Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 10 May 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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 at 6:00pm.

 

 

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

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members.

 

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

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 12 April 2011

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Urgent Business

Planning Matters

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.

 

Development Application Reports (record of voting required)
D42/11      142 Bundock Street, Randwick

D43/11      9 Tedwin Avenue, Kensington

D44/11      77 Bream Street, Coogee

D45/11      22 Camira Street, Maroubra

D46/11      11A Oswald Street, Randwick

D47/11      66 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

D48/11      2 Gordon Street, Randwick

D49/11      2 Beaumond Avenue, Maroubra

D50/11      60 Avoca Street, Randwick

D51/11      11 Torrens Street Matraville

D52/11      16/32 Perry Street, Matraville

D53/11      408 Malabar Road, Maroubra

D54/11      2 Wolseley Road, Coogee

Miscellaneous Report (record of voting required)
M11/11      Open Space and Environment Discussion Paper    

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

……………………………………………………

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

Development Application Report No. D42/11

 

 

Subject:                  142 Bundock Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/1051/2010

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to dwelling, including an upper level and car space within the front of the dwelling

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                D Pelzman

Owner:                         D & M Pelzman

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Executive Summary

 

The application details alterations and additions to an “existing semi detached dwelling” to provide for a first floor addition. The semi-detached dwelling house is in a Residential 2A Zone and is 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) following Council’s recent advice apply. The proposal has a floor space ratio of 0.69:1 and exceeds the maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1.

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee 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 and a car space to the front of the property. The main issues are the potential for any impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and the streetscape.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

1.    The Proposal

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to provide for a new upper level containing three bedrooms and two bathrooms. The proposal will provide for 68m of additional floor area to the dwelling. The application also proposes the demolition of the existing garage within the rear yard and replacement with a storage shed with access from the rear lane. The application includes the installation of a hardstand car space to the front of the property which will necessitate the removal of a portion of the existing façade of the dwelling and an existing street tree.

 

The application has been amended since originally lodged to site the proposed upper level further towards the rear of the dwelling to maintain the existing appearance of the front portion of the semi detached dwelling.

 

2.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the north eastern side of Bundock Street and has a frontage of 6.78m a depth of up to 34.53m and an area of 224m. The locality is residential and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings.

 

3.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

4.    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 40% 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 0.69:1 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 8m and an external wall height of 7.3m. The external wall height of the dwelling exceeds the control and a SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged by the applicant for consideration.

 

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

0.69:1 (154m2 )

LEP development standard

0.5:1 (112m2)

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

40% excess (42m2)

 

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 addition does not increase the height or footprint of the existing dwelling.

The proposed bulk does not result in adverse effects on the environmental amenity of neighbouring properties or the aesthetic character of the area.

 

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 FSR 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 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 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 zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality.

 

Pursuant to Clauses 20G of RLEP 1998, the maximum building and external wall height within 2A Zones is 9.5m and 7m respectively. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Building Heights

Proposal

7.7m height overall and 7.3m external wall height

LEP development standard

9.5m overall height and 7m external wall height

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

excess 3%

 

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).

 

Building Heights - Clause 20G

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

 

“To operate together with controls for floor space ratio 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 proposal does not increase the overall height of the existing building.

 

The height is not excessive and is compatible with the surrounding locality.

 

The area of non compliance results from the sloping topography and only occurs for a very short distance of wall.

 

It does not impact on the environmental amenity of the neighbouring properties.

 

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

 

The degree of non compliance is not significant and arises because of the fall of the site to the rear and will not result in any adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties.

 

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 external wall height 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 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 building height 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

40%

Yes.

25m² of private open space provided.

48m2 +

Yes

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

6.5m x 7.5m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

25%

Yes

Floor area

(Site area 224m2) maximum FSR 0.65:1 

0.69:1

See below

 

The proposal does not comply with the preferred solution of the DCP, however in this instance there are no major objections as the resultant floor area of the dwelling will not be out of keeping with the established character of the immediate locality which contains dwellings of similar bulk and scale and therefore whilst the preferred solution is not complied with it can be demonstrated that the overall objectives and performance requirements of the DCP are satisfied.

 

 

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

7.3m

No see below

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

No more  than 1m, see comments below in relation to proposed  car space

Yes

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

Up to side boundaries

See below

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Up to rear boundary for storage shed

See below

 

There are no major objections in relation to the wall height exceeding the preferred solution as the degree of non compliance is not excessive, will not result in any adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining dwelling and arises because of the fall of the site towards the rear of the site. Excavation for the addition will be up to the side boundary and to the rear boundary for the construction of the storage shed, conditions of consent are included with respect to ensuring that both the subject and adjoining sites are properly maintained during and after building works.

 

 

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

No change

Yes

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

7.5m to dwelling

Yes

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

No change

N/A

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Up to western side and 900mm 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. In relation to the upper level setback this maintains the existing ground level setback of the dwelling and will not impede access to sunlight and fresh air to the 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 and the windows to the upper level all serve the bedrooms and bathrooms.

 

 

Garages and car parking

The proposal includes the removal of a portion of the front fence and the removal of part of the dwelling façade and excavation beneath the dwelling to accommodate the installation of an off street parking car space. This also will require the removal of an existing street tree. The removal of a portion of the façade to accommodate a car space cannot be supported as it will detract from the appearance of the dwelling within the streetscape. A condition of consent is recommended to remove reference to the driveway crossing and car space from the application. At present no parking is provided on the property. There is an existing garage within the rear of the property however because of the dimensions of the building it is not usable, therefore deletion of the car space to the front and construction of the shed at rear stopping access from the laneway will not alter the on site parking situation. It is also noted that there is ample street parking for vehicles owned by local residents.

 

 

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

Yes

 

5.    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 $100,001 - $200,000

 $150, 000

0.5%

$750.00

 

6.    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 Clauses 20F & 20G of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to floor space ratio and building height respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

  1. That Council grant development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. 1051/2010 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling at 142 Bundock Street, Coogee subject to the following conditions;

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The development must be carried out in accordance with the following conditions of consent.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans and supporting documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s approved stamp, except where amended by Council in red and/or by other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

DA01a

Chris Weeding

10th February 2011

16th February 2011

DA02a

10th February 2011

16th February 2011

DA03a

10th February 2011

16th February 2011

DA04a

10th February 2011

16th February 2011

DA05

4th November 2010

16th February 2011

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received

A98822

4th November 2010

29th November 2010

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a ‘Construction Certificate’ by either Randwick City Council or an Accredited Certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the construction certificate application.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent conditions and to achieve reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

Consent Requirements

2.       The requirements and amendments detailed in the ‘General Conditions’ must be complied with and be included in the construction certificate plans and associated documentation.

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

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

 

         External materials, finishes and colours of the building are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building and any metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. Colourbond) to limit the level of reflection and glare.

 

4.       The proposed installation of the car space to the front of the dwelling does not satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of the Development Control Plan for Dwellings and will detract from the appearance of the semi detached dwellings and the local streetscape. The car space is not approved and is to be deleted from the application and plans accompanying the Construction Certificate are to be amended accordingly.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

5.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $150,000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council:   $750.00.

 

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.

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

6.       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).  Details of compliance with the BCA are to be included in the construction certificate application.

 

Structural Adequacy

7.       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), certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure to support the upper level addition.

 

Long Service Levy Payments

8.       The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, must be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, 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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

9.       A surface water/stormwater drainage system must be provided in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate:-

 

a)    Surface water/stormwater drainage systems must be provided in accordance with Part 3.1.2 of the Building Code of Australia (Volume 2);

 

b)    The surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or, subject to site suitability, the stormwater may be drained to a suitably designed absorption pit;

 

c)    Any absorption pits or soaker wells should be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed to any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance;

 

d)    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;

 

e)    Details of any proposed drainage systems or works to be carried out in the road, footpath or nature strip must be submitted to and approved by Council before commencing these works.

 

BASIX Requirements

10.     In accordance with section 80A(11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 97A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, the requirements and commitments contained in the relevant BASIX Certificate must be complied with.

 

 

The required commitments listed and identified in the BASIX Certificate must be included on the construction certificate plans, specifications and associated documentation, 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.

 

Energy & Water Efficiency

11.     The following energy efficiency and water saving measures are to be implemented in all new and upgraded building work and details included in the construction certificate:

 

a)    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.

 

b)    New 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.

 

c)    New 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.

 

Smoke Alarms

12.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or 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 are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’, as applicable.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity.

 

Construction Certificate, Principal Certifying Authority & Commencement of Works

 

13.     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 any 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.

 

Home Building Act 1989

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, the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with.

 

Details of the Licensed Building Contractor and a copy of the relevant Certificate of Home Warranty Insurance or a copy of the Owner-Builder Permit (as applicable) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council, in writing.

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the NSW DECC Construction Noise Guideline by a suitably qualified person, is to be implemented throughout the works.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of works.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

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

 

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

 

Temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or public place, a Local Approval application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Health, Building & Regulatory Services before placing any item or article on the road, footpath or nature strip.

 

Construction Site Management Plan

18.     A Construction Site Management Plan must be developed and implemented prior to the commencement of any works. The construction 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;

·          provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·          construction noise and vibration management;

·          construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

Demolition Work Plan

19.     A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures and relevant environmental/occupational health and safety requirements.

 

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

·          Recycling, reuse and waste disposal of remediation materials

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

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

§  Refer to the conditions within the “Requirements During Construction & Site Work”, for further details and requirements relating to demolition work, removal of any asbestos and public safety.

 

Sydney Water

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

 

Prior to the commencement of excavation or building works, the approved Construction Certificate plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre, 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 works.

 

Public Utilities

21.     A Public Utility Impact Assessment must be carried out to identify all public utility services located on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the building works.

 

Documentary evidence from the relevant public utility authorities confirming that their requirements have been or are able to be satisfied, must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.

 

The owner/builder must make the necessary arrangements and meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia, Sydney Water and other authorities to adjust, repair or relocate their services as required.

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with during the demolition, excavation and construction of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity during construction.

 

Demolition Work Requirements

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

 

·          Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

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

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECCW/EPA Guidelines

·          Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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.

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

23.     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

 

·          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.  A copy of the relevant licence must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

·          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.  Details of the landfill site (which must be lawfully able to receive asbestos materials) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

24.     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”.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

25.     Sediment and erosion control measures, must be implemented throughout the site works in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to Council’s satisfaction.  Details are to be included in the Construction Site Management Plan.

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

f)     Temporary safety fencing is to be provided to any swimming pools under construction, 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.

 

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

27.     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 must be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land

28.     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.

 

29.     Prior to undertaking any demolition, excavation or building work in the following circumstances, a report must be obtained from a professional engineer which details the methods of support for the dwelling or associated structure on the adjoining land, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

·          when undertaking excavation or building work within the zone of influence of the footings of a dwelling or associated structure that is located on the adjoining land;

·          when undertaking demolition work to a wall of a dwelling that is built to a common or shared boundary (eg. semi-detached or terrace dwelling);

·          when constructing a wall to a dwelling or associated structure that is located within 900mm of a dwelling located on the adjoining land.

 

The demolition, excavation and building work and the provision of support to the dwelling or associated structure on the adjoining land, must also be carried out in accordance with the abovementioned report, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Restriction on Working Hours

30.     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

Excavating of rock, use of jack-hammers, pile-drivers, vibratory rollers/compactors or the like

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - 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.

 

Inspections During Construction

31.     The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority, 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).

 

Building Encroachments

32.     There must be no encroachment of any structures or building work onto Council’s road reserve, footway, nature strip or public place.

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing an ‘Occupation Certificate’.

 

Note:        For the purpose of this consent, any reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall also be taken to mean ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent and to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity.

 

Occupation Certificate Requirements

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 relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

BASIX Requirements

35.     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.

 

Occupant Safety

36.     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:

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

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

·          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,

·          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),

·          Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

 

The following operational conditions must be complied with at all times, throughout the use and operation of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent and to maintain reasonable levels of public health and environmental amenity.

 

External Lighting

37.     External lighting to the premises must be designed and located so as to minimise light-spill beyond the property boundary or cause a public nuisance.

 

ADVISORY NOTES

 

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, or other relevant legislation and Council’s policies.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

 

·          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 requirements is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million.  Alternatively, Council may issue a penalty infringement notice (for up to $1,500) for each offence.  Council may also issue notices and orders to demolish unauthorised or non-complying building work, or to comply with the requirements of Council’s development consent.

 

·          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.

 

Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue Construction Certificates and be your Principal Certifying Authority for the development, to undertake inspections and ensure compliance with the development consent, relevant building regulations and standards of construction.  For further details contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

·          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.

 

·          A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

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

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

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

 

For further information please contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

·          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.

 

·          Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

Development Application Report No. D43/11

 

 

Subject:                  9 Tedwin Avenue, Kensington

Folder No:                   DA/47/2001/A

Author:                   Louis Coorey, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     S96 modification of approved development to increase size of basement garage (excavated), alter the front entry location and removal of front ground level balcony, reduce size of living room, delete study and extension of master bedroom, alter roof, glazing and colours and materials applied to dwelling

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Environa Studio

Owner:                         M Ashliegh

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application has been referred to the Planning Committee as the original consent was granted at the Planning Committee on 8 May 2001. The Section 96 application seeks to amend the development retrospectively as works have already been carried out.

 

The amendments sought are related to further excavation in the basement level garage, reconfiguring the front entry, obtaining approval for the Alucobond cladding applied to the main dwelling and modifications to the dwelling and its window openings.

 

The application was notified and objections were received from the two neighbouring properties east and west of the subject site at no 16 Inglethorpe Avenue and 7 Tedwin Avenue respectively. The main concerns relate to the following:

 

·      The resultant privacy intrusion into the rear yard of No. 16 Inglethorpe Avenue east of the subject site as a result of the reconfigured front entry and

 

·      The significant glare (both light and heat) reflected into two upstairs bedroom windows at No. 7 Tedwin Avenue as a result of the application of Alucobond (aluminium painted cladding) to the western elevation of the dwelling.

 

In response to the above issues and other inconsistencies shown on the submitted plans, the applicant submitted an amended statement and plans which were received by Council on 22 and 25 February 2011. In brief, these amended details corrected inconsistencies, seek to justify the use of Alucobond on the basis that it has been on the building since late 2005 and not inconsistent with use of conventional material such as semi gloss colour bond, and provision of a 500mm extension to the existing eastern side boundary fence.

 

Overall, it is considered that the applicant’s responses are generally acceptable. In particular, having regard to the overlooking into the rear yard of the eastern side neighbour, where it is considered the proposed extension to the fence would sufficiently restrict outlook. In respect to the use of Alucobond, whilst not ideal given that when it was originally installed (2005) it would have resulted in more glare, it is nonetheless considered acceptable on the basis that as a result of natural weathering, the glare from its surface is likely to be at a level where it is more in line with reflectivity levels from other more conventional material such as semi-gloss painted colour-bond cladding.

 

The application seeking to modify the original consent is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

This section 96 application seeks consent for the following modifications:

 

Level one:

 

·      Enlarge storage area

·      New pergola over courtyard located at the south eastern side of the dwelling

·      Extend excavation towards the west by approximately 1150mm increasing the area at basement garage level

·      Extend bathroom by 300mm towards front

·      Delete proposed 1800mm high fence along front eastern side boundary shared with no 16 Inglethorpe Avenue and instead add 500mm timber slat screen atop existing front eastern side boundary fence

·      Provision of two new small windows to western elevation.

Level two:

 

·      Remove front balcony serving entry at front eastern half of dwelling and reconfigure entry doorway so that it is now accessible via a straight path (1100mm wide) from the front of the site

·      Remove timber fixed battens across front living room window

·      Remove opening on face of western side of rear terrace

·      Modified dimensions of north facing living window, east facing highlight window, new glass entry door to new entry at eastern elevation and various modifications to south facing windows

·      Extend the depth of the eastern half of the rear balcony by approximately 400mm from a depth of 2950mm to 3350mm by reducing the size of the living room (that is no change to rear extent of development)

·      Remove privacy screen at the western side elevation (as per agreement reached with western neighbours) and therefore requiring the deletion of condition 3 of the original consent

·      Reduce width of the dining room and living rooms. Note: This change is a direct result of conditions 4 and 5 under the original consent, requiring increased setbacks from the eastern and western side boundaries and an internal reconfiguration.

 

Level three:

 

·      Amend the configuration of the rear western side wall, by providing additional step down to the rear incorporating additional wall sections at level (3). This modification allows for the removal of condition 2 on the original consent

·      Modification of window openings along the eastern, southern, and northern elevations.

 

Roof

 

·      Minor configuration change to parts of roof.

 

Colours, materials and finishes schedule:

 

This Section 96 application also seeks consent for the colours, materials and finishes which appear to have been installed since around 2005.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is sited at the southern side of Tedwin Avenue. The site has a frontage of 13.1m, a side boundary depth of 30.48m and a total site area of approximately 400sqm. Currently on site is a three storey dwelling substantially built in accordance with the approved development except for the majority of modifications sought under this section 96 application.

 

Adjoining the site to the east are the rear boundaries of a number of houses fronting Inglethorpe Avenue. Adjoining the site to the west is the side boundary of a multi storey dwelling at No. 7 Tedwin Avenue. The surrounding is characterised by single dwelling houses.

 

4.    Site History

 

Original consent

Approval was granted on 16 May 2001 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new flat roofed 3-level residence inclusive of a basement garage.

The original consent contained non-standard conditions (2 to 7) requiring modifications to the approved development as follows:

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the proposed dwelling does not result in unreasonable impact on adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing and bulk:

 

2.     The upper level south western wing wall be reduced in length by 1.2m and the overhang roof to be cut back by the same amount

3.     That the mid level south-western wing wall be reduced in length so as not to protrude beyond the line of the rear wall of No. 7 Tedwin Avenue at a height not greater than 1m, and that the portion of wall thereby deleted shall be replaced with timber louvres to match those proposed elsewhere in that wing wall.

4.     The portion of the mid level of the dwelling above the garage is to have an increased setback form the eastern boundary of 1.8m

5.     The western side boundary setback of the proposed building is to be increased to 1.5m in order to ensure the provision of adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air. The existing setbacks of the eastern walls are not to change as a consequence.

6.     The design proposed front fence is to comply with the preferred solutions of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual occupancies. i.e. upper two thirds is at least 50% open

7.     The driveway gradient to comply with preferred solutions of Section 4.7 of the DCP (above).”

 

2 sets of amended Plans received by Council (8 March and 10 March 2005) to address conditions 2 to 7

 

1st set of amended plans

The applicant submitted plans and details received by Council on 8 March 2005 addressing the abovementioned conditions (2 to 7) in order to obtain a Construction Certificate. However, these plans did not clearly indicate the various modifications required by the non standard conditions.

 

2nd set of amended plans

The applicant submitted a further set of amended plans, received by Council on 10 March 2005, notating (inclusive of red clouding) the various modifications required to comply with conditions 2 to 7. These plans also showed other variations/modifications, however Council only issued a memo to the Certifier indicating general compliance with the non standard conditions (2 to 7) and made no reference to the other modifications.

 

Note: The variations/modifications shown back in 2005 were constructed and substantially represent the modifications sought under this 96 application.

 

Colours and materials details submitted (8 April 2005)

Around the same time as the applicant submitted the amended plans (8th and 10th March 2005), they also submitted a schedule of materials and colours as required by Condition 8 of the original consent. These details showed a mixture of material incorporating a mixture of render, painted fibre cement panels (Hardi-flex) and composite painted aluminium panels (Symonite/Alucobond). It appears that Alucobond cladding (smokey silver colour) had been fitting prior to obtaining consent and that it was applied to the majority of the dwelling’s surface area which varied from that original development which showed a predominance of rendered brick/masonry construction.

 

This Section 96 application consequently seeks consent for the already installed colours, materials and finishes schedule.

Notice issued by Certifier regarding non conforming parts of the development

 

The certifier issued a notice to the owners of the subject site and proponents of the proposed development indicating various modifications that have been carried out without Council consent and non compliance with the requirement for critical stage inspections. These include (but are not limited to) the following:

 

·      Modifications including external finishes/colours, altered window openings

·      Deletion of proposed louvre to front living room window

·      Deletion of adjustable horizontal louvre to west side of level 2 terrace

·      Deletion of timber screen to top of east boundary fence

·      Use of clear glazing in lieu of translucent glazing to east facing louvre windows (W15 & W16); and

·      New pergola to east side playroom and bed 3.

 

Comment: The abovementioned inconsistencies where shown on the plans received by Council on 10 March 2005 (addressing conditions 2 to 7) and form the retrospective development sought as part of this Section 96 application.

 

Request for additional information to Section 96 application and applicant response to issues raised (received 22 February 2011 & 25 February 2011)

 

During notification, and assessment of the application the applicant was informed of several issues via email (see points below). The applicant responded with a statement containing industry documentation and amended plans received by Council on 22 February 2011 and 25 February 2011. A brief comment is made having regard to the issues raised with the applicant below:

 

·      Parts of the building as constructed were inconsistent with the submitted Section 96 plans namely the western side wall to the rear at ground and first floor level.

 

Comment: The applicant submitted amended plans (received by Council on 25 February 2011) showing the correct elevation.

 

·      The adjoining neighbour at No. 7 Tedwin Avenue has indicated a preference for removal of a privacy screen at the end of the western wall required by condition 3 of the original consent.

 

Comment: The applicant amended the Section 96 application seeking deletion of the required privacy screen and therefore condition 3 of the original determination.

 

·      The aluminium cladding installed across the dwelling is considered inappropriate given that it is reflective of the sun in terms of both light in general and heat onto the adjoining western neighbours upstairs bedrooms. You are required to investigate and explore methods to minimise this reflection as the material as installed is considered inappropriate.

 

Comment: The applicant submitted information indicating the level of both heat and specular reflectivity (glare) of the aluminium cladding is not dissimilar to more conventional colour-bond cladding with semi-gloss paint and that with age and natural weathering the level of glare had decreased and would further decrease. In respect to the reflection of heat, it was also indicated that the heat radiating from the installed Alucobond emits heat at a lesser rate than more conventional materials and colours such as semi gloss painted hardi-flex sheeting. Further, it was also noted that the level of heat radiation from the Alucobond is less than if the material selected was semi-gloss treated colour-bond, or Masonite.

·      The approved development shows a 1.8m high fence along the eastern side front boundary; however the current fence does not extend to this height. As this section 96 application does not include any changes to this side boundary fence, you will be required to carry out this part of the development. However, you're advised to consult with your eastern neighbour who only wishes for a 500mm extension above the existing fence which will be shorter than the approved 1.8m high fence. As such it is recommended that you consult with this neighbour to ascertain the nature of the fence along this part of the site and include it in your section 96 application.

Comment: At a site meeting held with the objector from 16 Inglethorpe Avenue, they indicated they would accept a 500mm timber slat extension to the existing fence shared with the subject site resulting in a 1700mm high fence along this part of the site. It is noted that the neighbour indicated a preference for a privacy screen at the eastern side of the walkway leading onto the entry doorway, however it is considered that this would detract from the appearance of the development and it was not considered that there were no significant concerns regarding privacy from this area which is mainly a transient area. Having regard to the 500mm extension, it is considered that a condition included in the recommendation would suffice.

Overall, it is considered that the applicant has reasonably addressed the following issues:

·           use of Alucobond cladding (having regard to the circumstances of the length of time it has been on the dwelling and the natural weathering of the material),

·           agreement to remove the privacy screen to the western side of the rear level 2 balcony,

·           inclusion of a 500mm timber screen atop the existing eastern side front fence in lieu of the approved 1.8m high fence and

·           Amended plans (received 25 February 2011) reflecting the development as built and sought to be approved under the Section 96 application and as described under Section 2 above.

5.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

5.1 Objections

16 Inglethorpe Avenue

Issue

Comment

Site visit to objectors site and reference to letter sent to applicant, dated 3rd March 2011, indicating issues with privacy impact from relocated doorway and fencing additions.

The objector was advised at a site meeting that there were no major concerns regarding the privacy impact from the relocated doorway in that this entry landing area was much smaller and further away than the initially approved balcony area and this area was primarily a transient area where it would not lend itself to being used for extended periods of time by large groups of people. They were also advised that the original approval included a 1.8m high side fence along the boundary shared with the subject site and that this would mean a significant addition to the existing fence.

They indicated that if the development had to incorporate a fence then they would prefer a slightly smaller overall height. It was indicated that rather than the full 1.8m high fence from the neighbours side I could approach the owner and suggest a 500mm extension instead of replacing the current fence.

The owner agreed to a 500mm extension and indicated this on the amended plans received by Council on 25 February 2011.

The objector was informed of the proposed modification and although indicated that they would prefer a screen opposite the doorway entry, they requested the following aspects to be incorporated into a condition addressing the fence modification:

That it be:

·     Treated with neutral light colours along its eastern side

·     A maximum of 500mm timber slats where the total opening across the face of the extension not exceed 25% of the area of the fence extension and

·     Located wholly within the subject site.

A suitable condition is included.

7 TedwinAvenue

Issue

Comment

Letters dated:

·      31 January 2011 and received by Council on 31 January 2011 (including copy of correspondence dated 17 January 2008)

·      4 February 2011 and received by Council on 7 February 2011

 

Privacy screen

Believe that the privacy screen which extends the full height between level 1 and level 2 on the southern corner of the building is not necessary as there are minimal privacy concerns between the two houses and its inclusion would reduce views in this area.

Acknowledged and accepted by the applicant. As a result, condition No 3 of the original consent which required the privacy screen to be constructed in this area of the dwelling is deleted.

Reflected glare

The western elevation of the neighbour’s property presents as a blank two storey wall facing our property. This wall is clad in a metal sheet cladding with a metallic silver finish which creates excessive glare to our east facing bedroom windows and that this requires us to draw our curtains during the day to deal with the glare. The current cladding is not in accordance with the approved DA finishes schedule (gull Grey) and the submitted s96 colour proposes a darker metallic finish which will still create a glare issue.

It is considered that the material selected (pre-applied smoke silver Alucobond cladding) is quite contemporary and fits in well with the modern design of the dwelling. Further, the surface is not dissimilar to the use of more conventional material such as semi-gloss painted colourbond. Also, given the material has been on the dwelling since at least late 2005 and given the natural weathering that generally occurs, it is considered that the use of Alucobond in this instance is acceptable.

Please advise if heat and glare could be reduced by any modification to the western external wall.

Unfortunately, the Alucobond material used does not allow for any application of paint or surfacing to reduce the level of glare or heat radiated. See comment above regarding natural ageing and weathering and similarity with more conventional material.

Noticed a few cracks appearing on the walls of 2nd 3rd and 4th bedroom and dining room. Is this due to natural movement of the land or due to demolition and construction of the building on 9 Tedwin Avenue?

The condition has been included requiring adequate certification be provided for the additional excavation carried out within Level 1 of the development. It is also noted a dilapidation report is on Council records and the objector is welcome to view and or obtain a copy of the dilapidation report under Freedom of information. Ofcourse any issues regarding damage arising out of the development should be raised with the PCA.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

No comments.

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

Not relevant

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The following clauses of LEP 1998 are relevant to the proposed development:

 

2A zone

The proposed modifications are considered to be generally consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone and other clauses within RLEP in that the proposed activity and built form does not detract from the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 


8.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plans

Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The proposed Section 96 modifications are addressed having regard to the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP as follows:

 

Level 1:

 

·      New rear side pergola over courtyard located the south eastern side of the dwelling;

 

No objection to the pergola in the current location given that it limited to ground level, it is an open lightweight designed structure which is predominately shielded from the adjoining neighbours properties by the existing side boundary fencing.

 

·      Extend excavation towards the west by approximately 1150mm increasing the area at basement garage level and enlarging the storage area.

 

No objections to the increased excavation to accommodate the storage area subject to adequate certification provided.

 

·      Extend bathroom by 300mm towards front

 

No objection to the increased depth of the bathroom as it continues to be behind the main building line and will not result in any appreciable adverse amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties.

 

·      Delete proposed 1800mm high fence along front eastern side boundary shared with no 16 Inglethorpe Avenue and instead add 500mm timber slat screen atop existing the front eastern side boundary fence

 

A site visit to the neighbours site at 16 Inglethorpe Avenue indicates that the owner of the subject site raises no objection to the inclusion of a 500mm screen atop the existing fence.

 

·      Provision of two new small windows to western elevation

 

The two new small windows along the western elevation are considered acceptable having regard to the performance requirements and objectives under the DCP for visual privacy.

 

Level 2:

 

·      Remove front balcony serving entry at front eastern half of dwelling and reconfigure entry doorway to eastern elevation so that it is now accessible via a straight path (1100mm wide) from the front of the site

 

No objections to the deletion of the front ground level balcony/entry and movement of the entry doorway to the middle of the dwelling facing east (towards the rear of No 16 Inglethorpe Avenue). There are no major privacy concerns regarding this change on the grounds of adverse privacy impacts as a result of the following observations:

 

·           The entry is a transient area which is used to enter and exit the dwelling rather than being an area usable for entertaining or use for extended periods by large groups of people.

·           The originally approved entry was a larger area closer to the boundary shared with the eastern neighbours rear yard incorporating a front balcony connected to a living/lounge room, which is considered to have represented a greater capacity for prolonged use by more people and therefore greater levels of overlooking and adverse privacy impact

·           An 1800mm high fence is approved along this side boundary and has not been constructed. In discussions with the neighbour, it is considered that an 1800mm high fence would be quite high from their side and request that a maximum addition of 500mm be located over the existing side fence which has a height of approximately 1200mm and that it be treated with neutral light colour on their side. The applicant has incorporated the 500mm extension to the existing side fence in the amended plans received by Council on 25 February 2011. A suitable condition has been included to address the above mentioned preferences.

 

·      Remove timber fixed battens across front living room window

 

The modification seeking removal of the fixed timber battens to the front living room window is considered acceptable having regard to the performance requirements and objectives for visual privacy under the DCP.

 

·      Remove opening on face of western side of rear terrace

 

The blocking up of this opening and maintaining the western wall along the side of the rear terrace will not result in any appreciable adverse impacts on the neighbouring property. It is noted that this wall maintains a 1.5m side setback from the western side boundary.

 

·      Modified dimensions of north facing front living window, east facing highlight window, new east facing glass entry door to relocated entry and various modifications to rear south facing windows.

 

The proposed modifications to window and door openings at level 2 are considered to satisfy the performance requirements and objectives for visual privacy under the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. It is noted that the proposed entry door facing the rear of the adjoining dwelling at no 16 Inglethorpe Avenue is only serving a predominately transient area which is not usable for any extended periods of time. Further, the objector at 16 Inglethorpe who is objecting to the relocated entry door indicates that they raise no objection to the provision of a 500mm screen atop the existing dividing fence. It is considered that this screen although not required given the transient nature of this area, would improve the perception of privacy protection within their rear yard.

 

·      Extend the depth of the eastern half of the rear balcony by approximately 400mm from a depth of 2950mm to 3350mm by reducing the size of the living room (note: the additional area to the terrace will be achieved by reducing the internal living area and not increasing the site coverage or bulk of the proposed development.

 

The increased terrace area is considered acceptable in so far as it does not increase the bulk of the development and will not result in any appreciable adverse impacts on the neighbouring properties amenity.

 

·      Remove privacy screen at the western side elevation (as per agreement reached with western neighbours) and therefore requiring the deletion of condition 3 of the original consent

 

Comment: This privacy screen is sought to be deleted and the immediate neighbour at 7 Tedwin Avenue agrees to the removal of this screen. Therefore condition 3 of the original consent requiring its installation is recommended for deletion.

 

·      Reduce width of the dining room and living rooms. Note: This change is a direct result of conditions 4 and 5 under the original consent, requiring increased setbacks from the eastern and western side boundaries and an internal reconfiguration

 

This is considered acceptable in so far as the reduced width of the living and dining rooms are a consequence of the increased side setbacks required by conditions 4 & 5 of the original consent.

 

Level 3:

 

·      Amend the configuration of the rear western side wall, by providing additional step down to the rear incorporating additional wall sections at level (3). This modification allows for the removal of condition 2 on the original consent

 

The amended configuration of the rear western side wall and removal of the privacy screen below is considered acceptable having regard to the relevant building design performance requirements and objectives under the DCP for dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and will not result in any appreciable adverse impacts on the neighbouring property.

 

·      Modification of window openings along the eastern, southern, and northern elevations

 

The proposed variations to the windows at level 3 are considered acceptable having regard to the building design performance requirements and objectives under the DCP for Dwelling Houses and attached Dual occupancies.

 

Roof

 

·      Minor configuration change to parts of roof

 

No objection to the variations sought to the roof profile and configuration.

 

Colours, materials and finishes schedule

This Section 96 application also seeks consent for Colours, materials and finishes already installed.

 

The main variation relates to the use of Alucobond aluminium cladding and its capacity for glare and heat radiation as raised by the western neighbour at 7 Tedwin Avenue. It is noted that in general where Council has a concern regarding glare or reflectivity, it places a 20% maximum restriction on materials used (in most instances related to the use of glossiness of paint or glass surfaces).

 

The application of Alucobond cladding (inclusive of painting) to the dwelling represented at initial installation a reflectivity value of approximately 35% and would not have complied with the abovementioned limits. However, the applicants have submitted that due to the cladding being in place since 2005 and through natural weathering the reflectivity of the paint would have fallen and is not dissimilar to more conventional material such as semi-gloss painted colourbond material which has a reflectivity value of approximately 25% and that over further time the level of reflectivity would have fallen further.

 

It is also noted that the use of this material is considered to fit in well with the modern design and sustainable theme of the architecturally designed dwelling.

 

Overall, whilst the Alucobond material clad across the majority of the surface area of the dwelling would not be the first choice of materials for the development given its potential for glare when new, it is in this instance considered acceptable on the basis that it has been affixed to the building for a significant time (since around 2005) and it is considered reasonable to conclude that natural weathering of the material has and will continue to reduce the level of glare from its surface. Further, it is considered that the modern design and sustainable theme of the material fits in with the contemporary design of the premises.

 

8.2 Council Policies

The proposed modifications fit substantially within the scope of the original development.

 

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.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in urban design and development.

 

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modifications are for the most part suitable for the site given the reasons outlined in the body of this report and having particular regard to the site visits conducted and the contemporary nature of the approved development. The proposed modifications, as conditioned, are considered acceptable in terms of its siting within the subject site, the additional impacts borne as a result of the modifications (as carried out) and the performance requirements and objectives under the DCP for dwelling houses and attached Dual occupancies DCP.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council, as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/47/2001 for permission to modify the approved development by increasing the size of garage, alteration to entry, reduction in size of living room, deletion of study and extension of master bedroom, alteration to roof, glazing and colours and materials for 9 Tedwin Avenue, Kensington in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition No 1 to read:

 

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered Job 169/01-09, dated December 2000 and received by Council on 16 January 2001 , the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by:

 

·        The additional plans numbered 102 to 109, dated 8 March 2003 and received by Council on 10 March 2005 only in so far as they relate to compliance with conditions 2 to 7 of the original determination and

 

·        The following Section 96 “A” plans:

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received by Council

01 Issue B

19 October 2010

25 February 2011

02 Issue B

19 October 2010

25 February 2011

03 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

04 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

05 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

06 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

07 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

08 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

09 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

10 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

11 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

12 Issue C

22 February 2011

25 February 2011

 

, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

Delete the following condition

 

3.       Condition No. 3 to be deleted

 

Add the following conditions:

 

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

 

32.      Documentary evidence prepared by a suitably qualified professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development, certifying the suitability and stability of the site for the existing building and certifying the adequacy of the design and construction of the building on the site taking into account the additionally excavated areas in level 1 and the structural adequacy of the lower level structures to support the additional levels above.

 

33.      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 the structural adequacy of the pergola and compliance with the relevant structural requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

The following condition is included to ensure the eastern side boundary fencing is installed in accordance with relevant design guidelines for fencing.

 

34.      The fence extension located along the eastern front side boundary shall be limited to a maximum extension of 500mm, be treated with neutral light colours on the eastern side elevation, located wholly within the subject site and the total area of any openings within the extension must not exceed 25% of the surface area. Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

Development Application Report No. D44/11

 

 

Subject:                  77 Bream Street, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/1061/2010

Author:                   David Mooney, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including first and second storey additions, new front hardstand car space, new front fence (SEPP1 objection to floor space ratio control)

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Abstract Designs

Owner:                         George Fatseas

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to the Planning Committee due to a SEPP 1 objection for floor space ratio that is more than 10% of the development standard.

 

The development application was accompanied by a well-founded SEPP 1 objection that demonstrates the proposal satisfies the objectives of the development standard irrespective of numerical non-compliance.

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including first and second storey additions, new front hardstand car space and a new front fence. The proposal was amended on two occasions to reduce bulk and scale and improve the streetscape appearance.

 

The site is on the northern side of Bream Street between Hill Street and Arden Street, Coogee. It is 210.5m2 with a 6.425m frontage; it slopes moderately toward the street and is zoned 2C Residential. The locality is dominated by larger residential flat buildings.

 

There were 3 objections and the issues that were raised are addressed in this report.

 

The proposal satisfies the LEP general and zone objectives and the Multi-unit Housing DCP performance requirements.

 

Approval subject to conditions is recommended.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including first and second storey additions, new front hardstand car space and a new front fence.

 

The proposal was amended 2 February 2011 to:

 

·           Increase the street setback so the upper level additions were behind the primary roof frontage,

·           Reduce the height and extent of the new common wall to improve aesthetics on the western elevation,

·           Integrate the new car park with landscaping in the front yard,

·           Install opaque glass and louvres to an east facing window to reduce night-time light spill,

·           Increase the head-height clearance to the car park.

 

The proposal was further amended 22 March 2011 to:

 

·           Alter the roof profile to reduce its dominance over the existing roof form that faces the street.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is on the northern side of Bream St between Hill St and Arden St, Coogee. Street frontage is 6.425m, length is 33.295m and area is 210.5m2. The land slopes moderately toward the street on a southerly aspect.

 

On the site is a dwelling that is one half of a semi-detached pair. There is another pair of semis to the west, a free standing dwelling to the north and an apartment building to the east. The local area has a mix of free-standing dwellings, apartment buildings and 

 

Figure 1 – Aerial photograph of the site

 

4.    Site History

 

The existing semi appears in a 1930’s aerial photograph and was constructed prior to then. There is no recorded development application history for the site.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards

The proposal does not comply with these LEP development standards:

 

Non-compliance with Part 2b Principle Development Standards

Cl

Standard

Assessment

20F

Maximum floor space ratio 0.65:1

0.74:1 Does not comply.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Floor space ratio: 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 written SEPP 1 objections, which outline the following justifications for variations to the standards.

 

Floor Space Ratio

 

Applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection for floor space ratio

The site is located within the 2C (Residential C) Zone under the LEP. Accordingly, surrounding developments include residential flat buildings that are typically medium to high in their density and site coverage. Local context analysis during the generation of the alterations and additions proposal identified a number of properties that are in excess of the floor space ratio development standard. Images of these surrounding building were provided in the accompanying Statement of Environmental Effects with a particular emphasis on the visually dominating residential unit buildings / walk-up flats on the Bream Street elevation.

 

Further investigations have uncovered that Council has permitted FSR departures on surrounding undersized lots (i.e less than 700m2) within the 2C (Residential C) Zone, where proposals have been deemed to achieve the objectives of the development standard. Some examples include:

 

1.  DA No. 344/2009 – No 85 Bream Street, Coogee, Site Area = 275m2, FSR approved = 1.46:1 (Note only 3 allotments separate the above development from the subject site)

 

2.  DA No. 496/2009 – No 164 Brook Street, Coogee, Site Area 368m2, FSR approved = 1.34:1

 

3.  DA No. 783/2008 – No 54 Mount Street, Coogee, Site Area = 344m2, FSR approved = 1.31:1

 

4.  DA No. 743/2006 – 112-114 Beach Street, Coogee. Site Area = 604m2, FSR approved 1.34:1

 

5.  DA No. 202/2002 – No 94 Dudley Street, Coogee. Site Area = 427m2, FSR approved = 0.9:1.

 

Notwithstanding the above, it is noted that a Development Application at No 83 Bream Street for the demolition of the existing residential flat building, and the construction of a new residential flat building comprising of 6 units is currently under assessment under DA No. 809/2010. It is documented that the proposal has a site area of 357.8m2 and is proposing an FSR of1.44:1, which is marginally less than the adjacent residential flat building at No 85 Bream Street which has an FSR of 1.46:1. It should be noted that these developments are only two and three allotments to the east of the subject proposal, and significantly higher in bulk, scale and density.

 

The proposed development presents a scheme that is lower in scale with respect to the local context as it is one of the last two examples of semi-detached housing (No. 75-77 Bream Street, and No. 71-73 Bream Street, respectively) within a street that is dominated by residential unit development of medium to high density. The scheme presents a development with a total GFA of 163.1m2 at an FSR of 0.77:1, which is a departure of 26.3m2 or 19% from numerical standard of 0.65:1. Given the site coverage and FSR of existing surrounding development in the immediate vicinity, the proposed FSR would be justifiable.

 

Due to the sites natural topography consisting of a 4m fall from the rear of the site to street frontage, any excess FSR beyond the streetscape presentation of the development would not contribute to the buildings visible bulk as the rear portion of the ground level plan is essentially submerged and not in view due to the sites topography. Accordingly, the excess FSR does not contribute to the buildings visible bulk and therefore will not look any larger than an alternative option that complies with the FSR development standard.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the proposal complies with all other development standards under the Consolidated LEP 1998 and virtually all other general planning controls. As documented in the Statement of Environmental Effects that accompanies this Development Application; the proposal warrants a favourable merits-based assessment in terms of its planning, urban design, environmental performance and acceptability. Accordingly, it is considered that despite the numerical non-compliance, the proposal meets the objectives of FSR development standards.

 

The streetscape and character of the Coogee precinct is undergoing considerable change. To date, this has been less apparent in Bream Street as it has typically been a street with a plethora of medium to high density developments, constructed over a period of time as is evident from the various architectural styles of the residential flat buildings and walk-up flats present. However, contemporary style developments of larger scales are becoming increasingly common throughout the precinct: these include the residential flat developments at No 85 Bream Street and No 85A Bream Street respectively: and the proposal for a new residential flat development at No 83 Bream Street. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered unlikely to adversely impact the function of the principle forms of architecture within the precinct.

 

It is considered that, the proposal has been designed to respond to and complement the emerging desired future character of the Bream Street streetscape. Given the application relates to one of the last remaining examples of semi-detached housing in Bream Street, the proposal will act as a visual transition between the last remaining ‘pocket’ of dual occupancies (semi-detached housing) to the larger scale unit development next door at No 79 Bream Street (to the east of the site) and the new residential developments beyond.

 

The proposal is considered to provide an appropriate height, form and scale of development in the Randwick 2C (Residential C) Zone whilst minimising the possible adverse impacts on surrounding properties in terms of privacy and solar access.

 

The subject site is generally not visible from any panoramic viewing points. The proposal is significantly smaller in bulk and scale to the adjoining and surrounding residential unit developments hence it is unlikely to disturb the continuity of the existing streetscape. It is also considered that the proposal will maintain any existing views to and from the site and is unlikely to affect any existing view paths from the habitable rooms of adjacent buildings.

 

As indicated above, the proposal is considered to relate well to the existing built environment the scale of development in the immediate context of the site and the emerging character of the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the FSR development standard.

 

In the circumstances of the particular case, the SEPP 1 Objection for the non-compliance with the density / FSR control is considered well founded. Furthermore, despite the numerical non-compliance it is considered that the proposal will achieve the objectives of the development standard.

 

Assessing Officer’s assessment of floor space ratio

The floor space ratio objection is well founded and the proposal satisfies the purpose for the standard:

 

·      Bream St is dominated much larger apartment buildings that are 3 and 4 storeys high. The scale of the proposed addition is much less than these buildings and as a result it does not adversely impact on the streetscape.

 

·      The proposed addition is sympathetic to the architecture of the existing semi-detached dwelling. It is set behind the primary frontage of the roof as is usually required for additions to semi-detached dwellings.

 

·      The height and setback configuration of the dwelling does not create unacceptable impacts on neighbouring dwellings. While the side setback is less than is common for the larger apartment buildings nearby, the site is much narrower and the proposed addition is much smaller allowing smaller side setbacks without severe and unacceptable impacts.

 

Matter 2: The Court must be of the opinion that “granting of consent to that development application is consistent with the aims of this Policy as set out in clause 3” (clause 7 of SEPP 1).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Assessing Officer: The applicant has presented a case to establish that compliance with the standards would hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act. The proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the character of the locality and this is consistent with the objects as quoted in the SEPP. The variations from the standards are consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as the proposal 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 impacts.

 

Matter 3: The Court must be satisfied that a consideration of the matters in clause 8(a) and (b) of SEPP 1 justifies the upholding of the SEPP 1 objection. The matters in clause 8(a) and (b) are:

 

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

 

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

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

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

Table - Establishing compliance is unreasonable or necessary

Method

Assessment

First

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

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

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

 

Second

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

 

Assessing Officer: 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The underlying objectives of the standards would 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The standards have 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The existing Residential 2C zoning is appropriate for the site.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with DCP – Public Notification.  As a result of this notification, the following submissions were received:

 

5.1 Objections

 

2/79 Bream Street

Issue: Loss of sunlight to bedrooms and bathrooms.

Comment: The objector’s apartment does not appear to have any northern orientation. It is on the lowest residential floor of the affected building. It generally faces south except for 2 bedroom windows, a bathroom window and a secondary kitchen window, which face west. The apartment is in the southern part of a southerly aspect lot making it highly vulnerable to shadow impacts. The proposal overshadows only the secondary west facing kitchen window from 2pm. The impact is considerably less than from a larger but still compliant proposal on the subject lot because the proposed building is much lower than the maximum external wall and overall height specified in the LEP.

 

Issue: Loss of privacy to bedrooms at 2/79 Bream St from the east facing window.

Comment: The subject window is a stair-well window and it is designed to admit light to the dwelling. The amended plans include fixed external louvres to protect privacy to the east.

 

Issue: Excessive height bulk and scale.

Comment: The addition complies with the maximum external wall and overall building height limits specified in the LEP. The bulk and scale is compact and compatible with the streetscape as discussed in the SEPP 1 section of this report.

 

Issue: Potential for increasing overpopulation and over congestion in Bream St.

Comment: The building would remain a single dwelling, albeit with more bedrooms.

 

Issue: Proposal destroys historical look of the semi and corrupts harmony between people.

Comment: The subject building is not heritage listed and not in a heritage conservation area.

 

Issue: The access to the car park would require removal of a tree.

Comment: Car parking and tree removal were assessed by the Development Engineer and Landscape Technician and are acceptable.

 

79 Bream Street (Executive Committee)

Issue: Vantage points on the eastern side will impact on the privacy at apartments 2, 3, 7 and 11

Comment: The window facing 79 Bream St is a stairwell window and the amended plans show fixed external louvres to protect privacy.

 

Issue: Loss of sunlight to apartments 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11 and reduced amenity.

Comment: The proposal affects only the secondary east facing kitchen window in unit 2 from 2pm. This impact is assessed above in the objection from apartment 2 and is acceptable. Other windows remain unaffected by the proposal.

 

Issue: Increase in ambient noise into the west facing units.

Comment: The proposed use is residential and noise impacts would be in-line with those expected for a residential zone.

 

Issue: The outlook from west facing balconies will be darker and of a wall and windows, which is unenjoyable.

Comment: The wall height is amply compliant with the maximum specified in the LEP and the visual impact is acceptable.

Issue: Apartment values will decrease.

Comment: This is not a matter for consideration in this assessment.

 

75 Bream Street

Issue: Bulk and scale is excessive. SEPP 1 objection to FSR should not be supported. Proposal is out of character with the nearby row of semi-detached houses.

Comment: The amended plans show the additions behind the primary street frontage of the roof as is typical for sympathetic additions to a semi-detached dwelling. The bulk and scale of the development is acceptable. The proposed FSR is assessed in the SEPP 1 section of this report and is acceptable.

 

Issue: Proposal does not comply with DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies provisions for desired future character and height.

Comment: This DCP does not apply to the proposal. The proposal satisfies the requirements of the relevant Multi-unit Housing DCP.

 

Issue: Proposal will mean that it is not possible to carry out an addition to the adjoining Semi at No 75 Bream St.

Comment: It is unclear why the objector believes this is the case. The proposal is not adverse to the redevelopment of No 75 Bream St.

 

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:-

 

Engineer Comments

 

Parking Comments

Council’s DCP-Parking requires that dwellings with 1 or 2 bedrooms provide 1 off-street carspace and dwellings with 3 or more bedrooms provide 2 off street carspaces. As the present dwelling is currently 2 bedroom with no off-street parking provided the site is subject to a parking credit of 1 space.

 

The proposed alteration will increase the number of bedrooms in the dwelling to 4 thereby increasing the parking demand by one space. This is proposed to be provided off the Bream Street frontage.

 

In previous memo from Development Engineering the application was not supported due to the non-compliance of the carspace  with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 in regards to the minimum head clearance requirement of 2.20m (only 1.9m was available).

The amended plans have addressed this issue by now indicating a head clearance of 2.20m and are satisfactory to Development Engineering. 

 

Some transitional grades may be required to satisfactorily grade from the footpath level to the carspace. These shall be contained within 1m of the front property alignment and shall not exceed 12.5%. The carspace itself shall not exceed a grade of 1 in 20 (5%)

 

Landscape Comments

The only vegetation that will be affected by this application is a 4 metre tall Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwood) on Council’s Bream Street verge, centrally across the width of the site that would need to be removed in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle crossing and hardstand as shown.

 

Ordinarily, Council would have no reason to consider this as it is in fair health and condition, and is also part of an avenue planting of this species, but given the fact it is not significant in anyway, and that there is no option for a re-design to allow its preservation given the narrow site width, conditions in this report allow its removal, with the applicant required to cover relevant costs, including a loss of amenity fee as a replacement cannot be provided due to the presence of a vehicle crossing to the east and a power pole to the west.

 

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:

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

 

Clause 12 Zone Objectives

The proposal is permissible with development consent in the 2C Residential zone as multi-unit housing. The proposal is compatible with the relevant zone objectives:

 

(1)  The objectives of Zone No 2C are:

(a)  to provide for a medium density residential environment, and

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

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

(e)  to encourage housing affordability, and

 

Part 2b Principle Development Standards

The table below shows a compliance check. Non-compliance is addressed in the SEPP 1 section of this report and is acceptable.

 

Part 2b Principle Development Standards

Cl

Standard

Assessment

20E

Minimum landscaped area: 50%

52% Complies

20E

Maximum landscaped podium: 25%

0% Complies.

20F

Maximum floor space ratio 0.65:1

0.74:1 Does not comply.

20G

Maximum external wall height: 10m

8.5m Complies.

20G

Maximum overall height: 12m

9.5m Complies

 

SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

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

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

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

 

Category

Cost

Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200000

$495,000.00

1.0%

$4,950.00

8.1 Policy Controls

 

Development Control Plan  - 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 there is non-compliance; assessment is made against the relevant Objectives and Performance Requirements in the following section. 

 

Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

Satisfactory.

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.

Proposal has 6.45m frontage, which does not comply but is suitable for additions to an existing semi-detached dwelling as proposed.

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

n/a

Height

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

 

The proposal complies with the 10m wall height and 12m overall height standard specified in the LEP and is acceptable.

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 proposal has an interesting visual form. The addition is behind the main roof face with an acceptable impact on the streetscape. Amenity impacts are acceptable.

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

No change to the existing. Acceptable.

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 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.

1m minimum and up to 1.8m with an average of 1.58m. Maximum length of any wall section is 4.2m. Non complying parts discussed in environmental assessment section.

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 2C

Minimum average setback 8 metres.

No part closer than 6 metres.

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

No change to existing. Upper levels are setback 14m. Acceptable.

P4  General

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

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

Satisfactory.

Density

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

 

Non-compliance with FSR assessed in SEPP 1 section of report and is acceptable.

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.

 

Front fence shown on plans 1.2m high. Acceptable.

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.

Landscaped area is 52% and complies with the minimum amount of 50% specified in the LEP

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

 

Not applicable.

P3  Private Open Space

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

 

Adequate.

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

 

Not located in the front setback.

P5  Townhouses

Each dwelling is provided with an area of useable private open space or courtyard area, at ground or podium level.

S5 Minimum area of 25m2 and a minimum dimension of 3 x 4 metres.

Acceptable.

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.

Not applicable.

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.

New windows in the eastern elevation are high-sill windows (1.8m). Outlook from the stair is generally obscured by fixed external louvres. There is some incidental outlook from the stair but it does not have significant and unacceptable privacy impacts.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

Existing private open space. Satisfactory.

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

Satisfactory.

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

New building work to comply with BCA.

View Sharing

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

 

Proposal is below maximum height and adequately preserves whatever views might exist over the site.

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

 

Satisfactory.

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

There are unlikely to be any view corridors down the side of the building because sites to the north are quite high

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

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

 

Proposal is assisted by north/south orientation. No impact on north facing windows or private open spaces.

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

 

No impact to existing solar collectors.

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.

 

Proposal does not overshadow any living areas.

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.

 

 

Proposal does not overshadow any private open recreational spaces.

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.

Proposal complies with BASIX and has sufficient northerly orientation. Satisfactory.

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.

 

Acceptable.

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Proposal retains casual surveillance from existing dwelling. Satisfactory.

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

Satisfactory.

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

Satisfactory.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

Satisfactory.

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

None required.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

Satisfactory.

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

No common areas.

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

 

Consent condition.

Parking

Required On-site Parking1 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.

 

 

1 parking space proposed, which is satisfactory.

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

 

Parking space is below the dwelling and recessed into the sub-floor area. Satisfactory.

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

 

 

Not required.

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

 

Satisfactory.

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

Not required.

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

 

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Satisfactory.

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

 

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

Complies.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

 

Satisfactory.

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

Satisfactory.

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.

Satisfactory.

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.

Not required.

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.

 

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

 

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

 

Utilities/Site Facilities

P1 Mailboxes provided in accordance with Australia Post.

 

Satisfactory.

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

 

Satisfactory.

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

 

Satisfactory.

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

 

Satisfactory.

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

 

Consent condition for Section 73 Certificate.

P6 Telephone lines provided in accordance with the service provider.

 

Satisfactory.

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

 

Satisfactory.

Waste Minimisation and Management

P1 Waste collection and separation facilities for each dwelling.

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

Satisfactory.

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

 

 

Satisfactory.

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

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

Satisfactory.

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.

 

Setbacks

The existing building is setback 1m from the eastern side boundary. The proposed addition has a minimum setback of 1m to the eastern side boundary for a distance of 3.6m for the stairwell. The addition is otherwise setback 1.8m improving the average setback slightly to 1.58m. The existing building and the proposed additions abut the western side boundary as is typical of a semi-detached dwelling.


The proposal encroaches in the preferred minimum side setback of 3.5m and the preferred minimum average side setback of 5m.

 

The proposed building is not a large apartment building as anticipated by the DCP preferred solutions, but quite a small semi-detached dwelling on a very small lot. Impacts on views, solar access and privacy are acceptable as described elsewhere in this report. The proposed building is quite narrow and has adequate separation to neighbouring buildings. It would reflect the relatively compact scale of the 3 dwellings to the west and therefore achieves the DCP performance requirements for setback, which are:

 

          DCP Performance requirements for setback

 

          Buildings are set back from the side boundary to ensure that:

-     there is adequate separation between buildings to maintain reasonable levels of solar access and minimise overshadowing.

-     reasonable levels of privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces are provided.

-     opportunities for landscaping and private open space are provided.

-     streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

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 development application was accompanied by a well-founded SEPP 1 objection that demonstrates the proposal satisfies the objectives of the development standard irrespective of numerical non-compliance.

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including first and second storey additions, new front hardstand car space and a new front fence. The proposal was amended on two occasions to reduce bulk and scale and improve the streetscape appearance.

 

The site is on the northern side of Bream Street between Hill Street and Arden Street, Coogee. It is 210.5m2 with a 6.425m frontage; it slopes moderately toward the street and is zoned 2C Residential. The locality is dominated by larger residential flat buildings.

 

There were 3 objections and the issues that were raised are addressed in this report.

 

The proposal satisfies the LEP general and zone objectives and the Multi-unit Housing DCP performance requirements.

 

Approval subject to conditions is recommended.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.       That Council support objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20F Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to Floor Space Ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the specified purpose of the clauses, and will not adversely affect the character and amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.       That Council grant development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/1061/2010 for alterations and additions to the existing single storey semi-detached dwelling house including first and second storey additions, new front hardstand car space and a new front fence at 77 Bream Street, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The development must be carried out in accordance with the following conditions of consent.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans and supporting documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s approved stamp, except where amended by Council in red and/or by other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan

Drawn by

Received

DA02

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

DA03

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

DA04

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

DA05

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

DA06

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

DA07

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

DA08

Abstract Designs

22/3/11

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Received

Alterations and additions

A107841

22/3/11

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a ‘Construction Certificate’ by either Randwick City Council or an Accredited Certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the construction certificate application.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent conditions and to achieve reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

Consent Requirements

2.       The requirements and amendments detailed in the ‘General Conditions’ must be complied with and be included in the construction certificate plans and associated documentation.

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

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

 

External materials, finishes and colours of the building are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building and any metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. Colourbond) to limit the level of reflection and glare.

 

b)    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 Manager Development Assessments prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

4.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $495,000.00, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council:   $4,950.00.

 

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.

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

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

 

Structural Adequacy

6.       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), certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure to support the addition.

 

Long Service Levy Payments

7.       The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, must be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, 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.

Security Deposits

 

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

 

·           $600.00     -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

The damage/civil works security deposit may be provided by way of a cash, cheque or credit card payment and is refundable upon a satisfactory inspection by Council upon the completion of the civil works which confirms that there has been no damage to Council's infrastructure.

 

The owner/builder is also requested 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.

 

To obtain a refund of relevant deposits, a Security Deposit Refund Form is to be forwarded to Council’s Director of City Services upon issuing of an occupation certificate or completion of the civil works.

 

9.       Any transitional grades required to satisfactorily grade from the footpath level to the carspace shall be contained within 1.5m of the front property alignment and shall not exceed 12.5%.  The remainder of the carspace shall not exceed a grade of 1 in 20 (5%). Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

Alignment Level Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

12.     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:

 

13.     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.

 

14.     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:

 

15.     Stormwater runoff from the site shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter along the site frontage by gravity (preferably without the use of a charged system).

 

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

 

The pump system must also be designed and installed strictly in accordance with Randwick City Council's Stormwater Code.

 

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

 

Street Tree Removal

 

18.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $592.00 (including GST) being to cover Council’s costs to remove the Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwood) from the Bream Street verge, in order to accommodate the proposed vehicle crossing and internal hardstand as shown, and also includes a loss of amenity fee as this semi-established public tree cannot be replaced upon completion due to the presence of another vehicle crossing to the east, and a power pole to the west.

 

The contribution shall be paid into Tree Amenity Income at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development.

 

The applicant must contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 (quoting the receipt number), and giving at least four working weeks notice to arrange for removal of the street tree prior to the commencement of site works.

 

BASIX Requirements

19.     In accordance with section 80A(11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 97A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, the requirements and commitments contained in the relevant BASIX Certificate must be complied with.

 

The required commitments listed and identified in the BASIX Certificate must be included on the construction certificate plans, specifications and associated documentation, 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.

 

Energy & Water Efficiency

20.     The following energy efficiency and water saving measures are to be implemented in all new and upgraded building work and details included in the construction certificate:

 

a)    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.

 

b)    New 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.

 

c)    New 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.

 

Smoke Alarms

21.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or 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 are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’, as applicable.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity.

 

Construction Certificate, Principal Certifying Authority & Commencement of Works

 

22.     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 any 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.

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

 

Details of the Licensed Building Contractor and a copy of the relevant Certificate of Home Warranty Insurance or a copy of the Owner-Builder Permit (as applicable) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council, in writing.

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the NSW DECC Construction Noise Guideline by a suitably qualified person, is to be implemented throughout the works.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of works.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

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

 

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

 

Temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or public place, a Local Approval application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Health, Building & Regulatory Services before placing any item or article on the road, footpath or nature strip.

 

Construction Site Management Plan

27.     A Construction Site Management Plan must be developed and implemented prior to the commencement of any works. The construction 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;

·          provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·          construction noise and vibration management;

·          construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

Demolition Work Plan

28.     A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures and relevant environmental/occupational health and safety requirements.

 

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

·          Recycling, reuse and waste disposal of remediation materials

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

 

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

§  Refer to the conditions within the “Requirements During Construction & Site Work”, for further details and requirements relating to demolition work, removal of any asbestos and public safety.

 

Sydney Water

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

 

Prior to the commencement of excavation or building works, the approved Construction Certificate plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre, 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 works.

 

Public Utilities

30.     A Public Utility Impact Assessment must be carried out to identify all public utility services located on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the building works.

 

Documentary evidence from the relevant public utility authorities confirming that their requirements have been or are able to be satisfied, must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.

 

The owner/builder must make the necessary arrangements and meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia, Sydney Water and other authorities to adjust, repair or relocate their services as required.

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with during the demolition, excavation and construction of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity during construction.

 

Demolition Work Requirements

31.     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 & Water and Randwick City Council policies, including:

 

·          Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

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

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECCW/EPA Guidelines

·          Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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.

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

32.     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

 

·          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.  A copy of the relevant licence must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

·          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.  Details of the landfill site (which must be lawfully able to receive asbestos materials) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

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”.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

34.     Sediment and erosion control measures, must be implemented throughout the site works in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to Council’s satisfaction.  Details are to be included in the Construction Site Management Plan.

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

f)     Temporary safety fencing is to be provided to any swimming pools under construction, 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.

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

36.     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 must be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land

37.     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.

 

38.     Prior to undertaking any demolition, excavation or building work in the following circumstances, a report must be obtained from a professional engineer which details the methods of support for the dwelling or associated structure on the adjoining land, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

·          when undertaking excavation or building work within the zone of influence of the footings of a dwelling or associated structure that is located on the adjoining land;

·          when undertaking demolition work to a wall of a dwelling that is built to a common or shared boundary (eg. semi-detached or terrace dwelling);

·          when constructing a wall to a dwelling or associated structure that is located within 900mm of a dwelling located on the adjoining land.

 

The demolition, excavation and building work and the provision of support to the dwelling or associated structure on the adjoining land, must also be carried out in accordance with the abovementioned report, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Restriction on Working Hours

39.     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

Excavating of rock, use of jack-hammers, pile-drivers, vibratory rollers/compactors or the like

 

·         Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·         Saturday - No work permitted

·         Sunday & public holidays - 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.

 

Inspections During Construction

40.     The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority, 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).

 

Building Encroachments

41.     There must be no encroachment of any structures or building work onto Council’s road reserve, footway, nature strip or public place.

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing an ‘Occupation Certificate’.

 

Note:        For the purpose of this consent, any reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall also be taken to mean ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent and to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity.

 

 

Occupation Certificate Requirements

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

 

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

 

Civil Works Conditions

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

BASIX Requirements

46.     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.

 

Occupant Safety

47.     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:

 

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

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

·          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,

·          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),

·          Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

48.     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.

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

49.     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.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

 

The following operational conditions must be complied with at all times, throughout the use and operation of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent and to maintain reasonable levels of public health and environmental amenity.

 

Use of premises

50.     The premises must only be used as a single residential dwelling and must not be used for dual or multi-occupancy purposes.

 

External Lighting

51.     External lighting to the premises must be designed and located so as to minimise light-spill beyond the property boundary or cause a public nuisance.

 

52.     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.

 

Advisory Conditions

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

 

ADVISORY NOTES

 

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, or other relevant legislation and Council’s policies.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

 

 

·          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 requirements is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million.  Alternatively, Council may issue a penalty infringement notice (for up to $1,500) for each offence.  Council may also issue notices and orders to demolish unauthorised or non-complying building work, or to comply with the requirements of Council’s development consent.

 

·          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.

 

Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue Construction Certificates and be your Principal Certifying Authority for the development, to undertake inspections and ensure compliance with the development consent, relevant building regulations and standards of construction.  For further details contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

·          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.

 

·          A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

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

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

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

 

For further information please contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

·          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.

 

·          Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

Development Application Report No. D45/11

 

 

Subject:                  22 Camira Street, Maroubra

Folder No:                   DA/1112/2010

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to dwelling

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                D Campbell

Owner:                         C & A Spanos

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. In accordance with legal 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 0.65:1 and exceeds the maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 and the external wall height of 7.25m which exceeds the maximum external wall height of 7m.

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as the proposal includes a SEPP 1 Objection for the floor space ratio 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 and a new garage to the front of the property. The main issue is the potential for any impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and the impact upon the streetscape in relation to the new garage.

 

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 revised floor plan layout, including a living area at rear and an upper level comprising two bedrooms and a bathroom. A garage is proposed to be erected to the front of the dwelling. The proposal will provide for 55m of additional floor area to the dwelling.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the western side of Camira Street and has a frontage of 5.645m a depth of 36.58m and an area of 231m. 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 – Notification. No response has 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 47% 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 0.65:1 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 maximum height however the external wall height is 7.25m which exceeds the control and a SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged and is discussed below.

 

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

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998. SEPP 1 objections have 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

0.65:1 (152m2 )

LEP development standard

0.5:1 (117m2)

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

30% excess (35m2)

 

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 design meets the objective to ensure the development is not excessive in height and scale and is similar to other developments in the street.

 

The alterations and additions to the dwelling are necessary to provide for a usable and practical area for the occupants.

 

The proposal has been designed taking into account the whole building rather than half of a pair of semis.

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 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 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 standards 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 standards 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.

 

Pursuant to Clause 20G of RLEP 1998, the maximum external wall height of buildings within 2A Zones is 7m. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

External wall height

Proposal

7.25m

LEP development standard

7m

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

250mm, 2.5%

 

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).

 

External wall height 20G

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

 

“To operate together with controls for floor space ratio 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 overall height of the building is well below the 9.5m building height.

 

The design meets the objective to ensure the development is not excessive in height and scale.

 

The form is similar to other developments in the street.

 

Sloping the roof to the western side means the roof and gutters are much more accessible for maintenance.

 

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 maximum external wall height however the degree of non compliance is not significant and arises because of the fall of the site towards the street frontage only and not because of a specific design of the proposal. In addition the overall height and external wall height of the building is similar to other two storey dwellings on this side of Camira Street and 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 external wall height 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 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 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 external wall height 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

47%

Yes.

25m² of private open space provided.

61m2 +

Yes

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

8.6m x 7.1m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

30%

Yes

Floor area

(Site area 231m2) maximum FSR 0.65:1 

0.65:1

Yes in relation to DCP, no in relation to Development Standard.

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

7.25m

No, see below

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

More  than 1m to garage portion of dwelling

See comments below

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

Up to side boundaries

See below

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

More than 7.3m

Yes

 

Excavation for the rear addition will be up to the side boundary and to the front of the dwelling to the garage portion will exceed 1m in depth, conditions of consent are included with respect to ensuring that both the subject and adjoining sites are properly maintained during and after building works.

 

 

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

See comments below in relation to position of garage

See below

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

7.3m

Yes

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

Up to northern and 1175mm from southern  side boundaries

Yes

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Up to northern side and 1500mm from western side boundaries

See below

 

The northern 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 and the windows to the upper level all serve the bedrooms and bathroom.

 

 

Garages & Driveways

 

 

 

 

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

1 space

Existing levels of parking maintained

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

Complies

Yes

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

The proposed new garage is sited up to the front boundary which is in keeping with the established streetscape character of this side of Camira Street which includes other examples of carports and garages sited to the front boundary, including a garage to the adjoining semi detached dwelling.

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

65% of the width of the site.

No objections based on the arguments as discussed above in relation to no adverse impact to the appearance of the dwelling and streetscape.

Fences     

The proposal includes a new entry gate and front fence which are indented from the front boundary and area a maximum of 1800mm in height. The style and overall height of the fence complies with the established fencing form within the street.

 

 

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 significant 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.

There will be some additional overshadowing to the adjoining property which arises because of the orientation of the sites and the close proximity of the dwellings. The extent of additional overshadowing is not unreasonable and does not result because of an inappropriate building design.

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

Slightly reduced by new upper level, overshadowing already from the existing dwellings and fencing

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 less than $200000

$150,000

0.5%

$750.00

 

 

 

 

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

 

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 Clauses 20G 20F of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to maximum floor space ratio and maximum external wall height respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 1112/2010 for alterations and additions to the dwelling at No. 22 Camira 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 S03-1/2010, 2/2010, 3/2010, 4/2010 dated 10.12.2010 and received by Council on the 17th December 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be 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.       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 $ 150 000 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $ 750.00.

 

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.     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.

 

13.     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:

 

14.     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.

 

15.     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).

 

16.     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.

 

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

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected 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).

 

18.     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”.

 

19.     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.

 

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

22.     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:

 

23.     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 upper level addition.

 

24.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

26.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 E of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that the adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times.

 

a)     If the development involves an excavation that extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, the person having the benefit of the development must, at the person’s own expense:

 

i)      protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

ii)      where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

 

b)     The condition referred to in subclause 1) does not apply if the person having the benefit of the development consent owns the adjoining land or the owner of the adjoining land has given consent in writing to that condition not applying.

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

28.     Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays and all building activities are strictly prohibited on Sundays and Public Holidays.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

34.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

36.     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:

 

·              20mm above the back of the existing concrete footpath at all points opposite the path, along the full site frontage.

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

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

 

39.     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.

 

40.     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:

 

41.     Stormwater runoff from the redeveloped portion of the site shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter along the site frontage 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:

 

42.     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.

 

43.     Suitable planting and landscape treatment incorporating the use of native coastal species shall be provided throughout the front and rear portions of the site, so as to both enhance and improve presentation of the dwelling to the street, as well as minimize any negative impacts on neighbouring properties in regards to overlooking and privacy from the proposed first floor as shown, and must include at least 1 x 25 litre/300mm (pot size at the time of planting) NATIVE coastal tree in the rear yard, selecting a species that will achieve a minimum height of between 4-7 metres at maturity.

 

44.     The PCA must ensure that the site landscaping has been completed, prior to issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, with the property owner required to maintain it in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

Development Application Report No. D46/11

 

 

Subject:                  11A Oswald Street, Randwick

Folder No:                   DA/1078/2010

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including attic roof conversion into bedroom, bathroom with terrace

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Brad Inwood

Owner:                         Amanda Hemmings & Mark Barbezat

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The subject application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as the proposed development involves variations to the Development Standard for minimum landscaped area under the LEP by more than 10% (being 38.36% and the standard is 50%), exceeds the FSR Development Standard under the LEP by more than 10% (having an FSR of 1.19:1 and the standard is 0.65:1) and exceeds the maximum external wall height control under the LEP by more than 10% (being 9.15m and the standard is 7m). 

 

The subject application is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling by extension to the rear on the ground and first floor level and internal reconfiguration.  The proposal also includes roof attic conversion into a bedroom, a bathroom with terrace and associated landscape works.

 

The application was advertised and notified in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. In response, a total of two submissions were received.

 

The main issues of objectors are the visual impact that the additions will have upon the amenity of the adjoining dwellings, bulk and scale, height, overshadowing and likely impact on the visual and acoustical privacy of adjoining dwellings.

 

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

 

The proposal will provide a landscaped area of 38.36% (41.24m2) which is under the RLEP 1998 minimum landscape requirement of 50% (53.75m2). 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 argued 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 that if the application was assessed against the provisions of the DCP-Dwelling Houses which were the relevant controls prior, to Council receiving that such applications are to be assessed as multi-unit development, the non compliance for the landscaped area would not be as significant and will equate to 1.76m².

 

The proposal has a floor space ratio of 1.19:1, which equates to 128.2m2 GFA. The proposal does not comply with the maximum permissible FSR of 0.65:1 (69.875m²) under RLEP 1998. If the application was assessed against the provisions of the DCP-Dwelling Houses which were previously 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, stating but the proposal 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 proposal has a maximum external wall height of 9.15m, which exceeds the maximum external wall height specified under the RLEP 1998 of 7m. The applicant has submitted an objection under SEPP No. 1 justifying the exceedance of the height limit as it does not create excessive visual bulk and scale, is not considered intrusive or dominant, and does not give rise to detrimental amenity impacts on adjoining/surrounding properties.

The objections to the landscaped area, FSR and building heights 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 subject application is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling by extension to the rear on the ground and first floor level and internal reconfiguration.  The proposal also includes roof attic conversion into a bedroom, a bathroom with terrace and associated landscape work.

 

The applicant was advised that the proposed development needed to be redesigned to be consistent with the FSR and rear building setback on the first floor level of the adjoining terraces.

 

Amended plans were submitted which addressed Council Officers concerns.

 

The following changes were made to the proposed development:

 

1.     The rear first floor setback was increased by 1.5m (and the side brick wing walls were removed and replaced with 1.8m high screens).

2.     The walk in wardrobe to bedroom 3 to the rear first floor was deleted.

3.     The setback to the inner courtyard of the dwelling to the western side on the first floor level was increased.

4.     The dormer window to the front of the attic level was removed and replaced with a skylight window.

5.     The storeroom along the rear southern boundary was deleted.

 

The assessment is based on these amended plans received by Council on 13 April 2011.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is currently occupied by an existing two storey terrace style dwelling.

The locality is residential in character and contains a mixture of terrace style dwellings, semi detached and free standing dwellings and low scale multi unit housing development.

 

The subject dwelling is within a row of terraces, No.s 1-19 which as a group are listed as heritage items in Schedule 3 of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

4.    Site History

 

The following are the most recent applications for the subject site:

 

DA/357/2001 – An application was approved on 4 June 2001 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house to alter the kitchen, bathroom toilet and laundry layout on the ground floor, to provide a covered pergola to the existing rear terrace, and a new attic with rear facing dormer window and front facing skylight.

 

DA/319/1996 - An application was approved on 23 October 1996 for alterations and additions including dormer window, rear attic extension and balcony.

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 and building height. 

 

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 2B Zones is 50%. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Landscaped area

Proposal

38.36% (41.24m2 )

LEP development standard

50% (53.75m2)

Variation of the LEP standard

Shortfall of 23.28% (11.64m2) 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 site is very small and compliance with the LEP results in a small dwelling.

-   The site has similar sized landscaped area to the adjoining terrace houses.

-   The works are not visible from the street.

-   The non compliance will have no impact on adjoining dwellings.

-   The proposal will improve access from the dwelling to the outdoor space and will improve the use of the garden for the occupants.

 

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 38.36% (or 41.24m2) 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 (of 40% landscaped area) prior to the new classification of semis, the non compliance for the landscaped area would not be as significant and will equate to 11% (or 11.825m²).

 

-    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. 24.4%) 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 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 2B Zone in that it will allows for multi-unit housing 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 does 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 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 B 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 2B Zones is 0.65:1 respectively. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio

Proposal

1.19:1 (128..2m2 )

LEP development standard

0.65:1 (69.875m2)

Variation of the LEP standard

83.47% excess (58.325m2)

 

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 variation is consistent with the aims of the policy and they do not adversely affect the standard in that:

 

- Similar Built Form, Scale and Size

The proposed works are compatible with the surrounding streetscape in scale, height, bulk and size. Most adjoining dwellings within the street are two or three storeys in height.

 

Most recently constructed alterations and additions, including those that have been assessed under the current DCP Plan, are generally three storeys in nature.

 

Therefore, even though the proposed works do not comply with the FSR, they do comply with the objectives of the FSR by ensuring dwellings are compatible with the scale and size of the surrounding dwellings and streetscapes.

 


- Harmonious with the existing built environment

The proposed works are all located the rear of the dwelling. Apart from a skylight to the fits floor roof, there is no change to the front facade from the proposed works.

 

Therefore, even though the proposed works do not comply with the FSR, they do comply with the objectives of the FSR by ensuring that the proposed development help establish a characteristic and harmonious built streetscape.

 

- Negligible impact on adjoining properties

The proposed works have negligible impact on the adjoining properties. The adjoining properties have negligible impact from overshadowing or loss of solar access. There is no loss of views from the proposed works. Acoustic and visual privacy to the surrounding properties is not compromised from the proposed works.

 

Therefore, even though the proposed works do not comply with the FSR controls, they do comply with objectives of the FSR control to ensure any proposed development have negligible impact to the adjoining properties and surrounding environment.

 

- Surrounding dwellings fsr and density

There is a strong precedence within the vicinity for all existing alterations and additions to not comply with the FSR controls. Virtually all recently constructed surrounding developments would not be in compliance with the FSR controls.

 

It would be most likely that all recent developments would also have had to submit a SEPP 1, especially all dwellings in the same row of terrace houses.

 

Therefore, it is unreasonable for the proposed works to comply with a FSR control that restricts density to the site to a level that is less than all the surrounding dwellings.

 

- Small nature of the site

Most sites within the area are generally small in size. The site of the proposed works is only 107m2. These sites are generally quite insufficient for modern living requirements. Compliance with the FSR would allow less floor space than a new 2 bedroom apartment.

 

Due to the nature of the site it is unreasonable for the site to comply with a control that restricts any possible development to make the house suitable for modern day living requirements. The proposed alterations and additions could not be seen as excessive or large in size, but they do make the dwelling into a more pleasant and liveable space for the occupants.

 

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 1.19:1 (or 128.2m²) which well exceeds the maximum FSR of 0.65:1 permitted for this site as stipulated in the LEP.  Whilst the degree of non-compliance is substantial it is considered that the affects of the additional building bulk will not adversely impact the amenity of the adjoining properties. 

 

The proposal is deemed to satisfy the performance requirement, namely, that the building bulk is generally compatible with the surrounding built forms and will not result in significant additional building bulk that will dominate the site or detract from the character of the streetscape or surrounding area.

 

It should be noted that the subject dwelling is a terrace style dwelling within a group of terraces which are all on very small blocks of land. Council has previously been flexible in relation to floor space ratio controls to this group of dwellings given the very restrictive constraints of the site. Below is a list of the recently approved applications for alterations and additions to other dwellings within this group and the resultant floor space ratios.

 

The approved floor space ratio of the dwelling at 11A Oswald Street as detailed in DA/357/01 is 0.99:1.

 

The approved floor space ratio of the dwelling at 15 Oswald Street as detailed in DA/288/03 is 1.1:1.

 

The approved floor space ratio of the dwelling at 7 Oswald Street as detailed in DA/8/2005 is 1.29:1.

 

The approved floor space ratio of the dwelling at 19 Oswald Street as detailed in DA/580/2009 is 1.11:1

 

Therefore, the proposed floor space ratio of the dwelling which is 1.19:1 is not inconsistent with the established character of this group of dwellings and satisfies the overall objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

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 maintains the footprint of the existing building towards the front of the dwelling.

 

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.

 

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 FSR 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 2B 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 does 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 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 B zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality.

 

 

c.      Clause 20G - External Wall Height

The proposal seeks a variation to the maximum external wall height. The proposal has a maximum external wall height of 9.15m, which exceeds the maximum external wall height specified in Clause 20G Randwick LEP 1998 of 7m.

 

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).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·      The proposed variation is consistent with the aims of the policy and they do not adversely affect the standard in that:

 

- EXISTING HEIGHT

The proposed works do not increase the height of the dwelling.  The existing ridge height remains.  Therefore, even though the proposed works do not comply with the height controls, they cannot be altered to the existing building.

 

- HARMONIOUS WITH THE EXISTING BUILT ENVIRONMENT

The proposed works are compatible with the surrounding building heights. All adjoining dwellings are the exact same height.

 

Most recently constructed alterations and additions to the adjoining dwellings have also been assessed under the current DCP Plan and been seen as acceptable development.

 

Therefore, even though the proposed works do not comply with height controls, they do comply with the objectives of the height controls by ensuring dwellings are compatible with the height of the surrounding dwellings.

 

- NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES

The proposed works have negligible impact on the adjoining properties.  The adjoining properties have negligible impact from overshadowing or loss of solar access from the building and its height.  There is no loss of views from the proposed works. Acoustic and visual privacy to the surrounding properties are not compromised from the proposed works.

 

Therefore, even though the proposed works do not comply with the height controls, they do comply with objectives of the height controls to ensure any proposed development have negligible impact to the adjoining properties and surrounding environment.

 

Therefore, it would be justifiable that sites of this size be developed and not comply with the FSR controls.

 

The applicant’s arguments are considered sound for the following reasons:

 

The height limit resulting from this development is warranted as it does not create excessive visual bulk and scale; is not considered intrusive or dominant; and does not give rise to detrimental amenity impacts on adjoining/surrounding properties.

 

The development will not give rise to any significant adverse overshadowing impacts, view loss, privacy or visual impacts on adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

The proposed non-compliance does not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of the 2B zone in which the site is located or the general objectives for the built and natural environment and amenity or the objectives of the external wall height standard. In particular, the proposed development will be in keeping with the existing height and scale of housing development in adjoining and surrounding sites, and will not dominate the adjoining and nearby sites.

 

The proposed development is not visible from the street and is not considered to be out of context in the streetscape.  The proposed development will satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

The proposal satisfies the purpose of the external wall height standard and the SEPP 1 Objection is well founded.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Building height Comments:

The variation from Building height standards 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 use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental or social impacts.

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of Residential 2B Zone in that it will allow 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”.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

Table – Establishing compliance is unreasonable or necessary

Method

Assessment

First

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

 

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

 

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 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 external wall height 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 considered to be appropriate for the locality.

 

 

 

 

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal has been notified in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan 1998. Amended plans were received reducing the scale of the development and therefore not requiring the development to be renotified.  The following submissions were received:

 

6.1      Objections

11 Oswald Street, Randwick

Issue

Comment

Object to the length and height of the rear extension as it will drastically affect their property.  Their terrace does not extend in depth as far as the other terraces nor extend both boundary walls.  Also, none of the terraces within this row extend out as far with such height. The extension will completely close them in and prevent light and proper use of their outdoor space.

 

Amended plans have been received reducing the scale of the development and increasing the rear building setback on the first floor level to a minimum distance of 1.5m (with the rear balcony being recessed 500mm from the side boundaries) to be generally consistent with the rear building line of the adjoining row of terraces.  This should improve the visual impact of the structure on the boundary and natural light into their rear yard.

Contrary to the claims on Page 21, Item 18 in the architects report, their second storey south facing balcony has extensive views to the skyline & beyond in the south west and to the west.  They have views of greenery, open space, light and sunlight in summer.  This will be lost as will light into their property which will have a detrimental effect on their life style.

 

It is not considered that the proposed rear additions will have an unreasonable impact on views to the objector’s property. The balcony in question that has the outlook does not enjoy any iconic views. The views from this balcony are primarily distant district views of roof tops and sky line views.  Consequently, any minor view loss is considered reasonable and not the result of a poor design.  Given the relatively modest bulk and scale of the proposal and its comparison with other adjoining and surrounding dwellings, further reduction of the building envelope is not warranted.

 

Loss of sunlight into their rear yard.

 

There will be some additional overshadowing to the rear yard of the adjoining properties; however, it is not considered to be unreasonable as is largely unavoidable due to the width and orientation of the allotment. 

 

Also, as discussed above, amended plans have been received reducing the scale of the development by increasing the rear building setback on the first floor level to a minimum distance of 1.5m; this should improve the visual impact of the structure on the boundary and natural light into their rear yard.

 

These Victoria terraces built in the 1860’s are unique in this area and their integrity should be maintained.

It is not considered that the proposal will become a distracting visual element in the area nor is it excessive in respect to bulk and scale.

The proposed development will be sympathetic and in keeping with the existing dwelling; and will not impact on the amenity of adjoining terraces or streetscape in that it is compatible with the existing dwelling and the other residential buildings in the vicinity. The proposal maintains the footprint of the existing building towards the front of the dwelling.

 

The proposed development is considered to be of a modest design that compliments the existing dwelling and will not overpower or unbalance the scale of the buildings on the site.

 

Further, the development will maintain the desirable attributes of the established residential area and will not unreasonably compromise the amenity of adjoining residents.

 

 

15 Oswald Street, Randwick

Issue

Comment

Loss of natural light to both their ground floor kitchen and rear bedroom. Also, 75% of their visible sky line will be lost to their light well and kitchen window.

 

Further, no measurements are given to the size of the light well on 11A Oswald Street.

 

Amended plans have been received reducing the scale of the development and increasing the rear building setback on the first floor level to a minimum distance of 1.5m (with the rear balcony being recessed 500mm from the side boundaries) to be generally consistent with the rear building line of the adjoining row of terraces.  Also, the setback to the inner courtyard of the dwelling to the western side on the first floor level is increased. This should improve the visual impact of the structure on the boundary and natural light into their rear yard and light well.

 

Item 19 in the architects report states that there will be negligible shadowing.  This was taken in the middle of winter June 21st which is not a fair test. The sun is low at this time of the year and behind the roof line and it would obviously cast no shadows, as it would in summer time.

 

There will be some additional overshadowing to the rear yard of the adjoining properties; however, it is not considered to be unreasonable as is largely unavoidable due to the width and orientation of the allotment. 

 

Council’s DCP requires Council to consider overshadowing impacts during the winter solstice and the assessment (discussed below) shows that the degree of overshadowing caused by the development is not unreasonable and will meet the objectives and performance requirement of the DCP.

 

Item 18 in the architects report states no loss of views and corridors will be maintained.  This is not correct as 80% of view from their rear first floor room will be lost.

 

It is not considered that the proposed rear additions will have an unreasonable impact on views to the objector’s property. The windows in question that have the outlook do not enjoy any iconic views. The views from these windows are primarily distant district views of roof tops and sky line views.  Consequently, any minor view loss is considered reasonable and not the result of a poor design.  Given the relatively modest bulk and scale of the proposal and its comparison with other adjoining and surrounding dwellings, further reduction of the building envelope is not warranted.

Item 14 in the architects report states no fencing is changed.  There is 2 storey brick wall proposed touching their garden fence.  This wall extends over 3m from their rear building line.  The notification plan shows this to be a 2 storey extension.  The owners claim it is only a single storey extension with balcony.  They sit and eat outside adjacent to this area and are surrounded by lush vegetation some of which will be lost.

Amended plans have been received reducing the scale of the development and increasing the rear building setback on the first floor level to a minimum distance of 1.5m (with the rear balcony being recessed 500mm from the side boundaries) to be generally consistent with the rear building line of the adjoining row of terraces.  This should reduce the visual bulk of the building when viewed from the objectors property and increase natural light into their rear yard.

Both visual and acoustic privacy will be diminished and their quality of life will be compromised as will the value of their property.

As discussed above, amended plans have been received reducing the scale of the development and as detailed in this assessment the additional privacy impacts are not unreasonable or dissimilar to this row of adjoining terraces and will satisfy the objectives and performance requirements for this section of the DCP.

 

In relation to the value of their property being compromised, this issue is not considered to be a planning related matter, which can be addressed under Section 79C of the EP&A Act.

 

 

6.2 Support

No supporting letters have been received for this application.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

7.1    Heritage Officer

 

The site and the locality

The subject site is part of a group of two storey Victorian terrace houses comprising nos. 1 – 19 Oswald Street, which is listed as a heritage item under Randwick LEP 1998.  The Randwick Heritage Study Inventory Sheet for the property describes it as “a very good row, of considerable streetscape value.” 

 


Background

A previous development application for alterations and additions at ground and first floor level, and provision of additional floor area within the roof space (DA/357/2001) was approved in June 2001.  The works at second floor level comprised a skylight in the front plane of the roof and a dormer window in the rear plane of the roof. 

 

Proposal

The application proposes alternations and additions at ground, first and second floor levels.  It is proposed to demolish the existing rear wing and to construct a two storey addition extending across the full width of the site and further to the rear than the existing rear wing.  At ground floor level, the application proposes a new family room, kitchen/laundry and wc.  At first floor level, the application proposes to provide an enlarged bedroom, bathroom, walk in robe and rear balcony.  At second floor level, it is proposed to enlarge the existing attic room for use as a bedroom, as well as providing a new bathroom and rear balcony.  A large flat roofed dormer is proposed for the rear plane of the roof and a small pitched roofed dormer to the front plane of the roof.  The existing wc at the rear of the site, adjacent to former night soil lane, is to be replaced with a new wc and store room. 

 

Submission

The development application is accompanied by a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by Brad Inwood Architects, which quotes the description of the row in the Heritage Study inventory sheet.  The HIS notes that most of the adjoining dwellings have substantial similar rear alterations but maintain the row’s historical presentation to Oswald Street, and that apart from the front dormer the works are all at the rear of the building and below the existing ridgeline and will not be visible from Oswald Street.

 

Comments

In relation to changes to the rear of the dwelling, it appears that the original form of the terrace consisted of a main pitched roof, together with a two storey rear wing with a skillion roof falling to the side, and possible a single storey wing extending further to the rear.  A range of alterations and additions to the rear of individual dwellings in the group have been carried out including extending the ground and first floor level wings towards the rear and to the side, as well as boxy rear attic level additions.  It is noted that the rear elevations and roof forms of the row have been substantially altered and the original form and character of the terraces from the rear have been lost.  It is noted that the addition will extend around 2m further to the rear than the dwelling to the north and around 3.5m further than the dwelling to the south.  The proposed addition will have greater bulk than those of adjacent properties, however given the extent of change that has occurred to the rear of the row, the proposed changes to the rear are considered acceptable. 

 

In relation to changes to the front of the dwelling, it is noted that two other dwellings in the row, no.11 and no.19, have dormer windows to the front elevation, and several have skylights.  The dormer to no.11 received building approval in 1984, while the dormer to no.19 may have been approval as part of a 1968 building approval.  Both of these dormers were issued prior to the heritage listing in 1993.  DA/288/2003 for no.15 gave consent for attic space with front and rear skylights.  DA/8/2005 for no.7 gave consent for attic space with a rear dormer.  It is considered that the proposed front dormer will detract from the integrity of the terraced row, be inconsistent with past approvals since the gazettal of the heritage items and set a poor precedent for further dormer windows in the front place of the roofs of other dwelling in the group. 

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Plans by Grad Inwood Architects, drawing no’s 0941-01 – 13, dated July 2010;

7.2    Development Engineers

 

Landscape Comments

There is a semi-mature, 10 metre tall Eucalyptus scoparia (White Gum) growing in Council’s bitumen footpath, centrally across the width of the site, which is only in fair health and condition due to past pruning, damage from passing trucks (as evidenced by the wounds on its trunk) as well as its restricted growing environment, but is still covered by the TPO.

 

This tree is part of a group planting of mature Gums in this section of Oswald Street, which are recognised as contributing and complementing the row of Heritage houses and general appeal of the streetscape, and while there is no external works proposed as part of this application, minimal conditions still need to be imposed in order to ensure its preservation.

 

In the rear yard, about halfway along the western boundary, there is a mature, 10-12 metre tall Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) which appeared in good condition but only fair health, as its fronds are suffering from exposure.

 

It is easily the most established vegetation within the site, is covered by the TPO, and is deemed worthy of retention as an existing site feature as has been shown on the plans, with the existing paving to be upgraded in its current location, and while both the ground and first floors will encroach closer towards this palm, finishing about 1900mm to its north, at the northern extent of its crown, no major impact is expected, with conditions in this report detailing the measures required to ensure it is incorporated into the rear courtyard.

 

In the rear yard of the adjoining property to the east, 11 Oswald, against the common boundary, there is from north to south, a closely planted Bangalow Palm and Washingtonia robusta (Washingtonia Palm), of about 5 metres in height, close to the rear of this neighbouring dwelling, and then towards the Right of Way, a 4m tall Howea fosteriana (Kentia Palm).

 

While a new common boundary (party) wall will be constructed, no major impact on either of the palms near the houses will result, with the same also applying to the Kentia Palm adjacent the new store & WC given that a brick toilet block already exists in the same location, with only precautionary conditions required.

 

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 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 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 2B 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 29% which is less than the minimum requirement by 50%. 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 2B zones is 0.65:1.

 

The site has an area of 107.5m2 and a maximum gross floor area (GFA) of 69.875m2 is permissible. As identified in Section 5 of this report, the proposal has a total floor space ratio of 1.19:1 (128.2m²) 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.

 

c. Clause 20G Building Heights

The maximum height for a building other than a dwelling house within a 2B zone is 9.5m from any point on ground level with a maximum external wall height of 7m.  The proposal has an overall height of 9.35m and a maximum external wall height of 9.15m.  The building height control for the maximum external wall height does not comply with this standard.  The SEPP 1 objection to this standard has been assessed and is supported.

 

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 Victorian terrace house, part of a terrace of three. The site is part of a group of two storey Victorian Terrace houses comprising no.’s 1 -19 Oswald Street, which is listed as a heritage item under Randwick LEP 1998.

 

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 the proposed works at the rear of the building as the row of terraces have already been substantially altered and the original form and character of the terraces to the rear have already been lost.  Amended plans have been received deleting the dormer windows and providing a roof skylight in its place.  No objections have been raised to this by Council Heritage Planner.

 

The proposal is considered to be sympathetic and in keeping with the heritage significance of the item and immediate streetscape. The proposed alterations and additions to the existing building will be sympathetic and in keeping with 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).

 

9.1 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, FSR and Building Heights are discussed above in Section 5 and 9 of this report. The SEPP 1 objections to the landscaped area, FSR and Building Heights have been assessed and are supported.

  

The eastern and western sides of the dwelling are sited on the common wall boundary with No.’s 11 & 15 Oswald 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 character of the existing row of terraces.  The additions are to the rear of the dwelling and are not noticeable from the streetscape. Also, the front existing roof form of the terrace is maintained.

 

It is not expected that there will be any unreasonable adverse privacy impacts to the adjoining properties. The new openings to the southern elevation which will primarily overlook the rear yard, are to bedrooms and/or will be screened by the dividing fence. Also, the new window opening on the first floor and attic levels are to bedrooms, which are considered to be low use rooms and will overlook the roof area of the adjoining terraces.  Further, it is expected that internal privacy measures will be used within the bedrooms.

  

The proposed balconies to the rear of the building are off bedrooms which are considered to be low use rooms and privacy screens are proposed to the eastern and western sides of the rear balcony on the first floor level which will minimise overlooking into adjoining properties. Also, given that there are other similar sized balconies within this row of terraces it would be unreasonable to delete the terrace balcony to the rear of the attic level on the grounds of privacy loss alone. 

 

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 faces north.  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 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

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

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 value.

 

 

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, 20F – Floor space ratios and 20G Building Heights, 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/1078/2010 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including attic roof conversion into bedroom, bathroom with terrace at No. 11A Oswald Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

 

DEVELOPMENT CONSENT CONDITIONS

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The development must be carried out in accordance with the following conditions of consent.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans and supporting documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s approved stamp, except where amended by Council in red and/or by other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

 

0941-3a

Brad Inwood Architects

July 10

12 April 2011

0941-4a

Brad Inwood Architects

July 10

12 April 2011

0941-5a

Brad Inwood Architects

July 10

12 April 2011

0941-6a

Brad Inwood Architects

July 10

12 April 2011

0941-7a

Brad Inwood Architects

July 10

12 April 2011

0941-8a

Brad Inwood Architects

July 10

12 April 2011

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received

 

A108961

27 March 2011

11 April 2011

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a ‘Construction Certificate’ by either Randwick City Council or an Accredited Certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the construction certificate application.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent conditions and to achieve reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

Consent Requirements

2.       The requirements and amendments detailed in the ‘General Conditions’ must be complied with and be included in the construction certificate plans and associated documentation.

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

3.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building are to be compatible with the existing building and surrounding buildings in the heritage conservation area.  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 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 development.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

4.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $180,000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council:   $900.

       

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

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

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

 

Structural Adequacy

6.       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), certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure to support the proposed additions.

 

Long Service Levy Payments

7.       The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, must be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, 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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

8.       A surface water/stormwater drainage system must be provided in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate:-

 

a)    Surface water/stormwater drainage systems must be provided in accordance with Part 3.1.2 of the Building Code of Australia (Volume 2);

 

b)    The surface water/stormwater must be drained and discharged to the street gutter or, subject to site suitability, the stormwater may be drained to a suitably designed absorption pit;

 

c)    Any absorption pits or soaker wells should be located not less than 3m from any adjoining premises and the stormwater must not be directed to any adjoining premises or cause a nuisance;

 

d)    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;

 

e)    Details of any proposed drainage systems or works to be carried out in the road, footpath or nature strip must be submitted to and approved by Council before commencing these works.

 

BASIX Requirements

9.       In accordance with section 80A(11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 97A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, the requirements and commitments contained in the relevant BASIX Certificate must be complied with.

 

The required commitments listed and identified in the BASIX Certificate must be included on the construction certificate plans, specifications and associated documentation, 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.

 

Energy & Water Efficiency

10.     The following energy efficiency and water saving measures are to be implemented in all new and upgraded building work and details included in the construction certificate:

 

a)    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.

 

b)    New 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.

 

c)    New 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.

 

Smoke Alarms

11.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or 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 are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’, as applicable.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity.

 

Construction Certificate, Principal Certifying Authority & Commencement of Works

12.     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 any 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.

 

Home Building Act 1989

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, the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be complied with.

 

Details of the Licensed Building Contractor and a copy of the relevant Certificate of Home Warranty Insurance or a copy of the Owner-Builder Permit (as applicable) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council, in writing.

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

A Construction Noise Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the NSW DECC Construction Noise Guideline by a suitably qualified person, is to be implemented throughout the works.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of works.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

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

 

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

 

Temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or public place, a Local Approval application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Health, Building & Regulatory Services before placing any item or article on the road, footpath or nature strip.

 

Construction Site Management Plan

17.     A Construction Site Management Plan must be developed and implemented prior to the commencement of any works. The construction 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;

·          provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·          construction noise and vibration management;

·          construction traffic management details.

 

The site management measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout the works, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

Demolition Work Plan

18.     A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures and relevant environmental/occupational health and safety requirements.

 

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

·          Recycling, reuse and waste disposal of remediation materials

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

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

§  Refer to the conditions within the “Requirements During Construction & Site Work”, for further details and requirements relating to demolition work, removal of any asbestos and public safety.

 

Sydney Water

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

 

Prior to the commencement of excavation or building works, the approved Construction Certificate plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre, 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 works.

 

Public Utilities

20.     A Public Utility Impact Assessment must be carried out to identify all public utility services located on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the building works.

 

Documentary evidence from the relevant public utility authorities confirming that their requirements have been or are able to be satisfied, must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.

 

The owner/builder must make the necessary arrangements and meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia, Sydney Water and other authorities to adjust, repair or relocate their services as required.

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with during the demolition, excavation and construction of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity during construction.

 

 

Demolition Work Requirements

21.     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 & Water and Randwick City Council policies, including:

 

·          Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

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

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

·          Relevant DECCW/EPA Guidelines

·          Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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.

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

 

·          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.  A copy of the relevant licence must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

·          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.  Details of the landfill site (which must be lawfully able to receive asbestos materials) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

23.     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”.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

24.     Sediment and erosion control measures, must be implemented throughout the site works in accordance with the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to Council’s satisfaction.  Details are to be included in the Construction Site Management Plan.

 

Public Safety & Site Management

25.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

e)    Temporary safety fencing is to be provided to any swimming pools under construction, 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.

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

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 must be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land

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.     Prior to undertaking any demolition, excavation or building work in the following circumstances, a report must be obtained from a professional engineer which details the methods of support for the dwelling or associated structure on the adjoining land, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

·          when undertaking excavation or building work within the zone of influence of the footings of a dwelling or associated structure that is located on the adjoining land;

·          when undertaking demolition work to a wall of a dwelling that is built to a common or shared boundary (eg. semi-detached or terrace dwelling);

·          when constructing a wall to a dwelling or associated structure that is located within 900mm of a dwelling located on the adjoining land.

 

The demolition, excavation and building work and the provision of support to the dwelling or associated structure on the adjoining land, must also be carried out in accordance with the abovementioned report, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Restriction on Working Hours

29.     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

Excavating of rock, use of jack-hammers, pile-drivers, vibratory rollers/compactors or the like

·        Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·        Saturday - No work permitted

·        Sunday & public holidays - 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.

 

Inspections During Construction

30.     The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority, 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).

 

Building Encroachments

31.     There must be no encroachment of any structures or building work onto Council’s road reserve, footway, nature strip or public place.

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing an ‘Occupation Certificate’.

 

Note:        For the purpose of this consent, any reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall also be taken to mean ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent and to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity.

 

 

Occupation Certificate Requirements

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

 

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

 

BASIX Requirements

34.     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.

 

Occupant Safety

35.     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:

 

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

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

·          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,

·          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),

·          Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

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.

 

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

 

The following operational conditions must be complied with at all times, throughout the use and operation of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent and to maintain reasonable levels of public health and environmental amenity.

 

External Lighting

37.     External lighting to the premises must be designed and located so as to minimise light-spill beyond the property boundary or cause a public nuisance.

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

 

38.     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.

 

39.     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.

 

a)       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.

 

b)       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.

 

c)       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.

 

Service Authority Conditions

 

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

 

40.     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.

 

41.     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.

 

 

Landscape Conditions

 

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

 

42.     Suitable landscape treatment incorporating both accent/feature species and native plants that have low water dependency shall be provided within the rear courtyard of the site so as to improve both its visual appeal and the usability of this primary area of private open space.

 

Pruning of neighbouring palms

43.     Permission is granted for the selective pruning of only those lower growing fronds from the western aspects of the Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) and Washingtonia robusta (Washingtonia Palm), which are located in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the east, 11 Oswald Street, against the common boundary, close to the house, as well as the Howea fosteriana (Kentia Palm), towards the Right of Way, only where they overhang into the subject site and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the palms; or; for clearance reasons.

 

44.     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.

 

45.     All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level 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 Street Tree

46.     In order to ensure retention of the Eucalyptus scoparia (White Gum) located on Council’s Oswald Street footpath 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 street tree, with the position and diameter of both its trunk and canopy to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       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 around its trunk, or, in a position where these types of materials may runoff towards its trunk, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

c.       Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar over public property must be done so in line with either of the sites side so as to avoid root damage and future maintenance issues.

 

d.       The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to this tree or any of the adjoining street trees along this frontage, 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.

 

e.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $750.00 shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and ultimately, preservation of this street tree.

 

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

 

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

 

Protection of Palms in rear yard & within no.11

47.     In order to also ensure retention of the mature Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located in the rear yard of the subject site, along the western boundary, as well as those palms within the neighbouring property at 11 Oswald Street, against the common boundary, being a Bangalow Palm and Washingtonia robusta (Washingtonia Palm) near the neighbouring dwelling, and a Howea fosteriana (Kentia Palm) towards the rear boundary/Right of Way 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 palms, with the position and diameter of their trunks and crowns to be clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.       The paving in the rear courtyard, around the trunk of the Bangalow Palm, must be porous/permeable.

 

c.       Any roots encountered during construction of the proposed paving, party wall and Store/WC must be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

d.       The Bangalow Palm in the rear yard of the subject site must be physically protected by installing a total of four star pickets at a setback 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, to which safety tape/para-webbing/shade cloth or similar shall be permanently attached so as to completely enclose this palm for the duration of works.

 

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

 

f.        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.

 

·      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 NOTES

 

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, or other relevant legislation and Council’s policies.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

 

 

·          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 requirements is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million.  Alternatively, Council may issue a penalty infringement notice (for up to $1,500) for each offence.  Council may also issue notices and orders to demolish unauthorised or non-complying building work, or to comply with the requirements of Council’s development consent.

 

·          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.

 

Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue Construction Certificates and be your Principal Certifying Authority for the development, to undertake inspections and ensure compliance with the development consent, relevant building regulations and standards of construction.  For further details contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

·          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.

 

·          A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

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

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

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

 

For further information please contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

·          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.

 

·          Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 10 May 2011

 

 

Development Application Report No. D47/11

 

 

Subject:                  66 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee

Folder No:                   DA/1101/2010

Author:                   Louis Coorey, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to existing multi-unit residential building including new upper level containing a bedroom with en-suite bathroom (SEPP1 objection to floor space ratio and height controls)

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Mr J Spiteri

Owner:                         M McGrath

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to the Planning Committee because there are SEPP 1 objections for floor space ratio, overall building height and external wall that exceed 10% of the standards.

 

The proposal is for a alterations and additions to an existing multi-dwelling building containing three flats to add an additional storey (comprising a bedroom and en-suite) resulting in an increase in storeys from three to four. The proposal has been amended via amended plans received by Council on 8 March 2011, where the proposed addition was located further from the main frontage at Coogee Bay Road so that it was largely sited over the middle of the existing building thereby reducing its dominance along Coogee Bay Road.

 

The site is on the northern side of Coogee Bay Road, with a rear frontage along Queen Street, Randwick. It shares a party wall with an adjoining semi at no 64 Coogee Bay Road and presents as a single level structure to Coogee Bay Road and a three level structure to the rear, which is similar in configuration to other buildings along this stretch of Coogee Bay Road. The land is zoned 2B Residential.

 

The application includes well founded SEPP 1 objections to the LEP Development Standards for Floor Space Ratio, overall building height and external wall height.

 

There was 1 objection on the grounds of the siting of the development along the common boundary (inclusive of the use of box guttering), its bulk and scale and presentation along Coogee Bay Road, levels of landscaping provided to the site, stability and capacity of the existing structures to support the additional storey and the applicability of SEPP 65 and the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009. These issues are addressed in the report.

 

There are encroachments on the DCP preferred side setbacks. However, overall the proposal satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the LEP and DCP.

 

Approval subject to conditions is recommended

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal seeks to carry out alterations and additions to existing multi-unit residential building including new upper level containing a bedroom with en-suite bathroom

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Coogee Bay Road with a rear frontage to Queen Street in Coogee. The site is presently occupied by an existing residential flat building (containing three flats). The flat building presents as a single storey semi detached building to Coogee Bay Road and a three storey building at the rear elevation facing Queen Street with a land level difference of 7.5m between the higher level at Coogee Bay Road and the lower level at Queen Street. This sharp gradient visually separates Queen Street from Coogee Bay Road.

 

The rear most part of the site along Queen Street contains a garage usable for parking of two vehicles and a habitable attic space above. The sites dimensions are as follows:

 

Southern frontage to Coogee Bay Road

7.33m

Northern frontage to Queen Street

7.06m

Eastern side boundary length

38.625m

Western side boundary length

36.3m

Total site area

278.2m²

 

Neighbouring the property to the west is the adjoining semi-detached building at No. 64 Coogee Bay Road used as a single dwelling (however rated under Councils property information system as a multi dwelling building. To the east is a pair of semi detached buildings at No 68 and No. 70 Coogee Bay Road, where the immediately adjacent building at No. 68 is used and rated as a single dwelling and No. 70 is rated as a multi dwelling use.

 

It is noted that No. 72 Coogee Bay Road further to the east is a multi dwelling building containing 3 flats with an upper floor addition.

 

Figure 1: Aerial view of subject site and surrounding area.

(Area bounded in red is the subject site, area bounded in blue shows the approximate siting of the proposed addition and the area bounded in yellow shows the location of an addition to No 72 Coogee Bay Road)

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/415/2006 – Approval granted to carry out alterations & additions to rear of existing multi-unit residential building by rear extension of lower ground, ground and first floor levels, to extend kitchen & balcony areas & creation of new 2 bedroom residential unit at lower ground floor level.

 

DA/342/2007: Approval granted to demolish an existing carport and construct a double garage with first floor study fronting Queen Street.

 

Whilst the current application results in further non compliances with the FSR, and height standards under the RLEP, the current application is assessed on its merits having regard to the relevant assessment criteria and applicable EPI’s, Policy documents and amenity.

 

5.    State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). These are addressed as follows:

 

Floor space ratio

A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted to Council, pursuant to Clauses 20F of RLEP 1998, regarding the 0.65:1 maximum FSR standard for 2B Zoned sites. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio

Proposal

1.14:1 (314m2 ; 25.5 m2 of additional floor area sought)

Existing FSR

1.04:1

LEP development standard

0.65:1 (180m2)

Excess above LEP standard (excess above floor area)

76% excess (137m2)

Excess above existing floor area

8.7% (25.5 m2)

 

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:

Assessment Officer’s Assessment

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary. The proposed development exceeds the floor space ratio control however in the context of the existing locality which includes a number of semi-detached dwellings, multi dwelling buildings, and free standing 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.

 

Whilst the proposed development also exceeds the height standard, the additional floor area is limited to an additional 25.5m2 over the middle part of the development away from the main and rear frontages to Coogee Bay Road and Queen Street respectively and it is not considered that the combined non compliances will have any substantial or significant adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining properties or the locality regarding the sought bulk and scale.

 

Overall, 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.”

 

Assessing Officer: The variation from the FSR 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 2B Zone in that it will allow multi dwelling developments, which are consistent with the existing 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”.

 

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

 

Assessing Officer: As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the siting and design 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.

 

Assessing Officer: 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.

 

Assessing Officer: 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.

 

Assessing Officer: 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The existing zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality.

 

Wall height and Overall height

The proposal has an external wall height of up to 12m and an overall height of up to 13m exceeding the maximum development standard of 7m and 9.5m specified in Clause 20G (3) & (1) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) respectively.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection for height

Assessing Officer’s Assessment

The applicant’s objections are adequately founded and the proposal has acceptable impacts on the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area in line with the purpose for the building height standard:

 

·      The existing building encroaches on the development standard with an external wall height of 9m and an overall height of 10.5m. The main part of the proposed developments height encroachment is at the middle of the existing building away from the front and the rear. The street elevation is maintained as a single storey development and the rear elevation is also maintained as a three storey elevation. The highest part of the proposed development up to 13m is located over the middle of the development and considered to be a relatively minor part of the whole development.

 

·      Whilst exhibiting non compliance with the FSR standard, the proposal is setback from the main street frontage to Coogee Bay Road retaining its predominately single storey scale at the front and it is compatible with the streetscape height of other single storey buildings nearby. Further, the proposed addition is set-back from the main roof form and generally consistent with the setback of a similar addition to No. 72 Coogee Bay Road.

 

·      While also exhibiting encroachments on the DCP preferred side setbacks, the proposed development is compact and the overall bulk and boundary setback treatment is acceptable having regard to the sites orientation on a north south axis, overshadowing impacts are largely shared across both adjoining sites without unnecessarily resulting in any excessive impacts on any one property. As a result there are no unacceptable impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties. The proposal satisfies the DCP performance requirements for solar access and privacy.

 

Matter 2: The Court must be of the opinion that “granting of consent to that development application is consistent with the aims of this Policy as set out in clause 3” (clause 7 of SEPP 1).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Assessing Officer: The applicant presents a case to establish that compliance with the standard would hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act. The proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the character of the locality and this is consistent with the objects as quoted in the SEPP. The variation from the standard is consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as it would not detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act embodied in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii). Specifically, the resultant development would promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts.

 

Matter 3: The Court must be satisfied that a consideration of the matters in clause 8(a) and (b) of SEPP 1 justifies the upholding of the SEPP 1 objection. The matters in clause 8(a) and (b) are:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

Table - Establishing compliance is unreasonable or necessary

Method

Assessment

First

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

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

 

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

 

Second

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

 

Assessing Officer: 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The underlying objective of the standard would 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The standards have 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.

 

Assessing Officer: The existing Residential 2B zoning is appropriate for the site.

 

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

6.1      Objections

The proposal was notified to adjoining property owners for a 14 day period between 17 January 2011 and 31 January 2011, in accordance with the Randwick Development Control Plan – Public Notification. As a result of the notification, a submission from a representative of the following property owner was received:

 

1.     64 Coogee Bay Road, Randwick

 

The issues raised in the submission are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comment

1.Despite the comments in the SEE and the SEPP objections, we believe that the application is VERY unsympathetic to the existing streetscape - No's 64 and 66 comprise one of the very few semi-detached dwellings still largely in tact along Coogee Bay Road and we believe it would be inappropriate therefore to add this fourth storey -see attached photographs of the existing street facade. (No 64 is on the left of the streetscape shot)

 

It is considered the originally proposed upper level addition would detract from the adjoining semi’s bulk, scale and the overall presentation along Coogee Bay Road.

The amended development, as received by Council on 8 March shifts the upper level further to the rear away from the Coogee Bay Road frontage behind the main ridge line of the semi and replaces a gable roof with a hipped roof at the front. It is considered that the amended design reduces the dominance of the upper level addition to an acceptable level having regard to the range of developments along this side of Coogee Bay Road and the adjoining semi.

 

2. The application does not comply with the three major controls for height bulk and scale. We don't agree with the SEPP 1 Objection contained in the SEE that these departures are minimal in nature and that the proposal is compatible with the built form and character of the surrounding developments in terms of building design, bulk and scale. The semi is a unique form and this proposal is NOT sympathetic.

 

An assessment of the applicants SEPP 1 objection to the height and floor space ratio control is carried out under Section 5. In general, it is considered that the amended plans substantially address the objectives of the RLEP and the associated DCP’s.

3. Currently we understand there is NO fire separation between the two dwellings (despite previous promises) which doesn't comply with the BCA. See attached photograph of the existing situation. Does the submission suggest that the cladding on the facade facing No 64 is face brickwork - with light weight frame and cladding facing onto Coogee Bay Road? This may create an unsightly junction not reflected in the elevations? What sort of cladding is proposed?

 

Addressing fire separation is a prescribed requirement under the BCA. The amended plans indicate the party wall is of varying height above the ground floor ceiling and that the proposed development seeks to construct brick veneer walls atop this party wall along the common side boundary.

 

In respect to cladding along the other parts of the upper level addition, it is considered to be a relatively normal building material and given the shifting of the upper level further to the rear it is not considered that it would detract from the existing semis fronting Coogee Bay Road. In addition, the colours used would require consent from Council and an assessment will be undertaken as to whether it was sympathetic to the existing and adjoining buildings.

 

3. We are concerned what this additional load onto the existing shared footings etc will do to no 64. The footings to no 64 already show evidence of cracking etc (which has occurred since the previous extension was done) and we therefore request that both a detailed dilapidation report, and structural report be prepared for No 64 (preferably by a Structural Engineer of our choice) as a DA condition ( should Council wish to approve this application)  - and that we have access to this report and can comment.

 

Suitable conditions will be included in the consent should it be recommended for approval. In this respect a dilapidation report will be required prior to works being carried out as well as an engineer’s certification stating the structural adequacy of the existing building and adjoining semi to support the proposed development.

4. The SEE states that No 64 is two dwellings - this is NOT correct - No 64 has been restored back to being  a single dwelling ( at least 25 years ago) - with much of the original detail still in tact ( such as the original metal ceilings and existing internal stair case etc)

 

Council records indicate that No 64 has a multi dwelling land use.

Notwithstanding the inconsistency between Council records and the indicated use as a single dwelling, the proposed development is for an upper level addition which is not inconsistent with another addition to No. 72 Coogee Bay Road and it is not considered that the proposed upper level addition, which will be used in conjunction with an existing unit, will result in any significant adverse impacts on the nature of the use at no 64 or the occupants amenity.

 

5.  As noted previously, the proposal does not comply with all three of the major controls for this site - the existing landscaping on the site is already much less than 50% of the site area - this proposal potentially adds people to the site ( by adding a third bedroom)  but does not increase the soft landscaping accordingly, the proposal exceeds the building height control by some 55%, ( hardly minimal) and the building height is exceeded by some 30% .The  external wall height control is exceeded  by more than 50%. The proposed treatment of the windows and walls is unsympathetic to the original federation architecture of the semi detached residence.

 

See section 5 for assessment of the SEPP 1 objections to the overall height, external wall height and floor space ratio standards of the RLEP. In respect to landscaping, the proposed development does not alter the existing levels of landscaping throughout the site. The addition of a bedroom to an existing dwelling does not require any additional landscaping be provided. It is not considered that the proposal would have any significant adverse impacts on the use of existing areas of private open space areas or the level of amenity enjoyed by the dinging residents. It is also noted that the surrounding area is well suited to catering for recreational pursuits.

In respect to treatment of windows and walls it is considered that the amended development substantially reduces its impact on the architectural and decorative features of the buildings front elevation to Coogee Bay Road. In respect to the rear elevation fronting Queen Street, it is considered that the decorative features are of much less quality and the proposed development subject to appropriate materials will not significantly detract from the appearance of the development and the way in which it fits in with adjoining developments along Queen Street.

IN respect to

 

6. The proposal is NOT consistent with the bulk and scale of No 64 ( the SEE only refers to No 72) as adjoining development.

 

Acknowledged, however it is considered that the amended development substantially reduces the bulk and scale having regard to its presentation along Coogee Bay Road and its impact on the adjoining semi at No. 64 Coogee Bay Road and is acceptable.

 

7. As far as the owner of No 64 is aware the owner of No 66 lives elsewhere and not at no 66 as noted in the SEE (although some of the current residents maybe related to him) As far as we are aware this is not an owner occupied site and so this proposal may therefore have to comply with SEPP 65?

 

Noted. The applicant was requested to provide a statutory declaration to that effect for provide rental schedule detailing rents for each of the three units within the building in accordance with the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing 2009.

 

Rental schedules were received by Council as additional details, and an assessment is carried out against the SEPP.

 

8. The proposed box gutter on the boundary is of concern - these details are notorious for failing and thus potentially will leak into No 64 and most probably into no 66 and thus potentially damage the ceilings in No 64.There doesn't appear to be any easy access shown to access this gutter for regular maintenance! We request that the proposal at least be moved away from the boundary between the properties to allow a 900 wide access way for easy maintenance of the new  gutter - and that the gutter not be a box gutter  due to their inherent issues with leaking etc.

Box gutters are a known building element. It is considered access to this box gutter could be achieved without too much difficulty (subject to safety being observed). It is not considered that a separation is required along the common side boundary shared with the objectors premises as the majority of developments to semi-detached buildings do occur along the common side boundary, particularly where there is no significant adverse impacts on the adjoining semi detached dwelling.

Should the additional bedroom and en-suite be more sympathetically designed ( for example contained wholly within the existing roof space with perhaps a dormer window as a more traditional attic conversion and set back from No 64 to allow access for maintenance) then the owner of 64 may not have any objection ( other than concerns re fire protection , adequate structural design and no box gutters) , however the current proposal in our opinion is unsympathetic, and inappropriate with regard to the current streetscape, and  in particular to its impact on the existing semi detached residence.

Whilst the amended development has not be contained wholly within the existing roof space, it is considered that its amended location further to the rear away from the main ridge line is an acceptable building design modification which substantially reduces the dominance along Coogee Bay Road and its impact on the design and decorative elements shared with the objectors semi at no 64 Coogee Bay Road.

 


Follow up email regarding the amended development received 7 April 2011.

 

Issues

Comment

1. The extension pushed back off the main street is an improvement - and is acceptable to the owner of No 64 - however we note that it will present a very high facade to Queen Street ( well above the required height controls), we assume that standard gutters are now proposed for the extension - the western edge of the new roof being shown on the party boundary in the new sketch- is it proposed to enter No 64 to access the gutters ( for maintenance) in the future  on the western face of the proposed extension?

 

The non complying height is assessed against the relevant objectives under the RLEP and the DCP for Multi unit housing having regard to the existing structures on site and the surrounding development.

 

The proposed gutter along the western side of the proposed development continues to maintain a box gutter system. In respect to access and maintenance it is considered that there are no significant issues which would preclude reasonable access to build the proposed development and maintaining the box gutter.

 

3.  The western facade will need to be fire rated and we assume no windows face this direction?

 

Correct.

4. A structural report will still be required - as will a dilapidation report for No 64.

 

Correct

5. As noted by yourselves our concerns regarding the bulk and scale and presentation along Coogee Bay Road, levels of landscaping provided to the site, stability and capacity of the existing structures to support the additional storey (i.e. the semi on the western side, and the subject RFB), and the applicability of SEPP 65 and the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009 are still relevant.

 

Landscaping to the site is not decreasing and the increase in floor area is limited to a bedroom which is not considered to place any significant demand on existing landscaping throughout the site. As noted in the assessment, this part of the Randwick Council area has an abundance of facilities available for recreational purposes. Having regard to the relevant Environmental Planning Instruments, these have been adequately addressed in the assessment of the application.

6. We wonder how the new room will be constructed without gaining access over the roof of No 64???? We have concerns regarding potential damage to the roof - and undue noise etc..... this new extension is adjacent/above to the main bedroom of No 64. Extreme care is to be taken regarding the existing building on No 64 and sensitivity with regard to noise generated by the construction process. The owner of number 64 is 82 years old and often sleeps in the early afternoon.

Access would be administered under the Access to Neighbouring Land Act. If damage occur to the neighbours premises then it is assumed that this would be fixed by the owner of the subject site.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The application has not required referral to any technical officers.

 


8.    Master Planning Requirements

Not applicable

 

9.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

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

The proposed development has a cost of works valued at less than $50,000 and consequently is not required to be accompanied with the BASIX certificate. Notwithstanding this appropriate conditions have been included to ensure a sustainable development is carried out having regard to construction of the development.

 

(b) State Environmental Planning Policy – Affordable Rental Housing 2009

Part 3 of the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009, seeks to retain affordable rental housing or at least seek a contribution for its loss. The building has not been strata subdivided and is therefore subject to the SEPP. However, under Clause 49 of Part 3 of the SEPP, if a unit was let at a level above the median rental over the last 24 months then these units are not considered to be low-rental accommodation and therefore not subject to the provision of a contribution or displacement payment. The applicant has provided a rental schedule for the three units by RUN Property showing rental figures for the 3 units from between 2008 to 2010 (ending with the preceding quartile).

The rental schedules show that the 3 units were let at or above an average of $579 per week which is above the median rental for two bedroom apartments in the Randwick area. This means these units are not low rental accommodation (under the SEPP) and therefore not be subject to a contribution or a displacement fee under the SEPP.

 

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

SEPP 65 is a State Environmental Planning Policy which is concerned with the design quality of residential flats. The SEPP applies to all residential flat development of three or more storey’s which also includes four or more dwellings (but not including Class 1a or 1b buildings). It requires the direct involvement of a registered architect in the design. The SEPP applies to development being:

 

(a)    The erection of a new residential flat building, and

(a)    The substantial redevelopment or the substantial refurbishment of an existing residential flat building, and

(b)    The conversion of an existing building to a residential flat building.

(c)    If particular development comprises development to which subclause (1) applies and other development, this Policy applies to the part of the development that is development to which subclause (1) applies and does not apply to the other part.

 

The guide stipulates that the SEPP is to be applied in accordance with the following:

The proposed works do not fall under SEPP 65 as the subject site contains only 3 units. Consequently, the application was not referred to the Design Review Panel.

 

(d)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 11 2B Zone

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

 

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

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

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

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

(e)  to encourage housing affordability, and

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

 

It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the objectives (a), (b) and (c) of the zone. The proposal continues to be considered as a medium-density residential environment given the scale of developments in the locality. The development will not significantly alter the predominant attributes of the semi-detached buildings setting along Coogee Bay Road which are buildings of a single and two storey scale (as a result of it being set further back behind the main ridge line). The proposed works will not compromise the amenity of adjoining properties, as there will be no adverse impacts on privacy or overshadowing as detailed in this report.

 

Objectives (d) and (e) are not relevant in this instance, as the residential use of the site will continue. Affordable housing is relevant as the proposal increases the density on the site and assessment is carried out against the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009.

 

The new works to the building will improve the internal amenity for existing and future occupants.

 

In terms of permissibility, multi unit housing is permissible in the 2B Residential Zone with Council consent. Therefore the proposed alterations and additions to the existing building are permissible with consent.

 

Clause 20F Floor Space Ratios

The maximum floor space ratios for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house within 2B zones is 0.65:1. This proposal has a total floor space ratio of 1.17:1 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 2B zone is 9.5m from any point on ground level with a maximum external wall height of 7m. The proposal does not comply with both these standards with an overall height of between 13.3m and an external wall height of 12m and a SEPP 1 Objection to these standards has been lodged by the applicant for consideration.

 


9.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plans

 

Development Control Plan – 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.

 

Provided

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.

Existing

Height

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

 

Does not comply see assessment of SEPP 1 objection under section 5

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.

 

See above

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

The proposed addition is set behind the front building line and main ridge line of the existing roof form and considered acceptable under the DCP.

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.

Common side boundary: no objection.

Side boundary setback to eastern side boundary does not comply with the preferred side setback solution under the DCP.

The non compliance is acceptable on the basis that the Development Control Plan states that buildings may be setback less than the preferred solution where the proposal will not have an adverse impact on the streetscape or adjoining premises, provided the performance requirements relating to a neighbour’s privacy and access to air, light and views will be met. The proposal is considered to still allow natural air and light to the eastern and western side neighbours at no 64 and 68 Coogee Bay Road. It will not affect direct sunlight to their north facing windows or result in any excessive overshadowing to existing and future solar collectors.

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.

Complies

Density

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

 

Does not comply see assessment of SEPP 1 objection under section 5

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.

Complies

View Sharing

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

 

 

The proposed development is located in the middle of the existing building and is unlikely to result in any unreasonable loss of views.

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.

 

 

Complies

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

 

 

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.

 

 

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.

 

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 development increases the upper level unit from a 2 bedroom flat to a three bedroom flat and requires an addition .3 of a carspace to the subject site.

No additional parking provided. It is considered that the proposed development will not create any significant additional demand for parking on site and the locality is serviced by a comprehensive public transport system.

Moreover, it is not considered that any additional parking above the two already provided at the rear of the site could be accommodated without substantially detracting from the functioning and desired character of the site and the locality.

 

9.2 Council Policies

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

This application is EXEMPT from a levy under Council’s s94A Development Contributions Plan as it falls into the category of works with a cost of development valued at less than $100,000.

 

Council’s Asbestos Policy 2005

In accordance with Council’s Asbestos Policy, a number of conditions of consent have been imposed accordingly to maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety.

 

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.

 

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

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 


Conclusion

 

The application satisfies the relevant assessment criteria and is recommended for approval subject to the attached conditions of consent.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 20F(1), 20G(1) and 20G(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (consolidation), relating to floor apace ratio overall building height and external wall height respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No DA/1101/2010 for permission to carry out alterations and additions to existing multi-unit residential building including new upper level containing a bedroom with en-suite bathroom at 66 Coogee Bay Road, Randwick subject to the following conditions:

 

DEVELOPMENT CONSENT CONDITIONS

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The development must be carried out in accordance with the following conditions of consent.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 10.181A sheet No. 1 of 5 to sheet No. 5 of 5, dated 7 March 2011, and received by Council on 8 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:

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a ‘Construction Certificate’ by either Randwick City Council or an Accredited Certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the construction certificate application.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, Council’s development consent conditions and to achieve reasonable levels of environmental amenity.

 

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.       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 buildings, additions to existing buildings which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of a building located upon an adjoining  premises,

·      buildings sited up to shared boundaries (eg terraced or attached buildings),

·      excavations for new buildings, additions to existing buildings which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any building 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 the relevant building/s 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.

 

4.       A 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

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy relevant legislative requirements and to provide reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity:

 

5.       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.

 

6.       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).  Details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’, as applicable.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity.

 

 

7.       Prior to the commencement of any building or ‘fit-out’ 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

 

8.       Prior to the commencement of any building or ‘fit-out’ works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:

 

·       appoint a Principal Certifying Authority for the building work, and

·       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

·       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

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

 

9.       The works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority, 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.

 

10.     Any 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.

Services

 

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

 

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

 

If the proposed works are suitable, the plans will be appropriately stamped by Sydney Water or their Agent.  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 is required to ensure that a Quick Check Agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans prior to the commencement of any building works.

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with during the demolition, excavation and construction of the development.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and to provide reasonable levels of public health, safety and environmental amenity during construction.

 

 

12.     In existing buildings, the following works are to be carried out to ensure minimum levels of fire safety (as applicable):-

 

1)     Any new or replacement ceilings walls and floor linings and doorways are required to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia. 

 

2)     Any residential parts of the building must be provided with a smoke detection and alarm system, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

3)     Any residential part/s of the building are to be suitably fire-separated from the commercial area encompassed in this development application.

 

Details of the abovementioned items and other building and fire safety works are to be provided in the construction certificate.

 

13.     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.

 

1)     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:

a)     protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

b)     where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

2)     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.

14.     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

 

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.

 

15.     Public health, safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition and building works and the following requirements must be complied with at all times (as applicable):

 

a)     Demolition work must be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard, AS2601 (2001) - The Demolition of Structures and a Demolition Work Plan is required to developed and implemented to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencing any demolition works.

 

b)     The demolition, removal, storage and disposal of any materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW, Council’s Asbestos Policy and the following requirements:

 

·         A licence must be obtained from WorkCover NSW for the removal of friable asbestos and or more than 10m2  of bonded asbestos (i.e. fibro)

·         Asbestos waste must be disposed of in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 & relevant Regulations

·         A sign must be provided to the site/building stating “Danger Asbestos Removal In Progress”

·         A Clearance Certificate or Statement must be obtained from a suitably qualified person (i.e. Occupational Hygienist) upon completion