Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 14 February 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          14 February 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 14 February 2012 at 6:00pm.

 

 

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

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members

 

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

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 6 December 2011

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Urgent Business

Planning Matters

 

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

 

Development Application Reports (record of voting required)

D1/12       128 Marine Parade, Maroubra (DA/618/2010/A) (DEFERRED)

D2/12       32-34 Grosvenor St, Kensington (DA/618/2011)

D3/12       1609-1611 Anzac Parade, La Perouse (DA/76/2009/A)

D4/12       16 Houston Road, Kensington (DA/518/2011)

D5/12       28 The Avenue, Randwick (DA/646/2011)

D6/12       80 Alison Road, Randwick (DA/611/2011)

D7/12       52 Milroy Avenue, Kensington (DA/1048/2010/A)

D8/12       16 Walenore Avenue, Kingsford (DA/641/2011)

D9/12       18-20 Stanley Street, Randwick (DA/891/2008/D)

D10/12      87 St Marks Road, Randwick (DA/367/2008/C)

D11/12      8-10 Wood Street, Randwick (DA/225/2004/B)

D12/12      1 Meagher Avenue, Maroubra (DA/29/1990/A)

D13/12      50 Milroy Avenue, Kensington (DA/783/2011)

D14/12      JRPP - 1408 Anzac Parade, Little Bay (DA/812/2011)

D15/12      JRPP - 330 Anzac Parade, Kensington - UNSW (DA/748/2011)

Miscellaneous Report

M1/12       Recent Land & Environment Court Decisions

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                          14 February 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D1/12

 

 

Subject:                  128 Marine Parade, Maroubra (DA/618/2010/A)

Folder No:                   DA/618/2010/A

Author:                   Adrian McKeown, Environmental Planning Assessment Officer     

 

Introduction

 

The S96 application was reported to Council at it’s meeting held on 6 December 2011. At the meeting it was resolved:

 

“(Andrews/Seng): that the application be deferred in accordance with the Applicant’s request.”

 

Issues

 

The applicant stated in a letter to Council dated 1 December 2011 that Council’s Assessing Officer had not been able to assess the full extent of the potential view loss from the subject balconies due to building works which were being undertaken at the time. The applicant requested that the application be deferred so that Councillors can conduct a site visit to view the completed balconies.

 

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.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The application is referred back to Council for its consideration.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/618/2010 for the modification of the approved development to amend conditions 2 and 3 relating to the provision of privacy screens, provide privacy screens to the western end of all south facing balconies and construct a garbage receptacle enclosure adjacent to the eastern side of the building for 128 Marine Parade, Maroubra in the following manner:

 

A.        Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 07/10 1 of 10, 2 of 10, 3 of 10, 4 of 10, 5 of 10, 6 of 10, 7 of 10, 8 of 10, 9 of 10 and 10 of 10, dated 16/07/10 and received by Council on 4 August 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans and as amended by the Section 96 plans numbered dwg No. 07/10 of 1-7 (Issue A-S96), dated 12/10/2011 and received by Council on 12 October 2011 only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

B.        Amend Conditions Nos 2 and 3 as follows:

2.       Privacy screens shall be provided along the entire edge of the balconies for units 4 and 7 facing 130B Marine Parade. The privacy screens shall be constructed from balcony floor to ceiling height between the southern wall of the units and the approved southern pylon. The privacy screens between the approved southern pylon and the southern end of the approved balconies shall be constructed to a maximum height of 1.6m above balcony floor level. The Construction Certificate plans shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

3.       The privacy screens for units 1, 4 and 7, between the southern wall of the units and the approved southern pylon, shall be fixed in place to a height of 1.6m above balcony floor level and may be operable above this height. The privacy screen between the approved southern pylon and the southern end of the approved balcony must be fixed in place and must not be operable. The Construction Certificate plans shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

C.        Add new Condition No. 26 to read as follows:

26.     The privacy screens to must be constructed from louvres which are fixed at an angle to prevent the direct overlooking of adjoining dwellings.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Development Application Report No. D181/11

 

 

 

 


Development Application Report No. D181/11

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D181/11

 

 

Subject:                  128 Marine Parade, Maroubra (DA/618/2010/A)

Folder No:                   DA/618/2010/A

Author:                   Adrian McKeown, Environmental Planning Assessment Officer

Proposal:                     Section 96 application to amend conditions 2 and 3 relating to the provision of privacy screens, provide privacy screens to the western end of all south facing balconies and construct a garbage receptacle enclosure adjacent to the eastern side of the building

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Classic Plans

Owner:                         SP No. 94

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1. Executive Summary

 

On 14 December 2010, consent was granted at an Ordinary Council Meeting for alterations to the existing multi-unit building including the reconstruction of front balconies, alterations to windows and balustrades, a new front entry canopy, an awning over the roof terrace and internal basement works. Conditions of consent were included to ensure that the proposal did not result in an unacceptable impact on the neighbouring dwellings at 130B Maritime Parade with regard to visual privacy.

 

The s96(2) application was notified to the surrounding properties and 1 objection was received. The objection raised visual privacy as the main impact of the proposed amendments to the approved plans.

 

The application is recommended for approval however a condition is recommended that the privacy screens be installed such that they are fixed to a height of 1.6m as measured from the approved deck height.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The original consent included the following conditions regarding Visual Privacy:

 

2.       Privacy screens shall be provided along the entire edge of the balconies for units 4 and 7 facing 130B Marine Parade. The Construction Certificate plans shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

3.       The privacy screens for units 1, 4 and 7 shall be fixed in place and must not be operable. The Construction Certificate plans shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

The Section 96(2) Application seeks consent to delete conditions 2 and 3 relating to the provision of privacy screens. Instead, it is proposed to provide privacy screens to the western end of all south facing balconies which are fixed to a height of 1.2m and which do not extend for the full depth of the balconies. It is also proposed to construct a garbage receptacle enclosure adjacent to the eastern side of the building.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Marine Parade between Bond Street and Maroubra Road in Maroubra. The site is currently occupied by an existing 4 storey multi-unit housing development.  The site has a frontage width of 21 m, a side boundary depth of 52.5 m and has an overall site area of 681.6 m² (approx). Neighbouring the property to the east is a 4 storey multi-unit housing development (128 Marine Parade) and to the west is a 3 storey multi-unit housing development (130B Marine Parade).  The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of 1 and 2 storey free standing dwelling houses and multi-unit housing developments.

 

Figure 1:  Multi-unit dwelling development on the subject site –under renovation.

4.    Site History

 

DA/618/2010 – Council granted consent on 14 December 2010 for alterations to the existing multi-unit building including the reconstruction of front balconies, alterations to windows and balustrades, a new front entry canopy, an awning over the roof terrace and internal basement works.

 

Prior applications to Council relate to the strata sub-division of the site (1962); alterations and additions to the residential flat building (1979) and for the construction of the residential flat building (1961).

 

5.    Section 96 Assessment:

 

Under the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the following criteria has been complied with:-

 

5.1      Substantially the Same Development:

The proposal does not involve any significant changes to the approved built form, floor space or landscaped area provision on site. Therefore, the modified development is considered to be substantially the same development as that for which the consent was originally granted.

 

5.2      Notification and Consideration of Submissions:

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

 

Units 1, 3 & 5/130B Marine Parade, Maroubra

Issue

Comment

The original approval was granted with a condition of consent to provide screens to the western end of the balconies. I was happy with this outcome as the condition would protect the visual privacy of the units I own – units 1, 3 and 5 of 130B Marine Parade.

 

The current proposal will result in an unacceptable outcome with regard to visual privacy.  Objection is raised to the following arguments provided within the submitted Statement of Environmental Effects:

·      The privacy impact already exists; that is, existed prior to the current building works commencing;

·      The conditions are unreasonable for the occupants of the subject dwellings;

·      The capacity for overlooking is entirely mutual;

·      Adjustable louvres are required to provide solar access to the subject units;

·      The conditioned privacy screens will add to the visual bulk of the building by providing an additional ‘wall’;

·      The louvres will unreasonably affect a view from the subject units to the south-west over Maroubra Beach; and

·      The louvres will unreasonably affect air flow to the units.

Noted.

 

 

 

 

See further discussion below - Part 9.1.

 

 

5.3      Support

No submissions were received in support of the application. 

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

No referrals are required.

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

The subject site has an area of less than 10,000 square metres and is not subject to Clause 40A of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

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.

 

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 2C under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent. The following clauses of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) are applicable to the development:

 

Clause 12 - Zone No 2C (Residential C Zone)

 

The site is zoned 2C Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.  The proposal (as recommended to be conditioned) will result in a development which will be consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas; and which will protect the amenity of existing residents.

Clause 20E   Landscaped area

Development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No 2C must provide a minimum of 50% of the total site area as landscaped area. The proposed enclosure of an existing garbage storage area will not further decrease the existing landscaped area within the site.

Clause 20G Building Heights

The maximum building height for buildings other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house within a 2C zone is 12 metres measured vertically from any point on ground level. This current application does not propose to increase the approved maximum building height.

 

Clause 29  Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

The consent authority may only grant consent to a building within the foreshore scenic protection area after it has considered the probable aesthetic appearance of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore. The proposed changes to the approved privacy screens will result in a residential flat building which will have a minimal impact upon the visual appearance of the foreshore.

 

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

The application is not inconsistent with proposed amendments to the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 (Consolidation) for definitions relating to ‘dwelling house’, ‘attached dual occupancy’ and ‘multi-unit housing’.

 

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

The proposal generally satisfies the preferred solutions in the Multi-Unit Housing DCP, except where discussed in Part 8.1.1 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 (as recommended to be conditioned) is consistent with the dominant residential character in the locality. The proposal is not considered to result in detrimental social or economic impacts on the locality.

 

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

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

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

 

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

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

The proposal (as recommended to be conditioned) 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.

 

 

8.1 Policy Controls

8.1.1   Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing

 

Issue Comment

 

Issue Comment

Height 

 

 

 

The proposed changes to the privacy screens will not increase the existing height of the building.

Privacy

 

The proposal has the potential to affect current levels of privacy to the locality, particularly for the residential units located to the west of the subject building. See further discussion below - Part 9.1.

 

View sharing

 

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

 

Solar Access & Energy Efficiency   

 

 

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

 

 

8.2 Council Policies

No Council policies are relevant to the proposal.

 

9.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

9.1      Visual Privacy

The Objectives of the DCP with regards to visual and acoustic privacy are to ensure that new development is designed so that its occupants enjoy visual and acoustic privacy and that the new development respects the existing level of privacy of adjoining and nearby properties. The Performance Requirements within the DCP include that windows and balconies of main living areas are to be located to avoid overlooking of similar windows in adjoining dwellings and areas of private open space and that areas of private open space are designed and located to ensure a high level of user privacy.

 

A preferred solution is included that screens are to be used to prevent overlooking and improve privacy and that where there is a horizontal separation of less than 10 metres between windows, they should be offset, angled or screened to reduce potential privacy impacts. A sill level of 1.6 metres above floor level provides satisfactory protection for overlooking. The previous assessment by Council’s Assessing Officer noted that the proposal did not comply with the preferred solution within the DCP and therefore recommended that conditions 2 & 3 be included to address privacy concerns.

 

It is proposed that the conditions of consent should be amended to provide adjustable louvres to the upper portions of the approved privacy screens and to decrease the approved height of the privacy screen to the south of the pylon (to 1.6m). The proposed amendment to the conditions 2 and 3 will improve the amenity of the subject units by allowing adjustable louvres, thereby increasing the ambient light and air flow within the units whilst maintaining the privacy into the adjoining units at 130B Marine Parade.

 

Nevertheless it is noted that the applicant provided the following justifications for the proposal to construct the privacy screens to the southern pylon only and to have the privacy screens fixed to a height of 1.2m:

 

1.     The overlooking of the units at 130B Marine Parade existed prior to the approval of the modified balconies. No record exists within Council’s archives (as far as we are aware) of any complaints from the residents of 130B Marine Parade regarding visual privacy;

 

Officer comment:

Whilst it is acknowledged that there was some mutual overlooking between the subject units and those at 130B Marine Parade prior to the approval of the modified balconies, the approved works had the effect of relocating the privacy impact significantly closer to the east-facing windows for the units at 130B Marine Parade (less than 10m). The assessment during the previous application of the privacy impact identified this as an issue which lead to the conditions of consent being recommended.

 

2.     The issue of overlooking is entirely mutual in that the residents of 130B Marine Parade look into the subject units from their kitchens. The privacy screens were therefore conditioned by council’s Assessing Officer out of concern for the residents of all of the adjacent dwellings;

 

Officer comment:

The issue of the mutual overlooking between the private open spaces for the subject site (the extended balconies) and to the internal living areas for the units at 130B Marine Parade was identified during the previous assessment undertaken by Council. Suitable conditions of consent regarding privacy screens were then recommended to ensure that the occupants of all of the affected dwellings were afforded the appropriate levels of visual privacy.

 

3.     The subject balconies are south-facing. The inclusion of adjustable louvres is therefore considered necessary to ensure solar access to the subject residential units;

 

Officer comment:

The conditions are recommended to be amended such that the privacy screens are adjustable above a height of 1.6m. This will ensure increased solar access to the subject balconies and internal living areas whilst maintaining suitable levels of privacy within the adjoining dwellings.

 

4.     The conditioned privacy screens will add to the perceived visual bulk of the subject building as viewed from neighbouring residential units and will compromise the architectural integrity of the subject building;

 

 

Officer comment:

The conditioned privacy screens will be consistent with privacy screens within the locality (see Figures 2 & 3 below) and will be constructed using materials which will not adversely affect the visual bulk of architectural integrity of the subject building.

 

5.     The views towards the south and east from the subject balconies (over Maroubra Beach) will be unreasonably affected by the imposed privacy screens;

 

Officer comment:

The proposed changes to the approved privacy screens will ensure that the primary existing views will be maintained from within the subject units whilst ensuring that suitable levels of visual privacy are maintained for the occupants of the adjoining units at 130B Marine Parade.

 

6.     The imposed privacy screens will limit airflow into the subject units and adjustable louvres will improve the flow of air into the units;

 

Officer comment:

Privacy screens which are adjustable above a height of 1.6m will improve the flow of air into the units.

 

7.     The imposed privacy screens is an excessive response by Council to the detriment of the amenity of the subject units.

 

Officer comment:

The privacy screens are recommended to be amended to maintain not only the amenity of the subject units but to also to ensure that suitable levels of visual privacy are maintained for the occupants of the adjoining units at 130B Marine Parade.

 

9.2      Visual Bulk, Height Form and Materials

The conditioned privacy screens will be consistent with privacy screens within the locality and will be constructed using materials which will not adversely affect the visual bulk of architectural integrity of the subject building (see Figures 2 & 3 below). The proposal to enclose the approved garbage receptacle area will not contribute unreasonably to the perceived visual bulk of the building as viewed from the streetscape and from adjoining residences.

 

  

 

Figures 2 & 3:  Existing buildings within the locality utilising louvred screens.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4          Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4A:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

 

Financial Impact Statement

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

The proposal complies with the objectives and performance requirements of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP and is consistent with the objectives and performance requirements of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). If approved, the proposed development would not result in any unreasonable or significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the character of the locality.

 

Recommendation

That Council, as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/618/2010 for the modification of the approved development to amend conditions 2 and 3 relating to the provision of privacy screens, provide privacy screens to the western end of all south facing balconies and construct a garbage receptacle enclosure adjacent to the eastern side of the building for 128 Marine Parade, Maroubra in the following manner:

A.        Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 07/10 1 of 10, 2 of 10, 3 of 10, 4 of 10, 5 of 10, 6 of 10, 7 of 10, 8 of 10, 9 of 10 and 10 of 10, dated 16/07/10 and received by Council on 4 August 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans and as amended by the Section 96 plans numbered dwg No. 07/10 of 1-7 (Issue A-S96), dated 12/10/2011 and received by Council on 12 October 2011 only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

B.        Amend Conditions Nos 2 and 3 as follows:

2.       Privacy screens shall be provided along the entire edge of the balconies for units 4 and 7 facing 130B Marine Parade. The privacy screens shall be constructed from balcony floor to ceiling height between the southern wall of the units and the approved southern pylon. The privacy screens between the approved southern pylon and the southern end of the approved balconies shall be constructed to a maximum height of 1.6m above balcony floor level. The Construction Certificate plans shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

3.       The privacy screens for units 1, 4 and 7, between the southern wall of the units and the approved southern pylon, shall be fixed in place to a height of 1.6m above balcony floor level and may be operable above this height. The privacy screen between the approved southern pylon and the southern end of the approved balcony must be fixed in place and must not be operable. The Construction Certificate plans shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

C.        Add new Conditions 26 to read as follows:

26.     The privacy screens to must be constructed from louvres which are fixed at an angle to prevent the direct overlooking of adjoining dwellings.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          14 February 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D2/12

 

 

Subject:                  32-34 Grosvenor St, Kensington (DA/618/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/618/2011

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing structures and construction of a part 3 and part 4 storey multi unit housing development including an above ground parking level with 12 car spaces, 11 dwelling units over 3 levels and associated works

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Level Orange Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Mr A Alexandrou & Mrs  M Alexandrou

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.      Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as a development exceeding $2M in value.

 

The original proposal was for demolition of existing structures and construction of a 4 storey multi unit housing development including an above ground parking level with 13 spaces, 12 dwelling units over 3 levels and associated works. 

 

Following concerns raised by Council and the Design Review Panel (DRP) regarding density, bulk and scale, efficiency, amenity impacts and aesthetics, amended plans were submitted on 11 November 2011 essentially incorporating amendments to address the issues raised. In particular, the following amendments mark significant improvements in the design and amenity of the proposal:

 

§  Deletion of a visually intrusive screen wall on the Grosvenor Street frontage to conceal front services, stairs and lift and replacement with a lighter façade element that is integrated with a rationalised stair, lift and entry area.

§  Deletion of the topmost unit on the western side resulting in a stepped built form from the western boundary with the top floor set back by a maximum 6.7m from the western boundary to respect the adjoining western building at No 28-30 Grosvenor Street as well as to reduce visual bulk and scale to the streetscape. 

§  Replanning of the two central units on each floor to improve their function and livability.

§  Recessing of the rear balconies in the central units so as to provide light and air to the on-grade parking and a reasonable setback to the side boundary of the adjoining northern property.

§  Provision of landscaped breaks in the at-grade surface parking area to allow tree plantings in deep soil that project outwards to the north and integrating these with mesh plantings on the northern wall of the car park thus softening the presentation of this wall as viewed from the adjoining properties and from Lorne Avenue.

§  Realignment of the building with the car parking footprint to provide for a more efficient building configuration and to reduce cantilevering elements which would be detrimental to landscaped areas and building design.

 

These amended plans of the 11 November 2011 are the subject of this report, and are considered to be satisfactory, addressing not only the bulk and scale issues, but also showing an improved overall proposal in relation to density, aesthetics and energy efficiency. As the amended plans represent an improvement in design and amenity impacts over the original plans, the amended plans were not required to be notified and advertised.

 

The amended proposal has an FSR of 0.92:1 compared with the maximum 0.9:1 FSR standard applicable under the Randwick LEP 1998. The amended proposal also has a maximum building and external wall height of 12.9m over the main roof slab which varies from the maximum building height standard of 12m and maximum wall standard of 10m under the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) objections have been lodged in support of these variations to the FSR and external wall height standards. The SEPP 1 Objections have been assessed and found acceptable as the proposal will not detract from the existing medium density character of its specific location typically comprising a pocket of multi-unit housing including 1970’s three to four storey walk-ups on the common side of Grosvenor Street, and large duplexes and dwelling houses towards the eastern end of Grosvenor Street. The amended building will be compatible in height, bulk and scale to adjoining properties as the upper floor (that is, Level 3) has been compressed and significantly setback from the front and western side boundaries, and the front façade element to Grosvenor Street has been lowered and made lighter with a rationalised stair, lift and entry area. Finally, the proposal will create additional floor area and building and wall height that will not negatively impact upon the amenity of adjoining and surrounding uses in terms of privacy, solar access, views and visual bulk and scale impacts as assessed in relevant sections of this report. Additionally, the proposal is consistent with the planning objectives for the locality and purposes of the standard as detailed in Sections 5 and 10.1 below.

 

It should also be noted that the height encroachment is largely due to the flood levels provided by Council engineers that require the ground floor to be approximately 1.6m above street level to protect against the 1 in 100 year flood. Notwithstanding this, the amended proposal has a reasonable and acceptable bulk, scale and massing consistent with adjoining and surrounding development while accommodating and balancing the site’s flooding constraints (namely, the need for higher ground level to meet flood protection and free board levels as required by Council’s engineers).

 

The proposal generally complies with the performance requirements of the DCP – Multi-unit Housing (with the exception of the FSR and height controls which have been assessed as part of the SEPP 1 Objection).

 

The proposal also does not comply with the numerical car parking requirement of the DCP – Car parking having a shortfall of 3 car spaces. The variation has been assessed in relevant sections of the report and are considered justified in the circumstances.

 

Four objectors have raised issues relating to height, bulk and scale, loss of privacy, view loss, increased traffic and non-compliance with development standards. The objectors’ issues are addressed in relevant sections of this report.

 

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 current amended proposal lodged on 11 November 2011 includes the following elements:

 

·      demolition of existing structures dwelling on-site;

·      construction of multi-unit residential building with part 3 and part 4 levels containing the following:

Groundfloor:        Car park containing 12 carapaces, foyer, lift and garbage room

Level 1:              2 x 2-bedroom unit and 2 x 1 bedroom unit

Level 2:              2 x 2-bedroom unit and 2 x 1 bedroom unit

Level 3:              2 x 2 bedroom unit and 1 x 1 bedroom unit

·      landscaping.

 

3.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located within an established residential area on the corner of Grosvenor Street and Lorne Avenue in Kensington just outside the boundary of the Kensington Town Centre.

 

The site comprises 2 existing lots and forms an “L” shape totalling an area of 708m2. It is generally flat and does not contain any significant vegetation. There is, however, a row of mature trees located on the street verge on Lorne Avenue.

 

Two separate dwellings are currently located on the site. The one at 32 Grosvenor Street is a single storey brick cottage with a double garage also located at the rear; the other at 34 Grosvenor Street is a two storey detached dwelling with a double garage and an in-ground pool to the side facing Lorne Avenue.

 

The locality is a mixed-use residential area that comprises a range of predominantly 4 storey residential flat buildings and single dwelling houses along Grosvenor Street as well as existing student housing and some commercial development along Anzac Parade.

 

Immediately to the north at No. 2A Lorne Avenue is a two-storey detached dwelling which fronts on to Lorne Avenue.  It is set only approximately 1m from its side and rear boundaries and only has openings on its east and west elevations; there are no openings on the southern elevation adjacent to the proposed development. Further north is a 4 storey residential flat building and beyond is Kensington Town Centre which is undergoing gradual redevelopment.

 

To the south of the site is Grosvenor Street, across which is land zoned Residential 2A under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and consisting of traditional pre-war single storey detached dwellings.

 

The eastern boundary of the site faces Lorne Avenue, across which is located the Unilodge development, a 5 storey student accommodation structure.

 

To the west at No. 28-30 Grosvenor Street west is a four storey residential flat building.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing dwelling houses at Nos. 32 and 34 Grosvenor Street (centre).

2. Adjoining residential flat building to the west at No. 28 Grosvenor Street


 

3. Residential flat building on the opposite side of Lorne Avenue at No 1A-3 Lorne Avenue (centre).  

4. Residential dwellings on the southern side of Grosvenor Street.

 

Figure 5 : Aerial view of the subject site

 

4.      Site History

Previous applications submitted for development at no. 32 include:

Development No.

Description

Determination

DA/544/2008

Partial demolition of existing dwellings and the construction of a 3 storey, 25 room boarding house and 4 parking spaces at No. 32 and 34.

Approved 2 December 2008

DA/24/1984

First floor additions to existing dwelling and conversion to dual occupancy at No. 32.

Refused 29 Mar 1984

DA/137/1984

First floor additions to existing dwelling and conversion to dual occupancy at No. 32

Refused 28 Jun 1984

BA/913/1983

New dwelling at No. 34

Approved 1983

BA/1186/1989

Swimming pool at No. 34

Approved 03 Nov 1989

 

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 0.9:1 (for sites in excess of 700 sqm) is applicable to the subject site (having a site area of 708 sqm) pursuant to Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposed multi-unit housing development will result in an FSR of 0.92:1 (654 sqm).

 

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 excess floor area, amounting to 17 sqm, is considered minor and only marginally exceeds the standard. It will be suitably distributed throughout the proposed building mass such that it would have a height, bulk and scale (maximum roof RL of 37.685) consistent with the height of existing development at this eastern end of Grosvenor Street immediately adjoining/surrounding the subject site especially comprising residential flat buildings at No. 24-26 and No. 28-30 Grosvenor Street and significantly lower than the height of the existing developments on the eastern side of Lorne Avenue at No. 1A-3 Lorne Avenue (multi-unit residential) and No. 159-171 Anzac Parade (student housing).  Accordingly, the proposed development will not be visually intrusive and will not read as an overdevelopment in the existing streetscape and locality.

 

·      The proposed multiunit housing development will have adequate landscape area (357.2 sqm or 50% of site area) which complies with the minimum 50% requirement under Clause 20E (2) of the Randwick LEP 1998, all of which will be deep soil as no basement podium is proposed which complies with the maximum 50% limit under Clause 20E (3) of the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

·      The proposal will replace existing dwelling houses (one of which being two storeys in height has a significant height, bulk and scale) in separate dispersed footprints that currently results in a fragmentation of the existing built forms and their respective landscape areas. In comparison, the proposal will have a compact footprint allowing for the “dog-leg” section of the subject site to be retained solely for common landscaped open space resulting in an overall compliant landscape area of 50% (357.2 sqm).  As such, the proposed development will not introduce a new intrusive built form into the streetscape but rather replace two existing buildings with one, new and contemporary, built form that will be compatible in bulk and scale with existing residential flat building immediately surrounding the subject site.

 

·      In terms of scale, the proposed height provides a stepped modulation from the adjoining western property at No 28-30 Grosvenor Street; is appropriate for its context acting as a “bookend” element at this eastern end of Grosvenor Street, being consistent with the bulk, scale and character of the streetscape with its pocket of residential flat buildings immediately surrounding the subject site. In particular, the upper most floor, Level 3, has been further setback to a maximum 6.7m from the western boundary in respect of the adjoining western building at No 28-30 Grosvenor Street as well as to reduce visual bulk and scale to the streetscape. 

 

·      The proposal will be consistent with the objectives of the Residential 2C zone in which the site is located as primarily it will contribute towards maintaining a medium density residential environment, contribute towards the variety of housing types in the area; and provide housing opportunities in a location that is highly accessible and is well serviced; is designed to ensure that no unreasonable adverse environmental impacts on adjoining properties in respect to overshadowing, visual and acoustic privacy and views; and is appropriately designed and landscaped to be compatible with adjacent residential developments and the existing environmental character.

 

·      The proposal will not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas in terms of privacy, solar access, views and bulk and scale impacts as indicated in relevant assessment sections of this report.

 

In conclusion, the proposal has adequately addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standard and the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The SEPP 1 objection has 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 immediate specific location containing predominantly medium to high density residential flat developments typically 1970’s three to four storey walk-ups and large apartment and multi-storey student accommodation buildings. 

 

·      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 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 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. 

 

 

·      Maximum Building and External Wall Height (Clause 20G)

The proposal seeks a variation to the maximum building height and maximum external wall height. The proposal has a maximum building and external wall height of 12.9m over the main roof slab. These exceed the maximum building and external wall height standards of 12m and 10m respectively as specified in Clause 20G Randwick LEP 1998.

 

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 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 the following arguments in support of the SEPP1 Objection:

 

 

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

 

·      The maximum breach in building and external wall height of 12.9m over the main roof slab is considered moderate as the breach will not read as a dominant element nor a visually intrusive increase in bulk and scale. As indicated above, the proposal also has a marginal breach in FSR of 17 sqm. Accordingly, the proposal will not be out of character with the medium density nature of development in the vicinity of the subject site.

·      The breach of the building and wall height limit over the main roof top is warranted as it does not create excessive visual bulk and scale and is not considered intrusive or dominant. Accordingly, the proposal will be consistent in height with the adjoining residential flat building at No. 24-26 and No. 28-30 Grosvenor Street and significantly lower than the height of the existing developments on the eastern side of Lorne Avenue at No. 1A-3 Lorne Avenue and No. 159-171 Anzac Parade as shown in the streetscape perspective below.

·      The top floor of the proposal will be setback by a maximum 6.7m from the western boundary to respect the adjoining western building at No 28-30 Grosvenor Street as well as to reduce visual bulk and scale to the streetscape.  As such, the proposed development will not introduce a new intrusive built form into the streetscape but rather will be consistent with the height, bulk and scale of adjoining and surrounding multi-unit housing development along Grosvenor Street. Accordingly, the proposed development will not be visually intrusive and will not read as an overdevelopment in the existing streetscape and locality.

·      The proposed multiunit housing development will have adequate landscape area (357.2 sqm or 50% of site area) which complies with the minimum 50% requirement under Clause 20E (2) of the Randwick LEP 1998, all of which will be deep soil as no landscaping over the basement car park is proposed which complies also with the maximum 50% over podium limit under Clause 20E (3) of the Randwick LEP 1998.

·      The proposal will make landscaping an integral part of the redevelopment of the subject site by providing an enhanced landscaped area which will serve as a recreational as well as a screening/softening element for the proposed development. In particular, the innovative use of landscape breaks in the car park extending and transforming outwards as future creepers on mesh along the northern car park wall (see schematic wall planting in Figure 5 below showing before and after treatment); terraced landscaped levels in the “dog leg” rear yard and mixed shrub and fern plantings along the Lorne Avenue and Grosvenor Street frontage will mark a significant improvement to the existing low quality landscaping on-site.

 

 

Figure 5: Schematic wall treatment for the proposed northern car park wall with creeper planting on wall mesh showing before and after treatment

 

·      The proposal provides an appropriate visual transition between the higher existing development to the east (at No 1A-3 Lorne Avenue and No. 159-171 Anzac Parade) and the moderately lower scaled building to the west along the northern side of Grosvenor Street. 

·      The proposed new building will make a positive contribution to the Grosvenor Street streetscape and locality providing a higher aesthetic quality and design than that currently exhibited by the existing buildings on site without being visually intrusive or dominant. In particular, the proposal’s use of a flat roof form provides an overall contemporary well-articulated and well-modulated building that not only moderates the visual bulk and scale of the proposal but also contributes to the streetscape by providing a building that is compatible in building bulk and scale as well as roof ridge levels.

·      The proposed non-compliance do not result in any inconsistencies with the objectives of the Residential 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 height encroachment is largely due to the flood levels provided by Council engineers that require the ground floor to be approximately 1.6m above street level to protect against the 1 in 100 year flood. Notwithstanding this, the amended proposal has a reasonable and acceptable bulk, scale and massing consistent with adjoining and surrounding development while accommodating and balancing the site’s flooding constraints (namely, the need for higher ground level to meet flood protection and free board levels as required by Council’s development engineer).

·      The breach the wall and building height standards results in a building envelope whose location and orientation will not give rise to any significant adverse visual bulk and scale, overshadowing impacts, view loss, privacy or visual or streetscape impacts on adjoining and surrounding properties as indicated in relevant parts of this report.

 

The proposal satisfies the purpose of the building 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 standards 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 building and 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 2C 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.

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The proposal was advertised and notified from 13 April to 2 May 2011 in accordance with the requirements of the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. Council has received 7 submissions objecting to the proposal. A signed petition was also received with 100 signatures objecting to the proposal. The issues raised in the submissions are detailed and addressed below:

 


Non-compliant FSR and building height will be greater than those of existing buildings in Grosvenor Street

Comment: As indicated in the assessment of the SEPP 1 Objections above, the proposal will have a visual bulk and scale that is not considered to be out of character in the context of existing development in adjoining and surrounding land on Grosvenor Street, and is not considered to result in any detrimental impact on the amenity of adjoining residents. In this regard, assessment of the SEPP 1 Objections lodge in relation to the breach in FSR and building/external wall heights shows that it is well founded and strict compliance with these standard would be unreasonable and unnecessary. Additionally, the proposal only marginally exceed the maximum permissible FSR of 0.9:1 (637.1 sqm) with a proposed FSR of 0.92:1 (654 sqm), being an increase of 0.2:1 or 17 sqm. The variation in building and wall height over the main roof at 12.92m compared with the maximum building and wall height standards of 12m and 10m respectively, is considered reasonable especially given the need to provide for an at-grade car park due to flooding levels.

 

Inadequate front setback

The front setback to Grosvenor Street will range from a minimum 1m to a maximum 3m which is considered reasonable for the following reasons:

 

·      The amended plans have significantly increased the front setback of the proposal to Grosvenor Street to maximum 3m by deleting the originally proposed intrusive screen wall on the Grosvenor Street frontage and reducing the area of the front services, stairs and lift and replacing all these with a lighter façade element and smaller stair, lift and entry area at a minimum setback of 1m. The effect of this is to provide more front setback area for landscaping thus softening and complementing the presentation of the building to Grosvenor Street.

 

·      The proposed maximum 3m front setback to Grosvenor is appropriate for a corner allotment such as the subject site and reinforces the building at the corner with Lorne Avenue without being intrusive or dominant. Accordingly, the proposed front setback provides the proposed building with an appropriate streetscape transition between the higher density buildings to the east near Anzac Parade and the low to medium density buildings to the west along Grosvenor Street.

 

Structural damage to adjoining/surrounding properties due to demolition, excavation and construction work and traffic

Comment : Appropriate conditions requiring excavation works to be properly guarded and supported during all works, and for a dilapidation report to be prepared for adjoining properties will be applied should approval be granted. Additionally, a standard condition requiring the lodgement of a Construction Traffic Management Plan will be applied should approval be granted.

 

Loss of views

Comment: The owner of a middle floor dwelling unit in the adjoining residential flat building to the west at No. 28-30 Grosvenor Street has objected to loss of views looking east. An assessment of the concern indicates that there will be loss of district views of Kensington and Randwick. Applying the principles for view loss analysis contained in the Tenacity vs Warringah, the view loss is considered minor and negligible for the following reasons:

 

Step 1 :   The view comprises an immediate and medium range view of the locality over the roof top of the existing properties on the subject site (Photo A) and, as such, not a significant or iconic view of a specific item of interest.

 

Photo A : View from living room window and balcony of No. 2/28 Grosvenor Street looking obliquely in a south-east direction over and across the roofs of the existing dwelling houses on the subject site.

 

Step 2:    The view is obtained in an oblique south-east view line or vista across a common side boundary to the subject site. As such, in line with the planning principle, retention of the view across the side boundary in a south-east direction is difficult especially combined with the non-iconic nature of the view.

 

Step 3:    Whilst the high value placed upon the district views of the locality by residents within No. 28-30 Grosvenor Street is recognized, the loss of these views as a result of the proposed development is considered to be moderate given the “non-iconic” quality of these views obtained across side boundaries as discussed above. Accordingly, the loss of this view as a result of the proposed development is considered acceptable and reasonable.

 

Step 4 :   The breach in building height control by a maximum of 900mm over the main roof of the proposed development (that is the proposed main roof height of 12.9m above the maximum building height standard of 12m) is not considered excessive in terms of its view loss impact given that a pitched roof over a development with a compliant 10m wall height would have a similar view loss impact. The view loss is considered negligible given that, as indicated above, any retention of the objector’s views would require deletion of one floor from the proposed development at 2.7m floor to ceiling height when the breach in building height is only 900mm. Accordingly, retention of the subject view through compliance with the prescribed envelope is considered unreasonable especially given that a clearer district view looking directly south (Photo B) will not be affected by the proposed development. Furthermore, the non-iconic nature of the views obtained across side boundaries do not warrant any modification in the design of the proposed building to accommodate view loss.

 

Photo B : View from living room window and balcony of No. 2/28 Grosvenor Street looking directly south that would be unaffected by the proposed development. 

 

Loss of sunlight

Comment: Shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that between 9:00am and 3:00pm the adjoining eastern property at No 28-30 Grosvenor Street will be largely free from overshadowing from the proposed development with only the extreme south-eastern corner of the No. 28-30 Grosvenor being in shadow at 9:00 am. From 10am onwards the objectors property at No. 28-30 Grosvenor Street will be free of overshadowing from the proposed development such that the proposal will not overshadow the objectors property to less the than the minimum 3 hours winter solar access required under the DCP – Multi-unit Housing.

 

Loss of Privacy

Comment: The resident/owners of the adjoining dwelling units at 28 Grosvenor Street to the west have raised concerns regarding loss of privacy especially from the north-facing balconies of proposed dwelling units in the western wing of the proposed development. Specific overlooking concerns from these balconies on Levels 1 to 3 will be mitigated by the following factors:

 

·      The proposed balconies have been design at an off-setting oblique angle to the existing balconies of the objectors’ property at No 28 Grosvenor Street so that there will be no direct overlooking.

 

·      The proposed balconies are recessed into the proposed built form such that the sides of the balconies will be covered completely by masonry walls directing outlook of future residents towards the north rather than to the west towards the objectors’ properties in No 28 Grosvenor Street.

 

Notwithstanding these mitigating factors, a condition will be applied to augment  privacy screening by requiring the installation of protruding privacy screens in the form of extensions to the western wall of the subject balconies on all floors.

 

Privacy concerns relating to other parts of the proposed buildings are mitigated by the following considerations:

 

·      The proposed balconies adjacent to the eastern boundary will not overlook the adjoining northern property at No. 2A Lorne Avenue as the south elevation of No 2A has no window openings that will be subject to overlooking.

·      The west elevation adjoining No 28 Grosvenor Street contains minor windows to bedroom and bathrooms that are orientated north and screened by projecting blade walls.

·      Overlooking from the front and eastern side of the proposed development is mitigated by the separation distance provided by Grosvenor Street at 21m wide carriageway and Lorne Avenue at 18m wide.

 

Increased traffic and parking demand

Comment: The proposal is for a medium size multi-unit housing development that will provide for a total of 11 dwelling units which will have a moderate traffic generation and therefore, minimal impact on the performance of existing intersections in the locality. There will be adequate capacity in the surrounding road network to cater for the traffic generated by the proposed development. It should be noted that the net increase in the number of dwellings will be 9 units given that there are 2 dwelling houses on-site so that in real terms the impact of traffic will be further minimised.

 

While the proposal will have a shortfall of 3 car parking spaces, the site is located adjacent a major public transport corridor and within walking distance of UNSW. It is considered that the residents are more likely to rely on public transport given the nature of the development and its location. Accordingly, the shortfall in car parking is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

Destruction of heritage quality of Grosvenor Street

Comment: While the subject buildings on-site are neither heritage items nor located in a conservation area, there is a listed heritage item at No. 16 Grosvenor Street comprising an Edwardian style cottage circa 1920. The proposed development is located some 6 properties away to the east from the heritage item such that any visual impact will be minimal. Notwithstanding this, the proposal will have a height, bulk and scale that respects the existing low to medium density streetscape along the southern and western sections of Grosvenor Street, which will not be over whelmed or dominated by the proposed development in terms of visual bulk and scale. As discussed in the SEPP 1 assessment above, the stepped modulation from the adjoining western property combined with a comparable height, bulk and scale to existing development in immediate adjoining and surrounding sites in this eastern end of Grosvenor Street, results in a development that will not be inconsistent with the existing character of Grosvenor Street.

 

Increased noise.

Comment: The proposal is for a permissible use being multi-unit housing development. The proposal is not considered to be an overdevelopment of the subject site as assessed in the SEPP 1 objections above and therefore would not introduce an unreasonable number of households into the area in the future. Rather, the proposal only seeks to create 11 dwellings all having living areas orientated to the rear north with limited screened openings to the western side boundary where the closest adjoining dwelling units are located.

 

Inappropriate design and external treatment for the area

Comment: The proposal will provide for a building with a stepped modulation from the adjoining western property at No 28-30 Grosvenor Street creating a “bookend” element at this eastern end of Grosvenor Street which has other existing multi-storey development in the immediate adjoining and surrounding lots. The proposal will have a combination of face brick, cladded, and metal screening elements that provide for a clean, modern presentation without being incongruous to more traditional existing dwelling house elements on the southern side of Grosvenor Street.

 

Support

No supporting submissions were received.

 

 

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

7.1    Building Services Comments

Council’s Building Surveyor has assessed the application and raises no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. 

 

7.2    Development Engineers Comments

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the subject application and the following comments are provided:

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

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

 

The development site is located within an area where flood planning levels need to be considered. Council’s Drainage Engineer provided the following advice regarding flood planning levels:

 

The typical depth of flooding on Lorne Avenue adjacent to this property is as follows:

·      Typical depth of flooding for the Probable Maximum Flood is 4.3m.

·      Typical depth of flooding for the 0.2% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) flood is 1.8m.

·      Typical depth of flooding for the 1% AEP flood is 1.3m.

·      Typical depth of flooding for the 5% AEP flood is 0.8m.

 

The 1 in 100 year flood level (1% AEP) in Lorne Avenue is therefore approximately RL 25.7 – 25.8m AHD. The proposed top of the wall along the Lorne Avenue site frontage is at RL 26.09m AHD. This height protects the site for the 1 in 100 year storm event with approximately 300mm freeboard. Council’s standard freeboard for habitable floor levels above the 1 in 100 year flood level is generally 500mm – the reduced freeboard in this instance is because the applicant based their design on an earlier iteration of the Council commissioned flood study, (which produced a lower 1 in 100 year flood level for this area). The provision of a 300mm freeboard is considered reasonable in these circumstances, particularly given that no habitable floor space is on the ground floor. Detailed conditions relating to protection of openings and habitable floor space have been included within this report.

 

Traffic Comments

The proposed development would require 5 + 7.2 + 2.75 spaces to be fully compliant with Council’s DCP-Parking. The amended plans only provide 11 spaces and therefore the proposal is deficient in parking. The Development Engineer has been advised that the provision of parking in this amended application has been reduced from earlier parking layouts as the applicant has been requested to incorporate additional landscape elements along the northern edge of the carpark. Given that each unit can be issued a carspace and that the development site is located within close proximity to a major public transport link, (and a range of services), the parking provision can be supported. The parking provision is the absolute minimum that can be supported.

 

Service Authority Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Landscape Comments

The only vegetation within either property is a 4m tall Allocasurina species (She Oak) in the rear yard of no. 32, in its northeast corner, which is insignificant and could be removed in order to accommodate the proposed development as shown.

 

Growing in Council’s Lorne Avenue road reserve, roughly in line with the common boundary between 34 Grosvenor Street and 2A Lorne Avenue, there is a large and significant Ficus microcarpa var. ‘Hillii’ (Hills Weeping Figs) of around 15m x 15m, which is part of a prominent group of this species in this street, and is covered by the TPO given its location on public property.

 

Its western aspect overhangs slightly into the northeast corner of no.34, and given that the basement level and upper floors will be constructed close to the eastern and northern site boundaries, disturbance to the western sides of both its root plate and canopy is likely.

 

In order to avoid damage to the tree and conflict during the course of construction, Council will require that this tree be pruned by Council, at the applicant’s cost, prior to the commencement of works, with conditions relating to the treatment and care of any roots encountered also to be included, as they are essential for its future health and stability. In recognition of its significance to the area, a refundable deposit as security for compliance will also be imposed.

 

The other Fig to its north, in front of 2A Lorne, would not be affected given its distance from the works.

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

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 also apply to the proposal:

Clause 20E   Landscaped areas

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

20E (2) – Landscaped Area for Zone 2B and 2C

50% of site area (or 354 sqm)

50% (or  357.2m2)

Yes

31(3) – Landscaped Area over podium

Max 50% of landscape  area requirement

No landscaped areas over the  basement car park  proposed

Yes

 

Clause 20F  Floor Space Ratio

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

20F  –  Floor Space Ratio

0.9:1 (637m2)

O.92:1 (654m2)

No (SEPP 1 Objection submitted)

 

Clause 20G Building heights

Clause No.

Requirement

Provided

Compliance

33(1) – Building Height

 

Max 12m

Max 12.9m (to top of roof slab)

No (SEPP 1 Objection submitted)

33(3) – External Wall Height

Max 10m

Max 12.9m (to top of roof slab).

No (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 12 – Zone No 2C (Residential C Zone)

Clause 29- Foreshore scenic protection area

Clause 40 – Earthworks

 

8.2    Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies

State Environmental Planning Policies that are relevant to the proposal are :

-   State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

-   State Environment Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

-   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

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

 

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 heritage, 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 alterations and additions to a multi-unit housing building 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,

 

The proposal maintains these objectives as follows:

·      The immediate adjoining buildings to the west (Nos. 24-26 and 28-30 Grosvenor Street) are comparable in height to the proposed development while those to the east on the opposite side of Lorne Avenue are of greater height than the proposed development with many four storey buildings nearby along Anzac Parade. 

·      Given the comparable height, bulk and scale, the proposal will provide for a medium density scale and, in effect, maintain the desirable attributes of the established residential areas.

·      The proposal will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality as detailed in Sections 5, 6 and 10.2 of this report.

 

Clause 40           Earthworks

Clause 40 of the Randwick LEP contains provisions for undertaking of excavation and filling of land. The proposal will require minimal excavation and only for the footings and slab of the surface car park. Accordingly, the works will not result in any detrimental impact on the topography of the site; is unlikely to interrupt the drainage patterns of the site or result in soil instability; and will not adversely impact upon the scenic quality of the site and locality subject to appropriate drainage and building conditions should approval be granted. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to the provisions of Clause 40.

 

 

 

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 an amended BASIX certificate (certificate number 390075M_02 dated 9 December 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 7 November 2011. 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):

 

“PANEL COMMENTS

This is the fifth occasion since the 7th March this year, on which the Panel has reviewed a proposal for this site, the fourth from this proponent. 

The Panel has visited the site and is familiar with the area.

 

Although close to Anzac Parade the surrounding streets are pleasant, well treed and create an excellent residential environment.

 

The site consists of two residential lots totaling 708m² that form an L shape.  It addresses the street corner of Grosvenor St and Lorne Avenue.  The rear part of the site is 7.62m wide for most of its length, with its boundary located approximately one metre from the next-door house. This part of the site is at present used to accommodate a garage.  Building on this would be difficult and the proponent does not propose to in this application.

The proposal is for an apartment building of three floors containing 12 apartments, with at grade parking beneath it, making it effectively four storeys in height.

 

Comment: The latest amended plans provide for a building containing a further reduced number of dwelling units, that is, a total of 11, to allow for further improvements in its layout and design.

 

1.         Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

As recommended in the Panel’s previous report, an analysis of the context has been undertaken to inform the approach to this corner site.  While the position is ideal for such housing, the unusual site dimensions have presented some challenges.

 

There are many buildings of similar scale in the vicinity, on both sides of the street as far as Anzac Parade. It is the opinion of the Panel that the proposed building, subject to the modifications to its setbacks and design set out below, would be appropriate for its context and an improvement over the existing situation.

 

2.         The Scale of the Proposal

As previously noted, although there is a two storey house on the adjoining site to the north, the building opposite the subject site is of greater height and there are many four storey buildings nearby.  In terms of height and bulk, the proposed building would be in scale with its context.

The site planning and massing are the key to the merits of the proposal – see comments below.

 

3.         The Built Form of the Proposal

The proposed building does not align with the setbacks of existing buildings on either Grosvenor St or Lorne Avenue.  In the Panel’s opinion the revised street setbacks to both frontages are now appropriate and have many benefits.

A number of the design features of the proposal have been improved, however there is still scope for the following refinements:

 

·      The two central units on each floor have been replanned, as previously they would be inconvenient to live in (as is demonstrated by the furniture layout).  The current plan is an improvement, but the Panel believes it could be further improved by tightening the bathroom dimension and widening the living room. The bedroom windows near the front doors could be repositioned so that they look out past the common stairs and lift

·      The rear balconies in the central units are now inset, providing light and air to the on grade parking and a reasonable setback to the side boundary of the neighbouring property.

·      The proposed “green roof” as this part of the site has sensibly been deleted, as it was unclear how it would be accessed for maintenance. The surface parking has been broken up to allow trees in deep soil, which is a better solution from every point of view.

·      The duplication of stairs and entry points on the south side of the building have been improved, however the Panel considers that a better solution would be to have the lift face a return stair, parallel to Grosvenor Street. These could be compactly arranged, so that the space in front of the entry doors to the central units was open to the street. It would allow all front doors to be within 6 metres of the topmost tread. This arrangement would also create a much better entry at street level and privacy to bedrooms previously facing the lift door.

·      the misalignment of the building with the car parking footprint has been addressed to some extent, however the columns at ground floor need to be of realistic structural dimensions in an efficient configuration. Their layout and geometry should be fully resolved with the cantilevers above.

·      a central entry from Grosvenor Street and clear north-south path through the parking level to the increased landscaped area would make the connection to the common terrace much more pleasant and direct.

·      access to the common terrace and rear garden has been improved, although the plants in the path within the garage is a clear anomaly that should be rectified.

·      as this location is well served by public transport, this could justify a reduction in the number of cars, thereby freeing up more space for trees and screen landscaping at ground level. 

·      Unit L3.01 on the top floor (arising from the deletion of the topmost unit on the west side) is awkwardly configured. It should be replanned to better relate to the floor below, in so doing having a balcony above the balconies below, and a more regular and orthogonal alignment on the western face.

·      All internal top floor bathrooms and laundries should have ventilating skylights.

·      The parking at ground floor is necessitated by the flood levels and the dimensions of the site. As it is open to light and air, and screened from the street, it is acceptable in this instance.

 

Comment: In relation to the stairs and entry points on the south side, the amended plans now show the lift facing a return stair, parallel to Grosvenor Street such that the space in front of the entry doors to the central units is now open to the street. In relation to structural columns to support any remaining cantilevered elements, a standard condition requiring structural certification by a professional engineer certifying that the building works satisfy the relevant structural requirements of the Building Code of Australia and approved design documentation prior to issue of occupation certificate will be applied. In relation to the configuration of the topmost western unit, the current amended plans show a regular and more orthogonal alignment for this unit with a generous stepped setback from the western boundary allowing for a balcony and roof garden. In relation to access to the common terrace and rear garden, the amended plans show that the path within the garage has been cleared of any plantings. Overall, the amended building predominantly addresses the Panel’s requirements, and conditions will be applied to address the Panel’s requirements where necessary.  

 

4.      The Proposed Density

The proposal is over the prescribed density and is now adequately arranged to justify an increase to 0.9:1 (that would be the density, except for the anomaly of lot area).

 

Comment: The correct total site area is 708 sqm (which is the total site area for combined lots - Lot 1 DP 937925, being No. 32 Grosvenor Street and Lot 132 DP 700652, being No. 34 Grosvenor Street). The maximum FSR applicable for lots larger than 700 sqm in Residential 2C zones is 0.9:1.

 

5.         Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

·      Orientation is good and all units would be cross-ventilated and north facing. 

·      Ceiling fans should be provided in habitable rooms and shown on drawings. 

·      Stormwater tanks should be provided.

·      The window design is inadequately detailed to show good cross ventilation options for future residents.  The development of window types should be investigated.

·      Concrete roof slabs should be insulated with polystyrene sheets covered with pebble ballast to effectively stop heat transfer to the living spaces below.  This method of construction should be shown on the sections.

·      Clotheslines should be located in the rear garden.

 

Comment: Conditions will be applied to address the Panel’s requirements where applicable as listed above.

 

6.         The Proposed Landscape

In a reconfigured design, the proposed landscape design provides for trees between car spaces between the building and the northern boundary of the site and shrubs that conceal the parking area from the street (not located under the building).

The use of the rear portion of the site for recreation is to be commended.  As proposed, it should also be used to establish large trees.

 

7.         The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

See comments throughout this report

The central units have enough space to be further improved as noted above, and the end units are reasonably arranged.

 

Methods of providing a more articulated elevation (shown only in plan so far) and window openings on the west have been investigated. North and west elevations should be provided for review. The east elevation could follow the line of the car park wall below which would allow for a small balcony off bedroom 2 and a larger kitchen.  This would further help to articulate the street elevation. 

 

The indented facade should be checked to achieve fire separation and allow for openings for natural ventilation.  The top floor apartment on the west should be able to achieve ample ventilation through windows set far enough away from the boundary.

 

Weather protection should be provided on south facing openings.

 

Comment: The amended building has been significantly realigned to the at-grade car park with minimal cantilevering and allowing for provision of balconies in the east elevation linked to bedroom 2 and associated enlarged kitchen and living areas of eastern dwelling units. In relation to fire protection to openings exposed to side boundaries, the applicant has advised Council that windows which are less than 3m to boundary can be treated with fire shutters which are always in open position and sit on top of openings and only operate when there is a fire in the building thus allowing for openings for natural ventilation The shutters typically sit in a small colorbond box approximately 100mm x 100mm. A condition will be applied requiring the installation of non-intrusive fire protection measures. Other conditions will be applied to address the Panel’s requirements where applicable as listed above. 

 

8.         The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

The street entry can be further improved as outlined in this report.

 

9.         Social issues

This is a good location for units of various sizes. 

 

10.        The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The proposed design remains too complex for what is essentially a small building.  If it is modified, as recommended above, it would have a simpler form that would be more suitable in its context.

 

The Panel considers that one screen type used for both the south circulation areas and the car park area would be more successful and enduring aesthetic. Currently what is illustrated is willful and lacks coherence.

 

It remains unclear how the proposed high wall surrounding the parking area is to be constructed to form a pleasant frontage to the streets. The stilts lack structural reality, as does the absence of a transfer structure. Plants under a building overhang are unlikely to flourish.

 

Detailed elevations at 1:100 or 1:50 need to be submitted for all elevations, with the selected materials clearly referenced to each drawing, as opposed to the disjointed detailed section and façade elements currently illustrated.

 

Comment: The amended plans have satisfactory addressed a majority of the Panel’s recommendations including the reconfiguration of the lift and staircase area and provision of an appropriate external treatment to these entry and service areas. Additionally, suitably detailed elevations with relevant associated façade elements. Conditions will be applied to address outstanding requirements wherever appropriate.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A proposal for a building of this scale and use is suitable for this site.  As noted previously and above, the planning, siting and design have been progressively modified.  The Panel does not need to review the proposal again if the issues raised have been addressed to the satisfaction of the assessing planner.

 

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.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

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.

Yes - the site has a combined allotment width of 21.08m fronting Grosvenor Street.

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

The development has a design that appropriately responds to both Grosvenor Street and Lorne Avenue as assessed by the Design Review Panel above.  The stepped modulation at the Grosvenor Street front combined with the proposed maximum 3m front setback to Grosvenor Street is appropriate for a corner allotment such as the subject site and reinforces the building at the corner with Lorne Avenue without being intrusive or dominant. Accordingly, the proposed front setback provides the proposed building with an appropriate streetscape transition between the higher density buildings to the east near Anzac Parade and the medium density buildings to the west along Grosvenor Street.

 

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 building and 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.

 

P2 Variations in massing and height create visual interest, distribute the bulk of the building.

g and minimise amenity impacts on the streetscape and adjoining properties.

 

The amended proposal has distributed the additional floor area in a stepped built form from the western boundary to reduce impacts on the adjoining residential flat building at No. 28 Grosvenor Street.

Therefore the proposal will 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.

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 

Front setback of max 3m to Grosvenor Street which provides more front setback area for landscaping thus softening and complementing the presentation of the building to Grosvenor Street and represents an appropriate average transition between the existing setback of the higher density buildings to the east near Anzac Parade and the low to medium density buildings towards the west along Grosvenor Street.

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

o     No part closer than 3.5 metres.

o     Minimum average setback 5 metres.

o     Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

o     Minimum length of any step is 3 metres.

East & West

o     No – the proposal has a min 1.0m to 1.8m setback to the western boundary and 1.5m setback to the eastern boundary.

o     Yes – no wall without articulation exceeds 10m length.

o     Yes – approx 1m (min) step

It should be noted that the proposed side setbacks are consistent with the character of the immediate streetscape on the northern side of Grosvenor Street which has a number of 3 to 4 storey residential flat developments relative to narrow lots with similar close side setbacks. 

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

·      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 adequately provided in the proposed development.

·      Streetscape amenity is maintained.

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

·      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.

 

North

 

·      Yes - the western wing will be setback max 14m from northern rear boundary

·      No – the middle section and eastern wing will be setback 4m and 3m respectively from the northern rear boundary. However, solar access and privacy are  adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings. Additionally, the proposed use of the “dog leg” section of the subject site for a communal landscaped open space adequately off-sets the shortfall in rear setback in this middle section.

·      Yes - no wall without articulation exceeds 10m length.

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 will arise from eaves, window hoods and other sun-shading or weather protection devices.

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 at the eastern end of Grosvenor Street.

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 – 1m high masonry fence to Grosvenor Street is proposed.

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 will be 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 –  all ground-level open space areas will be allocated for communal use.

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 / elevated terraces for dwelling units is provided.

P4 Private open space in front of the building only where setback and fence design sympathetic.

 

 

N.A. – no front private open spaces are proposed.

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.

Private open space in the form of balconies / elevated terraces for dwelling units is provided.

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 – privacy to adjoining properties is maintained as follows:

·              The proposed balconies adjacent to the western boundary have been design at an off-setting oblique angle to the existing balconies of the western adjoining property at No 28 Grosvenor Street so that there will be no direct overlooking.

·      The proposed balconies adjacent to the western boundary are recessed into the proposed built form such that the sides of the balconies will be covered completely by masonry walls directing outlook of future residents away towards the north rather than to the west where   objectors’ properties in No 28 Grosvenor Street are located. A condition will be applied to further augment the privacy screening by requiring the installation of protruding privacy screens in the form of extensions to the western wall of the subject balconies on all floors.

·      The proposed balconies adjacent to the eastern  boundary will not overlook the adjoining northern property at No. 2A Lorne Avenue as the south elevation of No 2A has no window openings that will be subject to overlooking.

·      The west elevation adjoining No 28 Grosvenor Street contains minor windows to bedroom and bathrooms that are orientated north and screen by projecting blade walls.

·      Overlooking from the southern front and eastern side of the proposed development is mitigated respectively by the separation distance provided by Grosvenor Street at 21m wide carriageway and by Lorne Avenue at 18m wide.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

Yes - see assessment of P1 above.

P3  Acoustic Privacy

Building layout and design minimises noise transmission of noise.

Quiet areas separate noise-generating activities.

 

Yes - layout of internal space will not result in significant loss of acoustic privacy.

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Australia (BCA).

Required to comply with BCA

View Sharing

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

 

The impacts on views currently available to adjoining/surrounding properties that have raised specific objections to view loss have been addressed in Section 5 above. In summary, the assessment shows that the amended proposal will result in loss of limited district views over the roof top of the existing dwelling houses on-site.

However, retention of these views having regard to the principles established in the case of Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council is not warranted.

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.

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties.

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

 

 

Yes

Shadow diagrams submitted indicate that at 9am in the winter solstice, overshadowing will be confined to the south-eastern corner of the west elevation of the adjoining western property at No. 28 Grosvenor Street.  By 12 mid-day, the proposed overshadowing will shift predominantly onto the Grosvenor Street carriageway with the south-eastern corner of the west elevation of the adjoining western property at No. 28 free from overshadowing from the proposed development. By 3:00pm, overshadowing will occur within the carriageway marked by the intersection of Grosvenor Street and Lorne Avenue, extending moderately onto the existing residential property diagonally opposite the subject site at No 1A-3 Lorne Avenue. Overall, the overshadowing impact is considered reasonable especially considering that the subject site is a corner allotment orientated north-south with Grosvenor Street and Lorne Avenue on the southern and eastern sides respectively. Accordingly, the living areas and open spaces of adjoining properties will not have their minimum or less than 3 hour solar access in mid-winter reduced by the proposed development.

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 assessment for P1 above.

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 assessment for P1 above.

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.

The amended proposal achieves compliance with BASIX targets.

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

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 individual car parking spaces will be secured by roller door entry directly off Grosvenor street.

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

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 10.2.2 below.

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

 

Proposed at-grade car park will be screened by proposed masonry wall and boundary landscape plantings.

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 in basement.

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

Yes – 3.6m wide driveway confined to south-western corner of subject site.

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

Yes – adequately internal manoeuvring space to allow for forward exit.

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 – driveway will be 3.6m wide and setback by 1m from western side boundary.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

Yes – suitable façade treatment to at-grade car park is proposed to minimise its visual impact.

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

Yes – driveway gradient to elevated at-grade car parking will be 9m at 1:8.

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 11 dwellings are proposed.

Utilities/Site Facilities: subject to  appropriate conditions of consent

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 building 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        DCP – Parking

 

Use

Requirement (DCP – parking)

Proposed number and/or floor area

Required provision

Proposed provision

 

1 space per one bedroom dwelling

 

5 x one bedroom dwelling

5

 

 

 12 carapaces

 

1.2 spaces per two bedroom dwelling

 

6 x two bedroom dwellings

7.2

 

1.5 spaces per three bedroom dwellings

Nil

NA

 

Visitor:

1 space per 4 units

Total dwellings = 11

2.75 spaces

TOTAL

 

 

14.95 spaces

12 spaces

 

The proposal will result in a shortfall of 3 car parking spaces. The non-compliance in car parking in this case is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·      The shortfall is minor amounting to three spaces which can be accommodated in the street and mitigated by way of reducing the allocation of car parking to two bedroom units.

 

·      There is limited scope to provide additional parking on the site by way of excavated basement due to the need to significantly protect against the adverse effect of flooding.

 

·      The site is served immediately by public buses on Anzac Parade linking it to other local centres including Randwick Town Centre and the CBD, and is within easy walking distance of services and major institutions in the area including the University of NSW and the hospital precinct.

 

 

 

10.2.3   Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost more than $200,000

$ 2,317,451

1%

$23,174.51

 

11.    Environmental Assessment

 

The site has been inspected and 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.

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

Not applicable.

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

Clause 7 of the EP&A Regulation 2000 requires the consent authority to consider the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. Accordingly, an appropriate condition is recommended to address the above matter.

 

Clause 92 of the Regulation requires the consent authority to consider relevant Australian Standards relating to demolition of structures. A specific condition is recommended to require compliance with Australian Standard 2601.

 

Clause 93 of the Regulation requires the consent authority to consider the structural capacity and fire safety aspects of a building. Appropriate conditions are recommended to address the above matters.

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment have been assessed within the body of this report.

 

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

 

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

The site is zoned Residential 2C in which the proposed multi-unit housing development is permissible. The site is located within an area, which is predominantly characterised by a mixture of medium to high density residential development a the eastern end of Grosvenor Street and low to medium density further away towards its western end with a melange of architectural  styles, scales and massing. The proposed development will have a sympathetic bulk and scale thus respecting the existing character and built form of the locality. The site has sufficient dimension to accommodate the proposed development. 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

Seven submissions and  a petition with 100 signatures were received and issues raised have been addressed in Section 5 and other relevant sections of this report. 

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

The proposal is not considered to result in significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered satisfactory in public interest terms.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:          Leadership in sustainability, excellence in urban design and development, integrated transport and land use.

Direction:          Improved design and sustainability across all development, integrating transport and pedestrian links between town centres and key locations.

Key action:       Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council on the subject site. The proposal does not comply with the maximum FSR and building and external wall height standard contained in the RLEP. SEPP No.1 objections in relation to these breaches have been submitted with the application and considered to be well founded in the circumstances. In particular, the proposal will be consistent with the planning objectives for the locality; the proposal is not considered to be visually intrusive or bulky with a minor increase in floor area of 17 sqm distributed reasonably within the proposed built form; the development overall is considered to be consistent with the character of existing development in the immediate streetscape and locality of the eastern end of Grosvenor Street; and the additional density will not give rise to any detrimental impacts to surrounding uses in terms of ventilation, sunlight, privacy, views, traffic and parking impacts.

 

The proposal complies with the relevant preferred solutions and performance requirements in the DCP – Multi-unit housing (with the exception of FSR and building and external wall height which have been addressed in the SEPP 1 objection).

 

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 20F and Clause 20G of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to maximum floor space ratio and maximum building and 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.

 

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/618/2011 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a part 3 and part 4 storey multi unit housing development including an above ground parking level with 12 spaces, 11 dwelling units over 3 levels and associated works at 32-34 Grosvenor Street,  Kensington, 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 numbered 1.00 Revision C, 1.01 Revision C, 1.02 Revision C, 1.03 Revision C, 1.04 Revision C, 2.00 Revision E, 2.01 Revision D, 2.02 Revision D, 2.03 Revision D, 3.00 Revision C, 3.01 Revision D, 3.02 Revision D, 3.03 Revision C, 4.00 Revision C, 4.02 Revision C, 4.03 Revision A, 4.04 Revision A, 4.05 Revision A, and 4.06 Revision A, and all dated 10 November 2011, and stamped received by Council on 11 November 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:

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

 

390075M_02

9 December 2011

 

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:

 

Should the approval be granted to the application, the following conditions should be included in the development consent:

 

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.

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the proposed development are to be compatible with adjacent developments 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.       Details of bicycle storage as required in the Development Control Plan – Parking shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning Council 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.       The following amendments to the proposal shall be undertaken:

 

·      Extension of the western wall of the north-facing balconies of Units L1.01, L2.01 and L3.01 by 600mm to mitigate privacy impacts on the adjoining western property.   

·      Provision of fire protection devices for all openings exposed to the side boundaries comprising open sensor triggered fire shutters within colorbond box located above the opening

·      Provision of a magnetic ‘hold open’ fire door to the stair of the lobby so as to provide to natural light and ventilation to the internalised lobby

·      Provision of ventilating skylights for all internal top floor bathrooms and laundries.

·      Provision of ceiling fans in all habitable rooms.

·      Installation of insulation in the form of polystyrene sheets covered with pebble ballast on the concrete roof slab to effectively stop heat transfer to the living spaces below.  This method of construction should be shown on the sections.

·      Provision of clothes lines located in the rear garden.

 

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.       The floor level of the ground floor inclusive of the carpark and entry foyer shall be increased by 200mm from the proposed RL 25.89 to a new RL 26.09 to protect the  ground level up to the calculated 1 in 100 flood level plus free board. The floor to floor heights of Levels 1, 2 and 3 above shall, correspondingly, be reduced by a maximum 70mm per floor to accommodate the required increase in the ground floor level.

 

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.

 

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.       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, prior to issuing a construction certificate.

 

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 2007, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council.

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost more than $200,000

$ 2,317,451

1%

$23,174.51

 

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.

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

10.     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.

 

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

 

Security Deposit

11.     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:

 

·           $5000.00    -      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

12.     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

13.     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.

 

Street Tree Management

14.     The applicant shall submit a payment of $214.50 (inclusing GST), being to cover the cost for Council to supply and install 2 x 25 litre street trees, Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) on the Grosvenor Street verge, spaced evenly between the southern edge of the vehicle crossing and in the intersection of Lorne Avenue.

 

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 planting of the new trees upon the completion of all site works.

 

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.

 

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:

 

15.     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.

 

16.     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.

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia & Relevant Standards

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

 

18.     Access and facilities for people with disabilities must be provided in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia, Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standard 2010, relevant Australian Standards and conditions of consent, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.  Details of the required access and facilities for people with disabilities are to be included in the plans/specifications for the construction certificate.

 

Site stability and construction work

19.     A report must be obtained from a suitably qualified and experienced professional engineer, which includes the following details, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority for the development:-

 

a)     Geotechnical details which confirm the suitability and stability of the site for the development and relevant design and construction requirements to be implemented to ensure the stability and adequacy of the development and adjacent land.

 

b)     Details of the proposed methods of excavation and support for the adjoining land (including any public place) and buildings.

 

c)     Details to demonstrate that the proposed methods of excavation and construction are suitable for the site and should not result in any damage to the adjoining premises, buildings or any public place, as a result of the works and any associated vibration.

 

d)     The adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times throughout demolition, excavation and building work, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

e)     Written approval must be obtained from the owners of the land to install any ground or rock anchors underneath the adjoining premises (including any public roadway or public place) and details must be provided to the Certifying Authority.

 

Traffic conditions

20.     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.

 

21.     The vehicular access driveways, internal circulation ramps and the carpark areas, (including, but not limited to, the ramp grades, 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.

 

Design Alignment levels

22.     The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) at the Grosvenor Street 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 roadway/kerb/footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0924.

 

23.     The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) at the Lorne Avenue 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 levels at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the roadway/kerb/footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

Any enquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Council’s Development Engineer on 9399 0924.

 

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

 

25.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $1065 calculated at $44.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage to Green Street. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

26.     The gradient of the internal access driveway must be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 2890.1 (2004) – Off Street Car Parking and the levels of the driveway must match the alignment levels at the property boundary (as specified by Council). Details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

The height of the building must not be increased to satisfy the required driveway gradients.

 

Stormwater Drainage & Flood Management

27.     The floor level of all habitable and storage areas shall be at a minimum RL of 26.09 metres (AHD) or be suitably waterproofed up to this same level. Details demonstrating compliance with this condition are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

28.     The proposed internal driveway shall be designed with a high point at least RL 26.09 metres (AHD). The level of the entire ground floor carpark must be at least RL 26.09 metres AHD or suitably waterproofed up to this same level. Details demonstrating compliance with this condition are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

29.     All windows, vents and other openings into the ground floor carpark are to be located at or above RL 26.09 metres (AHD). Details demonstrating compliance with this condition are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

30.     The ground floor foyer level shall be a minimum of RL 26.09 metres AHD. The lift, service room and garbage room shall also be at RL 26.09 metres AHD or suitably waterproofed to this level. Details demonstrating compliance with this condition are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

31.     The ground floor level located along the Grosvenor Street and Lorne Avenue site frontages, including any proposed walls around the ground floor carpark, shall be designed to structurally withstand hydrostatic pressure/stormwater inundation from floodwater during the probable maximum flood (PMF) event as defined in the Floodplain Management Manual (New South Wales Government, January 2001). Structural Engineering certification confirming that this condition has been complied with shall be submitted to the certifying authority with the construction certificate.

 

This requirement does not necessitate the development being flood proof/water tight up to the PMF event, rather the requirement is to ensure that the development will not be structurally damaged in manner that could endanger lives during the PMF event.

 

32.     Stormwater drainage plans have not been approved as part of this development consent. Engineering calculations and plans with levels reduced to Australian Height Datum in relation to site drainage shall be 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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Internal Drainage

33.     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 (by gravity) Directly to the kerb and gutter or drainage system located at the front of the subject site in Grosvenor Street and / or Lorne Avenue.

 

c)     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 10 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 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.    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)

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

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

iv.   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 or ground floor 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.

 

p)     Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas accessible by residents of all units.

 

q)     Should a charged system be required to drain any portion of the site, the charged system must be designed with suitable clear-outs/inspection points at pipe bends and junctions.

 

Waste Management

34.     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.

 

Further details of Council's requirements and guidelines, including pro-forma Waste Management plan forms can be obtained from Council's Customer Service Centre.

 

35.     The garbage room shall be sized to contain a total of 12 x 240 litre bins (comprising 6 garbage bins & 6 recycle bins) and with adequate provisions for access to all bins.  Details showing compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

36.     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.

 

Street Tree Management

37.     In order to ensure preservation of the large and significant Ficus microcarpa var. ‘Hillii’ (Hills Weeping Figs) street tree growing in Council’s Lorne Avenue road reserve, roughly in line with the common boundary between 34 Grosvenor Street and 2A Lorne Avenue, in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

a.       All documentation submitted for the construction certificate application MUST show the retention of this tree, with the position of its trunk and full diameter/spread of its canopy to be clearly and accurately shown on all drawings.

b.       Following demolition, all initial excavations associated with footings or structures for a distance of 5m along both the eastern and southern boundaries, closest to the tree, must be undertaken by hand, measuring a minimum depth of 600mm and width of 200mm, being mindful not to damage any roots encountered during this process.

c.       Upon completion of this trench, but prior to commencing any footings, structures or similar in these two areas, the applicant must contact Council's Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613, giving at least 2 working days notice,  to arrange an inspection of this trench and any roots found, and where approval is given for their pruning in order to accommodate the proposed works, they must be cut cleanly by hand, with the affected area tro be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

d.       The tree shall be physically protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing which shall be located a distance of 3m to its southwest and northeast (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), matching up with the back of the kerb to its south, and the footpath to its north, in order to completely enclose this tree for the duration of works.

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

f.        The applicant is not authorised to perform any work to this street tree, and shall contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 should further 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.

g.       Within the TPZ specified in point ‘d’ above, there is to be no storage of materials or machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble.

h.       A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card, cheque or bank guarantee for an amount of $10,000.00 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 this street tree.

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

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

 

38.     Any contravention of Council's conditions relating to this tree at any time during the course of the works, or prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, may result in Council claiming all or part of the lodged security in order to perform any rectification works necessary.

 

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.

 

39.     Any metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted and form part of the colour scheme and external finishes for the development. The reflectivity index of materials used in the external façade of the development must not exceed 20 percent.  The details and samples of the materials to be used are to be submitted with the colour and material schedule for the approval of Council’s Director of City Planning, prior to the commencement of works.

 

Certification and Building Inspection Requirements

40.     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.

 

Home Building Act 1989

41.     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

42.     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 No.2a Lorne Ave, Kensington, immediately adjoining the subject site (e.g. dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc).

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

43.     A Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the Department of Climate Change Guidelines for Construction Noise and Assessing Vibration, by a suitably qualified person, is to be developed and implemented prior to commencing site work and throughout the course of construction.

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. 

 

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.

b)     The Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan must include details of measurements, analysis and relevant criteria and demonstrate that the noise and vibration emissions from the work satisfy the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, current DECC Guidelines for Construction Noise and Assessing Vibration and Councils conditions of consent.

c)     A further report/correspondence must be obtained from the consultant as soon as practicable upon the commencement of works, which reviews and confirms the implementation and suitability of the noise and vibration strategies in the Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan and which demonstrates compliance with relevant criteria.

d)     Any recommendations and requirements contained in the Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan and associated reports are to be implemented accordingly and should noise and vibration emissions not comply with the terms and conditions of consent, work must cease forthwith and is not to recommence until details of compliance are submitted to Council and the PCA.

 

A copy of the Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan and associated acoustic/vibration report/s must be maintained on-site and a copy must be provided to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority accordingly.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

44.     Temporary site safety fencing must be provided to the perimeter of the site throughout demolition, excavation and construction works.

 

Temporary site fences must have a height of 1.8 metres and be a cyclone wire fence (with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control), or heavy-duty plywood sheeting (painted white), or other material approved by Council.

 

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.

 

All site fencing and hoardings must 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.

 

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

 

Construction Site Management

45.     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 site fencing / hoardings;

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities.

 

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

46.     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 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.

 

Public Liability

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

 

Demolition & Construction Waste

48.     A Demolition and Construction Waste Management Plan (WMP) must be development and implemented for the development, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Construction Traffic Management

49.     Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, an application for a ‘Works Zone’ must be submitted to Councils Integrated Transport Department, and approved by the Randwick Traffic Committee, for a ‘Works Zone’ to be provided in Grosvenor 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 referenced below (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.

 

50.     A detailed Construction Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

The Construction 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

 

Civil Works

51.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to all works which are located externally from the site within the road reserve/public place, in accordance with the requirements of the Roads Act 1993.  Detailed plans and specifications of the proposed works are to be submitted to and approved by the Director of City Services prior to commencing any works within the road reserve/public place.

 

 

All works within the road reserve/public place must be carried out to the satisfaction of Council and certification from a certified practicing engineer is to be provided to Council upon completion of the works.

 

Relevant Council assessment and inspection fees, as specified in Council's adopted Pricing Policy, are required to be paid to Council prior to commencement of the works.

 

Sydney Water

52.     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

53.     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.

 

54.     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.

 

Street Tree Management

55.     A minimum of 4 weeks prior to the commencement of any site works, the applicant must contact Council's Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613, to arrange for the selective pruning of only those lower growing branches from the significant Ficus microcarpa var. 'Hillii' (Hills Weeping Fig) which is located on Council's Lorne Avenue verge, roughly in line with the common boundary between 34 Grosvenor Street and 2A Lorne Avenue, and will only be performed where they overhang into the site and need to be pruned in order to either avoid damage to the tree, or, interference with the proposed works.

 

56.     Pruning of this tree can only be performed by Council or Council's nominated contractor, wholly at the applicant's cost, and in this regard, a payment of $104.50 (including GST) will need to be made into Tree Amenity Income, at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to the PCA issuing a Final Occupation Certificate for the development.

 

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.

 

Building regulation and construction site management

57.     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.

 

Inspections during Construction

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

 

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

 

Building & Demolition Work Requirements

59.     All work and activities must be carried out in accordance with the relevant regulatory requirements, including:

·            Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 & Regulations

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

·            WorkCover NSW Requirements, Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·            Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·            The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

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

·            DECC/EPA Waste Classification 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

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

·           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

61.     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 must be shown in a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan, including; a site plan; indicating the slope of land, access points & access control measures, location and type of sediment & erosion controls, location of existing vegetation to be retained, location of material stockpiles and storage areas, location of building operations and equipment, methods of sediment control, details of drainage systems and details of existing and proposed vegetation.

 

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

 

Dust Control

62.     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.

Public Safety & Site Management

63.     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.

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

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

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land

65.     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.

 

Site Signage

66.     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”.

 

Restriction on Working Hours

67.     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 1.00pm only

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Additional requirements for all development

·   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.

 

Survey Requirements

68.     A Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate or other suitable documentation must be obtained at the following stage/s of construction to demonstrate compliance with the approved setbacks, levels, layout and height of the building to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA):

·            prior to construction (pouring of concrete) of footings and retaining structures,

·            prior to construction (pouring of concrete) of each floor slab,

·            upon completion of the building, prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate,

·            as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

The survey documentation must be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority and a copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority for the development.  

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

70.     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

71.     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.

 

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

72.     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.

 

Fire Safety Certificate Requirements

73.     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.  The Fire safety Certificate must be consistent with the Fire Safety Schedule which forms part of the Construction Certificate.

 

A Fire Safety Statement must be provided to the Council on an annual basis, each year following the issue of a Fire Safety Certificate, which confirms that all the fire safety measures are operating in accordance with the relevant standards of performance.

 

A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate/Fire Safety Statement must be displayed in the building entrance/foyer at all times and a copy must also be forwarded to Fire and Rescue NSW.

 

Structural Certification

74.     A Certificate must be obtained from a professional engineer, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural requirements of the Building Code of Australia and approved design documentation, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority. A copy of which is to be provided to Council.

 

Occupant Safety - Windows

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

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

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

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

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

·            Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

The relevant safety measures must be implemented prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

Noise Control Requirements & Certification

76.     The operation of 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 Office of Environment and Heritage (EPA) Noise Control Guidelines.

 

77.     A report must be obtained from a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, which demonstrates and certifies that noise and vibration from any plant and equipment (e.g. mechanical ventilation systems and air-conditioners) satisfies the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (EPA) Noise Control Manual, Industrial Noise Policy and Council’s development consent.

 

A copy of the report must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued.

 

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 heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb in Grosvenor Street opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

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

c)     Remove the existing stone kerb and stone gutter and to reconstruct new kerb and gutter for the full Grosvenor Street site frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit point.

d)     Carry out a full depth, minimum 1.0 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full site frontage.

e)     Remove the existing concrete footpath in Grosvenor Street and to construct a new  concrete footpath along the full site frontage.  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.     The naturestrip 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

82.     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).

 

83.     The applicant shall meet the full cost for the overhead power lines located along the Grosvenor Street site frontage to be relocated underground. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the cables to be relocated. All cables most be relocated underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.

 

Stormwater Drainage

84.     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.

 

85.     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).

 

86.     Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer, 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.

 

87.     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

88.     The PCA must ensure that landscaping at this site is installed substantially in accordance with the DA Landscape - Amended Plan, by Taylor Brammer Landscape Architects Pty Ltd, project number 11-088S, and stamped 11 November 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.

 

Waste Management

89.     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.

 

90.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

91.     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 Council, prior to issuing an occupation certificate.

 

92.     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.

 

93.     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.

 

94.     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.

95.     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.

 

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.

Environmental Amenity

96.     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.

 

97.     Street numbering must be provided to the front of the premises in a prominent position, in accordance with the Australia Post guidelines and AS/NZS 4819 (2003) to the satisfaction of Council.

 

In this regard, an Application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, together with the required fee, for the allocation of appropriate street and unit numbers for the development.

 

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

 

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

99.     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.

 

100.    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.

 

Stormwater Detention System

101.    The detention area must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure it functions as required by the design.

GENERAL 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 requirements.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

A1      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.

 

A2      Building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

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

§  An Accredited Certifier or Council 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.

 

A3      This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA), Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010 and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards.  You are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A4      Any proposed amendments to the design and construction of the building may require a new development application or a section 96 amendment to the existing consent to be obtained from Council, before carrying out such works

 

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      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.

 

A7      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).

 

A8      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 any adjoining land.

A9      Finished ground levels external to the building are to be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised, other than for the provision of approved paving or the like on the ground.

 

A10     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.

 

A11     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.

 

A12     The necessary development consent and a construction certificate or a complying development certificate (as applicable) must be obtained for proposed external plant and equipment, if not included in this consent.

 

A13     An application must be submitted to an approved by Council prior to the installation and operation of any proposed greywater or wastewater treatment systems, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Greywater/Wastewater treatment systems must comply with the relevant requirements and guidelines produced by NSW Health, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and other relevant regulatory requirements.

 

A14     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.

 

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

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          14 February 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D3/12

 

 

Subject:                  1609-1611 Anzac Parade, La Perouse (DA/76/2009/A)

Folder No:                   DA/76/2009/A

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of approved development by altering the hours of operation to 10am to 10pm Monday to Thursday and 9am to 11pm Friday, Saturday and Sunday

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                First Fleet Marine P/L

Owner:                         NSW Department of Lands - Crown Land Division

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This section 96 modification application is referred to the Planning Committee as the original development application was determined by Council.

 

The approved development involves alterations and additions to the existing restaurant, known as “The Boatshed Café,” to provide additional outdoor seating, restoration of the timber deck, adjustment of the disabled toilet layout, reinstate the awning, planting of shrubs and new signage.

 

The subject application seeks to extend the approved hours of operation/trading from:

·       Monday - Thursday: 10.00am to 5.00pm

·       Friday - 10.00am to 6.00 pm and up till 11.00pm (during daylight saving).

·       Saturday - Sunday:  9.00am to 6.00 pm and up till 11.00pm (during daylight saving).

to the following: 

·       Monday - Thursday: 10:00am to 10:00pm

·       Friday, Saturday and Sunday: 9.00am to 11:00pm (at all times)

 

It is noted that the current section 96 modification does not propose any physical changes to the approved development.

 

The current Section 96 application was advertised and notified to surrounding from 9 – 23 November 2011. One (1) submission was received at the end of the public notification and advertising period raising issues relating to noise, visual amenity, parking and compliance with Council controls.

 

The site has been assessed as being suitable for use as a café in the previous development consents granted by Council. The current proposal does not involve any changes to the floor space or built form of the approved development.

 

The proposed modification to the original consent satisfies Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, in that it will constitute substantially the same development. The modification is not considered to result in an unreasonable detrimental impact on the streetscape or amenity of the surrounding residential and commercial development.

 

The proposed modifications will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the streetscape subject to compliance with the relevant conditions of consent. As such, the proposed modification is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The current section 96 proposal seeks to amend the original development consent by amending condition No. 11 of the original consent granted under section 82A relating to the hours of operation of the café. Condition 11 currently reads: -

 

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

·      Monday - Thursday: 10.00am to 5.00pm

·      Friday - 10.00am to 6.00 pm and up till 11.00pm (during daylight saving).

·      Saturday - Sunday:  9.00am to 6.00 pm and up till 11.00pm (during daylight saving).

 

The current section 96 modification seeks an extension to the approved trading hours to the following: 

·      Monday - Thursday: 10:00am to 10:00pm

·      Friday, Saturday and Sunday: 9.00am to 11:00pm (at all times)

 

It is noted that the increased trading hours are proposed to incorporate the café (all internal areas/seating), the approved outdoor deck on the western side of the building (seats 84 patrons) and the outdoor area on the northern side of the building (seats 12 patrons). A separate application has been made for liquor licensing to the premises to the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing. A copy of this application was received by Council on 12 November 2011 and forwarded to Council’s Coordinator - Regulatory Projects. In addition the applicant has indicated that a copy of the Liquor License Application form was forwarded to the Licensing Sergeant at Maroubra Police Station on 11 November 2011, which reflects the extended trading hours as outlined in section 1 of this report.

 

Details of the current application have also been forwarded to the Crime Prevention Officer - Eastern Beaches Local Area Command at the Maroubra Police Station. No response has been received to date.

 

3.    Application History

 

The subject application was lodged on 28 October 2011. Accordingly, the application and supporting documents were referred to Council’s Environmental Health officer for comment. The following comments were received: -

 

Key Issues – Noise  

As a result of the external seating for a total of 96 (84 plus 12) patrons on the northern side of the Boatshed Café, an acoustic report was requested in memo dated 26th February 2009 assessing the impact of the proposal on the existing amenity in relation to DA76/2009.

 

An acoustic report prepared by The Acoustic Group was received dated 21st August 2009 titled proposed Outdoor Seating Boatshed Café. 1609 Anzac Parade La Perouse.

The report confirms the boatshed café is located a significant  distance from residential premises and is subject to vehicular traffic throughout the day and night.

 

There are also other commercial premises operating on the intersection of Endeavour Avenue and Anzac Parade that have indoor and outdoor dining associated with their commercial use.

 

It was considered the receiver locations are satisfactory in terms of distance from the subject premises.

 

The café and associated outdoor areas do not propose to operate past midnight.

 

The report has provided the confirmation the proposal can comply with required noise criteria and appropriate conditions have been included as part of this proposal. In the context of the proposed operation the distance to residential receivers and an appropriate management plan being submitted to and accepted by Council it is considered the proposal can comply with required criteria.

 


Acoustics

An acoustic report has not been received in relation to this application for potential or existing noise sources, which may impact on the existing amenity of the surrounding environment.

 

RECOMMENDATION

The following information is required to be submitted to Council prior to a determination of the development application.

 

1.       An acoustic report is to be submitted to and accepted by Council.

The report is to be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics and the report and assessment is to be completed in accordance with the NSW Environmental Protection Guidelines, namely the Industrial Noise Policy and Environmental Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance) and the relevant Australian Standards.

The report is to include (but not be limited) to;

§   Noise emission from the proposed development (patron noise etc);

It is noted the previous acoustic report by the Acoustic Group report submitted titled “The Acoustic Group was received dated 21st August 2009 titled proposed Outdoor Seating Boatshed Café” may suffice with additional advice or statement being provided by the Acoustic consultant confirming he has considered the current proposal and it will comply with relevant noise criteria based on previous acoustic investigations if that is the case.

The applicant subsequently submitted a verification document (referencing the previous acoustic assessment report numbered 39.4807.R1 provided by the Acoustic Group in support of the original application DA/76/2009) prepared by The Acoustic group titled ‘Proposed extension of Trading Hours Boatshed Café. 1609 Anzac Parade, La Perouse’, numbered 41.4807.L2: ZSC, dated 18 November 2011, and undated ‘Plan of Management’, both received by Council on 21 November 2011. These documents have been considered as part of a comprehensive assessment of the subject section 96 application.

 

4.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is Crown Land and is identified as Lots 5254, 5255, 5256 & 5257 in Deposit Plan 824002 at 1609–1611 Anzac Parade, La Perouse. The subject premises comprises of an existing café and adjoining deck which is located along the southern end of Anzac Parade, La Perouse abutting a public (beach) recreation area and overlooking Frenchman’s Bay. The subject site is within the southern corner of Frenchman’s Bay, within Botany Bay, and is adjacent to the La Perouse Museum. The surrounding area has significant heritage and cultural value.

 

The “Boatshed Café” is located on Lot 5254 & part Lot 5255 and comprises a 2-storey rendered masonry building with basement floor space at the water line.  The boatshed premises provides for the hiring of boats and fishing tackle at the basement level and has a takeaway food outlet and restaurant at ground floor level and manager’s residence above. The adjoining timber deck is located on Lot 5257 and immediately abuts the café building along its southern elevation. Lot 5256 provides access between the deck and the road.

 

The site has a total area of 550.25m². This is inclusive of all lots: 

·      Lot 5254 – 212.8m²

·      Lot 5255 – 47.63m²

·      Lot 5256 – 21.86m²

·      Lot 5257 – 267.97m²

 

The deck has a floor area of 251.95m², the verandah is 52.3m², and the main Café is 116.2m².

 

The site is located between Anzac Parade and Frenchman’s Bay, opposite the Botany Bay National Park on the La Perouse peninsula.

 

No other buildings adjoin the subject site which enjoys a prominent elevated beachfront position. The site is set in the immediate surrounds of the Botany Bay National Park and a short distance from several other commercial food outlets located to the north-east of the “Boatshed” fronting Endeavour Avenue and Anzac Parade. A residential precinct including a new residential flat building is located further to the north of the food outlets. Opposite the site up the hill to the east is the Botany Bay National Park and museum.

 

The southern extent of Anzac Parade is predominantly grassed public open space comprising historic monuments/buildings and pedestrian walkways.

 

5.    Site History

 

The site has been the subject of a number of previous applications in connection with the use of the premises as a boat shed and food premises. The most recent and relevant consents being: -

 

DA/482/1991 – approved 22 April 1992 for alterations and additions to the existing building for boat hire and a takeaway food facility with provision for 15 seats over a 45.4m2 floor areas.

 

DA/482/1991/A – approved 8 March 1993 to amend the conditions of consent.

 

DA/53/1999 - approved at the Health Building & Planning Committee Meeting of 7 March 2000. The consent detailed alterations and additions to the building to provide for restaurant style dining with seating for 75 patrons within the building and the adjoining deck at the rear of the building. Other works included: 

·      Installation of an ice vending machine in the front of the premises.

·      Install plastic sheeting/blinds around the deck for weather protection

·      Provide an additional 50 chairs with tables located out on the deck and additional 10 chairs with tables inside (ground floor)

·      Extend the food service to a restaurant style service on the deck (the fast food takeaway food business still operates)

·      Re-instate material awning to the northern elevation.

·      Use of room behind the counter for wash up and storage.

·      Replace the existing painted sign and provide external illumination.

 

DA/142/2002 – approved at the Health Building & Planning Committee Meeting of 10 September 2002. The consent details the use of the existing deck adjoining the café into an outdoor dining area providing seating for 84 patrons beneath 7 retractable umbrellas. The dining area is proposed to operate between 10.00am to 5.00pm, Monday to Friday, 9.00am to 6.00pm Saturday to Sunday, and 9.00am to 11.00pm Friday to Sunday during daylight saving. The application also included the rectification of the maritime structure and installation of safety rails.

 

Note: DA/76/2009 is substantially the same as works approved under DA/142/2002. However, DA/142/2002 has since lapsed as no works have been commenced. The main changes from the previous consent relate to the additional 12 seats on the northern side of the cafe building for takeaway customers to utilise together with the reinstatement of an awning & illumination of the existing signage to the eastern elevation fronting Anzac Parade.

 

DA/76/2009 – Restoration of the outdoor deck to be used as dining area associated with 'Boatshed Cafe', adjustment to toilet layout and new signage.

A report recommending approval of this (original) development application was considered at the Planning Committee meeting on 10 November 2009 where Council resolved to refuse the application.

 

Subsequently, a review under Section 82A was lodged on 12 February 2009 and approved by Council on 25 May 2010. 

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

The subject application has been notified and advertised from 9 – 23 November 2011 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. In response, one submission was received from David Crane and Associates Planning Consultants acting on behalf of the proprietors of Danny’s Seafood Restaurant at 1605A, Anzac Parade, La Perouse. The submission raises the following issues:-

 

6.1      Objections

·      The proposed extension of hours will exacerbate noise and amenity impacts

For detailed discussion of noise and amenity impacts, refer to section 11.2 of this report.

·      The SEE does not adequately address social and environmental impacts

An independent assessment of the proposal has been undertaken by Council Officers. Council has not relied solely upon the information/description provided by the applicant in the assessment of the current application.

 

As a result, supplementary (acoustic) information was requested and submitted by the applicant. It is considered that the information provided to Council is adequate to carry out a full and proper assessment of the merits of the current application.

·      Extension of trading hours will impact the visual amenity of patrons of Danny’s Seafood Restaurant due to the illuminated signage

With respect to the visual impact relating to the approved signage, appropriate conditions of consent were included within the original development consent to ensure that wording and graphics for the signage maintains consistency with National Park and Council Interpretation Plan in the area.

 

Further, the western elevation of Danny’s Seafood (overlooking the foreshore area) is located some 83m away from the proposed illuminated signage, which has dimensions of only 700mm x 2350mm. Given the generous separation distance between the two sites, and the modest nature of the signage, it is not anticipated that the illuminated signage will have any unreasonable adverse impacts to the visual amenity of the surrounding foreshore area, or of that currently enjoyed by patrons of Danny’s Seafood.

·      There is insufficient parking and the intensification of use/extension of trading hours will further exacerbate parking pressures.

·      The SEE for the original application (DA/76/2009) was inadequate in addressing the issue of increased parking demand. 

Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 allows an applicant (or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by Council) to make an application, in accordance with the regulations to modify a development consent granted by it.

 

Pursuant to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, any applications made by an applicant to modify a development consent is subject to an independent merit based assessment in accordance with relevant heads of consideration as well as Randwick Council’s planning controls.

 

It is outside the scope of the current section 96 application to revisit the issues raised in the submissions received in response to the original development application and subsequent approval of the development proposal.

 

The subject application seeks to modify approved trading hours only, and does not result in an increase to the number of patrons/seats within the café. Parking and traffic considerations were comprehensively assessed by Council’s Development Engineers under the original development application and deemed to be acceptable. It should be noted that the original application was supported by a parking study including a detailed parking analysis which concluded that the availability of the on-street parking in the surrounding area is sufficient to meet the application’s deficiency.

 

The original application was subject to a thorough assessment and it was demonstrated that the proposal does not result in any inconsistencies with the aims and objectives of the RLEP, 6A zone, or DCP – Parking. For detailed assessment of the previous development consent, refer to the assessment report prepared for DA/76/2009.

 

The modified development will not result in unreasonable detrimental environmental and amenity impacts on the locality. Therefore, the proposed modifications are considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted.

·      The proposal is inconsistent with the general aims of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), specifically, Clause 13, objectives of the 3A General Business Zone.

The subject site is zoned 6A Open Space under Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998 and is within the Botany Bay National Park Conservation Area. As such, the zone objectives under Clause 13 – 3A General Business Zone are not applicable. The current proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the general aims of the RLEP and the relevant zone objectives for the 6A Open Space Zone as stipulated under Clause 18 of the RLEP. The relevant objectives of the zone are addressed in detail in section 8 of this report.

 

The approved activity is permissible with Council’s consent and the modified development is considered to allow for continued use of the publicly owned for recreational purposes and facilities a use that relates to the enjoyment of the surrounding open space.

·      The proposal is inconsistent with Council’s DCP for Footpath Dining and Trading 2004.

The proposed modifications do not seek to carry out any physical changes to the approved development under DA/76/2009. Council’s DCP for Footpath Dining and Trading defines footpath trading activity as ‘use of a public footpath, directly in front of the related premises only, for outdoor dining or other trading activity, including advertising and the display of goods’. The approved outdoor dining is located on an existing timber deck area associated with the café. The deck is located on Crown Land, which is under the care and control of the Department of Lands.

 

Notwithstanding this, the proposed modification to the approved development is considered to be generally consistent with the relevant stated objectives of the DCP – Footpath Dining in that: 

·      The proposed extension of trading hours does not seek to make any physical changes to the outdoor dining layout and does not have any adverse impacts upon the primary function of footpaths as public pedestrian corridors and domains

·      The use of the deck for outdoor dining continues to encourage reasonable opportunities for outdoor dining and other footpath trading activities.

·      Does not compromise safe and healthy outdoor environments.

·      The approved outdoor dining is compatible with surrounding land uses.

·      The proposed modification maintains unobstructed access to footpaths for those with physical and vision disabilities.

·      Access for people with disabilities is maintained.

·      The proposal does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residences.

·      The proposal does not compromise the social and aesthetic aspects of the City’s streetscapes.

·      The proposed modification does not impact the visual quality of the approved furniture and fittings.

·      The proposal does not impact the approved built form of the Boatshed cafe and will not adversely impact on the aesthetic, historic or social significance of the adjacent heritage items or the Botany Bay Conservation Area.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

7.1      Environmental Health Officer

The subject application has been referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officer for assessment. The comments provided are extracted below:

 

Environmental Health comments

The proposal seeks to extend the approved hours of operation to: -

 

Monday to Thursday 10.00 am to 10.00 pm

Saturday Sunday 9.00 am to 11.00 pm

 

Key Issues

Council requested further information and acoustic advice on the proposal. Council has now received Acoustic report/advice from The Acoustic Group confirming acoustic criteria will be achieved based on the current design and patron loading proposal. The report titled “Proposed extension of Trading Hours Boatshed Café. 1609 Anzac Parade, La Perouse” dated 18 November 2011 and referenced previous report no: 39.4807.R1 provided by the Acoustic Group.

 

The Plan of Management Boatshed Café was received on the 21 November 2011 addressing management of the cafe.

 RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the proposed hours of this application are satisfactory based on the information received and the hours of operation maybe amended.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

8.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 6A Open Space under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) and is situated within the Botany Bay National Park Conservation Area. The approved activity and proposed extension to trading hours is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

The relevant objectives of the zone 6A Open Space as contained in Clause 18 of the RLEP 1998 are:

(a)  To identify publicly owned land used or capable of being used for public recreational purposes, and

(b)  To allow development that promotes, or is related to, the use and enjoyment of open space.


The continued use of the café, including extension of trading times is considered to facilitate the use of the publicly owned for recreational purposes and maintains a use which relates to the enjoyment of the surrounding open space. The proposed modifications do not involve any changes to the approved built form and improves the capacity of the existing café to cater for patrons and provides a greater level of amenity for the surrounding scenic recreational area. The proposal is considered to meet the relevant objectives of the zone.  

 

The following clauses of the RLEP apply to the proposal:

 

8.2    Clause 29 – Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

Clause 29 of the RLEP requires Council to consider the probable aesthetic appearance of a proposed development in relation to the foreshore. The current proposal does not seek to physically alter the approved built form of the existing café and relates to changes to approved trading hours only. The approved café refurbishment and deck upgrade was covered by the Frenchmans Bay Plan of Management and was considered to be consistent with the surrounding foreshore and beach areas. It is therefore not considered the proposed modification to trading hours will result in an appreciable impact to the appearance of the foreshore.

 

8.3    Clause 38 – Development in open space zones

Clause 38 of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) states that Council may grant consent to the development of land within zone 6A if it is satisfied that the proposed use is suited to that location and the use is consistent with any plan of management prepared for the area. In addition consideration must be given to the need for the proposed development, if it relates to the use and enjoyment of the open space, the impact upon the likely future use and character of the land and the need to retain the land for its existing or likely use.

 

Subject to compliance with all original conditions of consent, the proposed extension to approved trading hours will allow for the continued and improved enjoyment of the café and promote the objectives of the zone. The proposal satisfies the provisions of Clause 38 of the LEP

 

Clause 38(2) requires the consideration of a number of issues when determining an application to carry out development on land zoned 6A. The relevant issues are discussed below.

 

(a)    The need for the proposed development on that land

The proposed extension to trading hours is considered to facilitate the ongoing utilisation of the existing deck to provide a service to the patrons of the boatshed café. Further, there is a genuine need for quality outdoor dining areas for patrons of this cafe, particularly during the summer months and during the evenings.

 

(b)  Whether the proposed development promotes or is related to the use and enjoyment of open space.

The proposal is related to the use and enjoyment of open space. The use of the deck for outdoor dining would allow the community to benefit from the scenic qualities of the locality.

 

(c)   The impact of the proposed development on the existing or likely future use and character of the land.

The proposed modification will not result in any adverse environmental impacts on the public domain in terms of overshadowing, access to pedestrian walkways etc, and as such will not impact existing or likely future use of the land.

 

8.4      Clause 43 - Protection of heritage items, heritage conservation area and relics

The subject site is located within the Botany Bay National Park Conservation Area and prominently located at the southern end of Frenchmans Bay. The coastal area to the south and east of the site are within the Botany Bay National Park Conservation Area while the area to the north is under the care and control of Council. 

 

Under Clause 43 of the RLEP, Council must consider the likely effect of the proposal upon the significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area.

 

The proposed modification relates to hours of trading only and does not seek to carry out any changes to the approved built form/outdoor dining area. As such, the building will retain its approved bulk, scale and character.  It is considered that the proposed works will not impact on the aesthetic, historic or social significance of the adjacent heritage items or the Botany Bay Conservation Area.

 

8.5    Clause 46 – Development in the vicinity of heritage items, heritage conservation areas, and known or potential archaeological sites

Clause 46 requires Council, when determining an application for consent to carry out development on land in the vicinity of a heritage item, a heritage conservation area or a known or potential archaeological site, take into consideration the likely effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage item, heritage conservation area or known or potential archaeological site and on its setting.

 

There are a number of heritage items in the vicinity of the site, including the former Cable House (1882), now a Museum, Macquarie Watchtower (1810), the La Perouse Memorial and the Tomb of Pere le Receveur.  The Statement of Significance for the conservation area notes that the area has aesthetic, historic and social significance.  The aesthetic significance of the area as a whole arises from the scenic value of the natural landscape and the man-made features within it, at the entrance to Botany Bay.

 

The proposed modification relates to hours of trading only and does not seek to carry out any changes to the approved built form/outdoor dining area. As such, the building will retain its approved bulk, scale and character. Having regard to these matters, the proposal is not considered to result in any adverse impact on the nearby Heritage Items.

 

9.    Policy Controls

The Policy controls applicable to the proposed development are:

·      Development Control – Parking

·      Frenchmans Bay Plan of Management

 

9.1      Development Control Plan - Outdoor Advertising

The approved signage is not altered as part of the subject application and continued to meet the relevant objectives of Council’s development Control Plan for Outdoor Advertising in that the signage and wording relates to the business and the type of goods and commodities provided at the premises. The sign keeps in character and aligns to the outline of the building and will not compromise the architectural integrity of the building.

 

 

9.2      Development Control Plan – Parking

The subject application seeks to modify approved trading hours only, and does not result in an increase to the number of patrons/seats within the café. Parking and traffic considerations were comprehensively assessed by Council’s Development Engineers under the original development application and deemed to be acceptable. It should be noted that the original application was supported by a parking study including a detailed parking analysis which concluded that the availability of the on-street parking in the surrounding area is sufficient to meet the application’s deficiency.

 

Further, Council’s DCP-Parking states the following with respect to parking requirements for Footway Restaurants:

 

“Where the development is for the purpose of a restaurant on the footway of a public road, or on community land no additional off-street parking will be required.”

 

An argument could be made that the proposed development is for the purpose of a restaurant on public land.

 

The original application was subject to a thorough assessment and it was demonstrated that the proposal does not result in any inconsistencies with the aims and objectives of Council’s parking DCP. For detailed assessment of the parking issues relating to the original development consent, refer to the assessment report prepared for DA/76/2009.

 

9.3        Frenchman’s Bay Plan of Management

The Frenchman’s Bay Plan of Management provides Council with a set of policy and management directions for the future enhancement and management of the area as a whole.

 

 It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant guiding principles contained in the plan. The proposal will also be required to comply with the DLWC policy on “Food and Beverage outlets on Crown Reserves

 

10.    Section96 Assessment

 

Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, states that a consent authority may, on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by the consent authority and subject to and in accordance with the regulations, modify the consent if:

 (a)   it is satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental impact, and

(b)   it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all), and

(c)   it has notified the application

(d)   it has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within any period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.

 

The proposed modification relates to hours of trading only and does not seek to carry out any changes to the approved built form/outdoor dining area. As such, the building will retain its approved bulk, scale and character. The modified development will not result in detrimental environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality, and is considered to be within the public interest.

 

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

 

The submissions received in response to the public notification and advertising period have been considered and addressed in detail within Section 6 of this report.

 

11. Environmental Assessment

 

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

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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 6A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the approved activity and built form will not compromise the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of 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 relevant assessment criteria, except where discussed in the key issues section of this report.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

11.1    Noise and Amenity

The proposal seeks to extend the approved trading hours of the Boatshed café (it is noted that no additional patrons are proposed to be accommodated on site). This has the potential to result in some additional degree of acoustic impact to the area immediately outside of the establishment.

 

As such, the applicant was required to provide additional acoustic information and advice as well as a Plan of Management to demonstrate the proposed extended trading hours will not adversely impact the surrounding area in terms of excessive noise.

 

The applicant subsequently submitted a verification document (referencing the previous acoustic assessment report numbered 39.4807.R1 provided by the Acoustic Group in support of the original application DA/76/2009) prepared by The Acoustic group titled ‘Proposed extension of Trading Hours Boatshed Café. 1609 Anzac Parade, La Perouse’, numbered 41.4807.L2: ZSC, dated 18 November 2011, and undated ‘Plan of Management’, both received by Council on 21 November 2011. The Plan of Management Boatshed Café was received on the 21 November 2011 addressing management of the cafe.

 

These documents have been considered as part of a comprehensive assessment of the subject section 96 application by council’s Senior Environmental Health Officer and no objections have been raised with regard to the proposed extension of trading hours.

 

The Boatshed café is located sufficiently away from residential premises and is subject to vehicular traffic throughout the day and night. There are also a number of other commercial premises operating on the intersection of Endeavour Avenue and Anzac Parade that have indoor and outdoor dining associated with their commercial use. Further, the café does not propose to operate past midnight.

 

The applicants have demonstrated the proposal’s compliance with required noise criteria and condition No. 11 of the original consent relating to hours of trading has been amended accordingly. It is considered the proposal can comply with required criteria and will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts to the amenity of the surrounding area, and nearby commercial and residential dwellings.

 

 

 

11.2    Public Interest

The site is well located in terms of distance from sensitive land uses and proximity to the beach and other tourist attractions. The continued use of the expanded food outlet with shaded dining area will provide patrons with protection from the elements whilst enjoying the surrounding scenic area. This will serve to enhance the recreational function and capacity of the adjoining opening space. It considered that the proposal is in the public interest.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

Outcome 6:       A Liveable City.

Direction 6b:      Our town centres, beaches, public places and streets are safe, inviting, clean and support a recognisable image of our city.

Direction 6c:      The safety of our community is paramount and is acknowledged and supported through proactive policies, programmes and strategies.

Outcome 7:       Heritage that is protected and celebrated.

Direction7a.       Our heritage is recognised, protected and celebrated.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the original consent satisfies Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, in that it will constitute substantially the same development. The proposed modification to approved trading hours is not considered to result in an unreasonable detrimental impact on the streetscape or amenity of the surrounding residential and commercial development.

 

The proposal is not anticipated to result in any unreasonable adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the streetscape subject to compliance with the relevant conditions of consent. As such, the proposed modification is recommended for approval.

 

 

Recommendation

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No. DA/76/2009 for permission to modify the approved development by extending the hours of operation to 10am to 10pm Monday to Thursday and 9am to 11pm Friday, Saturday and Sunday at No. 1609-1611 Anzac Parade, La Perouse in the following manner: 

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 01, 02, 03, 04, & 05, dated January 2009 and received by Council on 12 February 2009, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the Section 96’A’ application dated 16 September 2011 and received by Council on 28 October 2011, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

 

 

 

Amend Condition No. 11 to read:

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

·      Monday - Thursday: 10:00am to 10:00pm

·      Friday, Saturday and Sunday: 9.00am to 11:00pm

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          14 February 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D4/12

 

 

Subject:                  16 Houston Road, Kensington (DA/518/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/518/2011

Author:                   Alex Van Son, Senior Environmental Planner     

 

Proposal:                               Demolition of existing structures on site, construction of two separate two storey dwellings with garaging, Torrens Title subdivision and associated works

 

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Henry Zhang

Owner:                         Huilyma Ngadiman

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.        Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to the Planning Committee because there are departures from the LEP Development Standards that exceed 10%. The proposal was originally lodged on 8 July 2011 as multi-unit housing and satisfied all the relevant LEP Development Standards at the time of lodgement; recent amendments to the definitions of “multi-unit housing” contained within the LEP has meant that the proposal is now defined as two separate dwelling houses and the minimum allotment size development standard is now applicable. 

 

The proposal involves the demolition of all existing structures on the site and construction two free standing two-storey dwellings with internal stacked double garages. The site will be subdivided into two Torrens Title lots, Lot A and Lot B, both measuring 252.9m2. Unit A will have a frontage to Houston Road and Unit B will have a frontage to Houston Lane. A carriageway measuring 0.9m wide will provide pedestrian access to Unit B from Houston Road.

 

A final set of amended plans have been received on 25 August 2011 to address issues raised by Council in relation to parking, overshadowing and site planning.

 

The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy 1 in relation to non-compliance with principal development standards relating to minimum allotment size. The SEPP1 Objection is supported by the assessing planner.

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification and one objection has been received from a neighbouring property. The matters raised in these objections relates to overshadowing and the level of detail provided by the applicant. These matters have been addressed in satisfactorily through amended plans, as discussed within the body of this report.

 

The proposal generally complies with the objectives and relevant provisions of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998 and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

The proposed development satisfies the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended. Additionally, the proposed development satisfies the relevant legislation, State policies and Local planning controls, and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.        Site Description

 

No. 16 Houston Road (“the site”) is located on the eastern side of Houston Road between Barker Street and Day Ave and has a secondary frontage to Houston Lane. The site has a frontage to Houston Road of 10.6m, a depth of 50.29m and a total area of 505.8sqm.

 

At present, the site accommodates a single-storey residential dwelling fronting Houston Road. A large three car garage is located within the rear section of the site, accessed off Houston Lane.

 

The site is adjoined to the north by a similar development to that proposed at No. 14 Houston Road and another similar development is located at No. 12 Houston Road. To the south of the site is a three-storey multi-unit housing development comprising 10 apartments with basement car parking. To the east of the site is a large building associated with the UNSW campus. The locality is generally characterised by a mixture of detached and semi-detached dwellings and multi-unit residential developments.

 

3.        Proposal

 

It is proposed to demolish all existing structures on the site and construct two freestanding two-storey dwellings with internal stacked double garages. The site will be subdivided into two Torrens Title lots, Lot A and Lot B, both measuring 252.9m2.

 

Unit A will have a frontage to Houston Road and Unit B will have a frontage to Houston Lane. A carriageway measuring 0.9m wide will provide pedestrian access to Unit B from Houston Road.

 

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

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998. A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted with the development application. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the following matters are addressed:

 

4.1      Clause 20B: Minimum Allotment Sizes

 

4.2      20B: Minimum Allotment Sizes

 

Proposed

Site A:266.5 m2

Site B:257m2

LEP development standard (Zone 2B)

325m2

 

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

Site A: 18%

Site B: 21%

 

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 objective of Clause 20B Minimum Allotment Sizes of the Randwick LEP is stated as being:

 

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

 

As such, the appropriate test in this instance is to establish whether or not the reduced lot size would result in development that protects and improves the amenity of the residential area as defined by the objectives of the Residential 2B Zone.

 

The Applicant has provided the following argument in respect of Matter 1 considerations:

 

·      The proposed allotment size is consistent with existing development in the vicinity (i.e. 12, 14 and 21 Houston Road)

·      The proposal will provide adequate amenity for the occupants and complies with development standards for flor space ratio, landscaped area [and building height].

·      The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact to neighbouring properties.

·      The application was lodged prior to changes to the LEP definition for multi-unit housing.

 

Further to the above, although it is noted that the form of development closely matches development at No. 12, 14 and 21 Houston Road; these sites have been strata subdivided only. However, under the current provisions of the LEP, Torrens Title subdivision is the only means possible to achieve a similar form of development and (as stated above) the proposed allotment sizes complied with the relevant development standards of the LEP at the time of lodgement.

Notwithstanding the reduced lot size, the proposal complies all the relevant development controls in relation to landscaped area, floor space ratio and building height, and the proposal is not considered to have any unreasonable impacts on adjoining development or in relation to the streetscape.

 

Overall, the justifications for the SEPP 1 objection provided by the applicant are generally considered to be well founded. It is considered that the SEPP 1 Objection is well founded and compliance with the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary 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 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 allotment size development 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 2B Zone in that it will allow medium density development, which is consistent with the existing and 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 does not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not allow the best use of the site and there is no public benefit in maintaining the controls 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 proposal will achieve the objectives of the development standard.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

The minimum allotment size 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.        Submissions

 

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

 

5/18-20 Houston Road.

Issue

Comment

Inaccuracy of drawings and potential overshadowing of 18-20 Houston Road.

Detailed drawings have been provided by the applicant and the objector has been notified of this. The impact of the proposal in relation to overshadowing has been assessed within the body of this report and is considered to be acceptable. 

There are no dimensions on any of these drawings that display how far the buildings will be from Houston Lane (Unit B) and Houston Road (Unit A).

Plan shadow diagrams submitted by the applicant and available on Council’s website show the layout of the site and have been drawn to scale. These dimensions can be taken off these drawings. Front and rear setbacks are adequate as discussed within the body of this report.

 

Note: Amended drawings were requested from the applicant to address some of the concerns raised by the objector as detailed above. When amended drawings were received by Council on 25 August 2011 (and placed on Council’s website 30 August 2011) attempts were made to contact the objector on the phone numbers provided, but no contact was made. An email was subsequently sent on 6 December 2011 notifying the objector of previous attempts to contact them and notifying them of amended plans submitted by the applicant; a response was received via email. The objector currently lives in Singapore and no further submissions have been received to date.

 

6.        Technical Officers Comments

 

The proposal has been referred internally to Council’s Development Engineering Department. Comments have been received in relation to parking, landscaping and flooding. Suggested conditions have been included in the “Recommendation” section of this report.

 

General Comments

In response to issues raised in previous memo with the proposed garage the applicant has submitted new plans with the following amendments noted.

 

The garage has been widened to minimum 3.0m internal width

 

It is noted that changes to the floor level recommended in previous memo have not been acted upon. As a result there will still be 1 step intruding into the garage by about 300mm despite not being shown on the plans. Since the garage has been widened and the step will be below the opening door height for vehicles there is no objection from Development Engineering.

 

Parking Comments

The proposal complies with the minimum parking provision requirements specified in Council’s DCP-Parking with two spaces provided for each dwelling within the proposed garages in a tandem arrangement. 

 

Tree & Landscape Comments

There are two public trees growing on the Houston Road verge, being firstly, a mature, 8m tall Melaleuca quinquinervia (Broad Leafed Paperbark) towards the northern site boundary, and then to its south, a 4-5m tall, juvenile Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) which are both covered by Council's Tree Preservation Order and contribute to the streetscape.

 

No objections are raised to the applicant removing and disposing of the Jacaranda, at their own cost, during excavations for the vehicle crossing in this same area as shown, with relevant protection measures and a refundable bond as security for compliance imposed to ensure preservation of the Paperbark.

 

In the rear yard, there are a group of established trees, some of which are in the order of 30-40 years in age, that have been planted by the owner to assist with screening, privacy and to minimise overlooking from the large UNSW building on the eastern side of Houston Lane.

 

They comprise from south to north, a 10m tall Cedrus deodara (Cedar) close to the southern site boundary, then a mature, 15m tall Corymbia citriodora (Lemon Scented Gum) close to the western edge of the existing garage, a 6m Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located centrally, then a mature, 16m tall Populus deltoides (Poplar) towards the northern site boundary.

 

The Cedar is in poor health and condition due to an aggressive weed entwining throughout its canopy as well as being suppressed by larger, more dominant trees in this area, and while it would be preferable to retain the Lemon Scented Gum, it will not be possible in this case given its position only 1.5m off the western edge of the existing garage, with clause 4.b.vii of our TPO (2005) allowing the removal of trees without consent where located within 2 metres of a permanent structure.

 

The Jacaranda is not a significant tree in anyway, and given its poor form due to being suppressed under larger, more dominant trees, as well as its central location and direct conflict with the proposed works, no objections are raised to its removal.

 

Lastly, given the current large size of the Poplar, and the fact it has not yet reached its mature dimensions, it would not be possible to simply re-design the proposal given the significant setbacks required, and due to the high occurrence of failures, decay and general instability in this species, as well as its aggressive root system, is not deemed suitable for retention as part of this scheme given the inherent maintenance and safety issues, with consent also granted for its removal.

 

In order to compensate for the loss of this group, conditions in this report specify that replacement trees, that are appropriate for the space available, be provided as part of site landscaping, as screening and amenity is still an issue given the high density of housing in this area. 

 

Flooding Comments        

The Planning Officer is advised that the subject development site is located near an entrapped low point in Houston Lane and may be subject to stormwater inundation during major storm events. During major storm events ponding is likely to occur around the entrapped lowpoint and stormwater pit in Houston Lane near the southern boundary of 18-20 Houston Road.

 

Information in Council’s possession suggest that the habitable and garage floor levels are located sufficiently above the low point to not be affected by floodwaters during major storm events. In addition all stormwater runoff from the site will be required to be drained to Houston Road to minimize any potential impact in Houston Lane. It should also be noted that conditions included in a DA consent at 18-20 Houston Road required the provision of a formal overland flow path through the site to Houston Road assist in draining flows away from the low point which will further reduce the risk if floodwaters entering 16 Houston Road. This development is currently nearing completion.

 

7.        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.

 

7.1      Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The land is zoned 2B Residential and the proposal is permissible with development consent.

 

The proposal is consistent with the general aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will enhance and compliment the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

A summary of compliance with the relevant RLEP 1998 principle development standards is provided below:

 

Clause

Standard

Dwelling A

Dwelling  B

Clause 20B: Minimum Allotment Size

The minimum allotment size for development within the 2B Zone is 325m2.

266.5 m2

 

257m2

 

State Environment Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

The development application was accompanied by a BASIX certificate. There are conditions in the recommendation to ensure compliance.

 

8.        Policy Controls

 

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

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

 

Landscaping

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to landscaping and open space seek to ensure that existing significant trees and vegetation is retained; that dwellings are provided with useable outdoor recreation space; that stormwater management, the appearance, amenity, and energy efficiency of dwellings is improved; and to preserve and enhance native wildlife populations through the planting of appropriate native species.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Satisfactory, 50.4%/dwelling

S1

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

Satisfactory, at least 50m2 is provided for each dwelling with minimum dimension of 5m.

S1

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

Satisfactory, as above.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

Satisfactory.

 

Floor Area

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP in relation to floor space ratio aim to ensure that developments are not excessive in bulk or scale, are compatible with the existing character of the locality, and will minimise adverse amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

The preferred solution for an allotment of 252.9m2 is 0.65:1 FSR or 164.4m2.

0.63:1 or 159.5m2/site (complies).

 

 

Height, Form & Materials

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to building height seek to: ensure that the height of buildings relate to the topography of the site; ensure that development is not excessive in height and compatible with the existing character of the locality; and to ensure that natural light access to adjoining buildings is maintained.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

Satisfactory, external wall height of 6.25 metres.

 

S1

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

No applicable.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

Satisfactory, no significant cut or fill proposed.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

Satisfactory, as above.

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

Satisfactory, as above.

S4

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

Satisfactory, first floor levels are setback from site boundaries 1500mm.

S5

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

No applicable.

 

Building Setbacks

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to side setbacks seek to achieve the following objectives: to integrate development with established setbacks of the street and maintain environmental amenity of the streetscape; ensure dwellings have adequate access to natural daylight and fresh air; and maintain and enhance establish trees and vegetation.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

Satisfactory, Houston Road setback and Houston Lane setback generally match the adjoining development at 14 and 18-20 Houston Rd.

S2

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

Satisfactory.

S3

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

Average setback to north boundary is 900mm at ground floor level and 1500mm at first floor level.

The average setback to southern boundary is 1210mm at ground floor level.

S3

Side setbacks should be 1.5m at second floor level.

Average setback to north boundary is 1500mm at first floor level. The average setback to southern boundary is 1500mm at first floor level.

 

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

Not applicable

 

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to privacy seek to ensure that new buildings meet both the occupants and the neighbours’ requirements for visual and acoustic privacy.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Main living areas for both units are on ground floor and located on the northern side of the dwelling. Windows associated with these areas ore orientated toward the garage of the neighbouring dwelling to the north.

 

Bedrooms at first floor level have windows on the northern elevation, which are to be glazed with translucent glass, as confirmed by recommended conditions.

S1

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

It is recommended that conditions are attached requiring that landscaping along the rear boundary of each proposed site incorporate suitable species to provide screening between the two sites.

 

Satisfactory levels of privacy are provided to private open spaces of adjoining sites to the north and south given the context of the development.

 

S1

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

 

Satisfactory

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Condition of consent requires compliance with BCA.

 

Safety & Security

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to safety and security seek to ensure that new development provides a safe physical environment by promoting crime prevention through design; ensuring the security of residents and visitors and their property and enhancing the perception of community safety.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

Satisfactory.

S1,3

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

Satisfactory.

S2

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

Required by condition of consent.

 

Garages & Driveways

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to garages, carports and driveways seek to ensure that on-site car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive or detract from the streetscape and provide convenient and safe carparking

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

Satisfactory, two spaces provided.

S1

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

Parking space dimensions proposed are to the satisfaction of Councils Development Engineer.

S1

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

Satisfactory, 3m.

S1

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

Satisfactory, 3m

S1

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

Grades proposed are to the satisfaction of Councils Development Engineer.

 

S1

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

Satisfactory.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

Satisfactory.

S2

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

Satisfactory, 30%.

 

Fences

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to front fences is to ensure that front fencing is integrated with the streetscape and continues positively to street character; is integrated with landscape and dwelling design; to ensure adequate privacy, amenity, safety and security for occupants of new and existing dwellings.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

Not applicable.

S1

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

Satisfactory, the proposal includes a front fence along the western Houston Road frontage which is 1.2m in height.

 

A consent condition is required in relation to any proposed fence along the eastern Houston Lane frontage.

 

S1

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

Satisfactory, as above.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

The Objectives and Preferred Solutions of the DCP as they relate to fences seek to ensure that front fencing is integrated with the streetscape and contributes positively to street character; that fencing is integrated with the landscape and dwelling design; and that adequate privacy, amenity, safety and security for occupants of new and existing dwellings is provided.

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

BASIX certificate provided.

S2

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

Private open space associated with Dwelling A is located to east of the lot and private open space associated with Dwelling A is located to west of the lot.

 

Overshadowing is unavoidable on a narrow east-west lot, however the approximate 12m separation between Units A and B provides for reasonable solar access to Private open space to each unit.

S2,8

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

Due to the alignment of the site, living areas associated with each dwelling are orientated to the east and west. Internal living areas are expected to receive satisfactory levels of solar access through the day given the context of the site.

 

S9

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

Satisfactory, the proposed development is not expected to overshadow the roof of No. 18-20 Houston Road.

 

S9

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

Satisfactory, amended shadow diagrams provided by the applicant indicate that the northern elevation of the neighbouring building to the south would receive reasonable levels of solar access.

 

Given the orientation of allotments in Houston Road, which places side boundaries on an east-west alignment, the development of the site to the desired future character of the locale would be impracticable without resultant solar access impacts on adjacent properties to the south. Nonetheless, the approximate 12m separation between Units A and B provides for reasonable solar access between the two proposed dwellings.

 

S9

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

Satisfactory, as above.

 

 

Section 94A Development Contributions:

In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, the following monetary levy must be paid to Council.

 

Category

Cost

Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$495,000.00

1.0%

$4,950.00

 

 

9.        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.

 

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will enhance and compliment the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of 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 the key issues section of this report.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 12:     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 complies with the relevant assessment criteria will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality

 

The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy 1 in relation to non-compliance with principal development standards relating to minimum allotment size and the SEPP1 objection is supported.

 

The proposal generally complies with the objectives and relevant provisions of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998 and the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

 

The proposed development satisfies the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended. Additionally, the proposed development satisfies the relevant legislation, State policies and Local planning controls.

 

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

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 20B of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to Minimum Allotment Size 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/518/2011 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of multi unit development comprising two separate two storey buildings with garaging, torrens title subdivision and associated works at No. 16 Houston Road, Kensington 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

Issue

Drawn by

Stamped

H52-01

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-02

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-03

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-04

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-05

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-06

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-07

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-08

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-09

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-10

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-11

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-12

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

H52-15 (subdivision)

02

3D Archplan (J.L.)

25 August 2011

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

16 Houston Road

386245S

06 July 2011

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

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

a.   North facing windows off bedrooms at first floor level associated with Unit A and Unit B are to be glazed with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing below 1.5m from floor level.

 

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 to the building are to be compatible with the adjacent development to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

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 $495,000.00, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $4,950.00

       

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

 

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

 

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 Deposit

7.       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:

·           $3000.00    -      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.

 

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.

 

Design Alignment levels

8.       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, shall be:

 

Houston Road frontage

·  Match the back of the existing footpath  at all points opposite, along the full site frontage.

 

Houston Lane frontage

·  100 mm above the centreline of the existing asphalt laneway at all points opposite.

 

The design alignment levels 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 0881.

 

9.       The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $462 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.

 

10.     The top of footings of any structures constructed on the boundary alignment must be at least 150mm below the alignment level as specified for the vehicular accesses. 

 

Driveway Design

11.     The gradient of the internal access driveways must be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 2890.1 (2004) – Off Street Car Parking and the levels of the driveway must match the alignment levels at the property boundary (as specified by Council). Details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

The height of the building must not be increased to satisfy the required driveway gradients.

         

Sydney Water

12.     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 prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate or Subdivision Certificate (whichever the sooner).

 

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

 

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

 

Stormwater Drainage

14.     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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

15.     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 the 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 (by gravity) either:

i.     Directly to the kerb and gutter or drainage system located at the front of the subject site in Houston Road; or

 

ii.    To a suitably designed infiltration system (subject to confirmation in a geotechnical investigation that the ground conditions are suitable for the infiltration system)

 

c)     Should stormwater be discharged to Council’s street drainage system, 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 10 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)     Should stormwater be discharged to an infiltration system, the infiltration area shall be  sized for all storm events up to the 1 in 20 year storm event with provision for a formal overland flow path to Council’s Street drainage system.

 

Should no formal overland escape route be provided for storms greater than the 1 in 20 design storm, the infiltration system shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year storm event.

 

e)     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.

 

f)     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.

 

g)     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).

h)     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.

 

i)      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.

 

j)     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).

 

k)     Infiltration systems/Absorption Trenches must be designed and constructed generally in accordance with "Section 8.5 ABSORPTION TRENCHES" of Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

l)      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.

 

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

 

n)     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.

 

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

 

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

 

q)     Seepage waters are required to be drained and disposed of within the site and are not to be drained into Council’s stormwater drainage system.

 

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

 

Protection of Street Tree

16.     In order to ensure retention of the Melaleuca quinquinervia (Broad Leafed Paperbark) on the Houston Road verge, towards the northern site 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 this street tree, with the position and diameter of both its trunk and canopy to be clearly and accurately shown on all drawings.

 

b.     The northern edge of the vehicle crossing must be setback a minimum distance of 2.8m off the base of the tree (refer also Civil Conditions).

 

c.     Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar over public property must be lcoated along either of the sites side boundaries; or, against either side of the new crossing.

 

d.         It 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 2 metres to its north and south (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), matching up with the back of the kerb to its west, and pedestrian footpath to its east, in order to completely enclose this tree for the duration of works.

 

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

 

f.     The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to this street tree, 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.

 

g.     Within the TPZ, there is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

h.     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.

 

i.      A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $1,500.00 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 the tree.

 

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

 

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

 

17.     The applicant must also submit $250 to Council, being a loss of amenity fee in recognition that the existing Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) on Council’s Houston Road nature strip, located towards the southern site boundary is only being removed in order to accommodate the proposed development, with a replacement not possible given a lack of available space, with this fee to be used towards new plantings in the surrounding area.

 

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.

 

18.     A minimum 1 metre wide pedestrian path shall be provided from proposed Lot B through proposed Lot A to Houston Road. Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

19.     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

20.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia (volume 2) and 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

21.     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.

Building & Design

22.     The external walls of the dwelling must be located not less than 900mm from the northern side site boundary at ground floor level and 1500mm from the northern side site boundary at first floor level.

 

23.     The external walls of the dwelling must be located not less than 1210mm from the southern side site boundary at ground floor level and 1500mm from the southern side site boundary at first floor level.

 

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.

 

Demolition & Construction Waste

24.              A Demolition and Construction Waste Management Plan (WMP) must be development and implemented for the development, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Work Zone

25.              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 Houston Road 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.

 

Public Utilities

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

 

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

 

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

 

Landscaping

27.              For the type of development being proposed, and both the size and quantity of trees that need to be removed, the Landscape Plan by Archplan, dwg no H52-13, issue 01, dated 07/07/11 shows an insufficient level of treatment and cannot be accepted.

 

28.              A landscape plan prepared by a qualified professional in the Landscape/Horticultural industry (must be a registered member of either AILDM or AILA) must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the commencement of site works, and must detail the following:

 

a)            A Planting Plan & Plant Schedule which includes proposed species, botanic and common names, pot size at the time of planting, quantity, location, dimensions at maturity, maintenance practices (hedging, shaping etc), as well as any other landscape details to describe the proposed works;

 

b)            The small areas of lawn currently shown at the southwest and southeast corner of the site are to be deleted and replaced as garden areas containing a suitable mixture of decorative species that will assist with presentation of the development to the respective frontages;

 

c)            Deletion of Melaleuca armillaris (Bracelet Honey Myrtle) as this species is not associated with high quality residential developments, and must be replaced with a more suitable, decorative species of similar dimensions;

 

d)            A predominance of species that are not reliant on high rates of moisture and/or fertiliser for survival;

 

e)            In order to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity, at least 1 x 25 litre/300mm (pot size at the time of planting) tree must be planted within the rear yard of each proposed dwelling, selecting those species which will attain a minimum height of between 4-7 metres at maturity.

 

Construction Certificate, Principal Certifying Authority & Commencement of Works

29.              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.

 

Home Building Act 1989

30.              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

31.              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.  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

32.              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, to the satisfaction of the Council.  A copy of the strategy must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the commencement of works on site.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

33.              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 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, amenities or articles upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or public place at any time, 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

34.              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

35.              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

·                 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

36.              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.

 

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

37.              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

38.              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

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·     Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·     Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·     Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

 

·     Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·     Saturday - No work permitted

·     Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

 

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

 

Demolition Work Requirements

40.              All work and activities must be carried out in accordance with the relevant regulatory requirements 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

41.              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

42.              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 must be shown in a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan, including; a site plan; indicating the slope of land, access points & access control measures, location and type of sediment & erosion controls, location of existing vegetation to be retained, location of material stockpiles and storage areas, location of building operations and equipment, methods of sediment control, details of drainage systems and details of existing and proposed vegetation.

 

A copy of the Sediment and Erosion Control Plan must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and a copy must be maintained on site and be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

Public Safety & Site Management

43.              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

44.              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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

46.              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.

 

 

Survey Requirements

47.              A Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate or other suitable documentation must be obtained at the following stage/s of construction to demonstrate compliance with the approved setbacks, levels, layout and height of the building to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA):

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

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

·                 as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

The survey documentation must be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority and a copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority for the development.  

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Site Amenities

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

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

50.              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.

           

            Drainage

51.              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 Removals

52.              Approval is granted for removal of the following trees from the rear yard in order to accommodate proposed Unit B as shown, subject to full implementation of the approved landscaping:

a)       From south to north, a Cedrus deodara (Cedar), close to the southern site boundary, due to its poor health and condition and being suppressed under larger, more dominant trees in this area;

b)       The mature Corymbia citriodora (Lemon Scented Gum) as it is already exempt due to its inappropriate location close to the western edge of the existing garage;

c)       The Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located centrally due to its insignificance; and

d)       The mature Populus deltoides (Poplar) towards the northern site boundary, as it has not reached its full dimensions, and could not be retained as part of this proposal given the substantial setbacks required.

 

53.              The applicant must remove and dispose of (at their own cost) the existing Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) on Council’s Houston Road nature strip, located towards the southern site boundary, during excavations associated with the proposed vehicle crossing as shown, and must satisfy themselves as to the location of all site services prior to the commencement of any works on public property.

 

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

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

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

NOTE:

The northern edge of the vehicle crossing must be setback a minimum distance of 2.8m off the base of the Melaleuca quinquinervia (Broad Leafed Paperbark) located on Council’s street verge.

 

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

c)       Remove any redundant vehicular crossings and to reinstate the area with concrete footpath, turf and integral kerb and gutter to Council's specification.

d)       Re-construct concrete footpath along the full site frontage in Houston Road if required.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

e)       Construct concrete kerb and gutter along the full site frontage in Houston Lane except opposite the vehicular entry point. This shall include minimum 1.0 metre wide full depth road reconstruction in front of the new kerb and gutter.

f)         Construct full width concrete footpath between the back of the new kerb and gutter in Houston Lane and the western side of the proposed 0.9 metre parcel of land to be dedicated to Council along the Houston Lane site frontage.

 

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

 

56.              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.

 

57.              Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate the applicant shall, at no cost to Council, dedicate a 0.9 metre wide strip of land along the full Houston Lane site frontage for road widening purposes. The strip of land is required to facilitate the provision of a concrete footpath along the site frontage in Houston Lane.

 

Service Authorities

58.              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).

 

Stormwater Drainage

59.              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.

 

60.              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).

 

61.              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.

 

Landscaping

62.              The PCA must ensure that the landscaping is installed in accordance with the approved plan and relevant conditions of consent, prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, with the owner/s to maintain it in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

63.              The naturestrip 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.

 

Waste Management

64.              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 additional premises.

 

Occupation Certificate Requirements

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

 

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

 

BASIX Requirements

66.              In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue an Occupation Certificate for this development, unless it is satisfied that each of the required BASIX commitments have been fulfilled.

 

Relevant documentary evidence of compliance with the BASIX commitments is to be forwarded to the Council upon issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Occupant Safety

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

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

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

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

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

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

·                 Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

The relevant measures must be implemented prior to issue of an occupation certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISON CERTIFICATE

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing a ‘Subdivision certificate’ or ‘Strata Certificate’.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works.

 

68.              A formal subdivision application is required to be submitted to and approved by the Council or an accredited certifier and all relevant conditions of this development consent are required to be satisfied prior to the release of the subdivision plans.

 

69.              All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan must be constructed prior to the issue of a strata subdivision certificate.

 

70.              All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan must correspond to those depicted in this development consent and construction certificate  for the building.

 

71.              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 or Strata Certificate.

 

72.              A minimum 1 metre wide pedestrian path shall be provided from proposed Lot B through proposed Lot A to Houston Road. The pedestrian path shall be either allocated as common property or created as a right of way over proposed Lot A benefiting proposed Lot B.

 

73.              A "restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant" (under section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919) shall be placed on the title of the subject property (in conjunction with registration of the plan of strata subdivision) to ensure that the onsite detention system and/or infiltration system is maintained and that no works which could affect the design function of the infiltration/detention system are undertaken without the prior consent (in writing) from Council. The restriction and positive covenant shall not be released, varied or modified without the consent of the Council.

 

The “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” are to be prepared and specified 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 City Services Department.

74.              The applicant shall create suitable right of carriageway, easements for services and internal stormwater lines, as required. The applicant shall be advised that the minimum easement width for any internal stormwater line is 0.9 metres.

 

75.              The conditions of development consent must be satisfied and all public roads and reserves must be satisfactorily restored prior to endorsement of the strata subdivision plans.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

External Lighting

76.              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.

 

Use of premises

77.              The premises is to be used as a single residential dwelling only at all times and must not be used for dual or multi-occupancy purposes.

 

Street Numbering

78.              Street numbering must be provided to the front of the premises in a prominent position, in accordance with the Australia Post guidelines and AS/NZS 4819 (2003) to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Waste Management

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

 

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 – Air Conditioners

80.              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

81.              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.

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 – Rainwater Tanks

82.              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.

 

Rainwater Tank Requirements

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·       before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

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 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.

 

A2                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.

 

A3                This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards and you are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A4                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.

 

A5                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.

 

A6                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.

 

A7                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).

 

A8                The finished ground levels external to the building must be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised, other than for the provision of approved paving or the like on the ground.

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          14 February 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D5/12

 

 

Subject:                  28 The Avenue, Randwick (DA/646/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/646/2011

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of the existing outbuilding at the rear, construction of a new 2-storey outbuilding with garage and studio fronting the right of way, alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, installation of roof-mounted photovoltaic panels and air-conditioning units and associated landscape works (Heritage Item & Conservation Area)

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                S Dunn & J Wilson

Owner:                         S Dunn & J Wilson

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

The subject application is referred to the Planning Committee Meeting as it contains variation to the floor space ratio development standard by more than 10%. The proposed development is classified as multi-unit housing because it’s attached to two other dwellings.

 

The application was notified from 7 September to 10 October 2011 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of four (4) submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process, of which three (3) objects to the proposal. The issues raised are primarily related to the form, colours and finishes of the garage outbuilding and their compatibility with the heritage character of the subject and adjoining terraces and the locality.

 

The site is zoned Residential 2C under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the proposed works are permissible with consent.

 

The proposed landscaped area amounts to 41.4% of the site, which falls short of the development standard by 8.6%. The proposal has an FSR of 0.88:1 or 331m2 GFA, and exceeds the development standard by 0.23:1 or 86m2.

 

The proposal has not significantly increased the development footprints as compared to the status quo, and the general disposition of buildings and layout of open space have been maintained. The resultant footprints are consistent with the other buildings within the subject group of terraces (commonly known as Avonmore Terrace).

 

The proposed outbuilding has a height and form which are consistent with the development pattern along the right of way at the rear of Avonmore Terrace. The side elevations incorporate gable features which are similar to the adjoining outbuilding at No. 30 The Avenue. The eastern façade that fronts onto the right of way is articulated with dormer window and light weight zinc cladding on the upper level, which would avoid a monolithic visual bulk. The proposed extensions to the main dwelling are minor in nature and do not alter the general form and scale of the terrace.

 

The proposed works will not detrimentally affect the heritage significance of the existing building, the adjoining terraces and the St. Jude’s Conservation Area as a whole.

 

Approximately 44m2 of the site is occupied by a right of way which cannot be built upon. This has significantly restricted the site’s capability in meeting the landscaped area numerical standard in the LEP. However, the proposal has incorporated a high quality landscape design that substantially improves the amenity and functionality of the private open space. The design scheme has included suitable planting in both the front and rear courtyards, which will appropriately soften the physical structures and offer a degree of privacy screening for the neighbours.

 

The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to the non-compliance with the landscaped area and FSR standards have been reviewed and are considered to be well founded.

 

The DCP – Multi Unit Housing specifies detailed built form, setbacks and amenity controls, which apply to the proposal. The building height, setbacks, landscaped open space provision, façade treatment and solar access of the development comply with the objectives of the DCP and are considered to be satisfactory.

 

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

 

2.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot A in DP 950369, No. 28 The Avenue, Randwick. The site is located on the eastern side of the street, between Frances Street and Alison Road. The dimensions and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, side boundary

50.665m

377.5m2

Southern, side boundary

51.665m

Western, The Avenue boundary

7.29m

Eastern, rear boundary

7.345m

 

A 6.095m wide right of carriageway occupies the rear section of the site.

 

The site presently accommodates a 3-storey Victorian terrace with a double-storey outbuilding fronting the right of way. The site forms part of “Avonmore Terrace” that comprises Nos. 26 – 42 The Avenue. The site is identified as a heritage item and within the St. Jude’s Conservation Area under RLEP 1998. The site is also listed in the State Heritage Register.

 

To the west of the site on the opposite side of The Avenue is a public park. St. Jude’s Cemetery adjoins the site on its eastern boundary.

 

1. Front elevation of the subject Victorian terrace (2nd from the left)

2. Existing rear outbuilding as viewed from the right of way (middle)

3. Existing courtyard adjacent to the northern boundary

4. Eastern elevation of the main terrace building


3.      The Proposal

 

The proposed development includes the following elements:

 

·      Demolition of the existing outbuilding at the rear.

·      Construction of a 2-storey outbuilding fronting the right of way at the rear containing a garage with studio above and basement storage areas.

·      Construction of minor extensions to the rear of the main building at ground level.

·      Minor reconfiguration of the internal floor layout.

·      Installation of photovoltaic panels and air-conditioning units on the roof.

·      Installation of a swimming pool.

·      General landscape works. 

 

Computer generated model of the proposed outbuilding and swimming pool as viewed from the courtyard of the subject site.

 

4.      State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 Development Standards

 

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

 

4.1    Deviation from the development standards

 

(i)     Landscaped area

Pursuant to Clause 20E(2) of the LEP, a minimum of 50% of the site is to be reserved as landscaped areas. The proposed landscaped area amounts to 156m2 or 41.4% of the site, which falls short of the development standard by 32m2 or 8.6%. 

 

(ii)    Floor space ratio

Pursuant to Clause 20F(2) of the LEP, the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No. 2C where the land area is less than 700m2 is 0.65:1 or 245m2 gross floor area (GFA). The proposal has an FSR of 0.88:1 or 331m2 GFA, and exceeds the development standard by 0.23:1 or 86m2. The proposal entails a variation to the standard by 35%.

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio (FSR)

Gross floor area (GFA)

Proposed FSR / GFA

0.88:1

331m2

Existing FSR / GFA

0.83:1

312m2

Permissible FSR /  GFA

0.65:1

245m2

FSR / GFA in excess of LEP standard

0.23:1

86m2

 

4.2    SEPP 1 assessment

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

Comments:

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

Landscaped area:

 

Applicant’s SEPP 1:

 

 

Floor space ratio:

Applicant’s SEPP 1:

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and strict compliance with the landscaped area and FSR standards is unreasonable and unnecessary for the following reasons:

 

Landscaped areas:

·      The development involves demolition of the existing outbuilding at the rear and its replacement with a new 2-storey building containing garage with studio space above. The proposal also includes minor extensions to the ground floor kitchen / dining areas. The aggregate reduction in landscaped area amounts to only approximately 2% of the allotment size.

 

The proposal has not significantly increased the development footprints as compared to the status quo, and the general disposition of buildings and layout of open space have been maintained.

 

·      Based on Council’s aerial photograph and the applicant’s site analysis, the proposed development footprints are consistent with those of the other buildings within Avonmore Terrace. The minor reduction in landscaped area does not detract from the character of the row of terraces as a whole.

 

·      Approximately 44m2 of the site is occupied by a right of way which cannot be built upon. This has significantly restricted the site’s capability in meeting the numerical standard in the LEP.

 

·      The proposal has incorporated a high quality landscape design that significantly improves the amenity and functionality of the private open space. The design scheme has included suitable planting in both the front and rear courtyards, which will appropriately soften the physical structures and offer a degree of privacy screening for the neighbours.

 

Floor space ratio:

·      The development involves demolition of the existing outbuilding at the rear and its replacement with a new 2-storey building containing garage with studio space above. The proposal also includes minor extensions to the ground floor kitchen / dining areas. The aggregate increase in floor space amounts to only 19m2.

 

The proposal has not significantly increased the development footprints as compared to the status quo, and the general disposition of buildings and layout of open space have been maintained. The resultant footprints are consistent with the other buildings within Avonmore Terrace.

 

·      The proposed outbuilding has a height and form which are consistent with the development pattern along the right of way at the rear of Avonmore Terrace. The side elevations incorporate gable features which are similar to the adjoining outbuilding at No. 30 The Avenue. The eastern façade that fronts onto the right of way is articulated with dormer window and light weight zinc cladding on the upper level, which would avoid a monolithic visual bulk.

 

·      The proposed extensions to the main dwelling are minor in nature and do not alter the general form and scale of the terrace.

 

The proposed works will not detrimentally affect the heritage significance of the existing building, the adjoining terraces and the St. Jude’s Conservation Area as a whole.

 

·      As will be discussed in the “DCP” section of this report, the proposal will not result in unreasonable amenity impacts upon the adjoining properties in terms of solar access and privacy.

 

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

 


Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Comments:

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

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of the Residential 2C Zone in that it will improve the amenity of an existing dwelling, and will not detract from the character of the locality.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

Comments:

The proposed development and variations from the development standards do not generally raise any matters of significance for State or Regional environmental planning. The site is listed in the State Heritage Register and the Office of Environment and Heritage has reviewed the proposal and granted concurrence subject to their terms of approval.

 

The strict adherence to the numerical standards will not allow the best economic use of the site and improvement to the amenity and appearance of an existing residential dwelling in an established neighbourhood.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

First

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

 

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

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standards in question is unreasonable and unnecessary as the proposal will achieve the underlying purposes of the standards, subject to the recommended conditions.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standards is relevant to the subject development. As discussed above, the proposal is considered to satisfy the underlying purposes of the landscaped area and FSR standards, subject to the recommended conditions. 

 

Third

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

The landscaped area and FSR development standards have not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

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

 

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential C zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality. The current RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), effective from 15 January 2010, has maintained the 2C zoning for the site.

 

5.      Site History

 

There is no recent development approval relating to the subject site.

 

At the request of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, the applicant has submitted an archaeological assessment to address potential issues associated with the site excavation works. In addition, revised drawings have been prepared to reduce the overhang of the western dormer window of the outbuilding from 800mm to 600mm. SEPP 1 Objections relating to the non-compliance with the FSR and landscaped area development standards in the LEP and an amended exterior colour scheme have also been prepared. The above documents were submitted to Council on 7 December 2011.

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The subject application was advertised and notified from 7 September to 10 October 2011 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The following submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process:

 

Support

·      26 The Avenue, Randwick

 

Object

·      30 The Avenue, Randwick

·      34 The Avenue, Randwick

·      36 The Avenue, Randwick

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The form and finishes of the rear outbuilding are not consistent with the architectural and heritage character of Avonmore Terraces and the St. Jude’s precinct.

The proposal has been reviewed by Council’s heritage planner and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. No objections have been raised against the proposed form and materials of the outbuilding. The development is not considered to result in detrimental impacts on the significance of the subject and adjoining heritage items and the St. Jude’s Conservation Area as a whole.

 

The approval of the subject application will establish an undesirable planning precedent that encourages similar incompatible developments in the locality.

Each development application is assessed having regard to its merits and compliance with relevant planning controls. The approval of the proposal will not establish any undesirable planning precedent in this instance.

 

The development scheme is not considered to be incompatible with the character of the adjoining dwellings and the locality.

The proposed colour palette is not compatible with the heritage character of the row of terraces.

 

The location of the proposed colours is not indicated in the submitted schedule.

A revised exterior colour scheme has been prepared and submitted to the Office of Environment and Heritage for review. No objections have been raised against the amended colour palette.

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Development Engineer and Landscape Development Officer

The proposal has been reviewed by Council’s Development Engineering Section. No objections have been raised subject to conditions. The comments provided are extracted below:

 

Tree & Landscape Comments

While the smaller decorative vegetation within the front setback, including a Cyathea australis (Tree Fern, Tree 7) and a Phoenix robelinii (Dwarf Date Palm, Tree 8) close to the front entrance, contribute to the presentation of the site, no objections are raised to their removal as shown, subject to the replacement planting as shown on the submitted Landscape Plan being fully implemented, with a condition to this effect included in the report.

 

Located within the northern half of the front garden, there is a mature Livistona australis (Cabbage Palm, Tree 6) of 12m in height, which appears in excellent health and condition and is covered by the provisions of Council’s TPO.

 

This native palm is considered to be a significant example of the species both for its size, presence in the area and association with the heritage dwelling, with the Arborists Report assigning it a High Retention Priority.

 

Despite there being no major works proposed in this area, which should mean it would remain unaffected, in recognition of its importance and function to the site and its street appeal, precautionary measures have been imposed.

 

There are several shrubs/small trees around the perimeter of the rear yard, that while they may contribute to screening, privacy and amenity, any of these benefits are restricted solely to within the rear portion of the site only, and as they are not significant in anyway, no objections would be raised to their removal in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown, with the replacement landscaping to result in a high quality treatment, and shall be implemented.

 

Consent has been granted for removal of a 6m tall Gordonia axillaris (Gordonia, Tree 1) in the southeast corner of the site, both due to its close proximity to the existing garage as well as to facilitate construction of the new in-ground pool, as well as the Magnolia x soulangeana (Magnolia, Tree 2), along the northern boundary, adjacent the existing paved carport and garage.

 

Trees 3 & 4, both 4-5m tall Camelia’s along the northern boundary are too small for the TPO, with Tree 5, a 6m tall Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) to the southwest of Tree 4 able to be removed so as allow implementation of the new landscape scheme.

 

7.2    Heritage Planner

The comments provided by Council’s Heritage Planner are extracted under the “LEP” section of this report.

 

7.3    NSW Office of Environment and Heritage

The subject site is listed in the State Heritage Register. Accordingly, the proposal constitutes Integrated Development pursuant to Section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and requires concurrence from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. On 16 December 2011, the Office granted approval to the development subject to the General Terms of Approval. The terms of approval have been incorporated in the “Recommendation” section of this report.

 

8.      Master Planning Requirements

 

A master plan is not required for the subject proposal.

 

9.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

9.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The site is zoned Residential 2C under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal is defined as “multi-unit housing” and is permissible with development consent. The proposal is consistent with the aims of the LEP and the specific zoning objectives, in that the development will improve the form and functionality of an existing terrace building, which is compatible with the desired character for the locality.

 

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

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of total site area

41.4% (156m2)

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

(3) Landscaped areas over podium or basement not to exceed 50% of required provision

All landscaped areas are provided on deep soil.

Yes

20F Floor space ratio

(2) Maximum 0.65:1 for 2C zoned sites with less than 700m2 land area

 0.88:1 (331m2 GFA)

No, SEPP 1 Objection submitted

20G Building heights

(2) Maximum building height 12m

Main dwelling

13.7m, no change

Outbuilding

6.1m

Yes

(4) Maximum external wall height 10m

Main dwelling

12.3m, no change

Outbuilding

6m

Yes

 

Clause 40 Earthworks

Clause 40 requires Council to consider the likely impact of earthworks on the existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality.

 

The proposal involves excavation to create basement storage area underneath the outbuilding and to install swimming pool.

 

The application has been referred to Council’s Development Engineer for review. No objections have been raised against the proposed earthworks. It is considered that the proposal will not adversely affect the drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to standard construction management conditions. Further conditions are also recommended to ensure that appropriate soil retention and erosion control measures are undertaken during works on the site.

 

Subject to the above conditions, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.

 

Clause 43 Heritage conservation

The site is identified as a heritage item and within the St. Jude’s Conservation Area under RLEP 1998. The site is also listed in the State Heritage Register. The application has been referred to Council’s heritage planner for assessment. The comments provided are extracted below:

 

The site

The subject site is part of “Avonmore Terrace”, which comprises nos.26-42 The Avenue.  The group is listed as a heritage item under Randwick LEP 1998 and is also listed on the State Heritage Register.  The Randwick Heritage Study Inventory Sheet for the terrace describes its significance as “one of the best rows of Victorian terraces in Sydney, in a magnificent setting overlooking a row of large Moreton Bay figs.  Remarkable for a high degree of integrity despite alterations to some terraces.  All are redeemable.  Local historical interest associated with education.”  When the Heritage Study Inventory Sheet photograph was taken in the late 1980s at least four of the buildings had upper level balcony enclosures.  During the intervening period these enclosures have been progressively removed, so that only one now remains, considerably enhancing the streetscape continuity and heritage contribution of the group. 

 

Proposal

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house.  At ground floor level, it is proposed to make considerable change to the existing rear wing to create an open plan kitchen dining area.  At first floor level a number of existing walls are to be partially removed and new walls provided to create two new bathrooms and a walk-in robe within the rear wing and the rear section of the main body of the dwelling.  At second floor level a number of existing walls are to be modified to create a new wc in the existing hallway.  At roof level it is proposed to relocate the existing solar hot water system from the rear wing to the main roof, and to provide 14 photovoltaic panels, two air conditioning units and a skylight to the main roof.  The outbuilding is to comprise a double garage at ground floor level and a studio and bathroom above. 

 

Background

Building applications for alterations and additions to the building were approved in 1968, 1978 and 1982. 

 

Approvals

As the site is listed on the State Heritage Register the Heritage Office within the Office of Environment and Heritage is consent authority for the application and Council cannot issue cannot issue approval until the Heritage Office has provided conditions of consent.  There is evidence that Alison Park and the site of “Avonmore Terrace” was originally part of land set aside for St. Jude’s cemetery, although not actually used for burials.  The NSW Heritage Council will advise of any required approvals under the Heritage Act in relation to any potential archaeological material. 

 

Submission

The application has been accompanied by a Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by Noel Bell Ridley Smith and Partners.  The SHI notes that the proposal largely maintains the presentation of the building from the public domain and its contribution to the significant aspects of the larger group forming the terrace, including repair and replacement of missing elements on the street façade.  The SHI notes that the proposal largely maintains the traditional layout of the terrace within the group, with new services and equipment located at roof level behind the parapet.  The SHI considers that the proposal maintains the traditional layout, making changes to areas of lesser significance and where change has already occurred.  In relation to the bathroom on the first floor the SHI considers that the proposal will allow for expression of the original volume and that new services will not impact on ceilings below.  In relation to the bathroom on the second floor the SHI considers that the proposed removal of an archway and relocation of a door will not impact on fabric of high significance and will not substantially alter architectural character.  In relation to the garage the SHI suggests that the outbuilding has been designed to maintain the existing height and presentation of other structures in the laneway.  In relation to the elements which are to be demolished, the SHI addresses the proposed ground floor fireplace removal with the removal of walls marked by a change in ceiling level rather than by nib walls.  The SHI concludes that the proposed works do not adversely affect identified heritage significance or the role of the place as a contributing element in the total group of houses. 

 

Comments

         

Conservation works

The SHI notes that the proposal includes repair and replacement of missing elements on the street façade, with the drawings indicating that the original central iron column to the first floor verandah is to be restored.  First floor verandah columns within the group include timber posts (including the subject site) as well as several different styles of metal posts.  The Heritage Study Inventory Sheet photograph of the terrace taken in the late 1980s indicates that no.30 retained its original open balcony.  A consent condition should be included requiring the replacement column match as closely as possible the design of the existing first floor verandah column adjacent at no.30. 

 

          Changes at ground floor level

The existing rear wing consists of a partially separated kitchen and dining area.  The works will comprise removal of the majority of the rear and side walls, removal of an existing internal wall and provision of a new wall to enclose a pantry.  The existing rear wall is to be replaced with a glazed bay while the existing side wall is to be replaced with roofed bifolding doors.  There are no heritage objections to the replacement of existing openings which are generally not original, but in any case comprise secondary fabric.  The internal wall which is to be removed incorporates the original kitchen fireplace which supports the chimney flues on the two levels above.  The architect and heritage consultant have advised that these are to be supported on removal of the ground level fireplace.  There are no heritage objections to the changes to existing internal walls which comprise secondary fabric, and do not affect any original ceilings. 

 

Changes at first floor level

The existing rear wing includes a bathroom and a dressing/utility room.  The works will comprise provision of new partitions within the rear section of the main body of the dwelling and within the rear wing, as well as removal of an internal wall within the rear wing.  There are no heritage objections to proposed partitions within the rear section of main body of the dwelling which are not full height and will not affect original floors or ceilings.  There are no heritage objections to the changes to existing walls within the rear wing which comprise secondary fabric, do not affect original ceilings and have little impact on original floors.  Plumbing and drainage lines to new sanitary facilities at first and second floor level have been carefully considered to avoid impact on original ceilings. 

 

Changes at second floor level

The existing second floor comprises three rooms including two across the front of the dwelling, all with separate access from the hallway.  The works will comprise removal of an existing wall, relocation of an existing door opening and provision of new walls to enclose a new wc in the existing hallway.  It is noted that while original ceilings have been modified, there will be some impact on timberwork, as well as on the existing arch which is to be removed.  Although there will be some impact on original fabric, the impact on spatial character of the second floor level will be minimal. 

 

Changes at roof level

At roof level it is proposed to relocate the existing solar hot water system from the rear wing to the main roof, and to provide 14 photovoltaic panels, two air conditioning units and a skylight to the main roof.  The proposed service installations will not be visible from the street due to the screening of the existing 1.2m high parapet and will have minimal visibility from the St.Jude’s site to the rear due to the height of the building. 

 

Outbuilding

In relation to the proposed outbuilding, Council’s Development Control Plan for Single Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies includes a Preferred Solution for Height, Form and Materials that the external wall height of buildings or additions to the rear does not exceed 3.5m.  A number of the surrounding outbuildings along the right of way have a two storey scale.  The proposed outbuilding will have a wall height to the rear right-of-way of 4.5m and a wall height to the rear garden of 4.5m.  The dormers to the rear garden elevation project into the rear garden area so that the outbuilding presents a two storey scale to the rear garden of the site and its neighbours.  If the projection of the dormer in the rear garden elevation were reduced to around 100mm beyond the face of the ground floor wall, the apparent scale and bulk of the outbuilding would be considerably reduced. 

 

Materials and finishes

The sample board which has been submitted indicates a non-traditional colour scheme featuring much darker colours than are historically used for Victorian buildings.  The proposed colours and finishes are inconsistent with those of other buildings within the terrace and will detract from the integrity of the heritage group.  An amended colour scheme should be requested. 

 

Recommendation

The following conditions should be included in any consent, in addition to those provided by the Heritage Office:

 

·       The proposed first floor verandah column is to match as closely as possible the design of the existing first floor verandah column adjacent at no.30.  Detailed drawings indicating the profile to the verandah column are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development. 

 

·       The proposed ensuite bathrooms should be carefully installed to minimise impact on original fabric including original floors, skirtings, picture rails and ceilings. 

 

·       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces are to be compatible with the existing building and the remainder of the terrace.  Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (ie- a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Assessment Officer’s comments

·      The applicant has since submitted an elevation drawing showing the configuration and architectural detailing of the column to be reinstated to the first floor front verandah. Council’s heritage officer has reviewed the design and recommended further changes to match with the adjoining terrace at No. 30.

 

·      A revised exterior colour scheme, prepared by Arent & Pyke, has since been prepared. The colour palette has been assessed by the Office of Environment and Heritage. No objections have been raised. A standard condition is recommended to ensure the development is implemented substantially in accordance with the above colour scheme.

 

·      The proposed outbuilding contains a projecting dormer window which is oriented towards the courtyard. Council’s heritage officer has recommended the reduction of the overhang to a maximum of 100mm. The revised drawings have reduced the projection from 800mm to 600mm.

 

The dormer will not be visible from the public domain. The window glazing is setback approximately 1800mm from the side boundaries and is unlikely to cause any material privacy impacts on the neighbours. The overhanging feature will also enhance the articulation of the western elevation of the outbuilding. Therefore, this element of the proposal is considered to be satisfactory and no further changes are warranted.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. A BASIX Certificate has been submitted with the development application. The commitments listed in the above certificate will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

10.    Policy Controls

 

10.1  Randwick Development Control Plan – Multi-Unit Housing

The relevant provisions of the DCP are addressed as follows:

 

Density

The proposed development density and floor space ratio are considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for further details.

 


Building height

The proposal does not alter the existing overall and external wall heights of the terrace building on the site. The height and scale of the proposed outbuilding are consistent with the character of Avonmore Terrace. The proposal also complies with the building height development standards in the LEP. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for further details.

 

Setbacks

The proposal does not alter the existing front setback of the main building.

 

The extensions to the main building are confined to the rear at the ground floor level and will not significantly increase the visual bulk as viewed from the adjoining dwellings. In particular, the eastern extension is setback 645mm from the southern boundary, and will not result in any adverse visual or amenity impacts upon No. 30 The Avenue.

 

The proposed outbuilding will abut the boundary of the right of way, which is consistent with the development pattern of Avonmore Terrace.

 

Overall, the setback arrangement is considered to satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

Landscaped open space

An appropriate level of landscaped areas has been provided. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

 

Fences

No changes to the existing front fencing are proposed.

 

Privacy

The development scheme does not include any significant changes to the existing windows on the upper levels of the main building.

 

The proposed studio above the garage contains west-facing window which is oriented towards the courtyard. The window glazing is setback approximately 1800mm from the common boundaries. By virtue of the orientation and setback of this window as well as the relative low intensity use of the studio space, the development is not considered to result in detrimental privacy impacts on the neighbours.

 

Solar access

The performance requirements of the DCP stipulate the following:

 

P1.2

Living areas of neighbouring dwellings do not have access to sunlight reduced to less than 3 hours per day throughout the year.

P1.3

At least 50% of the principal landscaped areas of neighbouring dwellings do not have access to sunlight reduced to less than 3 hours per day throughout the year.

 

Based on the shadow diagrams, the neighbouring dwelling to the south at No. 30 The Avenue presently does not receive direct sunlight to 50% of the rear courtyard. The subject and adjoining sites are oriented in an east-west direction and solar access is significantly constrained by the existing subdivision pattern.

 

Notwithstanding, the proposal does not significantly increase the development footprints and the shadow diagrams show that no additional shadows will be casted onto the private open space and east-facing windows of the southern neighbour. The development will not exacerbate the current shadow situation.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered to satisfy the objectives of the DCP.

 

Safety and security

The demolition of the existing deteriorated garage and replacement with a modern outbuilding will reinforce a sense of territorial ownership and improve security in the right of way areas.

 

Parking facility

The design of the garage outbuilding is compatible with the adjoining properties and will not detract from the heritage character of Avonmore Terrace. No objections have been raised from the Office of Environment and Heritage and Council’s heritage officer relating to the design of the parking facility.

 

10.2 Randwick Development Control Plan – Parking

The DCP stipulates the following parking rates:

 

Dwelling house:

2 spaces per dwelling with 3 or more bedrooms

 

Multi unit housing:

1.5 spaces per 3 or more bedroom dwelling

 

The subject building is technically defined as multi-unit housing pursuant to the provisions of RLEP 1998. The proposal includes a double garage and will satisfy the parking requirements for both ‘dwelling house’ and ‘multi unit housing’.

 

10.3  Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 2 July 2007, applies 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

$400,000

 

1.0%

$4,000

 

11.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

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

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

Not applicable. 

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

The relevant clauses of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 have been addressed by the recommended conditions.

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment have been addressed within the body of this report.

 

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

 

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

The site is located within an established residential neighbourhood. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and structures. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

 

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

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

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

The proposal is not considered to result in unreasonable environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality, subject to the recommended conditions. The development promotes the objectives of the zone and is considered to be within public interest.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Leadership in sustainability, excellence in urban design and development.

Direction:  Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development complies with the general aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives for Residential 2C Zone. The proposal also satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of DCP – Multi Unit Housing.

 

The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes of the development are considered to be satisfactory. The proposal will not result in significant adverse impacts upon the adjoining properties in terms of solar access, privacy and visual amenity, and the heritage significance of Avonmore Terrace and St. Jude’s Conservation Area.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objections relating to landscaped area and FSR have been reviewed and are considered to be well founded.

 

Therefore, the application is recommended for approval subject to the attached conditions of consent.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 20E(2) and 20F(2) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to landscaped area and floor space ratio 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 and Infrastructure 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. 646/2011 for demolition of the existing outbuilding at the rear, construction of a new 2-storey outbuilding with garage and studio fronting the right of way, alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, installation of roof-mounted photovoltaic panels and air-conditioning units and associated landscape works, at No. 28 The Avenue, Randwick, subject to the following conditions:

 

DEVELOPMENT CONSENT CONDITIONS

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan Number

Dated

Received

Drawn By

DA01(B)

5.12.2011

7 December 2011

TFAD Pty. Ltd.

DA02(B)

5.12.2011

DA03(A)

Dec 2011

DA04(A)

Dec 2011

DA05(B)

5.12.2011

DA01(A)

09.08.11

24 August 2011

Jane Irwin Landscape Architecture

DA02(A)

01.08.11

 

BASIX Cert. No.

Project Name

Dated

Received

A120344

28 The Avenue

15 August 2011

24 August 2011

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the buildings are to be consistent with the approved drawings and the Revised Exterior Paint Schedule, dated 17.11.11, prepared by Arent & Pyke and stamp-received by Council on 7 December 2011.

 

Heritage Conservation

3.       The following General Terms of Approval are issued by the Office of Environment and Heritage under Section 91A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

Advisory: The architectural drawings stipulated in General Terms of Approval 1a above have already been superseded by those listed under Condition 1 of this consent.

 

4.       The proposed column to be installed at the first floor front balcony / verandah shall be in general accordance with drawing number DA08, dated Dec 2011, prepared by TFAD Pty. Ltd., and stamp-received by Council on 10 January 2012, with the exception that the surface to the shaft of the column shall be un-fluted (that is, without indentations). Details demonstrating compliance shall be submitted to the satisfaction of Council’s Director of City Planning, prior to the issuing of any Construction Certificate.

 

5.       The proposed bathroom facilities are to be carefully installed to minimize impacts on the original fabric, including the original floors, skirting, picture rails and ceilings.

 

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

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

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

7.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $400,000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $4,000.

       

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

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

 

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

 

Security Deposits

9.       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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

10.     Stormwater runoff from the site shall be discharged to the kerb and gutter in The Avenue.  

 

Tree Protection Measures

11.     In order to ensure retention of the mature Livistona australis (Cabbage Palm) located within the northern half of the front garden in good health, the Tree Protection Measures in Appendix 2, and Tree Protection Plan in Appendix 7, of the Development Impact Assessment Report by Earthscape Horticultural Services dated August 2011 (“the Arborists Report”), shall be fully implemented throughout the course of the works.

 

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.

 

BASIX Requirements

14.     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

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

 

a)     a Construction Certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance