Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 22 November 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             22 November 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

 

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

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

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

Amen”

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

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

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting - 18 October 2011

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council by Members of the Public

Mayoral Minutes

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

Urgent Business

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting required)

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

CP110/11   32 Willis Street, Kingsford (DA/1096/2010) (DEFERRED)

CP111/11   88 Garden Street, Maroubra (DA/674/2011)

CP112/11   7-13 Victoria Street, Randwick (DA/298/2011)

CP113/11   2 Lowe Street, Clovelly (DA/644/2011)

CP114/11   170-172 Marine Parade, Maroubra (DA/1070/2010)

CP115/11   1-3 Gubbuteh Road, Little Bay (DA/1108/2006/B)

CP116/11   102 Garden Street, Maroubra (DA/790/2010)

CP117/11   42 Wride Street, Maroubra (DA/119/2011/A)

CP118/11   225 Boyce Road, Maroubra (DA/293/2010/A)

CP119/11   18 Napper Street, South Coogee (DA/150/2011)

CP120/11   77 Little Bay Road, Little Bay (DA/525/2011)

CP121/11   28 Clonard Way, Little Bay (DA/532/2011)

CP122/11   55 Dudley Street, Coogee (DA/364/2008/F)

CP123/11   JRPP Report for 220-230 Maroubra Road, Maroubra (DA/974/2010/A)

CP124/11   Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) for the month of October 2011

CP125/11   Randwick City - Land Use Discussion Papers feedback from public consultations

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting NOT required)

CP126/11   Endorsement of Council Officers as Duly Authorised Representatives for the Granting of Access to NSW Family & Community Service's Information Portal (Online System)

CP127/11   Affordable Housing Dwelling at 119/1-5 Pine Avenue Little Bay, Classification of Land under the Local Government Act 1993

General Manager's Reports

GM36/11    Street Banner policy

GM37/11    Statement of Randwick City Council's Commitment to Gender Equity

GM38/11    Review of the 2011-12 Annual Operational Plan - September 2011 Quarterly Report

Director City Services Reports

Nil

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF65/11    Quarterly Budget Review - September 2011

GF66/11    Investment Report - October 2011

GF67/11    Withdrawal of Caveat and affixing of the Council Seal

GF68/11    Constitutional Referendums

GF69/11    Review of Model Code of Conduct - DLG Position Paper

GF70/11    Code of Conduct Complaints

GF71/11    Arrangements During Christmas/New Year Period for Decision Making and Schedule of Meetings for 2012

GF72/11    Christmas Operating Hours for 2011/12 Christmas/New Year Period

GF73/11    Waiving of Development Application Fee - Matraville Community Markets  

Petitions

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM29/11    Motion Pursuant to Notice from Cr Matson - Explore new Council measure to reduce non-biodegradable beach litter  


Closed Session

GM39/11    Investigation into breach of contract - Conflict of Interest SRBG

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (g) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

 

CS19/11    T16/11 - Des Rendord Aquatic Centre Electrical Upgrade

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (c) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

 

GF74/11    Management of Conflicts of Interest - Referral to Independent Body due to Lack of Quorum

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (g) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

  

Notice of Rescission Motions

NR4/11      Notice of Rescission Motion from Councillors Matson, Smith & White - Randwick Education and Health Specialised Centre Discussion Paper - Feedback from Public Exhibition   

 

 

 

 

……………………………………………………

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             22 November 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP110/11

 

 

Subject:                  32 Willis Street, Kingsford (DA/1096/2010)

Folder No:                   DA/1096/2010

Author:                   GAT & Associates , Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of part of existing building, construction of part 3/part 2 storey boarding house development comprising 17 units and associated works (SEPP1 objection to height control)

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Cracknell & Lonergan Architects

Owner:                         Epic Development Pty Ltd & Eminence Development Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The site is known as 32 Willis Street, Kingsford. This is a amended proposal for the demolition of the existing structures on the site and the erection of a part three storey and part two storey boarding house development. Significant amendments have been made to the original plans in response to the issues raised in the report to Council on the 26 July 2011, which sought refusal of the application.

 

The proposal was considered by Council at its meeting of the 26 July 2011 where it was resolved -

 

“that the application be deferred to allow the applicant to submit amended plans”.

 

Amended plans have been received with a covering letter dated 9 September 2011. The amended proposal has been notified to surrounding land owners and submissions have been received. An amended SEPP 1 was also received in relation to wall height (the proposal now fully complies with the overall height control of 9.5metres).

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The amended application involves the demolition of the existing structures on the site and the erection of a part three storey and part two storey development comprising two separate buildings connected below ground by a basement level which contains a car park, waste storage and bicycle parking. The proposed use is a boarding house. The boarding house contains 17 bedrooms and a common room plus landscaped areas.

 

The major amendments which has been made to the proposal are as follows-

 

The massing has been reduced by the reconfiguration of the building into two distinct elements allowing the centre of the site to be a landscaped space. The previous scheme which was considered by Council, stepped down the site without any relief to the massing of the building which resulted in a built form which was too high and created unacceptable amenity impacts upon its neighbours. As a result of this change, there is a 6 metre wide un built upon corridor through the site which allows adequate sunlight to penetrate the site to the south. 

 

The height of the building has been reduced and is within the 9.5 metre height limit specified by Clause 20G of the RLEP. Previously, the building was part four storeys and part three storeys in height and sought to vary Clause 20G by 41%. This issue has now been addressed and the form of the building has been modified to a part three storey and part two storey building.

 

The layout of the buildings has been changed so that units either look out towards the street frontages (either Wills Street or Wills Lane) or onto the central landscaped space between the buildings. Some units have a dual outlook onto these spaces. While this design approach means that the units do not have a northern aspect, it has improved privacy onto the adjoining sites and has provided a more pleasant outlook for the units onto landscaped spaces which will support substantial areas of soft landscaping. 

 

The basement level of the development has been further modified so that it provides for five (5) car parking spaces, five (5) motorbike spaces and a minimum of five (5) bike spaces secured on racks. Waste storage area and a pump room are also contained on this level. The previous scheme provided for only two car parking spaces and this was not considered to be sufficient in an area where there is a very high demand for street parking due to the proximity to the University of NSW. This situation has been improved by providing five onsite spaces.

 

Basement Floor Plan off Willis Lane

 

The basement floor is best described as a partial basement level, given this level as viewed from Willis Lane will be read as a storey (from the gutter level of the laneway to the roof of the basement is approximately 1.5-1.6 metres in height).  This level accommodates (5) five onsite car spaces, the bin storage area, a pump room, bike parking for five (5) bikes, motorcycle parking for five (5) bikes. The addition of three onsite (3) spaces is a significant improvement on the previous scheme which proposed two (2) spaces. While the issue of car parking remains an issue to some surrounding residents the proposal now fully complies with the requirements of the SEPP. The site is also in a locality which is serviced by excellent public transport to many major transport hubs.

 

Level 1

 

Level 1 of the development contains four (4) self contained rooms (known as units 12, 13, 16 and 17) which incorporate a shower, bathroom, separate bedroom with a separate living and kitchen arrangement each room has individual balconies. Two units are serviced by one stair core while the other is serviced by another stair core. There is good spatial separation between units 12 and 13 and 16 and 17. The walls of the units are 8 metres apart and the balconies approximately 5.5 metres apart. They are separated by a central landscaped space which will be planted kangaroo grass as a ground cover and suitable native shrubs such as dwarf lily pillies (maximum height 2-3 metres). Japanese Maples will be used as feature trees which is suitable as these are deciduous and will therefore allow good solar access into the space during the winter period. A condition of consent is recommended to ensure that the chosen species are appropriate given the limited soil depth in this landscaped space.

 

Level 2

 

This level contains four (4) self contained rooms (known as units 10, 11, 14 and 15) which sit above level 1 in the same configuration.

 

Level 3 Floor Plan (Willis Street Entry, lower level)

 

This level contains the lowest level of the building which fronts Willis Street and contains units known as unit 6, 7, 8 and 9. These units are accessible via a set of stairs which are located in the centre of the building and which discharge out to Willis Street. Units 6 and 7 have access to private courtyards which are on the eastern sides of the units. Units 8 and 9  have terraces facing the Willis Lane part of the development but will be slightly higher than the units in the lower part of the site and any overlooking should be reduced by the angle of view and the intensively landscaped central courtyard.

 

Unit 6 has been nominated as the Manager’s residence.

 

Level 4

 

This level contains three (3) one-bedroom self contained apartments with a common room in the south western corner of the building.  This level of the building has direct access to Willis Street via a ramped entrance way. All units and the common room have balconies. The common room is 35sqm and has a kitchen area and separate facilities. The balcony looks out onto the common central courtyard area.

 

 

Level 5

 

This level also contains two (2) one-bedroom self contained apartments (known as units 1 and 2). Access to these units is via the set of stairs in the centre of the building which serve all the units in this part of the development. There is a “semi public” terrace on this level and each unit has a private balcony.

 

Elevations/Exterior Materials/Landscaping

 

The development consists of two parts, there is the two storey building which fronts Willis Lane and the three storey building which fronts Willis Street. They are connected by a basement carpark which is accessed from Willis Lane.

 

The revised scheme allows for the development to be broken up into two components with a landscaped space in between. This has reduced the bulk, scale and height of the development. In addition, the exterior materials and colours which are proposed will also aid in the reduction in the massing of the development when viewed from outside the site. A light neutral colour has been chosen for the external walls and the exterior basement walls will have the appearance of stone facing (Random Ashlar Walling). This will ground the building, thus reducing its perceived height. Generally, colours have been chosen from the natural colour palette. Glass blocks and timber louvres have also been utilised in the exterior of the building. Exterior materials and colours are shown on plan 12.

 

The landscaping of the site is shown on a detailed landscaping plan (plan 11) which forms part of the development application. There is a good mix of hard and soft landscaped spaces. The front of the site at Willis Street will have low scale planting and incorporate feature trees. The central landscaped space will also incorporate low scale native plantings and deciduous feature trees. The frontage to Willis Lane is landscaped with soft landscaping.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The property is described as Lot B under DP 363519 and is commonly known as 32 Willis Street, Kingsford. The site is located on the western side of Willis Street between Barker and Middle Streets, Kingsford. The site also has frontage to its rear to Willis Lane.

 

The site has a width of 12.19m and a length of 50.29m. The total site area is 613sqm.

 

The site has a substantial fall from Willis Street (RL50.10) to Willis Lane (RL40.02), being a fall in the order of 10m.

 

Presently located on the site is a single storey dwelling that addresses Willis Street with the building having the form of a two-storey element off Willis Lane with a garage beneath creating in total three levels, which has a considerable setback off the Lane.

 

The rear access to the existing building is via Willis Lane and the proposal retains such access. Development surrounding the site is mixed in its form consisting of detached single dwelling houses as well as unit developments.

 

The site to the north contains a townhouse development which is stepped down the site in clusters. To the immediate south stands a single dwelling being No 34 Willis Street.

 

Surrounding development on the eastern side of Willis Street consists of two-storey development of a mixture of architectural style and form with surrounding developments consisting also of two and three-storey unit developments.

 

The subject site is in extreme close proximity to the University of NSW and within comfortable walking distance to the commercial precinct located along Anzac Parade.

 

 

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

 

4.1      Proposed variation to the development standard

The proposal seeks to vary a development standard contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to Council.

 

Building heights

 

Clause 20G specifies that the maximum heights for buildings within Zone No. 2B are to be 9.5m. The proposal complies with this requirement.

 

The maximum 9.5 metre height limit has been indicated on the plans and the proposal is well within this height line. Further, clear diagrams have been included with the amended plans which show the comparison between the previous and current schemes.

 

The proposal does not comply with the maximum wall height of 7 metres. As Council has applied both height controls in the case of all other applications, the two controls must be considered in relation to the application of the SEPP for affordable housing. In this case, the overall height standard is satisfied and the proposed variation to the wall heights has been significantly reduced and is supported in its amended form.

 

4.2      Assessment against planning principle

 

In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment C ourt 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 building height standard is:

 

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

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following key justifications for the variation to the building height standards:

 

“When assessed against the underlying objective at clause 20G, the proposal’s building height, floor space ratio and landscaped area is considered to be appropriate and performing optimally in accord while it also relates to the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area. Further, the proposal, although not necessarily, but when assessed against the suite of controls in the Multi-unit Housing DCP, achieves that desired future character through its design, i.e. the proposal is sensitive to the topographic, landscape and environmental conditions of the area, and, the appearance of the proposed building is of high visual quality, enhances the streetscape and is visually compatible with the identified desired future character for the locality.

 

In response to the planning principles cited in NSW LEC 40:

 

The underlying purpose of the Special Provisions is not specifically stated in the Auburn LEP 2000 in relation to clause 48. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the social development and character and amenity objectives at clause 3 and 4 of the LEP are the underlying purpose of clause 48:

 

(3) The specific objectives of this plan in relation to social development are as follows:

(a)    to ensure that there is an adequate and equitable distribution of open space for all residents within the LGA,

(b)    to ensure that development facilitates the efficient and equitable provision of public services and amenities,

(c)    to increase the housing choices available within the LGA while improving residential amenity,

(d)    to increase the availability of employment opportunities,

(e)    to ensure that social issues and needs are adequately addressed in the Council’s decision-making process.

(4)    The specific objectives of this plan in relation to the character and amenity of the LGA are as follows:

(a)    to recognise the special character and function of individual areas within the LGA,

(b)    to ensure that development improves the environmental character and quality of streetscapes within the LGA,

(c)    to protect the environmental and cultural heritage of the LGA,

(d)    to ensure that redevelopment improves streetscapes and is in keeping with the character of the LGA,

(e)    to identify and conserve those items and localities which contribute to the local environment and cultural heritage of the LGA.

 

When assessed against the underlying particular objectives at clause (3) c and (4) b & d, the proposal is considered to result in a development that will increase the housing choices available within the LGA while improving the residential amenity, improves the environmental character and quality of streetscapes within the LGA, and improve the streetscapes and is in keeping with the character of the LGA.

 

Nonetheless the relation of this proposal at 32 Willis Street to that in NSW LEC40 is weak as the site at 34 Willis Street is not isolated as in 1 Clarence Street as cited by Council, i.e. it could be consolidated with 4 or all of the remaining adjoining sites in the block and has 2 street frontages and the applicant had approached the owner unsuccessfully to consolidate the sites. Furthermore, there is evidence that the property at No. 34 Willis Street has recently been redeveloped on its own capacity, i.e. not consolidated with other neighbouring sites and this evidence can be provided if required.

 

Referring to the planning principles cited in NSW LEC 179:

 

In the absence of a council policy for narrow sites, the questions raised by the LEC are addressed directly:

 

-    The approval of the application would not result in the isolation of 34 Willis Street as mentioned above.

 

-    Reasonable development on sloping sites with a fall of 10 metres is difficult under any circumstances and this has not prevented this proposal to come to this stage. Hence, the viability of any reasonable development on the neighbouring site to the south is a matter of determination and resources commitment given that owners of other properties are cooperative with the matter.

 

-    Orderly, economic and appropriate development of this subject site is achievable given the approval by council and the neighbouring owner and this is not impossible to be repeated by the neighbouring site.

 

The proposal meets density, and landscaping controls as stipulated in the Randwick LEP 1998. Although it does not adopt the preferred solution as stated in the DCP , the proposal inherently provides 3 meters setback on both sides of the site’s length. The front setback of the proposal is aligned with neighbouring buildings on the block (~5.0m) and a rear setback of 3.35 meters is also provided although some buildings in the block are built right up their site boundary.

 

The overshadowing impact of the proposal upon the neighbour to the south has been reduced significantly relative to the previous scheme and due to the orientation of the site; any other development on the subject site would result in the similar outcome. On the other hand, the proposal should not be considered anything but positively contributory to the streetscape as most buildings in along the street are single or two storey residential dwellings of low to average significance. The proposal would set a design benchmark for upcoming developments in the immediate neighbourhood.

 

The proposal meets other planning controls and the area and width of the site should not be considered to exacerbate its impacts as any other type of development proposed on the site would result in the overshadowing of the neighbour to south. As such, the failure of this subject site to meet the preferred area or width should not be a reason for refusal.

 

Comment

It is considered that the variation to the proposed building height is well founded and supported in the circumstances of the case. It is noted however that the side setbacks for the amended proposal are 1200mm and not 3m as stated in the submission. Given that the amended scheme has provided for landscaped side boundaries, a reduced building height which complies with the maximum 9.5 metre height control and a significant open space between the two parts of the development of some 6 metres (terrace edge to terrace edge) the proposed setbacks and wall height are acceptable in the circumstances of this case. 

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Comment

While the proposal requires a variation to the 7 metre wall height standard, the amended proposal now complies with the overall building height limit of 9.5 metres. We note that the Design Review Panel accepted that due to the steep topography of this site, the proposal may exceed the height limits.

 

The reduction in height and the redesign of the building has resolved a number of amenity issues such as providing a substantial area of communal open space in between the two buildings which allows for improved levels of sunlight onto the adjoining site and provides an improved outlook for these neighbours.  It is considered that the proposal, in its amended form, will promote the orderly and economic use of the subject site as a boarding house which in turn promotes the social and economic welfare of the community without compromising the enjoyment of the surrounding lands.


 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

Comment:

We note that the proposed variation to the height control does not raise any matters of significance for State or under the regional environmental planning and there is no public benefit in maintaining the control in this instance.

 

The amended proposal now complies with the maximum building height of 9.5 metres. The area of variation relates to the wall height of the building which is considered to be acceptable because:

 

-    the degree of variation being proposed is not considered to be excessive and does not occur throughout the site (the applicant has presented figures which state that 7% of the wall heights are over the 7 metre maximum while 32% of the walls is below 7 metres in height.  

-    the site is a steep site therefore the topography makes compliance difficult to achieve.

-    solar access to the common areas and the provision of private open space in a communal sense has been provided

-    overshadowing impacts to the neighbours have been reduced by the massing of the building into two distinct elements

 

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:

 

The applicant has provided the following discussion in relation to these five principles-

 

“His Honour Preston CJ set out five alternative ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary in the preparation of a SEPP 1 objection in Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) NSW LEC 827, albeit only one of these 5 ways needs to apply in order for the objection to be well founded:

 

a          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.

 

b          Establish that the underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development with the consequence that compliance is unnecessary.

 

c           Establish that the underlying objective or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required with the consequence that compliance is unreasonable.

 

d          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 unreasonable or unnecessary.

e 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.

In the circumstances of this case, the provision of a strict numerical compliance would be unnecessary and unreasonable on the basis that:

 

·     The underlying objective of the standard is achieved, notwithstanding noncompliance.

·     The height, bulk and scale of the dwelling is not out of character with surrounding developments which include low density residential dwellings, town houses, residential flat buildings, and high density apartment buildings,

·     The proposal is compatible with the surrounding context which comprises a mix of scales, densities and types of buildings.

·     The proposal responds appropriately to the drastic drop of 10m across the length of the site while taking into consideration sun light access to the south neighbour, as recommended by the DRP.

·     The proposal generally complies with the building location controls in the LEP and DCP with minor, if not negligible, breaches in building height but is in accord with the comments from DRP.

·     The revised proposal’s impact on the amenity of the adjoining residential property to the south in terms of overshadowing or privacy has been improved significantly and in any event, is inevitable and would be similar with any other types of development.

·     The proposal development generally achieves compliance with the aims and objectives of the LEP and most importantly SEPP Affordable Housing.

·     Additionally, in any event, clause 29(4) of the SEPP Affordable Housing:

 

“A consent authority may consent to development to which this Division applies whether or not the development complies with the standards set out in subclause (1) or (2)”

allows council to approve the non-compliance.”

 

Comment

Given the circumstances of this case, it is considered that the proposal has now been modified to an extent that approval is warranted subject to conditions. The major amenity impacts of the original (amended) proposal, which was considered by Council in July have been remedied and the development is of a form which was generally envisaged by The Design Review Panel (i.e, reduced height and the building form split into two distinct volumes with a central space in between which would improve the provision of sunlight and aspect for the property to the south).

 

5.    Site History

 

Recent development applications relating to the site include:

 

Application Details

32 Willis Street, KINGSFORD NSW 2032

Property Applications: BA/1252/1975, Alterations

Property Applications: BA/78/1976, Alterations

Property Applications: BA/1466/1975, Sundeck

Property Applications: BA/2367/1913, Cottage

Property Applications: BA/5335/1918, Verandah

Property Applications: PL/55/2010, Pre development application for demolition of existing

and construction of a boarding house.

Property Applications: SC/33/1948, Land subdivision into 2 lots

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

6.1 Objections

 

The amended proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with the requirements of the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans.

 

The following submissions were received by Council by a form letter:

 

·     37 Willis Street, Kingsford

·     45 Willis Street, Kingsford

·     46 Willis Street, Kingsford

·     35 Willis Street Kingsford

·     69 Middle Street, Kingsford

·     42 Middle Street, Kingsford

·     28 Middle Street, Kingsford

 

The issues of concern which were stated in this letter included a lack of parking as only two spaces are proposed (however the plans show 5) and the aesthetics of the development.

 

The issues raised in the remaining submissions from the following addresses are addressed as follows:

 

·     29 Willis Street, Kingsford

·     34Willis Street, Kingsford

 

Setbacks insufficient

 

Comment

The setbacks, in this case are considered to be acceptable. The side setbacks are landscaped and there are no privacy impacts as no openings (windows) are proposed along the side elevations. The volume of the development is split into two and there is now a sufficient space between the buildings which will allow good solar access onto the site to the south.

 

The building is not articulated enough along the southern side resulting in a building of 27 metres length.

 

Comment

The building is stepped down the site and different materials have been used in the side elevations to provide some variation to these elevations (such as glass bricks and timber louvres to provide side screening to balconies). There will also be landscaping provided along the side boundaries in the central landscaped space but no landscaping along the side boundaries which will achieve any height to break up the side elevations. A condition of consent recommended to improve the landscaping along the side elevations.

 

The proposal will render No.34 as undevelopable.

 

Comment

The subject proposal is well within the maximum FSR for the site if developed as a boarding house under the Affordable Housing SEPP. It is complies with the maximum height limits for the site and provides a sufficient breakup of the volume of the development to allow good solar access onto the site to the south during the middle of the day in mid winter.

 

The proposed wall height is excessive and units Nos 1 and 2 should be deleted.

 

Comment

A SEPP 1 objection has been considered and is supported due to the circumstances of this case.

 

Basix requires a water tank and air conditioning which are not shown on the plans.

 

Comment

They are specified within the Baisx certificate and must be provided as part of the development.

 

Car parking space does not have enough manoeuvring space.

There is inadequate reversing space in the car park.

 

Comment

The basement space will need to comply with the relevant standards for maneuvering.

 

More car parking needs to be provided

 

Comment

The proposal complies with the requirements of the SEPP for this type of development within an “accessible area”.

 

The stormwater plans were not available for viewing.

 

Comment

Noted. These may not have been included in the notification plans which were available to the public however Council officers will ensure that they are assessed in regard to Council’s policy and conditions applied as part of any development consent.

 

No ramp grades were available for viewing

 

Comment

Noted. Such information is not always available to the public unless it is requested. Council’s engineers would assess the gradients to endure that they comply with Council requirements and a condition may apply in development consent.

 

The location of the basement beneath the courtyard will not allow for decent deep soil plantings to survive (such as the Japanese Maples which are proposed on the Landscape Plan).

 

Comment

Noted. This will require the advice of a qualified landscape architect. A condition of consent will apply in this regard so ensure that suitable plantings are provided in this area of the site.

 

There does not appear to be a room allocated for an onsite manager.

 

Comment

The applicant has advised that Unit 6 is nominated as the onsite Manager’s residence and a condition has been applied to the development consent.

 

Level 5 has a rooftop terrace which could be used for parties etc. This should be deleted.

 

Comment

Agreed. This terrace is shown as “semi public terrace” and could conceivably be used by any of the tenants. Given that Units 1 and 2 have balconies which face Willis Street and that there is good communal space within the development this space should be deleted to avoid any future conflicts or loss of amenity. 

 

The plan shows that lodgers will need to walk through a bin room from the car park to their rooms, which is a poor design solution. This should be redesigned.

 

The changes to the basement may require an additional set of fire stairs to be provided.

 

Comment

Agreed. The basement should be designed so that lodgers do not have to walk through the bin room. The basement will need to be redesigned and/or marginally enlarged to accommodate this and to comply with the BCA with regard to travel distances.

 

There seems to be a conflict between Section BB and the southern elevation in regards to the wall height. If this is the case, and a 4200mm wall height is proposed then a solution would be to relocate the stairs and recess them in order not to create a nil setback along this section of the boundary.

 

Comment

It appears that at the worst point on the neighbouring site the top of the proposed fence on the subject site will be approximately 3400mm in height and this is due to the topography of the sites.

 

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:-

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

Srormwater will be required to discharge directly to Willis Lane

 

The Affordable Housing SEPP states in regulation 29(2)(e) that consent authorities must not refuse consent to development on the grounds if:

(i)       in the case of development in an accessible area-at least 0.2 parking spaces are provided for each boarding room, and

(ii)      in the case of development not in an accessible area-at least 0.4 parking spaces are provided for each boarding room, and

(iii)     in the case of any development-not more than 1 parking space is provided for each person employed in connection with the development more than one parking space is provided for each 10 boarding rooms or part thereof.

 

For the subject proposal consisting of 16 rooms plus managers residence (Unit 6) this would require the provision of 3.2 (16 x 0.2) spaces for an accessible area.  An additional space will also be required for the boarding house manager resulting in a total of 4 spaces to be required for the development. A total of five spaces have been proposed in the basement and hence the number of carspaces complies with this rate however there are issues with some parking allocation and layout.

 

Parking Allocation

No carspaces have been allocated to the manager. This would not facilitate the efficient management of the boarding house. A condition has been included in this report requiring that at least one of the carspaces be allocated to the manager.

 

No parking has been allocated to the boarding house residents and the entire parking has been dedicated as visitor parking. The application has cited clause 30f in SEPP (Affordable Housing) in support of this. The assessing officer is advised that Clause 30f was omitted in amendments to the SEPP(Affordable Housing) in May 2011.

 

Parking is therefore requested to be allocated to the boarding house residents.

 

Bicycle and Motorbike Parking

 

The Affordable Housing SEPP states in regulation 30(h) that consent authorities must not consent to development unless at least one parking space is provided for a bicycle and one for a motorcycle for every 5 boarding rooms.

 

As the number of boarding rooms is 16 (not including managers residence) this will require the provision of 3 bicycle and 3 motorbike spaces.

 

The submitted plans demonstrate compliance with this requirement with 5 motorcycle and 5 motorbike spaces proposed.

 

Parking Layout

The parking layout is not supported in its current form as there are various non-compliancees with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 outlined as follows

§ The position of the motorbike parking reduces the aisle width to below Australian standards and is not supported. There is a high risk of cars reversing out of the carspaces and colliding with the motorbikes parked in the spaces.

§ Carspace 5 does not comply with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 in that it needs to be enlarged to 2.7m in width since it is adjacent to an obstruction. In addition also needs to be an additional 1m length in the aisle width clearance to allow for adequate car manoeuvrability.

 

As carspace 5 is not required to acheive compliance with the parking rate it shall be deleted from the application and the motorbike parking relocated to this location.

 

Waste Management Comments

Council’s ‘Waste Management Guidelines for Proposed Developments’ specify a waste generation rate for boarding houses of 9L/occupant/day for normal garbage and 3L/occupant per day for recycling. This is for the standard traditional model of a boarding house of individual rooms with common kitchen and living area.

 

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

 

Normal Garbage (weekly collection)

Amount(L) = 9 x 17 x 7 = 1071

Number of bins = 1071/240 (standard MGB)= 4.5 = say 5 bins

 

Recyclables (fortnightly collection)

Amount(L) = 3 x 17 x 14 = 714

Number of bins = 714/240 = 2.9 = say 3 bins

 

Green Waste (fortnightly collection)

As some landscaping is proposed it is required that a minimum of 2 x 240L bins be required

 

Total required (by Guidelines)  = 5(normal) + 3(recycling) + 2(green waste)

                                        = 10 bins

 

As there is significant over-compliance with the waste bin rate it is recommended the bin room be sized down so the basement parking can achieve compliance with AS 2890.1:2004 (see parking comments). AS the units are essentially self contained which tend to generate more waste some redundancy in the bin rate is prudent. In this sense it is considered the following arrangement is appropriate

 

Total required (Revises)  = 6(normal) + 6(recycling) + 2(green waste)

                                        = 14 bins

 

Total Provided = 26 (Complies)

As there is significant over-compliance with the bin rate the bin room may be resized down to allow for more room for motorbike parking.

 

Service Authority Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Given that the proposed works will be between $1 & $2 million the applicant will be required to meet all costs associated with replacing the overhead wires with Aerial Bundled Cables in the vicinity of the development site

 

Tree & Landscape Comments

There are two small public trees, Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwoods) on Council’s Willis Street verge, of 2m x 2m, being one centrally across the width of the site, and one in line with the southern boundary, which despite there being no external works along this frontage, will still need to be protected to ensure their preservation in the streetscape, with relevant conditions provided.

 

There is no significant vegetation within this site that would pose a constraint to the development in anyway; however, despite not being shown on any of the plans, growing in the side setback of the adjoining property to the north, 28-30 Willis Street, almost hard up against the common boundary, there are some semi-established trees which appear to have been planted to assist with privacy and screening between the two properties, and overhang into the subject site to varying degrees, and comprise firstly, a 6m tall Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak), about halfway along the length of the common boundary, and then further to the east, a row of similar sized Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gums).

 

This development will need to be stepped or terraced in order to address the natural slope of the land down to the rear (western) boundary, towards Willis Lane, with major excavations to a depth of 6m (44.79 to RL38.20) for the northeast corner of the proposed basement level to be undertaken directly adjacent the trunk of the Silky Oak (plan ADA 02-12).

 

This native species can attain a height of 20m at maturity in ideal conditions, and while regarded as having an invasive or aggressive root system, they are not know as having a high tolerance to disturbance.

 

While the Spotted Gums further to the east would not be affected by the basement, the Northern Elevation (ADA 06-12) shows that the ground level in this corresponding area of the site will be lowered by up to 1.5m, and as it is likely that the root systems of these trees would have encroached under the fence-line and into the subject site, substantial damage will result, with the extent of pruning required for clearances for the building, scaffolding and similar during the course of construction also needing to be considered.

 

None of these trees are significant in anyway, and while there would be no objections from Council to their removal if they were growing within the subject site, their location on a neighbouring property means that both Council and the applicant have a common law responsibility to ensure they are retained.

 

Building and Environmental Health Comments

 

BCA Building Classification – Class 3 (Boarding House)

Class 7a- Carpark

Key Issues

 

Local Government Act

Compliance is required with the Local Government Act appropriate conditions have been included in this report.

 

Noise

Noise is considered a potential issue as such appropriate conditions have been included in this report including management controls.

 

Conclusion:

No objections are raised in relation to the proposed development, subject to the following conditions being included in any development consent.

 

Building Services comments

 

Key Issues

 

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Site Management:

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

 

 

 

7.1      Design Review Panel

The comments provided by the Design Review Panel are extracted under the “SEPP No. 65” section of this report.

 

7.2      NSW Police - Eastern Beaches Local Area Command 

 

Local Area Police

By letter dated 13 January 2011 the Eastern Beaches Local Area Command has provided the following comments to the proposal-

 

A Safer by Design Crime Risk Evaluation has been carried out.

The crime risk rating for this development is medium on a sliding scale of low, medium and high risk.

 

There are no major objections to the proposal subject to conditions being applied to any consent. These conditions will address such issues as

 

Increasing surveillance opportunities by installing good lighting and detection devices

 

Territorial reinforcement by clearly delineating private and public spaces

 

Space/Activity management which includes such strategies as activity coordination, maintenance, rapid repair of vandalism and graffiti and the removal of burned out lighting.

 

Designing for Access Control by creating landscapes and physical locations that channel and group people into target areas, spaces which attract rather than discourage people from gathering and restricting access to internal areas like car parks and rarely visited areas.

 

8.    Master Planning Requirements

The site has a land area of only 613sqm and a master plan is not required.

 

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

 

The site is located within Zone No. 2B (Residential Zone) under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation). The proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. Although the proposal is consistent with the aims of the LEP and the specific objectives of the Residential 2B Zone, in that the development will deliver affordable accommodation, the proposal will have an impact on the amenity for surrounding development.

 

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

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

 

20F Floor space ratios

 

Residential 2B – 0.65:1

(Allowable 398.45 sqm based on 613 sqm site area.

 

0.997:1

 

 

No. See comments below.

 

20G Building heights

 

Max building height - 9.5metres max external wall height of 7metres.

 

Max proposed height – approximately 9 metres and wall height of approximately 8.8m.

 

Yes- overall height.

No – wall height.

 

The non compliance with the building wall height standard is examined under the “SEPP 1” section of this report. The non-compliance with the floor space ratio standard is remedied by the more generous allowances under the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 as discussed in the following section.

 

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

The subject application is made pursuant to the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) and requires assessment under Clause 29 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent and Clause 30 Standards for boarding houses. The following tables outline the assessment:

 

Standard

Assessment

The density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio are not more than 0.65:1 (Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998) + 0.5:1 under SEPP = 1.15:1

The proposed floor space ratio is 0.997:1 and thus compliant.

Building height if all proposed buildings comply with the maximum building height under another environmental planning instrument for any building on the land (that is, 9.5m).

The building complies with the overall height control however does not comply with the maximum wall height in some sections of the site. The building height and wall heights are both Local Environmental Plan standards under Clause 20G of the RLEP.

 

The applicant has submitted detailed diagrams to indicate where these breaches occur. The information which has been calculated by the applicant indicates that 7% of the elevations are non compliant with regard to wall height. 32% of the elevations are below the permissible wall height.

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

The proposed landscape treatment is compatible to both Street frontages.

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

The communal living area is located on level 4 and faces west. It has an adjoining balcony.

 

The SEPP requires 3 hours of direct solar access.

 

It appears from the submitted solar diagrams that this room will not achieve the minimum requirements in mid winter, largely due to the orientation of the building to the west. However this room has a good outlook onto common landscaped open space and does receive afternoon sunlight. Given the circumstances it is considered to be acceptable in this instance.

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

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

(ii)  if accommodation is provided on site for a boarding house manager – one area of at least 8sqm with a minimum dimension of 2.5sqm is provided adjacent to the accommodation.

 

 

 

The common open space in the centre of the site exceeds with the minimum requirements.

 

Unit 6 has been allocated for the onsite manager. This unit has a private courtyard on its eastern side which exceeds the minimum requirements. 

If not more than:

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

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

The controls under the SEPP requires in an accessible area at least 0.2 parking spaces for each boarding room.

 

In total there are 17 units. Each unit is shown as a separate domicile for up to two occupants.

 

Based on the above, the requirement is to provide 3.2 parking spaces plus one space for the onsite manager

 

4.2 spaces in total required, say 4.

 

The proposal includes five car spaces and therefore complies.

 

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

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

(ii)      16 square metres in any other case

Complies.

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

Provided.

 

Assessment of Clause 30 Standards for boarding houses

 

Standard

Assessment

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

Provided.

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

Some of the units exceed the maximum requirement. The proposal is non compliant with the standard however no objection is raised provided a condition is imposed which limits the maximum number of boarders at any one to that shown on the plans (by furniture layout).

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

The layout of the rooms indicates one double bed in each room. A condition will apply.

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

Provided.

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

Complies. Unit 6 is allocated for the onsite manager. A condition will apply.

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

In this case, five car spaces are provided which is satisfactory and which complies with the wishes of the local community to have parking provided.

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

Not applicable.

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

Parking for bikes and motorcycles is provided in accordance with this requirement.

 

(c)    State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 65 Design Quality of Residential flat Development

SEPP No. 65 applies to the proposed development. The application has been referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) as part of Council’s pre development application process. The current development application has made some amendments, however has not addressed all the concerns raised by the Panel. Accordingly, the application was not send back to the Panel for review. The areas of concerns will follow however the Panel raised the following original concerns:

 

1)       Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

 

The proposal is for the demolition and redevelopment of a remnant house / duplex on the eastern slopes overlooking Kingsford shopping centre, near the UNSW. The site falls steeply from Willis Street in the east down to Willis Lane, a drop equivalent to 3 floors.

 

Apartment buildings are interspersed with houses and town houses in the vicinity of the site. As the zoning anticipates, the site is ideally suited to more urban use. The Affordable Housing SEPP allows further intensification.

 

The proposal is for a slim-line contemporary boarding house. The proposed building would contain four floors of studio units, although the steep slope results in a building that is up to 6 storeys in height when viewed from the west. The lower ground floor has car parking, motor bike parking, services, a garden, a caretaker and a garden unit.

 

The Panel supports the thin cross-section and plan proposed, built to the predominant street alignment to Willis Street. However the Panel has concerns about the proposed height and density, and the overshadowing effects on the neighbour to the south (see below).

 

The Panel requests a broader contextual analysis to support the full DA.

 

Comment

The DA Architectural Set includes a relatively thorough site analysis to support the full DA. (Refer to Plan 01-12. Site Analysis).

 

2)       The Scale of the Proposal

The Panel supports the following aspects of the built form;

 

-     The straight-forward type, well suited to the site, and already found in the area.

-     The thin cross-section, which means that every unit has northern orientation and cross ventilation.

-     The clever site access strategy, with a single open gallery, inboard stair cases and access for all to both street and lane.

-     The stepping form is also an appropriate response to the sloped site, as is the 3 storey scale to Willis Street.

-     The incorporation of roof terraces, taking advantage of the panoramic vistas to the west.

-     The extent of deep soil planting, particularly along the northern and eastern boundaries.

 

The Panel has concerns about the following aspects of the proposal;

-     The overall height is generally a storey higher than the maximum permitted height under the LEP for the 2(b) zone. The proposed 4 storeys is due partly to the over-excavation, partly to too much height

-     The FSR is high, even taking account of the 0.5:1 Affordable Housing bonus.

-     The continuous building form, at the height envisaged, causes unacceptable overshadowing effects on the neighbour to the south. Regardless of whether this narrow property were to be redeveloped or not, this site would be permanently shaded in winter.

-     The extent of shoring and retaining walls along all boundaries needs to be considered and properly shown. The effect of excavation on neighbours’ trees needs to be considered

-     The excavation currently shown is excessive. No unit should have as its sole aspect the rear of a retaining wall.

-     The car parking is awkwardly handled, as it is too small and compromises the caretaker’s garden

-     There appears to be little space for planting on the south side due to the arrangement of stairs, paths and the retaining construction

-     The walkways and entries lack weather protection, and the door swings need to be resolved

-     The Panel believes that the typical unit plan can be improved with further design investigations - reducing circulation space and increasing living space.

-     Overlooking to the north needs to be further considered. Currently the scheme shows 4 stories of continuous glazed louvres facing the neighbours, which is unlikely to be the best solution to privacy for anyone.

-     On the south side privacy for bedroom windows from the walkways and stairs needs to be further considered

 

The Panel suggests some combination of the following improvements to the scheme should be investigated by the architect;

 

-     Introducing an opening and step to the centre of the building would improve the scale and relationship to neighbours. Such a revision to the massing could split the upper levels into 2 distinct volumes that step down following fall of the site. The split in the form would allow sunlight and aspect for the property to the south.

-     Alternatively, the point of stepping could be moved eastward by half a module, thereby deleting half the top floor units.

-     The 3 lowest units facing the retaining walls should be deleted. Boundary wall heights and ground RLs should be clearly indicated so that their impact on neighbouring properties can be assessed.

-     The articulation of any additional floor space achieved needs to be well handled. Due to the extreme slope of the site, there is likely to be a minor exceedance of the LEP height as the building steps down the hill. This can be compensated by a central opening / different point of stepping and lower height.

-     The Panel would prefer to see some variety in the unit plans, in terms of configuration, size, internal volume, balcony or the like.

-     The design of all windows, balconies, screens and hoods needs further consideration to improve environmental performance, privacy, amenity and weather protection.

-     A proportion of obscured glass, solid louvres, or similar to the balcony balustrades should be provided for privacy.

-     There is the potential for much more use of the roof, in terms of green roofs, ESD, usable space or better use of the cross section to make better interiors. There is scope for skylights/toplights and roof vents to increase the environmental performance and amenity of the top floor units. Some minor additional height, as long as it does not add to overshadowing, would be acceptable.

-     It would be appropriate for the common areas to be expressed differently in elevation to the apartments around them in response to their different use and relationship with the common outdoor areas.

 

Comment

The amended proposal is for two distinct buildings with a landscaped open space in the centre which was suggested by The Panel to reduce the overall volume of the development by dividing it into two components. The building also steps down the site. Fundamentally, the layout of the building has been changed to provide for an improved open space area which is between the two buildings, rooms have been provided with either courtyards or balconies and louvers have been proposed on the exterior of the building. In terms of energy efficiency, the amended proposal is accompanied by a new Basix certificate.

 

3)       The Built Form of the Proposal

See above.

 

4)       The Proposed Density

The Panel understands that the SEPP allows a floor space bonus above the 0.65:1 FSR envisaged in the LEP.

 

It is the Panel’s opinion that the LEP density plus the SEPP Affordable Housing bonus should be suitable in this relatively urban context, which is well served by public transport and is very convenient to the University, the hospital and a wide range of public places, facilities and shopping.

 

Implementing the changes suggested above would bring the proposed density closer to the permissible level of 1.15:1.

 

Any argument for additional density should be supported by design quality, and good amenity for all dwellings. This is the case with this proposal, which has every dwelling facing north and cross-ventilated.

 

Comment

The amended proposal has a FSR of 0.977:1 which is below the allowable 1.15:1 as suggested by the DRP.

 

5)       Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

The building has the potential to perform very well;

 

·  Good cross ventilation to units is provided uniformly by the plan. High level windows to the walkway / breezeway can be provided from the south side of the apartments, while side windows can also be provided for more units.

·  An improved roof design with clerestory windows could be used to capture winter sun and provide added light and ventilation.  Drawings should indicate roof thicknesses for falls and insulation.

·  It would be good to have as many bathrooms and laundries as possible on the external wall, with openable windows.

·  Appropriate windows have been provided to all elevations, considering spandrel separation and sun shading.  The use of sliding/folding doors between the narrow living rooms and the verandas might improve the convenience and utility of these spaces.

·  It is unclear from the drawings where provision has been made for water collection.

·  Ceiling fans should be provided throughout.

·  Cross ventilation should be able to be maintained at night without compromising security. Consideration needs to be given to fanlights, windows or other ventilation options.

·  Clothes lines should be provided, perhaps on the roof terraces

 

Comment

A Basix Certificate has been provided. The Basix Certificate shows a water tank will be provided. Air conditioning is to be provided and some of the units are cross ventilated. Louvres have been provided to the exterior of the building. 

 

6)       The Proposed Landscape

A qualified landscape architect should prepare the landscape design.

 

The proposal should endeavour to comply with the required landscape area, which is preferable given the higher density proposed.  Deep soil would be highly beneficial along the northern boundary.  Trees along all boundary frontages increase amenity enormously by providing visual relief, privacy and shading.

 

The landscape design should include the upgrading of the public frontages, and the planting of additional street trees. The landscape architect should coordinate with Council regarding these public domain improvements.

 

The ground floor unit to Willis Street should have a planning arrangement that improves the access and usefulness of the courtyard.

 

Comment

The landscaping of the site is shown on a detailed landscaping plan (plan 11) which forms part of the development application. There is a good mix of hard and soft landscaped spaces. The front of the site at Willis Street will have low scale planting and incorporate feature trees. The central landscaped space will also incorporate low scale native plantings and deciduous feature trees, however there may need to be some fine tuning of suitable species in this zone of the site to ensure survival of any such trees. The frontage to Willis Lane is landscaped with soft landscaping. There is deep soil planting along some of the northern boundary.

 

7)       The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

See above

Easy access to garbage rooms for all units should be considered.

 

Comment

The applicant has previously advised that stair lifts will be provided or if not achievable the management will appoint a cleaner or contractor to collect rubbish and recyclables from accessible units on a scheduled basis.

 

8)       The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

Generally satisfactory.

 

BCA advice should be sought with regard to the layout of the stairs for fire egress, spandrel separation, egress and the like. The Panel suggests that specialist advice may be needed regarding separate ascending and descending stairs, from level access to the street and lane.

 

Comment

The proposal will be required to comply with the BCA.

 

9)       Social issues

The Panel strongly supports new affordable housing on well-located sites in Randwick. The apartment configuration and small sizes proposed seem to be appropriate to diversify the housing choice available in the area. More variation in plan types and sizes should be provided, such as some suites / doubles that are suitable for couples, or couples with a young child.

 

Comment

The amended proposal further variation to the layouts and the rooms are now suitable for couples or couples with a young child.

 

10)    The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The architect needs to consider the issues and potential improvements suggested above, without losing the qualities inherent in the scheme. Subject to the changes suggested above being made, the proposed building could be a positive addition to Kingsford

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

The Panel looks for to seeing this application at DA stage, when it has developed into a good proposal, with an appropriate level of design resolution that well satisfies SEPP 65 requirements. 

 

 

 

Comment

The applicant has amended the plans from the original comments made by the Design Review Panel and the current plans reflect many of the comments made by the DRP.

 

9.1      Policy Controls

 

Development Control Plan Parking

The car parking requirements stipulated in the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) prevail over the Development Control Plan controls.

 

9.2      Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$1,400,000

1.0%

$14,000.00

 

10. Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

Not applicable.

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

The relevant clauses of the 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 that are otherwise not assessed within the body of this report, are addressed below.

 

The proposed development, as amended, is now consistent with the built form in the locality. The proposal will not result in a detrimental impact on the locality.

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

The site has convenient access to local retail services and public transport. The proposal, as amended, is now an appropriate development of this site.

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 within the body of this report.

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

The proposal, as amended, is considered to be in the public interest.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome (4):     Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal which Council considered at its July meeting has been redesigned to address many of the issues which were raised by during the course of the assessment of the original (and subsequently amended plans).

 

Fundamentally the proposal has been split into two built forms which are connected by a basement carpark. The development steps down the site and the two buildings are spatially separated by a landscaped open space. There is also landscaping along both street frontages.

 

The layout of the units has also been redesigned so units now address both street frontages and also the central open space. This reduces any overlooking or loss of privacy to the properties to either side of the site and also provides a pleasant outlook for the future lodgers.

 

Car parking to meet the requirements of the SEPP has been provided in a basement car park. This area will also house waste storage and a pump room.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20G of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to 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. 1096/2010 for Demolition of an existing building the erection of a part three storey and part two storey boarding house development with basement parking for five vehicles, bikes and motor cycles and associated works including landscaping of the site, at No. 32 Willis Street, Kingsford, 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:

 

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted plans

 

ADA 02-12 Floor Plans

ADA 03-12 Floor Plans

ADA 04-12 Floor Plans

ADA 05-12 Floor Plans

ADA 06-12 Elevations

ADA 07-12 Short Elevations

ADA 08-12 Sections

ADA 09-12 Floor Space Ratio Calculations

ADA 10-12 Erosion and Sediment Control Concept Plan

ADA 11-12 Landscape Concept Plan

ADA 12-12 Finishes Schedule

 

2.       Each room shall accommodate a maximum of two adults only as indicated in the layout of the rooms on the submitted plans (i.e only one double bed in each room).

 

3.       There must be an onsite manager who resides at the site and Unit 6 must be allocated as the onsite manager’s accommodation.

 

4.       The materials and finishes must be in accordance with the submitted and approved plan ADA 12-12. Colours must be taken from the natural colour palette. 

 

5.       The area labelled “semi public terrace” on Level 5 of the building is to be deleted from the plans. This area would have the potential to cause a loss of amenity to surrounding residents and to lodgers within the development given its size and location.

 

6.       The landscape plan pursuant to Condition No. 89 of this consent must be amended take into account the species which are proposed within the central landscaped space and the soil depth of this space and be designed accordingly. If Japanese Maples are not a suitable species then these are to be replaced by another deciduous tree. The landscape plan must also include suitable plantings along the side boundaries which will achieve enough height to provide some visual relief to the side elevations.

 

7.       The basement of the building must be redesigned so that lodgers are not required to walk through the bin room to the stairwell to access their units as this is a poor design solution. This may require a marginal increase in the size of the basement.

 

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

8.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 2 July 2010, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council:

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200000

$1,400,000

 

1.0%

$14,000.00

 

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 Contributions Plan may be inspected at the Customer Service Centre, Administrative Centre, 30 Frances Street, Randwick or at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au.

 

The following conditions have been applied to ensure compliance with Local Government Legislation and Policies of Council:

9.       Places of Shared Accommodation must comply with the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and the premises must be registered with the Council prior to occupation and on an annual basis, and the approved registration/inspection fee is to be forwarded to Council prior to occupation.

 

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

10.     Use of the premises must be in accordance with the Operation and Management plan in section 8.0 of the Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with the application.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

11.     The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

 

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

 

13.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage, collection and disposal of waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

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

 

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

 

Building Regulation & Construction

15.     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.

 

16.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

18.     In accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, prior to the commencement of any excavation or building 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 and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing, and

·            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.

 

19.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Details of the Licensed Building Contractor (and a copy of any relevant Certificate of Insurance) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to commencement of works.

 

23.     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.

 

24.     Prior to issuing an interim or final Occupation Certificate, a single and complete Fire Safety Certificate, which encompasses all of the essential fire safety measures contained in the fire safety schedule must be obtained and be submitted to Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be displayed in the building entrance/foyer and a copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must also be forwarded to the NSW Fire Brigades.

 

An annual Fire Safety Statement is also required to be submitted to the Council and the NSW Fire Brigades, each year after the date of the Fire Safety Certificate, in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

25.     A report or written correspondence must be obtained from a suitably qualified professional geotechnical engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issuing of a construction certificate, confirming the suitability and stability of the site for the proposed building and certifying the suitably and adequacy of the proposed design and construction of the building for the site.

 

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

 

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

 

Any practices or recommendations specified in the engineer’s report in relation to the avoidance or minimisation of structural damage to nearby premises or land must be fully complied with and incorporated into the documentation for the construction certificate. A copy of the engineers report is to be submitted to the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority.

 

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

 

28.     A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer or suitably qualified and experienced building surveyor shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works detailing the current condition and status of all buildings and ancillary structures located upon all of the premises adjoining the subject site (eg.  dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc.).

 

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

 

29.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to an occupation certificate being issued, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural requirements of the Building Code of Australia and approved structural design documentation.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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 (formerly EPA) and Randwick City Council policies and conditions, including:

 

·       Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·       Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

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

·       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 Department of Environment & Climate Change (DECC) / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW 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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

·       Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·       Method/s of demolition (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

·       Waste disposal, recycling and re-use of materials

·       Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·       Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·       Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

If the work involves asbestos products or materials, a copy of the Demolition Work Plan must be provided to Council.

 

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

 

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

 

a)     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

34.     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.

 

35.     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.

 

36.     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 or the like

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Additional requirements for all development (except for single residential dwellings)

·   Saturdays and Sundays where the preceding Friday and/or the following Monday is a public holiday - No work permitted

 

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

 

37.     The relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 must be complied with and construction noise and vibration strategies are to be developed and implemented in accordance with the DECC Guidelines for Construction Noise and Assessing Vibration and the following requirements:-

 

a)     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. 

 

b)     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.

 

38.     Public health, safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works and the following requirements must be satisfied:

 

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

 

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

 

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 & Regulatory Services department.

 

d)       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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The owner/builder must ensure that all works within or upon the road reserve, footpath, nature strip or other public place are completed to the satisfaction of Council.  For further information, please contact Council’s Road / Asset Opening Officer on 9399 0691 or 9399 0999.

 

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

 

h)       The owner/builder is required to hold Public Liability Insurance, with a minimum liability of $10 million. A copy of the Insurance cover is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.

 

39.     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)       A temporary safety fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the perimeter of the site (unless the site is separated from the adjoining land by an existing structurally adequate fence, having a minimum height of 1.5 metres). 

 

Temporary fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed of cyclone wire fencing, with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control, or other material approved by Council. Temporary site fences are to be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

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

 

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

 

If necessary, an awning is to be erected sufficiently to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work from falling into the public place or adjoining premises. The public place adjacent to the work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place and any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed upon completion of the work.

 

c)       A ‘B Class’ overhead type hoarding is required is be provided to protect the public, located adjacent to the development, prior to the commencement of any works on the site which comprise:-

 

·     any works or hoisting of materials over a public footway or adjoining premises, or

·     any building or demolition works on buildings which are over 7.5m in height and located within 3.6 metres of the street alignment.

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

40.     A Construction Site Management Plan is to be developed and implemented prior to the commencement of any site 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 Council and the Principal Certifying Authority.  A copy must also be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

41.     During construction stages, sediment laden stormwater run-off shall be controlled using the sediment control measures outlined in the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by Landcom, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

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

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

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

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

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

·       Landscaping and revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

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

 

§   prior to construction of the first constructed footings / floor slab,

§   prior to completion of the floor/ floor slab for each new floor level,

§   upon completion of the building work, prior to issuing an occupation certificate,

§   as may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

The check survey certificate or compliance certificate must be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority. A copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not the principal certifying authority.

 

Occupant Safety

 

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

 

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

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

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

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

v.    Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

Services

 

45.     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 applicable, the Construction Certificate plans and Structural Engineering details must be amended to satisfy the requirements of Sydney Water.

 

If the proposal is acceptable to Sydney Water, 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 is required to ensure that a Quick Check Agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before the commencement of any works.

 

 

Should the application be approved the following conditions shall apply under the appropriate section:

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

The following conditions of consent must be complied with before a ‘Construction Certificate’ is issued by either an Accredited Certifier or Randwick City Council.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be included in the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

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 provide adequate security against damage to Council’s infrastructure:

Security Deposit

46.     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:

 

·           $8000.00    -      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.

 

Sydney Water Requirements

47.     The relevant requirements of the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be complied with and a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water. 

 

An Application for a Section 73 Certificate must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator. For details, please refer to the “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Following the application, a “Notice of Requirements” will be provided, detailing water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid.  Please make early contact with the Water Servicing Co-ordinator, as building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

A copy of Sydney Water’s ‘Notice of Requirements’ must be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Construction Certificate.

The Section 73 Compliance Certificate is required to be obtained before an occupation certificate or subdivision certificate is issued, whichever the sooner.

 

Electricity Substation

48.     The applicant must liaise with Energy Australia prior to obtaining a construction certificate (for any above ground works), to determine whether or not an electricity substation is required for the development. Any electricity substation required for the site as a consequence of this development shall be located within the site and shall be screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on relevant construction certificate and landscape plans.

 

Protection of street trees

49.     In order to ensure retention of the two small Hibiscus tiliaceus (Cottonwoods) on Council’s Willis Street verge, being one located centrally across the width of the site, and one in line with the southern boundary in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.  All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show the retention of both street trees, with the position and diameter of both of their trunks and canopies to be clearly and accurately shown.

 

b.  Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar in the rear yard/that need to be installed over public property, must be setback a minimum distance of metres/done so along either the sites side boundaries; or, against either side of the new crossing, so as to minimise root damage to the street trees.

 

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

 

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

 

e.  The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to either of these street trees, and shall contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 should pruning or any similar such work appear necessary, with the applicant required to cover all associated costs with such work, to Council’s satisfaction, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate.

 

f.   Within the TPZ described in point , 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 these requirements.

 

g.  Any roots encountered during the course of the approved works must be cut cleanly by hand, and the affected area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

h.  A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $1,000.00 shall be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and ultimately, preservation of both street trees.

 

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

 

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

 

Protection of neighbouring trees

50.     In order to also ensure retention of those trees growing in the side setback of the adjoining property to the north, 28-30 Willis Street, against the common boundary, being a Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) about halfway along the length of this boundary, then a row of Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gums) further to its east 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 neighbouring trees, with the position and diameter of their trunks and canopies to be clearly and accurately shown in relation to the works.

 

b.  Prior to the commencement of site works, the PCA must ensure that an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level V in Arboriculture, and is also a registered member of a nationally recognized organization or association (‘the site Arborist’) has been engaged for the duration of the project for the purpose of performing and monitoring the conditions that are listed in this consent relating to tree preservation, with all site staff to comply with any instructions issued.

 

c.  All initial excavations required for the northeast corner of the proposed basement level, adjacent the Silky Oak, as well as for the lowering of ground levels at the northeast corner of the site, adjacent the row of Spotted Gums, must be performed by the site Arborist, to a minimum depth of 600mm, and a minimum width of 200mm in width.

 

d.  The applicant/Arborist must then contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613), giving at least 2 working days notice, to inspect the trenches and any roots encountered, and where approval is granted for the pruning of roots that are in direct conflict with the works, they must be cut cleanly by hand, and the area backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

e.  A suitably qualified professional shall be consulted in regards to the installation of temporary shoring adjacent both groups of trees so as to prevent collapse of the soil profile and instability of the trees.

 

f.   The Certifying Authority must ensure that the Construction Certificate plans show the northeast corner of the proposed basement level, for a distance of 3 metres along both its northern and eastern walls, being constructed using continuous bored piers, sheet piling, or a similar system that will not require further excavations or works beyond the final location of the wall.

 

 

g.  Any new services, pipes, stormwater systems shall be directed along the southern side of the site; but if they do need to be installed along the northern side setback, they must be located as close as practically possible to the actual building so as to minimise root damage, with any new boundary fencing needing to be a material that requires localised pad footings only.

 

h.  Any access, pathway or similar that is required along the northern side setback, beneath the extent of their driplines, must be designed so that ground levels are maintained as close as practically possible, with no other structures such as continuous strip footings, planters boxes or similar to be located in these areas, and must remain as a porous/permeable ground treatment.

 

i.   In order to prevent compaction of the soil profile during the course of works, woodchip mulch to a depth of 75mm shall be maintained within the northern side setback, extending a distance of 3 metres to the east and west of both groups of trees (measured off the common boundary adjacent the centreline of their trunks), to which ground protection comprising strapped together rumble boards, plywood or similar, shall be provided, and must remain in place for the duration of works, until such time as the side path is being installed.

 

j.   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 within the 3 metre zone described above, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

The requirements contained in the following conditions of consent must be complied with and details of compliance must be included in the construction certificate for the development.

 

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

Traffic conditions

51.     Adequate provisions are to be made to provide pedestrian visibility and safety.  All new walls (and/or landscaping) adjacent to vehicular crossings should not exceed a height of 600mm above the internal driveway level for a distance of 1.5m within the site or new walls (including landscaping) should splayed 1.5 metres by 1.5 metres. Details of compliance, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority, are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

52.     The internal circulation and the carpark areas, (including, but not limited to, the carpark layout and height clearances) are to be in accordance with the requirements of AS2890.1:2004. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with these requirements. In this regard the following amendments are required to achieve compliance;

a)     Carspace 5 shall be deleted from the application as it does not comply with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 as it is too narrow and requires an additional 1m of aisle length to allow for vehicle manoeuvrability). The deletion of the carspace does not affect compliance with the parking rate.

b)     The motorcycle parking shall be relocated as it results in an effective aisle width below 5.8m as required by Australian Standard 2890.1:2004. A minimum of 3 motorbike and 3 bicycle spaces shall be provided.

 

NOTE:

The waste bin room is over-compliant and may be downsized to allow more room for motorbike parking.

 

Design Alignment levels

53.     Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall indicate the road dedication along the full Willis Lane frontage to facilitate the construction of a 1.3m wide concrete footpath.

 

54.     The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) at the property boundary (after road dedication) for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, shall be:

 

Willis St Frontage

·      Match the back of the existing footpath, along the full site frontage.

 

Willis Lane Frontage

·       Match the centerline of the laneway at all points opposite, along the full site frontage.

 

The design alignment levels at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the roadway/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.

 

       NOTE: Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0881.

 

55.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $560 calculated at $46.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

56.     The internal access driveway must be designed and constructed to  match the alignment levels at the property boundary (as specified by Council) and in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a)  The first 4m of the access ramp from the street shall not exceed a grade of 1 in 8. The access ramp may then steepen to 1 in 4 but another 2m transition of 1 in 8 is required before proceeding onto the basement Level. 

 

57.     A longitudinal section of the driveway must be provided with the construction certificate plans, at a scale of 1:20 along the centreline of the driveway. The sections shall demonstrate compliance with the Council issued alignment level at the property boundary, together with satisfactory ramp grades (and transitions) and head clearances in accordance with AS 2890.1 (2004) to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

NOTE: The applicant shall liaise with the Development Engineer on 9399-0881 if there are any issues in achieving compliance with the above requirements

 

58.     One carspace shall be dedicated solely for the use of the manager of the boarding house. The remainder of the carspaces shall be dedicated to the occupants of the boarding house. Plans submitted for the constructed certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

Stormwater Drainage

59.     Engineering calculations and plans with levels reduced to Australian Height Datum in relation to site drainage shall be prepared by a suitably qualified Hydraulic Engineer and submitted to and approved by the certifying authority prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. A copy of the engineering calculations and plans are to be forwarded to Council, prior to a construction certificate being issued, if the Council is not the certifying authority. The drawings and details shall include the following information:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

60.     The site stormwater drainage system is to be provided in accordance with the following requirements;

 

a)     The stormwater drainage system must be provided in accordance with the relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and the conditions of this consent, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

b)     The stormwater must be discharged directly to Wllis lane

 

c)     An on-site stormwater detention system must be provided to ensure that the maximum discharge from the site does not exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 5 year storm of one hour duration for existing site conditions. All other stormwater run-off from the site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 year storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the street drainage system, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

An overland escape route or overflow system (to Council’s street drainage system) must be provided for storms having an average recurrence interval of 100 years (1 in 100 year storm), or, alternatively the stormwater detention system is to be provided to accommodate the 1 in 100 year storm.

 

d)     Determination of the required cumulative storage (in the on-site detention and/or infiltration system) must be calculated by the mass curve technique as detailed in Technical Note 1, Chapter 14 of the Australian Rainfall and Run-off Volume 1, 1987 Edition.

 

Where possible any detention tanks should have an open base to infiltrate stormwater into the ground. Infiltration should not be used if ground water and/or any rock stratum is within 2.0 metres of the base of the tank.

 

e)     If connecting to Council’s underground drainage system, a reflux valve shall be provided (within the site) over the pipeline discharging from the site to ensure that stormwater from Council drainage system does not surcharge back into the site stormwater system.

 

f)     Any new kerb inlet pits (constructed within Council’s road reserve) are to be constructed generally in accordance with Council’s standard detail for the design of kerb inlet pits (drawing number SD6 which is available from Council).

 

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

 

h)     A sediment/silt arrestor pit must be provided within the site near the street boundary prior to discharge of the stormwater to Council’s drainage system and prior to discharging the stormwater to any absorption/infiltration system.

 

Sediment/silt arrestor pits are to be constructed generally in accordance with the following requirements:

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

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

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

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

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

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

·         Provision of a sign adjacent to the pit stating, “This sediment/silt arrester pit shall be regularly inspected and cleaned”.

 

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

 

i)      The floor level of all habitable, retail, commercial and storage areas located adjacent to any detention and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage must be a minimum of 300mm above the maximum water level for the design storm or alternately a permanent 300mm high water proof barrier is to be provided.

 

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

v.    Above ground stormwater detention areas must be suitably signposted where required, warning people of the maximum flood level.

 

Note: Above ground storage of stormwater is not permitted within basement car parks or store rooms.

 

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

 

l)      A ‘V’ drain (or equally effective provisions) are to be provided to the perimeter of the property, where necessary, to direct all stormwater to the detention/infiltration area.

 

m)    The site stormwater system must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure it operates as required by the design.

 

n)     Mulch or bark is not to be used in on-site detention areas.

 

o)     Site discharge pipelines shall cross the verge at an angle no less than 45 degrees to the kerb line.

 

Site seepage & Dewatering

61.     Site seepage and sub-soil drainage (from planter boxes etc) must comply with the following requirements:

 

a)    Seepage/ground water and subsoil drainage (from planter boxes etc) must not be collected & discharged directly or indirectly to  Council’s street gutter or underground drainage system

 

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

 

c)    The walls of the basement level/s of the building are to be waterproofed/tanked to restrict the entry of any seepage water and subsoil drainage into the basement level/s of the building and the stormwater drainage system for the development.

 

d)    Sub-soil drainage systems may discharge via infiltration subject to the hydraulic consultant/engineer being satisfied that the site and soil conditions are suitable and the seepage is able to be fully managed within the site, without causing a nuisance to any premises and ensuring that it does not drain or discharge (directly or indirectly) to the street gutter.

 

e)    Details of the proposed stormwater drainage system including methods of tanking/waterproofing the basement level/s and any sub-soil drainage systems (as applicable) must be prepared or approved by a suitably qualified and experienced Professional Engineer to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

62.     Details of the proposed connection and or disposal of any site seepage, groundwater or construction site stormwater to Council’s stormwater drainage system must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Development Engineer, prior to commencing these works, in accordance with section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

Details must include the following information:

·       Site plan

·       Hydraulic engineering details of the proposed disposal/connection of groundwater or site stormwater to Council/s drainage system

·       Volume of water to be discharged

·       Location and size of drainage pipes

·       Duration, dates and time/s for the proposed works and disposal

·       Details of water quality and compliance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Act 1997

·       Details of associated plant and equipment, including noise levels from the plant and equipment and compliance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Act 1997 and associated Regulations and Guidelines

·       Copy of any required approvals and licences from other Authorities (e.g.  A water licence from the Department of Planning/Department of Water & Energy).

·       Details of compliance with any relevant approvals and licences

 

Waste Management

63.     Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate for the proposed building, a Waste Management Plan detailing the waste and recycling storage and removal strategy for all of the development, is required to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Services.

 

The Waste Management plan is required to be prepared in accordance with Council's Waste Management Guidelines for Proposed Development and must include the following details (as applicable):

·       The use of the premises and the number and size of occupancies.

·       The type and quantity of waste to be generated by the development.

·       Demolition and construction waste, including materials to be re-used or recycled.

·       Details of the proposed recycling and waste disposal contractors.

·       Waste storage facilities and equipment.

·       Access and traffic arrangements.

·       The procedures and arrangements for on-going waste management including collection, storage and removal of waste and recycling of materials.

 

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

 

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

 

 

64.     The garbage room shall be sized to contain a minimum of 14 x 240 litre bins (comprising 6 garbage bins & 6 recycle bins & 2 green waste bins) and with adequate provisions for access to all bins.  Details showing compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

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

                  

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

 

Construction Traffic Management

66.     Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, an Application for a ‘Works Zone’ and Construction Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to Councils Integrated Transport Department, and approved by the Randwick Traffic Committee, for a ‘Works Zone’ to be provided in Willis Street for the duration of the demolition & construction works. 

 

The ‘Works Zone’ must have a minimum length of 12m and extend for a minimum duration of three months.  The suitability of the proposed length and duration is to be demonstrated in the application for the Works Zone.  The application for the Works Zone must be submitted to Council at least six (6) weeks prior to the commencement of work on the site to allow for assessment and tabling of agenda for the Randwick Traffic Committee.

 

The requirement for a Works Zone may be varied or waived only if it can be demonstrated in the Construction Traffic Management Plan (to the satisfaction of Council’s Traffic Engineers) that all construction related activities (including all loading and unloading operations) can and will be undertaken wholly within the site.  The written approval of Council must be obtained to provide a Works Zone or to waive the requirement to provide a Works Zone prior to the commencement of any site work.

 

67.     A detailed Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to:

a)     commencement of any site work [or]

 

b)     a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

The Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and must include the following details, to the satisfaction of Council:

·       A description of the demolition, excavation and construction works

·       A site plan/s showing the site, roads, footpaths, site access points and vehicular movements

·       Any proposed road and/or footpath closures

·       Proposed site access locations for personnel, deliveries and materials

·       Size, type and estimated number of vehicular movements (including removal of excavated materials, delivery of materials and concrete to the site)

·       Provision for loading and unloading of goods and materials

·       Impacts of the work and vehicular movements on the road network, traffic and pedestrians

·       Proposed hours of construction related activities and vehicular movements to and from the site

·       Current/proposed approvals from other Agencies and Authorities (including NSW Roads & Traffic Authority, Police and State Transit Authority)

·       Any activities proposed to be located or impact upon Council’s road, footways or any public place

·       Measures to maintain public safety and convenience

 

68.     A Traffic Control Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council and relevant Authorities, prior to carrying out any work which results in the closure or partial closure of a State or Regional Road, as identified by the NSW Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

Sydney Water

69.     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

70.     A public utility impact assessment must be carried out on 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.  The assessment should include relevant information from public utility authorities and exploratory trenching or pot-holing, if necessary, to determine the position and level of services.

 

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 demolition, excavation or building works.

 

71.     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.

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

72.     Any openings within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place (i.e. for proposed drainage works or installation of services), must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of Council:

 

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

 

b)     Council’s Road / Asset Opening Officer must be notified at least 48 hours in advance of commencing any excavation works and also immediately upon completing the works (on 9399 0691 or 0409 033 921 during business hours), to enable any necessary inspections or works to be carried out.

 

c)     Relevant Road / Asset Opening Permit fees, construction fees, inspection fees and security deposits, must be paid to Council prior to commencing any works within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or other public place,

 

d)     The owner/developer must ensure that all works within or upon the road reserve, footpath, nature strip or other public place are completed to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate or occupation of the development (whichever is sooner).

 

e)     Excavations and trenches must be back-filled and compacted in accordance with AUSPEC standards 306U.

 

f)     Excavations or trenches located upon a road or footpath are required to be provided with 50mm depth of cold-mix bitumen finish, level with the existing road/ground surface, to enable Council to readily complete the finishing works at a future date.

 

g)     Excavations or trenches located upon turfed areas are required to be back-filled, compacted, top-soiled and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf.

 

h)     The work and area must be maintained in a clean, safe and tidy condition at all times and the area must be thoroughly cleaned at the end of each days activities and upon completion.

 

i)      The work can only be carried out in accordance with approved hours of building work as specified in the development consent, unless the express written approval of Council has been obtained beforehand.

 

j)     Sediment control measures must be implemented in accordance with the conditions of development consent and soil, sand or any other material must not be allowed to enter the stormwater drainage system or cause a pollution incident.

 

k)     The owner/developer must have a Public Liability Insurance Policy in force, with a minimum cover of $10 million and a copy of the insurance policy must be provided to Council prior to carrying out any works within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place.

 

Stormwater Drainage

73.     Adequate provisions must be made to collect and discharge stormwater drainage during construction of the building to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.

 

The prior written approval of Council must be obtained to connect or discharge site stormwater to Council’s stormwater drainage system or street gutter.

 

            Tree Management

74.     Approval is granted for the removal of all existing vegetation within the site where necessary in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown due to their insignificance, subject to full implementation of the approved landscaping.

 

Pruning of neighbours trees

75.     Permission is granted for the selective and minimal pruning of only those lower growing, lower order branches from the southern aspects of those trees growing on the neighbouring property to the north, 28-30 Willis Street, being a Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) about halfway along the length of this common boundary, as well as the row of Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gums) further to the east, only where needed in order to either avoid damage to the trees; or; for clearance reasons during the course of construction.

 

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

 

77.     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).

 

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.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

78.     Prior to issuing a final occupation certificate for the development, the owner/developer must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

a)     Construct a full width concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Willis lane.

b)     Construct kerb and gutter for the full site frontage in Willis Lane except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit points.

c)     Carry out a full depth 2 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full site frontage in Willis Lane.

d)     Construct a 1.3m wide concrete footpath along the full site frontage in Willis Lane. 

e)     Construct kerb and gutter for the full site frontage in Willis Street.

f)     Reconstruct a 1.3m wide concrete footpath along the full site frontage in Willis Street.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

79.     Prior to issuing a final occupation certificate or occupation of the development (whichever is sooner), the owner/developer 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.

 

80.     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.

 

81.     Prior to issuing of any occupation certificate, the owner/developer must meet the full cost to dedicate the amount of land as required as road widening to facilitate the construction of a 1.3m wide concrete footpath along the full site frontage on Willis lane. 

 

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

 

Service Authorities

83.     The Section 73 Compliance Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate or Subdivision Certificate (whichever the sooner).

 

84.     The applicant shall meet the full cost of the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site to be aerially bundled. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be relocated. All wires cables must be aerially bundled to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.

 

Stormwater Drainage

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

Notes:

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

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

c)   The Restriction and Positive Covenant may also be created in conjunction with the registration of the plan of survey for the road widening as an 88B instrument.

 

86.     Upon completion of the works and prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, a works-as-executed drainage plan prepared by a registered surveyor and approved by a suitably qualified and experienced hydraulic consultant/engineer must be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority and the Council. The works-as-executed plan must include the following details (as applicable):

 

·       The location of any detention basin/s with finished surface levels;

·       Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·       Volume of storage available in any detention areas;

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

·       The orifice size/s (if applicable);

·       Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

87.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer, which confirms that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system complies with the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standard AS3500.3:2003 (Plumbing & Drainage- Stormwater Drainage) and conditions of this development consent. 

 

The certification must be provided following inspection/s of the site stormwater drainage system by the Hydraulic Engineers to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

88.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate certification must be obtained from a suitably qualified and experienced professional Engineer, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority confirming that the basement tanking/waterproofing and any sub-soil drainage systems (as applicable) have been provided in accordance with the conditions of consent and relevant Standards. A copy of the certification must be provided to the Council with the Occupation Certificate.

 

Landscaping & Environmental amenity:

89.     The PCA must ensure that landscaping at this site is installed in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by Julie Cracknell & Peter Lonegran, dwg 11-12, dated September 2011, prior to issuing a Final (or any other type of Interim) Occupation Certificate/s, with the owner/s to ensure it is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

90.     Certification is to be obtained from a suitably qualified Landscape Architect and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) prior to the occupation of the development, which confirms that the landscaping works have been completed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans and relevant conditions of development consent, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

Waste Management

91.     Prior to the occupation of the development, the owner or applicant is required to contact Council’s City Services department, to make the necessary arrangements for the provision of waste services for the premises.

 

92.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

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.

 

Stormwater Detention/Infiltration  System

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

 

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.

 

·        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.

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

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1      The assessment of this development application does not include an assessment of the proposed building work under the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

All new building work must comply with the BCA and relevant Australian Standards and details of compliance must be provided in the Construction Certificate application.

 

A2      Access, facilities and car parking for people with disabilities must be provided in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and AS1428.1, AS4299 and 2890.1 and conditions of consent, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.  Details of the proposed access, facilities and car parking for people with disabilities are to be included in the plans / specifications for the construction certificate.

 

A3      A separate Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Health, Building & Regulatory Services department prior to commencing any of the following activities:-

 

§  Install or erect any site fencing, hoardings or site structures on any part of the nature strip, road or footpath

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

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

 

A4      A Local Approval application is required to be submitted to and approved by Council, in accordance with the provisions of Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 in relation to the place of shared accommodation, prior to the occupation of the proposed development.

 

A5      The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specification must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and the construction certificate must not be inconsistent with the development consent.

 

In this regard, the development consent plans do not show compliance with the deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the BCA, including:

 

a)     Part B1           -    Structural provisions

b)     Part C1          -    Fire resistance and stability

c)     Part C2          -    Compartmentation and separation

d)     Part C3          -    Protection of openings

e)     Clause D1.4     -    Exit travel distances

f)      Part D3          -    Access for people with disabilities

g)     Part E1           -    Fire fighting equipment

h)     Part E2           -    Smoke Hazard Management

i)      Part E4           -    Emergency lighting, exit signs & warning systems

j)      Part F1           -    Damp and weatherproofing

k)     Part F5           -    Sound Transmission and Insulation

 

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

 

You are advised to ensure that the development is not inconsistent with Council's consent and if necessary consult with Council’s Building Certification Services or your accredited certifier prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

A6      The applicant/owner is advised that this approval does not guarantee compliance with the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and the applicant should therefore consider their liability under the Act.  In this regard, the applicant is advised that compliance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standard 1428.1 - Design for Access and Mobility does not necessarily satisfy the objectives of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             22 November 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP111/11

 

 

Subject:                  88 Garden Street, Maroubra (DA/674/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/674/2011

Author:                   Scott Williamson, Development Assessment Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations to the existing dwelling and change of use to health consulting room (dental surgery) with associated carparking (SEPP1 objection to landscape area control)

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Michael and Monica Sim

Owner:                         Michael Sim

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.       Executive Summary

 

The application has been referred to Council on the basis of a SEPP 1 Objection, in excess of 10% of the Landscaped area requirements under RLEP 1998.

 

Proposed is the change of use of an existing semi-detached dwelling to a Health Consulting Room (dental surgery) and associated fit out works. A second dwelling located on the site and attached to the proposed dental surgery is to remain largely as existing, with minor alterations. The application does not propose an increase to the existing building envelope of the semi-detached dwellings. Three (3) hardstand car parking spaces are proposed within the rear open space of the site.

 

The applicant amended the proposal on 24 October 2011 to include an illuminated identification sign of dimensions 1000mm by 650mm, applied to the Garden Street façade. The proposed operation hours on Wednesdays were also amended. As notified, operation hours were proposed on Wednesdays as 8.00am to 2.00pm. This was amended to allow operation 8.00am to 6.00pm. No submissions were received in response to the initial notification period. Further, the nature of the amendments are considered minor and as such, do not warrant re-notification. 

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.       The Proposal

 

The application proposes the partial conversion of an existing semi detached dwelling at 88 Garden Street, Maroubra for use as a dental surgery and consulting room. The application proposes to retain the adjoining dwelling, containing four (4) bedrooms, family, dining, living and kitchen areas, largely as existing. No changes are proposed to the building envelope, however minor alterations are proposed to some external openings to the building. Specifics of the application are as follows:

 

Dental surgery- Proposed operational details:

 

·         Change of use of the southern portion of the building to a Health Consulting Room (dental surgery) use, with two (2) designated surgery rooms;

 

·         Proposed hours of operation:

Monday to Friday: 8.00am to 18.00pm;

Saturday: 8.00am to 14.00pm.

 

·         Proposed staff:

One (1) dentist;

One (1) dental nurse;

One (1) receptionist.

 

·         Provide allocated parking for two (2) vehicles to the rear of the site, accessed via Gale Road frontage. A single additional space is allocated for the purposes of the remaining dwelling on the site.

 

Works proposed:

·         Install plasterboard partitioning to the proposed dental surgery for the purposes of two (2) surgery rooms, waiting room, office, disabled bathroom, kitchen, autoclave and sterilising room;

·         Installation of two (2) skylights above proposed surgery rooms;

·         Install metal framed canopy over new surgery entry;

·         Install illuminated lightbox sign to Garden Street frontage of dimensions 1000mm by 650mm;

·         Alterations to existing building openings, including additional entry to Garden Street façade;

·         Install access ramp to surgery entrance from Garden Street frontage;

·         Construct open hardstand parking area for three (3) vehicles within the existing rear open space;

·         Widen existing vehicular crossing to the site at Gale Road, to measure approximately 5.5 metres.

 

Submitted with the application is a SEPP 1 objection to Clause 20E of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), dealing with landscaped area. The application proposes to vary the development standard by approximately 33%, or 91.75m2.

 

3.       The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located on a corner allotment at the intersection of Garden Street and Gale Road, Maroubra. The site has an approximate area of 556.5m2, with an 18 metre frontage to Garden Street and a 30 metre frontage to Gale Road. The site is generally flat, with an east-west orientation. Contained within the site are two (2) semi-detached residential dwellings.

 

Located immediately to the south of the subject site is a two (2) storey single dwelling. A dental surgery presently operates within a portion of this dwelling, as detailed in Section 4.1, below. This dental surgery is proposed to be relocated to the premises the subject of this application, at 88 Garden Street.

 

Development located along Garden Street, to the south of the subject site, consists of two (2) multi unit housing complexes, at numbers 92-94 & 98-100 Garden Street. Each complex is a two (2) storey development containing four (4) strata subdivided townhouses, approved under applications DA/648/2007 and DA/645/2001, respectively.

 

Development to the north along Garden Street and to the west on Gale Road consists of predominantly one (1) and two (2) storey single residential dwellings.

 

4.       Site History

 

The building contained within 88 Garden Street appears to have been constructed for the use of two (2) residential dwellings, a number of years ago. To date, the use has remained as two (2) separate residential premises. Council does not have any development history in regards to the existing building.

 

4.1     Existing Dental Surgery at 90 Garden Street

The Health consulting room (dental surgery) the subject of this application is presently located within the premises immediately to the south at number 90 Garden Street, operating for a number of years under the approval of the following applications:

 

DA/248/1986- approved on 9 September 1986 under delegated authority, for the conversion a portion of the ground floor of the existing dwelling for use as a dental surgery (home occupation). No parking was required to be provided ancillary to this approved use.

 

DA/248/1986/A- approved on 12 February 1987 under delegated authority, to amend the approved hours enabling the dental surgery (home occupation) to operate from 8.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday and 8.30am to 1.00pm Saturdays.

 

 

5.       Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

5.1     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 (1) Zone objectives

The objectives of Zone 2B specify the need to maintain the attributes of the residential area and to allow for a range of community uses to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors. The proposal is generally consistent with these objectives and is not considered to adversely affect residential amenity within the locality.

 

Clause 11 (3) Permissible Development

Clause 11 (3) outlines a number of development types which are permissible within the 2B zone. Included in the clause is the ‘Health consulting room’ use, which specifically applies to the subject application. As such, the proposed use is permissible with consent, within the 2B zone.

 

Clause 20E (2) 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. The proposal does not comply with this control. In response, the applicant has lodged a SEPP 1 objection to the standard for consideration. The SEPP 1 objection is discussed in detail in Section 5.1.1, below.

 

Clause 20F Floor Space Ratios

The maximum floor space ratio for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house within 2B zones is 0.65:1. The subject building has a total floor space ratio of 0.46:1, which is compliant with the aforementioned standard of Clause 20F.

 

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

 

RLEP Clause 20E (2): Landscaped area

Clause 20E of Randwick Local Environmental Plan outlines landscaped area standards for the zone. As relevant to the subject application, Clause 20E (2) specifies:

 

“Development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone 2B must provide a minimum of 50% of the total site area as landscaped area”.

 

The total site area of 556.5m2 would indicate a minimum of 278.25m2 of landscaping is required to meet the above standard. The application proposes a total landscaped area of approximately 186.5m2 square metres, 91.75m2 (33%) short of the development standard outlined in Clause 20E, above. A SEPP 1 Objection to this standard has been lodged by the applicant for consideration.

 

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:

 

Pursuant to Clause 20E of RLEP 1998, the minimum landscaped area within 2B Zones is 50%. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Landscaped area

Proposed landscaped area

33.5% (186.5m2) of site proposed as landscaped area.

LEP development standard

50% (278.25m2).

Variation of the LEP development standard

91.75m2 short of the LEP standard (33%).

 

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).

 

Comment:

The stated purpose of the landscaped area standard as outlined in the RLEP 1998 (consolidation) 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 contested the need for strict compliance with the above standard and submitted a written SEPP 1 objection, which outlines the following justifications for the variation to the standard:

 

1)   The existing landscaped area on the site serves 2 semi-detached dwellings. The proposal will convert one of the dwellings to a health consulting room, which will not require any landscaped area provision. The result will be a greatly increased landscaped area available to the remaining dwelling.

2)   The amount of landscaped area is sufficient for the purposes of private open space for the dwelling, runoff filtration area and curtilage for the development on the site.

3)   The existing building constitutes a development well within the limitations under the RLEP in respect to floor space and height. Notwithstanding the slight reduction in landscaped area available to the whole site, the end development will maintain the environmental and aesthetic character of the area for all intents and purposes unaltered and in conformity with the stated purposes of the landscaped area provision.

4)   Departure from the standard will not create any cumulative impacts as there are no apparent additional impacts beyond which would maintain the existing landscaped area.

5)   Strict compliance with the standard would hinder the attainment of objectives of Section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act 1979.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 objection is considered to be well founded. Further, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the stated purpose of the development standard and as such, it is considered that strict compliance with the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary, on the basis of the following:

 

·      The shortfall in landscape area arises primarily out of providing parking to the site, in facilitating the health consulting room use and minimising the potential for additional vehicles on the street;

·      Given the change of use of one (1) dwelling, the remaining landscaping to the site provides a significantly increased private open space area for the purposes of the remaining dwelling, given the proposed health consulting room will not require a significant amount of private open space; 

·      For the purposes of drainage, curtilage and planting, the provision of sufficient deep soil/ permeable area on the site is retained; 

·      The existing building envelope is not proposed to be increased under the application. As such, the building is not increasing bulk or overdeveloping the site and retains sufficient landscaped area to soften the existing structure and hardstand parking area;

·      No potential adverse impacts are considered to be imposed upon the surrounding locality, as a result of the proposed variation to the development standard. 

 

The variation from the prescribed minimum landscaping area is consistent with the aims of SEPP No.1 and would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section (a) (i) and (ii), specifically, in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and economic development of the subject land.

 

Given these considerations, the SEPP 1 objection is supported in this instance.

 

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 aforementioned objectives of 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.”

 

Comment:

The variation of the landscaped area standard is not inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1, given it is not considered to 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 providing a dental consulting service to the community. The proposal will maintain and be 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) outline:

 

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

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

 

Comment:

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for state or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will prevent the best use of the site and further, the delivery of a suitable and accessible health consultation facility for the benefit of the immediate community. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest and there is no benefit in maintaining the control in this instance.

 

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.

 

6.       Section 79C 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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

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

 

Clause 11 of the LEP establishes the objectives of the Residential 2B zone and permits the use of buildings for Health Consulting Rooms which are defined in Part 5 – Interpretation - Clause 49 as being;

 

“a room or a number of rooms forming either the whole or part of, attached to, or within the curtilage of, a dwelling house used by not more than 3 practitioners providing health care services (including dental or optical services) to members of the public.”

 

The proposal is permissible and considered to be consistent with the LEP and the specific objectives of Residential 2B Zone, in that the development will deliver dental services to the local community, while maintaining the established neighbourhood character.  It is not envisaged that the proposed use will result in any significant adverse impacts to neighbouring properties or result in any significant environmental, social or economic impacts. The proposal will provide a service to the surrounding residents and therefore, the development is considered satisfactory in public interest terms.

 

The proposed health consulting room (dental surgery) will be consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and is unlikely to adversely affect the locality.

 

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

The proposal generally satisfies the preferred solutions in the DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, except where discussed in Section 6.1 of this report.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment, which are otherwise not addressed in this report, are discussed in the paragraphs below.

 

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

 

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

The site is located in close proximity to local services and public transport. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and associated structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

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

 

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.

 

 

6.1     Development Control Plans

 

6.1.1 Dwelling houses and attached dual occupancies DCP

(Reference is made to this DCP as one (1) of the existing two (2) dwellings is to remain on site under the proposal).

 


Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies?

Landscaping

40 % of site provided as landscaped area

33.5%

No- See 6.1.2; below

25m² of private open space provided.

62m2 approx

Yes- See 6.1.2; below

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

5 m x 3 m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

25%

Yes

Floor area

(Site area 556.5m2) maximum FSR 0.53:1

046:1

Yes

Safety & Security

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

Yes

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

Yes

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

Standard condition

Yes

Garages & Driveways

 

 

 

 

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

2 spaces

No- See 6.1.3; below

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

5.5m x 2.5m

Yes

Driveway minimum width of 3m and side setback 1m

5m, Setback 900mm

No- See 6.1.5; below

Driveway maximum width of 3m at the boundary.

5 m

No- See 6.1.5; below

Parking and access is provided from the rear.

Rear parking provided

Yes

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

18% approx

Yes

 

6.1.2 Landscaped area & Private Open Space

Further to the landscaped area requirements of RLEP discussed above, Section 4.1 of the DCP outlines several performance requirements and preferred solutions for the provision of landscaped area and open space, including the following:

 

P1     The size and dimensions of landscaped areas suit the projected requirements of the dwelling occupants and accommodate outdoor recreation needs as well as providing space for service functions.

 

S1    A minimum of 40% of the total site area is provided as landscaped area.

 

S1    Each dwelling is provided with at least 25m2 of usable private open space.

 

Landscaped Area

As proposed, approximately 33.5% of the site is provided as landscaped area, short of the above preferred solution of 40%. This arises primarily in favour of enhancing parking provision to the site for the proposed Health consulting room component. Despite this, the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP are generally satisfied. The amount of landscaped area provided is sufficient for the purposes of private open space for the remaining dwelling, runoff filtration area and curtilage for the development on the site. Further, no increase in building envelope is proposed. Given this, the application is considered to meet the performance requirements of the above criteria and is generally acceptable.

 

Private Open Space

In regards to private open space, the application proposes alterations and additions to the private open space of the building, in catering for increased parking provision to the site. A complex fencing arrangement is proposed providing for approximately 62m2 of private open space to the remaining dwelling, in addition to approximately 43m2 of private open space to the proposed dental surgery component.

 

For the purposes of the remaining dwelling, the nature in which this space is configured around the parking area, while satisfying numerical requirements, is not considered to be practical or meet the above provisions of the DCP. Further, the Health consulting room aspect of the proposal will require minimal landscaped area to function effectively.

 

To improve practicality of the private open space to the remaining dwelling, a portion of the Health consulting room open space is recommended to be allocated to the dwelling. This would involve a small alteration of the proposed fencing, continuing the fence along the rear building line of the dwelling, to the rear of the dental surgery. No access is proposed between the allocated parking for the dental surgery through the rear of the surgery and as such the open space will remain for private use of the dwelling. This measure is recommended to be imposed by way of a condition, which given the application of this requirement, the provision of private open space to the dwelling is considered acceptable in regards to the above provisions of the DCP.

 

6.1.3 Parking DCP

The application specifies provision of three (3) parking spaces within the existing rear open space of the site. The DCP identifies a requirement for six (6) spaces allocated to the proposal.

 

Dental Surgery Parking provision

The application identifies two (2) spaces allocated specifically for use of the dental surgery, in stacked formation along the rear boundary of the site. Access from the parking area to the surgery is not enabled directly through the rear of the site, requiring staff and patients to exit the parking area onto Gale Road, using the Garden Street entrance to the surgery. The Parking DCP identifies a four (4) space requirement, based on the proposed two (2) consulting rooms. Given this, the application is deficient of two (2) onsite spaces. 

 

Specified within the application is the use of the premises by one (1) dental practitioner. Based upon this, one (1) consulting room will act as a surgery component, while the second specified consulting room will alternate for recovery or preparatory purposes, and is not strictly a consulting room. This would indicate a reduced intensity of each room, given the use is restricted to the capacity of one (1) practitioner, as opposed to simultaneous use of each room, as assumed by the DCP. As such, it is not considered the two (2) consulting rooms will not provide for a substantially increased intensity nor subsequent requirement for two (2) onsite parking spaces each.

 

Further to this, based upon site inspections by Council Officers, there remains further potential within the surrounding street network to absorb some of this parking requirement. Public transport options are also available in close proximity.

 

Based upon the intensity of the use, the requirement for an additional two (2) parking spaces onsite is not considered justified, nor within the capacity of the site. The parking allocated to the dental surgery is recommended to be enforced through the use of a condition, ensuring provision of two (2) spaces at all times to the surgery. It is not considered that the proposed dental surgery use will eventuate in causing traffic/parking congestion problems in the area and as such, the parking situation proposed is considered generally acceptable.

 

Residential Parking provision

One (1) parking space is identified for allocation to the residential use on the site, immediately beside those for use of the dental surgery. The Parking DCP requires two (2) spaces, based upon the inclusion of four (4) existing bedrooms. A single parking space is currently provided for the two (2) existing dwellings on the site.

 

The proposal does not alter the existing single-space parking situation on the site. The remaining dwelling is not proposed for substantial alteration or any increase in bedrooms and as such, requiring provision of two (2) parking spaces is not considered justified. Further, the provision of an additional space would restrict the ability of the site from achieving sufficient private open space for use of the dwelling. Given these considerations, the one (1) space allocated for the dwelling is considered acceptable.

 

Given the above, there are no significant planning objections raised in regards to the numerical noncompliance of the proposal with that of Council’s Parking DCP. Further parking comments have been provided from Council’s Development Engineer, as outlined below.

 

6.1.4 Outdoor Advertising DCP

The application proposes the installation of an illuminated identification sign of dimensions 1000mm by 650mm, applied to the Garden Street façade of the existing building.

 

Section 2.1 of the Outdoor Advertising DCP outlines the following objectives and requirements for advertising in residential zones:

 

Objectives

Allow for legitimate commercial uses in residential zones such as doctors surgery’s, dentists and other similar types of activities to be able to be adequately and effectively be identified by potential users.

 

Controls

Generally, illuminated signs will not be permitted [in residential zones]. However, where it can be demonstrated that spillage of light into adjoining and nearby residential properties will be minimal, proposals for illuminated signs will be considered on their merits.

 

The proposed sign relates to the use and activity carried out on the premises and its location is not considered to have any adverse impacts upon the locality or adjoining neighbours. It is not considered the signage will cause a detrimental impact upon passing traffic, given the application of a condition to control the intensity, period of intermittency and hours of illumination is applied. With the application of this condition, the signage will generally satisfy the relevant controls and objectives of the DCP for Outdoor Advertising in the residential zone and is acceptable with regards to provisions of the DCP. 

 

6.1.5 Driveway and Vehicular Crossing width

The application proposes a driveway width of five (5) metres to the Gale Road frontage of the site, setback 900mm from the neighbouring site, with a 5.5 metre vehicular crossing to the street. In regards to the provisions of the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP, the proposed driveway is not compliant with the preferred solution of a maximum three (3) metre driveway width and one (1) metre setback from side boundaries of Section 4.7. The following objectives are detailed in support of these preferred solutions:

 

·      To provide ensure onsite car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive and do not detract from the appearance of dwellings or the local streetscape.

 

·      To provide convenient and safe car parking and access. 

 

In regards to the above objectives, the proposal is considered satisfactory. The driveway width is proposed in order to facilitate parking to both uses on the site and with the imposition of a three (3) metre vehicular crossing and driveway, this is not considered achievable. The driveway will not detract from the appearance of the site or the streetscape, nor pose a detrimental impact upon neighbouring sites. Further, with the imposition of conditions recommended by Council’s Development Engineer, the driveway is considered convenient and safe.  As such, the proposed driveway is considered acceptable in regards to the subject Section of the DCP.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has provided further comment on the proposed driveway and vehicular crossing, in Section 8.2 of this report.

 

6.2     Amenity impacts

The proposed health consulting room is not considered to generate a significant amount of noise during operation. Given the nature of the use and the service that will be provided to the community; the proposed opening hours are considered satisfactory and will not unreasonably impact upon immediate neighbours or the locality.

 

7.       Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development from 12 September 2011 to 26 September 2011, in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. In response to this notification, no submissions were received.

 

The applicant amended the proposal on 24 October 2011 to include an illuminated identification sign of dimensions 1000mm by 650mm, applied to the Garden Street façade. The proposed operation hours on Wednesdays were also amended. As originally notified, operation hours were proposed on Wednesdays as 8.00am to 2.00pm. This was amended to allow operation 8.00am to 6.00pm. No change was made to the remaining operation hours proposed.

 

The nature of the amendments are considered minor and in the absence of submissions to the initial notification period, the application was not required to be renotified. 

 

8.       Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

8.1     Environmental Health Officer:

Council is not the regulatory authority for the operation of this business, as such no inspection or registration of the premises will be required.

 

Acoustic Amenity

There is no external plant or equipment proposed for this fit out.

 


Proposed Hours of Operation

Monday to Friday:              8:00am – 6:00pm

Saturday                          8:00am – 2.00pm

 

The potential for noise nuisance arising from the operation of plant and equipment has been considered and appropriate noise conditions have been included in this referral.

 

Waste

Waste is required to be handled in accordance with relevant legislation as such appropriate conditions have been included in this report.

 

8.2     Development Engineer:

 

·        Parking  Comments

Council’s Development Engineer has provided the following comments in regards to parking, further to the above assessment against the DCP:

 

Total Parking Demand generated by the site        =4 spaces (Surgery) + 2 spaces (dwelling) = 6 spaces

Total Parking provided on the site        = 3 spaces

Parking Shortfall                                = 3 spaces (50%) (see note below)

 

NOTE: As the existing residence is already experiencing a parking shortfall of 1 car space this may be considered as a parking credit for the dwelling. The parking deficiency for the site will therefore be reduced to 2 car spaces representing 33% of the total parking needs for the site. This shortfall has not been addressed in the Statement of Environmental Effects.

 

This amount of parking deficiency would normally be considered to be excessive but the following comments are made in relation to this subject site;

 

§ The Development Engineer inspected the site on two occasions and it was observed that on-street parking was observed to be available in Gale Road and also Garden Street to the north of the site.

§ There is a bus stop located immediately in front of the site on Garden Street for bus route 316 to Bondi Junction and on the opposite side of the road to South Maroubra and Eastgardens shopping centre with typical frequencies of around 30mins. There are also numerous more frequent services to various destinations (eg City) available approximately 300m to the west of the site on Anzac Parade.

§ Apart from the adjoining site at 119 Gale Road it was observed that all properties in the vicinity of the site have access to off-street parking. Any impact on residents is therefore expected to be minimal.

§ The site is within easy walking distance (400-500m) of Maroubra Town centre

§ The SEE states that only 1 practitioner, 1 dental assistant and 1 receptionist will be staffed at the facility. 

 

In consideration of the above factors Development Engineering will not object to the parking shortfall of two spaces in this instance and no parking study will be required from the applicant.

 

·      Line of sight Comments

Development Engineering had concerns that vehicles reversing out of the car spaces would have poor line of sight to the east due to the presence of an existing Willow Myrtle tree which will be approximately 1.5m from the eastern edge of the new vehicle crossing.  Council’s Landscape Development Officer has indicated however that this tree is in poor condition and will require it to be removed as part of the proposed works. This will satisfactorily address the line of site issue and hence remove any objections to the enlarged vehicle crossing by Development Engineering.

 

·      Stormwater Flow Comments

The first 1.0m length of the car spaces from the front property alignment internal to the site shall be graded up at 1 in 10 (10%) to minimise any potential impact from storm water flows in Gale Road.

 

8.3     Landscape Development Officer

While there is no significant vegetation within the site at all, on Council’s Gale Road verge, just to the east of the existing vehicle crossing, there is a mature Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) measuring approximately 6m x 6m, which is covered by the TPO due to its location on public property, and along with other established public trees in this area, provides a positive contribution to the streetscape.

 

However, the detailed site inspection revealed that this tree is already in poor condition due to a combination of extensive basal decay and its multiple leaders emerging from a common point at ground level, and is seen to pose a safety concern due to its high risk of part/full failure, and does not have any prospects for recovery.

 

Further, the plans also show that the existing vehicle crossing will be doubled in width to finish only 1500mm or less from its trunk, which would restrict the line of sight of approaching traffic from the east to the point where the proposal could not be supported if the tree remained.

 

In light of the above, conditions in this report require that the applicant cover Council’s costs for its removal prior to commencement, with a loss of amenity fee not to be charged in this instance due to its poor condition, and while a replacement will not be possible in the immediate area due to the presence of other trees and the line of sight issues described above, it will be possible further afield, in the surrounding area, at the applicant’s expense, with a relevant condition included in this report.

 

Another street tree of the same species and similar size further to the east, near the intersection of Garden Street, is sited well away from all works and will remain unaffected by these works, with conditions not necessary.

 

A SEPP1 objection has been submitted in relation to Council’s landscaped area control and the accompanying documentation describes that while 50% of the total site area needs to be dedicated as landscaped area in the 2B Zone, the site is already deficient, and will be reduced by a further 5% (12sqm) to 39.7% of the site area as a result of the additional hard stand car space.

 

It is claimed that this departure from Council’s numerical controls should be deemed reasonable in this instance, with the planner needing to determine the impact of this non-compliance on the environmental amenity of the site and surrounding area as part of their overall assessment.

 

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.

 

The proposed health consulting room is not considered to generate a significant amount of noise during operation. Given the nature of the use and the service that will be provided to the community; the proposed opening hours are considered satisfactory and will not pose a detrimental impact upon the amenity of the locality.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 8:       A strong local economy.

Direction 8a:      Vibrant business, commercial and industrial sectors that provide ongoing and diverse employment opportunities.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20E of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to Landscaped Area, 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/674/2011 for alterations to the existing dwelling and change of use to a health consulting room, at No.88 Garden Street, Maroubra, 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

045/11- Sheet 1 of 2

Issue A

Classic Plans

26 August 2011

6 September 2011

045/11- Sheet 2 of 2

Issue A

Classic Plans

26 August 2011

6 September 2011

East Elevation; Signage Plan

Unknown

25 October 2011

25 October 2011

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.       The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a.   The portion of fencing proposed to the rear of the Health consulting room (Dental Surgery) shall be amended to continue the rear building line of the dwelling, fencing directly from ‘bedroom 4’ to the boundary fence shared with 90 Garden Street, as indicated in red on the approved plans.

 

Signage

3.                  The approved sign location shall be generally in accordance with the Signage Plan specified in Condition 1. The sign shall be no greater than 1000mm in length by 650 mm in width, displaying business identification details of the approved dental surgery only. Illumination of the sign shall be compliant with condition no. 50, below.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

The following conditions of consent must be complied with before a ‘Construction Certificate’ is issued by either Randwick City Council or an Accredited Certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be included in the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

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

4.       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

5.       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.

 

Long Service Levy Payments

6.       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

7.       The following security deposits requirement must be complied with prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, as security for making good any damage caused to Council’s assets and infrastructure; 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

 

Security deposits 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.

 

Street Tree

8.       The applicant must submit a total payment of $745.25 (including GST), being to cover the cost for:

 

a.     Council to remove, stump grind and dispose of the most western Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) on the Gale Road verge, in order to accommodate the widened vehicle crossing and required line of sight; and

 

b.     For Council to supply and install 1 x 25 litre street tree in the surrounding area so as to maintain neighbourhood amenity, as there is insufficient space along this frontage due to the presence of other street trees and the required line of sight described above.

 

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.

 

Design Alignment levels

9.       The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) 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.

 

The design alignment level/s at the property boundary as 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.

 

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0923.

 

10.     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.

 

Driveway Design

11.     The internal carspaces must be designed and constructed so that they slope down towards Gale Road in accordance with the following requirements with details of compliance to be included in the construction certificate documentation ;

§  The first 1m of the carspaces/driveway internal to the site shall be graded at 1 in 10 (10%)

§  The remainder of the carspace/s shall be graded between 1% & 5%.

§  The levels of the carspace must match the alignment levels at the property boundary (as specified by Council).

 

NOTE:

This condition has been included to ensure that any potential impact from stormwater flows in Gale Road is minimized.

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

The requirements contained in the following conditions of consent must be complied with and details of compliance must be included in the construction certificate for the development.

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

12.     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.

 

Smoke Alarms

13.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia (volume 2) smoke alarms must comply with AS3786.  Smoke alarms must 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.

 

Energy & Water Efficiency

14.     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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

15.     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 the relevant requirements 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.

 

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

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 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

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

 

Dilapidation Reports

18.     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

19.     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 on site.

 

Construction Site Management Plan

20.     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

21.     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 (including asbestos)

·      Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·      Details of re-use, recycling and disposal of waste demolition/building materials

·      Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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

22.     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

23.     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.

 

24.     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.

 

 

 

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.

 


Inspections During Construction

25.     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).

 

Site Signage

26.     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”.

 

Restriction on Working Hours

27.     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.

 

Demolition Work Requirements

28.     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

29.     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.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

30.     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

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

 

·       Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials, construction equipment or other articles must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time.

·       The road, footpath, vehicular crossing and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe, clean condition and free from any excavations, obstructions, trip hazards, goods, materials, soils or debris at all times.  Any damage caused to the road, footway, vehicular crossing, nature strip or any public place must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

·       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.

·       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.

·       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.

 

Support of Adjoining Land, Excavations & Retaining Walls

32.     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.

 

33.     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.

 

Building Encroachments

34.     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

35.     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

36.     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.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings, street verge

37.     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/extend concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

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.

 

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.

 

40.     That part of the nature-strip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf or similar. Such works shall be completed at the applicant’s expense prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

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.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

41.     The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

 

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

 

43.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage, collection and disposal of waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

44.     All wastes (including contaminated waste) shall be stored and disposed of in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and DECCW Guidelines.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

46.     The use of the premises and the operation of plant and equipment shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance or damage to other premises.

 

Approved hours of Operation

47.     The hours of operation of the business are restricted to:

Monday to Friday:            8:00am – 6:00pm

Saturday:                        8:00am – 2:00pm

 

Approved Delivery times

48.     Deliveries are restricted to the following hours:

 

Monday to Friday:            8:00am – 6:00pm

 

This condition applies where noise being made whilst delivering can be heard from within any habitable room of any adjoining residence and is only subject to change at the discretion of the Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services.

 

External Lighting

49.     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.

 

Sign Illumination

50.     At no time is the intensity, period of intermittency and hours of illumination of the sign to cause objectionable glare or injury to the amenity of the neighbourhood.

 

The sign shall only be illuminated during approved hours of operation. If in the opinion of Council injury is likely to be caused, the intensity, period of intermittency and hours of illumination must be varied to the approval of Council. The sign must not flash.

 

Allocation of Parking

51.     The parking allocation indicated on the approved plans in Condition 1, shall be implemented as proposed, providing for the two (2) stacked spaces exclusively to the Health consulting room use, and the remaining space for allocation to the dwelling.

 

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 – Air Conditioners

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

 

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

 

Air Conditioning & Equipment

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

 

·       before 8.00am or after 10.00pm on any Saturday, Sunday or public holiday; or

·       before 7.00am or after 10.00pm on any other day.

 

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.

 

A1      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.

 

A2      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.

 

A3      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.

 

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      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.

 

A6      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.

 

A7      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.

 

A8      This consent does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the land owner or principal contractor must obtain:

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

A9      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.

 

A10     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.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             22 November 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP112/11

 

 

Subject:                  7-13 Victoria Street, Randwick (DA/298/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/298/2011

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations to existing multi-unit building with addition of new unit at the third level, amend strata subdivision and associated works (SEPP1 objection to landscape area, floor space ratio and external wall height controls)

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Sheer Property Group P/L

Owner:                         Mr T Chung & Mr P H Pilkington

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary 

 

The subject proposal is referred to Council for determination as it has a development that involves variation to the FSR development standard in excess of 10%. 

 

The subject application is for alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building with the addition of a new unit two bedroom + study dwelling unit at the third level to replace previously approved storage areas.

 

Following concerns raised by the Design Review Panel primarily regarding the symmetry and massing of the new top floor unit, amended plans were submitted on 15 August 2011 primarily deleting the originally proposed large single north-facing dormer window, and replacing this with a pair of smaller dormer windows on the northern and southern roof-face while increasing internal ceiling heights. This amendment also reduced the floor area of the proposed new dwelling unit by 14 sqm. The amended plans were notified from 31 August 2011 to 14 September 2011.

 

A further amended drawing containing amended sections and elevations providing for further increases in ceiling height were lodged on 12 October 2011. As these amendments do not involve any increase in overall building height and any new glazed openings, the amendments were not required to be notified.

 

The amended plans of the 15 August 2011 and 12 October 2011 are the subject of this report, and are considered to be satisfactory, addressing not only the massing and visual bulk and scale issues, but also the internal amenity of the proposed dwelling unit.

 

The existing property comprises a two (2) storey residential flat building containing 4 dwelling units with an existing FSR of 1:1 (461 sqm), a maximum height of 11.9m and landscape area of 24.3% (112.5m²). The building has a California Bungalow appearance and presents as a single storey building when viewed from Victoria Street due to the steeply sloping site (from Victoria Street to the rear). The building is presently in a poor condition. A previous DA (DA/281/2010) for a similar alteration and addition to the existing building but with storage area in the roof space was approved on 10 August 2010 and allowed for an FSR of 1.04:1 (483.05 sqm) and landscaped area of 28.5% (132 sqm). As indicated in relevant sections of this report, the proposed development will incorporate most of the works approved under DA/281/2010 while providing an overall improvement to the existing premises including the following:

 

§ integrating old and new elements in a sympathetic and sensitive way by introducing a new dwelling unit in the existing roof space through the use of sympathetic dormer window elements that matches the pitch and style of the existing roof while allowing for adequate internal amenity for this new dwelling.

§ providing an improved articulation to the existing building façade through the use of balanced and matching dormer elements in the roof and new matching balconies in the rear elevation;

§ improving the landscape design by replacing the existing fragmented common landscaped area with a well planned and well planted integrated landscape area for communal use;

§ providing improved communal areas by creating an inviting entry way and safer internal lobby areas;

§ providing improved access and safety by improving the function of the existing retained garages through a widening of their openings in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard .

 

 

 

The amended proposal has an FSR of 1.1:1 (516.4 sqm) which breaches the maximum 0.65:1 FSR standard applicable under the Randwick LEP 1998. The amended proposal has an external wall height of 10.8m compared with the maximum wall height standard of 10m. The amended proposal also provides for a landscaped area of 28.5% (132 sqm) which varies from the maximum landscape area requirement of 50%.

                                        

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) objections have been lodged in support of these variations to the FSR, external wall height and landscape area standards.

 

The SEPP 1 Objections have been assessed and found acceptable as the proposed  FSR and external wall height do not add significantly to the density and height of both the existing building and the previously approved development under DA/281/2010. The proposed development will maintain a single storey appearance to Victoria Street albeit with dormer elements to the existing roof to accommodate the new unit but still below the existing roof ridge line. Furthermore, the height, bulk and scale of the proposed development will not be out of character with the existing scale and character of development in the immediate streetscape along Victoria Street. Additionally, as indicated above, the proposal will allow for an upgrade and improvements to the existing building that will enhance its function in, and presentation to, the streetscape.  

 

The proposal generally complies with the preferred solutions/performance requirements of the DCP - Multi-unit Housing (with the exception of the FSR and landscape  control which has been assessed as part of the SEPP 1 Objection).

 

The proposal also does not comply with the numerical car parking requirement of the DCP – Carparking having a shortfall of 1 car space. The variation has been assessed in relevant sections of the report and are considered justified in the circumstances.

 

The proposal would be suitable for the site and would have acceptable impacts on the amenity of adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.      The Proposal

 

The amended proposal lodged on 15 August 2011 and 12 October 2011 for alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building includes the following:

 

§ Creation of a new one bedroom plus study dwelling unit in the third floor roof space by replacing previously approved storage area in this level

§ Widening garage door openings

§ Landscape improvements

§ Alterations to internal staircase to existing units 3, 4 and 5

§ Amendment to the existing approved strata sub-division by addition of one unit.

 


3.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Victoria Street between Alison Road and Albert Street in Randwick and is presently occupied by an two (2) storey residential flat building containing four (4) units known as ‘Graylands’. The building is located on a steeply sloping site (Victoria Street to rear) and presents as a single storey building when viewed from the street. The site has a frontage width of 16.585m, a side boundary depth of 27.865m and has an overall site area of 462.2m². Neighbouring the property to the north is a part 2, part 3 storey residential flat building, to the south is four (4) storey residential flat building, and to the rear is a two (2) storey residential flat building. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of residential types, multi unit housing and single & two storey dwelling houses.


 


Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing building.

2. Existing garage to the front of the residential flat building

3. The existing rear yard of the subject site.

4. Rear of the subject site and adjoining residential flat building at No. 15 Victoria Street.

5. No 6 Victoria Street to the north-west.

 

6. Nos. 8, 10 and 12 on the opposite side of Victoria Street

 

 

 

 

4.      Site History

 

A Pre DA proposal was lodged and assessed by Council previously under PL/9/2011. Pre DA advice was provided on 13 May 2010.

 

5.      State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 Objections

 

Clause 20F                  Floor space ratios

The proposal seeks to vary a development standard contained with Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 being Clause 20F - Floor Space Ratio.

 

A maximum FSR standard of 0.65:1 (300.43 sqm) is applicable to the subject site (being less than 700 sqm in area) pursuant to Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposed multi-unit housing development will result in an FSR of 1.1 : 1 (516.4 sqm) on the 462.2 sqm site.

 

The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with Clause 20F of Randwick LEP is unreasonable and unnecessary. 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 in the assessment of the applicant’s current SEPP 1 Objection:

 

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 maximum FSR standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

Purpose: 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 the following arguments in support of the SEPP1 Objection:

 

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

 

·      The previous approval under DA/281/2011 (for alterations and additions to existing residential flat building including extension at rear, storage attic development, internal reconfiguration, reconstruction of front garages, fencing, landscaping and associated works) resulted in an overall FSR of 1.04:1, amounting to 483.05 sqm. The current proposal will add an additional 33.35 sqm (resulting in a total GFA of 516.4 sqm).This increase is considered minor and will be added in the third floor attic level where the previous attic storage area was proposed and approved under DA/281/2010.

·      The applicant has amended the proposal to replace the originally proposed large intrusive dormer window for the additional dwelling unit with smaller and finer dormer windows that protrude side-ways to a maximum 1.7m from the existing roofline (compared with maximum 4m for the original dormer). As such the amended dormer design contributes positively to the existing building and streetscape without being visually intrusive or dominant.

·      The new dwelling unit will be contained within the pitch roof space of the existing building with no change in the maximum building height of the existing building as the original roof ridge line will remain intact (that is, the maximum roof ridge will not be pierced by the proposed new additional dwelling unit).  As such, the additional floor space is largely restricted within the existing building envelope and will not be highly visible when viewed from Victoria Street.

·      The proposal readily complies with the 12m standard for maximum building height as there will be no change in the maximum building height of the existing building as the original roof ridge line at RL 75.87 will remain intact. The existing side setbacks are also maintained to ensure the proposal does not unduly impact upon the privacy and solar access presently enjoyed by neighbouring residents.

·      There will be no appreciable adverse impacts on the surrounding development and streetscape in terms of additional bulk and scale and the development maintains reasonable daylight and solar access to all development and the public domain.

·      The proposed additions at the rear of the lower ground and ground floor levels remain the same as that approved under DA/281/2010 which are relatively compact and restricted to the rear of the building on the site.

·      The subject locality is characterised by a mixture of multi-unit, semi-detached and detached residential developments. The proposal, visually, will maintain the existing double storey building envelope, albeit with an attic/dormer addition in the existing roof, which complies with the maximum building height standard stipulated in RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal has a height and scale, which are compatible with the existing flat developments in the surrounding built environment, and do not detract from the prevailing residential character of the locality.

 

In conclusion, the proposal has adequately addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standard and the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The SEPP 1 objection has been provide that appropriately justifies that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

The variation from the FSR control is consistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) in that the resultant development would promote the orderly use and development of the subject land because

 

·      it will have a height, bulk and scale that will not detract from the predominant existing character of its specific location containing predominantly medium to high density residential development typically older style residential flat buildings, 1970’s three to four storey walk-ups and large duplexes. 

 

·      it will create additional floor area that will not negatively impact upon the amenity of adjoining and surrounding uses  in terms of privacy, solar access, views and visual bulk and scale impacts.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not be necessary, in this case, for maintaining the low to medium density housing forms in the locality, including dwelling houses and semi-detached housing, and the like, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary for the proposal to  achieve the objectives of the development standard.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the subject development.

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

Compliance would, in this case, be unreasonable to achieve the underlying objective of the standard.

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2C zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low to medium density residential development. 

 

·      External Wall Height (Clause 20G)

The proposal seeks a variation to the maximum external wall height. The proposal has a maximum building height of 10.8m (to underside of the eaves above the dormer openings), which exceeds the maximum external wall height specified in Clause 20G Randwick LEP 1998 of 10m.

 

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:

 

Purpose: To operate together with controls for floor space 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 the following arguments in support of the SEPP1 Objection:

 

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

 

·      The breach in wall height is restricted to the exposed eaves created above the dormer openings in the northern and southern roofs which are largely restricted to fine and restrained openings. As such, the dormer openings relate to an attic space dwelling unit rather than an outright third floor level. Accordingly, the breach in the wall height standard does not result in a visually intrusive addition.

·      The proposal readily complies with the 12m standard for maximum building height as the existing roof ridge line at 11.9m (RL 75.87) will remain intact. The existing side setbacks are also maintained to ensure the proposal does not unduly impact upon the privacy and solar access presently enjoyed by neighbouring residents.

·      The bulk and scale of the additions will not be highly visible from the street and will result in a building which is still compatible with development in this section of Victoria Stre et. 

·      The proposed dormer openings will incorporate matching materials and finishes which will contribute positively to the existing building as well as the character of the locality

·      The proposal’s use of the existing roof space for the proposed additional dwelling unit not only moderates the visual bulk and scale of the proposal but also contributes to the streetscape by retaining to a large degree the built form of the existing building in the streetscape.

·      The proposed non-compliance do not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of the 2C 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 these developments.

 

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

 

Matter 2

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 applicant has presented a case to establish that compliance with the standards would not 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 External Wall Height 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 or social impacts.

 

Matter 3

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

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

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 C zoning is considered to be appropriate for the locality.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objection has addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. As such, it is considered that the objection is well founded.

 

Clause 20E                  Landscaped Areas

The proposal seeks to vary a development standard contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted to Council.

 

Pursuant to Clause 20E of RLEP 1998, the maximum landscaped area required for development, other than a dwelling house, within Zone No 2C is 50 % (231.1 sqm) of the site area. The proposal has a maximum landscaped area of 28.5% (132 sqm).

 

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 landscape standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

Purpose: 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 the following arguments in support of the SEPP1 Objection:

 

 

 

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

 

·     The proposed landscape area is the same as that approved under the previous DA (DA/281/2010) for a building with a compatible visual bulk and scale to that approved under this previous DA. 

·      The proposed landscaped area will comprise entirely of deep soil area (with no areas located over a basement podium), a large proportion of which is located in the rear yard which will allow for more robust landscaping.

·      The proposed development is for the refurbishment of an existing building which will result in the provision of more amenable landscaped areas than currently available in the existing site. As such, the proposed landscaping will be significantly better in quality when compared to the existing landscaping on-site which will soften and add to the visual quality of the overall development.

·     The existing side setbacks will be maintained such that there will be no increase in the bulk and scale of the existing building when viewed at ground level but will have an updated landscaping scheme that will create visual interest.

 

In conclusion, the proposal has adequately addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standard and the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The SEPP 1 objection has been provide that appropriately justifies that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

The variation from the minimum landscape area control is consistent with the aims of the SEPP No.1 because it would not detract from the objects of the Act under Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii). Specifically, the resultant development would promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and would not result in significant adverse environmental or social impacts because it will have a height, bulk and scale that will be consistent with other development in the street and will be compliant with the maximum building height control in the Randwick LEP.

 

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 and there is no public benefit in maintaining the control in this instance. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not be necessary, in this case, for maintaining the low to medium density housing forms in the locality, including dwelling houses and semi-detached housing, and the like, where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and is compatible with the dominant character of existing development.

 


Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary for the proposal to  achieve the objectives of the development standard.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

Compliance would, in this case, be unreasonable as the underlying objectives of the standard is achieved.

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

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

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2B zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low to medium density residential development. 

 

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The original application was notified and advertised from 11 May 2011 to 25 May 2011 in accordance with the DCP-Public Notification. In response, 5 submissions were received as addressed in Section 6.1 below.

 

The amended proposal (which incorporated a redesign of the roof dormer as required by the Design Review panel) was notified and advertised from 31 August 2011 to 14 September 2011. In response, 3 submissions were received as addressed in Section 6.2 below.

 

6.1    Submissions to the original proposal

Five (5) submissions were received from residents in the adjoining and surrounding properties in response to the original DA raising the following issues:

 

·      Exacerbate shortage of car parking on Victoria Street

·      Need for angled parking in Victoria Street

The proposed dwelling unit will generate a demand for 1 car parking space as per Council’s DCP – Parking. As assessed in the relevant section below, the additional shortfall of 1 car parking space is minor and, therefore, is considered to have minimal impact on the demand for on-street car parking. The proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building that, among other things, will upgrade and improve the existing building. However, there is no scope to provide additional parking on the site without a complete knockdown and rebuild of the existing building. In view of this, the proposed addition of a new dwelling unit is considered reasonable and acceptable in terms of car parking especially considering that the site is within easy walking distance of Randwick Town Centre and in close proximity to numerous and frequent bus routes including major routes to Bondi Junction, Coogee and the CBD. The need for angled car parking in Victoria Street and safety improvements to kerbs are matters beyond the scope of this DA assessment. The objector raising these issues has been advised to contact Council’s Integrated Transport section. 

 

·      Exceeds allowable FSR

The non-compliance in the FSR standard and the SEPP No.1 objection lodged in relation to this breach is considered to be well founded in the circumstances as detailed in Section 5 above.

 

·      Inappropriate design and material

The amended proposal deletes the original proposal for a dominant, lop-sided and visually intrusive dormer window and replaces it with a more sympathetic dormer window design that matches the pitch and style of the existing roof. The amended plans indicate the use of timber, glazed and fibrous cement elements for the new dwelling unit as well as the re-use of existing roof tiles. A condition will be applied requiring the submission of a sample board to ensure consistency.

 

·      Loss of view

The owners of Units 4 and 7 in 6 Victoria Street (an elevated unit in a 3 storey apartment block diagonally opposite the subject site across Victoria Street) have objected to the loss of district views as a result of the additional apartment and dormer window in the original proposal.

 

The views that will be affected by the proposed development comprise a view of the district with ocean views in the distance. These views are obtained from the living areas of the objectors’ property. Applying the planning principles for assessing view loss established in the case of Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council, the impact of the amended proposal on views from Units No. 4 and 7 /6 Victoria Street is as follows:

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

 

Having regard to Senior Commissioner Roseth’s comments regarding “iconic views” it is considered that the views comprising a district view with a view of the ocean in the distance from both Units 4 and 7 do not qualify as iconic (see Photo A and B below). This view is highly valued by the objector, especially the significant water view in the distance. The proposal will not affect this water view.

 

Photo A: View from living room of Unit 4/6 Victoria Street with the existing subject property in the centre of the photo.

 

Photo B: View from living room of Unit 7/6 Victoria Street with the existing subject property in the centre of the photo.

 

Step 2:      “The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries.”

The district view and that of the ocean in the distance is obtained across the front boundary (Photo A and B) of both objectors’ property, such that retention of the view has added significance than if it were obtained across a side boundary.

 

Step 3:      “The third step is to assess the extent of the impact… The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them)… It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.”

 

The proposed development will not significantly obstruct the district views currently available to Units 4 and 7. The applicant has amended the proposal to replace the large intrusive dormer window with smaller and finer dormer windows that protrude side-ways to a maximum 1.7m from the existing roofline (compared with maximum 4m for the original dormer). Furthermore, the amended proposal maintains the maximum ridge line of the existing roof (ie., the proposal does not exceed the maximum height of the existing building along the existing roof-ridge). The amended dormer windows therefore will not significantly project sideways beyond the existing roof such that it would have minimal impact on the existing district views with the distant water views remaining intact.

 

Step 4 :     “The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of noncompliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours.”

 

While there will be some minor projection of the proposed dormer windows into the objectors’ view, this impact is not considered to be exacerbated by the proposal’s non-compliance in FSR and external wall height standards for the following reasons:

 

(1)      the non-compliance in external wall height (max 10.8m) occurs to the underside of the eaves to the roof over the dormer windows. These dormer windows do not protrude significantly from the existing roof (maximum 1.7m) which will retain its existing ridge line. As such, the new dwelling unit will not result in any significant view loss as demonstrated by the fact that, even if the proposal were to be made compliant through the deletion of the new dwelling unit, the existing pitched roof would still remain largely in view.

 

(2)      The non-compliance in FSR is not considered to give rise to the loss of views as the majority of the additional floor area for the new dwelling unit will be embedded within the existing roof space of the proposed development. As such, the new dwelling unit will not result in any significant view loss as demonstrated by the fact that, even if the proposal were to be made compliant through the deletion of the new dwelling unit, the existing pitched roof would still remain largely in view.

 

The owners of Unit 1/6 Victoria Street had raised an objection regarding loss of views arising from the original dormer window proposal. However, after a meeting on-site where plans of the amended dormer windows were presented, this objector advised verbally that objections in relation to loss of views are no longer pressed. 

 

Overall, the proposal is satisfactory with regard to views.

 

·      Loss of privacy/overlooking.

The owners of a semi-detached dwelling house to the front of the subject site on the opposite side of Victoria Street have objected to loss of privacy. The amended proposal will result in two small new window openings in the existing front gable roof facing Victoria Street. As these new windows are linked to bathroom ensuites, they are not considered to generate any overlooking concerns to the objector.

 

The objections regarding noise from the owners of a semi-detached dwelling house to the front of the subject site on the opposite side of Victoria Street is not well founded given the proposal involves an new dwelling unit internal to the existing roof space with a balcony oriented east away from the objector’s property.

 

6.2    Submissions to the amended proposal 15 August 2011

Three (3) submissions were received from residents in the adjoining and surrounding properties in response to the original DA raising the following issues:

 

·      Exacerbate shortage of car parking on Victoria Street

·      Need for angled parking in Victoria Street

See assessment in Section 6.1 above.

 

·      Exceeds allowable FSR

See assessment in Section 6.1 above.

 

·      Inappropriate design and material

See assessment in Section 6.1 above.

 

·      Loss of view

The owner of Units 4 and 7 in 6 Victoria Street maintained their objections regarding loss of views which have been addressed in Section 6.1 above.

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Building Comments

The Building Control Officer advises as follows:

 

“The proposal

Alterations and strata subdivision to the existing two storey residential flat building to create an additional storey containing a sole occupancy unit..

 

BCA Building Classification

Class 2 – Residential units

 

Description of the Building

In summary, the building incorporates:

 

§ A ‘rise in storeys’ of 3

§ Masonry walls, tiled roof and timber floors

§ Separate exits

§ A total of 5sole occupancy units,

§ External balconies

 

Key Issues

Building Code of Australia (BCA):

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

 

Site Management:

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

 

RECOMMENDATION:

Should the approval be granted to the application, the following conditions should be included in the development consent:”

 

7.2    Development Engineers Comments

Council’s Development engineer advises as follows:

 

“An amended application has been received for alterations to the existing multi-unit building with addition of new unit at the third level, strata subdivision and associated works (SEPP1 objection to floor space ratio control) at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Amended Architectural Plans by Martin & Spork Pty Ltd dated 30th May 2011;

·      Statement of Environmental effects by Denis Smith Planning Consultants dated April 2011

·      Parking & Traffic Statement by Parking & Traffic Consultants dated 19th April 2011

 

Parking/Driveway Comments

The proposed development includes the addition of a new 2 bedroom unit at the top of the existing building on a third level. The new unit will generate an additional parking demand for the site of 1 carspace. The site is currently experiencing a parking shortfall of around 4 spaces when adopting the rates from Council’s DCP-Parking. In reality however the deficiency is actually six spaces due to the existing garages not currently being utilized for parking as they are very narrow creating a significant deterrent to their use. No additional parking is planned and so a further deficiency of 1 space will be created from this proposal resulting in a total deficiency for the site of 7 spaces (not counting garages).

 

The submitted parking and traffic statement is not a comprehensive document and does not provide solid parking date and provides misleading statements. The consultant states “that numerous on-street carspaces were available within Victoria Street at various times of the day”. These findings are disputed by nearby resident and an independent survey undertaken by the Development Engineer on Wednesday 25th (3:30pm), Thursday 26th (9:05pm) and Saturday 28th (10:20am) May 2011 has confirmed that parking is in high demand. At the time of the site inspections it was observed that no on-street parking  at all was available in Victoria Street directly contradicting the findings in the parking assessment.

 

After concerns were raised by Development Engineering in regards to this shortfall and the parking assessment the applicant has submitted amended plans that widen the existing garages to comply with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 which will at least enable the existing parking facilities to be full utilized. Taking into account the garages now being fully utilized and the additional demand created by the new unit the resulting parking deficiency for the site will now be 6 spaces which is actually an improvement from the existing situation.

 

There is no scope to provide additional parking on the site without a complete knockdown and rebuild of the existing building.

 

It is noted that the site is within easy walking distance of Randwick Town Centre and in close proximity to numerous and frequent bus routes including major routes to Bondi Junction, Coogee and the city.

 

Although the site is experiencing a significant shortfall the current proposal should not result in an increased demand for on-street parking in the vicinity according to the rates provided in Council’s DCP-Parking when taking into account the proposed improvements to the garages.

 

In consideration of this Development Engineering have no further objection to this proposal.

 

To ensure the garages are widened and no interim occupation certificate is issued on the unit dwelling without the carspaces being in place a specific condition requiring completion of the garages prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate has been included in this report.

 

Waste Management Comments

The existing waste management arrangements on the site are unsatisfactory. There is presently no storage area provided for waste bins and they are currently being permanently stored on Council’s footpath immediately in front of the site. A new bin enclosure has been proposed which is adequate to accommodate the required number of bins. The enclosure represents a significant improvement on the existing situation and is fully supported. 

 

Drainage Comments

The existing garages and front portion of the existing residential flat building drain to Victoria Street via existing pipes underneath the floor of the garages.

The rear portion of the existing residential flat building however appears to be connected illegally to the sewerage system at the rear of the property. This illegal connection shall be removed as part of any development consent for the subject proposal. As the roof will be altered for the new unit this provides the opportunity to ensure that rainwater runoff  is disposed of correctly. A condition requiring the new roof be drained to Victoria Street via the existing site drainage system has been added to this report.

 

Kerb & Gutter  Comments

The existing concrete kerb and gutter in front of the site is in poor condition and will require replacement in conjunction with this development application.

 

Landscape Comments

The two trees growing in the raised garden bed fronting Victoria Street, on the northern side of the existing centrally located pedestrian path/bridge, comprising from north to south, an Eriobotrya japonica (Loquat) and a Cupressus sempervirens ‘Swanes Golden’ (Golden Pencil Pine), both of around 4-5 metres in height, are not worthy of retention in anyway, and as such, can be removed and replaced with new landscape treatment as part of the general improvements being proposed to this site.

 

There is also a row of three Ligustrum lucidum (Large Leafed Privets) growing along the southern side setback which will need to be removed, irrespective of this application, as they are recognised as environmental weeds which invade areas of native bushland.

 

The 4m tall Persea americanna (Avocado) located in the rear yard, in the southeast corner of the site is insignificant, and can also be removed and replaced with new landscape treatment, as this will improve the visual appeal of this area and the level of amenity provided to occupants.

Should the application be approved the following conditions shall apply:”


8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

8.1         Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The subject site is zoned Residential 2C under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed development is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

The following Clauses of the RLEP so apply to the proposal:

 

Clause

Required

Proposed

Compliance

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of the site area (or 231.1m2).

 

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas not to exceed 50% of landscaped area provision

Proposed – 28.5% (132m²)

 

Not applicable 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

 

 

20F

Floor space ratio

0.65:1 for sites less than 700m2 in 2C zones

Proposed - 1.1:1 (516.4 sqm)

 

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

20G

Building height

(2) Overall height: 12m

 

 

(4) External wall height: 10m

Maximum height 11.9m

 

Maximum wall height 10.8m

Complies

 

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

 

The following relevant clauses also apply to the proposal (and are addressed in detail in Section 10.1 below):

 

Clause 9 - Objectives

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

Clause 22 - Services

Clause 40 - Earthworks

 

8.2    Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies

State Environmental Planning Policies that are relevant to the proposal are :

 

-   State Environment Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

-   State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 - Remediation of Land

-   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

-   State Environmental Planning Policy – Affordable Rental Housing 2009

 

The application of these policies to the proposal is addressed in Section 10.1 below.

 

9.         Policy controls

 

The following Development Control Plans are applicable in the subject site:

·      Development Control Plan – Multi-unit housing

·      Development Control Plan - Parking

 

The application of these DCPs is addressed in Section 10.2 below.

 

The following policy is also applicable to the proposed development:

·      Randwick City Council Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 2 July 2007

 

10.    Environmental assessment

 

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

 

10.1    Statutory Controls – S79C(1)(a)

 

10.1.1       Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation)

Clause 9 - Objectives

Clause 9 of RLEP 1998 requires Council to consider the aims of the LEP and Zone objectives prior to determining any DA on land to which the RLEP applies. The purpose of this Clause is “To require the general aims of this plan and the specific objectives of each zone to be taken into account in the assessment and determination of development applications”. With reference to the general aims, the proposed development will not compromise the aims of the LEP in relation to aesthetic character, sustainability, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality and contribute to the variety of housing types that does not compromise the amenity of the residential area, consistent with the zone objectives as detailed under Clause 12 below.

 

Clause 12 Zone No 2C (Residential C Zone)

The subject site is zoned Residential C under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (RLEP). The proposed development for multi-unit housing is permissible with Council's consent under the zoning provisions applying to the land.

 

The proposal is also considered to be in general accordance with the relevant objectives of the Residential 2C Zone, which are:

 

·      To provide for a medium density residential environment, and

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

·      To protect the amenity of existing residents, and

·      To encourage housing affordability,

 

22 Services

Adequate facilities for supply of water, disposal of sewage and drainage are required to support a proposed development. The subject site is located in an existing and long established urban area in which the supply of water, sewage and drainage services is available.

 

40     Earthworks

Clause 40 requires Council to consider the likely impact on existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality, and the effects of the proposed works on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land. The proposal details minor excavation for the extension of the existing garages fronting Victoria Street. The works involve minimal excavation on the site. 

 

10.1.2        State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 - Remediation of Land

The site has not been identified as including any contaminated land or having sustained any previous uses which may have resulted in contamination.

 


10.1.3        State Environment Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

SEPP: BASIX requirements came into force for multi-unit housing where development applications were lodged on or after 1 July 2005. A BASIX assessment is a mandatory component of the development approval process under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) Regulation 2004 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing multi-unit housing development and the applicant has provided a BASIX certificate (certificate number A107865 dated 20 April 2011) 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.

 

10.1.4             State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)

The proposal is subject to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (SEPP 65) – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings. The application has been considered by Council’s Design Review Panel on 2 November 2009. The Panel essentially found the proposal satisfactory subject to a number of suggestions as reflected in the Panel’s comments in italics below (followed by Council’s comments in bold wherever necessary):

 

1)      Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

The proposal sits on a compact site in a tightly packed area off Alison Road not far from the Randwick shopping centre. Victoria Street forms the western frontage. There is a large apartment building immediately to the south, and most buildings in the vicinity are unit blocks. The site is extremely convenient to public transport, shops and a broad range of amenities, therefore its intensification is worth consideration.

 

The contextual information submitted remains scant, and impacts on all affected neighbours should be documented including measured drawings of the existing building. The building’s proposed enlarged scale in the street should be analysed and considered. The building occupies a small site, with tight setbacks, so this information is critical to the consideration of any proposal.

 

Comment: The applicant has provided additional contextual information on the 15 August 2011 that shows consideration being given to the proposed scale of the building’s addition in the context of the existing street. Having regard to this, the applicant has amended the design of the proposed addition replacing the earlier dominant, lop-sided, single aspect dormer opening with a finer restrained, balanced, and dual aspect dormer design that:

 

(1)      respects the form and scale of the existing building which visually would still present as a double storey building when viewed from the street and

(2)      fits in well with the scale and form of the adjoining building to the south which is a large 4 storey apartment building as well the large 3 storey apartment building to the east.

 


2)      The Scale of the Proposal

An additional storey has been proposed, centred on the existing building. This storey has now been reduced to a single unit in a large attic, with an oversized dormer window to the north. The massing remains clumsy and has little relationship to either the context or the host building. The Applicant is encouraged to explore better options for the scale, proportion, detail and elevational treatments of the building.

 

The detail and material of the large north dormer are poorly considered. The box gutter should be avoided, and adequate internal heights created throughout. The juxtaposition of small areas of zinc – a high quality material, with large areas of hardi-plank – a cheap material - lack sense and will not work well together in terms of aesthetics.

 

Some windows could be discretely inserted into the street façade.

 

The Panel does not support the extent of the proposed extensions to the rear, as these reduce the already minimal landscape area, impose bulk, overshadowing and overlooking impacts on the eastern neighbours. The proposed balconies should be designed to give privacy and they could be considered more as ‘outdoor rooms’. The applicant should look at ways of reducing the opportunities for overlooking. 

 

Correct shadow diagrams need to be submitted.

 

In the Panel’s opinion, the existing garages, their undercrofts and the front yard area which is below street level need to be upgraded as part of this application. It would be far better, for instance, if the old brick garages were removed and open carport timber decks constructed instead.  A lower deck and garden area could also be constructed to improve the appearance, natural light and amenity to the entire front yard - both for this site and the neighbour’s.

 

Comment: As indicated above, the applicant has amended the design of the proposed additional dwelling unit by replacing the earlier over-sized dormer window on the northern face of the existing roof with a finer, more restrained and  balanced, dual aspect, dormer window design. This amended design addresses the Panels concerns regarding material and finish which will include ones that will be sympathetic to and match the original roof. In addition, the amended dormer openings will have an 15 degree angled tile roof that complements the pitch of the existing roof which will be largely retained.

 

In relation to the buildings extension to the rear, it should be noted that the proposed extension of the main building and their associated rear balconies to the rear essentially remain the same as that approved under the previous DA (DA/281/2010) which included refurbishment and extension of the existing units eastward and provision of associated new balcony extensions to the rear. The current proposal maintains the same setback as that approved previously under DA/281/2010 which also allowed for rear courtyards to be allocated to individual units. Furthermore, the approval granted under DA/281/2010 included the provision of a new 1800mm high fence along the rear boundary to screen potential overlooking into the adjoining eastern property. This fence remains unchanged in the current proposal. 

 

The amended plans show two small windows have been inserted in the street elevation that would provide light in to the bathroom.

 

Correct shadow diagrams have been submitted with the amended plans.

 

In relation to the front garages, the applicant advises that retention of the existing garages was an important feature of the previous approval in terms of providing a full covered car space to relevant units. In line with advice from Council’s development engineer, the openings of these garages have been widened to ensure the use of these garages for car parking. Furthermore, the applicant advises that the existing building has an open aspect to Victoria Street which will be further enhanced by the proposed landscaping scheme under the current DA.

 

3)      The Built Form of the Proposal

See comments above.

 

There are opportunities for more thorough improvements to the overall building, that could be funded by the additional unit.

 

Comments: The subject site has a previous DA approval for alterations and additions to improve the amenity of the overall building. The current DA retains the bulk of approved changes and builds upon these improvements with the added provision of an upper floor unit in the existing roof space all of which have been appropriately designed as a comprehensive scheme.

 

4)      The Proposed Density

While a density above the Council controls in terms of FSR could be considered appropriate to this quite urban context, the current proposal that has little design merit.

 

Any argument for additional density should be supported by design quality, and good amenity for all dwellings.

 

Comment: A large part of the density / floor area of the proposed unit has already been approved for storage area under the previous DA approval (DA//2010). The conversion of this storage space to residential use has been subject to intensive discussions with the applicant culminating in the current restrained and sympathetic dormer opening design and improved internal amenity.

Accordingly, the proposed upper floor addition has been redesigned to ensure a better architectural outcome in relation to the existing building and surrounding context.

 

5)      Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

The environmental performance of any application should consider the following:

 

-    sun shading and external screening, particularly to all north facing windows / doors

-    operable screens for the east and west facing balconies

-    good natural ventilation, including showing types of openable windows throughout

-    providing more openable windows for adequate daylight and ventilation for all service spaces on the external wall and top floor, including stairs, kitchens, bathrooms, laundries

-    ceiling fans should be provided to all bedrooms and living rooms

-    a roof design that adds to the environmental performance of the interior by increased access to natural light and ventilation.

 

The character of the existing building should also be respected.

 

Comment: The proposed development has provided adequate consideration of most of these matters where appropriate. Conditions will be applied requiring the provision of ceiling fans in bedrooms and living rooms.

 


6)      The Proposed Landscape

The proposal is extremely weak on landscape issues, except to decrease the little landscape area on the site (garbage room and rear extension). This is unacceptable and does not comply with SEPP 65.

The front yard (below street level) should be improved with appropriate planting and the rear yard would benefit from some screen planting to reduce overlooking into the eastern neighbour’s yard and units.

 

New street trees should be planted. This would break up the apparent expanse of concrete.

 

Comment: An amended landscape plan for the rear and front courtyards has been provided indicating plantings in all the landscape area. In particular, the proposed plantings and landscape elements in the sunken front yard will replace existing unsightly concrete hardstand areas.

 

7)      The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

The low sloping ceiling height in the living room and study is unacceptable. The proposal does too little to upgrade the amenity of the existing building.

 

Comment: the amended plans lodged on 12 October 2010 shows that proposal has been amended to provide for higher ceiling heights in the proposed new unit which has been achieved by the use of predominantly higher high sill and more balanced dormer openings. A majority of the new dwelling unit now achieves a floor to ceiling height of 2.7m tapering to 2.4m at the sloping roof.  

 

8)      The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

BCA advice needs to inform the scheme. The Panel was informed that the existing garages (as noted on the DA plans) were actually to be replaced by new, slightly larger garages.

 

Comment: The amended proposal will widen the existing garage door openings to comply with AS 2890.1:2004.

 

9)      Social issues

The Panel considers that the reconfiguring and upgrading of existing poor quality flat buildings is a desirable social outcome, particularly given the very convenient location. The Panel also supports the diversification of the accommodation offered within the building.

 

10)   The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The revised design proposal has little sense of proportion, scale, material, detail and aesthetics and a marginal relationship with the existing building. The proposed aesthetics are barely adequate, for the reasons outlined above.

 

The Panel considers that the elevations and supporting material submitted remain substandard.

 

Comment: The applicant has undertaken a significant redesign of the proposed upper floor addition as discussed above, particularly, the replacement of the previously intrusive and dominant dormer window of the new dwelling unit to a more sympathetic design that matched the pitch and style of the existing roof while allowing for adequate internal amenity for this new dwelling.

 

Summary and Recommendations

In the Panel’s opinion, the proposal remains at best mediocre. It barely attempts SEPP 65 and RFDC compliance. A better design would be appreciated to improve this neglected property. Such a design should have sufficient merit to act as an exemplar for the renewal of dated flat buildings of this kind – such initiatives are urgently required around Randwick and Council has an explicit policy to improve such buildings and has issued guidelines on how best to do it. The drawings are well short of DA standard, and from the architect told the Panel, do not clearly represent the works for which they are seeking consent.

 

The above shortcomings should be addressed with the assessing planner. The Panel does not need to see this application again.

 

Comment: The amended plans and elevations have satisfactorily detailed the changes to the design of the additional dwelling unit and its dormer window as well as the increase in floor to ceiling heights within this dwelling unit to improve its amenity for future residents. A condition requiring an amended sample board of materials and finishes will be applied should approval be granted.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This should be a satisfactory development.  The issues raised should be addressed to the satisfaction of the assessing planner

 

Comment: The amended plans and elevations have satisfactorily addressed the issues raised by the Panel.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This should be a satisfactory development.  The issues raised should be addressed to the satisfaction of the assessing planner

 

10.1.5          State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

The SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, among other things, aims to facilitate the effective delivery of new affordable rental housing and to facilitate the retention and mitigate the loss of existing affordable rental housing.

 

The previous DA (DA/281/2010) included strata sub-division of the existing building. In determining that development application, Council took into account whether there was likely to be a reduction in affordable housing on the subject site pursuant to Clause 50 of the SEPP. Appropriate evidence was provided by the applicant indicating that there are no low-rental dwellings in the building which would be affected as a result of the strata subdivision proposed under DA/281/2010. Accordingly, as the existing building was not defined as a “low rental residential building” under Part 3 of the SEPP, the proposed strata subdivision was not required to be assessed against the remaining sub-clauses of Clause 50, namely Clause 50 2) a) to h) which involves calculation of the payment of the monetary contribution to offset any loss of low cost accommodation .

 

The current DA seeks only to amend the approved strata sub-division plan by adding an additional lot for the new dwelling unit to the approved strata sub-division plan. As such, the current proposal does not involve any reduction or loss of affordable housing which would be subject to the provisions of Clause 50 of the SEPP. 

 

10.2           Policy Controls– Section 79C(1)(a)

 

10.2.1                 DCP – Multi-unit Housing

The table below assesses the proposal against the Preferred Solutions of the DCP – Multi-unit housing, and where variations occur, assessment is made against the relevant Objectives and Performance Requirements. 

 

Performance requirements

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

1     Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

Amended 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.

The site has an allotment width of 16.585m and does not comply with the preferred solution. However, the current proposal is an improvement over the original proposal in terms of height, bulk and scale such that the proposal now achieves the performance requirements of the control by making the proposed development commensurate with the areas/dimensions of the subject site.

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

Not applicable

2     Height

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

 

The application is accompanied by a SEPP 1 Objection to the external wall height standard which has been assessed and found to be reasonable and well-founded. In this assessment, amongst other things, the location and orientation of the proposed building will not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties. Furthermore, the proposal  complies with the maximum building height standard of the Randwick LEP.

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 amended proposal has deleted the bulky and intrusive dormer window and replaced with smaller dormer openings. Furthermore, the proposed additional dwelling unit does not pierce the existing maximum roof ridge height which would preserve existing views and minimise overall amenity impacts on adjoining properties, and provide consistency in scale to the streetscape, as well as provide adequate visual interest in terms of articulation and façade treatment.

3     Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

The existing building setbacks (including that of the two front garages built to the street alignment) will remain unchanged as a result of the proposed alterations and additions.

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

·    No part closer than 3.5 metres.

·    Minimum average setback 5 metres.

·    Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

·    Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

North & South

 

No – the proposal retains the existing 0-1.5m setback to the northern  boundary and 0-1.6m setback to southern  boundary.

No – the existing side walls are 16m in length.

N.A.  –No steps in the side elevations are proposed 

 

 

 

While the proposal does not comply with the side setback requirements of the DCP, it achieves the performance requirements of the control in that :

·    Solar access is maintained to the adjoining southern property.

·    Privacy is adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings and to adjoining open spaces (through the orientation of window openings north and south) and the use of privacy screens on the east elevation.

·    Landscaping and private open space is provided in the proposed development.

·    Streetscape amenity is maintained.

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.

 

East

 

The bulk of the building remains unchanged at minimum 4.29m from the rear of the site. The proposed rear balconies will be 3m in depth and setback 3m from the rear boundary. Given the balconies are not solid structures, they will not unreasonably impinge on the solar access or amenity of the residents to the rear. For assessment of potential privacy impacts, refer to Section 10.3.2.2 below. 

 

 

 

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.

No adverse impacts on adjoining properties arising from eaves, window hoods and other sun-shading or weather protection

4     Density

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

 

The bulk and scale of the proposed building when viewed from adjoining public spaces, streetscape and private properties is visually compatible with existing 3-4 storey RFBs and duplexes/dwelling houses in adjoining and surrounding properties.

5     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.

 

Yes – the proposal will maintain the existing open low rail fence along Victoria Street which is approximately 1.2m high. 

6     Landscaping and Private Open Space

P1  Landscaped Areas

Areas are sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

S1 Minimum dimension for landscaped area 2 metres.

Yes - landscaped areas are sufficiently sized in excess of 2m.

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

 

Yes – The plans indicate that the rear courtyards can be accessed by all residents of the development.  Notwithstanding this, a condition will be applied requiring all landscaped areas to be made into a communal space for all future residents of the proposed development.

P3  Private Open Space

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

 

Yes – private open space in the form of balconies / terraces for dwelling units is provided.

P4 Private open space in front of the building only where setback and fence design sympathetic.

 

N.A. – Plans do not indicate any private open space in front of buildings.

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.

N/A

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.

Yes – private open space in the form of balconies / terraces for dwelling units is provided.

7     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.

Yes (see Section 10.3.2.2 below)

 

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

Yes

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

Yes

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Australia (BCA).

Required to comply with BCA

8     View Sharing

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

 

Yes (see Section 6.1 above) 

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

 

As above

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

N/A

9     Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties.

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

 

 

Yes (see Section 10.3.2.2 below)

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

 

 

N/A

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.

 

 

Yes (see Section 10.3.2.2 below)

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

 

 

Yes (see Section 10.3.2.2 below)

P4  Building Layout, Design and Construction

Protect from prevailing strong winds and adverse weather.

Living areas are orientated to the north.

Larger windows are located on the north.

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

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

 

Proposal achieves compliance with BASIX targets (see Section 11.3.2.4 below).

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.

 

N/A – solar collectors not proposed

10   Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Yes

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

Yes

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

Yes

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

 

Yes in that existing two garages will be secured by roller door entry.

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

 

Yes by condition

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

 

Yes by condition

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

Yes by condition

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

Yes by condition

11   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.

 

See Section 11.2.2 below.

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

 

Two existing garages to Victoria Street will be retained leaving the remaining parts of the site frontage open.

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

 

N/A

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

Yes at lower ground floor under the existing south-western garage.

12   Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

Yes

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

Yes

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

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Yes, the proposal will not have a long gun-barrel driveway.

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.

Yes.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

 

Yes

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

Yes by condition to comply with Australian Standard

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.

Yes – Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling provided.

Barrier-free access

 

 

Access for people with a disability is provided to and within one dwelling at the following rate:

0-14 dwellings     0

15-29 dwellings   1

30-44 dwellings   2

45-60 dwellings   3

and so on.

 

N/A as only 5 dwellings are proposed.

13   Utilities/Site Facilities: subject to  appropriate conditions of consent

14   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.

Yes by condition

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

 

Yes – centralised garbage storage area provided at basement level.

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.

Waste facility provided in basement level therefore not visible from street.   

 

The assessment in the table above indicates that the proposal would comply with all the preferred controls / performance requirements of the DCP – Multi-unit housing with the exception of FSR and external wall height which have been addressed in the assessment of the SEPP No. 1 Objections in Section 5 above, and setbacks which have been addressed in terms of the performance requirements. 

 

10.2.2        Development Control Plan – Parking

The DCP – Parking requires, amongst other things, car parking to be provided for multi-unit residential development at a rate of 1.2 spaces per 2 bedroom dwelling, 1.5 spaces per 3 bedroom dwelling and 1 visitor space per 4 dwelling units. The building has only two (2) on site parking spaces available which are allocated to units 3 and 4. In accordance with the DCP for Parking, the site would be required to meet the following car parking provisions:

 

 

Rate

Required

Proposal

Business Premises

1 per 40m2 GFA

N/A

N/A

Studio

1 per 2 dwellings

N/A

N/A

1 Bedroom

1 per unit

1 unit = 1

N/A

2 Bedroom

1.2 per unit

4 units

= 4.8 spaces

2 spaces

Visitor

1 per 4 units

4 units

= 1 space

0 spaces

Total car spaces

 

7 spaces

2 spaces (Credit of 4 spaces)

 

Although the site is currently deficient in parking spaces, Council’s Development Engineers do not require additional carspaces be provided for the subject  development for the following reasons:

 

·      The shortfall is minor as the effective increase amounts to 1 carspace, 

 

·      There is no scope to provide additional parking on the site without a complete knockdown and rebuild of the existing building.

·      The site is within easy walking distance of Randwick Town Centre and in close proximity to numerous and frequent bus routes including major routes to Bondi Junction, Coogee and the city.

 

·      The widening of the existing sub-standard garages would provide some relief to the existing car parking demand on Victoria Street. Accordingly, the garages currently do not comply with Australian standard 2890.1:2004 in regards to minimum width for enclosed carspaces. The proposed widening will ensure they comply with the standard.

 

10.2.3        Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

 

 

In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council.

 

Category

Cost

Applicable

Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$275,000

1.0%

$2,750.00

 

10.3           Likely impact of the development - S79C(1)(b)

 

10.3.1        Natural Environmental Impacts

The subject site contains an existing residential flat building and associated external outbuilding and paved/slab areas within an existing built-up area in Randwick.  As such, there are no threatened species, populations or ecological communities or habitats that would be affected by the proposed development either within, or in the vicinity of, the development site.

 

10.3.2        Built Environmental Impacts

 

10.3.2.1    Urban Design

The applicant has undertaken a significant redesign of the proposed upper floor addition as discussed above, particularly, the replacement of the previously intrusive and dominant dormer window of the new dwelling unit to a more sympathetic design that matches the pitch and style of the existing roof while allowing for adequate internal amenity for this new dwelling.

 

 

Figure A: Original lop-sided and dominant dormer window design.

 

Figure B: Amended balance and less intrusive dormer window design.

 

In order to further improve the design of the proposal a condition will be applied requiring the kitchen of the upper floor addition to be setback further to align with the external wall of the adjoining Bedroom 1 while the width of the study will be increased to be the same width as Bedroom 1 (that is from 2750mm to 3150mm being a minor increase of 400mm) so as to present a more balanced dormer presentation to the street.

In summary, the amended proposal will have a significantly lower degree of prominence in the streetscape than the original design and, importantly, will maintain the existing character of the building as it presents to Victoria Street. 

 

10.3.2.2.   Sunlight, Privacy and Views

 

Sunlight

Shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that at 9am, 12 noon and 3:00pm in the winter solstice, the proposal will generally maintain the same overshadowing as that casted by the existing building on the adjoining southern property at No. 15 Victoria Street which is just below the window sills of the north-facing dwelling unit on the second floor of the adjoining southern property at No. 15 Victoria Street. There will be minimal increases in this overshadowing arising from the proposed top floor dwelling unit during this period given that it is largely embedded within the existing roof space and given that the existing maximum roof ridge line of RL75.87 will remain intact.

 

Privacy

The proposal performs adequately in relation to maintaining the privacy of adjoining properties in that:

 

·      The all new east facing balconies will be located 9m away from the closest residential property to the rear which will provide adequate separation for privacy.

 

·      The proposal will mainly use high sill / recessed windows for the proposed new dwelling unit which would not be conducive to overlooking.

 

Furthermore, a condition will be applied requiring the installation of a 1.8m high privacy screen along the southern edge of the east-facing balcony to the living room of the new dwelling unit to further enhance the privacy of the dwelling units in the adjoining southern property at No 15 Victoria Street. 

 

Overall, the proposal will be acceptable in terms of privacy for the reasons discussed above.

 

Views

Adjoining residents of properties that have raised specific objections to view loss have had their concerns assessed within the body of this report at Section 6 above. In summary, the assessment shows that the amended proposal will have minimal, if no, impact on the district and ocean views enjoyed by these relevant adjoining properties.

 

10.3.2.4    Ecologically Sustainable Development

As indicated above, the applicant has provided a BASIX assessment for the proposed development which indicates compliance with the targets for multi-unit housing for water saving, energy consumption and thermal comfort. In addition, the proposal achieves full cross-ventilation for all dwelling units; and will include appropriate energy efficiency and water conservation measures.

 

The proposed development will be well served by public buses along Alison Road and also in the nearby Randwick Junction Town Centre linking the subject site to the CBD and Randwick Junction in keeping with the promotion of public transport usage as a primary means of enhancing ecological sustainability and the reduction of greenhouse gases in the Sydney Region. The proposal would assist in encouraging the use of public transport in line with urban consolidation and ESD principles.

 

Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable in relation to Ecologically Sustainable Development issues.

 

 

 

10.4           Social and Economic Impacts – S79C(1)(b)

The proposal will increase the availability of housing and promote the key directions and actions for the Randwick City Plan and the objectives of the Residential 2C zone contained in the Randwick LEP 1998. The effect of the proposal would be to bring more people to the locality potentially linking them to existing economic, institutional and service facilities in the area. Overall the proposal presents a positive impact within the site and locality.

 

10.5           Suitability of the site – S79C(1)(c)

The subject site is zoned Residential 2C. The subject site is therefore suitable for the proposed medium density residential development whilst retaining the existing and desired future character of the locality. The site is well located in relation to Randwick Junction and other nearby local centres.

 

10.6           Any submissions made – S79C(1)(d)

The DA was notified and advertised from 11 May to 25 May 2010 (original proposal) and from 31 August to 14 September 2011 (amended proposal). All submissions received are addressed as per Section 6 above.

 

11.7           The public interest – S79C(1)(e)

The proposed development will be in the public interest as it will provide additional housing stock in an area that is highly accessible by public buses and private vehicles. In addition, the proposal will consolidate the residential character of the locality by enabling residential development of a medium density housing form without compromising the amenity of surrounding residential area in accordance with the Randwick City Plan and the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship to the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 12:               Excellence in urban design and development – The proposal has a good architectural quality in that it maximises the potential of the subject site in the context of the existing surrounding development whilst minimising impacts on adjoining and nearby residential properties.

Direction 4a &

associated key action:  Improved design and sustainability across all development – The proposal will achieve a good design in conjunction with a significant sustainable outcome for the proposed development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site. The proposal does not comply with the maximum FSR, wall height and minimum landscaped area standards contained in the RLEP. SEPP No.1 objections in relation to these variations have been submitted with the application and considered to be well founded in the circumstances. The breaches in the standards do not give rise to unreasonable impacts upon the amenity of the surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, view sharing, solar access and privacy. Additionally, the resultant height, bulk and scale of the proposed development will match the form, proportion and style of the existing building and remain consistent with the existing scale and character of development in the immediate streetscape along Victoria Street.

 

The proposal complies with the relevant preferred solutions and performance requirements in the DCP - Multi-unit Housing (with the exception of FSR, wall height and landscape area standards which have been addressed in the SEPP 1 objection).

 

The shortfall in the numerical car parking requirement of the DCP – Parking has been adequately justified in relevant sections of this report. 

 

The proposal will not have a significant impact on the amenity of surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access, privacy and views.

 

The recommendation is for approval of the application subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council support the objections under State Environmental Planning No. 1 (SEPP No.1) in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20E, 20F and Clause 20G of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to minimum landscape area, maximum floor space ratio and maximum external wall height, on the grounds that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives 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 responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No DA/298/2011 for the alterations to existing multi-unit building with addition of new unit at the third level, amended strata subdivision and associated works at 7-13 Victoria Street, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 1108-DA-01 Revision E and 1108-DA-03 Revision C, and stamped received by Council on 15 August 2011, and plan numbered 1108-DA-02, Revision J, received by Council on 12 October 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:

 

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 proposed development are to be compatible with the existing building to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

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

 

3.       The following amendments to the proposal shall be undertaken:

·      the kitchen of the proposed new upper floor unit, Unit 5, shall be setback further from the northern boundary so that its northern wall shall align with the external wall of the adjoining Bedroom 1.

·      The width of the study in the proposed new upper floor unit, Unit 5, will be increased to the same width as Bedroom 1, that is from 2750mm to 3150mm and this amendment shall be reflected in the Victoria Street elevation.

·      Provision of ceiling fans in all living/dining rooms and in all bedrooms (except for the bedroom of the proposed new upper floor unit, Unit 5.

·      Provision of a 1.8m high privacy screen measured from the finished floor level of the balcony along the southern edge of the east-facing balcony linked to the living room of the proposed new upper floor unit, Unit 5.

 

Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

4.       All landscape areas shall be designated as communal landscaped area and common property for the proposed development. Details shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development in accordance with section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

 

6.       The reflectivity index of glass used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent. Details shall 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 development.

 

7.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed in accordance with AS4282 – 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of  Outdoor Lighting" so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents or motorists and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

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

 

9.       In accordance with Section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that all of the required commitments listed in the relevant BASIX Certificate for this development are fulfilled.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11.     In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue a final Occupation Certificate for this development, unless it is satisfied that each of the required BASIX commitments has been fulfilled.

 

Relevant documentary evidence of compliance with the BASIX commitments is to be forwarded to the Council upon issuing the final Occupation Certificate.

 

12.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council:

 

Category

Cost

Applicable

Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

%275,000

1.0%

$2750.00

 

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

 

a)   a construction certificate being issued

 

for the proposed development. The development is subject to an index to reflect quarterly variations in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the date of Council’s determination to the date of payment.

 

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

 

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations and to provide for reasonable levels of safety and amenity:

 

Regulatory

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

19.     Prior to the commencement of any building or fire safety works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:-

 

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

 

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

                                        

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

22.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

25.     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.

 

Structural adequacy

26.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to issuing a construction certificate, which certifies the structural adequacy of the existing building to support the additional storey.

 

27.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to issuing an occupation certificate or strata subdivision certificate, which certifies that the structural adequacy of the building including the external balconies and external stairway.

 

Construction site management

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

·           Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·           Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·           Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

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

·           WorkCover NSW Codes of Practice and Guidelines

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

 

29.     In accordance with Council’s Asbestos Policy, the following requirements are to be satisfied if any materials containing asbestos are present in the building:

 

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

 

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

 

a)     A Demolition Work Plan must be developed and implemented in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001, Demolition of Structures.

 

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

 

c)     Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

d)     Asbestos waste must be disposed of at an approved waste disposal depot (refer to the DEC or Waste Service NSW for details of sites). Copies of all receipts detailing method and location of disposal must be maintained on site and be provided to Council officers upon request, as evidence of correct disposal.

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

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

32.     Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works.

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

 

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

 

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 & Regulatory Services department.

 

d)     During construction stages, sediment laden stormwater run-off shall be controlled using the sediment control measures outlined in the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by the NSW Department of Housing. Sediment and erosion control measures must be implemented prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout construction. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i)      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.

 

j)      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.

 

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

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

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

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

 

Fire safety

33.     The existing levels of fire and safety within the building are to be upgraded in accordance with the following requirements and the fire safety certificate provisions of Part 9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 must be complied with, prior to issuing an occupation certificate or strata subdivision certificate:

a)   The following works are to be undertaken in accordance with the specified provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), as applicable:

1)    Install a smoke detection and alarm system throughout the building in accordance with specification E2.2a of the BCA,

 

2)    Balustrades and handrails to the stairway, balcony, or the like are to be designed and constructed to satisfy clause D2.16 & D2.17 of the BCA,

 

3)    Provide a ceiling having a resistance to the incipient spread of fire to the space above of not less than 60 minutes, throughout the premises in accordance with Specification C1.1 of the BCA,

 

4)     Prior to commencing  the abovementioned works, a Construction Certificate must be obtained from Council’s Building Certification Services or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

b)   All new building works (including the proposed alterations/additions) must satisfy the relevant performance or deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

c)   All of the fire safety upgrading works and new building work must be detailed in the Construction Certificate for the development.

 

34.     The fire safety upgrading works must be carried out prior to issuing of an Occupation Certificate for the development and written confirmation must be provided to Council which confirms that all of the upgrading works have been carried out in accordance with the conditions of consent.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for health and amenity :

35.     Provide sound transmission insulation to the floors throughout the building to comply with the relevant requirements of Part F5 of the BCA and details are to be provided with the construction certificate documentation to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

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

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

a)       Construct new concrete vehicular crossings and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrances to the site.

 

a)       Re-construct  kerb and gutter for the full site frontage except opposite the vehicular access.

 

37.     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.

 

38.     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.

 

39.     Prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate the applicant shall have completed the widening of the garages and construction of the bin enclosure to ensure adequate amenity to the occupants and neighbouring residents.

 

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.

 

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

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

 

43.     Stormwater runoff from the redeveloped portion of the site shall be discharged either:

 

a)   To the kerb and gutter along the site frontage by gravity ( via the existing stormwater system) ; OR

 

b)   Through a private drainage easement(s) to Council’s kerb and gutter (or underground drainage system); OR

 

c)   To the kerb & gutter along the site frontage via a pump-out system

 

NOTE: The rear of the building appears to drain illegally to Sydney Water’s sewerage system. This must be removed and connection made in accordance with Council’s conditions.

 

44.     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.

 

 

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

 

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

46.     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.

 

47.     In order to improve the overall appearance of the site and its presentation to the streetscape, as well as to increase usability of the private open space which will improve the level of amenity provided to occupants, landscape treatment shall be provided within both the front and rear portions of the property (as has been shown), selecting suitably decorative and low water, low maintenance species that will attain at minimum, the same height as boundary fencing in these respective locations.

 

48.     The PCA must ensure that the landscape improvement works are completed prior to issuing a Final Occupation Certificate, with the body corporate or similar to ensure it is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state.

.

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works:

49.     All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan must correspond to those of the building as constructed.

 

50.     All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan must correspond to those depicted in the building plans for the site approved under this development consent and future construction certificate for the building.

 

51.     A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.

 

Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to the Building Developing and Plumbing section of the website www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to “Water Servicing Coordinator” under Developing Your Land” or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

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

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to release of the plan of subdivision.

 

52.     The applicant shall create suitable rights of carriageway, easements for services, support and stormwater lines, as required. The applicant shall be advised that the minimum easement width for any stormwater line is 0.9 metres.

 

53.     A formal subdivision application is required to be submitted to and approved by the Council or an accredited certifier and all conditions of this development consent are required to be satisfied prior to the release of the subdivision plans.

 

 

54.     Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority, together with any other certification relied upon, must be provided to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the issuing of a subdivision certificate.

 

55.     If a survey ‘Plan of Redefinition’ is required a copy shall be forwarded to Council prior to the endorsement of the strata plans.

 

ADVISORY

A1      The assessment of this development application does not include a complete assessment of the proposed building work under the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

All new building work must comply with the BCA and relevant Australian Standards and details of compliance must be provided in the Construction Certificate application.

 

A2      In existing buildings, the levels of fire and occupant safety should be upgraded where necessary and details should be incorporated in the Construction Certificate to the satisfaction of the Certifying authority.

 

Where the levels of accessibility to existing buildings do not meet current standards, if practicable, the level of accessibility should also be upgraded in conjunction with the proposed development (e.g. via the installation of a 1:8 access ramp within the building) and details included in the construction certificate application.

 

Building owners, applicants and builders are advised to speak to the appointed Certifying Authority prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate.

 

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

z

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             22 November 2011

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP113/11

 

 

Subject:                  2 Lowe Street, Clovelly (DA/644/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/644/2011

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to semi detached dwellings SEPP 1 Objection

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                M Alexander

Owner:                         M Alexander & A Preston

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application details alterations and additions to an existing semi detached dwelling to provide for a first floor addition. As per Council’s legal advice the semi-detached dwelling houses 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 0.78:1 and exceeds the maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1.

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the proposal includes SEPP 1 Objections to the Landscaping, Floor Space Ratio and External Wall Height Control that in the instance of the floor space ratio and external wall height exceeds the standard by more than 10%. If the proposal was assessed under the provisions of the DCP – Dwelling House the preferred solution for minimum landscaping would be 40% of the site area, the floor space ratio would be 0.65:1 and external wall height 7m.

 

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

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to provide for a new upper level comprising three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a family room and balconies to the front and rear. An existing upper level attic style addition will be incorporated within the new upper level. The proposed balcony to the front of the dwelling will be provided by the conversion of the existing garage roof into a trafficable area.

 

Within the ground level an existing courtyard will be enclosed to provide additional floor area to the kitchen and living area, new doors installed to the rear and BBQ area adjacent to the southern boundary.

 

The proposal will provide for 54m of additional floor area to the dwelling.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the eastern side of Lowe Street and contains half of a pair of semi detached dwellings which are in a group of six semi detached dwellings. The street is residential in nature and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings and multi unit housing development. The locality is within the Foreshore Scenic Protection area.

 

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 resultant area of landscaping represents 36% of the site area which is less than the minimum and a SEPP 1 Objection to this standard has been lodged by the applicant for consideration. 

 

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 0.78:1 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 party wall to the southern side boundary is at a height of 7.736m which complies with the overall height but does not with the external wall height. A SEPP 1 Objection to this standard has been lodged by the applicant for consideration.

 

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

 

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

 

5.1      Landscaping

Pursuant to Clause 20E of the RLEP 1998 the minimum of 40% of the site area is to be provided as landscaped area. The proposed variation is summarised below.

 

 

Landscaping

Proposal

36% (87m2 )

LEP development standard

40% (95m2)

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

9% shortfall (8m2)

 

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).

 

Landscaping 20E

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

 

“To operate together with controls for floor space ratio and building height 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:

 

There is a negligible amount of change being made to what is the existing landscaping area and so small is the change that it will not affect the look of the building or its open space in any significant manner on whichever side it is viewed.

 

The area of landscaping being taken in as floor space is currently hard paved area and therefore does not affect the existing soft landscaping area by any amount. This area is also in shadow by the fence and building and would not assist in the growth of any vegetation of value to the occupants.

 

The area of landscaping being taken in as floor space is currently a dead space on the outside which significantly mars the planning of the spaces inside.

 

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

 

In this instance it would be unreasonable to require strict compliance with the minimum landscaping control when it can be demonstrated that the area of landscaping proposed will meet the overall objectives of the LEP control. The resultant landscaping area will still allow for an adequate area of open space for recreation and planting of vegetation and the encroachment upon the existing landscaping area by the development is not significant with only a minimal increase in the existing building footprint by the enclosure of the small courtyard in the northern side of the building.

 

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 landscaping 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 and there is no public benefit in maintaining the planning control.

 

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 landscaping 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      Floor Space Ratios

Pursuant to Clause 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

0.78:1 (186m2 )

LEP development standard

0.5:1 (119m2)

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

56% excess (67m2)

 

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:

 

There is already an existing area covering the new altered area, however it is not usable and has not been counted to the existing floor area on the upper floor as advised by the LEP guidelines when calculating the FSR.

 

The proposed addition matches the size and bulk of the existing streetscape on Lowe Street and has intended to mimic the attached dwelling on the southern side of the subject development.

 

Because of the minor non compliance a favourable outcome and impact will be presented for the residents providing adequate amenity for a more useable and aesthetic space.

 

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

 

The proposal exceeds the floor space ratio control however there are good reasons to support the additional bulk and scale as proposed to this dwelling by the development. There is a group of 6 semi detached dwellings on this side of Lowe Street, of which this dwelling and its pair are the only ones which have not been altered to include an upper level. To the other four dwellings there is a consistency in the building design in that the upper level is to the front of the dwelling and includes a large balcony. These dwellings are distinct from other semi detached dwellings which have had upper level additions sited behind the main portion of the existing roof portion at the front of the dwelling. The position of the upper level additions to these other dwellings in Lowe Street has set a precedent not only in relation to the siting of the upper level to the front of the dwelling but also in relation to the overall floor area and bulk and scale of the buildings. It is noted that the most recently approved similar alteration and additions to another dwelling in this group at No. 6 Lowe Street detailed a FSR of 0.79:1.

 

Therefore whilst it is clear that the LEP control is exceeded the actual resultant bulk and scale of the dwelling will not be greater than the existing adjoining dwellings at 6-12 Lowe Street and an argument cannot be made that the proposal will be out of character with the locality.

 

The potential amenity impacts to the adjoining properties in relation to overshadowing are not unreasonable or excessive given the orientation of the sites on an east west axis and the narrow width of these allotments and would not necessarily be significantly reduced by an upper level of a reduced bulk.

 

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 and there is no public benefit in maintaining the control.

 

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.

 

 

5.3      Building Heights

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

 

 

Building height

Proposal

7.8 party wall maximum height and external wall height

 

LEP development standard

9.5m maximum height and 7m external wall height

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

11% excess (800mm)

 

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

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

 

“To operate together with controls for landscaped area and floor space ratio 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:

 

This is the only way in which a usable second storey can be added to the development with an internal ceiling height that complies with the minimum Building Code of Australia requirement of 2.4m clearance and which also carries the same roof pitch as its adjacent attached dwelling, therefore carrying the same language and allowing for the same aesthetic to be followed in any future development on the neighbours behalf.

 

The proposal is only 800mm over the LEP required external wall height and this compromise seems appropriate when it is taken into consideration that the building is trying to retain the same character and for to it’s adjacent neighbour in shape and roof pitch. This is also consistent with the pitched roof forms of the streetscape.

 

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

 

The external wall height of 7.8m arises because of the continuation of the party wall to maintain and match the roof pitch of the adjoining semi detached dwellings which also have upper level additions and also to provide for a party wall between the two semi detached dwellings which complies with the prescriptive building standard of party walls between semi detached dwellings to maintain fire separation between the two dwellings. Therefore, the departure from the external wall height standard does not result because of an unreasonable or inappropriate building design and is a result from the nature of party wall standard and the reasonable anticipation that a future upper level addition to the adjoining would seek to match the established roof form of the other semi detached dwellings in this group.

 

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 building height 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 and there is no public benefit in maintaining the control.

 

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 building height 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.

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

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

 

Issue

Comment

55 Melrose Parade Clovelly

-There are concerns that the proposed rear balcony will result in a significant intrusion into the privacy and amenity of their rear yard unless some screening is provided.

 

51 Melrose Parade Clovelly

-There are concerns that the overall height of the proposed development will tower over their back yard and block out views of the sky towards the south. A suggestion is that the roof pitch be reduced and roof form altered to a hip at the rear to reduce the visual mass and impacts to their property.

 

 

A condition of consent is recommended to require the installation of a privacy screen to the rear balcony to prevent direct overlooking into the adjoining rear yards.

 

 

A condition is recommended to require that the rear portion of the roof be redesigned to incorporate a hipped roof instead of the proposed gable to reduce the visual impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties.

 

7.    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

36%

No see comment below

25m² of private open space provided.

41m2 +

Yes

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

6m x 6.9m

Yes

Open space behind the building line.

Yes

20% of the site area is permeable.

1%

See comments below

 

The existing landscaping is almost entirely hard surface by way of formalised paving to the side and rear and concrete driveway to the front of the property. The impact upon the existing landscaped area is by the enclosure of the small courtyard area which reduces the area of landscaping by 5sqm.

The area of landscaping does not meet the minimum preferred solution, however the area provided satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP in that it will provide for a usable area of outdoor recreation and private open space for the occupants of the building and in addition does not reduce the area by any significant amount. In relation to the soft landscaping there is no change from the existing acknowledged substantial non compliance with the preferred solution minimum.

 

 

Floor area

(Site area 237m2) maximum FSR 0.65:1 

0.78:1

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. In any case, FSR is controlled by LEP development standards in this case.

 

 

Height, Form & Materials

External wall height maximum 7m

7.8m

No, see comment below

Cut or fill maximum 1m.

 

N/A

No excavation within 900 mm of a side boundary.

 

N/A

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

 

N/A

 

The external wall height of the dwelling exceeds the preferred solution of the DCP, however in this instance there are no objections as the external wall height arises because of the design of the addition to accommodate a future upper level addition to the adjoining semi detached dwelling which would maintain the character of these group of dwellings. As noted above in the SEPP 1 FSR discussion the position of the upper level is somewhat unusual being to the front of the dwelling, however the precedent of the other four dwellings in this group which have had upper level additions that extend to the front of the dwelling cannot sustain an argument that the design would be out of keeping with the existing streetscape character.

 

 

Building setbacks

Front setback average of adjoining dwellings or 6m

No change

N/A

Rear boundary setback at least 4.5m

No change

N/A

Side setbacks be 900mm at ground level.

1265mm to northern side boundary.

Yes

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

Up to the southern side and 1357mm from northern side boundaries

See below

 

The southern 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 northern side boundary there will not be any impact to the adjoining dwelling at the setback is opposite a driveway to an adjoining multi unit housing development and will therefore not have any impact upon light and ventilation to that dwelling.

 

 

Privacy

The proposal includes an upper level balcony to the rear off the master bedroom, there is a potential for direct overlooking into the private outdoor living areas of the adjoining dwellings and a condition of consent is recommended to require the provision of a privacy screen to both sides of the balcony. The new balcony to the existing garage roof overlooks the street and front yard areas only and will not result in any impact to private living and out door areas.

 

 

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.

 No additional overshadowing to the north facing windows of the nearby dwelling.

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

 

See comments below

 

 

There will be some additional overshadowing onto the adjoining properties, however the extent of overshadowing is unavoidable and not unreasonable as it arises because of the orientation of the sites on an east west axis rather than because of any unacceptable design. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

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 20 E, F & G of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to Landscaping, Floor Space Ratio and External Wall heights respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 644/2011 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling at 2 Lowe Street, Clovelly 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

DA00 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA01 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA02 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA03 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA04 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA05 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA06 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

DA07 Revision B

SM

28.10.11

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

 

A119808

23 August 2011

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.       The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a.     A privacy screen having a height of 1.8m above the floor level of the balcony must be provided to northern side of the rear balcony. The privacy screen must be constructed of metal or timber and the total area of any openings within the privacy screen must not exceed 25% of the area of the screen.  Alternatively, the privacy screen may be constructed with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing in a suitable frame.

b.     The roof form of the rear addition is to be amended to incorporate a hipped roof instead of the proposed gable to reduce the visual impact of the rear portion of the dwelling from the adjoining properties.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

The following conditions of consent must be complied with before a ‘Construction Certificate’ is issued by either Randwick City Council or an Accredited Certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be included in the documentation for the construction certificate.

 

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

3.       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

4.       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.

 

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 $300,000 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $3,000.00.

       

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.

 

Long Service Levy Payments

6.       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

7.       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).

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

The requirements contained in the following conditions of consent must be complied with and details of compliance must be included in the construction certificate for the development.

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

8.       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

9.       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 floor addition.

 

Smoke Alarms

10.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia (volume 2) smoke alarms must comply with AS3786.  Smoke alarms must 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.

 

BASIX Requirements

11.     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.

 

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.

 

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 on site.

 

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 (including asbestos)

·        Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·        Details of re-use, recycling and disposal of waste demolition/building materials

·        Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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.     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 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.

 

21.     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.

 

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.

 

Inspections During Construction

22.     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).

 

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”.

 

Restriction on Working Hours

24.     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.

 

Demolition Work Requirements

25.     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

26.     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.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

27.     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

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

 

·           Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials, construction equipment or other articles must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time.

·           The road, footpath, vehicular crossing and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe, clean condition and free from any excavations, obstructions, trip hazards, goods, materials, soils or debris at all times.  Any damage caused to the road, footway, vehicular crossing, nature strip or any public place must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

·           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.

·           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.

·           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.

 

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

29.     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.