriented directly towards each other:

 

·      Between Rooms 5 and 9

·      Between Rooms 4 and 8

·      Between Rooms 3 and 7

 

The window location has not been designed to minimise transmission of noise between rooms.

 

The layout and detailed design of the proposal are not considered to adequately mitigate potential visual and acoustic privacy issues between the boarding rooms.

 

10.3  Operational management

The Amended Plan of Management, dated February 2011, prepared by HK Archidraft, includes the following information:

 

1.1 Site Supervision

A Managing Agent will be appointed and will be available during working hours and a contact telephone number will clearly be displayed at all times within each room to ensure the site is being appropriately monitored.

 

2.1 Manager’s Office

The Managing Agent will be available from 8:30am to 6:00pm daily.

 

The Managing Agent’s name and 24 hour contact details will be displayed inside each room of the boarding house including the Communal Living Room.

 

2.3 Surveillance

The building will have a CCTV security surveillance system through the premises, located in areas considered to be a potential security risk including:

-   At the entrances

-   Communal open space area

-   Common stairs, communal living room and laundry areas

 

3 Site Management

The Managing Agent will be appointed to be responsible for the welfare of the boarders who administers the premises’ emergency procedures and plans of management and any conditions of consent.

 

He / She will be the contact for boarders in the event of an emergency he will be able to contact the Owners by mobile phone.

 

14 Process for Community Consultation and Dealing with Noise Complaints from Residents

The Managing Agent will be available at all times to deal with any complaints as to the operation and management of the premises.

 

The issues associated with the day to day management of the premises are identified as follows:

·           The submitted plan of management (POM) indicates that a “Managing Agent” will be employed to supervise the boarding house. It does not appear that the Managing Agent will be stationed within the premises even during his or her available hours (i.e. 8:30am to 6:00pm, daily) as there is no site office or reception desk proposed in the development scheme. It appears that the agent will be managing the premises from an off-site location. This management practice is considered to be indirect and the effectiveness of supervising the premises is highly questionable.

 

·           The POM states that a CCTV system will be installed to monitor areas subjected to a higher security risk, such as the pedestrian entries, stairs, laundries, communal room and outdoor deck. In the absence of a site office, it is unclear as to where the monitor screens will be provided. The proposition of having a CCTV security system is considered to be improbable and unconvincing.

 

·           The proposal does not include any security gate for the southern staircase accessible from the rear and is considered to have adverse implications on access control and security of the boarding house.

 

·           The Managing Agent will only be available during working hours, that is, 8:30am to 6:00pm daily (refer to pages 1-2 of the POM). Accordingly, the agent would not be on duty after business hours even when “24-hour contact details” are provided at each boarding room. In this pretext, it is unlikely that the agent would be able to administer emergency procedures and address noise complaints (from residents both within and external to the premises) at night hours. Therefore, the operation hours of the Management Agent contradict the proposed management practices as detailed in Sections 3 and 14 of the POM.

 

·           The POM does not provide information as to how the boarders will be supervised and how the house rules will be enforced at night times, when noise issues are more likely to occur for boarding house type of developments.

 

The submitted POM is uncomprehensive and contains management procedures that are unlikely to be implementable. The application is not considered to have formulated effective and convincing methods for the day to day management of the boarding house.

 


10.4  Waste management

According to Council’s waste management policy, a total of 10 x 240-litre bins comprising 5 x recycling and 5 x general waste bins are required to be provided for the proposed boarding house in a storage area separate to that of the existing commercial tenancies. The applicant has been advised of the above requirement both in the Pre-lodgement comments dated 3 August 2010 (PL/44/2010) and Council’s letter dated 30 December 2010 associated with the subject application.

 

The submitted drawings show the provision of only 6 bins and do not comply with Council’s requirements. Refer to the “Technical Officers Comments” section for further details.

 

In addition, the waste management arrangements for the existing commercial tenancies at ground level of the buildings have not been explained in the application. The existing development on the site does not provide any formal garbage storage areas. Upon site inspection, the bins of the individual commercial tenancies are observed to be scattered around the rear parking area in a disorderly manner. Given the scope of the proposal involving change of use and substantial alterations to the first floor level, it is considered appropriate to improve the current garbage storage arrangement as part of the works.

 

The drawings show that 2 of the boarding house bins will be kept outdoors at the rear of No. 514-516. It is likely that the above outdoor bin storage would worsen the current situation of having randomly placed bins at the rear service area. The proposal also includes 4 x motorcycle and 4 x bicycle parking spaces at the rear of the buildings to meet the requirements of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing). To meet the above statutory requirement would involve further reduction of available outdoor space for bin storage. It is questionable whether the unbuilt upon areas of the site have sufficient room for adequate bin storage for all uses and the proposal does not attempt to address this issue.

 

The proposal should have calculated the number of bins required for the existing commercial tenancies, and designated a storage area on the site conveniently accessible by these premises, which is defined by appropriate enclosure structures. A separate waste storage compound for the boarding house should also be provided to avoid the common problem of having residential bins being used by commercial tenants. Suitable alterations to the buildings may need to be undertaken to achieve the above.

 

The application does not adequately consider the waste management requirements of both the existing uses and the proposed boarding house on the site. It is considered that the proposal is likely to lead to congestion at the rear service area and adversely impact on its intended function and environmental amenity. The proposal is therefore not supported in this regard.

 

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 subject application seeks approval for alterations and additions to the first floor level of the existing buildings and change of use to a boarding house with 17 rooms.

 

The site is located within the Kingsford Commercial Centre which has convenient access to local services and public transport. The combined floor area of the first level of the existing buildings is capable of supporting boarding house use. The site location and characteristics per se are considered to be suitable for the nature of the proposed use.

 

However, the proposed layout of the boarding house will result in a large number of internalised rooms, which have adverse implications on living amenity.

 

There are 6 boarding rooms that do not meet the minimum accommodation size standard (standard that cannot be used to refuse consent) stipulated under Clause 29 of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing). The SEPP operates in a manner where a development proposal complies with the standards listed under Clause 29, relating to FSR, building height, landscaped area, solar access, private open space, parking and accommodation size, the consent authority cannot refuse the application based on the aforementioned grounds. However, where there is a non-compliance with any of the standards stipulated under Clause 29, it will be capable of being used as a ground for refusal. In this instance, the sizes of those rooms are not considered adequate for medium to long-term accommodation purposes and the proposal is not supported.

 

The application contains insufficient information in a number of key areas and it cannot be ascertained that the boarding rooms would achieve an acceptable level of living standard for medium to longer term accommodation.

 

In particular, the proposal relies heavily on skylights for natural light and ventilation. However, the roof of the buildings presently contains exhaust vents that are connected to the restaurants at the ground level, and have material implications on the air quality of the boarding rooms. The adequacy of the proposed method of ventilation remains questionable.

 

The majority of the boarding rooms are likely to have poor privacy and acoustic performance as their primary windows are opened onto the common hallways.

 

The proposal does not meet the requirement of Council’s waste management policy and entails a shortfall of 4 bins. Furthermore, the application does not successfully demonstrate that the site has sufficient areas for the separate storage of waste bins for both the existing commercial tenancies at ground level and the proposed boarding house. At present, the bins of the individual commercial tenancies are scattered around the rear parking area in a disorderly manner. It is likely that the proposed waste storage arrangement would worsen the current situation and detrimentally impact on the amenity and functionality of the rear service / parking areas of the site.

 

In terms of the daily operational management, it does not appear that the Managing Agent, as mentioned in the submitted Plan of Management, would be stationed within the premises even during his or her available hours (i.e. 8:30am to 6:00pm, daily) as there is no site office or reception desk proposed in the development. It is unclear as to how the boarding house will be supervised. It is also unlikely that the agent would be able to administer emergency procedures and address complaints as stated in the Plan of Management, especially during night hours. The submitted POM is not considered to have formulated effective and convincing methods for the day to day management of the boarding house.

 

It is considered that the layout and configuration of the boarding house in the current form would not offer a satisfactory level of amenity to the future occupants. It appears that a reduction to the number of rooms would facilitate a better design and bring the living standard to a more appropriate level. Based on the current information, it is unable to be established that the proposal will not result in detrimental environmental and social impacts on the locality. For the above reasons, it is recommended that the subject application be REFUSED.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuses development consent under Section 80(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 942/2010 for alterations and additions to the first floor level of the existing buildings for use as a boarding house with 17 rooms and associated facilities, at 508-516 Anzac Parade, Kingsford, for the following reasons:

 

1.       The application does not provide adequate management practices relating to the supervision and enforcement of house rules during night hours. It remains a possibility that any irresponsible use of the outdoor terrace by the boarders would result in material noise impacts on the neighbouring residences. The application contains insufficient information to demonstrate that the potential impacts of the development on the adjoining and nearby residential uses have been minimised. Therefore, the proposal in its current form is not considered to satisfy the provisions of Clause 13(1)(c) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

2.       The proposal does not satisfy the minimum accommodation size standard stipulated under Clause 29(2)(f) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

3.       The proposed layout of the boarding house will result in a large number of internalised rooms, which rely heavily on skylights for natural light and ventilation. The roof of the buildings already contains exhaust vents that are connected to the restaurants at ground level, and have material implications on the air quality of the future boarding rooms. The application contains insufficient information to demonstrate that the proposed method of ventilation will offer an appropriate level of health and amenity. Additionally, Rooms 5 and 12 are only provided with south-facing windows opening onto the hallway, and will not receive adequate daylight. Consequently, it cannot be justified that the proposal will not result in detrimental social impacts on the locality. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

4.       The privacy and acoustic performance of the majority of the boarding rooms are significantly compromised by the locations of their primary windows, which open onto the common hallways. The development scheme has not provided adequate measures to ensure a suitable level of amenity to the future boarders. The proposal in its current form is not considered to achieve an acceptable level of social planning outcome and fails to satisfy the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

5.       The application has not successfully demonstrated that adequate waste storage areas will be provided for both the existing commercial tenancies at ground level and the proposed boarding house. The application fails to demonstrate that the proposed waste storage arrangement will ensure the rear service area of the site functions in an orderly manner. Based on the information available, it cannot be ascertained that the proposal will not result in adverse environmental impacts on the site and the immediate surroundings. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

6.       The application does not clearly and convincingly demonstrate how the boarding house will be supervised on a daily basis. The proposal is not considered to have formulated effective methods for the on-going management of the premises. Based on the information available, it cannot be justified that the proposal will contribute to a positive social planning outcome and fails to satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

7.       The proposal in its current form is not within the public interest and does not satisfy Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP13/11

 

 

Subject:                  47 Holmes Street, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/9/2011

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to dwelling including an upper level addition

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                A Knight & M Odgers

Owner:                         A Knight & M Odgers

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

The application details alterations and additions to an “existing semi detached dwelling” to provide for a first floor addition. As per Council’s advice the semi-detached dwelling house in the Residential 2A Zone should be classified as an attached dual occupancy.

 

As the proposal is now classified as an attached dual occupancy and not a dwelling house the development standards contained in the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) now apply. The proposal has a floor space ratio of 0.56:1 and exceeds the maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1.

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the proposal includes a SEPP 1 Objection that exceeds the standard by more than 10%. If the proposal was assessed under the provision of the DCP – Dwelling House the preferred solution for floor space ratio would be 0.65:1

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing semi detached dwelling including a first floor addition. The main issue is the potential for any impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to enlarge the existing ground level to provide for a new living area opening onto a terrace area and an upper level comprising two bedrooms a bathroom and study. The proposal will provide for 66m of additional floor area to the dwelling.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the southern side of Holmes Street and has a frontage of 9.315m a depth of 30.835m and an area of 287m. The locality is residential and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings.

 

4.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. No submissions have been received.

 

5.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2A 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 20E Landscaped area

Development other than for the purpose of a dwelling house within a 2A zone must provide a minimum of 40% of the total site area as landscaped area. The proposal complies with this clause with 55% of the site provided as landscaping.

 


Clause 20F Floor Space Ratios

The maximum floor space ratios for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house within 2A zones is 0.5:1. This proposal has a total floor space ratio of 0.56:1 which exceeds the maximum in the control and a SEPP 1 Objection to this standard has been lodged by the applicant for consideration.

 

Clause 20G Building Heights

The maximum height for a building other than a dwelling house within a 2A zone is 9.5m from any point on ground level with a maximum external wall height of 7m. The proposal complies with both these controls in this standard with an overall height of 6.6m and an external wall height of 5.7m.

 

5.1    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.

 

Pursuant to Clauses 20F of RLEP 1998, the maximum FSR within 2A Zones is 0.5:1 respectively. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio

Proposal

0.56:1 (161m2 )

LEP development standard

0.5:1 (143m2)

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

13% excess (18m2)

 

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).

 

FSR - Clause 20F

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

 

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

 

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

 

The proposed floor space ratio is only marginally above the maximum allowed floor space ratio of the LEP.

 

The proposal complies with the preferred solution floor space ratio of the DCP for Dwellings.

 

The scale and size of the proposed addition is considered to be very moderate and sits comfortably within the streetscape, and complies with all other planning controls for the locality.

 

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

 

The proposed development exceeds the floor space ratio control however in the context of the existing locality which includes a number of dwellings of similar bulk and scale it cannot be argued that this development will be substantially out of keeping with the established character of the locality.

 

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not allow the best use of the site.

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 standards is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

5.2      Policy Controls

Development Control Plan Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies

 


Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

Clause

Standard

Check

y/n

Landscaping

40 % of site provided as landscaped area

55%

Yes.

25m² of private open space provided.

80m2 +

Yes

Min. dimensions of 3m x 4m & minor level change

8.5m x 9.3m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

42%

Yes

Floor area

(Site area 316m2) maximum FSR 0.6:1 

0.56:1

Yes

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

5.7m

Yes

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

No more  than 1m

Yes

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

No

Yes

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

More than 8m

Yes

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

No change

Yes

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

8.5m

Yes

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

Up to western and 2300mm from eastern side boundaries

See below

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Up to western side and 3384mm from eastern side boundaries

See below

 

The western boundary setback of the dwelling up to the side boundary maintains the party wall and fire separation between the two semi detached dwellings and will not result in any impacts to the amenity of that adjoining dwelling.

 

 

Privacy

The proposal will not result in any significant impact to the existing level of privacy to the adjoining dwellings as the proposal does not include an upper level balcony, the windows to the upper level primarily serve the bedrooms and bathroom, and the window to the study is modest and orientated to the rear yard of the subject property.

 

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

New dwellings comply with 3.5 stars on the NatHERS.

See BASIX

n/a

Private open space receive at least 3 hours sunlight 9am - 3pm on 21 June.

No reduction

Yes

North-facing living areas receive at least 3 hrs sunlight 9am - 3pm 21 June.

Yes

Solar access to existing or future solar collectors on adjacent buildings is maintained 9am - 3pm.

No impact to solar collectors

North-facing windows to living areas of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight 9am - 3pm 21 June, or not further reduced.

Existing north facing windows to front of dwelling not affected by proposal

Principal outdoor recreation space of neighbouring dwellings receive at least 3 hours sunlight 9am- 3pm 21 June, or not further reduced.

Slightly reduced but minimum solar access maintained

Yes

 

6.    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

$ 245 740

1.0%

$ 2 457.40

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 


Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

It is recommended that the application to carryout alterations and additions to the existing dwelling be approved 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 Clause 20F of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 9/11 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including an upper level at 47 Holmes Street, Maroubra subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA002, DA003, DA004, DA005, DA006, DA007, dated 06.12.2010 and received by Council on the 10th January 2011, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

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

 

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

 

3.       Metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. colourbond) and form part of the colour scheme and external finishes for the development.

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

5.       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;

 

6.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $ 245 740 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $ 2 457.40.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

7.       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.

 

8.       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.

 

9.       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)

 

10.     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:

 

11.     Surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

Absorption pits must be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed or flow onto any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance.

 

Details of any works proposed to be carried out in or on a public road/footway are to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to commencement of works.

12.     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:

 

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

 

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

 

14.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that all building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

15.     Prior to the commencement of any building works, the following requirements must be complied with:

 

a)    a Construction Certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

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

 

b)    a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) must be appointed to carry out the necessary building inspections and to issue an occupation certificate; and

 

c)    a principal contractor must be appointed for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, an owner-builder permit may be obtained in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and the PCA and Council are to be notified accordingly; and

                                        

d)    the principal contractor must be advised of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority; and

 

e)    at least two days notice must be given to the Council, in writing, prior to commencing building works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

18.     The relevant requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with, in accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Smoke alarms must comply with AS3786 – Smoke alarms and be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.

 

Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be included in the plans/specification for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

22.     Certificate of Adequacy supplied by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure to support the new upper level.

 

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

 

·          Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines & Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

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

 

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

 

24.     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.

 

25.     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.

 

26.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer, building surveyor or other suitably qualified independent person must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works, in the following cases:

 

·           excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·           new dwellings or additions to dwellings sited up to shared property boundaries (e.g. additions to a semi-detached dwelling or a terraced dwelling),

·           excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·           as otherwise may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

The report (including photographs) are required to detail the current condition and status of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon the adjoining premises, which may be affected by the subject works.  A copy of the dilapidation report is to be given to the owners of the premises encompassed in the report/s before commencing any works.

 

27.     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.

 

28.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity to the satisfaction of Council. 

 

A copy of the Construction Site Management Plan must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

The sediment and erosion control measures are to be in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be provided in the Construction Site Management Plan. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Placement of a waste skip (greater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

A3      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:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP14/11

 

 

Subject:                  9 Cook Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/1037/2010

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including new first floor and carport to rear

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Steven and Kristina Garlinge

Owner:                         Steven and Kristina Garlinge

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

The subject application is referred to Council for determination as the proposed development involves variation to the minimum landscaped area standard under the LEP by more than 10% (being 28%).

 

The subject application is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including new first floor and carport to rear which is accessed off Kelso Lane.

 

The application was advertised and notified in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process.

 

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

 

The proposal will provide a landscaped area of 36% (84.3m2) which is under the RLEP 1998 minimum landscape requirement of 50%. The applicant has submitted an objection under SEPP No. 1 justifying that the development is modest in scale and the site coverage and is compatible with the surrounding built form in the area.  Also, it is augured that the proposal will comply with all of the remaining performance requirements in that there is adequate permeable treatment on the site and private open space to service the needs of the occupants.

 

It should be noted if the application was assessed against the provisions of the DCP-Dwelling Houses which were the relevant controls prior to the new classification of semis, the non compliance for the landscaped area would not be significant and will equate to 9.3m².

 

The proposal has a floor space ratio of 0.71:1, which equates to 167.2m2 GFA. The proposal does not comply with the maximum permissible FSR of 0.65:1 under RLEP 1998. If the application was assessed against the provisions of the DCP-Dwelling Houses which were the relevant controls prior to the new classification of semis/terraces, it would still not comply with the FSR standard of 0.65:1.  The applicant has submitted an objection under SEPP No. 1 justifying that the breach will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. The scale, proportion and massing of the proposed dwelling house is considered to be appropriate to the site and the surrounding built environment.

 

The objections to the landscaped area and FSR have been assessed and are supported.

 

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

 

The proposed development satisfies the relevant legislation, State policies and Local planning controls, and is recommended for approval. 

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to provide for an open plan living area on the ground floor level.  The proposal also includes a new first floor and carport structure with roller door accessed off Kelso Lane.  On the ground floor level it is proposed to carryout internal reconfiguration to provide for new living room, kitchen/dining, bathroom and a central courtyard area between the living room and dining area. On the first floor level it is proposed to provide an office room, main bedroom and ensuite.

 

Section 94A Contributions

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$495,646

 

1.0%

$4956.46

 

 

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Cook Street between Cowper Street and Frances Street in Randwick.  The site is presently occupied by an existing single storey building terrace, which is one of a row of three terrace style buildings comprising nos. 7 to 11 Cook Street.  The site has a rear laneway access to Kelso Lane.  The site has a frontage width of 4.9m, a side boundary depth of 47.53m and has an overall site area of approx. 234.1m². 

 

Neighbouring the property to the north is the adjoining single storey terrace building, to the south is the other adjoining single storey terrace building and to the rear opposite the lane way is a four storey residential flat building with garage access. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of residential flat buildings and dwelling houses.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing subject single storey terrace.

2. The rear yard of the subject site.

3. The rear yard and dwelling of the subject site.

4. Adjoining garages along Kelso Lane.

 

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/868/2005 – An application was approved on the 16 February 2006 for a new rear garage and pergola structure.

 

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

 

SEPP 1 objections have been provided by the applicant to justify the variations to the development standards for the landscaped area & FSR. 

 

Principles for assessing SEPP 1 Objections have been established in the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827. 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. The principles established in Wehbe v Pittwater Council are addressed below:

 

a. Clause 20E Landscaped area

Pursuant to Clauses 20E of RLEP 1998, the minimum landscaped area within 2C Zones is 50%. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Landscaped area

Proposal

36% (84.3m2 )

LEP development standard

50% (117.05m2)

Variation of the LEP standard

Shortfall of 28% (32.75m2) less than the LEP 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).

 

Landscaped area - Clause 20E

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

 

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

 

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

 

-      The proposed landscaping of 84.3m2 (or 36%) of the site area does not comply with the development standard of 117m2 (being 50% of the site area) and therefore provides a 33m2 shortfall in the required area. However, the shortfall would not be so extreme should the DCP control requirement of 40% of the site area be applied to the site. This would have resulted in a shortfall of only 9m2.  Whilst technically the LEP control applies to the development given that terrace dwellings are now not considered to be single dwelling houses, it was not the intention of Council that the LEP control should apply to houses. Therefore Council should in general terms use the 40% landscaping control as being more relevant to houses (whether they be attached or detached). In this sense the degree of landscaping non-compliance is minor.

 

-      The form of development is entirely compatible with the surrounding development.

 

-      The building footprint is comparable to both immediately adjoining terraces. The footprint of the building to the north is slightly larger than the subject dwelling and the building to the south has a slightly smaller building footprint than that proposed here. The amount of open space provided is comparable with other dwellings in this row.

 

-      The proposal provides adequate areas of open space. The rear garden dimensions alone easily comply with the minimum 3m x 4m rectangular requirement and has dimensions of 4.4m x 8.2m. Consequently the degree of open space will allow for good amenity. The main open space area is accessible from the main living space allowing a good flow between the inside and outside main living areas.

 

-      The proposal complies with the building envelope and setback controls.

 

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

 

-    The proposed landscaped area of 84.3m2 (or 36%) is not considered to contribute to any negative impacts on the amenity of the subject and adjoining properties.  If the application was assessed against the provisions of the DCP-Dwelling Houses which were the relevant controls prior to the new classification of semis, the non compliance for the landscaped area would not be significant and will equate to 9.3m².

 

-    There is adequate private open space in the rear yard to accommodate the recreation needs of the occupants as well as provide space for service functions. 

 

-    There is sufficient permeable treatment (approx. 25%) on the site to facilitate infiltration of storm water for urban runoff. 

  

Comment:

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Landscaped area Comments:

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

 

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

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

Landscaped area Comments:

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not allow the best use of the site and the delivery of an accessible garage suitable for mobility impaired persons.

 

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 standards is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

b. Clause 20F Floor Space Ratios

Pursuant to Clauses 20F of RLEP 1998, the maximum FSR within 2C Zones is 0.65:1 respectively. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio

Proposal

0.71:1 (167.17m2 )

LEP development standard

0.65:1 (152.165m2)

Variation of the LEP standard

9.86% excess (15m2)

 

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).

 

FSR - Clause 20F

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

 

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

 

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

 

-      The proposed GFA is 167.2m2 which equates to a FSR of 0.71:1, which exceeds the development standard by 0.06:1 or a GFA of 15m2. This is a relatively minor non-compliance.

 

-      The form of development is entirely compatible with the surrounding development.

 

-      The building footprint is comparable to both immediately adjoining terraces. The footprint of the building to the north is slightly larger than the subject dwelling and the building to the south has a slightly smaller building footprint than that proposed here.

 

-      In this zone (Residential 2C) apartment buildings are permissible. The retention of the dwelling house will safeguard the visual amenities and character of the area.

 

-      The proposal complies with the building envelope controls. The height controls are easily complied with. The majority of the rear addition is single storey. Only a very small part of the additions (which are generally within the existing attic) are two storeys.

 

-      The additions are set below the ridgeline to safeguard street views of the site.

 

-      Large areas of open space are provided for on the site.

 

-      Impacts to neighbour’s are minimal. The proposal has been well considered.

 

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

The proposed development has an FSR of 0.71:1 which exceeds the maximum FSR of 0.65:1 permitted for this site as stipulated in the LEP.  The degree of non-compliance is not significant and it is considered that the affects of the additional building bulk will not adversely impact the amenity of the adjoining properties. The proposed first floor addition maintains the footprint of the existing building and will not result in significant additional building bulk that will dominate the site or detract from the character of the surrounding area.

 

The proposal is deemed to satisfy the performance requirement, namely, that the building bulk is generally compatible with the surrounding built forms. Within the surrounding area there is a disparate mix of building forms that do not provide a consistent character to this area of Cook Street.  Development in the broader vicinity consists predominately of 3 to 4 storey multi-unit residential flat buildings and a number of single and two storey attached and detached dwelling houses.

 

The proposal will not become a distracting visual element in the area and is not considered excessive in respect to bulk and scale.

 

The proposed development is considered to have a modest design that compliments the existing dwelling and will not overpower or unbalance the scale of the buildings on the site. The proposal is deemed to be compatible with the existing dwelling and the other residential buildings in the vicinity.

 

The development will maintain the desirable attributes of the established residential area and will not unreasonably compromise the amenity of existing residents.

 

Further, it is noted that the development is two storey in an area which is 2C and will allow multi unit housing development.

 

As such, it cannot be argued that this development will be substantially out of keeping with the established character of the locality; and for the above reasons, the proposed FSR of the development is considered acceptable.

 

Comment:

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

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

FSR Comments:

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

 

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

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

FSR Comments:

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not allow the best use of the site and the delivery of an accessible garage suitable for mobility impaired persons.

 

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 standards is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the DCP for Notification. As a result of this notification no submissions were received.

 

5.1 Objections

No objections have been received for this application.

 

5.2 Support

No supporting letters have been received for this application.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

a. Development Engineers

An application has been received for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including new first floor and garage to rear (Heritage Conservation Area) (SEPP1 objection to landscape area control) at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Architectural plans by Angus Mckenzie Architects dated 22nd December 2010;

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by Damian O Toole Town Planning

 

Parking/Access Comments

There is currently no off street parking provided on the site and the applicant proposes a new carport and associated slab and carspace at the rear of the site with vehicle access off Kelso Lane. It is noted there are other developments in the lane with similar access.

 

The carspace meets the requirements of Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 and Council’s DCP-Parking and it is noted that due to the relatively large opening fronting the lane (over 3.0m) this greatly assists in car manoeuvrability. Cars should not have any difficulty accessing the carspace.

 

The only possible issue of concern is that the carport slab is shown as RL 69.59 while it is noted that there is some fall in the lane from south to north. Some transitional grades may therefore be necessary within the front portion of the carport to grade to Council’s issued alignment levels. These transitional grades shall not exceed a grade of 1 in 8. Appropriate conditions have been added to this report.

Landscape Comments

The mature, 6 metre tall Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) on Council’s Cook Street verge, to the north of the subject site, growing in front of no.9, should not be affected by this application, with conditions relating to its preservation not required.

 

There are no objections to removing the small Mangifera indica (Mango Tree) in the rear yard, along the northern boundary, so as to accommodate the proposed rear extension as shown, with the relevant consent for this included in this report.

 

The similarly sized Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani) to the east of the tree described above, is not significant in anyway, but should be able to be retained as part of constructing the proposed garage as shown, with the western wall to be 2 metres off its trunk, and the roof overhang/eave 1.2 metres away, but as it is not covered by the TPO, conditions have not been provided.

 

While the site inspection revealed a large Eucalyptus moluccana (Grey Box), of around 12 metres in height, growing beyond the southern site boundary (beyond the dividing pailing fence), in the rear yard of the adjoining property at no.11, the site survey shows that its trunk is actually located right on the common boundary between these two properties, meaning that both no.9 & 11 share joint ownership of this tree.

 

The report for DA/486/2006, for a similar garage structure within no.11 (which is now complete), and is also in close proximity the tree, details that exploratory trenching revealed an absence of major roots, which may have been due to the presence of the original concrete slab and shed.

 

However, such an impervious surface would make it likely that roots would have extended to the north of the tree, into the subject site, and in the area of the proposed works, with the site inspection revealing that this tree is already in poor health and condition, with dieback, deadwood and past failures observed throughout its canopy.

 

The southern wall is shown as being setback 500mm off its trunk, which is closer than recommended by industry guidelines, and while the garage at no.11 has been stepped slightly away from its trunk, there is no scope for a greater setback in this case given the narrow width of this property and the minimum dimensions required for car parking/manoeuvring.

 

In order to ensure the potential impact on the northern side of its root plate is minimised, and so as to ensure its ongoing future health, conditions in this report require that a high level of care be taken with initial excavations, and that an inspection be performed by Council prior to pouring the slab.

 

Permission has also been granted for the pruning of some medium and lower order branches from its northern aspect both for clearance reasons, as well as to avoid damage to the tree during the course of works, and will also reduce the incidence of branches failure given that its canopy will be directly both garages. 

 

b. Heritage Consultant Comments

 

Introduction

The subject site is on the eastern side of Cook Street near the northern edge of the St Jude’s HCA, and has a rear boundary to Kelso Lane. The HCA lies immediately north of Randwick Junction, and is characterised in the Council’s inventory sheet as including ‘Randwick’s earliest church and civic buildings together with some fine groups of 19th and 20th century houses’. The inventory sheet describes the area as falling into two distinct precincts: the historic St Judes precinct of church and civic buildings, and the residential precinct centred on Alison Park and the intersection of Cook and Frances Streets. The subject site comes within the residential precinct.

 

The inventory sheet points out a magnificent Federation style house on the north western corner of Cook and Frances Streets which is particularly prominent in the Federation housing area and is individually listed as a heritage item in the Randwick LEP.

 

The site is occupied by a single storey terrace house, the centre of a row of three attached houses. The row appears to have been built in the late Victorian or early Federation period around the turn of the 19th century of face brickwork with steep pitched slate roofs decorated with terra cotta finials and ridge cappings and small gablets. The row is unsymmetrical, and each house has slightly different detailing and decorative features. The row makes a valuable contribution to the streetscape of Cook Street and the character and heritage significance of the HCA.

 

Proposal

 

·      Retain front elevation without change.

·      Demolish entire dwelling behind second bedroom

·      Erect new part two/part one storey structure with courtyard behind existing ridgeline

·      Construct new carport at rear of site.

 

Submission

The DA is accompanied by an SEE which indicates that the DA proposals comply with the applicable development standards with the exception of the Gross Floor area, which marginally exceeds the standard, and the landscaped area, which is below the minimum by a small amount.

 

The SEE contains a section dealing with heritage issues which notes that the subject site is within a conservation area (although it does not identify it), but is not listed as an individual heritage item. It briefly describes the appearance of the row from Cook Street, noting that ‘…the collective appearance of the three terraces is visually appealing. Undoubtedly the front façade of the dwelling contributes positively to the character and appearance of the heritage conservation area’. The SEE indicates that the rear of the terraces is much more varied than the front, noting that the subject dwelling is the only one of the three to be unchanged, with the terrace on either side having large modern extensions, resulting in little consistency.

 

In summary, the SEE comments that:

 

·      The proposed development will not affect the appearance of the building as viewed from Cook Street and will safeguard its contribution to the HCA

·      The works proposed to the rear are consistent in terms of building bulk with the adjoining developments

·      The proposed additions will not protrude above the existing ridgeline

·      The proposed carport is consistent with neighbouring garages.

 

The SEE concludes that the proposed development is consistent with Council’s planning objectives for the zone, and consistent in character, bulk, roof form, materials, setbacks and scale with the surrounding development.

 

Assessment

In pure conservation terms it is a pity to see a house which has survived unaltered for 100 years or more being largely demolished and radically altered in this manner. However, it must be recognised that the dwelling has not been identified and listed as a heritage item in its own right, but is of heritage significance simply because of its contribution to the HCA within which it lies. This contribution resides almost entirely in the visual contribution of the dwelling and its two siblings to the streetscape of Cook Street.

 

While the proposed development appears radical in conservation terms, it will retain and preserve the front of the dwelling back as far as the ridgeline of the existing slate roof. It will, therefore, not affect the contribution of the dwelling or its immediate neighbours to the Cook Street streetscape or to the heritage significance of the HCA. It should also be recognised that the other two dwellings making up the immediate row have already been altered and extended as a result of earlier approvals, indicating Council’s policy in respect of such proposals in the vicinity and within the HCA.

 

In these terms, as the SEE notes, the rear of the proposed development will be consistent with the two neighbouring terrace houses making up the row.

 

Conclusions

In my opinion the proposed development will not adversely affect the heritage significance of the St Jude’s Heritage Conservation Area, and will therefore be consistent with the heritage objectives of the Randwick LEP.  The DA indicates an intention to repaint the front façade of the dwelling at some time in the future. Because of this, a condition should be imposed on any consent granted requiring submission of a colour scheme for prior Council approval.

 

8.    Master Planning Requirements

 

No Master Planning Requirements apply to the site.

 

9.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

 

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

The site is zoned Residential 2C under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will not compromise the desirable attributes of the residential area, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

As the development is classified as multi-unit housing, the following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Part 2b – Principal Development Standards

 

a. Clause 20E Landscaped area

Development other than for the purpose of a dwelling house within a 2C zone must provide a minimum of 50% of the total site area as landscaped area.

 

As identified in Section 5 of this report, the proposal provides a total landscaped area of 36% which is less than the minimum requirement by 14%. A SEPP 1 Objection to this standard has been lodged by the applicant for consideration. The SEPP 1 objection to this standard has been assessed and is supported in this application.

b. Clause 20F Floor Space Ratios

The maximum floor space ratios for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house within 2C zones is 0.65:1.

 

The site has an area of 234.1m2 and a maximum gross floor area (GFA) of 152.1m2 is permissible. As identified in Section 5 of this report, the proposal has a total floor space ratio of 0.71:1 (167.2m²) which exceeds the allowable maximum permitted for this site as stipulated in the control. A SEPP 1 Objection to this standard has been lodged by the applicant for consideration. The SEPP 1 assessment process concluded that the variation is not excessive and is supported in this application.

 

c. Clause 20G Building Heights

The maximum height for a building other than a dwelling house within a 2C zone is 12m from any point on ground level with a maximum external wall height of 10m.  The proposal has an overall height of 6.6m and a maximum external wall height of 5.9m; both of these height controls will comply with this standard.

 

Part 3 – Miscellaneous Provisions

 

a.      Clause 22 – Services

The Council may grant consent to the carrying out of development on any land only where it is satisfied that, when relevant to the proposed development, adequate facilities for the supply of water and for the removal or disposal of sewage and drainage are available to that land.

 

The proposal will require additional services. A specific condition is recommended to require the applicant to make all necessary arrangements with the service authority for any adjustments to the utility services connections. The proposal will comply, subject to conditions.

 

Part 4 - Heritage Provisions

The site is occupied by a largely intact single storey Federation dwelling, part of a terrace of three. The site is within the St. Jude’s Conservation Area, and is considered to make a positive contribution to the streetscape.

 

Part 4 of the LEP requires that Council take into consideration the likely effect of a proposed development on the heritage significance of any heritage items, or heritage conservation areas.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Planner for assessment; no objections were raised to proposed development, subject to a condition which requires the submission of a colour schedule to be approved by Council.

 

The proposal is considered to be sympathetic and in keeping with the heritage significance of the conservation area and immediate streetscape. The proposed alterations and additions to the existing building including rear carport structure will be sympathetic to the existing dwelling and will not impact on the amenity of adjoining terraces or streetscape. The proposal will satisfy the requirements of Part 4 - Heritage Provisions of the Randwick LEP (Consolidation).

 

8.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan No. 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. Where non-compliance results, an assessment is made as to whether the proposal satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

The proposed landscaped area and FSR is discussed above in Section 5 and 8. The SEPP 1 objections to the landscaped area and FSR have been assessed and are supported.

 

The height of the dwelling and carport structure comply with the preferred height requirements of the DCP.

 

The northern and southern sides of the dwelling are sited on the common wall boundary with No.’s 7 & 11 Cook Street respectively. It is not considered that the development will have an unreasonable environmental impact on the neighbouring dwelling in terms of privacy, access to daylight or fresh air nor will it impact on the streetscape.  The first floor addition is sited behind the front existing roof form of the terrace and is not significantly noticeable from the streetscape.

 

It is not expected that there will be any unreasonable adverse privacy impacts to the adjoining properties. The new openings to the eastern and western elevations will primarily overlook the rear yard and proposed courtyard area of the subject site and will be screened by the dividing fence. Also, the new window opening on the first floor level is to bedroom, which is considered to be low use room and will overlook the roof area of the adjoining terraces.  Further, it is expected that internal privacy measures will be used within the bedrooms. Moreover, no objections have been received by adjoining owners in relation to privacy loss.

 

The carport has dimensions of 5.7m x 4.16m and is accessed off Kelso Lane. It is not considered that the location of the carport will dominate the existing streetscape or detract from the appearance of the dwelling.  Within this section of the laneway there are a number of other garages that adjoin the site which are of similar scale, width and size without compromising the existing streetscape.  In addition, the sites within this block are relatively long with large rear yards to cater for this type of development and the opposing side of the laneway backs onto the rear of residential flat buildings, which have garages accessed from the rear laneway.  Further, no objections were raised by Council’s Development Engineers in relation to the structure being sited on the rear boundary with a nil setback as there is other like structures in the laneway which are sited up to the rear boundary and there is adequate manoeuvrability for vehicles to appropriately entry and exit the site. (Refer above to Section 6 a. for Development Engineers comments.)

 

A 1.8m high fence is proposed directly adjacent to the proposed carport structure along Kelso Lane.  The fence is constructed of horizontal weatherboard cladding. The height of the fence is 1.8m.  This is considered reasonable and will provide adequate security and privacy between the dwellings and will integrate positively with the street character of the laneway.

 

There will be some additional overshadowing to the rear yard of the subject and adjoining properties; however, it is not considered to be unreasonable as it is largely unavoidable due to the width and orientation of the allotment. 

 

There is no impact to north facing living room windows as the dwelling is attached to the common wall boundary with no. 11 Cook Street.  The proposed development will satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

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 development is consistent with the dominant residential character 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 in close proximity to local services and public transport. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and associated structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

 

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

No submissions have been received for this application.

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

The proposal promotes the objectives of the zone and will not result in any significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

 

Building Sustainability Index: BASIX

SEPP 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.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Multi Unit Housing. The proposal will improve the amenity on the site and is consistent with the relevant purposes and objectives of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).  Subject to conditions it is not considered that the development will give rise to any significant environmental impacts on adjoining properties, or have any unreasonable adverse impacts on the visual amenity and character of the street.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council support the objections under State Environmental Planning No. 1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1988, relating to Clauses 20E – Landscaped area and 20F – Floor space ratios, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the objective of the clauses and will not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding locality and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly; and

 

B.       That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/1037/2010 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including new first floor and carport to rear at No. 9 Cook Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

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

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plan numbered DA04 to DA11 (all Revision A), dated 15/11/2010 and received by Council on the 26 November 2010, and additional plan numbered DA18 (Revision A) and received by council on the 9 March 2011, 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 external colours and finishes of the development shall be in general accordance with the external Materials and Finishes schedule prepared by Angus Mackenzie Architect, plan numbered DA 17, dated November 2010 and received by Council on 25 November 2010.

 

3.       Metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. colourbond) and form part of the colour scheme and external finishes for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

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

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

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

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

v)       Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

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

 

6.       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;

 

7.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $495,646 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $4956.46.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

8.       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.

 

9.       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.

 

10.     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)

 

11.     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:

 

12.     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:

 

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

 

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

 

14.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that all building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

15.     Prior to the commencement of any building works, the following requirements must be complied with:

 

a)    a Construction Certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

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

 

b)    a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) must be appointed to carry out the necessary building inspections and to issue an occupation certificate; and

 

c)    a principal contractor must be appointed for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, an owner-builder permit may be obtained in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and the PCA and Council are to be notified accordingly; and

                                        

d)    the principal contractor must be advised of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority; and

 

e)    at least two days notice must be given to the Council, in writing, prior to commencing building works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

18.     The relevant requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with, in accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Smoke alarms must comply with AS3786 – Smoke alarms and be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.

 

Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be included in the plans/specification for the construction certificate.

 

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

 

22.     Certificate of Adequacy supplied by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure to support the additional storey.

 

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

 

·          Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines & Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECC/EPA Guidelines

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·          Method/s of demolition (including removal of any asbestos)

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

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

·          Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·          Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·          Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

If the work involves asbestos products or materials, a copy of the Demolition Work Plan must also be provided to Council, not less than 2 days before commencing such works.

 

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

 

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

 

·          Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

26.     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.

 

27.     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 a) 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.

 

28.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer, building surveyor or other suitably qualified independent person must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works, in the following cases:

 

·               excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·               new dwellings or additions to dwellings sited up to shared property boundaries (e.g. additions to a semi-detached dwelling or a terraced dwelling),

·               excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or the like which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining  premises,

·               as otherwise may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

The report (including photographs) are required to detail the current condition and status of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon the adjoining premises, which may be affected by the subject works.  A copy of the dilapidation report is to be given to the owners of the premises encompassed in the report/s before commencing any works.

 

29.     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.

 

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

 

Noise and vibration from any rock excavation machinery, pile drivers and all plant and equipment must be minimised, by using appropriate plant and equipment, silencers and the implementation of noise management strategies.

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan, is required to be developed and implemented throughout the works, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of site works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity to the satisfaction of Council. 

 

A copy of the Construction Site Management Plan must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

The sediment and erosion control measures are to be in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to the satisfaction of Council and details are to be provided in the Construction Site Management Plan. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

●     before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

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

 

35.     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 an asphalt/concrete vehicular crossing opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Kelso lane

 

36.     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.

 

37.     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.

 

38.     Any transitional grades required to grade from the carport slab to Council’s issued alignment levels shall not exceed a grade of 1 in 8 (12.5%) and be contained within 1m internally of the property alignment of Kelso Lane. A cross-fall of up to 1 in 20 (5%) across the carspace will also be accepted to assist with this constraint. Plans submitted for the construction certificate must demonstrate compliance with these requirements.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

·              60mm above the edge of the bitumen road at all points opposite the road, along the full site frontage in Kelso Lane.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0881.

 

40.     The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) issued by Council and their relationship to the roadway 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.

 

41.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $135.00 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Service Authority Conditions

 

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

 

42.     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.

 

43.     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.

 

Drainage Conditions

 

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

 

44.     Stormwater runoff from the redeveloped portion of the site shall be discharged either:

 

b)       To the kerb and gutter along the site frontage in Cook Street by gravity ( without the use of a charged system); OR

 

c)       Carport only to Kelso Lane (without the use of a charged system).

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

45.     That part of the nature-strip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works 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 completed at the applicant’s expense prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

Tree Removals

 

46.     Approval is granted for removal of the Mangifera indica (Mango Tree) in the rear yard, along the northern boundary, so as to accommodate the rear extension as shown.

 

Pruning of neighbouring tree

 

47.     Permission is also granted for the selective and minimal pruning of that 2nd order branch at a height of 4 metres, growing to the northeast, as well as any smaller dead, dying or damaged branches in the upper canopy of the Eucalyptus moluccana (Grey Box), which is growing in the rear yard of 11 Cook Street, only where they overhang the dividing fence, into the subject site, and need to be pruned in order to either avoid damage to the tree, or provide the necessary clearance during construction.

 

48.     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.

 

49.     All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level III or V in Arboriculture, and to the requirements of Australian Standard AS 4373-2007 'Pruning of Amenity Trees,’ and NSW Work Cover Code of Practice for the Amenity Tree Industry (1998).

 

Protection of neighbouring tree

 

50.     In order to ensure retention of the Eucalyptus molucanna (Grey Box) located in the rear yard of 11 Cook Street, against the dividing fence, in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show the retention of this tree, with the position and diameter of both its trunk and canopy to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       Initial excavations for footings along the southern edge of the proposed garage, for a distance of 3 metres measured from its southwest corner, must be dug by hand, to a minimum depth of 600mm, without damaging any roots which have a diameter of 50mm or more.

 

c.       Prior to constructing/pouring any footings, the applicant must firstly contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613, to inspect the trench and any roots encountered, where any roots which are given permission to be pruned are to be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

d.       Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed in the rear yard, must be directed along the northern half of the site.

 

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

·          Placement of a waste skip (greater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

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

 

A4      This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards and you are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A5      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                   22 March 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP15/11

 

 

Subject:                  37 Houston Road, Kingsford

Folder No:                   DA/622/2009

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Section 82A Review of determination for refusal of application for alterations and additions to existing multi unit housing, incorporating changes to landscaped areas, building form and setbacks

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                TFAD Pty Ltd

Owner:                         A & E Hatzopoulos

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.       Executive Summary

 

This Section 82A Review application is referred to Council for determination as the original Development Application No. 622/2009 for alterations & additions to existing RFB including new attached double garage fronting Barker Street with new kitchen and terrace for Unit 4 above, new laundries for units 1, 2, 3 on the southern elevation and a new ensuite for Unit 4 was referred to the Planning Committee Meeting held on 13 April 2010, where Council resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons:

 

1.     The proposed landscaped area is 33.9% and does not achieve the minimum prescribed landscaped area of 50% specified in Clause 31 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal does not satisfy the purpose of the landscaped area standard because the lack of setback to Barker Street prevents landscape planting that would soften the impact of the development.

 

2.     The proposed floor space ratio is 1.13:1 and exceeds the maximum prescribed floor space ratio of 0.65:1 specified in Clause 32 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal does not satisfy the purpose of the floor space ratio standard because its massing and scale would compromise the character of the existing building and the locality.

 

3.     The proposed addition has an adverse impact on the character of the street and is therefore inconsistent with the objectives of the 2B Residential Zone specified in Clause 11 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

 

4.     The proposed addition does not satisfy the preferred solutions and objectives for Building Setback specified in Clause 3.3 of Development Control Plan Multi-Unit Housing.

 

5.     The proposed addition does not satisfy the preferred solutions and objectives for solar access specified in Clause 4.4 of Development Control Plan Multi-Unit Housing.

 

To address the reasons for refusal, the applicant has amended the original proposal under DA/622/2009 in this S82A Review application primarily in the following ways:

 

·      increase to the southern setback of the proposed addition to Barker Street by 930mm;

·      provision of 6sqm of landscape area within the new setback

·      reduction in the height of the roof of the proposed addition by 390mm to a maximum building and wall height of 6.61m.

 

The amended Section 82A proposal is considered an improvement over the original application that was refused by Council in that the proposal will now have a lower height and scale that will not be out of character with that of the existing building and the local streetscape and the proposed addition will be enhanced by the provision of a landscaped setback. There will also be minimal overshadowing, privacy and view impacts on adjoining properties as assessed in relevant sections of this report.

 

The S82A Review application was advertised and notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 9 June 2010 to 24 June 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received in response to the notification/objection.

 

The site is zoned Residential 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal is permissible in the zone subject to Council’s consent.

The proposal has an increased landscaped area of 6sqm resulting in a total landscaped area of 140.52sqm or 34.4% (compared with 33.9 % (138sqm) for the refused proposal) which varies from the maximum landscaped area control of 50% (204.2sqm).

 

The proposal has a maximum FSR of 1.03:1 (compared with 1.13:1 for the refused proposal), which varies from the maximum FSR control of 0.65:1 under the RLEP.

 

The proposal has a maximum building and external wall height of 6.61m (than that of the refused proposal which was 7m) which complies with the maximum building and external wall height control of 9.5m and 7m respectively.

 

SEPP No.1 Objections have been submitted in relation to the non-compliances in landscaped area and FSR, which have been assessed and found acceptable as the proposal will be located in a street which has a concentration of residential flat development that are typically 2 to 3 storeys in height focused along Barker Street and Houston Road such that the proposed addition will not be out of character in the streetscape. Specifically, the proposed two–storey addition will be lower in height than the existing residential flat building on-site as well as the existing residential flat developments in the street and locality. Accordingly, the impact of the proposal on the adjoining southern property in terms of overshadowing will be reasonable with no north-facing openings to living areas and north-facing landscaped areas of adjoining dwellings overshadowed by the proposal. Additionally, the proposed addition will not give rise to any privacy and view impacts in the locality surrounding Barker Street. Accordingly, an assessment of the SEPP 1 objections indicate that strict compliance with the controls would be unreasonable and unnecessary as indicated in Section 4 of this report.

 

The proposal generally complies with the preferred solutions/performance requirements of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing (with the exception of the FSR and landscape controls which has been assessed as part of the SEPP 1 Objections).

 

The proposal would be suitable for the site and would have acceptable impacts on the amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

The recommendation is for approval of the Section 82A review proposal subject to conditions.

 

2.       The Proposal

 

The development proposed under this Section 82A Review submission essentially differs from the original refused development in DA 622/2009 in the following respects:

 

·      Provision of a 930mm setback for the proposed new structure from the Barker Street boundary.

·      Increase in landscape area by 6sqm in the setback area

·      Reduction in maximum building height of the proposed new structure by 390mm to a maximum building and wall height of 6.61m

 

The Section 82A proposal essentially is an improvement over that originally proposed. 

 


3.       The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site has an 11m frontage to Houston Road and a 37.345m frontage to Barker Street. It is 408.5m2 and has a 2 storey brick building with 4 residential units. There are 2 storey residential flat buildings to the north across Barker Street and a 3 storey residential flat building to the south. Immediately to the west is open public open space comprising Council’s Kensington plant nursery and the wider Kensington Park. The land is zoned residential 2B and the proposal is permissible with consent. Figure 2 shows an aerial photograph of the site.

 

Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph of the site

 

Figure 1 Barker Street elevation of the existing residential flat building on the subject site

Figure 2 View towards the end of Barker Street looking west.

 

4.       State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 Objections

 

Clause 20F:  Floor space ratios

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

 

Pursuant to Clause 20F 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. The proposal results in an FSR of 1.03:1 (421.3sqm) which exceeds the development standard by 0.38:1 or approximately 155.7sqm GFA of which only 21.5sqm relates to the proposed addition.

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

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

 

The applicant has submitted the following arguments in support of the SEPP1 Objection:

 

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

 

·      The excess floor area generated by the proposed addition amounts to  21.5sqm which will be added to a pre-existing variation to the standard in the form of the existing residential flat building which has a total floor area of 399.8sqm (ie., an existing FSR of 0.99:1).

·      The proposed addition will have a maximum building and wall height of 6.61m that will comply with the maximum 9.5m building and 7m wall height controls under the Randwick LEP 1998.

·      The addition will be confined to the eastern end of the existing building with the garage to be constructed in matching brick scheme, and the upper floor addition to be constructed in light weight framing and cladding with a heritage-style green colour scheme, to respect the existing building whilst blending into the existing predominant pre-war WWII residential flats streetscape. The applicant’s photomontage of the Section 82A proposal shown below indicates that the proposed addition will not be unreasonably dominant nor visually intrusive in the Barker Street streetscape. A condition requiring additional treatment to the facade of the addition including the increase in the window sill height to match existing windows and provision of vertical nibs along the garage façade will be applied to further enhance the presentation of the addition in the streetscape. Additionally, the proposed addition will have no direct impact on the streetscape along Houston Road as it will not be directly visible from Houston Road.

 

Photomontage of proposed addition viewed from Barker Street.

 

·      The proposed development will be in keeping with the height and scale of existing residential flat building (being lower than the eaves of this building) as well as that of existing multi-unit housing development in nearby and adjoining sites. Furthermore, there are existing residential flat building on the opposite side of Barker Street that have later garage additions such that the proposed addition will not be unique or out of character in the streetscape.  

 

Existing RFB across Barker Street with later garage addition.

 

·      The proposal will be consistent with the objectives of the Residential 2B zone in which the site is located as primarily it will contribute towards the variety of housing types in the area by the provision of a larger unit (3 bedroom unit) as opposed to the predominant market trend for smaller one to two bedroom units.

·      The proposal will not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas in terms of privacy, solar access, views and bulk and scale impacts as indicated in relevant assessment sections of this report.

 

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

 

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 FSR control is consistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and development of the subject land because

 

·      it will have a height, bulk and scale that will consistent with other development in the street and will be compliant with the maximum building height control in the Randwick LEP

 

·      it will create additional floor area that will not negatively impact upon the amenity of adjoining and surrounding uses in terms of privacy, solar access, views and visual bulk and scale impacts.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not be necessary, in this case, for maintaining the low to medium density housing forms in the locality, including dwelling houses and 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.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not 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:

Compliance would, in this case, be unreasonable to achieve the underlying objective of the standard.

 

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 maximum FSR development standard has not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Clause 20E        Landscaped Areas

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

 

Pursuant to Clause 20E of RLEP 1998, the minimum landscaped area for development, other than a dwelling house, within Zone No 2B is 50 % of the total site area. The proposal has a minimum landscaped area of 34.4%  or 140.52sqm (of which 6sqm relates to the proposal) compared with the required 204.2sqm.

 

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 landscape standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

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

 

The applicant has submitted the following arguments in support of the SEPP1 Objection:

 

 

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

 

·      The provision of 6sqm landscaped area within the new streetfront setback, whilst quantitatively small in amount, provides a significant visual relief and softening impact on the proposed addition as viewed from Barker Street.

 

·      Landscaping will be well integrated as part of the proposed street setback which will help to ‘soften’ the appearance of both the addition and the overall development from the street in accordance with the objectives of the landscaping standards. A condition will be applied to further enhance the quality of this landscape area by requiring the installation of a planter box at the western-most end of the landscape strip which given its north orientation will provide for reasonable medium size plantings.

 

·      The proposal provides for an enhanced/refurbished rear landscaped common area through the removal of the existing external laundry room and associated concrete paving (see photo below) and replaced with permeable landscaped area, all of which adds to the amenity of the units.

 

Existing external laundry room and associated concrete paving

in the rear yard of the subject site

 

·      The new landscape setback will operate together with the reduced compliant height of the addition to enhance the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area so that the objectives of clause 20E will be met by the development despite non-compliance the statutory standard.

 

·      the amount of landscaping provided at the site is commensurate with, if not greater than, that provided in other multi-unit housing developments in the immediate locality, including No. 35 Houston Road and 3 Barker Street, in the immediate vicinity.

 

In conclusion, the proposal has adequately addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standard and the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The SEPP 1 objection has been provided that appropriately justifies that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

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 minimum landscape area control is consistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and development of the subject land because

 

·      it will result in a height, bulk and scale that will consistent with other development in the street and will be compliant with the maximum building height control in the Randwick LEP

·      it will create additional external wall height that will not negatively impact upon the amenity of adjoining and surrounding uses in terms of privacy, solar access, views and visual bulk and scale impacts.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not be necessary, in this case, for maintaining the low to medium density housing forms in the locality, including dwelling houses and 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.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

Compliance would, in this case, be unreasonable as the underlying objectives of the standard is achieved.

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 standard has not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2B zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low to medium density residential development. 

 

5.       Site History

 

The original DA relating to this Section 82A review (DA/622/2009) for alterations and additions to an existing multi-unit housing including new attached double garage fronting Barker Street with new kitchen and terrace for Unit 4 above, new laundries for units 1,2,3 on the southern elevation and a new ensuite for Unit 4 was refused on 13 April 2010.

 

6.       Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified between 9 June 2010 to 20 June 2010 in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. No submissions were received in response to the notification process.

 

7.       Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Development Engineer

 “A Section 82A Review application has been received for the refusal of DA/622/2009 at the above site.

 

Original Consent -

 

Alterations & additions to existing multi-unit housing including new attached double garage fronting Barker St with new kitchen and terrace for Unit 4 above, new laundries for units 1,2,3 on the southern elevation and a new ensuite for Unit 4.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Amended architectural plans by TFAD Pty Ltd dated 17th May 2010;

·      Details of Amendments cover letter  by TFAD Pty Ltd dated 17th May 2010

 

Garage Comments

Of interest to Development Engineering in the amended design is the new setback of the proposed garage off Houston Road. The proposed 1.0m setback is supported as it allows for room to grade down to the footpath level from the garage floor level and improves pedestrian safety by increasing sightlines.

In the original design a zero setback was proposed which meant that the driveway grading had to be done internally within the garage with the first 1.0 indicated for this purpose. This has now been effectively shifted externally to the garage.

 

To allow for the 1.0m setback the garage has been shortened to 5.4m internal length. This length is acceptable as it still complies with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004.

 

The amended garage represents an improvement on the original design and there is no objection from Development Engineering. The only amendment to the engineering conditions contained in previous memo from Development Engineering dated 26th October 2009 is the amendment of Condition 4 & 5 relating to the alignment levels. Condition 4 & 5 shall be amended as follows.

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

 

7.2    Health Building and Regulatory Services

The Manager, Health Building and Regulatory Services raises no objections to the application subject to appropriate building and health/environmental conditions.

 

8.       Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

The Section 82A Review application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The subject 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

Required

S 82A Proposal

Compliance

20E Landscaped area

(2) minimum 50% of site area

34.4% of site area

No  SEPP 1 Objection submitted

(3) landscaped areas over podiums or basements not to exceed 50% of required provision

No basement proposed

Not applicable

32 FSR

(1) 0.65:1 (265.5m2 GFA)

1.03:1 (421.3 m2)

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

33 Building heights

(2) maximum height 9.5m

Max6.61m

Yes

(4) maximum external wall height 7m

Max 6.61m

Yes

 

9.       Policy Controls

 

The following Council policy controls are applicable to the proposed development:

 

DCP – Multi-unit Housing

DCP – Parking

 

The relevant provisions of these DCPs have been assessed in Section 10 of this report.

 

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.

 

10.1           Statutory Controls – S79C(1)(a)

 

10.1.1        EP&A Act 1979 - Section 82A Review

 

Section 82A of the Act enables an applicant to request a review of Council’s decision to refuse a Development Application, or a condition(s) imposed in a development consent granted by Council. In the event that the applicant has made amendments to the development proposal, Council must be satisfied that the development, as amended, is substantially the same as that originally described in the application.

 

The current Section 82A Review application has reduced the height of, and provided a setback and landscaping for, the proposed addition. It is considered that the nature and form of the amended proposal remain substantially the same as that described in the original application.

 

In this Section 82A application, the applicant has responded to each reason for refusal of the original DA and these are listed below (followed by Council’s assessment wherever appropriate):

 

1.      The proposed landscaped area is 33.9% and does not achieve the minimum prescribed landscaped area of 50% specified in Clause 31 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal does not satisfy the purpose of the landscaped area standard because the lack of setback to Barker Street prevents landscape planting that would soften the impact of the development.

 

Applicant’s response:

 

 

Council comments: The 930mm setback to Barker Street has resulted in an additional 6sqm soft landscaping, all of which is deep soil at the front of the garage structure. The addition of this 6sqm landscaped area has increased the proportion of landscape area from 33.9% to 34.4%. As indicated in the assessment of the SEPP 1 Objection, while this additional landscape area is small in area, it can provide for a softening of the proposed garages and the addition above when consideration is given to the concomitant effect of the setback of the garage from street and the lowering of the proposed first floor extension by 390mm.  Accordingly, the SEPP 1 Objection for the variation to the landscaping standard has been assessed in Section 4 above and found to be well founded.

 

2.      The proposed floor space ratio is 1.13:1 and exceeds the maximum prescribed floor space ratio of 0.65:1 specified in Clause 32 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal does not satisfy the purpose of the floor space ratio standard because its massing and scale would compromise the character of the existing building and the locality.

 

Applicant’s response:

 

Council comments: The amended proposal now has an FSR of 1.03:1, a large part of which comprises the existing residential flat building which has an FSR of 0.99:1.  The excess floor area generated by the proposed addition amounts to 21.5sqm which is relatively minor. The assessment of the SEPP 1 Objection in Section 4 above indicates that the reduction in overall height of the proposal by 390mm to a maximum height of 6.61m, and the provision of a 930mm setback assist in mitigating any visual bulk and scale. Furthermore, the proposed development will be in keeping with the height and scale of the existing residential flat building (being lower than the eaves of this building) as well as that of existing multi-unit housing development in nearby and adjoining sites. The additional landscaped area at the front of the addition  will soften the impact of the proposed addition through the provision of soft landscaping at the front (which will be augmented by the requirement for a planter box in the far western section of the proposed landscaped area).Accordingly, the assessment in Section 4 above finds that the SEPP 1 Objection to the FSR standard is well founded and compliance with the standard is not reasonable and necessary in this case.

 

3.      The proposed addition has an adverse impact on the character of the street and is therefore inconsistent with the objectives of the 2B Residential Zone specified in Clause 11 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

 

Applicant’s response:

 

Council comments: The assessment of the proposal against the objectives of the Residential 2B zone specified in Clause 11 of the RLEP is assessed in Sections 10.1.3.1 and 10.1.3.2 below. Specifically, the provision of a 930mm setback to Barker Street together with a reduction in the roof height by 390mm will assist in alleviating any impact of the proposed addition on Houston Road. It should be noted that the proposal is located in a street which has a dense concentration of residential flat development that are typically 2 to 3 storeys in height such that the proposed addition, especially given its additional setback and reduced height, will not be out of character in the streetscape. In view of this, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the zone.

 

4.      The proposed addition does not satisfy the preferred solutions and objectives for Building Setback specified in Clause 3.3 of Development Control Plan Multi-Unit Housing.

 

Applicant’s response:

 

 

Council’s comment: Clause 3.3 of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing has the following setback controls:

 

Performance Requirement 1:  Front boundary setbacks are to be consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

The proposed addition will have a secondary street front setback of 930mm from Barker Street which will be consistent with the existing setback of the existing residential flat building along this street (minimum 650 mm) as well as that of existing residential flat buildings on the opposite side of Barker Street.

 

Preferred Solution S2: requires that multi-unit developments in Zone 2B to be:

 

·      No part closer than 2.5 metres.

·      Minimum average setback 4 metres.

·      Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

·      Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

While the existing residential flat building has an existing setback of approximately 1.3 m from the southern side boundary, the proposed addition will have a side setback of 4.1m from the southern side boundary which accords with the minimum setback preferred solution of 3.5m. However, the proposed addition falls slightly short of the 5m average setback requirements.  Notwithstanding this, it will achieve the performance requirements of the control in that:

 

·    Solar access is maintained to the adjoining southern property.

·    Privacy is adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings (subject to a condition requiring a high sill southern windows)

·    Streetscape amenity will be maintained especially given the setback of the proposal from Barker Street and lowering of the roof of the proposed addition by 390mm such the proposed addition will not be visually intrusive nor overbearing in the streetscape. 

 

The proposed addition will have a maximum length of 7m on the southern side which is less than preferred solution of max 10m without articulation and therefore satisfies this control. Additionally, the proposed addition will have no steps along the south elevation.

 

Preferred Solution S3: requires that multi-unit developments in Zone 2B to have:

 

·      Minimum average setback 8 metres.

·      No part closer than 6 metres.

·      Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

The proposed addition will have a nil setback to the rear western boundary which does not satisfy the preferred solution. However, it will achieve the performance requirements of the control in that:

 

·    Solar access is maintained to the adjoining southern properties.

·    Privacy is adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings (subject to a condition requiring a high sill southern windows and privacy screens)

·    Streetscape amenity will be maintained as the proposed addition will be setback from Barker Street and will be suitable treated externally to match the existing building and complement existing older style residential flat development in   Barker Street and Houston Road. With the reduction in height of the proposed addition by 390mm, the proposal will not be visually intrusive nor overbearing in the streetscape. 

 

5.      The proposed addition does not satisfy the preferred solutions and objectives for solar access specified in Clause 4.4 of Development Control Plan Multi-Unit Housing.

 


Applicant’s response:

 

Council’s comment: Clause 4.4 of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing has the following solar access controls:

 

Performance Requirement P1.2:  Solar access to existing solar collectors maintained between 9am and 3pm.

 

The proposal will not impact upon any solar collectors on any adjoining properties.

 

Performance Requirement 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.

 

A site inspection shows that the dwelling units in the existing residential flat building in the adjoining southern property have no living area openings facing north.

 

Blank north-facing wall of lower dwelling unit in the adjoining southern property at No 39-41 Houston Road.  The two windows further in the background are to bedrooms that will be partially overshadowed between 2:00pm and 3:00pm in winter.

 

As such no overshadowing of north-facing living room windows will occur. The living areas of dwelling units in the adjoining residential flat building instead face west such that they will not be overshadowed by the proposed addition at all. The applicant’s shadow diagrams for the Section 82A proposal indicates that the only overshadowing that will occur onto the adjoining southern property will fall on the blank north-facing ground floor wall at 12 mid-day and partially on the two bedroom windows at 2:00pm to 3:00pm. Accordingly, the Section 82 proposal satisfies Performance Requirement P1.2 of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing.

 

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.

 

A site inspection shows that the ground floor dwelling unit in the adjoining southern property has a private open space orientated west. The applicant’s shadow diagrams for the Section 82A proposal indicates that the proposal will only overshadow this private open space during the winter morning with this area being free of overshadowing from the proposed development from 11:00 am onwards. Accordingly, the Section 82 proposal satisfies Performance Requirement P1.3 of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing.

 

10.1.3        Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

10.1.3.1    Clause 9 - Objectives

Clause 9 of RLEP 1998 requires Council to consider the aims of the LEP and Zone objectives prior to determining any DA on land to which the RLEP applies. The proposed addition will not compromise the aims of the LEP in relation to aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality and contribute to the variety of housing types that does not compromise the amenity of the residential area, consistent with the zone objectives.

 

10.1.3.2    Clause 11 – Zone Residential 2B

The objectives of Zone No 2B are:

 

(a)    to provide for a medium density residential environment; and

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

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

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

(e)    to encourage housing affordability; and

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

 

The proposal is considered to satisfy the objectives of the zone, particularly objectives (a) (b) (c) and (e). The proposal essentially comprises a small upper floor addition above a garage and therefore would not constitute an overdevelopment of the site. Rather, it will maintain the medium density character of the locality and the open character of the adjoining Kensington Park. The proposal will contribute further to the mix of apartments by providing for a 3 bedroom unit in the existing building as per objectives (a) and (e). The proposed addition will have minimal impacts on the amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties (as assessed in Section 10.3.2.2 of this report) in line with objectives (b) and (c).

 

The amended proposal, in fact, proposes changes to address the reasons for refusal of the original DA which, as assessed in Section 10.1 above, all result in an improvement in the overall proposal. In particular, the amended proposal has provided a reduction in height of the proposed addition and, as such, now has reduced its overall visual bulk and scale and improved amenity impacts to adjoining properties in terms of visual impact. In doing so, the amended proposal has assisted in drawing the proposed development even closer to the objectives (a), (b), (c) and (e) of the Residential 2B zone and will not detract from the character of the area.

 

10.1.4        State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

The application was lodged under the former SEPP 10 (Retention of low cost rental accommodation) but must be considered under the current SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 because of the transitional provisions in clause 54(2).

 

The applicant proposes to off-set the potential loss of low-rental accommodation with rental cap of $400 per week for 2 years on the 3 rented units. The applicant says the units are presently let for $360/$370 per week, and once renovated would normally fetch between $425 and $450 per week. The rent-cap on 3 units would equate to a discount of between $7800 and $15600 over 2 years (and perhaps up to $20,000 depending on growth in rental prices in that time).

 

The alternative cash contribution to an affordable housing fund that could be levied by Council (if the units were proposed for strata-subdivision) would be $34,940 when calculated according to the formula in the SEPP.

 

To match the value of the cash contribution, the applicant would need to propose a rent cap set at $81.63 per week below the median rental for Randwick LGA for a period of 3 years. The discount over 3 years would be $35,264. It needs to be slightly more than the up-front amount because of the time-value of money.

 

The median rental for the Randwick LGA is presently $450 per week so the rent cap of $81.63 means that the current rents could be maintained and only increased as median rental increases. If approval is granted, a condition will be applied to cap the rents of Units 1-3 to achieve the provisions of the SEPP.

 

10.2  Policy Controls– Section 79C(1)(a)

 

10.2.1                 DCP – 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.

 

Adequate site analysis of the nature and layout of developments on the adjoining sites, and sufficient detail of the potential impacts on the neighbouring properties has been undertaken.

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.

Extensive street frontages to Houston Road (10.9m) and Barker Street (37.3m) which, combined with the regular shape and orientation of the subject site, will adequately accommodate the proposed addition.

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

Not applicable.

Height

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

 

The section 82A proposal ha been reduced in height by 390mm and complies with the maximum building and external wall height standard of the Randwick LEP.  Furthermore, the location and orientation of the proposed building will not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties. Accordingly, the reasons for refusal of the original DA relating to unsatisfactory visual bulk and scale and overshadowing have now been adequately addressed.

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 bulk of the building will be located at the western end of the existing RFB with a reduced height of 6.61m and setback of 930mm from the streetfront assists in mitigating any potential impact of visual bulk and scale.

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

Adjoining dwelling is setback min 3.5m

 

Secondary street front setback of 930mm to Barker Street consistent with the

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

 

 

 

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.

S2  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 5 metres.

No part closer than 3.5 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

 

existing setback of the existing residential flat building along this street as well as that of existing residential flat buildings on the opposite side of Barker Street.

Complies.

 

While the existing residential flat building has an existing setback of approximately 1.3 m from the southern side boundary, the proposed addition will have a side setback of 4.1m from the southern side boundary which accords with the minimum setback preferred solution of 2.5m. However, the proposed addition falls slightly short of the 5m average setback requirements.  Notwithstanding this, it will achieve the performance requirements of the control in that :

 

·    Solar access is maintained to the adjoining southern property.

 

·    Privacy is adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings (subject to a condition requiring a high sill southern windows)

 

·    Streetscape amenity will be maintained especially given the setback of the proposal from Barker Street and lowering of the roof of the proposed addition by 390mm such the proposed addition will not be visually intrusive nor overbearing in the streetscape. 

 

 

 

 

The proposed addition will have a maximum length of 7m on the southern side which is less than preferred solution of max 10m without articulation and therefore satisfies this control. Additionally, the proposed addition will have no steps along the south elevation.

 

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.

S3  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 8 metres.

No part closer than 6 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

 

The proposed addition will have a nil setback to the rear western boundary which does not satisfy the preferred solution. However, it will , it achieve the performance requirements of the control in that :

 

·    Solar access is maintained to the adjoining southern properties.

 

·    Privacy is adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings (subject to a condition requiring a high sill southern windows)

 

·    Streetscape amenity will be maintained especially given that the rear of eth subject site adjoins an existing sub-station and the setback of the proposal from Barker Street and lowering of the roof of the proposed addition by 390mm such the proposed addition will not be visually intrusive nor overbearing in the streetscape. 

 

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.

N.A. 

Density

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

 

The bulk and scale of the proposed addition when viewed from adjoining public spaces, streetscape and private properties will not overbearing (given its setback and reduced height) such that the overall building will be visually compatible with RFBs in adjoining and surrounding properties. The proposal will result in reasonable shadow impacts on the adjoining property to the south. The proposed development density is not considered to be excessive.

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.

 

Not applicable.

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.

With the removal of the external laundry room the refurbished landscape area at the rear achieve the preferred solution.

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

 

 

No change.

P3  Private Open Space

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

 

The refurbished rear yard will be semi-enclosed by the existing RFB on site while the adjoining southern RFB at No 39-41 Houston Road do no have any living room opening looking into this rear yard. Complies.

 

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

 

Not applicable.

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.

The proposed addition will create a private open space in the form of the terrace adjoining new kitchen /dining room of Unit 4 and therefore accords with this control. The remainder of the dwelling units are located in the existing RFB which, being and older style residential building, does not include private terraces or balconies for individual units.   

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 only areas of potential overlooking occur from the south-facing window to the new kitchen/dining area and southern edge of the proposed terrace which will be required to be addressed by way of high sill windows and privacy screens respectively. Apart from this the proposed addition does not give rise to overlooking into adjoining dwellings.

 

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

 

Addressed by standard condition..

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

Addressed by condition.

 

View Sharing

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

 

 

The proposal will not obstruct any significant view corridors from any public or private domain.

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 assessments below.

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

 

Refer to assessment below.

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.

 

Refer to assessment below.

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.

 

Refer to assessment below.

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 “BASIX”.

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 roof design allows the installation of solar panels in the future.

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

The proposed addition will have a window opening to Barker Street . No change for the existing RFB.

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

N.A.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

N.A. 

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

N.A.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

No change.

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

No change.

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

 

Addressed 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 addition provides for an additional carparking space for unit 4 which, being a three bedroom unit, complies. The existing RFB does not provide carparking for the other existing units.

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

 

The proposed garage will be setback from Barker Street which will be installed with a landscape area to soften the new carparking structure and the habitable area above. 

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.

 

N.A. 

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

The new driveway leads directly from garage into Barker Street .

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

Vehicular access can achieve the preferred solution.

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

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

N o long driveway access.

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.

Driveway will satisfy the landscape features of the performance requirement.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

Matching brickwork for the garage and lightweight frame and cladding structure for the upper floor with sympathetic colour is proposed and a condition to reinforce this will be applied.

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

 

Driveway gradients are safe and acceptable. 

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.

N.A. as no change internally to existing units apart from Unit 4 which will have adequate internal storage areas.

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.

Addressed by condition.

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.

 

 

N.A. 

Utilities/Site Facilities

P1 Mailboxes provided in accordance with Australia Post.

 

Addressed by condition.

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

 

Addressed by condition.

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

 

Addressed by condition.

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

 

Addressed by condition.

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

 

Addressed by condition.

P6 Telephone lines provided in accordance with the service provider.

 

Addressed by condition.

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

 

 

Complies.

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.

 

No change.

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.

No change.

 

10.2.2                 Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP) Parking

The DCP specifies the following parking rates for multi-unit housing developments:

·      1.2 spaces / 2-bedroom dwelling: 13 x 1.2 = 15.6

·      1 space / 4 dwellings or part thereof for visitors: 13 / 4 = 3.25

·      1 bicycle space / 3 units, plus 1 visitor / 10 units: 5.63

 

The existing development only provides for one carparking space to Unit 4 which will be increased to two spaces so that the proposed alterations and additions to this unit complies with the DCP. However, the remaining dwelling units in the existing RFB do not have carparking given the age of the building and constraints of the site. As no changes are proposed to these other units, the provisions of the carparking DCP do not apply.

 

10.2.2        Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

As, the cost of development is less than $100,000 (calculated at $75,000), no monetary levy under the provisions of Section 94A is applicable.

 

10.3         Likely impact of the development - S79C(1)(b)

 

10.3.1     Natural Environmental Impacts

The subject site is located in an existing built-up area comprising a mix of residential developments south of King Street and institutional and transport uses north of King Street and, as such, there are no threatened species, populations or ecological communities or habitats that would be affected by the proposed development within, or in the vicinity of, the development site.

 

10.3.2     Built Environmental Impacts

 

10.3.2.1  Urban Design

The proposed addition will be treated externally to match the existing RFB on-site and in the locality. Specifically, the garage will be constructed in matching brick scheme, and the upper floor addition will be constructed in light weight framing and cladding with a heritage-type green colour scheme, to respect the existing building whilst blending into the existing predominant pre-war WWII residential flats streetscape.

 

A condition requiring additional treatment to the facade of the addition including the increase in the window sill height to match existing windows and provision of vertical nibs along the garage façade will be applied to further enhance the presentation of the addition in the streetscape.

 

10.3.2.2    Sunlight, Privacy and Views

 

10.3.2.2.1   Sunlight

Shadow diagrams have been provided for the amended proposal which indicate that at 9.00 am in the winter solstice, overshadowing will occur predominantly upon the  adjoining western property comprising Council’s Community Plant Nursery. By 12 noon the lower blank wall north-facing wall of the RFB at No 39-41 Houston Road will be overshadowed by the proposed addition (that is, no windows will be affected by overshadowing at mid-day). By 3.00 pm, the shadows will shift to the eastern part of the wall of the adjoining southern RFB but with some minor overshadowing of the  existing window openings to bedrooms on this southern facade.

 

A site inspection shows that the ground floor dwelling unit in the adjoining southern property has a private open space orientated west. The applicant’s shadow diagrams for the Section 82A proposal indicates that the proposal will overshadow the ground level private open space of the adjoining southern unit during the winter morning with this area being free of overshadowing from the proposed development from 11:00 am onwards.

 

Overshadowing of the refurbished rear yard of the proposed development will occur during the winter morning and midday. However, solar access is available to this rear yard in the winter afternoon. A condition will be applied requiring the relocation of the clothes line to the south-western corner of the subject site to maximise solar access times for clothes drying.

 

Overall the proposal’s shadow impact on adjoining properties is considered to be reasonable and acceptable in context of the surrounding area and satisfies the solar access Performance Requirement of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing.

 

10.3.2.2.2 Privacy

The adjoining southern property at No. 39-41 Houston Road potentially could be overlooked from the south-facing window of the proposed kitchen / dining room and the southern edge of the proposed terrace. This will be addressed by way of condition requiring high sill windows and privacy screens to be installed in the proposal. No privacy issues arise to the west and north as the proposal is bounded by Council’s existing plant nursery and Barker Street respectively.

 

Overall, the proposal will be acceptable in terms of privacy subject to appropriate mitigating measures. 

 

10.3.2.2.3 Loss of views

There are no iconic or significant views that will be obstructed by the proposed development given the relatively flat topography of the site and the immediate surrounding area. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to views and outlook.

 

10.3.3           Ecologically Sustainable Development

The proposal will be served by public buses along Anzac Parade linking the subject site to the CBD, Railway Square, and locally to Coogee and Randwick Junction, as well as institutional uses in the LGA. The proposal would assist in encouraging the use of public transport in line with ESD principles.

 

The applicant has provided a BASIX assessment of the proposal in accordance with BASIX modelling requirements which indicates compliance with the targets for multi-unit housing for water saving, energy consumption and Thermal comfort. Specifically, the proposal achieves good cross-ventilation and dual aspects for all dwelling units; and will include appropriate energy efficiency and water conservation measures.

 

Overall, the amended proposal is considered acceptable in relation to Ecologically Sustainable Development issues.

 

10.4     Suitability of the site – S79C(1)(c) 

 

The subject site is zoned Residential 2B in which the proposal is permissible. The subject site is therefore suitable for the proposed alterations and additions without compromising the existing and desired future character of the locality. The site is well located in relation to the Kingsford and Kensington town centres. Public bus services are also available in the immediate locality.

 

10.5     Any submissions made – S79C(1)(d)

The Section 82A application was notified and advertised between 9 June 2010 to 24 June 2010 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan (DCP) – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. No submissions were received in response to the notification/objection.

 

10.6     The public interest – S79C(1)(e)

The proposed development will be in the public interest as it will result in an appropriate use that will be compatible in the locality in terms of land-use, scale, design and amenity as assessed in Sections 5.1, 10.3.2.1 and 10.3.2.2 of this report.

 

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 height and form of the Section 82A proposal in its amended form is appropriate on the site given the existing predominantly medium to high density residential, character of the locality. In particular, the reduction in the building height of the proposal by 390mm and provision of a setback of 930mm from Barker Street effectively reduces the visual bulk and scale of the overall proposal and softens the additional builtform in the streetscape. Further, the proposal will not have a significant impact on surrounding properties in terms of overshadowing, overlooking and views.

 

The proposal does not comply with the maximum FSR and landscape standard contained in the RLEP. SEPP No.1 objections have been submitted in relation to these breaches which have been considered to be well founded in the circumstances for the reasons detailed in Section 4 above.

 

The proposal complies with the relevant preferred solutions and performance requirements in the DCP - Multi-unit Housing. It is considered that the scale and form of the proposed development in its amended form in the Section 82A application is appropriate on the site. The proposal will have a reasonable impact on surrounding properties and the redevelopment of the site will not exacerbate impacts.

 

The recommendation is for approval of the application subject to conditions.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council’s original determination of Development Application No. 622/2009 dated 13 April 2010 for alterations & additions to existing RFB including new attached double garage fronting Barker Street with new kitchen and terrace for Unit 4 above, new laundries for units 1,2,3 on the southern elevation and a new ensuite for Unit 4, at 37 Houston Road, Kingsford be rescinded.

 

B.     That Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No DA/622/2009 for alterations & additions to existing RFB including new attached double garage fronting Barker Street with new kitchen and terrace for Unit 4 above, new laundries for units 1,2,3 on the southern elevation and a new ensuite for Unit 4, at 37 Houston Road, Kingsford, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered S82A-01 and S82A-02, all Issue A, and dated 17/05/2010 and received by Council on 4 June 2010,  the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

The following 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 compatible with the adjacent development to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

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

 

3.       The following amendments to the proposal shall be undertaken:

 

·   Provision of a planter box at the north-western corner of the subject site  with details of appropriate planting to match the proposed planting in front of the existing building.

·   Increase in sill heights for the north-facing windows of the proposed addition to match sill heights of the windows of the existing building.

·   Provision of vertical nibs in the façade of the proposed garage to match the nibs in the façade of the existing building.

·   Installation of a high sill window in the south-facing opening of the proposed kitchen/dining room.

·   Provision of a continuous 1.8m high privacy screens along the length of the southern edge of the proposed terrace measured from the proposed floor level of the terrace.    

·   Relocation of the clothes line/drying court to the south-western corner of the subject site.

 

Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

5.       The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent. 

 

6.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed in accordance with AS4282 – 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.

 

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

 

8.       All plumbing and drainage pipes, other than rainwater heads, gutters and downpipes, must be concealed within the building.

 

9.       The enclosure of balconies is prohibited by this consent.

 

10.     No cooking facilities or sanitary fittings other than those indicated on the approved plans are to be installed in the premises without the prior written consent of the Council.

 

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

 

12.     Internal or external clothes drying facilities are to be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Should external clothes drying facilities be provided, the facilities must be adequately screened by vegetation and details are to be incorporated into the landscaping plans, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

13.     Dwelling Units 1 to 3 in the existing residential flat building shall be rented at $81.63 per week below the median rental for Randwick LGA for a period of 3 years upon obtaining an occupation certificate for works under this consent. Each tenant (including any new tenant) is to be notified of this condition.

 

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

 

14.     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, shall be:

 

§ Eastern side of driveway = RL 21.43 (AHD).

§ Western side of driveway = RL 21.36 (AHD)

 

15.     The design alignment levels (concrete/paved/tiled level) 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.

 

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

 

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

 

17.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

21.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $121(inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

22.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

24.     Stormwater runoff from the redeveloped portion of the site shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter in Barker Street by gravity (without the use of a charged system).

 

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

 

25.     That part of the nature-strip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works 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.

 

26.     Landscaping at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Concept Landscape Plan by TFAD Pty Ltd, issue A, dated 04.09.09, subject to the following additional requirements being included on an amended plan, which must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the issue of a construction certificate (with a copy of the approved plan to be forwarded to Council if not the PCA, prior to the commencement of works):

 

a)    While a native species, the selection of 3 Melaleuca armillaris (Bracelet Honey Myrtles) along the length of the Barker Street frontage is not supported as this species is not normally associated with high quality residential landscaping, and should be replaced with an alternative native tree from the following short list:

 

Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia), Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), Eleaocarpus reticulatus (Blueberry Ash), Syzygium paniculatum (Magenta Lilly Pilly), Syzygium leuhmannii (Small Leafed Lilly Pilly). 

 

b)    Incorporation of additional accent/feature species and/or ornamental shrubs to those mass planted areas of Isolepis around the perimeter of the site so as to provide increased visual appeal, and could include Gymea Lillies or Grevillea and Bottlebrush cultivars or similar;

 

c)    Confirm that a 50-75mm layer of woodchip mulch will be provided and maintained throughout all garden areas;

 

d)    Inclusion of edging along the eastern boundary of the site in order to separate the grass area shown as being retained and the proposed new garden/planting.

 

Tree Protection Measures

 

27.     In order to ensure retention of the two small, recently planted Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush’s) on the Houston Road frontage, as well as the larger, more established Callistemon salignus (White Bottlebrush) on the Barker Street nature strip in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar that need to be installed over public property, must be done so along either the sites side boundaries; or, against either side of the vehicle crossing, so as to minimise root damage.

 

c.       Each of these three street trees must be physically protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing, which shall be located a minimum distance of 1.5 metres off their trunks, matching up with the back of the kerb and pedestrian footpath on both frontages, in order to completely enclose each of them for the duration of works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

g.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $2,000.00 (including GST) shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and ultimately, preservation of these street trees.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Regulatory

 

28.     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.

 

29.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

31.     Prior to the commencement of any building or fire safety works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:-

 

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

 

ii)       appoint a principal contractor for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, obtain an owner-builder permit in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing, and

                                        

iii)       unless the person having the benefit of the consent is the principal contractor (i.e. owner-builder), notify the principal contractor of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority, and

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

33.     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”.

 

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

 

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

 

35.     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 and must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

Structural adequacy

 

39.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to issuing an occupation certificate which certifies that the structural adequacy of the building and the balustrading to the external terrace and internal stairway.

 

Construction site management

 

40.     Demolition work and the removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials 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

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

·           WorkCover NSW Codes of Practice and Guidelines

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

 

41.     In accordance with Council’s Asbestos Policy, the following requirements are to be satisfied if any materials containing asbestos are present in the building:

 

a)     Compliance with 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 Demolition Work Plan must be developed and implemented in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures.

 

c)     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.

 

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.

 

e)     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.

 

f)      On demolition 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.

 

g)     A 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 upon completion of the works (prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued), which confirms that 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.

 

42.     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.

 

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

 

44.     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.

 

45.     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.

 

46.     Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works.

 

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)     A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from the Council and other relevant Authorities prior to excavating or opening-up the road or footway for services or the like.

 

c)     Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials or construction equipment 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.

 

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

 

e)     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. Sediment and erosion control measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout construction. 

 

f)      Public access to demolition/building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted and 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.

 

g)     Temporary fences or hoardings or the like 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.

 

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

 

i)      If it is proposed to locate any hoardings, site fencing 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.

 

j)      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.

 

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

 

a) A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities upon any part of the footpath, road, 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.

 

Fire safety

 

47.     The existing levels of fire and safety within the building are to be upgraded in accordance with the following requirements and the fire safety certificate provisions of Part 9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 must be complied with, prior to issuing an occupation certificate:

 

a)     The following works are to be undertaken in accordance with the specified provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), as applicable:

 

1)     Provide a self-closing, tight-fitting, 35mm thick solid-core timber door to the entry of each sole-occupancy unit in accordance with clause C3.11 of the BCA,

 

2)     The ceilings throughout the top-floor level of the building (including stairway and corridor/s) are to be provided with material having a resistance to the incipient spread of fire to the roof space above, of not less than 60 minutes, or alternatively, provide a ceiling having a resistance to the incipient spread of fire to the space below of not less than 60 minutes to the top of the stairway and corridor/s and interconnect the smoke alarms located within the sole occupancy units located throughout the top-floor level and the stairway and corridor/s,

 

3)     Install a smoke detection and alarm system throughout the building in accordance with specification E2.2a of the BCA,

 

4)     Provide emergency lighting system to the common stairway and corridor/s, in accordance with clause E4.2 & E4.4 of the BCA,

 

5)     Provide exit signs to the foyer, in accordance with clause E4.5 & E4.7 of the BCA,

 

6)     Provide portable fire extinguisher within the, building adjacent to the electrical switchboards, in accordance with clause E1.6 of the BCA,

 

7)     Provide a non-combustible enclosure (ie a metal cabinet) with seals to prevent the passage of smoke to electricity meters and switchboard located in corridors, exits and within stairways etc,

 

8)     Balustrades and handrails to stairway/s, balconies, decks or the like are to be designed and constructed to satisfy clause D2.16 & D2.17 of the BCA,

 

9)     The floors/ceilings separating the residential units throughout the building shall be upgraded to achieve reasonable levels of fire separation and sound transmission, having regard to the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and details are to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to commencement of the works,

 

10)    The main entry/exit door is to be provided with a ‘hold-open’ device, or swing in the direction of egress, to facilitate people seeking egress from  the building in the event of an emergency,

 

11)    Prior to commencing  the abovementioned works, a Construction Certificate must be obtained from Council’s Building Certification Services or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

b)     All new building works (including the proposed alterations/additions) must satisfy the relevant performance or deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

c)     All of the fire safety upgrading works and new building work must be detailed in the Construction Certificate for the development.

 

48.     The fire safety upgrading works must be carried out prior to issuing of an Occupation Certificate for the development and written confirmation must be provided to Council which confirms that all of the upgrading works have been carried out in accordance with the conditions of consent.

 

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

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v.    Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

Advisory

 

A1      The assessment of this developmen