Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 8 May 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                                                                                                   8 May 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, 8 May 2012 at 6pm.

 

 

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 - 10 April 2012

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)

 

D36/12      51 Willis Street, Kingsford (DEFERRED) (DA/676/2009/B)

D37/12      65-71 Belmore Road, Randwick (DA/606/2011)

D38/12      35- 37 Sackville Street, Maroubra (DA/406/2011/A)

D39/12      123-125 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee (DA/93/2012)

D40/12      8 Hincks Street, Kingsford (DA/436/2011/A)

D41/12      6 Govett Street Randwick (DA/358/2011/A)

D42/12      1609-1611 Anzac Parade, La Perouse (DA/76/2009/A)

D43/12      214 Maroubra Road, Maroubra (DA/119/2012)

D44/12      163 Boyce Road, Maroubra (DA/170/2012)

D45/12      17 Liguria Street, Maroubra (DA/818/2011)

D46/12      JRPP Report - 330 Anzac Parade, Kensington (DA/494/2011/A)

D47/12      Tyree Building - UNSW Kensington Campus

Miscellaneous Reports

M3/12       S94A Development Contributions Plan Review - 2012    

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D36/12

 

 

Subject:                  51 Willis Street, Kingsford (DA/676/2009/B)

Folder No:                   DA/676/2009/B

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The application was reported to Council at its Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 February 2012. At the meeting it was resolved:

 

“(Matthews/White) that this matter be deferred for the applicant to consider submitting amended plans and for mediation between the applicant and objectors.”

 

Issues

 

Mediation Issues

A mediation between the parties was held on 22 March 2012 and an agreement was reached between the parties to the following outcomes that was contingent upon a meeting between the applicant and objectors on-site to confirm the feasibility of these outcomes:   

 

a)       That the applicant deletes the planter boxes on Level 5.

b)       That the Willis Street section of the building be reduced by 500 mm overall

c)       That the balcony overhang to Unit 3 be reduced by 1m

d)       That a fence be erected along the northern side boundary to a height of 1.8m

e)       That no light spill occurs to the northern neighbour.

f)       That the proposed sky lights to Unit 3 do not to interfere with views of Unit 7 of the northern adjoining property.

g)       That translucent glass to Unit 3 northern side be in installed

 

However, following the scheduled meeting on-site, one objector who was a signatory to the mediation outcome, Mr B. Vakhnovetski, at Unit 7/47-49 Willis Street (the northern adjoining property) indicated that he had continuing concerns regarding the height of the proposed development and its impact on views from his property, so that, in effect, he withdrew his agreement to the mediation outcome.

 

Notwithstanding the withdrawal of Mr Vakhnovetski’s support, and given that 3 remaining objectors maintained their support of the mediation outcomes, the applicant submitted amended plans on 28 March 2012 incorporating all outcomes of the mediation as listed above. An assessment of the amended plans indicate that amendments contained in the plans are consistent with the mediation outcomes.

 

Section 96 assessment issues

In relation to the broader points of refusal raised in the business report to the Council meeting of 28 February 2012, the applicant has submitted further amended plans on 24 April seeking to address these issues. The amended plans contain the following:

 

§ A reduction in height of the Willis Street section of the building by 500mm to RL 60.1.

§ A reduction in height of the Kennedy Lane section of the building by 1.3m from RL 67.6 in the original Section 96 plan to a new RL 66.3.

 

A revised landscape area calculation indicating the following break down:

 

§ Total Landscape area : 308.24 sqm (48% of site area)

§ Landscape area over podium : 133.46 sqm (41% of landscape area)

 

An assessment of the amended plans in relation to relevant key points of refusal indicates the following:

 

Height, bulk and scale

The amended Section 96 plans show a reduction in height in the section of the building fronting Willis Street by 500mm (to RL 60.10), and reduction the height of the portion of the building fronting Kennedy Lane by 1.3m (from RL 67.6 in the original Section 96 plan to a new RL 66.3). The reduction in height of the Kennedy Lane section is significant, and would result in a less intrusive visual height, bulk and scale. However, this reduction in height results in a flat unarticulated roof form as well as low compressed internal floor to ceiling height on the upper floors. Furthermore, the eastern portion remains in breach of the maximum 10m external wall height standard. Accordingly, the amended Section 96 proposal remains unsatisfactory.

 

Floor Space

While there has been a reduction in visual bulk and scale in the overall building through a reduction in overall height as well as through deletion of balcony over hang and planter beds, described above, there has been no reduction in floor area in the he latest amended Section 96 plans.  The increase in floor area remains at a Gross Floor Area of 603 sqm and FSR of 0.9:1 compared with the original approved non-compliant DA FSR of 0.87:1 (571 sqm). Furthermore, the amenity impacts flowing from the increase in density in terms of visual intrusion and overshadowing remain outstanding.

 

Landscaped area

In relation to landscape area, the amended plans only provide recalculated and clearer breakdowns of deep soil, podium level and total landscaped areas. Specifically, the amended proposal will provide 48.15% (308 sqm) of landscape area which does not comply with the minimum 50% (320 sqm) required under the Randwick LEP. Accordingly, the amended plans confirm that the Section 96 proposal will be deficient in total landscape area by approximately 12 sqm. More significantly,  the Section 96 plans do not address the loss in deep soil and overall landscape area arising from the provision of an additional car parking space off the rear lane (to meet the demand arising from the addition of one new dwelling unit). Furthermore, the amended plans seek to maintain this car parking space without any regard to the development engineers concerns regarding the practicality of providing a car parking space off Kennedy Lane described as follows in the original Section 96 report to Council on 28 February 2012:

 

“Council’s development engineers has noted that due to the gate opening at the property alignment on Kennedy lane for the new car space, this car space has inadequate width to allow for adequate car manoeuvring to and from Kennedy Lane. Whilst enlargement of the car park width can be considered, this will further compromise the remaining landscaped planter bed on Kennedy Lane. Accordingly, the subject car park is deficient in terms of width and does not allow for adequate car manoeuvring to and from Kennedy Lane.”

 

In summary, the issues relating to deficiencies in the landscaped area and consequent deterioration in the quality of the landscape treatment as raised in the report to Council on 28 February 2012 remain outstanding.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome: 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

 

In accordance with Council’s resolution at its Ordinary Meeting on 28 February 2012, a mediation session was held on 22 March 2012. No unanimous agreement was reached between the parties during the mediation process, as, subsequent to this process, one objector, who was a signatory to an earlier full agreement, effectively withdrew support for the mediated outcomes. Notwithstanding this, amended plans have been submitted by the applicant incorporating amendments discussed and agreed to in the mediation meeting.

 

In relation to the reasons for refusal of the Section 96 proposal contained in the business report to the Council meeting on 28 February 2012, amended plans have been lodged essentially indicating a reduction in overall building height and a revised landscape area calculation. While the reduction in building height has reduced the height, bulk and scale of the proposal, the roof form and floor to ceiling heights have been compromised. The landscaped area remains deficient and non-compliant with the landscape area standard. Having regard to this, the Section 96 application is still recommended for refusal.

 

The application is referred back to the Planning Committee for its consideration and determination

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/676/2009 by modifying the approved development by the increase in building height, internal reconfiguration, alterations to openings, revised lift location, alteration to basement car park layout and provision of extended basement car parking and provision of parking within set back from Kennedy Lane, new unit on level 5 and alteration to deck for unit 1  at 51 Willis Street, Kingsford, for the following reasons: 

 

1.       The proposal does not satisfy the relevant objectives for Residential 2C Zone as set-out in the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) in that: 

a)   The proposal fails to maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas, and

b)   Does not adequately protect the amenity of existing residents

 

2.       The proposal fails to satisfy the SEPP 65 Design Quality Principles as set-out in State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

3.       The proposal does not satisfy the objectives, preferred solutions and performance requirements for height, density, landscaping, privacy, view sharing and solar access set-out in the Development Control Plan – Multi-unit Housing.

 

4.       The proposed increase in building and external wall height is excessive and does not comply with maximum building and external wall height under Clause 20G of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) and results in adverse amenity impacts on adjoining properties and the streetscape in terms of solar access, privacy, view loss and excessive visual bulk and scale.

 

5.       The proposed increase in floor space ratio varies from the maximum FSR standard stipulated for the zone in the Randwick LEP. The increase in floor space will detract from the purpose of the standard as it will result in adverse amenity impacts on adjoining properties and the streetscape in terms of solar access, privacy, view loss and excessive visual bulk and scale.  

 

6.       The visual bulk and scale of the proposal are not considered to be compatible with the existing development pattern in Willis Street and Kennedy Lane and the local area and will dominate the adjoining and nearby residential buildings. The proposal will not contribute to a satisfactory architectural outcome and will adversely affect the character of the local area and streetscape. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

7.       The proposal will compromise the approved original design of the proposal in that it will have a reduced landscaped area that does not comply with the minimum landscape area standard under Clause 20E of the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) and therefore compromise the landscaping treatment and measures along Kennedy Lane which are an integral part of the design of the approved development.

 

8.       The proposal will have a detrimental impact on the heritage significance of the adjoining heritage item at No 53 Willis Street and its setting contrary to the provisions contained in Clause 43 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)for the protection of heritage items.

 

9.       The documentation submitted with the application is deficient of information and details relating to the slab thickness, proposed services, colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the building. 

 

10.     The documentation submitted with the application is deficient of information and details relating to an amended BASIX and therefore does not satisfy the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy - Building Sustainability Index: BASIX 2004.

 

11.     The proposal is not considered to be in the public interest having regard to the public submissions received.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D37/12

 

 

Subject:                  65-71 Belmore Road, Randwick (DA/606/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/606/2011

Author:                   Willana Associates, Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                     Conversion of an existing hotel to residential apartments for 84 unit and 4 retail units at ground level, facade upgrade, extension of unit on level 7 to roof top (level 8), lift access from level 7 to level 8 (communal terrace), associated works and strata subdivision (Heritage Conservation Area)

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Mr M Gheorghiu

Owner:                         Piano Holdings Pty Limited

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.       Executive Summary

 

The Development Application (DA) proposes the conversion of an existing motel to residential apartments with retail units at the ground level and the existing commercial tenancies on levels 1 and 2 to be retained.  The proposal will result in 84 residential units and is referred to Council as it involves SEPP1 objections to development standards that are in excess of 10%.

 

The proposal is for the conversion of the existing motel rooms into residential apartments with minimal alterations to address the shift from a transient population to a permanent population.  The dwelling sizes, floor layouts and external balconies are not considered to be of an acceptable level of amenity to accommodate a permanent residential population.  The building as a whole also fails to provide an adequate level of amenity in terms of common areas, natural ventilation, lighting and the provision of communal open space.  In addition, the proposal fails to adequately address traffic and parking impacts associated with the increased population density at the site.  Overall, the proposal does not adequately mitigate amenity concerns for future occupants and neighbouring residents.

 

The application is accompanied by two (2) State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 (SEPP 1) objections to the development standards for Building Height and Floor Space Ratio.  Both the SEPP 1 objections were assessed in accordance with the relevant case law.  The proposal represents considerable variations to these controls.  Despite the building being in existence, the proposed change of use will result in inadequate amenity for future residents.  These impacts have failed to be satisfactorily addressed by the applicant.  The SEPP 1 objections are not considered satisfactory and the variations cannot be supported in this instance.

 

Throughout the assessment process Council Staff provided the applicant with a number of opportunities to amend the proposal to ensure greater consistency with the relevant controls in an effort to improve amenity for future occupants.  Although amendments were made they were not considered satisfactory in terms of addressing the issues raised. 

 

The proposal fails to adequately address the objectives of the zone, being 3A Local Centre and fails to satisfy the principles of the State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Residential Flat Design.

 

The proposal was placed on exhibition and as a result ten (10) submissions were received.  Each of the submissions has been considered as part of the assessment.

 

Generally the proposal does not achieve the objectives of the relevant controls and fails to minimise the potential for adverse impacts, as a result the proposal is recommended for refusal.  

 

2.       The Proposal

 

 

The Development Application (DA) is primarily for the change of use of the existing motel rooms to residential dwellings. The proposal includes alterations to the ground level to allow for an additional retail tenancy and the reconfiguration of the lobby.  The proposal also includes the strata subdivision of the residential units. In addition, subdivision is proposed for the commercial and retail tenancies. 

 

The original application was amended twice and two (2) separate sets of amended plans were submitted in response to consultation with Council. The final amended plans, submitted on 2 April 2012, included a reduction in the number of units from 91 to 84 and alterations to the exterior design. The amended plans incorporated changes to the unit mix and layout by: amalgamating 8 of the units into 4; deletion of floor space at level 8 and the conversion of this level to a communal roof top terrace; increase in waste storage areas; and provision of bicycle parking.

 

The original description of the proposal was as follows: Conversion of an existing motel to residential apartments with retail units at ground level, facade upgrade, extension of unit on level 7 to roof top (level 8), lift access from level 7 to level 8, associated works and strata subdivision (Heritage Conservation Area).

 

3.       The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot 10 in DP 84436, 65-71 Belmore Road, Randwick. The site is located on the eastern side of Belmore Road. The site currently contains a seven (7) storey building.  The land area and dimensions of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Table 1 | Lot Dimensions

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, side boundary

49.23m

975.7m2

Southern, side boundary

51.16m

Eastern, rear boundary

16.66m

Western, front boundary

19.81m

 

The site is currently occupied by a seven (7) storey building containing a retail tenancy on the ground floor, commercial tenancies on the 1st and 2nd floors and motel rooms above.  The site also contains car parking on the ground, 1st and 2nd floors.  The subject building is one of the tallest in the Randwick Centre and is visually prominent.

 

Belmore Road is the main commercial and retail strip of Randwick.  It contains a mix of uses.  Belmore Road is also a major public transport route, with a number of regular bus services running 24 hours a day.  The area has a varied built form with a range of building heights and designs, reflecting the variety of uses of the locality.   

 

Royal Randwick Shopping Centre, on Lot 104 DP 812174 adjoins the subject site and occupies both the south and much of the eastern boundaries.  The shopping centre adopts a height of 2–3 storeys fronting Belmore Road and up to five stories at the rear fronting Avoca Street.  The shopping centre has a zero setback to the subject site along the southern boundary. 

 

The shopping centre contains a mix of retail and commercial tenancies and is serviced by a two (2) storey basement car park.  In addition, to the rear of the subject site is a portion of the Marcellin College School that is primarily located to the north east of the subject site.  There is a small building and a playground / access path to the rear of the subject site.

 

Adjoining the subject site to the north is 57-63 Belmore Road.  This site contains a four (4) storey mixed use building, with retail uses at street level and residential uses above.  The subject site has the benefit of a right of way across 57 – 63 Belmore Road which provides access to Belmore Road, in an “L” shape running along the eastern and northern boundaries.  The building on 57-63 Belmore Road has minimal setbacks to the south and adopts an irregular shape.  The building contains a roof top terrace for use by the residents.

 

Opposite the subject site, to the west are a range of three (3) storey mixed use buildings containing retail and commercial uses fronting the street and residential uses above.  The subject site is also opposite Waratah Avenue which is a residential street that contains a mix of dwellings types, including residential flat buildings, single storey semi detached cottages and detached dwellings.

 

4.       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 Development Standards

 

4.1    Proposed variation to the development standards

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). SEPP 1 Objections have been submitted with the development application to support the variations. The objections relate to both floor space ratio and height variations as set out below.

 

(i)     Floor space ratio

Pursuant to Clause 20F(3) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), the maximum floor space ratio for buildings in the General Business 3A zone is 2:1 as indicated on the zoning map.  The proposal has a floor space ratio of 4.4:1 (GFA of 412sqm) and does not comply with the requirement of Clause 20F(3) of the RLEP. 

 

(ii)    Building height

Clause 20G(5) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) stipulates a maximum building height of 12m as illustrated on the zoning map.  The proposal has a maximum building height of 30.4m and does not comply with Clause 20G(5) for maximum building height.

 

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).

 

The stated purposes of the standards as outlined in the LEP are:

 

Maximum FSR:

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.

 

Maximum building and external wall height:

 

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

 

Consistency of the development with the aims of SEPP 1, the local planning objectives for the locality and objects of the Environmental Panning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended

 

Clause 20F(3) Floor space ratio

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

 

Comments:

The primary consideration in this application is the conversion of a motel style land use to a land use comprising permanent occupancies in the form of dwellings.  Whilst the building already exists, that does not negate the need to assess the proposal against the underlying objectives which seek to control the way that the way that land uses impact on the amenity of the surrounding environment through controls on floor space and height.

 

In this application, the test is whether the extent of floor space that makes up the development is acceptable for the proposed use and achieves the objectives behind the floor space ratio standard.  This assessment concludes that the objection is not “well founded” for several reasons.

 

The lack of amenity afforded to future populations as a result of the proposed conversion from motel rooms into dwellings.  The existing floor space in the building cannot be adapted for permanent residents without some change to accommodate the proposed for of residential dwellings. 

 

In particular, the amenity required by a transient population utilising motel rooms is vastly different to the amenity requirements for a permanent population.  In addition, the living mainly in small studio rooms (62 rooms) and 18 one (1) bedroom apartments requires even more careful consideration given the limited ability within each dwelling space to achieve that amenity.

 

The argument for increased population density also needs to address issues of impact on the existing parking capacity in the locality. This assessment has determined that the provision of parking is also a fundamental concern that is not adequately addressed.  The issues are directly related to the extent of floor space on the site and the use of that floor space for the creation of dwellings.  On that basis, the proposed use of the floor space is inconsistent with the objectives that underpin that standard in terms of amenity, environmental outcomes and parking provision.

 

The applicant has failed to justify support for the proposed development given the inadequate amenity provided poor environmental performance and lack of parking.

 

Clause 20G(5) Maximum building height

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

 

Comments:

The height of the proposal will not significantly alter but how the building is used will be altered.  The change of use of areas of the building that are well over the height limit along with the need to utilise some of the roof area as common space are matters for consideration in the SEPP 1 Objection assessment.  The need for the use of the rooftop area, and associated structures, are indicative that the proposal has not provided adequate common areas or landscaping at lower levels.

 

It is these inadequacies that indicate the proposal does not meet objectives relating to environmental amenity and character.  The building seeks to use areas well above the height control as permanent dwellings and therefore amenity provision resulting from that use require consideration.  A building with less dwellings and more common space at appropriate levels will better achieve the objectives underpinning this control.  As a result, the objection is not “well founded”.

 

Conclusion

The objections are not considered to be “well founded” and the proposal is inconsistent with the objectives that underpin the development standards.  It is considered that the objection has not appropriately justified that the 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 objectives 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 SEPP 1 objections state:

 

For the variation to the FSR control:

For the variation to the Building Height Control:

 

 

Comments:

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

 

Similarly, the proposal is also inconsistent with the relevant objectives of the 3A Zone, in that the proposal fails to address the objectives of the zone, in particulars the proposal does not satisfy the following:

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

The proposal will result in significant amenity impacts in terms of unit size, layout and access to private open space.  The communal areas of the building also lack adequate design in terms of corridor layout, parking and waste management.  The proposal fails to accommodate the differing requirements of a transient population compared to the proposed permanent population of the building.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

Comments:

The proposed development and variations from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standards is inconsistent with the existing built form and hence in this case is not considered in the public benefit.

 

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 3 | Ways of Establishing that Compliance is Unreasonable or Unnecessary 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.

 

Applicant’s responses:

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standards is relevant to the subject development.  The proposal is not considered to satisfy the underlying purposes of the FSR and building height standards.  The proposed use will not protect the amenity or character of the area.  The proposal will result in apartments which are minimal in size with minimal open space, minimal landscaping and lack the proper provision of services in terms of parking, waste management and storage.  Generally the proposal will lack adequate amenity for its future inhabitants.

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.

 

Applicant’s responses:

 

 

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.

 

Applicant’s responses:

 

Comments:

The underlying objective of both the floor space ratio and the building height standards would not be defeated or thwarted if full numerical compliance was required.

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.

 

Applicant’s responses:

Comments:

The FSR and Building Height development standards have not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.  There has been no precedent established by Council’s assessment decisions, which in effect would abandon the development standards prescribed in the LEP.

Fifth

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

 

Applicant’s responses:

 

Comments:

The existing zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality. The site is located within the core of one of Randwick Council's prime retail areas.

 

Conclusion:

The proposed variations to the development standards are not considered to adequately address the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827. In this instance, the variations cannot be supported.

 

5.       Site History

 

Until recent years the motel was in use.  A Previous development application 882/2010 was lodged and approved for “alterations to Gemini Motel including decrease in motel rooms from 98 to 91, increase in ground floor shops from 2 to 3 and new openings on northern elevation”.  These works are currently being undertaken and as a result the operation of the motel has ceased.  The commercial and retail uses are still in operation. 

 

Since the lodgement of the subject application, Council representatives have met with the applicant and provided written communication requesting additional information.  Subsequently various packages of additional information have been provided including two (2) x sets of amended plans.  Despite this, it is considered that the applicant has failed to fully addressed Council’s concerns regarding the application. 

 

6.       Community Consultation

 

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

 

6.1   Objections

 

The Randwick Precinct Committees

Strata Manager – SP 73868 - 57-63 Belmore Road, Randwick (x2)_

Unit 16/57-63 Belmore Road, Randwick

Unit 20/57-63 Belmore Road, Randwick

Resident - PO. Box 172 St Pauls  NSW  2031

Shop owner, 57-63 Belmore Road, Randwick

 

Table 4 |  Discussion of Issues raised in Submissions.

Issue

Comment

Excessive noise resulting from the uses of the right of way as the vehicular exit from the subject site.

The issues raised predominantly related to the use of the driveway.  In terms of impact the change of use from motel to permanent residences will result in the additional usage of the right of way. 

The application does not propose any mitigation measures to address the potential impacts and the additional usage of the right of way.  These impacts have not been adequately addressed in the applicant's Traffic Report. Despite this, the Traffic Engineer has deemed the use of the right of way acceptable.

Should this application be approved, it is recommended that a condition of consent should require the preparation of a traffic management plan for approval by Council’s Development Engineers.

The proposed intensification of the right of way would result in increased traffic congestion, in particular for the service trucks which currently use the right of way for loading/ unloading.

Security risk to the adjoining Belmore Apartments resulting from increased access.

The existing “right of way” driveway cannot adequately accommodate the proposed use. The loading and the servicing of the apartments currently is a challenge.

The proposal will undermine the existing loading zone status and cannot adequately accommodate the additional traffic proposed.

The proposed use of the driveway would result in negative consequences including:

-    congestion

-    danger to pedestrians

-    danger to oncoming cars

-    the driveway is already servicing commercial and residential apartments as well as large delivery vehicles,

-    additional noise

-    reduction in the property prices adjoining the driveway.

-    over intensification of the site use,

-    unsuitability of the proposed studio apartments – no kitchens, lack of solar access and ventilation,

-    insufficient parking,

-    excessive number of studios planned,

-    fails to comply with the Residential Flat Design Code. 

-    incorrect estimated cost of works.

The objections raised related to the amenity of the proposed dwelling has been noted and will be considered in the assessment of the proposal. 

A revised cost of works has been submitted to Council.

 

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             Development Engineer

An amended application has been received which includes reduction in number of units from 91 to 84 and alteration to exterior design

 

Original proposal: Conversion of an existing motel to residential apartments with retail units at ground level, facade upgrade, extension of unit on level 7 to roof top (level 8), lift access from level 7 to level 8, associated works and strata subdivision (Heritage Conservation Area) at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·                Amended Architectural Plans by  Marchese Partners Architects  stamped by Council 2 April 2012;

·                Supplementary  Statement of Environmental Effects received by Council 2 April

·                Detail & Level Survey by Macquarie Park

·                Additional traffic Report by Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes Pty Ltd dated March 2012

·                Draft Strata Plans by Surveyor Scott Deveridge.

 


General Comments

Development Engineering has undertaken an assessment of the amended plans and accompanying traffic report and significant issues remain with this application. Development Engineering has consistently recommended refusal of this application based on parking and waste management grounds. Further assessment has also raised strata issues which are outlined in this report.

 

Parking/Traffic Issues

The assessing officer is advised that the application is not supported on parking grounds. The parking demand generated by the proposed development will dramatically increase beyond current levels generated by the motel and will result in an unacceptable impact on the availability of on-street parking.  Further detail on the parking demand generated by the existing and proposed development including assessment of the accompanying traffic and parking study is given below.

 

FOR EXISTNG DEVELOPMENT

At the time of closure the motel was operating with 98 rooms and approximately 55 carspaces

 

Council’s DCP-Parking requires that parking be provided for motels at a rate of 1 space per 3 employees plus 1 space per two rooms plus 1 space for manager. As the number of staff was unknown at time of writing this report the number of staff has been estimated.

 

Parking Required (Motel)      = 9/3 (staff) + 98/2 (rooms) + 1 (manager)

                                      = 53 carspaces

 

Parking required (Commercial)   = (53.5+33)/40 (for existing tenancies)

@1 space per 40m2                 = 2.2 spaces

 

Total Parking Required    = 55 spaces

Total Parking Provided    = 55 spaces  (obtained from previous application DA/882/2010)

                             

The current provision of parking for the motel complies with Council’s DCP-Parking.

 

FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Parking Provision – Residential Component

As the mix and number of apartments has now changed with the amended plans the total parking required has been recalculated in accordance with the rates provided in Council’s DCP-Parking.

 

The subject proposal now consists of 84 residential units consisting of 62 x studio, 17 x 1 bedroom & 5 x 2 bedroom units.

 

Parking Required = 62 x 0.5 + 17 x 1 + 5 x 1.2 + 84/4 (visitor)

                        = 31 + 17 + 6 + 21(visitor)

                        = 75 spaces (including 21 visitor spaces)

                       

Bicycle Parking    = 84/3 + 84/10 (visitor)

Required             = 36.4

                        = say 36 bicycle spaces    

 

Parking Provision – Commercial Component

Council’s DCP-Parking specifies the following parking rates for business premises.

1 space per 40m2

 

Parking Required = (212m2 (retail ground floor) + 350(office first floor) + 350(office second floor)) /40

                = 912/40

                = 22.8

                = say 23 spaces

TOATAL PARKING REQUIRED = 75 + 23 = 98 spaces

TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED   = 40 spaces 

Parking Shortfall = 58 spaces (59.2%)

 

Council’s DCP-Parking does make provision for the reduction of the parking rate in areas which have access to good public transport. The proximity of frequent bus routes passing by the site in Belmore Road has been noted by the Development Engineer however it is considered the parking shortfall of 59.2% is  excessive and unable to be supported.

 

Development Engineering may consider the removal of the visitor parking requirement for the proposal (21 spaces) but even after this reduction the proposal would still be deficient by up to 37 spaces (37.8%) which is still excessive and could not be supported.

 

A further reduction may be applied if considering the existing parking deficiency for the ground floor commercial component be considered as a parking credit. The Parking DCP would require 5 spaces for these tenancies with a total area of 212m2. Three spaces were required as part of DA/882/2011 hence a credit of 2 spaces can be applied. This is still insufficient to significantly address the parking shortfall (resulting deficiency = 35 spaces)

 

Bicycle Parking

The amended plans indicate that 28 bicycle spaces will now be provided on the second floor replacing 4 carspaces. This provision is still 10 spaces short of Council’s requirements specified in Council’s DCP-Parking (38 required). It should be noted that the shortfall predominantly relates to the visitor spaces only but given the large shortfall in car parking non-compliance with these requirements is also not supported.

 

Traffic and Parking Study

The amended traffic report by Colston Budd Hunt & Kaffes  includes a parking study which examines the availability of on-street parking in nearby streets including Belmore Road, Waratah Avenue, Arthur St, Avoca St which appear to demonstrate that sufficient parking is available.

 

An immediate issue with this parking study is that it assumes a constant supply of available spaces which due to No Stopping/Parking restrictions in the morning and afternoon peak on Avoca St and Belmore Road is clearly not the case. In addition existing time restrictions for on-street parking are not elaborated fully in the study. Belmore Road (east side) for example for has only 30 minute parking available 8:30am to 4pm Mon-Fri and No Stopping 4:00pm – 6:00pm.

 

The study does indicate that on-street some parking is available but does not contain sufficient detail to indicate where or for how long. The opening hours of the public carpark under Randwick Shopping Village are also not specified.

 

Comments on Right of Way

The report has calculated that traffic generation for the proposal will be in the order of some 25-30 vehicles pr hours two way at peak times. Traffic increases in the right of way (for exiting vehicles) would be for some 20 vehicles in morning and 8-9 vehicles in afternoon. These are considered low and not expected to create a significant impact on the Right of Way.

 

The study has also modelled the intersection of the Right of way and Belmore concluding the intersection performs well and no significant delays will be experienced. Based on these findings Development Engineering accepts that the conclusions of the traffic study in this regard.

Carpark layout –Existing  Non  Compliances with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004

There are existing non-compliances with Australian Standard 2890.1 evident within the existing carpark layout. For example the top level only has a clearance of 1.8m (2.2m required) and some car spaces are too narrow & difficult to access. Development Engineering have concerns of future liability issues if residents are unable to use these carspaces due to the non-compliances especially considering the site is to be strata subdivided

 

See previous memos from Development Engineering dated 23rd March 2012 & 29th September 2011 for further detail on the existing non-compliances.

 

Waste Management Issues

The assessing officer is advised that the application is not supported on waste management grounds. The issues raised in previous memo from Development Engineering are still valid and have not been addressed.  In summary the main issues are;

§         660L bins are not available for recyclables. Council’s collection vehicles for recyclable are side loading and are only able to accommodate 240L bins. 660L bins require rear loading trucks. Hence for the subject application 44 x 240L bins will be required which has not been addressed with the waste bin not being sized accordingly.

§         An increased collection frequency for residential premises is not available in Randwick LGA. Waste Management facilities must be designed for weekly collection for normal garbage and fortnightly collection for recyclables.

§         The required number of waste bins being presented kerbside for collection on Belmore Road will significantly impact street amenity. A total of 44 x 240L bins for recyclables plus 16 x 660L bin will be located kerbside for collection.  How the bins are transported to the street frontage and presented has also not been adequately considered. There is unlikely to be sufficient room on the footpath along the site frontage available.

 

Strata Issues

An assessment of the draft strata plans have also raised additional concerns to Development Engineering which are outlined below.

It is noted that none of the 40 parking spaces are proposed to be allocated to a single unit. Instead the applicant proposes that they will all be contained within a separate strata lot whose owner will rent the carspaces out to the various unit owners as required.

This arrangement is not supported by Development Engineering as it does not guarantee unit owners will have access to the carspaces.

It is likely that the renting out carspaces will further discourage off-street parking and exacerbate the already severe deficiency.

The arrangement is not considered appropriate given the severe deficiency and Development Engineering requires that parking spaces be allocated to the individual units as part of the strata subdivision with preference obviously given to the 2 bedroom and 1 bedroom units.

Strata lots 15 & 16 on the third floor are not consistent with the proposed unit layout and should be combined as one strata lot.

It is noted that the entire 7th floor consisting of the penthouse, 1 x 1bedroom unit and 15 x studio units have been included within 1 strata lot (Lot 71).  This is unusual and for what purpose this arrangement is proposed is not explained in the SEE.  

 

 

The application is not supported and the assessing officer is strongly advised to refuse the application. 

 

7.2             Environmental Health and Building Services Comments

The proposal

 

Conversion of an existing motel to residential apartments with retail units at ground level, façade upgrade, extension of unit on level 7 to roof top (level 8), lift access from level 7 to level 8, associated works and strata subdivision (Heritage Conservation Area).

 

BCA Building Classification

 

Class 6      -      Retail/Shops

Class 2      -      Residential units

Class 7a    -      Car park

 

Background

 

The applicant was asked to address a number of items pertaining to fire safety.  A response was received in a report dated 27 January 2012.  The building is of Type A construction, less than 25m effective height and has a RIS of 10.  The report identifies areas which are likely to comply and those which will be subject to fire engineering and upgrading as required. 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

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

 

7.3             Heritage Planner

Not comments provided.  The Heritage Planner reviewed the application and had not comment on the proposed works.

 

7.4             Design Review Panel

The Panel had previously reviewed the proposal in November 2011.

 

This proposal is for the conversion of the Gemini Motel from a mixed use building containing retail, commercial and motel, to a mixed use building with upgraded retail at the ground floor and up to 8 storeys of apartments over.

 

This is a DA and the second time the Panel has reviewed a proposal for the site. 

 

The Panel has visited the site.

 

The drawings are not clear with regard to the existing building, recently approved balconies and screens and proposed new apartment layouts.  It appears that most of the motel rooms are being converted into studio apartments of approximately 27m², and larger 1 bed and 2 bed apartments are created on the east and west ends of the building.

 

1.     Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

The site is within a general business zone in the heart of Randwick.  The existing development exceeds current development limitations for both height and floor space.  However, the regeneration of the building is a desirable outcome given the site’s central location and its current poor state of repair.

 

There is little contextual information provided and the Panel will require the following information for review:

 

Footprints, heights, use, ground levels and window positions of all adjacent      buildings

        A site survey and building dimensions

        A series of cross sections through the site and adjacent buildings

        Shadow impacts onto the site from neighbours

        Shadow impact of this proposal on neighbours

 

2.     The Scale of the Proposal

Although the new balconies add to the amenity of the apartments they increase the bulk of the building and the opportunities for overlooking.  These issues need to be more clearly described for assessment.

 

The proposed facade upgrade has the potential to improve the apparent scale and street presentation of the building.

 

3.     The Built Form of the Proposal

It seems that the built form has previously been approved by Council. 

Improvements need to be considered as the units will have more permanent occupation and these improvements will require some changes to the built form as follows:

Open the corridor to the street to admit light and ventilation and provide outlook for all building occupants.  This could be a small balcony accessed from a glazed door.

Apartments 4.02, 5.02 and 6.02 will require outdoor private space.

A roof terrace with some common room space on the roof

Provision of a laundry - possibly off the roof terrace + common room

The western level 7 apartment and penthouse to be replanned (see 7. Amenity)

High quality finishes and lighting to the residential entry and lobby

High quality finishes and lighting to the car park driveway for its full extent

Improved retail frontage including quality glazing

 

It is not apparent where the air-conditioning plant and vents are placed for the existing office spaces

 

4.     The Proposed Density

Any argument for increased density needs to be supported by excellent urban design, appropriate response to the context, high quality architectural and landscape design, good amenity to all dwellings and reasonable impacts on and relationship to neighbours.

 

The current building is an anomaly and the proposal to convert it to a strata titled apartment building will require additional work to increase its amenity and environmental performance as outlined in this report.

 

5.     Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

There is no cross ventilation provided to any of the apartments other than the ones on the north west corner.  An environmental engineer should be engaged to advise on ways of introducing passive systems for ventilation.

 

It is unclear if the rooms are air-conditioned.  The Panel would prefer natural ventilation for cooling (however the street facing apartments may need acoustic measures to reduce road noise), and the inclusion of ceiling fans in all bedrooms and living spaces.

 

Louvred screens have been provided for western sunshading.  It is not clear if the louvres are operable - this should be clarified.

 

Natural light and ventilation should be available to the long internal corridor and lift lobby as previously noted in this report.

 

Clothes drying areas should be provided on the private balconies or on the roof terrace.

 

Roof areas that are not occupied by accommodation or roof terrace should be upgraded to include ventilating skylights to the rooms below.

 

External sunshading should be provided to any new level facing west and the new window proposed on the north.

 

6.     The Proposed Landscape

There is no opportunity for deep soil on this site however a roof garden designed by a landscape architect could be provided for the benefit of the occupants, and some visual relief from neighbouring properties.

 

7.     The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

Many of the issues of reduced amenity have been listed above and particularly the problems ventilation, traffic noise, overlooking, provision of laundries, private balconies and common outdoor areas.

 

The Applicant needs to provide clarification of internal planning as it is unknown if laundries and kitchens are being provided to the bulk of the rooms. 

 

Apartment 7.17 seems to include the rooftop penthouse however there are two kitchens and two living rooms but only two bedrooms.  There is no internal access provided as the stair is accessed from the common corridor and the lift is accessed from the external balcony. This planning arrangement is unacceptable.

 

The proposed new external lift should be deleted.

 

The addition of a penthouse is only considered appropriate if it improves the street presentation of the roof level of the building and is of excellent design and environmental performance.  The drawings have a note about the telecommunication pods however it is not readable.

 

The proposed garbage bin area needs to be separated from the car park and provided with an airlock.  The original laundry chute could be converted to a garbage chute.

       

8.     The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

An independent BCA assessment report should be provided.

 

It is assumed that the building is sprinklered.

 

9.     Social issues

The structural drawings for the original building should provided and the opportunity for any interconnected units be investigated.  This will provide a better range of unit sizes.

 

It is desirable that affordable, accessible, medium density dwellings are available in this area due to proximity to the city, the university, the hospital, schools and good public transport.  Due to the high level of public transport the Panel supports the reduction in car parking provisions.

 

10.   The Aesthetics of the Proposal

Generally the aesthetics could be acceptable however there is not enough detail to be certain of quality.  The Panel recommends that more detail be provided for further assessment including 1:50 wall and roof sections showing construction, balustrade details, window types, sunshading, water management, roof insulation etc.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

The current application is substandard, and does not comply with SEPP 65 and RFDC requirements.

 

The Panel looks forward to reviewing this proposal again when the issues in this report have been discussed with Council and adequately addressed.

 

8.            Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

·         State Environmental Planning Policy 1 Development Standards (SEPP 1)– addressed above.

·         State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality or Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)

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

·         Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998

·         Development Control Plan – Parking

·         Development Control Plan – Randwick Junction

·         Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

 

8.1   State Environmental Planning Policy 65 - Design Quality for Residential Flat Developments

The proposal has been referred to the Design Review Panel twice since being submitted.  The principles have been considered in detail.  The proposal fails to satisfy all of the principles, however, the proposal is found to be particularly lacking in terms of principles 2. The Built Form of the Proposal, 5. Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency and 7. The amenity of the Proposal for its Users.  A number of the issues have not been addressed including:

 

·         The amenity of the hallway/ communal areas the lack of natural lighting and ventilation

·         No provision of private open space for 4.02, 5.02 and 6.02

·         A lack of resolution related to the heating and cooling of the units.

·         No clothes drying areas are indicated on the site.

·         No detail was provided regarding the roof terrace in the plans and the landscaping of the roof terrace was not detailed.

·         The internal planning of the units is not detailed adequately.

 

In addition to these matters an assessment against the Residential Flat Design Code has been undertaken.  The proposal fails to achieve the objectives of the Residential Flat Design Code in terms of apartment layout, apartment mix, ceiling heights, flexibility, internal circulation, mixed use, storage, daylight access (no detail provided), natural ventilation, energy efficiency, water conservation, deep soil zones, open space and safety.

 

The proposal to retain the existing building stock is considered to be a sustainable outcome.  Despite this, the internal design and accompanying information provided with the application, fails to adequately achieve minimum standards and are not considered consistent with the Residential Flat Design Code or SEPP 65. 

 

The proposal fails to recognise the requirements of transient occupants of the motel rooms compared to the requirements and minimum level of amenity afforded to a permanent residential population.  The majority of rooms are small studio apartments (GFA 23m2) with 10m2 balconies, no additional storage and are unlikely to have access to a car space.  In retrofitting apartments from motel rooms the applicant has failed to address the main concerns raised by Council’s officers relating to density, the units do not achieve minimal areas, ventilation, communal open space, inadequate parking and inadequate waste management provision. 

 

The proposal lacks the consideration of adequate amenity for the future residential population.  No attempt has been made to allow for a single adaptable apartment within the proposal.

 

Additional amalgamation to reduce the number of studio apartments with compromised amenity in terms of internal / external areas and communal spaces would have somewhat addressed these concerns accompanied by clear and detailed accompanying information. Despite this the applicant has failed to address the concerns of the Design Review Panel and the proposal is not considered to be consistent with the requirements of the SEPP 65.

 

8.2   SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

The proposal is for the creation of 84 new dwellings and the applicant has provided a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP. The provision of a certificate indicates that compliance with the current targets set for energy and water conservation have been met by the development. The certificate also identifies the measures to be shown on Development Application plans to ensure these targets are maintained through to construction.

 

8.3   Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 3A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 13 Zone No 3A (General Business Zone)

The proposal fails to achieve the objectives of the zone, in particular the proposal does not address the following:

 

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

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

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

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

 

As stated in Section 4 as the proposal fails to satisfy the controls for bulk and scale and fails to minimise the existing impact of the building in terms of amenity the proposal does not adequately satisfy the objectives.  Secondly as the proposal will result in significant increases to the density of the locality in terms of population and permanent usage of the building, these impacts should have been mitigated to ensure that the proposal’s environmental and aesthetic qualities are improved and maintained.  The proposal fails to adequately address these qualities and protect them.  Hence the proposal is not considered consistent with the objectives.

 

Clause 20F Floor Space Ratio

The control for Floor Space Ration in the 3A zone is 2:1 the proposal is for 4.4:1 this represents double the existing control.  A SEPP 1 is provided to address this variation, as discussed in Section 4.  The SEPP 1 is not considered to be well founded and the variation is not acceptable in this instance.

 

Clause 20G Building Height

The indicated building height for the site is 12m. The proposal is for 28.2m. A SEPP 1 is provided to address this variation, as discussed in Section 4.  The SEPP 1 is not considered to be well founded and the variation is not acceptable in this instance.

 

Clause 43 Heritage Conservation

The subject site is located within a heritage conservation area.  The application and subsequent amendments were referred to Council's heritage officer who raised no concerns with the application.

 

8.4   Development Control Plan – Parking

The application has been referred to Council's Traffic Engineer for comment, which is provided in Section 7.1 of this report. Council’s DCP Parking Specifies:

The subject proposal now consists of 84 residential units consisting of 62 x studio, 17 x 1 bedroom & 5 x 2 bedroom units.

 

Parking Required         = 62 x 0.5 + 17 x 1 + 5 x 1.2 + 84/4 (visitor)

                = 31 + 17 + 6 + 21(visitor)

                = 75 spaces (including 21 visitor spaces)

               

Bicycle Parking   = 84/3 + 84/10 (visitor)

Required     = 36.4

                = say 36 bicycle spaces    

 

Parking Provision – Commercial Component

Council’s DCP-Parking specifies the following parking rates for business premises.

1 space per 40m2

 

Parking Required = (212m2 (retail ground floor) + 350(office first floor) + 350(office second floor)) /40

                = 912/40

                = 22.8

                = say 23 spaces

 

TOATAL PARKING REQUIRED = 75 + 23 = 98 spaces

TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED   = 40 spaces 

Parking Shortfall = 58 spaces (59.2%)

       

This provision is significantly less than the required number of car spaces and is not considered acceptable.  The variation is protracted by the layout of the car park which does not allow for large vehicles to enter. Hence, the useability of the car park is further reduced.  Despite the provision of public transport in the locality, the variation is considered too significant to be justified in this case.  Further car parks often provide additional storage for small dwellings, in this case no additional storage is provided and the access to car parking is minimal in the locality at large, hence the proposal will add to the existing constraints on the area.

 

8.5   DCP Randwick Junction

This DCP specifically relates to Randwick Junction and provides objectives to achieve a positive design outcome for the built form.  The major areas of variation from the controls are in solar access and energy efficiency, parking, safety density height and setback.  The proposal is not consistent with this DCP. The discussion below illustrates the key areas of non compliance with the objectives.

 

3.1 Site Analysis and Planning

 

Objectives

·         Achieve a coherent site layout that provides a pleasant, attractive, manageable, resource efficient and sustainable environmental for living, commerce and study.

·         Ensure that the local site conditions, positive attributes, constraints and opportunities of the site are taken into account in the design of new development.

·         Ensure that new development responds to the topography of the site and its neighbouring areas.

·         Ensure that the relationship of new development to adjoining development is considered in the design process and that negative impacts are minimised.

 

Comment:

This application has the potential to achieve a high level of amenity and retro fit an energy efficient sustainable outcome in what is currently a poorly designed building.  Despite this the proposal fails to adequately address the key controls for the site in terms of amenity.  The minimal unit amalgamations and the introduction of a roof terrace are positive additions to the proposal yet fail to go far enough in providing a higher level of amenity to the future residential population.

 

3.2 Density height and setbacks

Objective

·         Control the relationship of new development to the street and adjoining development.

 

Comment:

Although the footprint is existing additional consideration, accompanied by internal amendments, could have addressed some of the areas of the building where the relationship of the subject building and the adjoining building does not achieve a high level of amenity.  No consideration was given to the provision of setbacks.

 

3.3.1 Pedestrian and Disabled Access

Objectives:

 

·         Ensure that appropriate levels of access to new developments are available to all sectors of the community and

·         Maintain a pedestrian focus within the streetscape environment

 

Comment:

The proposal does not meet the relevant controls related to accessibility. In particular none of the units will be adaptable or accessible.  There are no accessible car spaces proposed.  The BCA report states that the proposal does not satisfy all the requirements of the Australian Standards.

 

3.3.2 Vehicular Access

Servicing to the site has not been addressed in the proposal. The existing driveway lacks amenity.

 

3.3.3 Carparking

The proposal fails to provide adequate car parking for the proposed use.

 

3.3.4 Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

Objectives

 

·         Orientate buildings to achieve the maximum solar access wherever possible and maximise light and ventilation though new age development

·         Optimise energy usage by minimising the building’s dependence on grid supplied electricity thought the use of alternative energy sources where feasible.

 

Comment:

The proposal fails to adopt and implement sustainable practices for the function of the building as a multi unit development.  The design fails to adequately accommodate for energy efficiency in the design.

 

3.38 Private and Communal Recreation Areas

Objectives

·         Provide adequate private and communal recreation areas for new residential development in Randwick Junction.

·         Ensure each area of private or communal recreation are is useable fro the purpose for which it is intended.

·         Ensure that the enjoyment of private or communal recreation areas does not impact on adjoining uses in an undue manner.

 

Comment:

The nature of the existing building is such that the provision of open space is difficult. Despite this, there is scope to provide for an extensive and well designed roof top garden for communal open space.  The detail of the proposed roof top garden is not clear and access to it has not been clearly indicated.  As a result, the proposal is considered inadequate in terms of communal recreation areas and is not considered acceptable.

 

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.

Table

 

Table 5 | Assessment of the proposal against Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

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 3A General Business under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

The proposal is not consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone as previously stated.  The proposal fails to achieve an adequate level of amenity for the future residents. 

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

See below.

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

The proposal fails to satisfy the objectives of both the DCP – Randwick Junction and DCP – Parking.  The proposal is not considered acceptable in terms of the controls. 

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 will result in a significant increase to the population density of the area and the proposal fails to adequately account for permanent occupation of the subject site.  The main impacts are amenity, accessibility, access to private open space and safety

 

An additional issue with the application was the lack of detail.  The inadequate detail provided resulted in the Assessor not being able to adequately determine the level of solar access for the units.

 

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

The site fails to address the impacts that will result from the change of use.  The site is suitable for the use however this has not been adequately accounted for in the existing building.

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

 

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

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

The proposal is not in the public interest as it fails to adequately address the relevant controls and fails to provide an adequate level of amenity for the future residents.

 

 

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Draft LEP)

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 is a matter for consideration in the assessment of the subject development application under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended).

 

The following table considers the proposed development having regard to the zoning provisions and development standards contained in Draft LEP that are of relevance to the subject development application:

 


Table 6 | Consideration of the relevant controls contained within the Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

Zoning:

(Please insert)

 

Is development permitted under zoning?

The proposed zoning for the subject site is B2 Local Centre

Mixed use developments and multi unit housing is permissible within the zone. 

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Maximum)

2:1

4.4:1

No

Height of Building (Maximum)

12m 

As is 28.2m

No

Lot Size (Minimum)

 

 

N/A

Heritage:

Draft Heritage Item

Draft Heritage Conservation Area

In vicinity of draft item or area

Contained within a heritage conservation area.

No impact.

N/A

 

The proposal fails to comply with the numerical controls contained within the draft LEP.  

 

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:

 

Table 7 | Section 94 Contributions.

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$345,000

1.0%

$3,450

 

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 subject proposal for the proposed change of use at 65-71 Belmore Road, Randwick has been assessed in accordance the planning relevant controls.  The proposal entails significant non-compliance with the objectives of the zoning, the development standards for floor space ratio and building height and is inconsistent with the State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Development.   As a result of the assessment it is concluded that the proposal will not result in an adequate level of amenity for the future occupants.  Consequently,  the proposal is recommended for refusal.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to Development Application No. DA/606/2011 to for the change of uses of an existing motel for use as 84 residential units at 65-71 Belmore Road, Randwick for the following reasons:

 

1.            The SEPP 1 Objection to the development standard for floor space ratio pursuant to clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998 is not well founded.

 

2.            The SEPP 1 Objection to the development standard for building height pursuant to clause 20G of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998 is not well founded.

 

3.            The proposal is inconsistent with the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

4.            The proposed development is inconsistent with the objectives of the 3A General Business Zones in that it will compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas and will not maintain the character of the area.

 

5.            The proposal will adversely impact on the parking capacity of the locality.

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D38/12

 

 

Subject:                  35- 37 Sackville Street, Maroubra (DA/406/2011/A)

Folder No:                   DA/406/2011/A

Author:                   Scott Williamson, Development Assessment Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of the approved development through increase in size of basement level to provide storage/rumpus area for dwelling

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                C & V Thorn

Owner:                         C & V Thorn

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The original development application (DA/406/2011) was approved at the Planning Committee of 6 December 2011. Consent was granted for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three (3) storey attached dual occupancy comprising both a three (3) bedroom dwelling and a four (4) bedroom dwelling, car parking for four (4) vehicles, swimming pool, landscaping and associated works and strata subdivision into two (2) allotments.

 

The original application was supported with SEPP 1 Objections to three (3) development standards of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), including minimum allotment size, floor space ratio and external wall height standards.

 

The subject application (DA/406/2011/A) proposes to increase the extent of the approved basement level, in order to provide for a rumpus and storage room for the use of the approved Unit 1. The increase will result in an additional 56.13 square metres of floor space to the development and is contained entirely below street level. A single opening is provided to the Beaumond Street elevation, at ground floor level for the purpose of ventilation to the proposed increased subfloor area. 

 

The approved development of DA/406/2011 featured an FSR of 0.80:1, given conditions requiring deletion of two (2) proposed rooftop terraces. The above amendments of DA/406/2011/A will result in an additional 56.13 square metres of floor space to the approved 331 square metres. The proposed additions to the sub floor level will equate to an FSR of 0.94:1. Despite the above, the subject application proposes no change to the approved building envelope, as viewed from the streetscape and adjoining sites.

 

The original SEPP 1 Objection to the Floor Space Ratio Development Standard was supported by Council on the basis of a number of factors, including consistency with surrounding built form, given proximity to the Residential 2C Zone. The assessment also noted suitable articulation and the absence of unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy and view loss.

 

The current application was notified from 14 March 2012 to 28 March 2012 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification. One (1) submission was received at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The issues raised in the submission cited concerns over increased excavation in close proximity to neighbouring sites and the potential for subsidence and drainage complications.

 

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

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application proposes to modify the approved plans adopted within Condition 1 of DA/406/2011, at 35-37 Sackville Street, Maroubra.

 

The proposed modification involves the expansion of the approved basement car park level for the purposed of a rumpus and storage room, to be associated with Unit One (1) of the approved development (shown Figures 1 and 2, below).

 

The basement expansion will provide for an addition 56.13 square metres of floor space to the development and will require excavation below the open space provided to lots one (1) and two (2) on the site. A small opening is proposed to the east elevation of the development at ground floor level, providing ventilation to the proposed rumpus and storage rooms. 

 

Figure 1: Approved Basement Plan of DA/406/2011

Figure 2: Proposed Basement Plan of DA/406/2011/A, excavated rumpus/ storage room highlighted.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot A in DP 331589, No. 35-37 Sackville Street, Maroubra. The site is located on the western side of the intersection between Sackville Street and Beaumond Avenue. The land slopes from the north-west to the south-east with a fall of approximately 3.9m. The land area and dimensions of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

North-eastern, Sackville Street boundary

20.115m

413.9m2

South-eastern, Beaumond Avenue boundary

20.575m

North-western, side boundary

20.575m

South-western, side boundary

20.115m

 

At present, the site is occupied by a part two (2), part three (3) storey attached dual occupancy with semi-basement garage, which has been strata subdivided.

 

The site is adjoined by a double-storey detached dwelling to the north-west at No. 33 Sackville Street. To the south-west at No. 2 Beaumond Avenue is a single-storey dwelling with a semi-basement garage. There is a recent development approval (DA/507/2010) for the construction of a 3-storey residential flat building containing two units at No. 2 Beaumond Avenue. 

 

Sackville Street is characterised by lower density detached style residences. Beaumond Avenue predominantly contains residential flat buildings with a height of up to four (4) storeys.

 

                                                  

Figure 3: Sackville Street elevation of the existing building on the subject site

Figure 4: Beaumond Avenue elevation of the existing building on the subject site

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/1142/2003

Construction of an in-ground swimming pool.

Approved by Council on 13 February 2004.

DA/17/1988

Alterations and additions to the first floor level of the existing building.

Refused by Council on 17 March 1988.

SC/6/1984

Strata subdivision into two allotments.

Approved by Council on 10 September 1984.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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, one (1) submission was received, as follows:

 

·      33 Sackville Street, Maroubra;

Issue

Comment

Excavation:

·      Proposed increase is located close to the boundary with 33 Sackville;

·      Concern over risk of subsidence, alteration to drainage channels and potential damage to adjoining property.

 

These concerns are noted. A standard condition was applied to the original application (Condition 22), requiring a dilapidation report be prepared prior to the commencement of works. This condition remains in effect and is considered sufficient in protecting neighbouring sites from any damage as a result of the proposed works.

 

6.    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:

 

6.1         Substantially the Same Development

In accordance with Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposed changes are considered to be substantially the same as the originally approved development.  As such, the application is eligible for assessment under Section 96 of the Act.

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

The development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning instruments:

 

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

BASIX applies to the proposed development and BASIX Certification has been supplied with the application. The commitments listed in the certificate will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

7.2    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is located within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal is consistent with the aims of the LEP and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will maintain the existing housing form, which is compatible with the character of the locality.

 

7.2.1          Clause 20F- Floor Space Ratio

Clause 20F of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) details the Floor Space Ratio development standard. The development standard notes a maximum floor space of a dual occupancy within the Residential 2A zone as 0.5:1.

 

The original application was approved with an FSR of 0.8:1, and as such a SEPP 1 Objection was submitted against the development standard and supported by Council. The proposed development will increase floor space ratio to the site, achieving 0.94:1.

 

The original SEPP 1 was supported citing strict compliance with the Development Standard as unreasonable and unnecessary, on the basis of the following:

 

·           Sackville Street is predominantly characterised by two (2) and three(3) storey detached dwelling houses. A number of in-fill residential flat buildings reaching a height of up to four (4) storeys are found in Beaumond Avenue. The subject site is located immediately adjacent to Residential 2C zoned land to the southwest.

 

·           The site occupies a prominent corner location and has a significant cross-fall. In response to the topographical constraints, the design scheme has created a podium platform where the dwellings above are recessed from the property boundaries, with perimeter planting and stepped retaining walls and fences that minimise visual bulk. Subject to conditions, the height and scale of the development would be compatible with the streetscape pattern and site landform.

 

·           The building facades are suitably articulated with staggered wall planes, windows and balconies. The development adopts a flat roof. The design scheme will minimise the mass and scale of the structures as viewed from the surrounding public domain. The proposed colour palette adopts a neutral hue, which is suitable to the character of the locality.

 

·           The proposed level of floor space will not compromise the environmental performance and living amenity of both dwellings. The development will enjoy good solar access and natural ventilation and will achieve satisfactory energy efficiency outcome.

 

·           The revised proposal will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy and view loss, subject to condition.

 

·           The proposal will replace an aged attached dual occupancy with a contemporary building that provides upgraded facilities and improved presentation to the streets. The proposal represents an orderly and economic use of the land and satisfies the purposes of the development standards.

 

Given the proposed addition of floor space is contained entirely below ground and will not change the bulk or scale of the development, the above arguments are considered to remain applicable to the subject proposal. On this basis, the proposed basement extension will remain consistent with the intent of Clause 20F and will not pose a detrimental impact upon the environmental amenity or aesthetic quality of the area.

 

7.3         Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Draft LEP)

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 is a matter for consideration in the assessment of the subject development application under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended).

 

The following table considers the proposed development having regard to the zoning provisions and development standards contained in draft LEP that are of relevance to the subject development application:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

 

Zoning:

 

The site is proposed to be zoned Low Density Residential R2.

Yes

Permissible under the proposed zoning?

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Max)

0.75:1

0.94:1

 

No, see below.

 

Height of Building (Max)

9.5m

No change proposed.

No change from that approved under DA/406/2011.

Lot Size (Min)

     450m2

No change proposed.

No change from that approved under DA/406/2011.

 

7.3.1   Draft floor space controls

The Draft LEP proposes to adopt an FSR of 0.75:1 to the subject site. The subject application proposes a floor space of approximately 0.94:1.

 

The increase in floor space proposed within this application is contained below ground. The proposed floor space increase will not be visible from adjoining sites, the streetscape or surrounds. No additional impact to that of the originally approved development is considered to result from the proposed floor space. The proposal is consistent with the objectives and performance requirements of the current planning controls and as such, is considered acceptable with regard to the Draft LEP.

 


8.    Development Control Plan- Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The proposal has been assessed against the Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP. In order to gain Council approval, proposed developments must demonstrate that they have fulfilled the relevant objectives for each topic. The performance requirements of the DCP provide the means by which a development will achieve the objectives for each topic. Preferred Solutions are ‘deemed to comply’ standards, not compulsory standards, illustrating how a development may achieve the performance requirement. 

 

The application has been assessed against, and is consistent with, the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP. The development will not result in significant impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality. The issues elaborated upon below have been raised as concerns during the assessment of the application or where the ‘deemed to satisfy’ provisions have not been met.

 

9.    Key issues

 

9.1      Landscaped Area

Section 4.1 of the DCP outlines a number of objectives and performance requirements in regards to landscaping on the site, as follows:

 

§  To retain and enhance existing significant trees and established landscaping.

 

§  To provide dwellings with useable outdoor recreation space.

 

§  To improve stormwater management and the appearance, amenity and energy efficiency of housing through integrated landscape design.

 

§  To preserve and enhance native wildlife populations and habitat through appropriate planting and indigenous vegetation.

 

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

 

P6     Unpaved or unsealed landscaped areas are maximised and are designed to facilitate infiltration of stormwater.

 

The original development was approved under DA/406/2011 with 231.5 square metres or 55.9% of the site as landscaped area. Approximately 148.3 square metres or 36% of the site was noted to have permeable or soft landscaping treatment. The subject application will not reduce landscaped area on the site, given the proposed additions are located below ground.

 

Despite the above, the component of landscaped area located immediately above the proposed excavation works formerly sat upon an unobstructed deepsoil area, with no structure beneath. The subject application seeks to excavate below this landscaped area, with 470mm of soil cover provided as a base layer for ground cover.

 

The open space area above the proposed basement rumpus and storage area comprises primarily decking and tiled area, with some soft landscaping. The proposal will see in excess of 93 square metres, or 22.3% of the site remain as permeable landscaping. The planning controls note a preferred minimum of 82.8 square metres (20%) permeable landscaped area be provided to the site.

 

Given the above, a substantial amount of permeable area is provided around the site for the purpose of drainage and the inclusion of established landscaping. The overall provision of landscaping to the site is considered to remain acceptable with regard to the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP and consequently, the proposal is supported by this assessment.

 

9.2      Floor Area

Further to the above provisions of Clause 20F of Randwick LEP 1998, Section 4.2 of the DCP outlines the following objectives and performance requirements in regards to floor space on the site:

 

§  To ensure developments are not excessive in bulk or scale but are compatible with the existing character of the locality.

 

P1     Building bulk must be compatible with surrounding built forms and must minimise effects of bulk on neighbours, streets and public open space.

 

The original application was approved with a floor space ratio of 0.8:1, supporting a SEPP 1 Objection to the application. The proposed development seeks to expand the basement floor by 56.13 square metres, achieving a floor space ratio of 0.94:1. The proposed additional floor space is located entirely below ground and will not be visible from the street or neighbouring sites.

 

The original SEPP 1 was supported, citing strict compliance with the Development Standard as unreasonable and unnecessary. Support was on the basis of several points detailed above in Section 7.2.1 of this report, notably consistency of the proposal with surrounding built form, given proximity to the Residential 2C Zone. The assessment also noted suitable articulation and the absence of unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy and view loss. Given the proposed addition of floor space is contained entirely below ground and will not change the bulk or scale of the development, these points are considered to remain relevant to the subject proposal.

 

On this basis, the proposed basement extension will remain consistent with the provisions of the LEP and DCP and will not pose a detrimental impact upon the amenity of neighbouring sites, the streetscape or the locality.

 

10. Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

The site is zoned Residential 2A 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

The provisions of Randwick Draft LEP 2012 have been considered in the assessment of the application and are generally satisfied by the proposed development. 

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.

 

 

11. Technical Officers Comments

 

The application was not required to be referred to any other departments of Council or external bodies.

 

12. Section 94 Contributions

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$1,173,000

 

1.0%

$11,730.00

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Leadership in sustainability, excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development complies with the objectives and performance requirements of relevant Local and State planning controls.

 

The design will be sympathetic to the character of both Sackville Street and Beaumond Avenue. The extent of floor space, excavation and internal amenity proposed are considered to be satisfactory. The development scheme will not have a significant impact on the amenity of surrounding properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy, subject to the recommended conditions.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/406/2011/A for Section 96 modification of the approved development by increase in size of basement level to provide storage/ rumpus area for dwelling, at No. 35-37 Sackville Street, Maroubra, subject to the following conditions:

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

 

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

Dated

Received

Prepared By

DA2000(D)

Sep 2011

31 October 2011

Sgammotta Architects

DA2001(D)

Sep 2011

DA3000(D)

Sep 2011

DA4000(D)

Sep 2011

Draft Strata Plan (B)

Undated

7 November 2011

LA01(A)

23.05.2011

3 June 2011

Taylor Brammer Landscape Architects

 

And where amended by the following plans, as approved and stamped under DA/406/2011/A;

 

Plan

Dated

Received

Prepared By

S96(A)

February 2012

29 February 2012

Sgammotta Architects

 

BASIX Cert. No.

Project Name

Dated

Received

378686M_03

35-37 Sackville Street, Maroubra_03

28 February 2012

29 February 2012

 

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

 

Add the following detail to Condition 3:

 

(v)      The strata plan adopted in Condition 1 shall be amended to incorporate the approved alterations shown on Plan ‘S96(A)’, adopted above and ensuring:

 

·       All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan correspond to those of the building as constructed.

 

·       All floors, external walls and ceilings depicted in the proposed strata plan correspond to those depicted in the approved building plans for the site.

 

Amend Condition 4 to read:

 

4.     In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $1,170,344, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $11,703.44.

       

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.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D39/12

 

 

Subject:                  123-125 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee (DA/93/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/93/2012

Author:                   Louis Coorey, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations to 123 and 125 Coogee Bay Road and conversion to yoga studio, tea bar and retail sales on ground floor Amendment: Deleted the proposed conversion of the dwelling at first floor level into Health Consulting rooms

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Coogee Wellness Centre - H Levy

Owner:                         Mr P Manavis and Mrs J Manavis

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application has been referred to Council on the basis that, although it is permitted by Clause 35 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, the floor area of the shop premises exceeds the maximum 100sqm allowed for under Clause 35 by more than 10%. The applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to the non-compliance.

 

The subject application proposes the fit out and use of the existing shop premises as a yoga studio, tea bar and retail sales on ground floor and associated building identification signage.  The premises is sought to operate from 6am to 8pm, however given the premises is in close proximity to residential uses and sleep disturbance criteria begin to ease at around 7am, it is considered reasonable to restrict operating hours to a 7am starting time. It should be further noted that the original proposal included the conversion of the first floor dwelling into health consulting rooms, however this part of the application was deleted to overcome a substantial shortfall in parking.

 

The application was subject to public notification for a period of 14 days, and no submissions were received.

 

The main issues with the proposal relate to the hours of operation, compliance with the BCA, public health, floor space, signage and parking. Conditions of consent are recommended to address the issues of hours of operation, public health and signs. 

 

It is recommended that the SEPP 1 objection be supported by Council as strict compliance is unnecessary and unreasonable in this case given that the proposed development will maintain consistency with the purpose of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality but rather will contribute to its vitality and wellness.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The subject application proposes to use and fit-out the existing tenancies at 123-125 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee as yoga studio, tea bar and retail sales on ground floor.  The premises is sought to operate from 6am to 8pm, seven (7) days a week.

 

The existing separate entries and common party wall of the tenancies will be maintained.  A Yoga studio, basins, lockers, bar/café and retail display areas are accommodated within the floor area at ground level.  A bike rack will be located in the rear of the site.

 

The following signs are proposed:

 

·      Awning fascia business identification signage

·      Two under awning business identification signs over the entrances to the shop premises.

·      Shopfront detailing consistent with the colour proposed for business identification signage.

 

Important note: The conversion of the dwelling at first floor level into Health Consulting rooms has been deleted from the development application.

 

 


3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site, 123–125 Coogee Bay Road, is located on the southern side of Coogee Bay Road.  It comprises of one allotment, Lot 1 in DP 306682, with an approximate area of 367.8 m2.

 

It is occupied by a part one part two storey building of masonry construction, with two (2) shopfronts facing and accessible off Coogee Bay Road, an awning over the footpath and parapet feature above.  The dwelling located above the shops and behind at ground level is accessed off Byron Street and has a rear yard area for private open space purposes. The site backs onto a flat building fronting Byron Street elevated above the subject site.

 

The subject application only relates to the shops fronting Coogee Bay Road as  a result of the deletion of the health consulting rooms from the application.  Councils property information system and observations indicate that these shops have variously been used for newsagency and food premises. 

 

Adjoining the eastern side of the site is a three storey flat building of masonry construction.  To the west on the opposite corner is a heritage item used for the purposes of an educational establishment being the ‘Coogee Bay Public School’. Beyond these premises and opposite, land uses are generally a mixture of mixed uses, residential flat buildings or community related uses.

 

4.    Site History

 

No relevant development consents have been issued for the site. However Councils digital information system indicates various inspections and certificates issued for commercial and food premises.

 

5.    State Environment Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards

 

The proposal seeks variation to maximum 100m2 floor space permitted for a business premises permitted within Zone No. 2B control contained in Clause 35(b) of the RLEP 1998.

 

Clause 35 allows Council to grant development consent to a business premise in a Residential 2B Zone where it is satisfied the proposed use:

 

(a)    is to be situated in a building, or part of a building, that was originally designed or constructed (or both) for use as business premises, and

(b)    the total floor space to be used as business premises does not exceed 100 square metres.

 

The following is proposed:

 

Existing total floor space (approx)

131.31m2

proposed total floor space

131.31m2

Maximum permissible floor space (b)

100.00m2

Excess floor space

31.31m2

 

The combined floor space of tenancies 123-125 Coogee Bay Road is 131.31m2. This exceeds Council’s control by 31.31m2.

 

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).

 

Clause 35(b) Business premises in residential zone

The stated purpose of Clause 35 is:

 

To provide for the establishment and continued operation of small scale business development in residential zones’.

 

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

 

“In this case given the proposed development will maintain consistency with the purpose of the clause and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality to warrant refusal. We also do not wish to add any additional floor area to the site at ground floor level. The proposed use is consistent with the previous use as a commercial premises. Also the ground floor occupies essentially 2 shop premises on site which if considered in isolation is less than 100sqm per shop.”

 

Comment: It is considered that the applicants arguments are satisfactory and compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following:

 

·      The additional floor space is existing and only a consequence of the one business occupying two tenancies of the building.  If two separate businesses where proposed, compliance would be achieved.

·      The building will not be extended in any manner to provide the additional floor space.

·      The additional floor area will be of no consequence to the intensity of the use and related amenity impacts. 

·      The development will be a ‘small scale’ business. 

·      The business will occupy an existing vacant tenancy and therefore ‘provide for the establishment and continued operation of small scaled business development’.

·      The shop design and layout is commensurate with retail and commercial usage.  It has not been subject to major changes and therefore it is reasonable to assume its original construction was for two shop premises.  Records retained in Council’s digital property information support this.

·      It would preclude an older commercial building from being adapted for a viable use

·      Any amenity impacts on neighbouring properties is appropriately minimised

 

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 floor area 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 Clause 35 in that it is consistent with the desired character of the locality.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

 

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will not allow the best use of the site and there is no public benefit in maintaining the control 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 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 general zoning is considered to be inappropriate for the locality in so far as Council has identified this site as more appropriate for neighbourhood centre zoning.

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

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, no submissions were received.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

Development Engineer

An amended application has been received for alterations to 123 and 125 Coogee Bay Road and conversion to yoga studio, tea bar and retail sales on ground floor. The change of part of first floor to health consulting rooms and office has now been deleted from the application.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·           Fitout Plans stamped by Council 13th February 2012;

·           Statement of Environmental Effects stamped by Council 13th February 2012

 


Parking Comments

In response to raised concerns over a significant increase in parking demand generated by the site the applicant has decided to delete the health consulting room component on the first floor from the application.

 

Parking has now been assessed only on the proposed yoga studio and tea bar on the ground floor.

 

As detailed in previous memo there is no off-street parking currently provided on the site and hence there is an existing parking deficiency of 5 spaces when adopting the rates provided in Council’s DCP-Parking.

 

For the Proposed Development

The proposed development will consist of a yoga studio and small café on the ground floor. The 3 health consulting rooms on the 1st floor have now been deleted from the application and hence the first floor will remain as a 3 bedroom unit.

 

Parking for Yoga Studio & small cafe

There are no rates provided in Council’s DCP-Parking specifically for Yoga Studios but a rate of 1 space per 25m2 has been specified for gymnasiums which is considered comparable. The parking for the commercial shop in the eastern portion has been calculated using the rates provided for commercial premises at 1 space per 40m2.

 

Parking required (ground floor)     = 65.7/25 + 65.8/40

                                              = 2.63 + 1.65

                                              = 4.3 spaces

                            

Total Parking Required (proposed)        = Parking for Yoga Studio & commercial shop + 3 bedroom unit on 1st floor (unchanged)                      = 4.3 + 1.5

                                              = 5.8

                                              = say 6 spaces

 

Parking deficiency = 6 spaces (or 1 space after taking into account the existing parking deficiency of 5 spaces)

 

The proposed development (as amended) will only increase the parking demand generated by the site by one space. The site is located adjacent to a bus stop on Byron Street (Route 313) with typical frequencies of 30 minutes Mon-Sat and 60 minutes on Sunday. Other services are located within 400m to the south in Carr St. 

 

It was also suggested that a bike rack be proposed as part of the application to provide a sustainable transport option as a means of addressing the parking shortfall. This has been proposed within the amended application however the details provided are not satisfactory and hence an appropriate condition has been included in this report to ensure the adequate provision of the bike rack.

Due to the proposed installation of the bike rack and proximity to public transport the parking shortfall of 1 space will be acceptable in this instance.

 

Sydney Water Comments

The small café will not significantly increase water demand generated by the site (there is no cooking) and consistent with Sydney Water guidelines a S73 compliance certificate will not be required. 

 

Landscape Comments

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

 

Environmental Health

 

The following comments were provided:

*Note* - Amendments have been made to the environmental health concerns regarding DA/93/2012.

 

The environmental health team have been informed that the application has been amended to exclude health rooms from the development. The application now only includes for a yoga studio and café.

 

Conditions for the health rooms have been removed as they are no longer required for this development application.

 

Introduction

An application has been received for the fit out of health rooms, yoga studio & and a Café at 123-125 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee.

 

An inspection was undertaken on 21 February 2012. The premises was previously used as a newsagent and is currently vacant.

 

Discussions were held with the applicant Diane Hauritz regarding the café and retail store to seek further information regarding the application.

 

Food safety

The applicant has stated that their will be no food preparation to be undertaken at the premises. The café will be used for the purpose of selling prepackaged food, tea and coffee. No mechanical equipment or cool rooms are to be installed within the premises. The existing ventilation system will be used.

 

The retail area is for the sale of clothing only.

 

Food safety conditions have been included to satisfy the relevant legislation.

 

Noise and Amenity

The proposed hours of operation are from Monday to Sunday, 6am – 8pm.

 

Due to a large amount of residents within the location of the proposed development, it is recommended that the opening of the café and deliveries be restricted to 7am- 8pm Monday to Sunday.

 

The planner is to check that the hours of operation are consistent with surrounding food businesses in the area and if so condition the consent accordingly.

 

No mechanical equipment or mechanical ventilation is being installed.

 

Standard noise conditions have been included to address any noise concerns that may arise.

 

Should the proposed development be approved, standard conditions have been included;

 

Comment: The conditioned hours of operation are considered acceptable having regard to the nature of the business being proposed being unlikely to result in any significant adverse impacts on the neighbouring properties and the locality.

 

 

 

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

·      Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended)

·      Building Code of Australia

·      State Environment Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards

·      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

·      Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

·      Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

·      Development Control Plan - Parking.

·      Development Control Plan – Outdoor Advertising

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is a non conforming use, but it is permissible with Council’s consent subject to Clause 35 of the RLEP. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 22 – Services

Facilities for the supply of water and disposal of sewage and drainage currently service the subject site.  They will be maintained to service the proposed development.

 

Clause 31 – Landscaped Area

Clause 31 – Landscaped Area sets a minimum 50% overall landscaped area requirement for development within Zone 2B and maximum landscaped area over podiums or excavated basement areas of 50% of the overall landscaped area requirement.

 

The proposal will not involve any building extensions or other works that will impact on the existing landscaped area of the site. In particular, it will not impact on any existing landscaping that: softens the visual impact of the building on the site; assists in the reduction of urban runoff; and provides areas of open space for recreational purposes to the dwelling.

 

Clause 32 – Floor Space Ratios

Clause 32 provides a maximum floor space ratio of 0.65:1 for buildings on land zoned Residential 2B.  The proposed development will not alter the existing gross floor area of the building.

 

Clause 33 – Building Heights

Clause 33 provides a maximum building height of 9.5m and a maximum external wall height of 7m on land Zoned 2B.  The proposal will not affect the height of the existing building and its external elevations.

 

Clause 35 – Business Premises in Residential Zone

There is insufficient evidence provided with the DA to substantiate that the subject site enjoys existing use rights in particular it is noted that there are no digital reference to records held at Council.  Nevertheless Clause 35 allows Council to grant development consent to a business premise in a Residential 2B Zone where it is satisfied the proposed use:

 

(a)    is to be situated in a building, or part of a building, that was originally designed or constructed (or both) for use as business premises, and

(b)    the total floor space to be used as business premises does not exceed 100 square metres.

 

The shop design and layout is commensurate with retail and commercial usage.  It has not been subject to major changes and therefore it is reasonable to assume its original construction was for two shop premises.  Records retained in Council’s digital property file support this.

 

The total floor space of the ‘yoga studio, café, and retail premises’ will be 131.318m2 and therefore exceeds the 100m2 requirement.  In response to a request, the applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to seek variation to the requirement which is discussed in section 4 of this report. In short it is considered that it is unreasonable and unnecessary for the standard to apply.

 

Clause 43 - Heritage provisions

A heritage item is located on the adjacent corner of Coogee Bay Road and Byron Street and identified as the Coogee Public School building (c1920).

 

Clause 43 requires consideration of the likely effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage item and its setting. The proposed development is not of a scale that will degrade the heritage significance of the items.  The proposal will provide signage and colours that fit in with the shop fronts rather than the current ad-hoc signage across its facade, and will not detract from the traditional character of the item.

 

No changes are proposed that will impact on the setting of the items, particularly as a result of obstructing views to and from the items; additional overshadowing on the items or their surrounds; and physical damage to the items.

 

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The proposal will be consistent with the aims and objectives of the draft LEP.  It is noted that the draft instrument alters the zoning of the site from 2B to B1 Neighbourhood Centre which permits business premises. This means that the application would not be subject to the maximum 100sqm provisions under Clause 35 and therefore not require consideration at this Council meeting and therefore more consistent with the objectives of the zoning under the draft LEP 2012.

 

8.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plans

Development Control Plan – Parking

The DCP indicates a rate of 1 space per 25m2 of gross floor area for the gymnasiums.  The gross floor area of the studio will be 63.88m2 and therefore generates a car parking requirement of 1 space.  The numerical deficiency is acceptable in this instance due to the following:

 

•      No additional floor space is proposed however the proposed yoga studio has a more intense use than that which has been carried out within the existing tenancies and therefore the proposal attracts an additional demand for one car space. No additional parking space is provided and the applicant has sought to address this by providing a bike rack in the rear of the site (expected to be utilised by workers and patrons).

•      On street parking exists along Coogee Bay Road and surrounding side streets that could accommodate the shortfall.

•      Any demand for clientele parking will be short-term in accordance with the parking restrictions close to the school and other shops, however most clients are expected to be from the local area.

•      Public transport facilities are available along Coogee Bay Road.

•      The demand will not always coincide with that created by surrounding peak times.

 

Development Control Plan – Outdoor Advertising

The proposed signs are identified as ‘building identification signs’ located appropriately across the awning and shopfronts. The proposed signage and associated colour scheme are consistent with the objectives under the DCP for Outdoor Advertising and will not detract but will improve the appearance of the site from Coogee Bay Road and the streetscape.

 

8.2    Council Policies

Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The application is exempt from a levy under Council’s plan as it falls into the category of works valued less than $100,000.

 

9.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

The site is zoned Residential 2A 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

See above.

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

The proposal generally satisfies the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the relevant DCP’s, 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.

 

Nature of the Use

 

The proposed use is consistent with the general aims of RLEP 1998 in that the proposal will provide a business to serve the needs of the surrounding residents, workers and visitors to the area.  

 

The details provided with the application and amended accordingly adequately describe a development for the purpose for which approval is sought, i.e. as a legitimate premises providing yoga and retail services. A good indication of the legitimacy of the proposal is the type of signage provided to the premises.  The applicant has provided details pertaining to the intended use, trading hours and qualifications of the proponent of the business.  In this regard the proposed use and advertising signage specifically alerts potential clients to the exact nature and scope of services.

 

Hours of operation

 

The applicant has stated that the proposed hours of operation of the business are from Monday to Sunday from 6.00am to 8.00pm (7 days a week). 

 

It is not considered that the proposed starting time is appropriate given that the premises are located in close proximity to residential premises next door. In this respect, it is recommended that the starting time be restricted to 7am so that it is consistent with the permitted operating hours of other premises in the locality which is also in line with the threshold at which sleep disturbance is less likely to occur and therefore able to satisfy the relevant assessment criteria. A suitable condition is included restricting the hours of operation from 7am to 8pm 7 days in order to ensure that the proposal will not result in any unreasonable adverse impact upon the amenity of the surrounding commercial and residential properties. 

 

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

The site is located in close proximity to local services and public transport. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed land use and associated structures. 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 8:       A Strong Local Economy.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal will be consistent with the aims and objectives of the relevant controls.  It will result in one variance to a development standard, being a standard prescribed under Clause 35(b) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).  The SEPP 1 objection submitted by the applicant with respect to the variance has been found to be well founded.

 

The proposal will not have a significant impact upon the amenity of the surrounding properties, particularly in terms of visual bulk and scale, heritage significance, solar access, view loss and visual privacy.  The application has been amended to ensure negligible increase in demand for on street parking. Conditions are recommended to limit operating hours to ensure the amenity impacts are minimised to surrounding residential properties.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 35(b) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to business premises in residential zones, 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/93/2012 to carry out alterations and conversion into yoga studio, tea bar and retail sales on ground floor at 123-125 Coogee Bay Road, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Received by Council

Commercial/lower level floor plan

13 February 2012

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.       The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements and details are to be included in the Construction Certificate:

 

(a) This determination is only related to the lower level commercial premises. The conversion of the dwelling into health consulting rooms shall be deleted from the application and details showing compliance with this condition shall be included in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

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.

 

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 surface finishes to the development must be consistent with the relevant plans, documentation and colour schedules provided with the development application.

 

Long Service Levy Payments

5.       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.

 

Development Engineer

6.       Plans and documentation submitted for the construction certificate shall provide details on the proposed bike rack to the satisfaction of the certifying authority. The bike rack must be large enough to accommodate a minimum of 3 bicycles and be wholly located within the subject property with suitable access provided.

 

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 & Relevant Standards

7.       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).

 

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.

 

Certification and Building Inspection Requirements

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

 

·      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.

 

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

 

·      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

 

·      at least two days notice must be given to the Council, in writing, prior to commencing any works; and

 

 

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

9.       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, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

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. 

 

Construction Site Management

10.     A Construction Site Management Plan must be developed and implemented throughout the site works, to Council’s satisfaction.  The construction site management plan must include the following measures, (as applicable):

 

·          location and construction of temporary 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.

 

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.

 

Sydney Water

11.     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

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

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

 

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

 

Inspections during Construction

14.     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.

 

Building & Demolition Work Requirements

15.     All demolition and building work associated and activities must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements:

 

·          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’s 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.

 

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

 

16.     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 be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, 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.

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

 

·           The requirements of WorkCover NSW and 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 (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority 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

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

·           Public safety must be maintained at all times and public access to any demolition and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted. If necessary, a temporary safety fence or hoarding is to be provided to protect the public. 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.

 

·          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.

 

·          Site fencing, bulk bins/waste containers and other articles must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council. 

 

Applications to place site fencing, waste container or other articles in a public place can be made to Council’s Health, Building and Regulatory Services department.

 

Excavations & Support of Adjoining Land

20.     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.

 

21.     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.

 

Site Signage

22.     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

23.     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

Additional requirements for all development

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

Internal fit-out work only within a commercial or industrial development, located in a commercial or industrial zone, which is not audible within any residential dwelling or commercial or industrial premises

·   Monday to Saturday - No time limits (subject to column 1)

·   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.

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

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

25.     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.

 

Fire Safety Certificate Requirements

26.     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.

 

Noise Control Requirements

27.     The operation of plant and equipment must 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.

 

Waste Management

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

 

Trade/commercial waste materials must not be disposed in or through Council’s domestic garbage service.  All trade/commercial waste materials must be collected by Council’s Trade Waste Service or a waste contractor authorised by the Waste Service of New South Wales and details of the proposed waste collection and disposal service are to be submitted to Council prior to commencing operation of the business.

 

The operator of the business must also arrange for the recycling of appropriate materials and make the necessary arrangements with an authorised waste services contractor accordingly.

 

29.     Any liquid trade waste materials are to be disposed of in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water, Trade Waste Department (i.e. via a grease trap) and details of compliance are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings, street verge

30.     The proposed bike rack with suitable access must be fully installed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

31.     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.

 

32.     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.

 

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

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

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

 

33.     There are to be no emissions, discharges or transmission of vibration nuisance 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.

 

34.     The proposed use of the premises and 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 premises and plant and equipment shall not give rise to a 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).  The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq, 15 min and adjusted in accordance with the NSW DECCW/EPA Industrial Noise Policy 2000 and Environmental Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance).

35.     The hours of operation of the business are restricted to the following:-

 

Monday – Sunday     7:00am - 8:00pm

 

36.     Delivery of food and the like are restricted to;

 

Monday – Sunday     7:00am – 8:00pm

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure compliance with the Food Act 2003, Food Safety Standards and to ensure public health and safety:

 

37.     No food preparation (cooking, cutting etc) shall be undertaken within the food premises unless written consent is given by Randwick City Council. The Café section is to be used for the sale of drinks and pre-packaged foods only.

 

38.     The premises is to be designed and constructed in accordance with the Food Act 2003, Food Regulation 2004, Australia & New Zealand Food Standards Code and Australian Standard AS 4674-2004, Design, construction and fit-out of food premises.  Details of the design and construction of the café & acupuncture treatment room are to be included in the documentation for the construction certificate to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

39.     The design, construction and operation of the food premises must comply with the following requirements, as applicable:-

 

a)     Floors of kitchens, food storage areas and the like are to be constructed of materials which are impervious, non slip and non abrasive.  The floor is to be finished to a smooth even surface, graded and drained to a floor waste connected to the sewer.

 

The intersection of walls with floor and plinths is to be coved, to facilitate cleaning.

 

b)     Walls of kitchens and food storage areas are to be of suitable construction finished in a light colour with glazed tiles, stainless steel, laminated plastics or similar approved material adhered directly to the wall adjacent to cooking and food preparation facilities or areas, to provide a smooth even surface.

 

The glazed tiling or other approved material is to be extended up to the underside of any mechanical exhaust ventilation hoods and a minimum of 450mm above bench tops, wash hand basins, sinks and equipment.

 

c)     Walls where not tiled are to be cement rendered or be of rigid smooth faced non-absorbent material (i.e. fibrous cement sheeting, plasterboard or other approved material) and finished to a smooth even surface, painted with a washable paint of a light colour or sealed with other approved materials.

 

d)     Ceilings of kitchens, storerooms and the like are to be of rigid smooth-faced, non absorbent material (i.e. fibrous plaster, plasterboard, fibre cement sheet, cement render or other approved material), with a light-coloured washable paint finish.  ‘Drop-down’ ceiling panels are not to be provided in food preparation and cooking areas.

 

e)     All equipment including refrigerators, washing machines, hot water heaters, large scales, food mixers, food warmers, cupboards, counters, bars etc are to be supported on wheels, concrete plinths a minimum 75mm in height, metal legs minimum 150mm in height, brackets or approved metal framework of the like.

 

f)      Cupboards, cabinets, benches and shelving may be glass, metal, plastic, or other approved material.  The use of particleboard or similar material is not permitted unless laminated on all surfaces.

g)     Fly screens and doors with self-closing devices, are to be provided to all external door and window openings and an electronic insect control device is also to be provided within the food premises.

 

h)     A wash hand basin must be provided with hot and cold water, together with a sufficient supply of soap and clean towels in the Café area and to the existing toilet located at the rear of the premises.  The hot and cold water shall be supplied to the wash hand basins through a suitable mixing device.

i)      A double bowl sink must be provided with a supply of hot and cold water within the kitchenette of the food premises. The water supply must be from a potable water supply.

 

40.     Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, the premises must be inspected by Council’s Environmental Health Officer to ascertain compliance with relevant Food Safety Standards and the written approval of Council (being the relevant Food Authority for this food business) must be obtained prior to the operation of the food business.

 

41.     Prior to commencement of food business operations, the food premises must be registered with Council's Health, Building & Regulatory Services Department and the NSW Food Authority in accordance with the Food Safety Standards.

 

42.     Food safety practices and the operation of the food premises must be in accordance with the Food Act 2003, Food Regulation 2004, Food Standards Code and Food Safety Standards at all times, including the requirements and provisions relating to:

 

·       Food handling – skills, knowledge and controls.

·       Health and hygiene requirements.

·       Requirements for food handlers and businesses.

·       Cleaning, sanitizing and maintenance.

·       Design and construction of food premises, fixtures, fitting and equipment.

 

The Proprietor of the food business and all staff carrying out food handling and food storage activities must have appropriate skills and knowledge in food safety and food hygiene matters, as required by the Food Safety Standards.

 

Failure to comply with the relevant food safety requirements is an offence and may result in legal proceedings, service of notices and/or the issuing of on-the-spot penalty infringement notices.

 

43.     The food premises must be kept in a clean and sanitary condition at all times, including all walls, floors, ceilings, fixtures, fittings, appliances, equipment, fridges, freezers, cool rooms, shelving, cupboards, furniture, crockery, utensils, storage containers, waste bins, light fittings, mechanical ventilation & exhaust systems & ducting, storage areas, toilet facilities, basins and sinks.

 

44.     A numerically scaled indicating thermometer or recording thermometer, accurate to the nearest degree Celsius being provided to refrigerators, cool rooms, other cooling appliances and bain-maries or other heated food storage/display appliances.  The thermometer is to be located so as to be read easily from the outside of the appliance.

 

A digital probe type thermometer must also be readily available to check the temperature of food items.

 

45.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the confines of the premises for the storage, collection and disposal of waste and recyclable materials including for the collection of the sharps container by a licensed waste transporter, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

The waste storage area must be located within the property and not within any areas used for the storage of food.

 

Waste/recyclable bins and containers must not be placed on the footpath (or road), other than for waste collection, in accordance with Council’s requirements.

 

46.     Trade/commercial waste materials must not be disposed via council’s domestic garbage service.  All trade/commercial waste materials must be collected by Council’s Trade Waste Service or a waste contractor authorised by the Waste Service of New South Wales and details of the proposed waste collection and disposal service are to be submitted to Council prior to commencing operation of the business.

 

47.     All plumbing and drainage work must comply with the requirements of Sydney Water. Liquid trade waste materials are to be disposed of to the sewer (via a suitable grease trap). Details of compliance are to be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of any works.

 

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 $3,000) 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.

 

A1      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.

 

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.

 

A2      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.

 

A3      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

 

 

A4      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).

 

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 in a public place.

 

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

 

A6      There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to an environmental or public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

A7      In existing buildings, the levels of fire and occupant safety should be upgraded where necessary and details should be incorporated in the Construction Certificate to the satisfaction of the Certifying authority.

 

Where the levels of accessibility to existing buildings do not meet current standards, if practicable, the level of accessibility should also be upgraded in conjunction with the proposed development (e.g. via the installation of a 1:8 access ramp within the building) and details included in the construction certificate application.

 

Building owners, applicants and builders are advised to liaise with the appointed Certifying Authority prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate.

 

A8      A separate development application and construction certificate or a complying development certificate (as applicable) must be obtained if the premises is to be used for any of the purposes detailed below:

·       All food businesses (including premises used for the sale, storage, preparation and distribution of food and drinks)

·       Hairdressing salons, Beauty salons, Businesses involving Skin Penetration & Piercing, Massage businesses

·       Licensed premises, places of public entertainment and hotels

·       Places of Shared Accommodation (including Boarding / Lodging Houses, Bed & Breakfast businesses, Backpackers, Residential Hotels or the like

·       Cooling Towers or Warm Water Systems

·       External plant and equipment which is not encompassed in the development consent

·       Business providing any form of sexual service (i.e. brothel or the like).

 

Business premises which are used for any of these purposes must comply with relevant public health and safety legislation and requirements and they must be registered with Council prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued for the development. The relevant registration and inspection fee is also required to be paid to Council in accordance with Council’s adopted Pricing Policy.

 

A9      The applicant/owner is advised to engage the services of a suitably qualified and experienced Acoustic consultant, prior to finalising the design and construction of the development, to ensure that the relevant noise criteria and conditions of consent can be fully satisfied.

 

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     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                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D40/12

 

 

Subject:                  8 Hincks Street, Kingsford (DA/436/2011/A)

Folder No:                   DA/436/2011/A

Author:                   Louis Coorey, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of the approved development by increasing the external wall height by 600mm and change to the roof pitch of the building

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Mr R P Broderick

Owner:                         Mr R P Broderick and Ms P Brunett

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillors Nash (Mayor), Andrews and Matthews.

 

The proposal involves a Section 96 application seeking to modify the approved development consent by increasing the external wall height of the garage and granny flat (above) by 600mm.

 

The application is permissible under Division 2 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) for Affordable Rental Housing 2009. The SEPP allows for detached granny flats limited to a maximum floor area of 60sqm. The proposed granny flat complies with this standard. In terms of environmental assessment and the suitability of the modified development for the subject site, it is important to note that Councils Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) does not contain any provisions for detached dwellings on 2A zoned land. As such, assessment is guided by the Development Control Plan (DCP) for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies having particular regard to building design criteria and the potential for amenity impacts on the surrounding properties and the streetscape.

 

The applicant indicates that the increase of the floor to ceiling height in the granny flat would improve amenity and that in order to ameliorate the adverse impacts on neighbouring properties they have maintained the approved ridge height by reducing the angle of the roof and that the proposal would not be inconsistent with the scale of other structure/s along Isis Lane.

 

Two objections have been received from the two neighbouring sites raising concerns with the increased height of the development and the associated adverse impacts on their amenity. The eastern side neighbour is also particularly concerned with encroachments of the existing garage and therefore the approved development as well as the possibility that the existing down pipe is not adequately connected. These concerns have been addressed in the body of this report.

 

The main issue in the assessment of the application is related to height and the way in which the proposal would fit in with the streetscape along Isis Lane and potential for adverse impacts on neighbouring properties. In general, it is considered that the proposed increase in the wall height would be inconsistent with the 2A zone objectives, the objectives and performance requirements under the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies having particular regard to height, form and materials which guides such development.

 

In particular, the proposal is not considered supportable on the basis of the following:

 

·      It is not considered necessary from a functional perspective in that the use of the stairs or the granny flat would appear to be sufficient and there are alternative design solutions that could be adopted to improve amenity rather than the proposed increase in height and

 

·      The increase in height and floor area both detracts from the amenity of the neighbour’s properties and the existing and established streetscape along Isis Lane.

 

Overall, the proposed modification would dominate Isis Lane streetscape, set a poor precedent for other developments along this side of Isis Lane and therefore a recommendation is made for refusal of the Section 96 Modification.

 

 

 

2.    The Proposal

 

Section 96 modification of the approved development by increasing the external wall height by 600mm and change to the roof pitch of the building.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Isis Lane (dominated by single level structures) on sites zoned 2A low density. The opposite side of Isis Lane contain properties that front Anzac Parade located within a local business zone (3B). The size of structures along the laneway are mainly single level structures except for a three storey apartment block on the opposite side at 489 Anzac Parade on a 3B zoned site.

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/436/2011: Approval was granted on 29 September 2011 for alterations and a first floor secondary dwelling addition to the existing garage. The following non standard conditions were included in the determination:

 

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

 

a.     The following windows must have a minimum sill height of 1.5m above floor level, or alternatively, the windows are to be fixed and be provided with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing below this specified height:

•      Upper level south facing windows

•      East and west facing skylight windows

 

b.     Details of the location of the existing and proposed buildings shall be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the existing and proposed building works will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority. Should there be any existing encroachments, these shall be suitably addressed with the affected neighbour prior to any work being carried out as part of this development.

 

Stormwater Drainage

11.   Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, drainage plans shall be prepared by a suitably qualified Hydraulic Engineer and be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority.  A copy of the plans shall be forwarded to Council, if Council is not the certifying authority.

 

The drainage plans must demonstrate compliance with the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standard AS3500.3:2003 (Plumbing and Drainage - Stormwater Drainage) and the relevant conditions of this development approval.

 

12.   The drainage plans submitted for approval must include a mechanism for ensuring that stormwater ponding in Isis Lane during storm events can travel into the rear yard of the development site in conjunction with the proposed development. This condition is required because there is a localised low point in Isis Lane and there is currently a passageway on the western side of the existing garage which allows the flow of stormwater from Isis Lane into the development site. The applicant must liaise with council’s Development Engineer Coordinator regarding this requirement prior to lodgement of the Construction Certificate Application. A possible option is the installation of a suitably sized grated drain on the Isis Lane side of the proposed ground floor addition and installation of a minimum 150mm pipe going from the grated drain outlet to a “spreader” unit on the southern side of the ground floor addition.

 

13.   There must be no storage of goods in the area of the ground floor additions between the doorway closest to Isis Lane and the stairs leading to the Granny Flat. Council recommends that a step up be positioned between the ground floor additions and the existing garage, at the entry to the garage.

 

14.   Stormwater runoff from the redeveloped portion of the site shall be discharged either:

 

a.   To the table drain in Isis Lane along the site frontage; OR

 

b.   To a suitably sized infiltration area. As a guide the infiltration area shall be sized based on a minimum requirement of 1 m2 of infiltration area (together with 1 m3 of storage volume) for every 20 m2 of roof/impervious area on the site.

 

Prior to the use of infiltration in rear draining lots (where there is no formal overland escape route to Council’s kerb and gutter/street drainage system),  a geotechnical investigation will be required to determine whether the ground is suitable for infiltration. Should rock and/or a water table be encountered within two metres of the proposed base of the infiltration pit, or the ground conditions comprise low permeability soils such as clay, infiltration may not be appropriate.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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 submissions were received:-

 

5.1 Objections

 

6 Hincks Street (3 submissions on behalf of owner)

Issue

Comment

This allows for only 14 days including week ends.  We request that more time be allowed for a response. 

Extension granted

I vehemently object to the 600 mm addition and change to the roof pitch.

The original has a height of 4.1 metres which is in excess of the preferred maximum of 3.5m under the DCP and the increase in bulk and scale associated with the increased floor space ratio.

The DCP is only a guide, the approved height varies between 3.5m and 4.1m from Laneway to the rear of the property and the height above 3.5m is largely a consequence of the fall in ground level from laneway to the rear of the site. Despite this, it is considered that the proposed increase in height does not meet the objectives and performance requirements under the DCP and results in unnecessary impacts on the neighbouring properties and will result in an undesirable precedent for outbuildings of excessive height along Isis Lane.

The existing and proposed development encroaches on to adjoining land.

The original consent contained a condition requiring the development not encroach onto the adjoining land. There are no further comments pertaining to this as it is considered to adequately address the neighbours concerns.

To build a garage, the building regulation stipulates that the preferred side setback is 900 mm. The development is allowed only 150mm from this side boundary and there is a concern that the gutters and down pipes appear to encroach on our land and in case there is a need to enter our property to repair or replace gutters that overhang in our property.  We request the Regulatory Compliance Department to contact the Certifier to resolve this matter and if possible to show us the surveyor’s certificate for 8 Hincks Street. 

We are also concerned about the density I enquire at the council I don’t seem to get the right answer. The preferred ratio was FSR 0.58:1 but FSR 0.61:1 ratio was accepted.

 

The Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP contains objectives, performance requirements and preferred solutions. The DCP preferred solutions illustrate a way the performance requirements associated with the relevant building design criteria may be achieved. The preferred solutions (rather than the performance requirements) provide a simple and quantifiable way of achieving compliance. Where the applicant has chosen to address a performance requirement through a means other than the suggested preferred solution, a detailed assessment of the proposal against the relevant performance requirement is provided.

In other words, applications are assessed on how well they achieve the objectives and performance requirements.

Setback

In respect to setbacks, it was considered that the original development satisfied these objectives and performance requirements and would not result in any significant adverse impacts on the neighbour’s property. It is particularly noted that there are numerous examples of garages to rear laneways that are sited to both side boundaries. Further, the configuration on a north south axis means that overshadowing would not be to the detriment of any single neighbour but would be shared across both sites.

Location of downpipes

In respect to the location of the downpipes and the concern with maintenance it is considered sufficient arrangements exist under the Access to Neighbouring land Act to allow for access for maintenance purposes. It is noted that the garage is made of brick which would not require maintenance.

Floor area

The proposed development is considered acceptable having regard to floor area in so far as it does not result in any significant adverse impacts on the neighbour’s property.

We believe that the garage and its addition are for the purpose of rental.

The purposes of a granny flat or secondary dwelling under the SEPP Affordable rental housing 2009 is for inter family arrangements and or rental to persons who are employed or study in the locality and would otherwise be unable to afford to live in the area.

We request that council contact us regarding these concerns so that we do not have to take the matter to the Building Commission.

Several conversations have taken place with the person acting on behalf of the owner. The salient points reiterated during these discussions are:

·      The DCP is a guiding document;

·      The original development contained conditions that suitably address and ensure that the development does not encroach onto the neighbour’s site and that only a survey will confirm this and

·      The adverse impacts were considered acceptable;

At no time did any discussion relate to a “Building Commission”.

 

10 Hincks Street (three submissions)

Issue

Comment

Could you please let me know if a letter notifying me of this new application has been sent to my managing agent, and if so which address has it been sent to?

Council’s records indicate that notification letters were addressed to the managing agents’ at the time of the original application and at the time of this section 96 application.

Is there still time for me to make a comment on this development application?

The neighbour was advised that Council accepts submissions up until determination and that the notification plans pertaining to the amendment and a statement of environmental effects were available for view from Councils website under Enquire about a DA link (web address of Randwick Council is: www.randwick.nsw.gov.au)

Concerned that they have not received notification of this development application, on two occasions (initial plus modified application).

The results of an audit of the notification process for the original and section 96 applications for the subject site have been included under separate cover to the neighbour. In short the letters were sent to the correct postal addresses as confirmed by the objector.

The proposed height of the garage is already out of scale with the adjacent garages in Hincks Street and increasing it by a further 600mm will further increase the bulk of the building and make it out of scale, proportion and character with the surrounding garages of Hincks Street .

The proposed height of the garage is considered excessive having regard to the presentation of it along Isis Lane and the existing and likely height of garages along Isis Lane. A recommendation for refusal is made.

A considerable increase in the shadow falling into the backyard has already been approved. This new proposal shows that even more shadow will fall into the backyard of our property.

The proposed modifications will not significantly increase the level of overshadowing to the neighbours rear yard area above that originally approved or outside the required levels of solar access during the Winter Solstice (shortest day of the year where the shadows are longest during the day time).

This development will result in a considerable compromise of the privacy of the backyard and that of surrounding backyards and that condition 2a is not sufficient having regard to the anthropometric data which suggests that most males and half of females can look outside these windows.

There we ask that these be refused and please consider whether aspects of the original approval could be looked at again particularly in relation to privacy and whether this should be raised to the 95th percentile of males at 1.75m.

The 1.5m sill height is a preferred solution under the adopted DCP which has been considers privacy protection of buildings and outdoor spaces taking into account community expectations. In this respect direct overlooking of main internal living areas and private open spaces of other dwellings is minimised by building layout, location and design of windows and balconies, screening devices and landscape.

I note the documentation submitted by the neighbour regarding anthropometric data. However:

·      ABS data (1995) indicates that the average male height was 174.8cm and the average female height was 161cm and considering that eye levels would be lower, the suggested 1.75m sill height is an unreasonable request.

·      Surveys measuring heights are conducted over a sample,

·      Average heights largely correlate with a persons heritage or genetics,

·      A person is more likely to overstate their heights by around 1cm for males and 3cm for females.

Further to the above, a merit assessment of privacy protection, seeks to strike a balance between community expectations and reasonable amenity within the development. In this respect it is considered that no further change to the condition 2a is required on the basis of the following:

·      There is more than 9m separation between the habitable south facing windows and the neighbours habitable living room and bedroom windows;

·      The outlook is somewhat obstructed by existing vegetation on site;

·      The outlook is limited to standing and not sitting positions and when in a seated position there is only an outlook across the roof and sky of neighbouring dwellings and sites rather than directly into the neighbour’s rear yard area.

Overall, to achieve a reasonable balance between the community’s expectations and concerns for privacy protection against the expectations for a building that provides reasonable amenity the requirement for a 1.5m effective sill height is regular and acceptable approach taken by Council.

 

6.    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:-

 

6.1    Substantially the Same Development:

The modifications to the approved development does not alter the nature of the approved development and for the purposes of legislative requirements under Section 96 (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered the application remains substantially within the scope of the original development.

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

a)  State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

The original application was submitted seeking consent under Division 2 of the SEPP: Affordable Housing Secondary dwellings. Accordingly this application to modify the original consent is assessed under the following clauses:

 

Clause 19: Definition

 

The proposed modification continues to fall within the definition of a secondary dwelling in that it maintains development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling and (not being an individual lot in a strata plan or community title scheme).

 

Clause 20: Land to which this division applies

 

This subject site is located on 2A zoned land which is equivalent to Zone R2 Low Density Residential identified under the SEPP Affordable Housing and the development for the purposes of a granny flat is permissible on the land. Please note further increase in floor area as assessed under Clause 22.

 

Clause 21: Development to which Division applies

The proposed development for a secondary dwelling may be carried out with consent under this SEPP subject to Clause 22 below.

 

Clause 22:   Development may be carried out with consent

 

 

Under Subclause 3(a) & (b) the following criteria apply:

(a)      the total floor area of the principal dwelling and the secondary dwelling must be no more than the maximum floor area allowed for a dwelling house on the land under another environmental planning instrument.

There is no maximum floor area for dwellings detailed in the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation).

(b)      the total floor area of the secondary dwelling is no more than 60 square metres or, if a greater floor area is permitted in respect of a secondary dwelling on the land under another environmental planning instrument, that greater floor area.

The original development had a floor area of 63sqm (floor area with a floor to ceiling height over 1.4m) and exceeded the 60sqm maximum under Clause 22 of the SEPP. A SEPP 1 objection accompanying the original application was considered to have presented a reasonable argument on the basis that the bulk and scale that would not be inconsistent with the scale of development likely along this side of Isis Lane and there would be no unreasonable adverse impacts on the neighbouring properties. To clarify it was considered that the proposed development would present a scale along Isis Lane that would neither be excessive or inconsistent with the DCP objectives and performance requirements, that the height at the rear (although above the 3.5m height limit) was largely a consequence of the fall in land level at this point and the proposal would not result in any significant adverse impacts on the neighbours properties. 

However, this Section 96 application increases the height by 600mm, resulting in the area previously excluded from the floor area calculations, below 1.4m floor to ceiling height, now being included in the calculations. This results in the total floor area of the secondary dwelling having a floor area of 66.19sqm resulting gin a further increase of approximately 3sqm.

Despite this increase being nominal it is not considered reasonable in so far as it directly translates into added bulk both when viewed from Isis Lane and when viewed from the rear yards of the neighbouring properties rear yard areas.

In this respect the proposed modification having particular regard to environmental assessment, results in unreasonable and avoidable significant adverse amenity impacts on the adjoining properties and Isis Lane and it is not considered a well founded argument can be made that the proposed increase in height would lead to a better planning outcome

Clause: 23   Complying development

The proposed development is not complying development as defined under the SEPP and therefore requires a Development Application.

Clause 24:   No subdivision

 

The proposed development does not result in any subdivision of the lot on which development for the purposes of the secondary dwelling has been carried out under this Division.

 


(b)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent under Part 3 of the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 10: No.2A (Residential A Zone)

The objectives of the 2A zone are aimed at (a) ‘maintaining the character of established residential areas’ and (c) ‘not compromising the amenity of the surrounding areas’.

 

The height, bulk and scale of the proposal is not consistent with the surrounding residential area which is characterised predominantly by either single level garages or two level garages with walls that are generally at or below the 3.5m wall height. The proposed increase in the wall height and bulk and scale of the development results in adverse and unacceptable visual impacts on the streetscape and neighbouring properties rear yard areas in terms of visual bulk and scale.

 

Therefore, the proposal does not satisfy the zone objectives contained in sub-clauses (a) and (c).

 

In other words, the proposed increase in height and the commensurate increase in bulk and scale relative to the sites frontage along Isis Lane and its zoning would dominate the subject site and the streetscape and not be conducive to future development along Isis Lane (See further discussion under DCP section)

 

7.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP contains objectives, performance requirements and preferred solutions. Applications are assessed on how well they achieve the objectives and performance requirements, whilst the preferred solutions illustrate a way the performance requirements may be achieved.

 

The preferred solution contained in Part 4 of the Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP provides a simple and quantifiable way of achieving compliance with the objectives and performance requirements. The applicant has chosen to address a performance requirement through a means other than the suggested preferred solution, and as such a detailed assessment of the proposal against the relevant performance requirement is provided.

 

Building height

The building height objectives of the DCP are that developments should not be excessive in height and scale and be compatible with the existing character of the locality; to ensure impacts in terms of privacy, natural light and views are minimised; and with respect to additions that they not detract from the individual character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the streetscape.

 

The relevant Performance Requirements are that the height of buildings should relate to those in the existing streetscape and the topography; buildings be designed to enhance the existing desirable built form character of the street by adopting where relevant characteristics of mass and proportion, materials and finishes, roof form and pitch, facade articulation, window and door location and proportions, and verandas, eaves and parapets; with respect to additions to semi-detached dwellings they integrate with the attached dwelling; and views are shared.

 

The proposed modification seeks an increase in the height of the approved outbuilding by 600mm. The proposal results in an outbuilding with a height of between 4.1m to Isis Lane and 5.1m adjacent to the neighbouring properties (eastern and western side neighbours). The proposal does not meet the preferred maximum 3.5m height limit for buildings or additions to the rear.

 

In respect to the relevant objectives and performance requirements for heights under the DCP, it is considered that the proposed modification will not comply with the objectives and performance requirements under the DCP. This means that the proposed outbuilding will dominate and detract from the prevailing and future streetscape along both Isis Lane and the neighbouring properties.

 

Whilst it is acknowledged that there is an example of building that exceeds the preferred solution along Isis Lane, it is noted that there are salient differences between this example and the proposed development such that the example put forward is a residential flat building on a site zoned 3B Local Business zone which allows for higher and larger buildings whereas the subject site is located on a site zoned 2A residential which is generally capable of accommodating a single dwelling and a standard outbuilding. In this respect, the majority of outbuildings fronting Isis Lane are single storey structures whose heights are generally well below the allowable 3.5m height limit (Note: gable roof forms do not constitute height in so far as the DCP is concerned). The proposed increase in height adjacent to the neighbouring properties (whilst partially a consequence of the lower land level in this part of the site) would unnecessarily result in a further increase in height which is considered avoidable in so far as the existing approved development provides reasonable amenity or an alternate design could achieve greater amenity.

 

In addition, there is a real possibility that an approval may constitute an undesirable precedent for similar developments in the area. Consequently, if other properties were to develop along the laneway and other elevations in a similar fashion, the amenity, character and local streetscape of the laneway would be significantly and adversely impacted.

 

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 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

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

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

Draft ‘Randwick Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012 (Draft RLEP 2012)

 

The Draft RLEP 2012 is currently on exhibition, prepared so that it is consistent with the NSW Government’s Standard Instrument (a template LEP), and sets out the aims of the Plan with a focus on local strategic planning. The particular aims of the Draft RLEP 2012 guide future land uses and development within the Council area.

 

Under the Draft RLEP 2012, the subject site is located within map reference grid 002 and is zoned R2 Low Density Residential which is consistent with the current 2A zoning of the site. It is further noted that there is no change proposed to the zone of the sites opposite as they are zoned B1 neighbourhood centre under the Draft LEP which is consistent with their current 3B zoning.

 

The proposed development is inconsistent with the general objectives, aims and provisions under the Draft RLEP 2012.

 

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 does not promote the objectives of the zone and will 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 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal does not comply with the relevant assessment criteria and will result in any adverse impacts upon both the amenity of the adjoining premises and the character of the locality.

 

The proposed modification is unsuitable for the site given the reasons under the recommendation section of this report and therefore a recommended for refusal based.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to Development Application No. DA/436/2011 for permission to increase the external wall height by 600mm and change the roof pitch of the building, for the following reasons:

 

1.       The proposed development fails to comply with the objectives of the Zone No 2A (Residential A Zone) in that it will compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas, is not compatible with the dominant character of existing development and will not maintain the character of established residential areas.

 

2.       The proposal is not considered to have minimised environmental impacts on the locality and does not satisfy the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended. In particular, the proposed height is excessive in scale in relation to the existing and likely development along this side of Isis Lane and will dominate and detract from the local streetscape and the amenity of neighbouring properties.

 

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

 

Attachment/s:

Nil


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D41/12

 

 

Subject:                  6 Govett Street Randwick (DA/358/2011/A)

Folder No:                   DA/358/2011/A

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification to approved development to raise the ridge level of the dwelling, provide new dormer windows to front elevation and bay window to rear bedroom, new skylights and internal reconfiguration of stairwell and garage/store

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                J Rothwell

Owner:                         J & E Rothwell

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the original application was determined by Council.

 

The application is a Section 96(2) application seeking consent to increase the ridge height of the dwelling, provide two dormer windows to the front of the dwelling and bay window to the rear bedroom, install skylights and reconfigure the internal stairwell and garage/store.

 

The main issue is the potential for any additional impacts to the amenity of the adjoining properties and the significance of the heritage conservation area.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal details the modification of the original approval to raise the ridge height of the roof to the dwelling by 200mm to improve the ceiling height of the rooms within the second floor, install two dormer style windows to each bedroom to the front of the dwelling and a bay window to the rear bedroom, install skylights to the front and rear roof and the internal reconfiguration of the stairwell and additional doors within the basement garage/store.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the southern side of Govett Street and has a frontage of 16.605m a depth of 23.27m to the western side and 33.53m to the eastern boundaries, the site has an area of 319m². The locality is residential and contains a mixture of terrace style dwellings, semi detached dwellings and multi unit housing development. The locality is a heritage conservation area known as the ‘North Randwick Heritage Conservation Area’.

 

4.    Site History

 

The original application detailed alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to provide for a new storage area to the garage, new stairs to connect the garage and ground level, minor internal alterations to the existing ground level of the dwelling, new windows and doors and an upper level comprising three bedrooms and a bathroom. The original application was approved at the Council meeting of the 12th July 2011.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  The application was also advertised in the local newspaper. No submissions have been received.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The proposed modifications have been referred to Council’s Heritage Planner for comment and advice has been provided that there are no objections to the proposed modifications as they will not significantly alter the presentation of the upper level within the existing roof form and the increase in the roof ridge height is considered minor and will not substantially increase the scale and streetscape prominence of the addition.

 

 

7.    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:-

 

7.1 Substantially the Same Development:

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 proposed modification remains substantially the same development.

 

The proposed modifications to the approved development do not alter the overall nature of the proposal and for the purposes of Section 96 application satisfies the definition of being substantially the same development.

 

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 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

The proposed modifications to the approved development 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

The proposed modifications to the approved development will be consistent with the relevant R2 Low Residential Zone and the Floor Space Ratio and Building Height controls in the Draft Randwick LEP 2012

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

The proposal generally satisfies the preferred solutions and the relevant objectives and performance requirements in the DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. See further comments below.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

No submissions have been received.

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.

 

 

8.1    Privacy

The proposed new windows to the bedrooms will not result in any unreasonable impacts to the amenity of the adjoining properties in that the windows are to bedrooms, which being low use rooms will not unreasonably impact upon the privacy of the adjoining properties.

 

8.2      Heights

The additional 200mm to the overall building height is relatively insignificant in the context of the approved height of the dwelling and the adjoining and nearby dwellings and will therefore not detract from the established character of the locality in regards to the height of the building.

 

8.3      Heritage

As noted the Council’s Heritage Planner has considered the proposed modifications and advises that they will not detract from the presentation of the building within the streetscape and the significance and values of the conservation area.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the existing development has been assessed against the requirements of the relevant planning guidelines of the RLEP, the Draft RLEP 2012 and Council policies and plans as well as in regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

The proposed modification will result in substantially the same development as that previously approved and will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or 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/358/2011/A for permission to a Section 96 modification to the approved development to include the increased height of the roof ridge, the installation of dormer windows within the front of the dwelling and  bay window to the rear, the installation of skylights and internal reconfiguration of the stairwell and garage/store at 6 Govett Street, Randwick in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition 1 to read:

 

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

02

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

03

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

04

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

05

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

06

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

07

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

08

CJ

March 2011

17 May 2011

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received

 

A108176

21 March 2011

17 May 2011

 

As amended by the Section 96 ‘A’ plans;

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

02

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

03

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

04

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

05

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

06

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

07

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

08

CJ

March 2012

7 March 2012

 

Revised BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received

 

A108176_02

19 January 2012

7 March 2012

 

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.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D42/12

 

 

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

Folder No:                   DA/76/2009/A

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96AB review of Council’s refusal of proposed extension of hours of operation from 10:00am to 10:00pm Monday to Thursday and 9:00am to 11:00pm Friday, Saturday and Sunday

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                First Fleet Marine Pty Ltd

Owner:                         NSW Department of Lands - Crown Land Division

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application seeks a review pursuant to Section 96AB of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 of the determination pertaining to the Section 96 development application DA/76/2009/A.  

 

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 Section 96A application was refused at the Planning Committee Meeting of 14 February 2012. 

 

The amended proposal subject to this Section 96AB assessment, remains substantially the same development as submitted for the Section 96‘A’ application.

 

The original 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.

 

There has been one (1) submission made in relation to this application. The objection reiterates the key concerns and issues raised in the submission for the original Section 96 ‘A’ application. (i.e. noise, visual amenity, parking and compliance with Council controls; and also suggests that Council consider applying the Vinson v Randwick Council (2005) NSWLEC 142 (Vinson) planning principal in assessing this application).

 

Whilst no major objections were raised by Council Environmental Health Officer with regard to the proposed extension of trading hours, it was considered appropriate to confirm that acoustic amenity in the community would be maintained with the inclusion of a reviewable condition for the trading hours. The reviewable condition will allow Council to monitor and address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to any permanent/extended use under the proposed amended trading hours.

 

It should be noted that there are a number of other commercial premises operating on the intersection of Endeavour Avenue and Anzac Parade that have indoor and outdoor dining areas associated with their commercial use with trading hours comparative to that proposed for this application. (i.e. Danny’s Seafood Restaurant and Tony’s at La Perouse Restaurant). Further, the café does not propose to operate past midnight.

 

The subject application has been reviewed taking into account the reasons and arguments submitted by the applicant. Having regard to all relevant matters for consideration, the proposal is not considered to result in any unreasonable adverse impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises and the streetscape, subject to Condition no. 11 being amended with the hours of trading being on reviewable basis.

 

For the above reasons, it is recommended that Council’s determination of the original development application be rescinded and the application be approved.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The subject application seeks to make amendments to the original development application by extending 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.

 

3.    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.

 

4.    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 26 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.

 

DA/76/2009/A – The Section 96A modification to extend the trading hours of the business was refused at the Planning Committee Meeting of 14 February 2012.  Subsequently, requiring the applicant to submit further information and reasoning for requesting a review of determination under Section 96AB.

 

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 96AB 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 21 March 2012 to 4 April 2012 in accordance with the provisions of Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans.  In response, one submission was received from Daintry 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

 

Daintry Associates Planning Consultants acting on behalf of the proprietors of Danny’s Seafood Restaurant at 1605A, Anzac Parade, La Perouse.

This submission made by Daintry Associates elaborates on the issues previously raised below by David Crane and Associates dated 18 November 20011. Previous objection, amenity impacting behaviours such as noise from people on the premises or its plant and equipment; noise from entertainment provided on the premises or the noise necessarily arising from patrons such as car doors, engines starting or late-night conversations in residential streets in the vicinity and demand for on-street parking are all relevant considerations and impacts not yet realised under the existing consent.

 

In addition to the above issues, this submission suggests that Council consider applying the Vinson v Randwick Council (2005) NSWLEC 142 (Vinson) planning principal in assessing this application given that this use has not commenced or operated such that Council at this date can determine whether there are any adverse impacts from the approved trading hours, permitted number of patrons or permitted activities.  If Council does not agree to the above approach and proceeds to grant amended consent it should be on the basis of a reviewable condition under sections 80A(10B-E) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, which will allow Council to monitor and measure the amenity impacts associated with the extended trading hours.  

 

Planners Comment

In addition to the earlier comments made by the assessing planner in the report to the Council meeting on 14 February 2012 (as detailed reiterated below), Council’s Environmental Heath Officer has advised that a reviewable condition be imposed. Whilst no objections have been raised with regard to the proposed extension of trading hours, it was considered appropriate that a reviewable condition be applied to ensure that the acoustic amenity of the community is protected. The reviewable condition will allow Council to monitor and address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to any permanent/extended use under the proposed amended trading hours.

 

Original submission made by David Crane and Associates Planning Consultants acting on behalf of the proprietors of Danny’s Seafood Restaurant at 1605A, Anzac Parade, La Perouse.

 

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

 

Planners Comment

For detailed discussion of noise and amenity impacts, refer to Section 14.1 of this report.

 

·      The SEE does not adequately address social and environmental impacts

 

Planners Comment

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

 

Planners Comment

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. 

 

Planners Comment

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.

 

Planners Comment

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.

 

Planners Comment

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.

 

6.2 Support

No submissions of support were received.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

7.1      Environmental Health and Building Services

Reference is made to development application DA/76/2009/A and submissions relating to the development. After consideration of information received it is recommended the following reviewable condition be imposed:

 

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

 

All food services to customers in outdoor dining area shall only be provided within the abovementioned hours of operation and all patrons must vacate the area and all outdoor furniture must be removed 30 minutes within the specified hours.

 

The hours specified above are subject to a review period in accordance with Section 80(A)(10B) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Division 14 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

The hours of operation will be reviewed by Council within 12 months of the date of commencement.  The operator of the premises must provide Council with appropriate supporting evidence (including, but not limited to, relevant acoustics measurements) to demonstrate compliance with all conditions of this consent as part of the review.

 

It is considered this condition will address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to use.

 


8.    Master Planning Requirements

 

The Master Planning requirements do not apply to the site.

 

9.    Statutory requirements under Section 96AB:

 

Section 96AB of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, enables an applicant to request a Review of a Determination of a Modification Application.  Council may accept amendments to the original development proposal if the proposed amendments result in substantially the same development as that originally approved. Council may review the Determination, and as a consequence of the review, may confirm or change the Determination.

 

The proposal remains substantially the same development as described in the Section 96A application.

 

10. Reasons for review

 

The applicant has provided the following reasons for requesting the review:-

 

 

Council’s Comment

Noted, the opportunity to address the Council meeting is available to the applicant as part of the Council meeting protocols and this will allow the applicant to address Councillors by communicating the issues more directly which have not been elaborated upon in the submission.

 

 


Council’s Comment

Council’s pathway/DA records indicate the following trading hours for Danny’s Seafood restaurant and Tony’s Restaurant:

 

Danny’s Seafood Restaurant at 1605 Anzac Parade, La Perouse

In 1999, approval was given by consent to DA 57/1999 to expand the seating capacity of the restaurant from 100 to 150 patrons which included the first floor terrace area.  Condition No. 2 restricts the hours of operation of the restaurant to 9.00am to 12 midnight.  On 10 September, 2003, development consent was granted to DA 692/2003 to enlarge the existing ground floor outdoor dining terrace by 15m2.  Condition No. 17 of the consent restricts the hours of operation of the ground floor terrace area to 10.00am to 8.00pm, Monday to Sunday.

 

Tony’s Restaurant at 1599 Anzac Parade, La Perouse, also known as 36-38 Goorawahl Avenue, La Perouse

 

Consent was issued by Randwick Council on 15 October 2007 for the fitout and use of shops 1, 2 and 3 for food premises under DA/3/2007. As part of the approval, trading hours for Shop 1 was limited to the following:

 

Cafe (inside shop):     Sunday to Wednesday        8.00am to 10.00pm

Thursday to Saturday         8.00am to 11.00pm

 

Outdoor dining area:   Monday to Saturday           8.00am to 10.00pm

Sunday:                           8.00am to 9.30pm

 

The hours of operation for outdoor dining are restricted to:

 

Shop 1

Monday to Saturday: 7:00am – 11:00pm

Sunday & Public Holidays: 8:00am – 11:00pm

 

Shop 2

Monday – Saturday: 8:00am -10:00pm

Sunday: 8:00am – 9:30pm

 

DA/03/2007/A – A Section 96 application was approved on 10 February 2009 at Planning Committee Meeting modify the approved operation hours of the business to:

 

Shop 1

Monday to Saturday: 7:00am – 11:00pm

Sunday & Public Holidays: 8:00am – 11:00pm

 

Shop 2

Sunday – Wednesday: 8:00am – 10:00pm

Thursday – Saturday: 8:00am – 11:00pm

 

Shop 3

Sunday – Wednesday: 8:00am – 10:00pm

Thursday – Saturday: 8:00am – 11:00pm

 

The consent for the extending hours of trading for shop 1 was limited to a 12 month (12) trial period.

 

The proposed extended trading hours for “The Boatshed Café” will be consistent with the above approved trading hours and other adjoining uses within the immediate locality.  Also, with the inclusion of the reviewable condition it will allow Council to monitor and address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to any permanent/extended use under the proposed amended trading hours.

 

 

Council’s Comment

On the 21 November 2011, the applicant has submitted a supporting verification document confirming the adequacy of the original acoustic assessment report.  In addition, a Plan of Management for the Boatshed Café was also received on this date addressing management of the café to an appropriate acoustical standard.

 

Council’s Comment

It was demonstrated in the original development application that the proposal does not result in any inconsistencies with the aims and objectives of Council Parking DCP.

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. It is agreed that parking and traffic considerations were comprehensively assessed by Council’s Development Engineers under the original development application and deemed to be acceptable.

 

Council’s Comment

After consideration of the information received it is recommended that condition no. 11 be revised so that the trading hours can be applied on a reviewable basis. The reviewable condition will allow Council to monitor and address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to any permanent/extended use under the proposed amended trading hours.

 

11.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

 

11.1    Clause 18 – Zone No. 6A (Open Space Zone)

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:

 

11.2    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 Frenchman’s 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.

 

11.3    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.

 

11.4    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 Frenchman’s 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.

 

11.5    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.

 

12.    Policy Controls

The Policy controls applicable to the proposed development are:

 

· Development Control – Parking

· Frenchman’s Bay Plan of Management

 

12.1    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.

 

12.2    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.

 

12.3    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.

 

13.      Council Policies

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 6.1 of this report.

 

14.      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).

 

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

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

The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of the Draft Local Environmental Plan 2012

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

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

 

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment, 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 submission 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.

 

 

14.1    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). The extension of the trading hours may have 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. Whilst no objections have been raised with regard to the proposed extension of trading hours, it was considered appropriate to confirm that the acoustic amenity of the community would be maintained with the inclusion of a reviewable condition for the trading hours. The reviewable condition will allow Council to monitor and address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to any permanent/extended use under the proposed amended trading hours.

 

Having regard to the above, it should be noted that 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 areas associated with their commercial use which generally trade to these hours. (i.e. Danny’s Seafood Restaurant and Tony’s at La Perouse Restaurant). 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 so that the condition is on a reviewable basis.  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.

 

14.2    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 proposal is for alteration to the operating hours of the “The Boatshed Café”.  Assessment of the application demonstrates the proposal is consistent with the expectations of relevant legislation.

 

The proposal has also been found to be permissible, with consent, according to the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, and satisfy the relevant objectives of the 6(a) Open Space Zone.  The development is also consistent with relevant statutory and non-statutory controls, in this case, the Frenhmans Bay Plan of Management.

 

The proposal is consistent with the heads for consideration under section 79 C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

The proposal allows the “The Boatshed Café” to fulfil its publicly oriented obligations, without unreasonably compromising the function and character of the subject area.  Accordingly, it is recommended development application 76/2009 be rescinded and the application to extend the trading hours be approved, subject to a reviewable condition which will address any potential adverse impacts that cannot be determined prior to use.

 

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

 

The hours specified above are subject to a review period in accordance with Section 80(A)(10B) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Division 14 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

The hours of operation will be reviewed by Council within 12 months of the date of commencement of the use.  The operator of the premises must provide Council with appropriate supporting evidence (including, but not limited to, relevant acoustics measurements) to demonstrate compliance with all conditions of the development consent as part of the review.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D43/12

 

 

Subject:                  214 Maroubra Road, Maroubra (DA/119/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/119/2012

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                 Demolition of existing presbytery building at St Aidans Church, and construction of a two storey with undercroft parish centre building comprising offices, garage and priests accommodation, landscaping, extension of playground and associated works

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Paynter Dixon Constructions

Owner:                         St Aidans Holy Family Church

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

 

 

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee as the proposed development is valued at over $2,000,000.

 

The proposal seeks consent for the demolition of existing presbytery building at St Aidans Church, and construction of a two storey with undercroft parish centre building comprising offices, garage and priest’s accommodation, landscaping, extension of playground and associated works

 

The DA was notified and advertised from 7 March 2012 to 21 March 2012 in accordance with Council’s DCP – Public Notification. No submissions were received in response.

 

The subject site is located on the north-eastern corner of Garden Street and Maroubra Road, and contains the Holy Family Church building, which is a listed Heritage Item under the Randwick LEP, as well as the existing presbytery and St Aidan’s Primary School. The subject site has a total area of 5,491 sqm.

 

The proposed development is permissible with consent of Council and complies with the relevant provisions of the LEP.

 

The proposal will introduce a new Parish Centre (inclusive of accommodation facilities for a resident priest) for the Holy Family Church, being a necessary and associated ancillary use to the Church. Furthermore, the proposed demolition of the existing Presbytery building and its replacement with a new Parish Centre building in an adjoining location on-site has been assessed by Council’s Heritage Planner and considered to have minimal impact on the heritage significance of the main Church building.  Additionally, the expansion of the existing church forecourt with a new entry pergola further improves the curtilage of the existing heritage item.

 

Having regard to all relevant matters for consideration, the proposal will not result in any significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the nearby properties or the character of the locality.

 

The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal involves the following:

 

§ Demolition of the existing two storey brick presbytery building and creation of an enlarged forecourt area and playground extension adjoining the existing church building.

 

§ Construction of a two storey parish centre building with undercroft level in an area adjoining the demolished presbytery at the eastern end of the subject site, which will contain the following components:

 

Undercroft (RL 34.75)

Electrical switchboard, airconditioning condensers, hot water unit adjoining an existing bitumen capped play ground

 

Ground Floor (RL37.45)

3 x offices, board room, store room, double garage, lift, wc, accessible wc, tea area waiting area, and residence lobby providing stair and lift access to first floor

 


First Floor (RL40.65)

Kitchen, dining room, 3 bedrooms with en-suite, wc, lift and north-facing balcony

 

The Parish Centre will be used for office and administration purposes associated with the Parish of St Aidans. There will be a maximum of 4 workers (comprising a secretary, part-time finance/accounts clerk, a part-time clerical assistance and a Parish Priest or Assistant Priest) at any one time. 

 

The hours of operation will be from 9:00am to 4:00pm, Monday to Friday.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located at No. 214 Maroubra Road, Maroubra, and has frontages to Maroubra Road, Garden Street and Green Street. The site consists of Lot 34648/A DP 752015. The subject site has an area of 5491 sqm.

 

The site is in the ownership of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney and the Holy Family Parish of Maroubra.

 

At present, the site accommodates a number of buildings of varying ages and condition, which are as follows:

 

§ A Church Building comprising the Holy Family Church which is listed as a heritage item under Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).  The Randwick Heritage Study Inventory Sheet for the site describes its significance as a “local landmark building.  The most impressive and significant in the historic church- school group.  Excellent example of period architecture with its extensive use of decorative brickwork.  Also a fine example of the Romanesque style which enjoyed a revival in the 1940s.” 

§ A two storey brick presbytery building with rear garage.

§ A two storey school building with high pitch roof and associated school hall attached also to the existing church.

 

 The surrounding land uses are described as follows:

North

To the north of the site on the opposite side of Green Street are a number of single- and double-storey dwelling houses.

West

To the west of the site on the opposite side of Garden Street are predominantly mixed use developments located in the adjoining Maroubra town centre.

South

To the south on the opposite side of Maroubra Road are a number of 3- and 4-storey residential flat buildings constructed in the 1960’s to 80’s.

East

To the east is an existing seniors living development comprising independent dwelling units and hostel rooms with associated car parking (Southern Cross Care, No. 216-218 Maroubra Road). 

 

The subject urban block is predominantly characterised by religious and community related uses, including Holy Family Church, church presbytery, St. Aidan’s Primary School and Southern Cross Care senior housing. Holy Family Church, which is situated at the corner of Garden Street and Maroubra Road, is listed as a heritage item under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

 

Maroubra Junction contains a mixture of commercial, retail and multi-unit residential developments and is located within 30m to the west of the site.

 

 

Aerial view of the subject site and surrounding built environment

 

1. Maroubra Road frontage of the subject site with the heritage item, the Holy Family Church in the centre set against the Maroubra town centre in the background

2. The existing presbytery building adjoining the Holy Family Church.

3. The eastern end of the subject site (as viewed from the corner of Maroubra Road and Green Street) which will be occupied by the new Parish Centre building

4. The adjoining seniors living/aged care housing at No. 216-218 Maroubra Road

5. The west elevation of the adjoining seniors living/aged care housing at No. 216-218 Maroubra Road.

6. Existing development on the opposite side of Maroubra Road

 

4.    Relevant History

 

BA/446/1985 – Install balcony and patio cover – Approved: 1 June 1985

 

DA/566/1997 – Alterations and additions to existing school building – Approved: 28 Nov 1997

 

DA/574/1999 – Alterations & refurbishment of internal part of Church building and sanctuary & install new air-con system – Approved: 30 June 1999

 

DA/836/1999 - Replacement & extension of existing sun shelter to school building adjacent to Green Street – Approved 2 August 1999

 

PL/49/2011 Demolition of existing two storey church facility and replaced with playgrounds, and construction of new 3 storey Parish Centre comprising under-croft playground, parish centre at street level and priest residence at top level. Advice provided:

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The DA was notified and advertised from 7 March 2012 to 21 March 2012 in accordance with Council’s DCP – Public Notification. No submissions were received in response.

 

6.      Technical Officers/External Agency Comments

 

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

 

6.1    Building Control & Environmental Health Comments

No referral was required to Council’s Building Surveyor and Environmental Health Officer. Standard BCA and environmental health conditions have been applied. 

 

6.2    Development Engineers Comments

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

 

“An application has been received for the demolition of the existing two storey church facility and replace with playgrounds, and construction of new 3 storey Parish Centre comprising under-croft playground, parish centre at street level and priest residence at top level at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Architectural Plans by Curtin Bathgate & Somers dated 23.02.2012;

·      Landscape plan by Conzept Landscape Architects;

·      Traffic & Parking report by Paynter Dixon Constructions P/L;

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by Andrew Martin Planning.

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for the redeveloped portion of the subject site.

 

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.

 

Traffic Comments

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the Traffic & Parking report submitted by Paynter & Dixon Construction P/L for the subject site, dated Feb 2012 and advises that the parking provided as well as the layout is considered satisfactory.

 

Service Authority Comments

There are no overhead powerlines located along the Maroubra Road site frontage and thus aerial bundling or undergrounding of powerlines is not required.

 

Landscape Comments by P O’sullivan

Street trees

Approval is granted for the removal of the Scribbly Gum tree located within the construction zone of the new vehicular crossing.

 

Site trees

There is two large Kaffir Plums (Harpephyllum cafrum) located on the southern side of the existing Presbytery which are proposed to be removed. Approval is granted for the removal of these trees subject to replacement planting which is shown on the submitted Landscape Plan.

 

There is also no objections to the removal of the small Eucalypts adjacent to the existing shade structure.

 

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

 

6.3    Heritage Planners Comments

Council’s Heritage Planner has assessed the subject application and the following comments are provided:

 

“The Site

The site is occupied by Holy Family Church, prominently located on the corner of Maroubra Road and Gale Road, listed as a heritage item under Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).  The Randwick Heritage Study Inventory Sheet for the site describes its significance as a “local landmark building.  The most impressive and significant in the historic church- school group.  Excellent example of period architecture with its extensive use of decorative brickwork.  Also a fine example of the Romanesque style which enjoyed a revival in the 1940s.” 

 

Proposal

It is proposed to demolish several existing structures on the site in order to provide a new 2 – 3 storey Parish Centre together with additional open space areas.  Demolition includes the original brick Presbytery building and a timber framed garage building.  The Parish Centre will comprise an open undercroft area at lower ground floor level, office areas and garage at ground floor level and first floor living areas. 

 

Background

The proposal was the subject of a formal pre-lodgement meeting (PL/49/2011) at which concerns were raised in relation to the design of the new building. 

 

Submission

The proposal has been accompanied by a thorough Heritage Impact Statement prepared by OCP Architects P/L, which addresses the heritage impact of the proposal in terms of the existing building and the proposed works.  The HIS notes that the Maroubra Catholic Parish was established in 1914 with the foundation stone of the Presbytery laid in 1915.  The original school building in the north west section of the site was constructed in 1915 while the main school building was commenced in 1940.  Before the Church was constructed in 1940 (designed by architect Clement Glancy), church services were held in the original St. Aidan’s School building.  The HIS notes that the Holy Family Church building exhibits the classic qualities of the Interwar Romanesque Revival style with strong simple external forms and restrained detailing. 

 

An early photograph of the Presbytery indicates that the building was designed in the Federation Arts and Crafts style but has been considerably altered internally and externally.  Externally, the original terracotta tiled roof remains but all chimneys have been removed.  The verandahs to the south and west elevation, and at the rear have been infilled with brickwork and timber and aluminium windows.  Internally, the building retains five main original rooms on the ground and first floor and much original timber joinery including fireplace surrounds and mantles and some original plaster ceilings.  The HIS considers that apart from some water damage from roof leaks, the building is in fair to good condition.  The HIS addresses the archaeological potential of the site and the positive and negative impacts of the proposal. 

 

In terms of archaeological potential, the HIS notes that given the degree of disturbance of original ground levels, that there is low potential for the discovery of archaeological relics.  In terms of positive impacts, the HIS considers the existing Presbytery has been degraded by later alterations and additions and detracts architecturally from the adjacent church and the overall site.  The HIS notes that the removal of the Presbytery will improve the visibility of the eastern side of the church from Maroubra Road and that the scale and location of the new Parish Centre will separate the church from any significant built structure on the Maroubra Road frontage.  The HIS notes that the scale and form of the new Parish Centre will respect the church building and the main school building, with the existing brick front fence to be retained.  In terms of negative impacts, the HIS notes that the demolition of the Presbytery will result in the removal of some well maintained internal fabric and makes recommendations in relation to these timber joinery elements.  The HIS recommends that panel doors, timber architraves and fireplace surrounds and mantles should be salvaged for possible reuse in other Catholic Church buildings.  The HIS concludes that the proposed development will have minimal impact of the heritage values of the church and surrounding school site. 

 

 

 

Comments

 

Demolition of Presbytery

The existing Presbytery is one of the earliest buildings on the site.  The extent of internal and external changes to the building have however detracted from its integrity, and the extent to which it contributes to the setting of the church.  There are no heritage objections to the removal of the Presbytery building. 

 

Siting of new building

The new Parish Centre is to be located in the south east corner of the site, separated from the Church and the classroom building by playground areas.  The removal of the existing Presbytery and construction of the new building further to the east, and will open up views to the western end of the classroom building, at the expense of existing views to its eastern end.  The siting of the new Parish Centre will however will provide considerably improved views of the eastern elevation of the Church building.  It is considered that the landscape design of the enlarged forecourt and playground extension between the existing church and the new Parish Centre will provide an appropriate setting for the heritage item. 

 

Design of new building

It is noted that both the church and classroom buildings are characterised by simple, ordered and regularly spaced window openings.  As compared to the pre-lodgement plans, the development application plans have somewhat simplified and rationalised the elevational design of the new Parish Centre.  The Maroubra Road elevation has a symmetrical treatment incorporating public and private entrances and reduces the dominance of the entrance to the double garage.  The proposed roof forms, window openings, materials and finishes relate the new building to existing church and classroom buildings and do not draw attention to the new development.  It is considered that the Parish Centre will remain a secondary element on the church site. 

Recommendation

The following conditions should be included in any consent:

 

·      Original timber joinery elements in the Presbytery building such as panelled doors, timber architraves and fireplace surrounds and mantles should be tagged for recycling prior to the commencement of demolition work.  The demolition contractor should be briefed on the need to carefully removal of these tagged timber elements. 

 

·      Seek to store and reuse these timber elements in other Catholic Church buildings where it is stylistically appropriate. 

 

·      A brief archival recording of the property, incorporating internal and external photographs included in the Heritage Impact Statement shall be prepared and 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.  Two copies of the endorsed archival recording shall be presented to Council, one of which shall be placed in the Local History Collection of Randwick City Library. 

 

·      In the unlikely event that historical archaeological remains or deposits are exposed during the works, all work should cease while an evaluation of their potential extent and significance is undertaken and the NSW Heritage Office notified under the requirements of the Heritage Act.”

 

Comment : Conditions as recommended by the Heritage Planner will be applied accordingly.

 

 

7.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

Refer to the “Policy Controls” section of this report.

 

 

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

Not applicable.

 

 

 

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

-  The proposed development is consistent with the predominant institutional use in the wider urban block in which the existing Holy Family Church is located.

-  The proposal is not considered to result in detrimental social or economic impacts on the locality but rather enhance the heritage and religious significance of the existing church, parish  and site.

-  The proposed new parish centre building will not give rise to any overshadowing, privacy and view impacts to adjoining properties.

-  The proposal satisfies the objectives of Randwick LEP under Clause 9 as well as the objectives of the Special Uses zone.

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

The site has a zoning that permits the proposed use. The site has an existing church use that provides for, and allocates, sufficient space for the proposed use. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

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

No submissions have been received in relation to the proposed development.

 

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

The proposal will provide an enhance place of worship for relevant sections of the community while respecting the heritage significance of the existing church with minimal adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered satisfactory in public interest terms.

 


8        Statutory Controls – S79C(1)(a)

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The site is zoned Special Uses 5 under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. The proposal is permissible in the zone with development consent.

 

The following relevant clauses of the Randwick LEP apply to the proposal:

 

Clause 9 - Objectives

Clause 9 of RLEP 1998 requires Council to consider the aims of the LEP and Zone objectives prior to determining any DA on land to which the RLEP applies. The purpose of this Clause is “To require the general aims of this plan and the specific objectives of each zone to be taken into account in the assessment and determination of development applications”. With reference to the general aims, the proposed development will not compromise the aims of the LEP in relation to aesthetic character, sustainability, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality in that:

§ The proposed parish centre provides the necessary ancillary facilities for office and accommodation for priests being necessary and incidental uses associated with the existing Church.

§ The proposal maintains and respects the heritage significance of the existing heritage item comprising the Holy Family Church and including increasing the curtilage of the Church through an expanded eastern forecourt.

§ The proposed Parish Centre use is consistent with the existing Special Uses zoning.

§ The proposal maintains the amenity of the existing surrounding residential area, consistent with the zone objectives as detailed under Clause 17 below.

 

Clause 17 Zone No 5 (Special Uses Zone)

The subject site is zoned Special Uses 5 under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (RLEP). The proposed development 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 zone, which are:

·      To accommodate development for educational, religious, public transport or similar purposes on both publicly and privately owned land

The subject urban block containing the Holy Family Church presently is occupied by a variety of religious and community uses, including the subject church and its associated presbytery, St. Aidan’s Primary School and a church affiliated retirement home). The development of the proposed Parish Centre is considered to be compatible with the existing religious, community and educational elements of the broader land, and will continue to support and offer religious services for a significant sector of the local population.

 

·      To enable associated and ancillary development.

(The proposed development incorporates ancillary parish facilities for the existing Holy Family Church namely in the form of offices and accommodation for priests being necessary and incidental uses associated with the existing Church.)

 

Clause 20F  Floor Space Ratio

The Randwick LEP states that, in the Special Uses zone, “the maximum floor space ratio for buildings within Zone No. 5 to be used for the purpose of boarding houses, dwellings or multi-unit housing (or any two or more of them) is 0.5:1”. While the proposed new building will contain accommodation facilities for priests serving in the Church, the building will also be an ancillary use in the form of a Parish Centre containing office facilities associated with the Church. As such, the maximum FSR standard does not apply to the proposed development. Notwithstanding this, the proposed Parish Centre will result in an FSR of 0.6:1 which is the same FSR for the existing Presbytery building. The proposed FSR is considered reasonable and acceptable and results in a built form density that is consistent with, and will not detract from, the existing institutional and residential uses within the subject street.

 

Clause 37A  Development in the Special Use Zone     

Clause 37A states that Council may only grant consent to development within the Special Use Zone only if it is satisfied that the proposed development is compatible with the character of the locality and will not adversely affect the amenity of adjoining residents. The proposal for a new two-storey Parish Centre will be compatible in height, bulk and scale to the existing surrounding development which is predominantly 2-3 storeys. Furthermore, as assessed in the relevant section of this report below, the proposal will not result in any significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the nearby properties or the character of the locality.

 

Clause 43   Heritage Conservation

The proposal sits within a site which has a listed heritage item under Schedule 3 of the RLEP, being the Holy Family Church, and the provisions of Clause 43: Heritage Conservation apply to the development.

 

Clause 43(4) requires that the effect of the proposal on heritage significance should be considered in relation to any proposal affecting a heritage item. The applicant has submitted a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by OCP Architects Pty Limited which has been reviewed by Council’s Heritage Planner and found to be adequate in addressing the heritage impacts of the proposed development subject to conditions relating to the reuse and recycling of elements of, and archival recording of, the existing Presbytery Building (see Heritage Planner’s comments above).

 

8.2             Relevant draft environmental planning instrument–Section 79C(1)(a)

 

Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

Under the Draft LEP, the subject site is zoned SP2 Educational Establishment in which the existing Church and proposed Parish Centre are permissible. Accordingly, the controls applicable over the subject site are prescribed in the relevant clauses of the Randwick LEP 2012.

 

The proposal is considered to satisfy the key zoning objectives in terms of minimising the impacts of development and protecting the amenity of residents in the zone.

 

8.3             Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies– Section 79C(1)(a)

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

 

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. Furthermore, the proposed Parish Centre does not constitute a more sensitive land use in relation to site remediation but maintains similar uses as the existing Presbytery namely office and residential use.

 

9.           Policy Controls– Section 79C(1)(a)

 

9.2    DCP – Parking

There are no specific provisions relating to presbytery or parish centres in the DCP – Parking. Notwithstanding this, the applicant has provided a Traffic and Parking Report that advises that the provision of 2 car parking spaces for the residential component of the proposal (comprising a three bedroom priest residence) accords with the DCP –Parking requirements for 2 car spaces for a three bedroom dwelling house. Similarly, the Report advises that the provision of 2 car parking spaces for the Parish office accords with the DCP’s requirement for 1 space per 2 staff members for a community facility. The traffic and parking consultant’s advice is considered reasonable and acceptable and, accordingly, the proposal is considered to satisfy the parking requirements of the DCP – Parking.  

 

9.3         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

$ 2,000,000

1%

$20,000.00

 

10.      Likely impact of the development - S79C(1)(b)

 

10.1           Impact on adjoining development

 

Building Design, Materials and Aesthetics

The proposed new parish centre building presents as a two storey building with a  bulk and scale that appears similar to that of the existing presbytery but with a lower overall height than the pitched roof form of the existing building. More significantly, as acknowledge by Council’s Heritage Planner, “…the roof forms, window openings, materials and finishes will relate the new parish centre building to the existing church and classroom buildings yet do not draw attention to the new development so that  the Parish Centre will remain a secondary element on the church site. Overall, the proposed parish centre will complement, and not be visually intrusive in the, existing Maroubra Road streetscape of the subject block. Furthermore, it will be augmented by a good landscape design for the expanded forecourt area.” 

 

10.2           Impact to Adjoining Properties

 

Privacy

Privacy to adjoining properties is maintained as follows:

 

·      The first floor windows on the east elevation facing the adjoining seniors living home at No. 216-218 Maroubra Road are linked to bedrooms which are less conducive for over looking and also will have a 10m separation distance from this adjoining property which accords with the required separation distances for privacy under the residential design code.

 

·      The north-facing elevated terrace will 2m high privacy screens on their western and eastern edge as well as moveable folding shutters along the northern edge.

 

·      Living and dining room windows have been orientated to the north and west which face the existing school and church and not residential uses.

 

Sunlight

Shadow diagrams submitted indicate that at 9am in the winter solstice, overshadowing largely will occur to the south-eastern corner of the proposed extended forecourt of the Church, the front yard of the proposed Parish Centre and Maroubra Road beyond. By 12 mid-day, the proposed overshadowing will be confined to the front yard of the proposed Parish Centre and Maroubra Road beyond.  By 3:00pm some overshadowing will occur on the west facing windows of the adjoining seniors living home to the east. This is the only impact on any residential property and is considered acceptable as this adjoining property will be free from overshadowing from the proposed development in the morning and midday period of the winter solstice, so that the living areas of this adjoining property will not have their minimum 3 hour solar access in mid-winter reduced by the proposed development.

 

Views

There are no impacts on views currently available to adjoining/surrounding properties given the predominantly flat topography and built-up urban context of the surrounding locality.

 

Noise

The proposal is only for the construction of a Parish Centre and extension of a church forecourt area. Furthermore, the DA does not involve any changes to the existing Church and school uses on-site.

 

In any event, there are provisions under the Protection of the Environment Operation Act 1997 that protect the amenity of residents in relation to noise and vibration issues if required.

 

Traffic

The traffic impacts for the proposal will be minor as they involve uses associated with an ancillary office and priest accommodation for the existing Church. Accordingly, any expected traffic generation will be minor and commensurate with its local scale. The Traffic and Parking Report confirms that “Traffic Generation is small and can easily be absorbed in the priority east bound traffic flow in Maroubra Road”.

 

10.3    Social and Economic Impacts - S79C(1)(b)

As noted previously, the proposal will have positive social impacts on the locality as it will consolidate the Church use on-site by providing a necessary ancillary parish centre and within an overall urban block that already contains a number of related institutional uses.

 

10.4  Ecologically Sustainable Development

The proposed development is located in an area well served by public buses along Maroubra Road, linking the subject site to the CBD, Railway Square, Bondi Junction and Randwick Junction. Additionally, the SEE and plans submitted with the DA indicate the maximised use of natural ventilation and lighting, site orientation and building materials that reduce energy consumption. The proposal is considered acceptable in relation to Ecologically Sustainable Development issues.

 

10.5  Site Suitability - S79C(1)(c)

The site contains an established church with a large site area to adequately accommodate the proposed parish centre use and within an overall urban block that already contains a number of related institutional uses. The zoning allows for the proposed use. The site is located close to the Maroubra town centre and has convenient access to the local and regional transport network. Therefore, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

 

10.6  Issues raised in submissions - S79C(1)(d)

No submissions were received in response to the notification and advertising of the proposal.

 

10.7  The public interest – S79C(1)(e)

The proposed development will provide necessary and associated ancillary use for an established church in the local community. Additionally, the proposal will assist in strengthening the site’s function as a place of worship for the local public.

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

Key Action:       Encourage and reward design excellence and sustainability.

 

Financial Impact Statement - Not applicable.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development is permissible with consent of Council and complies with the relevant provisions of the Randwick LEP (Consolidation).

 

The proposed development will provide necessary and associated ancillary parish centre use for an established church in the local community. The proposal will assist in strengthening the site’s function as a place of worship for the local community.

 

Having regard to all relevant matters for consideration, the amended proposal will not result in any significant adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the nearby properties or the character of the locality.

 

The recommendation is for approval of the application subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

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/119/2012 for the demolition of existing presbytery building at St Aidans Church, and construction of a two storey with undercroft parish centre building comprising offices, garage and priests accommodation, landscaping, extension of playground and associated works at 214 Maroubra Road, Maroubra, 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 DA-01, DA-02, DA-03, DA-04 and DA-05, all Issue A, and all dated 23/02/2012, and stamped received by Council on 23 February 2012, the application form, 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:

 

Document

Prepared by:

Dated

Statement of Environmental Effects

Andrew Martin Planning

February 2012

 

2.       The colours, materials and finishes of the external surfaces to the proposed development are to be consistent with the colours, materials and finishes submitted with the development application and prepared by Curtin, Bathgate and Somers Architects Pty Limited and be compatible with the existing church on-site and adjacent developments to maintain the integrity and amenity of the building and the streetscape.

 

3.       Lighting to the premises shall be designed so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents or motorists and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

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.

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

5.       Details of any proposed mechanical ventilation systems, detailing compliance with the relevant requirements of Clause F4.12 of the BCA and Australian Standard AS 1668 Parts 1 & 2 (including exhaust air quantities and discharge location points) are to be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority with the construction certificate and a copy of relevant documentation is to be provided to Council.

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia & Relevant Standards

6.       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).

 

Building regulation and construction site management

7.       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.

 

8.       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.

 

Design Alignment levels

9.       The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing Council footpath levels along the full site frontage.

 

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

 

11.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $135.00 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

12.     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.

 

13.     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 along the Green Street site frontage.

 

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

 

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

 

d)     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)      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.

 

g)     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.

 

h)     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.

 

i)      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.

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

p)     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.

 

            Landscaping & Environmental amenity:

14.     Landscaping is to be provided to the site in accordance with the landscaping plans/specifications submitted with the development application (identified as drawing LPDA12-268/1 & LpDA12-268/2, dated 23/02/2012 by Conzept Landscape Architects.

 

15.     All detention tanks and stormwater infiltration systems located within the landscaped areas shall have a minimum soil cover of 600mm to ensure sufficient soil depth to permit the establishment of landscaping on top of these services as required by these conditions of development consent. Details are to be included in the relevant construction certificate and landscape plans.

 

            Tree Protection Measures

16.     In order to ensure the retention of the Council Street Trees located either side of the proposed new vehicular crossing in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.     All detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application shall show the retention of the existing tree specimen/s with the position of the tree trunks/ and full diameter of the tree canopy/ies clearly shown on all drawings.

 

b.     Detailed architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services), and landscape documentation submitted for the construction certificate application shall show no alteration in the existing soil levels or the location of any structures, services, footings, paving, detention tanks, stormwater infiltration systems, pipes, cutting or battering of the existing soil profile, or any excavations within a radius of  2.00 metres from the outside edge of the tree trunk/s.

 

c.     The trunk of Council street trees are to be physically protected by 2m lengths of 50mm x 100mm hardwood timbers, spaced at 150mm centres, and secured by 8 gauge wires or steel strapping at 300mm spacing, laid over geo-textile, underfelt or layers of Hessian unless otherwise agreed by Council’s Landscape Development Officer.

 

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

 

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

 

f.      Within this zone 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 in the area, no stockpiling of soil or rubble, or any works listed in Point b.

 

Any works required within this zone (only as approved on the construction certificate) shall be under the direction of, and to the satisfaction of, a suitably qualified Arborist.

 

g.   A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $3,000.00 shall also 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/s.

 

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.

 

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.

 

         Heritage protection

17.     A brief archival recording of the property, incorporating internal and external photographs included in the Heritage Impact Statement shall be prepared and 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.  Two copies of the endorsed archival recording shall be presented to Council, one of which shall be placed in the Local History Collection of Randwick City Library. 

 

Security Deposit

18.     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.

 

Sydney Water Requirements

19.     A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation. 

 

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 refer to “Water Servicing Coordinator” under Developing Your Land” 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.

 

The Section 73 Compliance Certificate is required to be obtained before an occupation certificate is issued.

 

            Reflectivity

20.     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.

 

Section 94A Development Contribution

21.     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

$2,000,000

1%

$20,000.00

 

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

 

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

 

            Building Regulation

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Access & Facilities

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development 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.

            Heritage Protection

27.     Original timber joinery elements in the Presbytery building such as panelled doors, timber architraves and fireplace surrounds and mantles should be tagged for recycling prior to the commencement of demolition work.  The demolition contractor should be briefed on the need to carefully removal of these tagged timber elements.  The applicant shall store and reuse these timber elements in other Catholic Church buildings where it is stylistically appropriate. 

 

Council Street Tree Removal

28.     Approval is granted for the removal of the Council Street Tree (Eucalyptus haemastoma – Scribbly Gum) located within the construction zone of the proposed new vehicular crossing. This work is to be carried out by Council approved contractors.

 

Prior to the commencement of any works the applicant is to contact Council’s Landscape Development Engineer (David Meredith on 9399 0613) to obtain the cost for removal of the subject tree as well as meeting any amenity value put on the tree.

 

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

 

Demolition & Construction Waste

29.     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

30.     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 Maroubra 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.

 

31.     A detailed Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to commencement of any site work

 

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

·       A description of the demolition, excavation and construction works

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

·       Any proposed road and/or footpath closures

·       Proposed site access locations for personnel, deliveries and materials

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

·       Provision for loading and unloading of goods and materials

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

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

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

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

·       Measures to maintain public safety and convenience

 

 

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

 

Sydney Water

33.     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

34.     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.

 

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

 

         Service provisions

36.     All plumbing and drainage work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of Sydney Water and liquid trade waste materials are to be drained to the sewer (via a suitable grease trap) and details of compliance are to be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of any works.

 

            Construction Management

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

 

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

 

38.     Prior to the commencement of any excavation or building works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:-

·            appoint a Principal Certifying Authority for the building work, and

·            appoint a principal contractor for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, obtain an owner-builder permit in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing, and

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

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

 

39.     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 any relevant Certificate of Insurance) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to commencement of works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

·           Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

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

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

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

·           Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials

·           Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·           Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

44.     A Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the Department of Environment and 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, to the satisfaction of the Council.

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.

 

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

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

·       location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·       location of building materials for construction;

·       provisions for public safety;

·       dust control measures;

·       site access location and construction;

·       details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·       protective measures for tree preservation;

·       provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·       location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·       details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·       construction noise and vibration management;

·       construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

46.     Any liquid trade waste materials are to be disposed of in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water, Trade Waste Department and details of compliance are to be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of works if applicable.

 

Hazardous Materials

47.     The demolition, removal, storage, handling and disposal of products and materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy and the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW and the NSW Department of Environment & Conservation (formerly the Environment Protection Authority), including:

·      Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·      Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

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

·      Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

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

 

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.

 

48.     A Demolition Work Plan must be prepared for the development in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001 and carried out in accordance with document titled “Attachment 19 Hazardous Material Survey” dated October 2010 prepared by EIS.

 

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

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

·          Details of hazardous materials, including asbestos

·          Method/s of demolition and removal of asbestos

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

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

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

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

·          Date the demolition and removal of asbestos will commence

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING WORKS

The following conditions of consent must be complied with during demolition and  construction 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.

 

Heritage Protection

51.     In the unlikely event that historical archaeological remains or deposits are exposed during the works, all work should cease while an evaluation of their potential extent and significance is undertaken and the NSW Heritage Office notified under the requirements of the Heritage Act.”

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

52.     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.

 

            Internal Tree Removal

53.     Approval is granted for the removal of the 2 large Kaffir Plums located on the southern side of the existing Presbytery.

 

54.     Approval is also granted for the removal of the 2 Eucalyptus trees located adjacent to the existing shade structure.

 

55.     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.

 

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

§   prior to construction of the first floor/floor slab (prior to pouring of concrete),

§   prior to construction of each additional new floor level,

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

§   as may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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.  

 

57.     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”.

 

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

·       Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000

·       Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

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

·           Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

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

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

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

 

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

 

59.     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. In this regard:

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Excavating of rock, use of jack-hammers, pile-drivers or the like

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Internal work only within a commercial or industrial development, located in a commercial or industrial zone, which is not audible within any residential dwelling or commercial or industrial premises

·   Monday to Saturday - No time limits (subject to column 1)

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The public place adjacent to the work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place and any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed upon completion of the work.

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

m)      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 Council.

 

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 of 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.

 

Hazardous Materials

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

64.     Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

65.     A specific contact number is to be made available for such enquiries and complaints (including an after-hours emergency contract number) and a complaints register is to be maintained to record all such enquiries, complaints and actions taken in response to same, which is to be made available to Council officers upon request.

 

66.     Any hazardous and/or intractable wastes arising from any demolition, excavation, building and any remediation works are to be managed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of Work Cover NSW and the Department of Environment and Climate Change (formerly EPA), including the provisions of:

·          New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 2000

·          The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

·          Protection Of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW)

·          Environment Protection Authority's Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non Liquid Wastes (1999)

·          Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

 

Construction Noise Control

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

 

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

68.     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.

 

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.

 

69.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

71.     A Certificate prepared by a professional engineer shall be submitted to the certifying authority (and the Council, if the Council is not the certifying authority) prior to an occupation certificate being issued, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural requirements of the Building Code of Australia and approved structural design documentation.

 

Street numbering

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

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

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

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

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.

 

74.     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.

 

75.     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.

 

Service Authorities

76.     The Section 73 Compliance Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Stormwater Drainage

77.     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.

 

78.     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).

 

79.     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

80.     The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications prior to occupation of the development and the landscaping must be maintained in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.

 

Certification is to be obtained from a suitably qualified Landscape Architect and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) (and Council, if Council is not the PCA) prior to the occupation of the development, which confirms that the landscaping works have been completed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans and relevant conditions of development consent, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

Waste Management

81.     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.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATION

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any food business operations on the site. 

 

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.

 

82.     Trade/commercial waste materials must not be disposed via council’s domestic garbage service.  All trade/commercial waste materials must be collected by Council’s Trade Waste Service or a waste contractor authorised by the Waste Service of New South Wales and details of the proposed waste collection and disposal service are to be submitted to Council prior to commencing operation of the business.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Stormwater Detention/Infiltration  System

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

 

Environmental Amenity

84.     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.

 

Health, safety and amenity

85.     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.

 

86.     The proposed use of the premises and 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 premises and plant and equipment shall not give rise to a 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).  The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq, 15 min and adjusted in accordance with the NSW DECC/EPA Industrial Noise Policy 2000 and Environmental Noise Control Manual (sleep disturbance).

 

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

 

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

Waste/recyclable bins and containers must not be placed on the footpath (or road), other than for waste collection, in accordance with Council’s requirements.

 

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      Prior to the commencement of any building or shop ‘fit-out’ works, a construction certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

A3      The assessment of this development application does not include an assessment of the proposed building work under the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

All new building work must comply with relevant regulatory requirements and Australian Standards and details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate application.

 

A4      The design and construction of the premises must satisfy the requirements of the Food Act 2003, Food Standards Code and AS 4674 (2004). Prior to finalising the design and fit-out for the development and prior to a construction certificate being obtained, advice should be obtained from an accredited Food Safety Consultant (or Council’s Environmental Health Officer).

 

A5      The applicant and operator are also advised to engage the services of a suitably qualified and experienced Acoustic consultant, prior to finalising the design and construction of the development, to ensure that the relevant noise criteria and conditions of consent can be fully satisfied.

 

A6      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.

 

A7      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                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D44/12

 

 

Subject:                  163 Boyce Road, Maroubra (DA/170/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/170/2012

Author:                   Louis Coorey, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Subdivide the land into two separate lots. Amended to include the construction of a basement garage fronting Boyce Road.

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                A Richard

Owner:                         M Murray - Power of Attorney

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.    Executive Summary

 

The proposed development is for a two lot subdivision as follows:

 

·     Lot 1: 351.89m with a frontage of 10.06m to Boyce Road. Variation: 48.11m2 or 12% below the minimum allotment and 1.94m or 16% below the minimum allotment frontage.

 

·     Lot 2: 280.3m2 with a frontage of 10.06m to Green Street. Variation: 119.7m2 or 29.9% below the minimum allotment and 1.94m or 16% below the minimum allotment frontage.

 

Under Clause 20B(1) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) (RLEP) the minimum allotment size for subdivision in the 2A zone is 400sqm minimum site area and 12m minimum frontage for each allotment. The variations indicated above are greater than 10% and as required by the NSW Department of Planning, the application is referred to Council for determination.

 

In respect to the variation of the development standard, the applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards, and has argued that strict compliance with clause 20B(1) of RLEP is unreasonable and unnecessary. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection the most relevant factor is that the proposed lot sizes are not dissimilar to the predominant lot sizes and subdivision pattern of lots along this side of Boyce Road and within surrounding streets.

 

Further to the above, in response to the Development Engineers concern with the shortfall in parking, the applicant submitted amended plans showing the construction of a basement garage fronting Boyce Road. The applicant has raised a concern with Council’s requirement that the garage be built prior to the endorsement of subdivision plans. Their concern is based on undue financial hardship and that in the past Council has sought a bond for a similar development. Council does not support a bond in lieu of parking being provided particularly as a result of the scenario that has transpired at No. 153 Boyce Road where the parking has not been provided and Council does not have the legal right to carry out works on private property.

 

Overall, subject to the inclusion of a condition requiring the construction of the garaging to the Boyce Road property, the proposed development will be consistent with the subdivision pattern of this locality.

 

The application is, therefore, recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposed development seeks to subdivide the land into two separate lots. The proposed dimensions of the lots are as follows (inclusive of variations to the standard under Clause 20B(1) of the RLEP 1998 which requires 400m per allotment and a 12m frontage:

 

·     Lot 1: 351.89m with a frontage of 10.06m to Boyce Road. Variation: 48.11m2 or 12% below the minimum allotment and 1.94m or 16% below the minimum allotment frontage.

 

·     Lot 2: 280.3m2 with a frontage of 10.06m to Green Street. Variation: 119.7m2 or 29.9% below the minimum allotment and 1.94m or 16% below the minimum allotment frontage.

 

 

Note: A small portion of the site fronting Green Street (measuring 4.243m deep and 10.06m wide) is to be dedicated to Council for the purposes of Road Widening. If this land is included in the proposed allotment fronting Green Street (Lot 2) then it would result in a smaller shortfall of 77sqm (or a 19.25% variation) rather than the 119sqm and 29.9% variation.

 

Figure 1: Proposed subdivision layout

 

Amended application: The application is amended to include construction of a basement garage fronting Boyce Road. This type of development has previously been carried out at sites that have been subdivided at No. 157 and 161 Boyce Road. Council advised the applicant’s representative that parking would have to be constructed prior to endorsement of the subdivision. The applicant submitted a letter raising concerns with this arrangement requesting that subdivision be endorsed prior to the garage being constructed and that a bond may be paid. The table below contains a brief of relevant issues raised by the applicant and comments in response to these concerns.

 

Applicant submission:

 

Issue

Comment

Request bond be paid in lieu of condition requiring construction of a garage fronting Boyce Road prior to endorsement of the subdivision plan which is a scenario that occurred at no 153 Boyce Road.

153 Boyce Road: The original determination required the construction of the car parking prior to endorsement of the subdivision.

A Section 102 to amend the application approved the amendment of this condition to allow for a bond to be paid and for the car parking to be installed within 1 and then two years of the subdivision. The parking was never installed and the bond was forfeited.

This is the type of scenario that Council wishes to guard against and it is the reason why it is recommended that the car parking for the site fronting Boyce Road be required prior to endorsement.

Further, Council is not in a position to construct the parking spaces as the site is under private ownership.

Council has ceased this type of arrangement as it is akin to entering into a private contract with a developer and in the case for 163 Boyce Road, it does not address the relevant issue of parking shortfalls.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the southern side of Boyce Road with rear lane access off Green Street.  The site has a frontage width of 10.06m, a side boundary depth of 67.085m and has an overall site area of 674.87m².  Neighbouring the property to the east are two allotments with detached dwellings fronting Boyce Road and Green Street, to the west are two dwellings that front Boyce Road and Green Street. The surrounding area is predominately residential in character and consists predominantly of single detached dwellings on blocks of land that are similar to that proposed for subdivision. Figure 1 is an aerial view of the subject site and surrounding area and Figure 2 is a cadastral map of the area showing the allotment layout of surrounding blocks of land.

 

Figure 1: Aerial view of subject site and surrounding area.

 

Figure 2: Aerial cadastral of subject site and surrounding area: The cadastral shows the majority of the surrounding sites have already been subdivided into two allotments fronting Boyce Road and Green Street.

 

Note: Cadastral image from Councils GIS ‘e-view’ system obtained from NSW Government Department of Lands information database.

 

 

4.    Site History

 

No relevant history.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

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, no submissions were received.

 

Amended application: The amended application incorporated basement garage works in the development application, however given the owners signatures from adjoining sites (at No 161 and 165 Boyce Road) indicating non-objection to the proposed garaging, it was not considered necessary to carry out formal notification of the amended application.

 

5.1 Support

The adjoining neighbours at No. 161 and 165 Boyce Road indicate no objection to the proposed basement garage.

 

6.    State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards

The proposal does seek to vary a development standard contained with Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation). The standard sought to be varied is Clause 20B(1) minimum allotment sizes for land zoned 2A requiring a minimum site area of 400sqm and a 12m frontage for each allotment. A SEPP 1 objection is addressed as follows:

The proposed allotments have an area of 351.89sqm and 280.3sqm and frontages of 10.06m and do not meet the minimum development standards. The variation with the development standards are greater than 10% and therefore require consideration at a Council meeting. The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1– Development Standards (SEPP 1), arguing that strict compliance with clause 20B(1) of RLEP is unreasonable and unnecessary.

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

·      Comments:

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

 

 “To establish minimum requirements for the subdivision of land within residential zones in order to protect and enhance local amenity”

 

The underlying purpose of Clause 20B(1) is to maintain the historical and existing subdivision pattern, low density character of land zoned 2A.”

 

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

 

 

Comment: The development standards for minimum allotment sizes are intended to maintain the existing character of the 2A zone and to ensure environmental outcomes from housing are suitably located with access to services, transport, shops and the like, whilst minimising the impact on adjoining neighbours and maintaining or enhancing neighbourhood character. The proposed subdivision and parking are consistent with the predominant subdivision pattern, size of allotments within the vicinity of the subject site and parking provided to the allotments fronting Boyce Road (see Figure 2).

 

Whilst the proposed lots are under the current standards, it is considered that the proposed subdivision would lead to a better planning outcome and it is unreasonable and unnecessary for the strict application of the standard for the following reasons:

 

a)     The subdivision will create a new allotment to Green Street which will accommodate a new one or two storey dwelling. Green Street currently presents as a mix of dwellings that address the street and only a small number of Boyce Road properties have rear lane access/garages to Green Street and remain un-subdivided. The erection of a new dwelling in future will maintain and enhance the local residential character of the area.

 

b)     The development standards for minimum allotment sizes are intended to maintain the existing character of the 2A zone and to ensure acceptable environmental outcomes from housing that are suitably located with access to services, transport, shops and the like, whilst minimising the impact on adjoining neighbours and maintaining or enhancing neighbourhood character. The fact that other similar sized lots (and even other smaller allotments) have had dwelling house developments approved and constructed (on similar sized subdivided allotments) demonstrate that Council can be satisfied that future development on the subject site can also be consistent with the scale and form of other developments and do not have any significant adverse impact on local amenity. Moreover, the amended application will provide onsite parking, which ensures that the objectives of the 2A zone are met and that consistency is achieved with other more recent developments along this side of Boyce Road.

 

c)     Local amenity will be protected and improved given that the subdivision will consolidate land for required road widening and eventual kerb and guttering of Green Street as per Councils Subdivision Policy.

 

d)     The proposed lot sizes are consistent with the prevailing subdivision pattern in this segment of Boyce Road/Green Street and would therefore allow development consistent with surrounding developments. It would not set an undesirable precedent in the locality.

 

It is therefore considered unreasonable for the minimum allotment size standard to apply on the basis of the applicant arguments, the context of the site and the surrounding allotments, and Council having maintained consistent decisions for subdivision of land where similar circumstances apply. In this respect, the submitted SEPP 1 objection has addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standard, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. Moreover, the applicant has appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

In conclusion, it is considered that the objection is well founded.

 

 

 


Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Comment: The variation from the minimum allotments size standard is consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 as it would not detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act embodied in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii). Specifically, the resultant development would be representative of the orderly and economic use of the land.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

 

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

 

Comment: The proposed development and variation from the development standard do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning.

 

The strict adherence to the numerical standard is therefore considered unreasonable and there is no public benefit in maintaining the standard 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 standard is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

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

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the proposed subdivision will achieve the objectives of the development standard and those of the 2A zone.

 

Second

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

 

Comments:

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

Third

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective of the standard would be 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 standard has been applied consistently for the subdivision of land where the proposed allotments are consistent with the subdivision pattern and the average allotment sizes in the vicinity of the subject site.

 

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

 

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

Development engineer issues with original application:

The development engineer indicated that they would not support the application on the basis of the following parking issue:

 

“the subdivision of the site will result in no off-street parking being provided for proposed Lot 1 fronting Boyce Road.

 

Similar to the neighbouring site at 161 Boyce Road (DA/87/1997) the front dwelling shall be required to fully comply with the requirements of Council’s DCP-Parking. At No.161 Boyce Road a garage was constructed at street level with a pedestrian over-bridge constructed to maintain the pedestrian footpath.  It is envisaged a similar type of development should be constructed at No.163.

 

…..As a consequence of the above, the application should either be withdrawn, amended, or refused……”

 

The applicant sought to amend the application which has been referred to the Development Engineer who has provided the following comments:

 

Development engineer comments in response to amended application:

An application has been received for subdivision of the site into two torrens title lots.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Subdivision Plan by arkivis stamped by Council 16th March 2012;

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by Arkivis stamped by Council 16th March 2012

 

Parking Comments

After issues were raised about the lack of off-street parking (see previous memo) amended plans have now been received indicating the provision of off-street parking for proposed Lot 1.

 

Similar to neighbouring properties at 161 Boyce Road a garage is now proposed to be constructed at street level with a pedestrian bridge over to maintain the pedestrian footpath.  The off-street parking vehicle access and footbridge shall be fully constructed prior to the issuing of a subdivision certificate.

 

Landscape Comments

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

 

Subdivision Comments

In compliance with Council's Subdivision Policy, (and in particular the subdivision policy with respect to properties fronting Green Street), the applicant shall be required to do the following:

 

(a)      Dedicate a strip of land 4.57 metres wide along the Green Street frontage of the proposed Lot fronting Green Street for road widening of Green Street.

 

(b)      pay to Council the sum of $3,682.00, (based on a rate of $366.00 per lineal metre of road frontage along Green Street), as a contribution towards the cost of future construction of Green Street in conjunction with the road dedication.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

-      Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

-      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998.

-      Building Code of Australia.

-      Section 94 Contributions Plan

-      Development Control Plan (DCP) - Parking

-      Development Control Plan (DCP) – Dwelling Houses and attached Dual Occupancies

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The site is zoned 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent. The following Clauses of the LEP 1998 apply to the proposal:-

 

Clause 20B(1) Minimum Allotment Sizes

Pursuant to Clauses 20B(1) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, the minimum allotment size for subdivision of land zoned 2A Residential is for each allotment to retain a minimum size of 400sqm and 12m frontage per allotment. The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Lot 11 – fronting Boyce Road

Lot 12- fronting Boyce Lane

Proposal

351m and 10.06m

280m and 10.06m

LEP 1998 (Consolidation) development standard

400m and 12m frontage

400mand 12m frontage

Shortfall below the LEP standard

48.11m2 or 12% below the minimum allotment and 1.94m or 16% below the minimum allotment frontage.

119.7m2 or 29.9% below the minimum allotment and 1.94m or 16% below the minimum allotment frontage.

 

Clause 21 - Subdivision

Clause 21 of RLEP98 requires Council’s consent for subdivision works. The applicant has provided draft subdivision plans to Council for assessment and approval and this complies with the requirements of the RLEP in relation to subdivision.

 

Clause 22    Services

Clause 22 states that Council may grant consent to the carrying out of development where it is satisfied that adequate facilities for water supply, sewage removal/disposal and drainage are available. If approval is granted for this application, a condition will be applied requiring a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 to be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.

 

8.1 Policy Controls

a.    Development Control Plan Parking

The DCP provides car parking requirements for dwelling houses. For the existing three bedrooms dwelling 2 spaces are required. Council advised the applicant that the proposal to create a new allotment at the rear will result in the loss of parking to the existing dwelling fronting Boyce Road and that council could not support this application. They were afforded the opportunity to amend, withdraw or have an assessment carried out which in this instance having regard to the provision of parking required at No. 161 and 157 Boyce Road in the vicinity of the subject site their proposal would result in a recommendation for refusal. The applicant chose to amend their application, submitted amended plans that show provide parking the front of the Boyce road allotment and the provision of an extension to the existing public walkway over.

 

The proposed parking is considered acceptable in so far as it ensures that the proposal does not result in an increase in demand for on-street parking.

 

b.    Development Control Plan Dwelling Houses and attached Dual Occupancies

The proposal does not seek to build on the proposed allotment fronting Green Street, however a development is unlikely to result in significant impact on the adjoining allotments; In this respect the proposed allotment size and associated road widening will not be dissimilar to other developments that front Green Street and it is likely that a reasonably sized dwelling may be able to be accommodated on the proposed allotment which will not result in any significant or unreasonable adverse impacts.

 

Garage

The proposed garage and driveway is considered to satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements under the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

8.2 Council Policies – S94 Contributions

This application is EXEMPT from a levy under Council’s s94A Development Contributions Plan as it falls into the category of development with a cost of works valued at less than $100,000.

 

Subdivision Code

The subdivision code was originally adopted by Council on 14 February 1978. The policy is primarily aimed at addressing special circumstances that have arisen as related to subdivision within Randwick Council. Part of the code is particularly relevant to the subject application in that it envisages subdivision and road widening along certain areas of the Randwick City Council land. Green Street is identified as being subject to these special circumstances requiring road widening when subdivision is proposed.

 

It is important to note that the current minimum allotment size standards for the subdivision of 2A zoned land are higher than those that exist under the subdivision code. Despite, the subdivision code is only a Council policy and not a statutory document, as is the RLEP, and the weight given to the subdivision code would be substantially less than that afforded to the current standards under Clause 20B(1) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), it is nevertheless considered that the proposed subdivision has merit in so far as the subdivision code is concerned.

 

Despite the intent of the policy remains relevant to the current application, the main body of this assessment is undertaken having regard to the current standards under Clause 20B(1) and the requirements under SEPP 1 which are discussed in the body of this report.

 

9.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

The site is zoned Residential 2A 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

Draft ‘Randwick Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012 (Draft RLEP 2012)

 

The Draft RLEP 2012 is currently on exhibition, prepared so that it is consistent with the NSW Government’s Standard Instrument (a template LEP), and sets out the aims of the Plan with a focus on local strategic planning. The particular aims of the Draft RLEP 2012 guide future land uses and development within the Council area.

 

Under the Draft RLEP 2012, the subject site is located within map reference grid 008 and is zoned R2 Low Density Residential which is consistent with the current 2A zoning of the site.

 

The proposed development is not inconsistent with the general objectives, aims and provisions under the Draft RLEP 2012.

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

The proposal generally satisfies the performance requirements in the DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, and the DCP for Parking except where discussed in sections 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 submission 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:          Excellence in urban design and a healthy environment.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Despite the applicants request to subdivide the land prior to endorsement of the subdivision being in direct conflict with Council’s requirement that parking be constructed prior to endorsement, it is considered that the arguments provided by the applicant are supportable, and it is considered unreasonable and unnecessary for the minimum allotment size standard to apply on the basis that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the subdivision pattern in close proximity to the subject site, and Council has maintained consistent decisions for subdivision of land where similar circumstances apply.

 

In this respect, the applicant’s amended application to provide a basement garage to the site fronting Boyce Road to address the shortfall in parking can be addressed by included a suitable condition in the recommendation section of this report.

 

Overall, the proposed subdivision and garage are considered to meet the relevant assessment criteria having particular regard to the provisions under the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). Specifically, it will not result in an undesirable precedent given the historical subdivision development of other sites within the locality which exist on separate Torrens titled lots; the resultant lots will not result in any adverse impact on the visual aesthetics of the buildings, streetscape or the amenity of the locality and the provision of parking to the front allotment will not result in an increase in demand for on street parking. The proposal is, therefore, considered acceptable and is recommended for approval.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clause 20B(1) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998, relating to minimum allotment sizes, 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/170/2012 to subdivide the land into two separate lots at 163 Boyce Road, Maroubra, subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received by Council

01A

Arkivis

15 March 2012

23 April 2012

02A

Arkivis

15 March 2012

23 April 2012

03A

Arkivis

15 March 2012

23 April 2012

04A

Arkivis

15 March 2012

23 April 2012

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing a ‘Subdivision certificate’.

 

These conditions have been applied to satisfy the provisions of Council’s environmental plans, policies and codes for subdivision works.

 

2.       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 Coordinator. For details please refer to the Building Developing and Plumbing section of the website www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to “Water Servicing Coordinator” under Developing Your Land” or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

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

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a subdivision certificate.

 

3.       The applicant shall create suitable rights of carriageway, easements for services, support and stormwater lines, as required. The applicant shall be advised that the minimum easement width for any stormwater line is 0.9 metres.

 

4.       All site stormwater from the proposed lots shall be discharged by gravity to the kerb and gutter/Council's underground drainage system in Boyce Road or to Green Street

 

5.       Prior to registration of the plan of subdivision for this property the applicant shall demolish all existing structures within proposed lot 2 (e.g. garage).

 

6.       Prior to registration of the plan of subdivision for this property the proposed garage, vehicle crossing, retaining walls and footbridge along the Boyce Road frontage to facilitate vehicle access to proposed Lot 1 fronting Boyce Road  shall be fully constructed and certified.

 

7.       In conjunction with the registration of the plan of subdivision the applicant shall dedicate a strip of land 4.57 metres wide along the Green Street frontage for road widening of Green Street.

 

8.       Prior to the issuing of a subdivision certificate the applicant shall pay to Council the sum of $3,682.00, (based on a rate of $366.00 per lineal metre of road frontage along Green Street), as a contribution towards the cost of future construction of Green Street in conjunction with the road dedication and in compliance with the Council's subdivision policy in relation to Green Street.

 

9.       A "restriction as to user" shall be placed on the title of the proposed Lot 2 in conjunction with the registration of the proposed plan of subdivision for this property. This restriction as to user shall indicate that onsite stormwater detention is required on the lot in conjunction with any development approval issued for Lot 2 .  (This is to ensure that no works which could affect the provision of onsite detention on the subject lots shall be permitted to be carried out without the prior consent in writing of the Council). This restriction will also ensure that all prospective purchasers of the subject lot are aware that onsite stormwater detention will be required as a condition of any future development consent.

 

10.     A formal subdivision application is required to be submitted to and approved by the Council and all relevant conditions of this development consent are required to be satisfied prior to the release of the subdivision plans.

 

 

11.     Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority, together with any other certification relied upon, must be provided to Council prior to the issuing of a subdivision certificate.

 

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

12.     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

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

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

14.     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

15.     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:

 

·           $15,000.00 -      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.

 

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.

 

Design Alignment levels

16.     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:

·        200mm above the edge of bitumen roadway along the full site frontage.

The design alignment levels at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the roadway must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

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

 

17.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $135.00 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

18.     Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate the applicant will be required to submit a full dilapidation survey including a photographic record to Council, which documents the existing condition of the sandstone wall and footpath adjacent to the proposed vehicle access in Napper Street. The report will include  details of the works proposed in this area of the subject site such as excavations, changes to existing levels, construction methods, etc

 

Sandstone Wall

19.     Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall include an annotation that the  excavation of Council’s footpath should be undertaken such that blocks from the portion of the sandstone wall to be removed can be retained as much as possible and to be stored and used at a later date when constructing the new retaining walls on Council property.

 

Driveway Design

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

 

21.     Prior to the issuing of a construction certificate the applicant is to contact Council’s Coordinator of Engineering Services within the City Services Department to obtain Council’s design requirements for the proposed retaining wall location, driveway, footbridge, relocation of the stairs and structural columns located on Council’s road reserve. The plans submitted for the construction certificate must reflect the Council requirements and be submitted to council for approval.

 

22.              The proposed suspended Council footpath along the site frontage is to be designed by a suitably qualified structural engineer so as to be structurally independent from the developed site’s front wall and so as to allow the footpath to be easily removed if required, without causing structural damage to the redeveloped site frontage. An independent structural engineer shall certify the design prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

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

 

Stormwater Drainage

24.     Surface water from building work and structures must satisfy the following requirements (as applicable), to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate:-

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

d)     External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to the adjoining premises;

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

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

 

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

 

Construction Certificate, Principal Certifying Authority & Commencement of Works

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

Home Building Act 1989

26.     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.

 

Construction Noise & Vibration

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

 

Sydney Water

28.     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

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

 

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

 

Footbridge

31.     The applicant is to have their own licensed contractor/builder construct the suspended Council footpath in which the applicant’s structural engineer shall certify the suspended footpath and handrails have been constructed and installed to the relevant Australian Standards. A copy of the certification is to be forwarded to Council prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate. The applicant’s contractor/builder shall liaise with Council’s Construction Supervisor prior to the commencement of any demolition/building works on Council’s naturestrip/roadway regarding Council requirements for traffic control etc.

 

32.     The contractor engaged to undertake the works must hold full public liability in relation to any claims sustained as a result of the works.

 

The contractor must keep a policy of public risk insurance with respect to the works on Council property. The limit of public risk shall be not less than $10,000,000 or such other sum as the Council may reasonably nominate in writing from time to time as the amount, which may be paid arising out of any one single accident or event.

 

NOTES:

 

a.  The policy shall extend to cover death or injury to any person and damage to property of any person sustained when such person is using or working within the Napper Street road reserve in the area adjacent to the subject works.

 

b.  The policy must name the Council as the owner and the contractors undertaking the work as the insured and must contain a clause that the insurer will not change the insurance without first giving the Council ten (10) days prior written notice.

 

c.  The insurance must be with an insurer approved by the Council and a copy of the policy or a certificate of insurance shall be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of work on Council property.

 

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.

 

Tree Removals

33.     No objections are raised to removing any of the existing vegetation within the site where necessary in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown, due both to their small size and insignificance, but is subject to the full implementation of the approved landscaping.

 

Inspections During Construction

34.     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.

 

Site Signage

35.     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

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

 

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Excavating of rock, use of jack-hammers, pile-drivers, 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

37.     The demolition of buildings must be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures and the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW, Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

38.     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 and 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).  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 (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority upon completion of the asbestos related works which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately, in accordance with the relevant conditions of consent.

 

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.

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

a)     Public access to the building site and materials must be restricted by existing boundary fencing or temporary site fencing having a minimum height of 1.5m, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

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

 

b)     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.

 

c)     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.

 

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

 

e)     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.

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land, Excavations & Retaining Walls

40.     Excavations and adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times and the following requirements must be satisfied:

 

a)     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.

 

b)     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.

 

c)     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 demolishing or constructing a wall of a dwelling that is built to a common or shared boundary (e.g. semi-detached or terrace dwelling);

·         as otherwise required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

The work and provision of support to the adjoining land, must be carried out in accordance with the abovementioned report, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

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

 

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

 

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

 

Occupation Certificate Requirements

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

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings, street verge

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

a)  Remove the sandstone wall and excavate as required to facilitate the construction of the vehicular access.

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

c)  Construct sandstone retaining walls using as much of the recovered stones from the existing wall as possible.

d)  Construct pedestrian footbridge with handrail over the vehicle access across the site frontage.

e)  Reconstruct Council’s steps at suitable location if required (to be determined by Council’s Coordinator of Engineering Services).

        

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Pedestrian Footbridge

47.     The applicant’s structural engineer shall certify the suspended footpath and handrails have been constructed/installed to the relevant Australian Standards and Council requirements. A copy of the certification is to be forwarded to Council prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

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      Smoke alarms are required to be installed in residential dwellings, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and the Building Code of Australia (volume 2).  Details should be included in the construction certificate application.

 

A6      A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

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

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

-     Placement of a waste skip or any other container or article in a public place.

 

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

 

A7      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.

 

A8      This consent does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the land owner or principal contractor must obtain:

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

A9      Demolition work and removal of asbestos materials:

 

-      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.

 

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

 

A10     Any external lighting to the premises should be designed and located so as to minimise light-spill beyond the property boundary or cause a public nuisance.

 

A11     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.

 

A12     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                                                                                                   8 May 2012

 

 

Development Application Report No. D45/12

 

 

Subject:                  17 Liguria Street, Maroubra (DA/818/2011)

Folder No:                   DA/818/2011

Author:                   Alex Van Son, Senior Environmental Planner     

 

Proposal:                               Ground and first floor alterations and additions to existing dwelling with plunge pool at the rear and landscaping works

 

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Ms D Moon

Owner:                         Mr A M Murphy & Ms L M E Hogan

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North