Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 11 December 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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             11 December 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 at 6pm.

 

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

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

Amen”

 

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

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

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 November 2012

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council by Members of the Public

Mayoral Minutes

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

Urgent Business

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting required)

 

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

 

 

CP103/12   34 Carrington Road, Randwick (DA/407/2012) (Deferred)

CP104/12   131 Botany Street, Randwick (DA/268/2012)

CP105/12   129 Botany Street, Randwick (DA/266/2012)

CP106/12   95 Wentworth Street, Randwick (DA/381/2012)

 

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting NOT required)

 

CP107/12   Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) for October to November 2012

CP108/12   Recent Land and Environment Court Decisions

CP109/12   Green Money Recycling Reward update

General Manager's Report

GM38/12    Re-determining the Organisational Structure

Director City Services Reports

CS17/12    Ficus 'Hillii' outside 28 Hooper Street, Randwick

CS18/12    Tree Removal - Outside 5 Lorne Avenue, Kensington

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF62/12    Annual Review of Councillors' Expenses & Facilities Policy

GF63/12    Review of Delegations of Authority

GF64/12    Future Management of Crown Reserves at Prince Henry, Little Bay  

Petitions

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM79/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Nash - Kingsford Town Centre Strategy

NM80/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - ICAC Operation Jarek

NM81/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - Community Consultation

NM82/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - Legality of Motions Pursuant to Notice

NM83/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Stevenson - Clubs and community responsibility

NM84/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Stevenson - Costs for use of community halls and parks

NM85/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Stevenson - Recognition of Lurline Bay as a suburb

NM86/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Criteria for and implementation of reduced ‘no stopping’ distance zones

NM87/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Community transparency and consultation

NM88/12    Notice of Motion from Crs Andrews, Seng & Stevenson - Upgrade of Amenities - Mahon Pool

NM89/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - "Response to the Case for Sustainable Change" document

NM90/12    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Containment and decontamination strategy for Malabar Headland leachate and stormwater from South Maroubra flowing onto Maroubra Beach  

 

 

Closed Session

Confidential Director City Services Reports  (record of voting required)

 

CS19/12    Supply of Waste Compactor Trucks - LPG 1608-E1 and BUS 198-0410

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

 

CS20/12    Tender T09/12 - Infrastructure Services Panel Contract

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

  

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             11 December 2012

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP103/12

 

 

Subject:                  34 Carrington Road, Randwick (DA/407/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/407/2012

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The application is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, including a two storey addition to the rear of the dwelling and a garage with attic to the rear of the property.

 

At the Council Meeting held on 27 November 2012 it was resolved;

 

“(Matson/Neilson) that the matter be deferred for mediation.”

 

Issues

 

The applicant has advised Council that he is not prepared to mediate in relation to the development application on the basis that relocating the addition to the front of existing dwelling house and within the roof space is not a feasible option in that there is limited height and volume within the existing roof pitch to accommodate the additional floor space.  The relocation of the addition to the front would require the removal of the existing roof and the wall height being increased resulting in the first floor addition being significantly higher than currently proposed. 

 

It was also indicated by the applicant that the requirement for a staircase to access a new first floor over the front part of the house, would result in the loss of a downstairs bedroom that would need to be added to the first floor thereby extending the length of the first floor addition. This would result in a greater external wall height to the rear than currently proposed in order to maintain a higher upper floor level due to the addition being sited over the front part of the original house which sits higher on the site.

 

The applicant has also indicated that they are prepared to reduce the balcony depth of the rear upper level balcony to 300mm in order to minimise the impacts on the adjoining properties. A suitable condition is included in the recommendation.

 

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 applicant is not prepared to mediate in relation to the development application on the basis that relocating the addition to the front of existing dwelling house and within the roof space is not a feasible option in that there is limited height and volume within the existing roof pitch to accommodate the additional floor space without having to increase the overall height of the proposed first floor addition.

 

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

 

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

 

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. 407/2012 for alterations and additions to the dwelling, including a new garage with attic at 34 Carrington Road, Randwick 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

Sheet 1

Peter Banfield

12/9/2012

Sheet 2

Peter Banfield

12/9/2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

 

A140955

18 June 2012

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

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

3.       The rear upper floor balcony at first floor level must be reduced in depth to a maximum of 300mm. Details to be provided with the construction certificate application.

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes    

4.       Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager Development Assessments prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

5.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $320,000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $3,200.00.

       

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

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

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

 

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

 

Security Deposit

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

·           $600.00     -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Design Alignment levels

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

·        60-100mm above the edge of the bitumen roadway at all points opposite, along the full site frontage in Hooper Lane.

 

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.

 

9.       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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

10.     Surface water/stormwater (from the proposed garage and granny flat) must be drained and discharged to Hooper Lane or the street gutter on Carrington Road  or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

Absorption pits 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.

 

Sydney Water

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

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s waste water 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 details please refer to the Sydney Water web site at www.sydneywater.com.au for:

 

·           Quick Check agents details -  see Building and Developing then Quick Check and

·           Guidelines for Building Over/Adjacent to Sydney Water Assets – see Building and Development then Building and Renovating, or telephone 13 20 92.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must ensure that a Sydney Water Quick Check Agent has appropriately stamped the plans.

 

Protection of Street Tree

12.     In order to ensure retention of the recently planted Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) on Council’s Carrington Road footpath, centrally across the width of the site in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show its retention, with any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar over this frontage to be setback a minimum distance of 2 metres of its trunk.

 

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

 

c.       There is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble around its base, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

Protection of neighbours trees

13.     In order to also ensure retention of the Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the south, no.36, against the common boundary, and adjacent the southeast corner of the existing/proposed garage, as well as the Washingtonia robusta (Washingtonia Palm) also within no.36, further to the southwest in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       The PCA/builder must ensure that removal of the existing concrete surfacing, within a radius of 1.5 metres of the trunk of the Jacaranda, is undertaken by hand, not machinery, to a minimum depth of 300mm, so as to avoid the indiscriminate damage of roots, with Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613) to be contacted (giving at least 2 working days notice) to inspect this work, prior to forming up or pouring the new slab.

 

c.       The builder/PCA must ensure that where any roots are encountered during the course of the approved works, they are cut cleanly by hand, with the affected area to be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

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

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

 

Smoke Alarms

15.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in dwellings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia (volume 2), smoke alarms must comply with AS3786.  Smoke alarms must be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.  Details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

BASIX Requirements

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

 

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

 

The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ (PCA), 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, PCA & other Requirements

17.     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

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

 

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

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

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

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

Public Utilities

21.     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.

 

22.     The applicant must meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Ausgrid, 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

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

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

 

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

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

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

 

Restriction on Working Hours

25.     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

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

·            Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and Regulations

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

·            WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·            Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·            The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations

·            Relevant DECCW/EPA Guidelines

·            Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

·        Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

·        Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

 

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

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

·        Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005.  Details of the landfill site (which must be lawfully able to receive asbestos materials) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

·        A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (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

28.     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

29.     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.

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land, Excavations & Retaining Walls

30.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring, piling or other measures are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Road / Asset Opening Permit

33.     A Road / Asset Opening Permit must be obtained from Council prior to 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 a final occupation certificate for the development.

 

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

 

Tree Management

34.     Approval is granted for the removal of any existing vegetation within the site where necessary in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown, including the clump of Bouganvillea in the rear yard, in the southwest corner, so as to accommodate the proposed works as shown, as all were observed to be insignificant, and not covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

 

Pruning of neighbours tree

35.     Permission is also granted for the minimal and selective pruning of only those four, low-mid order branches from the northwest aspect of the Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) which is growing in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the south, no.36, against the common boundary, only where they overhang the common boundary into the site and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the tree; or; interference with the works.

 

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

 

37.     All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level III in Arboriculture, and to the requirements of Australian Standard AS 4373-2007 'Pruning of Amenity Trees,’ and NSW Work Cover Code of Practice for the Amenity Tree Industry (1998).

 

38.     Prior to commencing these pruning works, the Arborist must contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613), giving at least working weeks notice, for the purpose of a joint site inspection to confirm the exact location and extent of pruning that is permitted by this consent.

 

Footings adjacent to drainage easements

39.     Any footings adjacent to the drainage easement/s must be inspected by the applicant's engineer to ensure that these footings are either founded on rock or extend below the "angle of repose”. Documentary evidence of compliance with this condition is to be submitted to certifying authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction.

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

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

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

 

BASIX Requirements

41.     In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue an Occupation Certificate for this development, unless it is satisfied that each of the required BASIX commitments have been fulfilled.

 

Relevant documentary evidence of compliance with the BASIX commitments is to be forwarded to the Council upon issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Occupant Safety

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

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

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

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

·           Installing a fixed heavy-duty gauge metal screen over the opening (excluding upon any front or street elevation of the building) e.g. A metal security screen or metal security mesh and frame system, but not standard fly-screen material,

·           Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

The relevant measures must be implemented prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings, street verge

43.     The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

a.       Construct a concrete/asphalt vehicular crossing opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

44.     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.

 

45.     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 an occupation certificate being issued for the development, together with payment of the relevant fees.

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

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

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

External Lighting

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

 

ADVISORY NOTES

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

A1      The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

 

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

 

A2      Demolition, building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

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

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

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

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

A4      Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue Construction Certificates and be your Principal Certifying Authority for the development, to undertake inspections and ensure compliance with the development consent, relevant building regulations and standards of construction.  For further details contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

A5      A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

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

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

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

 

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

 

A6      Specific details of the location of the building/s should be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the proposed building work will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

A7      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      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.

A10     Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Report for Planning Committee Meeting  on 13 November 2012

 

 

 


Report for Planning Committee Meeting  on 13 November 2012

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. D94/12

 

 

Subject:                  34 Carrington Road, Randwick (DA/407/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/407/2012

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to existing semi detached dwelling and new garage with attic.

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                A Smith

Owner:                         L & A Smith

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Smith, Nash and former Councillor Notley-Smith.

 

The application is for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, including a two storey addition to the rear of the dwelling and a garage with attic to the rear of the property.

 

The main issue is the impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties with respect to solar access, privacy and visual bulk and scale.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

1.    The Proposal

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing semi detached dwelling to provide for a two storey addition to the rear of the dwelling containing at ground level a kitchen and open plan living area with two bedrooms and two bathrooms within the upper level and rear balcony. Part of the existing rear portion of the dwelling will be demolished to accommodate the new addition. The existing garage will be demolished and replaced with a new garage with attic. New steps will be installed to the southern side of the dwelling to provide side access from the existing deck at the southern side of the dwelling to the rear yard. The proposal will provide for 65m² of additional floor area to the dwelling.

 

The proposal as originally lodged has been amended at the request of Council’s Development Engineers to setback the garage 300mm from Hooper Lane at rear, to lower the garage floor level to ensure the maximum 1 in 8 gradient is complied with, which also reduces the overall height of the garage by 270mm, and increase the internal width of the garage by 200mm to comply with the relevant Australian Standard 2890.1:2004.

 

2.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the western side of Carrington Road and has a frontage of 7.36m, a depth of 36.575m and area of 273m². The site falls from the front to rear with a difference in levels of almost 2m. The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings and some multi unit housing. The subject dwellings is a semi detached dwelling within a group of similar dwellings.

 

3.    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:-

 

Objections

 

Issue

Comment

32 Carrington Road Randwick

 

-The proposal is not compatible with the desired built form expressed in the DCP and gives rise to a significant environmental impact on the community and/or adjoining residents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The proposed two storey development is at a height of 6.8m and abuts the fence line, other two storey structures are offset from the fence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The building will result in loss of privacy, overshadowing and blocking of views and outlook.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The proposed outbuilding will significantly overshadow the garage structure at 32 Carrington Road and will also impact upon privacy and sunlight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

36 Carrington Road Randwick

-The proposal will result in overshadowing upon their private outdoor living area and within the living areas of their dwelling.

 

-The proposed outbuilding will also result in overshadowing upon their dwelling.

 

-The proposal exceeds the floor space ratio control in the DCP for Dwellings and the degree of non compliance is not minor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The building proposes a 1200mm setback from the southern boundary, the DCP requires a 1500mm setback, and no argument has been made to support the non compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The proposal rather than being sited within the main roof of the dwelling will because of the siting of the solid two storey building form at the rear of the building result in the most adverse impact to the amenity of the adjoining properties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The projecting upper level balcony will result in a loss of privacy into their property and should include screening to mitigate overlooking.

 

-There are concerns that the proposal will result in the existing deck to the side of the dwelling being used more intensively which could cause noise nuisance and privacy impact to their property.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

38 Carrington Road Randwick

-The proposal will result in a major loss of sunlight into the rear living area of their dwelling and backyard.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-The shadow diagrams provided do not accurately illustrate the rear garages to the adjoining properties at 36 & 38 Carrington Road which gives the impression of a larger rear yard area to those properties and more sunlight access.

 

 

 

See comments below with regards to the Floor Space Ratio of the dwelling and resultant bulk and scale in relation to the DCP for Dwellings. It is noted that the resultant building form is not out of character with the surrounding locality which includes a variety of building forms and the development remains a single dwelling which is permitted in the 2B zone.

 

The rear addition continues the party wall upon the northern side boundary at both levels and extends up to 2.6m past the party wall of the adjoining semi detached dwelling at 32 Carrington Road. Other than two small bathroom windows which face west to the side passage between these two dwellings there are no other windows opposite this wall. As these two windows that are closest in position to the party wall are to bathrooms and not to living areas it is not considered that the continuation of the party wall perpendicular to those windows will result in a significant adverse impact to the amenity of those occupants. 

 

The proposal will not cast any shadow in mid winter upon 32 Carrington Road Randwick as that property is directly to the north of the subject property. In relation to any blocking of views, there are no windows on the southern side of that dwelling and views across the district will remain available from the rear windows of 32 Carrington Road.

 

The proposed outbuilding will not result in any additional overshadowing upon the existing garage structure at 32 Carrington Road as that building is directly north of this structure. In relation to privacy, the dormer window which faces east includes a lower panel which is nominated as being of fixed obscured glazing which will prevent direct overlooking into the private areas of the adjoining properties.

 

 

See detailed comments in Section 5 with respect to overshadowing upon the adjoining property.

 

 

See comments in Section 5.

 

 

The floor space ratio of the dwelling at 0.69:1 (as calculated by Council) is consistent with the recently approved dwellings in this locality, including the most recent development approval at No.30, which has an approved floor space ratio of 0.82:1. See further comments in the DCP section below.

 

 

The setback of the dwelling is up to 1200mm from the southern side boundary and whilst a distance of 1500mm is provided for in the DCP as a preferred solution it is not a statutory control. A closer setback can be considered when it is demonstrated that there will not be any significant impact upon neighbours adequate access to natural light, daylight and fresh air, which is the test of compliance with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings. See additional comments in the DCP assessment section below.

 

These sites on the western side of Carrington Road fall from the front to rear with a difference in level of up to 2m. The existing floor level of the dwelling is just above ground level at the front of the site and rises to almost 1.5m at rear. The new addition rather than following the existing ground floor level is closer to the site ground level and incorporates a step down of 1330mm from the existing portion of the dwelling to the new rear level. An argument can be made that siting the addition in this position rather than being above the existing rear portion of the dwelling will result in less of an impact than an addition upon a greater portion of the existing dwelling as it would be a larger and bulker building, having regard to the existing floor level of the dwelling.

 

The proposal includes privacy screening nominated to both sides of the rear upper level balcony.

 

 

The existing deck to the southern side of the dwelling extends for a majority of the existing side passage to the side of the dwelling and is sited off the lounge room and includes BBQ facilities. The new steps connecting the deck to the rear yard area do not increase the overall area of the deck and it is therefore not considered that they would significantly intensify the use of the deck which would result in any significant additional privacy or noise nuisance.

 

See comments below in relation to overshadowing impacts to the adjoining properties. It is noted that overshadowing to the property at 38 Carrington Road is primarily during the morning period only with solar access to that property satisfying the DCP minimum of 3 hours between 9.00am to 3.00pm.

 

The shadow diagrams provide an accurate indication of the extent of additional overshadowing in combination with an inspection of the subject sites and surrounds demonstrate the extent of overshadowing which will result to the adjoining properties. It is noted that the amendments to the proposal to reduce the overall height of the garage by 270mm will result in less overshadowing to the adjoining properties from the garage part of the development.

 

4.    Technical Officers Comments

 

The application has been referred to the Council’s Development Engineers for comment. Conditions have been provided for inclusion with any consent granted.

 

5.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The site is zoned 2B under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

5.1 Policy Controls

 

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 following table is derived from the preferred solutions contained in Part 4 of the Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP. The preferred solutions (rather than the performance requirements) have been used in the table as they 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.

 

Preferred Solution

Proposal

Compliance with preferred solutions of DCP for Dwellings

Landscaping

40%

The proposal satisfies the preferred solutions of the DCP with regards to the minimum area and dimensions of landscaping.

 

Yes

Floor Space ratio

0.6:1

The proposed floor space ratio of the dwelling is 0.69:1.

No, see comments below

Building Heights

7m height

The external wall height of the building is 6.6m and the length of upper level were sited less than 1500mm from the southern boundary does not exceed 12m.

Yes

Side Setbacks

Ground – 0.9m

1st floor – 1.5m

Front set back

6m on dominant setback

 

Rear set back

4.5m

The proposed addition is sited up to the northern and up to 1200mm from the southern side boundaries.

See comment below.

Privacy

 

Where a direct view is available into the private open space of an existing dwelling, outlook from windows is obscured or screened within 9m and beyond a 45 degree angle from the plane of the wall containing the opening. Windows have sill heights of 1.5m above floor level or fixed glazing to any part of the window less than 1.5m above floor level.

The upper level side elevation contains one window in the southern side elevation which is to the bathroom only. There is a rear balcony off the master bedroom which has 1800mm high privacy screens to both sides. The attic room to the garage includes dormer windows to internal and laneway elevations. The windows to the dormer are nominated as having the lower pane fixed and of obscured glazing. The sill height of that fixed panel is 1600mm above floor level.

Yes

Garages

The proposal details the demolition of the existing garage and erection of a new garage with attic/store above.

See comments below

Solar Access

 

Private open space and north facing windows to dwelling receives at least 3 hours of sunlight over at least part of its area between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

 

Due to the orientation of the site the proposed new addition to the rear of the dwelling will result in unavoidable additional overshadowing to the adjoining properties to the south.

See discussion below.

 

The proposal provides for at least 3 hours solar access to a part of the rear yard of No. 36 Carrington Road.

 

Floor space ratio

Th proposed floor space ratio of the dwelling exceeds the preferred solution of the DCP with a FSR of 0.69:1 and therefore an assessment must be carried out as to whether or not the proposal will satisfy the overall objectives and performance requirements of the DCP. The floor space ratio has been calculated by Council in accordance with the definition in the DCP is 0.69:1 which is less than that nominated in the application by the applicant.

 

The existing locality contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings. The subject building is within a group of semi detached dwellings with most having being modified in some form, including upper level additions. The proposal is commensurate with the size and scale of these recent developments and will maintain the pattern of development in the locality in terms of the relationship between setbacks, landscaping and built form.

 

Therefore, whilst the preferred solution of the DCP is not adapted in this instance there are no objections to the proposed FSR as there will not be any resultant adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and the overall objectives and performance requirements of the DCP are satisfied.

 

Building Setbacks

The proposed addition is sited up to the northern side boundary and up to 1200mm to the southern boundary, at both levels. There are no major objections to the northern side boundary as this maintains the party wall separation between the two dwellings and extends 4m past the end of the buildings and will not be directly opposite a window to a living area and will therefore not unreasonably reduce access to light and air to the adjoining property at 32 Carrington Road.

 

In relation to the southern side boundary setback this is only 300mm less than the preferred solution and will not result in any appreciable difference in amenity impact to the adjoining dwelling in comparison with the preferred solution setback of 1500mm to the upper level with a negligible reduction on overshadowing to the property at 36 Carrington Road.

 

Therefore, whilst the preferred solution of the DCP is not adopted the overall objectives and performance requirements of the DCP are complied with.

 

Garage

The new garage and attic is consistent with others in this locality, including others that have been approved which front Hooper Lane. The rear setback of the building matches the other new garages to the adjoining properties (see photos above) which is acceptable as this lane is for local access only and is not a thoroughfare with heavy traffic use.

 

The attic to the garage is mostly within the roof space of the garage with the exception of the dormers to provide headspace for the occupants. The building is consistent with other structures in the locality which have been approved to provide for new garaging with an upper level that could be utilised for storage or home office of the like. A condition of consent is recommended to require that the garage/attic is to be used in conjunction with the dwelling and not for separate occupation.

As stated above in the privacy comments the new dormers are nominated to include window panels that have the lower panel fixed with obscured glazing and a sill height of 1600mm above floor level which will maintain privacy from the attic to the adjoining rear yard areas.

 

Solar access

Due to the orientation of the sites any development to the subject site will result in an unavoidable impact to the existing levels of solar access to the adjoining property immediately to the south at 36 Carrington Road.

 

Therefore whilst there will be some additional overshadowing onto the adjoining properties, the extent of overshadowing is unavoidable and not unreasonable as it arises because of the orientation of the sites on an east west axis rather than because of any unacceptable or unreasonable design. 

 

Further, the north facing windows are already overshadowed to some extent throughout most of the day during the winter solstice and whilst the proposal will result in additional overshadowing during that period the amount of overshadowing is not to a degree that would be unexpected in the context of the site orientation and the nature of the development which it should be noted complies with the overall objectives and performance requirements and preferred solution for height in the DCP for Dwellings.

 

6.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

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

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

 

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

See below.

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.

 

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: R2 Low residential

 

Is development permitted under zoning?

Development for the purpose of dwellings is permitted.

The proposal details alterations and additions to an existing dwelling.

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Maximum)

On merit

0.69:1

Yes

Height of Building (Maximum)

9.5m

6.8m

Yes

 

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

 

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

 

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. 407/2012 for alterations and additions to the dwelling, including a new garage with attic at 34 Carrington Road, Randwick 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

Sheet 1

Peter Banfield

12/9/2012

Sheet 2

Peter Banfield

12/9/2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

 

A140955

18 June 2012

 

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

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

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes    

3.       Details of the proposed colours, materials and textures (i.e. a schedule and brochure/s or sample board) are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager Development Assessments prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

4.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $320,000, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $3,200.00.

       

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

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

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.

 

Security Deposit

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

·           $600.00     -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Design Alignment levels

7.       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:

·        60-100mm above the edge of the bitumen roadway at all points opposite, along the full site frontage in Hooper Lane.

 

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.

 

8.       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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

9.       Surface water/stormwater (from the proposed garage and granny flat) must be drained and discharged to Hooper Lane or the street gutter on Carrington Road  or suitably designed absorption pit, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate application for the development.

 

Absorption pits 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.

 

Sydney Water

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

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s waste water 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 details please refer to the Sydney Water web site at www.sydneywater.com.au for:

·           Quick Check agents details -  see Building and Developing then Quick Check and

·           Guidelines for Building Over/Adjacent to Sydney Water Assets – see Building and Development then Building and Renovating, or telephone 13 20 92.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must ensure that a Sydney Water Quick Check Agent has appropriately stamped the plans.

 

Protection of Street Tree

11.     In order to ensure retention of the recently planted Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) on Council’s Carrington Road footpath, centrally across the width of the site in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show its retention, with any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar over this frontage to be setback a minimum distance of 2 metres of its trunk.

 

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

 

c.       There is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble around its base, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

Protection of neighbours trees

12.     In order to also ensure retention of the Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the south, no.36, against the common boundary, and adjacent the southeast corner of the existing/proposed garage, as well as the Washingtonia robusta (Washingtonia Palm) also within no.36, further to the southwest in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

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

 

b.       The PCA/builder must ensure that removal of the existing concrete surfacing, within a radius of 1.5 metres of the trunk of the Jacaranda, is undertaken by hand, not machinery, to a minimum depth of 300mm, so as to avoid the indiscriminate damage of roots, with Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613) to be contacted (giving at least 2 working days notice) to inspect this work, prior to forming up or pouring the new slab.

 

c.       The builder/PCA must ensure that where any roots are encountered during the course of the approved works, they are cut cleanly by hand, with the affected area to be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

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

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

 

Smoke Alarms

14.     Smoke alarms are required to be installed in dwellings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia (volume 2), smoke alarms must comply with AS3786.  Smoke alarms must be connected to the consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.  Details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

BASIX Requirements

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

 

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

 

The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ (PCA), 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, PCA & other Requirements

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

In relation to residential building work, the principal contractor must be the holder of a contractor licence, in accordance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

 

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

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

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

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

Public Utilities

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

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

 

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

Inspections During Construction

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

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

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

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

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

Restriction on Working Hours

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

 

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

 

Demolition Work Requirements

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

·            Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and Regulations

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

·            WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·            Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·            The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations

·            Relevant DECCW/EPA Guidelines

·            Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

·        Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

·        Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

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

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

·        Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005.  Details of the landfill site (which must be lawfully able to receive asbestos materials) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

·        A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (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

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

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.

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land, Excavations & Retaining Walls

29.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring, piling or other measures are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Road / Asset Opening Permit

32.     A Road / Asset Opening Permit must be obtained from Council prior to 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 a final occupation certificate for the development.

 

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

 

Tree Management

33.     Approval is granted for the removal of any existing vegetation within the site where necessary in order to accommodate the proposed works as shown, including the clump of Bouganvillea in the rear yard, in the southwest corner, so as to accommodate the proposed works as shown, as all were observed to be insignificant, and not covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

Pruning of neighbours tree

34.     Permission is also granted for the minimal and selective pruning of only those four, low-mid order branches from the northwest aspect of the Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) which is growing in the rear yard of the adjoining property to the south, no.36, against the common boundary, only where they overhang the common boundary into the site and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the tree; or; interference with the works.

 

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

 

36.     All pruning must be undertaken by an Arborist who holds a minimum of AQF Level III in Arboriculture, and to the requirements of Australian Standard AS 4373-2007 'Pruning of Amenity Trees,’ and NSW Work Cover Code of Practice for the Amenity Tree Industry (1998).

 

37.     Prior to commencing these pruning works, the Arborist must contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613), giving at least working weeks notice, for the purpose of a joint site inspection to confirm the exact location and extent of pruning that is permitted by this consent.

 

Footings adjacent to drainage easements

38.     Any footings adjacent to the drainage easement/s must be inspected by the applicant's engineer to ensure that these footings are either founded on rock or extend below the "angle of repose”. Documentary evidence of compliance with this condition is to be submitted to certifying authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction.

 

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

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

 

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

 

 

BASIX Requirements

40.     In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue an Occupation Certificate for this development, unless it is satisfied that each of the required BASIX commitments have been fulfilled.

 

Relevant documentary evidence of compliance with the BASIX commitments is to be forwarded to the Council upon issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Occupant Safety

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

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

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

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

·           Installing a fixed heavy-duty gauge metal screen over the opening (excluding upon any front or street elevation of the building) e.g. A metal security screen or metal security mesh and frame system, but not standard fly-screen material,

·           Other appropriate effective safety measures or barrier.

 

The relevant measures must be implemented prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings, street verge

42.     The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

a.       Construct a concrete/asphalt vehicular crossing opposite the vehicular entrance to the site.

 

43.     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.

 

44.     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 an occupation certificate being issued for the development, together with payment of the relevant fees.

 

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

 

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

 

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

External Lighting

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

 

ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

A1      The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

 

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

 

A2      Demolition, building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

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

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

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

 

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

 

 

A4      Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue Construction Certificates and be your Principal Certifying Authority for the development, to undertake inspections and ensure compliance with the development consent, relevant building regulations and standards of construction.  For further details contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

A5      A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

A6      Specific details of the location of the building/s should be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the proposed building work will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

A7      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      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.

A10     Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             11 December 2012

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP104/12

 

 

Subject:                  131 Botany Street, Randwick (DA/268/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/268/2012

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing building to provide for a 3 room boarding house with communal facilities at first floor, addition of lift and external access from Barker Street (SEPP1 objections to landscaped area and floor space ratio controls)

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                ES Engineering and Design

Owner:                         Mr D Vasales & Mr C Vasales

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to Council as it contains a variation to the floor space ratio and landscaped area development standard stipulated in Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 by more than 10%. The applicant has submitted SEPP 1 objections to these development standards.

 

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing single storey building containing a blinds shop to provide for a new first floor boarding house containing 3 boarding rooms with communal facilities at first floor, addition of lift and external access from Barker Street.

 

The DA was originally submitted pursuant to the boarding house provisions of the SEPP - Affordable Rental Housing 2009. However, the applicant was advised that the proposal did not qualify to be considered under the provisions of the SEPP as the subject site is not located within 400m of a bus stop that serves a regular bus service as required by the SEPP. The applicant subsequently amended the submission by deleting references to the SEPP and applying for consideration under the relevant provisions of the Randwick LEP (Consolidation). 

 

Further amended plans were received on 13 November 2012 incorporating the following changes:

 

§ Provision of an east facing balcony adjoining a bathroom and kitchen.

 

The site is zoned 2A Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation). The existing blinds shop is prohibited within the zone but operates under existing use rights pursuant to Clause 106 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

The proposed first floor boarding house is a permissible use within the 2A zone subject to consent.

 

The proposal provides no landscaped area and has a maximum FSR of 1.211:1 which varies from minimum landscape requirement of 40% and the maximum FSR control of 0.5:1 under the Randwick LEP 1998. The non-compliances have been assessed and an assessment of the SEPP No. 1 objections made in relation to the non-compliances indicates that the applicant has not made a valid case to indicate why compliance with the development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary. Specifically, the proposal will:

·      be an overdevelopment of the subject site and will be excessive, intrusive and overwhelming in height, bulk and scale such as to detract from the existing predominant 2 storey character of the immediate local area and Residential 2A zone to the north.

·      introduce a significant built element along the length of the allotment which will be integrated in external design and built form with the proposal for a similar boarding house above the adjoining property at No. 129 Botany Street (as contained in a separate application, DA/266/2012). The combined effect is a bulky and large building on the subject site that visually dominates the adjoining dwellings and surrounding Residential 2A zone with no regard to the absence of landscaping on-site.

·      be inconsistent with the planning objectives for the locality as expressed in the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal was found to be inconsistent with key objectives of the zone and the controls for the subject site under Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation). Specifically, the proposal does not represent a desirable built form outcome for the Residential 2A area. 

·      generate additional height, bulk and density in breach of the relevant FSR and landscape area standards resulting in detrimental impacts to surrounding uses in terms of  loss of privacy and overbearing bulk and scale.

 

The scale and intensity of the proposal in the context of a site with no landscape area raises a number of concerns when assessed against key planning criteria.  On this basis, the proposal is considered unsatisfactory and recommended for refusal.

 

2.    The proposal

 

The amended proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing single storey building containing a blinds shop to provide for a new first floor boarding house containing 3 boarding rooms with communal facilities at first floor, addition of lift and external access from Barker Street  The communal facilities include a kitchen, communal room and one bathroom. Each boarding room has the following areas;

 

Room 1 (single room): 12.07 sqm

Room 2 (single room): 12.11 sqm

Room 3  (single room): 13.10 sqm

 

Access into the boarding house is proposed at Barker Street via a new lift with adjoining external fire staircase.

 

3.    The subject site and surrounding area

 

The site is located on the north-eastern corner of the round-about at the intersection of Botany Street and Barker Street. The site is rectangular in shape, having an overall area of 189.7 sqm. The site has a western frontage to Botany Street of 5.9m (including the splay corner), an eastern frontage to Hay Lane of 5.06m, northern side boundary of 26.99m to an adjoining shop at 129 Botany Street and a southern boundary of 34.9m to Barker Street. The subject site is relatively flat.

 

The site is presently occupied by an existing single storey blinds shop with rear car park and rear lane access off Hay Lane.

Adjoining to the south and sharing a party wall is a single storey commercial building containing a pizza shop. To the south, on the opposite side of Barker Street, is a petrol station and single storey dwelling houses. The eastern boundary is bounded by Hay Lane which provides access to the rear. Further to the east of Hay Lane are residential properties including a single storey residential dwelling immediately on the opposite side of Hay Lane at No. 129 Barker Street. To the west, across Botany Street, is a two storey residential flat building at No. 127B Barker Street. Further west is a residential area with a mix of single storey detached and semi-detached houses and two-storey multi-unit developments.


 


Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing non-conforming blinds shop at No. 131 Botany Street (building to the right). 

2. Adjoining non-conforming existing pizza shop at No. 129 Botany Road.

 

3. Adjoining dwelling house at No 129 Barker Street to the east on opposite side of Hay Lane

4. Single storey dwelling houses fronting Botany Street immediately adjoining the subject site to the north extending from No. 121 to No. 127 Botany Street. 

Figure 1 Aerial view of the subject site and surrounding built environment

4.    History

 

The following relevant DA was previously approved for the subject site:

 

DA/856/2002 - Change of use from convenience shop to a blind shop including new window openings and new carport/awning. Approved – 18 October 2002.

 

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

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained for land zoned 2A contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). SEPP 1 Objections have been submitted with the development application. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the following matters are addressed:

 

The proposal seeks to vary any development standards contained with Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) as follows: -

 

Landscaped Area (Clause 20E)

Pursuant to Clause 20E(1) of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No 2A must provide a minimum of 40% of the total site area as landscaped area.

 

The proposal provides no landscape area.

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

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

 

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

 

Landscaped Area

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following key justifications for the variations to the standard:

 

 

It is considered that the proposal is unsatisfactory and compliance with the purpose of the development standard should be required for the following reasons:

 

·      the proposal will be contrary to the purpose of the landscape standard, in that the absence of landscaped area does not allow the standard to operate efficiently together with the controls for floor space ratio and building heights to limit the size, scale and site coverage of a building having regard to the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area.

 

·      the absence of any landscaped area does not provide any screening and softening of the overly bulky and intrusive first floor boarding house addition particularly when viewed from the surrounding southern, eastern and northern properties. 

 

·      The development will introduce a significant built element along the length of the allotment that visually dominates the adjoining dwellings with no regard to the absence of landscaping on-site. The proposal has been designed as part of an integrated built form for boarding houses on both Nos. 129 (under a separate application, DA/266/2012) and the subject site (see Figure 2 below). In other words, while the boarding house proposals on the adjoining property at No. 129 and the subject site are the subject of separate DAs, they share an integrated external design and built form which presents as a mainly tiled and rendered, large and bulky commercial-looking building that would be at odds with the predominantly low density, low scale, Residential 2A zoning of the surrounding local area. Accordingly, the design and development of the proposal has been predicated on a common DA outcome for both sites which is considered inappropriate. While there is merit in having a uniform design over the two sites, the current approach to the design of the building over the two sites based on separate DAs has resulted in built form that physically reads as an increased intensification of the commercial use of the subject site and No. 129. It is considered that a better approach, would be for the redevelopment of the two sites to be the subject of one development application so that the overall building can be design holistically both internally and externally to properly address bulk and scale in its local context, as well as to provide landscaped area and landscape treatment.

 

·      While it is recognised that a two storey building over the subject site can be considered given the sites “urban edge” to the existing street corner and roundabout, the current proposal is considered to be overly dominant and intrusive because of its integrated external design with the proposal for the adjoining site at No. 129 Botany Street. It is considered that a better approach, would be for the redevelopment of the two sites to be the subject of one development application so that the overall building can be design holistically both internally and externally to properly address bulk and scale in its local context, as well as to provide landscaped area and landscape treatment.

 

 

·      The absence in landscaped area is attributed to the complete site coverage of the ground floor non-conforming use, being the blinds shop, which uses the rear ground floor as a car park and storage yard. The absence of a rear open yard to be provided at the rear of the allotment is inconsistent with the development and open space allocation pattern in the area.

 

·      The resultant development is not considered to be compatible with the character of other residential premises in the locality and the objectives of the 2A Zone.

 

·      The proposal fails to provide adequate and appropriate accessible private open space, which adds to the amenity of the boarding rooms.

 

·      The absence of landscaping exacerbates the proposal’s excessive built form resulting in adverse amenity impacts in terms of visual bulk and scale and overlooking.

 

In conclusion, the SEPP 1 Objection relating to variations from the landscaped area control has not presented appropriate evidence to demonstrate the satisfaction of the zoning objectives and purpose of the development standard, and accordingly is not considered to be well founded. The full compliance with the development standard is therefore necessary to ensure orderly development of the land.

 

Figure 2 : Photomontage of proposed boarding houses on the subject site and the adjoining site at No 129 Botany Street (DA/266/2012) under the one integrated design and built form.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2B Zone, in that the development it will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings and existing streetscape. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

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 variations from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, as discussed above, it is considered that the strict application of the landscaped area development standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted controls.

 

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:

The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

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 proposal will create an undesirable precedent for the built form of future development in the area, and is anticipated to result in cumulative adverse implications on the streetscape and neighbourhood amenity. Accordingly, the strict compliance of the subdivision standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality.

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 in question has 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 RLEP.

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 2A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low density residential development. 

 

Maximum Floor Space Ratio 

Clause 20F(1) specifies a maximum FSR of 0.5:1 for development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No 2A.

 

The proposal has a maximum floor space ratio of 1.211:1 and does not comply with Clause 20G(3) of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

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 maximum building and external wall height standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

The purpose of this clause is to set upper limits for the heights of buildings in residential zones and business zones that are consistent with the redevelopment of potential land in those zones given other development restrictions, such as floor space and landscaping, and have regard for the amenity of the surrounding area.

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection outlining the following key justifications for the variations to the standard:

 

 

It is considered that the proposal is unsatisfactory and compliance with the development standard is reasonable and necessary for the following reasons:

 

·      The proposed FSR of 1.119:1(229.8 sqm) is considered excessive representing an increase of 142% over the maximum FSR standard of 0.5:1 (94.85 sqm). The existing non-conforming blinds shop already exceeds the max FSR standard being 0.65:1 (124.10 sqm). While the floor area of the existing blinds shop will be reduced under the current DA to accommodate a lift and stairwell, the FSR will still be over the maximum standard being 0.61:1 (117.04). More significantly, the inclusion of the lift shaft and stairwell results in an overall built form that will be larger and bulkier than the existing building. The proposal adds another 124.13 sqm above the blinds shop which creates a monolithic, unrelieved built form along almost the entire length of the subject site.  

 

·      The development will introduce a significant built element along the length of the allotment that visually dominates the adjoining dwellings with no regard to the absence of landscaping on-site. The proposal has been designed as part of an integrated built form for boarding houses on both Nos. 129 (under a separate application, DA/266/2012) and the subject site. In other words, while the boarding house proposals on the adjoining property at No. 129 and the subject site are the subject of separate DAs, they share an integrated external design and built form which presents as a mainly tiled and rendered, large and bulky commercial-looking building that would be at odds with the predominantly low density, low scale, Residential 2A zoning of the surrounding local area. Accordingly, the design and development of the proposal has been predicated on a common DA outcome for both sites which is considered inappropriate. While there is merit in having a uniform design over the two sites, the current approach to the design of the building over the two sites based on separate DAs has resulted in built form that physically reads as an increased intensification of the commercial use of the subject site and No. 129. It is considered that a better approach, would be for the redevelopment of the two sites to be the subject of one development application so that the overall building can be design holistically both internally and externally to properly address bulk and scale in its local context, as well as to provide landscaped area and landscape treatment.

 

·      While it is recognised that a two storey building over the subject site can be considered given the sites “urban edge” to the existing street corner and roundabout, the current proposal is considered to be overly dominant and intrusive because of its integrated external design with the proposal for the adjoining site at No. 129 Botany Street. It is considered that a better approach, would be for the redevelopment of the two sites to be the subject of one development application so that the overall building can be design holistically both internally and externally to properly address bulk and scale in its local context, as well as to provide landscaped area and landscape treatment

 

·      The proposal has been designed internally to be almost a mirror image of a similar proposal for alterations and additions to the adjoining property at No 129 Botany Street (currently the subject of DA/266/2012 and a separate assessment to the Council meeting). In doing so, the proposal creates an elongated linear first floor envelope (containing the boarding house) commensurate with that of the proposed first floor boarding house on No. 129 Botany Street. This elongated first floor envelope will impose a visually intrusive and over bearing built form in relation to Botany Street and Barker Street as well as adjoining and nearby single storey properties further to the south, north and east.

 

·      The south elevation of the proposal presents as a sheer unrelieved wall to the street, lacking in articulation, steps or distribution of mass to alleviate this visual bulk and scale. The overbearing south elevation is accentuated further by the length of the proposed first floor being longer than the existing ground floor as evidenced by a 1.1m cantilevered section at the rear eastern end.

 

·      The proposal has no landscape area and as such does not comply with the minimum landscape area standard. The absence of any landscaped area on site due to the existing non-conforming use provides no opportunity for screen planting of the excessive bulk and scale of the building. Accordingly, the proposal will be contrary to the purpose of the FSR standard, in that the proposed FSR will not operate efficiently together with the control for landscaped area to limit the size, scale and site coverage of proposed building while being sympathetic to the overall environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the streetscape and local area.

 

·      As indicated in relevant assessment sections of this report, the proposal will generate unreasonable impacts upon the amenity currently enjoyed by adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

·      The resultant development is not considered to be compatible with the character of other residential premises in the locality and the objectives of the 2A Zone. Furthermore, the Draft Randwick LEP 2012 retains a low density zoning of R2 over  the subject site and immediate local area with a maximum FSR of 0.5:1.

 

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 objection does not adequately address the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The objection fails to justify that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of each case. The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

The variation from the standard for maximum FSR is 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). In this respect the proposed development would not represent an orderly and economic development of the subject land.

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard does not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, as discussed above, it is considered that the strict application of the external wall height development standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the surrounding residential development. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted controls.

 

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:

The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

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 proposal will create an undesirable precedent for the built form of future development in the area, and is anticipated to result in cumulative adverse implications on existing neighbourhood amenity. Accordingly, the strict compliance of the height standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality.

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 in question has 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.

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low density residential development. 

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal was exhibited in accordance with Council policy. Objections were received from the following addresses:

129 Barker Street, Randwick

132 Barker Street, Randwick

134 Barker Street, Randwick

121 Botany Street, Randwick

127 Botany Street, Randwick

 

A petition has also been lodged containing 80 signatures.

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The proposed boarding house use is not compatible with the residential character of the locality.

Boarding house is a permissible use within Residential 2A zones under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The land use per se is not considered to be incompatible with the residential character of the locality.

 

However, the proposed boarding house has excessive visual mass and no  landscaping, and therefore is not considered to be compatible with the existing locality character in its current form.

The proposed development has excessive density, height, size and bulk and is not compatible with the character of the locality.

Agreed. Refer to the SEPP 1 Objection  assessments above.

The proposed development will have insufficient car parking and will generate significant vehicular traffic and cause congestion and safety problems in the surrounding road network.

The proposal does not require any car parking spaces to be provided containing only 3 boarding rooms compared with Council’s Parking DCP which requires provision of 1 car space per 10 rooms for boarding houses.

 

Boarding houses typically generate a lower level of vehicular traffic and this is recognised in Council’s Parking DCP, which specifies a low parking rate for this type of development

 

The proposal is not considered to increase the level of vehicular traffic to such an extent that exceeds the capacity of the surrounding road network.

The proposed boarding house will present a large number of bins along the kerb during garbage collection days and will further reduce on-street parking supply.

The presentation of bins at the kerb is a standard waste collection arrangement across all residential properties, including multi-unit buildings, in the area. The proposal is not considered to be unreasonable in this regard.

 

The proposed development will result in significant noise impacts on the adjoining and nearby residences.

 

The unenclosed staircase and  walkway along the side boundaries will generate significant noise impact on the adjoining neighbours.

The proposed development is considered to result in detrimental noise impacts on the neighbours in its current form. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

The proposal results in loss of privacy.

The proposal is considered to result in overlooking to the adjoining southern and eastern properties.  Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

The proposed development will detrimentally overshadow the adjoining properties.

The development scheme is considered to have minimised shadow impacts on the neighbouring properties. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

There are concerns that the boarding house will not be adequately maintained.

The submitted operational management plan has briefly mentioned about regular cleaning and maintenance of the boarding house. However, the management plan does not contain sufficient information to enable detailed assessment. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

 

The proposal does not satisfy the relevant planning controls, including RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

The DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies does not apply to boarding house proposals.

 

Refer to the “Environmental Planning Instruments” section of this report for detailed comments on compliance with the relevant planning instruments.

 

The proposal is excessive in FSR.

The SEPP 1 Objection lodged in relation to the non-compliance in FSR has been assessed above and is not supported.

 

7.    Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1      Development Engineering Comments

Council’s Development Engineer has raised concerns regarding the adequacy of waste management for the boarding house as “the submitted plans have not indicated any provision for the additional waste bins required. A bin area will need to be provided at the rear of the property which may be in conflict with the requirements of the commercial tenancy.

 

It is also noted that the submitted waste management plan does not detail how the ongoing management of waste for the boarding house will operate given the lack of a caretaker and possible issues with waste storage it is considered hat this information be required prior to issuing of consent.

 

Comment: The submitted operational management plan has briefly mentioned about regular cleaning and maintenance of the boarding house. However, the management plan does not contain sufficient information to enable detailed assessment. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details. This can be addressed by way of condition of consent.

 

7.2             Building Services Comments

Building Services Officer advises that no objections are raised to the proposal in relation to building issues subject to conditions should approval be granted.

 

7.3             Environmental Health Comments

The application was not required to be referred to the Environmental Health officer.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

8.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

 

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

The site is located within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposed development is defined as “boarding houses” pursuant to Clause 49 of the LEP, and is a permissible use with consent within the 2A Zone.

 

(a)    to provide a low density residential environment, and

Comments:

The proposal has a prominent additional floor level that significantly breaches the FSR standard. Additionally, the proposed building is significantly elongated and extends beyond the footprint of the existing shop such that it has a dominant and over bearing bulk and scale both in relation to the street and adjoining single storey dwelling houses to the south and east, and in the context of the overall Residential 2A zone to the north. It is therefore considered that the proposal is not compatible with the desired low density residential environment of the local area.

 

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

Comments:

The immediate residential area has low density residential development (predominantly characterised by dwelling houses and semi-detached dwellings in the area to the north of Barker Street) which predominantly contain landscaped open space at the rear of the allotments. The rear sections of these premises are substantially well setback from rear boundaries to provide for deep open landscaped rear yards with occasional outbuilding structures. The proposal involves a significant first floor level over a site that has no landscaping. The development does not provide a suitable landscape ambience to the site and the proposed building is monolithic in form. The design scheme is therefore not considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the local character.

 

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

Comments:

The proposal will result in adverse loss of privacy and intrusive visual bulk and scale to neighbouring southern and eastern properties. A more skilful design that respects the low density context would have reduced the degree of visual bulk and scale and loss of privacy on the neighbours. The development is not considered to adequately protect the amenity of existing residents.

 

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

 

 

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of site area

0%

Does not comply (SEPP 1 Objection)

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or basements not to exceed 50% of required provision

No landscaped areas are provided.

N/A

20F Floor space ratios

Maximum 0.5:1

1.119:1 (229.8 m2 GFA)

Does not comply (SEPP 1 Objection)

20G Building heights

(1) Maximum building height 9.5m

Maximum 7.3m (north elevation)

Complies

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

Maximum 7.3m (north elevation)

Does not comply (No SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged)

40 Earthworks

Council to consider the likely impact on existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality, and the effects of the proposed works on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land

 

The proposal does not involve any excavation.

N/A

 

8.2         Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

Under the Draft LEP, the subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential in which the proposal is permissible. The controls applicable over the subject site under the Draft LEP are:

 

Max FSR - 0.5:1

Max Building Height – 9.5m

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied with a BASIX Certificate. The commitments listed in the above certificate can be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

9.1    Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 17 July 2012, applies to the proposed development. In accordance with the plan, the following monetary levy is required:

 

 

 

 

Category

Cost

Applicable

Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost

$100,001 - $200,000

$170,000

0.5%

$850.00

 

 

10.    Environmental Assessment

 

10.1  Section 79C assessment

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

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 Control” section of this report for details.

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

Not applicable. 

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

Appropriate standard conditions can be imposed to address the relevant clauses of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.  

 

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment that are otherwise not assessed within the body of this report, are addressed below.

 

The proposed boarding house is essentially a residential use and is not considered to create any detrimental economic impacts.

 

The proposed boarding house would promote housing affordability and broaden accommodation choice in the locality.

 

However, the proposed building footprints, bulk and scale are considered to be excessive and would adversely affect the amenity of the neighbouring residential developments in terms of visual bulk and scale and privacy. The negative implications of the proposal would more than offset the potential social benefits delivered by the scheme.

 

A more skilful design that involves a reduction in floor area, provision of landscaped area and respects the existing character of the surrounding environment would be needed to minimise the environmental and social impacts of the boarding house development.

 

Based on the current design, it cannot be justified that the proposal will not result in unreasonable environmental and social impacts.

 

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

The proposal in its current form would visually overwhelm the street and neighbouring residences and result in significant amenity impacts. Therefore, the site is not considered to be suitable for the proposed development.

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

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

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

The proposal in its current form is not considered to lead to an appropriate environmental and social planning outcome in the locality. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to be within the public interest and is not supported.

 

10.2  Built form

The built form of the proposed first floor boarding house follows the existing elongated configuration of the ground floor shop which creates the following impacts:

 

Figure 3: The south elevation facing Barker Street.

 

 

·      As is demonstrated in the SEPP 1 assessment above, the proposal creates an elongated linear first floor envelope (containing the boarding house) commensurate with that of the proposed first floor boarding house on No. 129 Botany Street (DA/266/2012). This elongated first floor envelope will impose a visually intrusive and over bearing built form in relation to the existing rear yard of the adjoining northern property at No 127 Botany Street.

 

·      The proposed built form has not incorporated a variety of wall indentations, steps and redistribution of building mass to alleviate its visual bulk and scale to the neighbouring properties and the Barker Street and Botany Street streetscape. In particular, the south elevation of the proposal presents as a sheer unrelieved wall to the street with no articulation, steps or distribution of mass to alleviate this. The overbearing south elevation is accentuated further by the length of the proposed first floor being longer than the existing ground floor as evidenced by a 1.1m cantilevered section at the rear eastern end.

 

·      The absence of any landscaped area on site due to the existing non-conforming use provides no opportunity for screen planting of the excessive bulk and scale of the building. Accordingly, the proposal will be contrary to the purpose of the FSR standard, in that the proposed FSR will not operate efficiently together with the control for landscaped area to limit the size, scale and site coverage of proposed building while being sympathetic to the overall environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the streetscape and local area.

 

·      The monolithic built form means that the first floor balcony and associated communal area will be oriented south towards Barker Street and the properties to the south well as east towards the neighbouring eastern properties.

 

In conclusion, the form, massing and footprints of the development are considered to result in detrimental impacts on the amenity of the neighbouring residences and are not supported.

 

10.3    Landscaping

10.4   

The proposal provides no landscape area due to the existing non-conforming use on site. Given the scale and footprint of the development, adequate screen planting is essential in softening the physical structure. However, the proposal does not provide any plantings on-site whether in the form of small and medium planter bed vegetation, let alone larger canopy trees. An integrated approach to redesign the boarding house built form and provide landscape area for both the subject site and No. 129 Botany Street under one DA would assist in addressing the landscaping deficiency.

 

10.4  Visual and acoustic privacy

The proposal will result in the following visual and acoustic privacy impacts:

 

·      The proposal has included a balcony on the east elevation on new first floor which is directly oriented towards the neighbouring dwelling house at No. 129 Barker Street. The west elevation of No. 129 Barker Street contains a ground floor living room window which will be overlooked.

 

10.5  Overshadowing

The submitted shadow diagrams indicate that at 9.00 am in the winter solstice, the proposal will mainly overshadow Botany Street and the adjoining roundabout at the intersection. At winter mid-day, the proposal will predominantly overshadow Botany Street and Barker Street. By 3.00 pm in winter, overshadowing will occur predominantly on Barker Street and Hay Lane. Only a small portion of the front yard of the adjoining eastern property at No. 129 Barker Street will be overshadowed at this time. The overshadowing overall will be acceptable as the shadow diagrams show no major impact on adjoining buildings with most of the overshadowing occurring on Botany Street, Barker Street and Hay Lane. 

 

10.6  Amenity

The proposed development is not considered to achieve an adequate level of amenity for future residents in terms of the orientation of the communal areas and their poor relationship :

 

§   The size and function of the boarding house balcony appears tokenistic with a limited area. The balcony also has a poor connection to the internal communal area being blocked predominantly by a bathroom.

 

§   The use of an elongated hallway obstructed by doors does not allow for cross ventilation through the whole boarding house.

 

§   All boarding rooms will be single aspect with their respective windows facing south which does not allow for cross ventilation and direct solar access.

 

10.7  Operational management

The submitted “Plan of Management” is rudimentary and lacks the essential information relating to the day to day management of the boarding house:

 

·      The management plan does not specify the target population (e.g. students, low income persons, etc.) expected to be accommodated in the boarding house.

·      The plan does not contain any policies relating to parties, gatherings, music level and overnight stay of guests.

·      The plan does not contain details demonstrating how neighbours’ complaints would be addressed and the role and responsibility of the caretaker’s in this regard.

·      Details of proposed house rules have not been given.

·      Details of the frequency and extent of periodic cleaning and maintenance have not been given.

·      Details of how an off-site manager will be employed to manage and regulate the boarding house.

 

The submitted management plan only attempts to superficially cover the key areas of concern associated with boarding houses. The document does not provide any articulated details demonstrating the actual management measures that would be undertaken. The level of information provided is not considered to be sufficient and adequate for the proposed management and administration of the premises. The above-listed deficiencies can be addressed as a condition of consent.

 

Conclusion

 

The location and bulk of the first floor boarding house will be highly visible from the adjoining northern and eastern dwelling houses. The form, massing and proportions of the development are not considered to contribute to an appropriate architectural outcome and would detrimentally impact on the visual and general amenity of the neighbouring residences. The development scheme has not properly examined the relationship of the building with the surrounding context and does not demonstrate a skilful design that fits into the local character. A more skilful design that integrates the internal and external aspects of the proposed boarding house for both the subject site and No 129 Botany Street under one DA to reduce visual bulk and scale and provide landscaped area would be appropriate.

 

As it stands, the absence of any landscape area to screen and soften the proposed dominant built form is unacceptable.

 

Furthermore, the proposal has not been designed to maximise the amenity of future dwellers within the proposed boarding house.

 

For the above reasons, it is recommended that the subject application be REFUSED.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/268/2012 for alterations and additions to the existing building to provide for a 3 room boarding house with communal facilities at first floor, addition of lift and external access from Barker Street at 131 Botany Road, Randwick, for the following reasons:

 

1.       The application does not satisfy the objectives for Zone No. 2A stipulated under Clauses 10(1)(a), (b) and (c) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) in that the proposed building is monolithic in form with an inappropriate envelope and bulk, and that the development fails to deliver any landscape area  to the site. The development scheme will not be compatible with the desired residential character of the locality and will not protect the amenity of the existing residents.

 

2.       The proposed development does not comply with Clause 20E of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 which prescribes the minimum landscape area standard, and the SEPP No.1 Objection submitted in relation to this standard is not well founded as the proposed development will have no landscape area to address the excessive height, bulk and scale of the proposal and therefore  detracts from existing predominant character of the development in the local area; adversely and affect the visual amenity of the streetscape.

 

3.       The proposed development does not comply with Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 which prescribes the maximum floor space ratio standard, and the SEPP No.1 Objection submitted in relation to this standard is not well founded as the proposed development will have an excessive bulk and scale that detracts from existing predominant character of the development in the local area; adversely affect the visual amenity of the streetscape due to the non-compliant and excessive FSR.

 

4.       The proposal does not comply with the maximum external wall height standards stipulated under Clauses 20G(3) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) respectively, and no SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to justify the deviation from the development standards.

 

5.       The form, massing and proportions of the boarding house are not considered to be compatible with the existing development pattern in the 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 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.

 

6.       The proposed development will result in detrimental visual and acoustic privacy impacts on the neighbouring residential buildings, and does not satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

7.       The proposal has not been designed to maximise the amenity of future dwellers within the proposed boarding house especially in relation to private open space, communal area, solar access and ventilation. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

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

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             11 December 2012

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP105/12

 

 

Subject:                  129 Botany Street, Randwick (DA/266/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/266/2012

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing building to provide for a 3 room boarding house with communal facilities at first floor with external access (SEPP1 objections to landscape area and floor space ratio controls).

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                ES Engineering and Design

Owner:                         Mr C Vasales & Mr D Vasales

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

This development application is referred to Council as it contains a variation to the floor space ratio and landscaped area development standard stipulated in Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 by more than 10%. The applicant has submitted SEPP 1 objections to these development standards.

 

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing single storey building containing a pizza shop to provide for a new first floor boarding house containing three boarding rooms with communal facilities and external access stair case.

 

The DA was originally submitted pursuant to the boarding house provisions of the SEPP - Affordable Rental Housing 2009. However, the applicant was advised that the proposal did not qualify to be considered under the provisions of the SEPP as the subject site is not located within 400m of a bus stop that serves a regular bus service as required by the SEPP. The applicant subsequently amended the submission by deleting references to the SEPP and applying for consideration under the relevant provisions of the Randwick LEP (Consolidation). 

 

Further amended plans were received on 13 November 2012 incorporating the following changes:

 

§ Provision of an east facing balcony adjoining a bathroom and kitchen.

§ Provision of a spiral staircase as the main access from the rear car park and lane.

§ Redefinition of the originally proposed main access southern staircase as a fire escape staircase only.

 

The site is zoned 2A Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation). The existing pizza shop is prohibited within the zone but operates under existing use rights pursuant to Clause 106 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

The proposed first floor boarding house is a permissible use within the 2A zone subject to consent.

 

The proposal provides no landscaped area and has a maximum FSR of 1.259:1 which varies from the minimum landscaped area standard of 40% and the maximum FSR control of 0.5:1 under the Randwick LEP 1998. The non-compliances have been assessed and an assessment of the SEPP No. 1 objections made in relation to the non-compliances indicates that the applicant has not made a valid case to indicate why compliance with the development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary. Specifically, the proposal will:

 

·      be an overdevelopment of the subject site and will be excessive, intrusive and overwhelming in height, bulk and scale to the adjoining northern and eastern properties and detracts from the existing predominantly single and two-storey character of the immediate local area and Residential 2A zone to the north.

·      introduce a significant built element along the length of the allotment that visually dominates the adjoining dwellings with no regard to the absence of landscaping on-site.

·      be inconsistent with the planning objectives for the locality as expressed in the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal was found to be inconsistent with key objectives of the zone and the controls for the subject site under Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation). Specifically, the proposal does not represent a desirable built form outcome for the Residential 2A area. 

·      generate additional height, bulk and density in breach of the relevant FSR and landscape area standards resulting in detrimental impacts to surrounding uses in terms of  loss of privacy and overbearing bulk and scale.

 

The scale and intensity of the proposal in the context of a site with no landscape area raises a number of concerns when assessed against key planning criteria.  On this basis, the proposal is considered unsatisfactory and recommended for refusal.

 

2.    The proposal

 

The amended proposal is for alterations and additions to the existing single storey building containing a pizza shop to provide for a new first floor boarding house containing three boarding rooms with communal facilities and external access stair. The communal facilities include a kitchen, communal room and 2 x bathrooms. Each boarding room has the following areas;

 

Room 1 (single room): 12.2 sqm

Room 2 (single room): 12.05 sqm

Room 3  (twin room):          21.44 sqm

 

Access into the boarding house is proposed via Hay Lane at the rear via a new stairwell from the car park area of the pizza shop.

 

3.    The subject site and surrounding area

 

The site is located on the north-eastern corner of the round-about at the intersection of Botany Street and Barker Street. The site is rectangular in shape, having an overall area of 189 sqm. The site has a western frontage to Botany Street of 5.245m, an eastern frontage to Hay Lane of 5.399m, southern side boundary of 26.99m to an adjoining shop at 131 Barker Street and a northern side boundary of 36.02m to the property at No. 127 Botany Street. The subject site is relatively flat.

 

The site is presently occupied by an existing single storey pizza shop with rear car park and rear lane access off Hay Lane.

The site is adjoined to the immediate north by a single storey dwelling house at No. 127 Botany Street. Adjoining to the south and sharing a party wall is a single storey commercial building containing a blinds shop. The eastern boundary is bounded by Hay Lane which provides access to the rear. Further to the east of Hay Lane are residential properties including a single storey residential dwelling immediately on the opposite side of Hay Lane at No. 129 Barker Street. To the west, across Botany Street, is a residential area with a mix of single storey detached and semi-detached houses and two-storey multi-unit developments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing non-conforming pizza shop at No. 129 Botany Street  

2. Adjoining dwelling house at No. 127 Botany Road.

 

4. Adjoining dwelling house at No 129 Barker Street to the east on opposite side of Hay Lane

4. Single storey dwelling houses fronting Botany Street immediately adjoining the subject site to the north extending from No. 121 to No. 127 Botany Street. 

 

http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview61745.png

Figure 1 Aerial view of the subject site and surrounding built environment

 

 

4.    History

 

The following relevant DAs were previously approved for the subject site:

 

DA/15/1980 - To convert the existing mixed business for use as a refreshment room (coffee lounge). Approved - 11-Nov-1980

 

DA/375/2005 - Use the subject premises as a pizza shop including internal fitout.  Approved on 19 July 2005

 

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

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained for land zoned 2A contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). SEPP 1 Objections have been submitted with the development application. In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection, the following matters are addressed:

 

The proposal seeks to vary any development standards contained with Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) as follows: -

 

Landscaped Area (Clause 20E)

 

Pursuant to Clause 20E(1) of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No 2A must provide a minimum of 40% of the total site area as landscaped area.

 

The proposal provides no landscape area.

 

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

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

 

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

 

Landscaped Area

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection, which outlines the following key justifications for the variations to the standard:

 

It is considered that the proposal is unsatisfactory and compliance with the purpose of the development standard should be required for the following reasons:

 

·      The absence of any landscaped area does not provide any screening and softening of the overly bulky and intrusive first floor boarding house addition particularly when viewed from the adjoining northern and eastern properties. 

·      The development will introduce a significant built element along the length of the allotment that visually dominates the adjoining dwellings with no regard to the absence of landscaping on-site.

·      The shortfall is attributed to the complete site coverage of the ground floor non-conforming use, being the pizza shop, which uses the rear ground floor as a car park and storage yard. The absence of a rear open yard to be provided at the rear of the allotment is inconsistent with the development and open space allocation pattern in the area.

·      The resultant development is not considered to be compatible with the character of other residential premises in the locality and the objectives of the 2A Zone.

·      The proposal fails to provide adequate and appropriate accessible private open space, which adds to the amenity of the boarding rooms.

·      The absence of landscaping exacerbates the proposal’s excessive built form resulting in adverse amenity impacts in terms of visual bulk and scale and overlooking.

·      the proposal will be contrary to the purpose of the landscape standard, in that the absence of landscaped area does not allow the standard to operate efficiently together with the controls for floor space ratio and building heights to limit the size, scale and site coverage of a building having regard to the environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the area.

 

In conclusion, the SEPP 1 Objection relating to variations from the landscaped area control has not presented appropriate evidence to demonstrate the satisfaction of the zoning objectives and purpose of the development standard, and accordingly is not considered to be well founded. The full compliance with the development standard is therefore necessary to ensure orderly development of the land.

 


Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2B Zone, in that the development it will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings and existing streetscape. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

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 variations from the development standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, as discussed above, it is considered that the strict application of the landscaped area development standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted controls.

 

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:

The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

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 proposal will create an undesirable precedent for the built form of future development in the area, and is anticipated to result in cumulative adverse implications on the streetscape and neighbourhood amenity. Accordingly, the strict compliance of the subdivision standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality.

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 in question has 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 RLEP.

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 2A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low density residential development. 

 

Maximum Floor Space Ratio 

Clause 20F(1) specifies a maximum FSR of 0.5:1 for development, otherwise than for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone No 2A.

 

The proposal has a maximum floor space ratio of 1.259:1 and does not comply with Clause 20G(3) of the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

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 maximum building and external wall height standard as outlined in the LEP is:

 

The purpose of this clause is to set upper limits for the heights of buildings in residential zones and business zones that are consistent with the redevelopment of potential land in those zones given other development restrictions, such as floor space and landscaping, and have regard for the amenity of the surrounding area.

 

The applicant has submitted a written SEPP 1 Objection outlining the following key justifications for the variations to the standard:

 

 

It is considered that the proposal is unsatisfactory and compliance with the development standard is reasonable and necessary for the following reasons:

 

·      The proposed FSR of 1.259:1(237.92 sqm) is considered excessive representing an increase of 151% over the maximum FSR standard of 0.5:1 (94.5 sqm). The existing non-conforming pizza shop already exceeds the max FSR standard being 0.65:1 (124.73 sqm). The proposal adds another 124.73 sqm above the pizza shop which creates a monolithic, unrelieved built form along almost the entire length of the subject site. 

 

·      The proposal has been designed to be almost a mirror image of a similar proposal for alterations and additions to the adjoining property at No 131 Botany Street (currently the subject of DA/268/2012 and a separate assessment to the Council meeting). In doing so, the proposal creates an elongated linear first floor envelope (containing the boarding house) commensurate with that of the proposed first floor boarding house on No. 131 Botany Street. This elongated first floor envelope will impose a visually intrusive and over bearing built form in relation to the existing rear yard of the adjoining northern property at No 127 Botany Street as well as adjoining and nearby single storey properties further to the north and east.

·      The north elevation of the proposal presents as a sheer unrelieved wall to the rear yard and living area of No 127 Botany Street with no articulation, steps or distribution of mass to alleviate this. The overbearing north elevation is accentuated further by

 

§ the length of the proposed first floor being longer than the existing ground floor as evidenced by a 1.1m cantilevered section at the rear eastern end.

 

§ the provision of a north-facing screen along the northern edge of the proposed rear balcony adjacent and in addition to the cantilevered section.   

 

·      The proposal has no landscaped area and as such does not comply with the minimum landscape area standard. The absence of any landscaped area on site due to the existing non-conforming use provides no opportunity for screen planting of the excessive bulk and scale of the building. Accordingly, the proposal will be contrary to the purpose of the FSR standard, in that the proposed FSR will not operate efficiently together with the control for landscaped area to limit the size, scale and site coverage of proposed building while being sympathetic to the overall environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the streetscape and local area.

 

·      As indicated in relevant assessment sections of this report, the proposal will generate unreasonable impacts upon the amenity currently enjoyed by adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

·      The resultant development is not considered to be compatible with the character of other residential premises in the locality and the objectives of the 2A Zone. Furthermore, the Draft Randwick LEP 2012 retains a low density zoning of R2 over  the subject site and immediate local area with a maximum FSR of 0.5:1.

 

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 objection does not adequately address the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The objection fails to justify that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of each case. The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

The variation from the standard for maximum FSR is 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). In this respect the proposed development would not represent an orderly and economic development of the subject land.

 

The proposal is inconsistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will detract from the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area and compromise the amenity of the adjacent dwellings. The proposed works will result in a development which is inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. As such, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard does not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, as discussed above, it is considered that the strict application of the external wall height development standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the surrounding residential development. Public interest will be well served by the adherence and upholding of the adopted controls.

 

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:

The proposed development does not satisfy the purpose of the standard, the applicant’s case is not well founded, and compliance with the development standard is therefore considered reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

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 proposal will create an undesirable precedent for the built form of future development in the area, and is anticipated to result in cumulative adverse implications on existing neighbourhood amenity. Accordingly, the strict compliance of the height standard is reasonable and necessary to ensure orderly development and to maintain the character of the locality.

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 in question has 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.

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality, which is characterised by low density residential development. 

 

6.    Community Consultation

 

The proposal was exhibited in accordance with Council policy. Objections were received from the following addresses:

 

129 Barker Street, Randwick

132 Barker Street, Randwick

134 Barker Street, Randwick

121 Botany Street, Randwick

127 Botany Street, Randwick

 

A petition has also been lodged containing 80 signatures.

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The proposed boarding house use is not compatible with the residential character of the locality.

Boarding house is a permissible use within Residential 2A zones under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The land use per se is not considered to be incompatible with the residential character of the locality.

 

However, the proposed boarding house has excessive visual mass and no  landscaping, and therefore is not considered to be compatible with the existing locality character in its current form.

The proposed development has excessive density, height, size and bulk and is not compatible with the character of the locality.

Agreed. Refer to the SEPP 1 Objection assessments above.

The proposed development will have insufficient car parking and will generate significant vehicular traffic and cause congestion and safety problems in the surrounding road network.

The proposal does not require any car parking spaces to be provided containing only 3 boarding rooms compared with Council’s Parking DCP which requires provision of 1 car space per 10 rooms for boarding houses.

 

Boarding houses typically generate a lower level of vehicular traffic and this is recognised in Council’s Parking DCP, which specifies a low parking rate for this type of development

 

The proposal is not considered to increase the level of vehicular traffic to such an extent that exceeds the capacity of the surrounding road network.

The proposed boarding house will present a large number of bins along the kerb during garbage collection days and will further reduce on-street parking supply.

The presentation of bins at the kerb is a standard waste collection arrangement across all residential properties, including multi-unit buildings, in the area. The proposal is not considered to be unreasonable in this regard.

The proposed development will result in significant noise impacts on the adjoining and nearby residences.

 

The unenclosed staircase and  walkway along the side boundaries will generate significant noise impact on the adjoining neighbours.

The proposed development is considered to result in detrimental noise impacts on the neighbours in its current form. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

The proposal results in loss of privacy.

The proposal is considered to result in overlooking to the adjoining northern and eastern properties.  Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

The proposed development will detrimentally overshadow the adjoining properties.

The development scheme is considered to have minimised shadow impacts on the neighbouring properties. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

There are concerns that the boarding house will not be adequately maintained.

The submitted operational management plan has briefly mentioned about regular cleaning and maintenance of the boarding house. However, the management plan does not contain sufficient information to enable detailed assessment. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details.

The proposal does not satisfy the relevant planning controls, including RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

The DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies does not apply to boarding house proposals.

 

Refer to the “Environmental Planning Instruments” section of this report for detailed comments on compliance with the relevant planning instruments.

The proposal is excessive in FSR.

The SEPP 1 Objection lodged in relation to the non-compliance in FSR has been assessed above and is not supported.

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Development Engineering Comments

Council’s Development Engineer has raised concerns regarding the adequacy of waste management for the boarding house as “the submitted plans have not indicated any provision for the additional waste bins required. A bin area will need to be provided at the rear of the property which may be in conflict with the requirements of the commercial tenancy.

 

It is also noted that the submitted waste management plan does not detail how the ongoing management of waste for the boarding house will operate given the lack of a caretaker and possible issues with waste storage it is considered hat this information be required prior to issuing of consent.”

 

Comment: The submitted operational management plan has briefly mentioned about regular cleaning and maintenance of the boarding house. However, the management plan does not contain sufficient information to enable detailed assessment. Refer to the “Environmental Assessment” section of this report for details. This deficiency can be addressed by condition of consent.

 

 

7.2    Building Services Comments

Building Services Officer advises that no objections are raised to the proposal in relation to building issues subject to conditions should approval be granted.

 

7.3    Environmental Health Comments

The application was not required to be referred to the Environmental Health officer.

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

 

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

The site is located within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposed development is defined as “boarding houses” pursuant to Clause 49 of the LEP, and is a permissible use with consent within the 2A Zone.

 

(a)    to provide a low density residential environment, and

Comments:

The proposal has a prominent additional floor level that significantly breaches the FSR standard. Additionally, the proposed building is significantly elongated and extends beyond the footprint of the existing shop such that it has a dominant and over bearing bulk and scale both in relation to the adjoining single storey dwelling houses to the north and east, and in the context of et overall Residential 2A zone to the north. It is therefore considered that the proposal is not compatible with the desired low density residential environment of the local area.

 

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

Comments:

The immediate residential area has low density residential development (predominantly characterised by dwelling houses and semi-detached dwellings in the area to the north of Barker Street) which predominantly contain landscaped open space at the rear of the allotments. The rear sections of these premises are substantially well setback from rear boundaries to provide for deep open landscaped rear yards with occasional outbuilding structures. The proposal involves a significant first floor level over a site that has no landscaping. The development does not provide a suitable landscape ambience to the site and the proposed building is monolithic in form. The design scheme is therefore not considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the local character.

 

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

Comments:

The proposal will result in adverse loss of privacy and intrusive visual bulk and scale to adjoining northern and eastern properties. Additionally, inadequate side setback along the addition is considered to visually overwhelm the adjoining dwelling house. A more skilful design that respects the low density context would have reduced the degree of visual bulk and scale and loss of privacy on the neighbours. The development is not considered to adequately protect the amenity of existing residents.

 

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

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of site area

0%

Does not comply (SEPP 1 Objection)

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or basements not to exceed 50% of required provision

No landscaped areas are provided.

N/A

20F Floor space ratios

Maximum 0.5:1

1.259:1 (237.92 m2 GFA)

Does not comply (SEPP 1 Objection)

20G Building heights

(1) Maximum building height 9.5m

Maximum 7.07m (north elevation)

Complies

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

Maximum 7.07m (north elevation)

Does not comply (No SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged)

 

40 Earthworks

Council to consider the likely impact on existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality, and the effects of the proposed works on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land

The proposal does not involve any excavation.

N/A

 

8.2         Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

Under the Draft LEP, the subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential in which the proposal is permissible. The controls applicable over the subject site under the Draft LEP are:

 

Max FSR - 0.5:1

Max Building Height – 9.5m

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied with a BASIX Certificate. The commitments listed in the above certificate can be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

9.      Policy Controls

 

9.1    Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

The Section 94A Development Contributions Plan, effective from 17 July 2012, applies to the proposed development. In accordance with the plan, the following monetary levy is required:

 

Category

Cost

Applicable

Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost

$100,001 - $200,000

$170,000

0.5%

$850.00

 

 

10.    Environmental Assessment

 

10.1  Section 79C assessment

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

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

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

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

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 Control” section of this report for details.

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

 

Not applicable. 

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

Appropriate standard conditions can be imposed to address the relevant clauses of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.  

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment that are otherwise not assessed within the body of this report, are addressed below.

 

The proposed boarding house is essentially a residential use and is not considered to create any detrimental economic impacts.

 

The proposed boarding house would promote housing affordability and broaden accommodation choice in the locality.

 

However, the proposed building footprints, bulk and scale are considered to be excessive and would adversely affect the amenity of the neighbouring residential developments in terms of visual bulk and scale and privacy. The negative implications of the proposal would more than offset the potential social benefits delivered by the scheme.

 

A more skilful design that involves a reduction in floor area and respects the adjoining dwelling house and existing character of the surrounding environment would be needed to minimise the environmental and social impacts of the boarding house development.

 

Based on the current design, it cannot be justified that the proposal will not result in unreasonable environmental and social impacts.

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

The proposal in its current form would visually overwhelm the adjoining residences and result in significant amenity impacts. Therefore, the site is not considered to be suitable for the proposed development.

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

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

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

The proposal in its current form is not considered to lead to an appropriate environmental and social planning outcome in the locality. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to be within the public interest and is not supported.

10.2  Built form

The built form of the proposed first floor boarding house follows the existing elongated configuration of the ground floor shop which creates the following impacts: 

Figure 2: The north elevation facing the adjoining northern property at No 127 Botany Street.

 

·      As is demonstrated in the SEPP 1 assessment above, the proposal creates an elongated linear first floor envelope (containing the boarding house) commensurate with that of the proposed first floor boarding house on No. 131 Botany Street. This elongated first floor envelope will impose a visually intrusive and over bearing built form in relation to the existing rear yard of the adjoining northern property at No 127 Anzac Parade.

 

·      The proposed built form has not incorporated a variety of wall indentations, steps and redistribution of building mass to alleviate its visual bulk and scale to the neighbouring northern and eastern properties. In particular, the north elevation of the proposal presents as a sheer unrelieved wall to the rear yard and living area of No 127 Botany Street with no articulation, steps or distribution of mass to alleviate this. The overbearing north elevation is accentuated further by the following:

 

§ the length of the proposed first floor being longer than the existing ground floor as evidenced by a 1.1m cantilevered section at the rear eastern end.

 

§ the provision of a north-facing screen along the northern edge of the proposed rear balcony adjacent and in addition to the cantilevered section.   

 

·      The absence of any landscaped area on site due to the existing non-conforming use provides no opportunity for screen planting of the excessive bulk and scale of the building. Accordingly, the proposal will be contrary to the purpose of the FSR standard, in that the proposed FSR will not operate efficiently together with the control for landscaped area to limit the size, scale and site coverage of proposed building while being sympathetic to the overall environmental amenity and aesthetic character of the streetscape and local area.

 

·      The monolithic built form means that the first floor balcony and associated communal area will be oriented north towards the adjoining northern property as well as east towards the neighbouring eastern properties.

 

In conclusion, the form, massing and footprints of the development are considered to result in detrimental impacts on the amenity of the neighbouring residences and are not supported.

 

10.3  Landscaping

The proposal provides no landscape area due to the existing non-conforming use on site. Given the scale and footprint of the development, adequate screen planting is essential in softening the physical structure. However, does not provide any plantings on-site whether in the form of small and medium planter bed vegetation, let alone larger canopy trees on the site.

 

10.4  Visual and acoustic privacy

The proposal will result in the following visual and acoustic privacy impacts:

 

·      The proposal has included a balcony on the east elevation on new first floor which is directly oriented towards the adjoining dwelling house at No. 129 Barker Street. The west elevation of No. 129 Barker Street contains a ground floor living room which will be overlooked.

·      The external unenclosed spiral staircase will create overlooking and noise issues to the rear yard of No. 127 Botany Street and the western living room window of No 129 Barker Street.

 

10.5  Overshadowing

The submitted shadow diagrams indicate that at 9.00 am in the winter solstice, the proposal will mainly overshadow Botany Street and the adjoining roundabout at the intersection. At winter mid-day, the proposal will have minimal overshadowing impact as it will have a southern party wall to the adjoining attached blind shop and its proposed first floor boarding house which is the subject of a separate DA (DA/268/2012). By 3.00 pm in winter overshadowing will occur predominantly on Barker Street and Hay Lane. Only a small portion of the front yard of the adjoining eastern property at No. 129 Barker Street will be overshadowed at this time. The overshadowing overall will be acceptable as the shadow diagrams show no major impact on adjoining buildings with most of the overshadowing occurring on Botany Street, Barker Street and Hay Lane. 

 

10.6  Amenity

The proposed development is not considered to achieve an adequate level of amenity for future residents in terms of the orientation of the communal areas and their poor relationship :

 

·      The size and function of the boarding house balcony appears tokenistic with a limited area and acting more as a landing for the spiral stair case than a proper balcony. The balcony also has a poor connection to the internal communal area being blocked predominantly by a bathroom.

 

·      The rear spiral stair case will function as the sole access to the first floor boarding house. This stair case encroaches into, and potentially conflicts with, the carparking area of the shop below. As such, the proposal is not considered to provide proper and safe pedestrian entry into the boarding house. 

 

·      The communal area, being set in behind the bathroom and the kitchen will not receive the minimum 3 hours solar access, which as a guide, is required under the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing.

 

·      The use of an elongated hallway obstructed by doors does not allow for cross ventilation through the whole boarding house.

 

·      All boarding rooms will be single aspect which does not allow for cross ventilation.

 

10.7    Operational management

 

The submitted “Plan of Management” is rudimentary and lacks the essential information relating to the day to day management of the boarding house:

 

·      The management plan does not specify the target population (e.g. students, low income persons, etc.) expected to be accommodated in the boarding house.

·      The plan does not contain any policies relating to parties, gatherings, music level and overnight stay of guests.

·      The plan does not contain details demonstrating how neighbours’ complaints would be addressed and the role and responsibility of the caretaker’s in this regard.

·      Details of proposed house rules have not been given.

·      Details of the frequency and extent of periodic cleaning and maintenance have not been given.

·      Details of how an off-site manager will be employed to manage and regulate the boarding house.

 

The submitted management plan only attempts to superficially cover the key areas of concern associated with boarding houses. The document does not provide any articulated details demonstrating the actual management measures that would be undertaken. The level of information provided is not considered to be sufficient and adequate for the proposed management and administration of the premises. The above-listed deficiencies can be addressed as a condition of consent.

 

Conclusion

 

The location and bulk of the first floor boarding house will be highly visible from the adjoining northern and eastern dwelling houses. The form, massing and proportions of the development are not considered to contribute to an appropriate architectural outcome and would detrimentally impact on the visual and general amenity of the neighbouring residences. The development scheme has not properly examined the relationship of the building with the surrounding context and does not demonstrate a skilful design that fits into the local character. A more skilful design would be able to reduce visual bulk and scale and privacy  impacts on the neighbours. Additionally, the absence of any landscape area to screen and soften the dominant built form is unacceptable.

 

Furthermore, the proposal has not been designed to maximise the amenity of future dwellers within the proposed boarding house.

 

For the above reasons, it is recommended that the subject application be REFUSED.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/266/2012 for alterations and additions to the existing building to provide for a three room boarding house with communal facilities at first floor with external access at 129 Botany Road, Randwick, for the following reasons:

 

1.       The application does not satisfy the objectives for Zone No. 2A stipulated under Clauses 10(1)(a), (b) and (c) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) in that the proposed building is monolithic in form with an inappropriate envelope and bulk, and that the development fails to deliver any landscape area  to the site. The development scheme will not be compatible with the desired residential character of the locality and will not protect the amenity of the existing residents.

 

2.       The proposed development does not comply with Clause 20E of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 which prescribes the minimum landscape area standard, and the SEPP No.1 Objection submitted in relation to this standard is not well founded as the proposed development will have no landscape area to address the excessive height, bulk and scale of the proposal and therefore  detracts from existing predominant character of the development in the local area; adversely and affect the visual amenity of the streetscape.

 

3.       The proposed development does not comply with Clause 20F of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 which prescribes the maximum floor space ratio standard, and the SEPP No.1 Objection submitted in relation to this standard is not well founded as the proposed development will have an excessive bulk and scale that detracts from existing predominant character of the development in the local area; adversely affect the visual amenity of the streetscape due to the non-compliant and excessive FSR.

 

4.       The proposal does not comply with the maximum external wall height standards stipulated under Clauses 20G(3) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) respectively, and no SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to justify the deviation from the development standards.

 

5.       The form, massing and proportions of the boarding house are not considered to be compatible with the existing development pattern in the 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 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.

 

6.       The proposed development will result in detrimental visual and acoustic privacy impacts on the neighbouring residential buildings, and does not satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

7.       The proposal has not been designed to maximise the amenity of future dwellers within the proposed boarding house especially in relation to private open space, communal area, solar access and ventilation. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             11 December 2012

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP106/12

 

 

Subject:                  95 Wentworth Street, Randwick (DA/381/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/381/2012

Author:                   Scott Williamson, Development Assessment Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of all structures on site, construction of a part 3, part 2 storey multi-unit residential development in two building forms with 5 units, basement carparking for 7 vehicles and associated works (SEPP1 objections to landscaped area, floor space ratio and wall height controls)

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Ballas Mendes Constructions

Owner:                         Mrs E Balafoutis and Ms H Mendes and Mr P Balafoutis and Mr J Mendes

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is reported to Council on the basis of a SEPP 1 Objection, seeking a variation greater than 10%. The application proposes to vary the development standard of Clause 20F of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation), relating to floor space ratio, by approximately 17%.

 

Consent is sought for demolition of existing structures and construction of a part two (2), part three (3) storey multi-unit residential development, containing five (5) units. The development is made up of two (2) built form components, separated by a landscaped internal courtyard. The proposal also encompasses basement parking for seven (7) vehicles, with associated excavation and landscaping works across the site.

 

The site is zoned 2C (Residential C Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

The site is located on the eastern side of Wentworth Street in Randwick. Wentworth Street binds the site to the west, Waverley Street to the east, Four (4) storey residential flat buildings adjoin the site to the north and south. The site is rectangular in shape and falls from east to west (Waverley to Wentworth Street) with a level difference of approximately five (5) metres.

 

The application was originally notified and advertised between 27 June 2012 and 11 July 2012.  Five (5) submissions and a petition of 22 signatures were received in response to the notification. The primary concerns raised involved that of bulk and scale, view loss, solar access and parking.

 

The application was amended on 5 October 2012, following a request from Council officers. Amendments were made in the interest of amenity, privacy, landscaping and basement car park manoeuvrability. The amendments were re-notified from 26 October 2012 to 9 November 2012. One (1) submission was received, reiterating the concerns raised previously.

 

The application is accompanied by SEPP 1 Objections to landscaped area (5.2% variation), floor space ratio (17.2% variation) and building height (4% variation). Notwithstanding these variations, the proposal is considered a suitable infill development that will effectively transition from the adjoining residential flat buildings to the north and south. The development is not considered to impose any adverse impacts upon adjoining sites and will maintain the character of the locality.


The proposal will deliver a multi-unit residential development in a form that is consistent with the desired character for the locality and the zoning objectives. The proposed development meets the objectives and performance requirements of relevant State and Local planning controls.

 

It should be noted a previous application lodged in relation to this site under DA/767/2009, was refused by Council, proposing a floor space of 0.969:1. The refusal was appealed in the Land and Environment Court (Ballas Mendes Constructions Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1224). The appeal was dismissed, citing unreasonable bulk and scale as a result of a SEPP 1 Objection to floor space ratio. The extent of bulk on the site has been significantly reduced in the present application, seeking 0.76:1. Associated impacts upon adjoining sites are similarly reduced.

 

The application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

 

 

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The subject application, as amended on 5 October 2012, proposes demolition of existing structures and construction of a part two (2), part three (3) storey multi-unit residential development, containing five (5) units. The development is made up of two (2) separate built form components, separated by an internal courtyard.  Specifically, the application proposes:

 

Basement parking for seven (7) vehicles, accessed via a single driveway ramp from Wentworth Street. The basement car park also provides common bicycle parking, waste areas and a general storage area allocated for each unit;

A three (3) storey building fronting Wentworth Street, containing three (3), two (2) bedroom apartments, accessed via a common stair along the southern elevation;

A two (2) storey building fronting Waverley Street, containing two (2), two (2) bedroom townhouse style dwellings.

External works including tree removal and landscaping across the site.

 

The following assessment is conducted according to the application as lodged and amended on 5 October 2012.

 

3.    Site and surrounding area

 

The site is described as Lot 2 in DP 305794, No. 95 Wentworth Street, Randwick. The site is located on the eastern side of Wentworth Street, between Stanley and Sydney Streets, and has secondary frontage to Waverley Street. The land falls from the east to the west with a fall of approximately 5.1m. The dimensions and land area of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land Area

Northern, side boundary

45.72m

585.3m2

Southern, side boundary

45.72m

Eastern, Waverley Street boundary

12.8m

Western, Wentworth Street boundary

12.8m

 

At present, the site accommodates a single-storey dwelling of brick and tiled roof construction, with detached storage shed and single garage at the rear fronting Waverley Street.

 

The site is adjoined to the north by a 4-storey residential flat building (No. 93 Wentworth Street) with car parking at ground level and 3 levels of dwelling units above. A detached garage building containing 2 car spaces is located at the rear off Waverley Street. To the south is a 4-storey residential flat building (No. 97-99 Wentworth Street) with a driveway located along the northern boundary of the property leading to an undercroft parking area. There is a detached garage with 6 car spaces located to the rear of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street, which forms part of the property at No. 101-103 Wentworth Street.

 

Wentworth Street is a 4-lane (2 x parking lanes plus dual carriageways) local distributor road and is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments.

 

Waverley Street contains a single carriageway and a parking lane. A row of double-storey terraced cottages are located on the eastern side of Waverley Street (Nos. 11-35 Waverley Street). Another group of terraces are located at the corner of Waverley and Gordon Streets (Nos. 2-26 Gordon Street).

 

Figure 1: Wentworth Street elevation of the existing dwelling on the subject site (middle); adjoining flat buildings at Nos. 93 and 97-99 Wentworth Street on the left and right, respectively.

Figure 2: Existing single garage on the Waverley Street frontage of the site.

Figure 3: Rear courtyard area of the site as viewed from the first floor balcony of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street

Figure 4: The group of terrace buildings located on the eastern side of Waverley Street.

 

4.    History

 

4.1      Site history

BA/705/1965 – Approved 1 January 1965 for alterations and additions to the existing building.

 

PL/23/2008 – The site was subject to a pre-lodgement for the demolition of existing dwelling and construction of residential flat building with 8 units and basement parking for 12 vehicles on 8 September 2008.

 

DA/767/2009- Proposed demolition of existing structures  and construction of a multi-unit development comprising two (2) x three (3) storey buildings containing seven (7) residential units, a combined basement car park for 10 vehicles and associated works (SEPP 1 objection to floor space ratio control). The design scheme proposed an FSR of 0.969:1.

 

A report recommending approval of the application was considered at the Planning Committee Meeting of 14 September 2010, where Council resolved to refuse the application.

 

A subsequent review of determination was lodged on 8 November 2010 under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The application was recommended for approval, however was refused by the Planning Committee of 8 February 2011. 

 

4.1.1   Land and Environment Court: (Ballas Mendes Constructions Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1224)

In March 2011 the applicant challenged Council’s refusal of DA/767/2009 in the Land and Environment Court (Ballas Mendes Constructions Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1224).

 

The primary contentions in the matter related to:

 

whether the objections to the FSR and height development standards contained in clauses 20 F and 20G of the LEP should be allowed pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 (SEPP1);

whether the impact of the proposed development is acceptable in terms of the adjoining properties;

the streetscape and the context of the Gordon Square conservation area;

whether the development represents an overdevelopment of the site; and,

whether the development standard for landscaped area is met.

 

The Commissioner dismissed the appeal, citing unreasonable bulk and scale as a result of the SEPP 1 Objection to floor space ratio. It was recommended any future scheme be reduced in bulk.

 

Figure 5: Wentworth Street frontage as refused under DA/767/2009.

Figure 6: Waverley Street frontage as refused under DA/767/2009.

 

4.2      Current application, DA/381/2012:

·      22 August 2012 – Further to advice of the Design Review Panel and concerns of Council, it was requested the applicant amend the proposal in order to respond to issues of streetscape, landscaping, privacy, amenity and parking arrangements.

 

·      5 October 2012 – The applicant submitted amended plans, making a number of changes in response to the request of 22 August 2012. Most notably;

o Amendment to basement parking layout in response to accessibility concern;

o Landscape plan amendments to provide more appropriate species and more effective screening;

o Increase length of balconies and provide privacy screening to balconies fronting Wentworth Street;

o Amendment of planter boxes fronting Wentworth Street to be stepped;

o Internal amenity provisions including ceiling fans, additional highlight windows and a skylight;

o The cost of works was clarified, following query from Council.

 

It should be noted that due to the reconfiguration of the basement parking area, the total deep soil achieved through the amended application is below the requirement of Clause 20E (3) of RLEP 1998. Given this, the amendments have introduced an additional SEPP 1 from that of the original application.

 

Figure 7: Proposed Wentworth Street frontage, as lodged on 18 June 2012.

Figure 8: Proposed Waverley Street frontage, as lodged on 18 June 2012

 

The applicant provides the following numerical overview of the proposal, as amended:

 

 

The following assessment is conducted in accordance with the amendments made by the applicant on 5 October 2012.

 

5.    State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1- Development Standards

 

The application seeks variation of development standards 20E (3), 20F (2) and 20G (4) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation). These clauses relate to landscaped area, floor space ratio and building height, respectively. Detail of each variation is summarised as follows:

 

Clause

Required

Proposed

Compliance

Degree of variation

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of the site area

(Min. 292.65m2)

 

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas not to exceed 50% of landscaped area required by part two (2).

(Max 146.3 m2).

60.67% (355.1m2).

 

 

52.6% (153.9m2) of the landscaped area requirement is provided over podium or basement levels.

Complies

 

 

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

None

 

 

 

5.2% (7.6m2) variation.

20F

Floor space ratio

0.65:1 for sites less than 700m2 in 2C zones

(Max 380.5 m2).

0.76:1 (446m2)

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

17.2% (65.5m2) variation.

20G

Building height

(2) Overall height: 12m

 

(4) External wall height: 10m

Maximum height 10.4m

 

Maximum wall height 10.4m.

Complies

 

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

None

 

 

4% (0.4m) variation.

 

SEPP 1 Objections have been submitted to each relevant standard and are addressed as follows: 

 

Landscaped Area – Clause 20E (3)

Clause 20E (3) of RLEP 1998, stipulates that landscaped area provided over podiums or excavated basement areas must not exceed 50% of the landscaped area requirements specified in sub clauses (1) and (2). Based upon the landscaped area requirement of 292.65 square metres, the standard would indicate a maximum of 146.3 square metres may be provided above podium or basement.

 

The application proposes 52.6% or 153.9 square metres of the required landscaped area above a basement. This figure represents a variation of approximately 5.2% of the landscaped area development standard, of Clause 20E (3).

 

Floor space ratio - Clause 20F (2)

Clause 20F (2) of RLEP 1998, stipulates the maximum FSR for buildings within the 2C zone, other than for the purpose of a dwelling house, as 0.65:1 where the lot size is less than 700 square metres. Based upon the site area of 585.3 square metres, the standard would indicate 380.5 square metres of gross floor area may be accommodated within the scope of the standard. 

 

The application proposes an FSR of 0.76:1, or approximately 446 square metres. This figure represents a variation of approximately 17.2% of the floor space development standard, of Clause 20F (2).

 

o   Building Height - Clause 20G (4)

Clause 20G (4) of RLEP 1998, stipulates the maximum external wall height for buildings within the 2C zone, other than for the purpose of a dwelling house, as ten (10) metres.

 

The application proposes a maximum external wall height of 10.4 square metres above existing ground level. This figure represents a variation of approximately 4% of the height development standard, of Clause 20G (4).

 

5.1      SEPP 1 Objection Assessment

In assessing the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objections, the principles established within 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).

 

o    The stated purpose of the landscaped area standard of Clause 20E, as outlined in the LEP is:

 

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

 

o    The stated purpose of the floor space ratio standard of Clause 20F, as outlined in the LEP is:

 

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

 

o    The stated purpose of the building height standard of Clause 20G, as outlined in the LEP is:

 

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

 

The applicant has submitted written SEPP 1 Objections to the above clauses, which outline the following key justifications for the variation to the landscaped area, floor space ratio and building height standards:

 

5.2      Applicant justifications

 

Justification: Landscaped Area - Clause 20E (3)

 

The applicant has provided the following justifications for variation of standard 20E (3):

 

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding    noncompliance with the standard:

The proposed development satisfies the underlying purpose of clause 20E in that:

 

·         the development complies with and exceeds the minimum amount of landscape area as required under clause 20E(2);

 

·         the development complies with the maximum building height control of 12m, avoids and does not generate any adverse impacts on adjoining properties;

 

·         it does not generate any additional different environmental impacts on adjoining properties when compared to a complying scheme;

 

·         the development complies with other relevant provisions of Randwick LEP 1998 and the zone objectives;

 

·         the soil depth above the basement car park will be at least 900mm, which provides adequate soil depth for healthy growth of the trees and shrubs proposed on the Landscape Plan; and

 

·         compliance with the standard could be achieved by deleting some of the landscaping on the podium. This would be no benefit to residents in the development or adjoining the site.

 

Justification: Floor space ratio - Clause 20F (2)

The applicant has provided the following justification for variation of standard 20F (2):

 

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding noncompliance with the standard:

The proposed development satisfies the underlying purpose of clause 20F in that:

 

·         the development is of an appropriate size, bulk and scale having regard to other controls and enhances the character of the area and avoids adverse impacts on adjoining properties;

 

·         the development is consistent with the planning principles established by case law for height, bulk and scale and is very modest within the streetscape; and

 

·         the development complies with other relevant provision of Randwick LEP 1998 and the zone objectives.

 

1.1 No Adverse Impacts on Neighbouring Properties

The potential impacts on neighbouring properties arising from the proposed development relate to views and outlook, overshadowing and privacy.

 

Views and Outlook

As detailed at Section 4.3.1 of the SEE, the siting and massing of the proposed development will change the outlook of the terraced dwellings to the east of Waverley Street across the site towards Wentworth Street.

 

The impact is considered acceptable given that the proposed development is well within the Council's height controls, will not obscure any iconic or significant view and has a generous degree of separation. The Waverley Street terrace views would still be impacted upon under a complying scheme.

 

Views from one first floor and one second floor unit on the northern elevation of 97-99 Wentworth Street are also likely to be impacted by the proposed development. The proposed views would be affected by a complying scheme. The proposed development is 2m below the maximum building height. The views are not iconic and are obtained across a side boundary. For these reasons this impact is also considered to be reasonable.

 

Overshadowing

As shown on the shadow diagrams at Appendix K and discussed at Section 4.3.2 of the SEE, the proposed development will not result in any unacceptable overshadowing effects on principle living areas in the adjacent properties and all living areas will retain 3 or more hours of sunlight.

 

Privacy

The proposed development is designed to minimise the potential for adverse visual and acoustic impacts to neighbouring buildings. As discussed in Section 4.3.3, the proposed development achieves greater separation from the existing situation and will achieve appropriate visual and acoustic privacy levels by way of:

 

·      orientation of the proposed units to the east and west towards the two street frontages and away from the side boundaries;

 

·      off-setting windows along the side boundaries;

 

·      off-setting floor levels to neighbouring buildings to the north and south;

 

·      installation of privacy screens to all windows on the first and second floors on the northern elevation of the Wentworth Street building;

 

·      provision of opaque-glazed windows to bathroom and en-suite windows; and,

 

·      the use of Fire Tuff Radian Heat Attenuation Screens which also provide a level of privacy.

 

1.2 Consistency with planning Principle for Height, Bulk and Scale

In Veloshin v Randwick Council (2007) NSWLEC 428, Roseth SC established a

planning principle for the assessment of height, bulk and scale. In looking at these issues the relevant questions Roseth stated that should be asked are:

 

·      are the impacts consistent with impacts that may be reasonably expected under the controls?

·      where the planning controls are aimed at creating a new character, is the proposal consistent with the bulk and character intended by the planning controls?

 

As discussed in Section 5.1.2 above, the proposed development complies with the controls which seek to maintain a suitable level of residential amenity to neighbouring dwellings. The proposal maintains an acceptable level of solar access to 97-99 Wentworth Street. A reduction in the amount of GFA proposed, would not necessarily reduce potential impacts upon the adjoining properties.

 

In regard to the second question outlined above, whilst the existing building on the site is typical of a federation bungalow, the area surrounding the site is a ‘Mixed Building Types Area’ dominated by 1960s – 1980s flats.

 

The typical form and massing of the streetscape is therefore simple rectangular forms sitting on solid bases, often with car parking at street level reflecting the topography of the land. In terms of character, the street comprises a variety of styles and quality of design. Overall there is no defining architectural character or architectural period on display.

 

The block within which the site is located is zoned Residential Zone 2C and comprises predominantly residential flat buildings. The block has progressively been ‘in filled’ over the years, with very few dwelling houses remaining in the vicinity of the site. The building will therefore fit within the context of the surrounding built form.

 

In the above appeal, Roseth SC differentiates between bulk and scale, stating that

 

“bulk refers to the mass of the building and scale is property used only when referring to the relative size of two or more things”. Regarding the bulk of the proposal, the building will have a narrower frontage than the existing building on the site towards Wentworth Street and the central courtyard area provides separation between the two buildings and the opportunity for landscaping. In terms of scale, the proposal is consistent in relation to the adjacent properties see Figures 1, 2 and 3. The proposals appearance is appropriate for its context, is consistent with the scale and improves the character of the streetscape and surrounding residential buildings.

 

2.1.3 Compliance with Environmental and Amenity Controls

The proposed development complies with all other relevant LEP and DCP controls (with the exception of the minor departure from the Preferred Solution for side setbacks – discussed further below).

 

The proposal provides more than the required amount of landscaping as set out in LEP 1998. Clause 20E of the LEP requires 50% of the site area be landscaped area. The proposal provides 60.67% (355m2). Clause 20E also requires no more than 50% of the landscape area to be situated over a podium or basement (i.e. 146.33m2). The proposal provides only 138.9m2 of landscaped area over a podium or basement.

 

There is a minor departure from the Preferred Solution for side boundary setbacks. This issue is discussed in detail at Section 4.1.9 of the SEE.

 

The setback departure is well founded on urban design grounds and provides a better outcome that the existing building situation with provision of a minimum of 3m to the northern and southern boundary for the Wentworth Street building and 1.6m for the Waverley Street building.

 

The additional FSR proposed does not result in a density that compromises the amenity of the residential apartments proposed. All units have a large area of private open space and are naturally cross ventilated. They also all have allocated secure parking spaces, separate storage areas within the basement and good landscaped common open space surrounding and between the buildings.

 

2.1.4 Consistency with Objectives of Zone2C

Clause 12 of LEP 1998 outlines the following Zone No 2C (Residential C Zone)

objectives:

 

a.   to allow a variety of housing types within residential areas, and

 

b.   to allow a range of community facilities to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, and

 

c.   to enable residential development in a variety of medium density housing forms where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas, and

 

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

 

e.   to enable a mix of housing types to encourage housing affordability.

 

The proposed development is consistent with these objectives in that it:

 

·      will contribute to the provision of smaller, more affordable housing types within the area;

 

·      provides new and contemporary housing opportunities in a location that is highly accessible and is well services by local transport, shops and facilities;

 

·      is designed to ensure that there is no unreasonable adverse environmental impacts on adjoining properties in respect of overshadowing, visual and acoustic privacy views;

 

·      is appropriately designed and landscaped to be compatible with adjacent residential development and the existing environmental character; and

 

·      will increase the housing stock within the area and encourage housing affordability.

 

Justification: Building Height- Clause 20G (3)

The applicant has provided the following justification for variation of standard 20G (3):

 

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding noncompliance with the standard

The proposed development satisfies the underlying purpose of clause 20G in that:

 

·         the development complies with the maximum building height control of 12m, avoids and does not generate any adverse impacts on adjoining properties;

 

·         the wall height potentially exceeds the maximum wall height control by potentially only 0.4m. This is a worst case scenario;

 

·         the potential non compliance was canvassed by the planning experts in the previous appeal, both experts agreed it did not raise any planning issues of any consequence;

 

·         it does not generate any additional different environmental impacts on adjoining properties when compared to a complying scheme;

 

·         the development is consistent with the planning principles established by case law for height, bulk and scale and is very modest within the streetscape (as discussed in Appendix F and the SEE); and

 

·         the development complies with other relevant provision of Randwick LEP 1998 and the zone objectives.

 

5.3      Planning comment:

The stated purposes of each of the three (3) development standards discussed above, specifically interrelate in seeking to limit the size, scale and site coverage of development.

 

It is considered that the proposed development and variation from the minimum landscaped area, maximum floor area and height standards are satisfactory. All three (3) submitted SEPP 1 Objections are addressed below and are well founded for the following reasons:

 

1. The circumstances of the site;

·      The context of the site provides merit to a strong built form, given:

 

o   The site and it’s surrounds are within the Residential 2C zone, which envisages multi-unit development of the nature proposed. The proposal represents a reasonable attempt to realise the full development potential of the site;

o   The site exists in a locality characterised by a mixture of multi-unit, semi-detached and detached residential developments. The proposed development provides a modest response to the dominance of residential flat buildings within the immediate visual catchment of the site;

o   To the immediate north and south of the site exist four (4) storey multi-unit developments. Comparatively, the three (3)-storey proposal is unobtrusive in size, scale and site coverage; a reasonable infill of this site would contemplate a similar size, scale and site coverage to that adjoining;

o   The site is located in close proximity to public transport services along Alison Road and Centennial Park. The high level of accessibility benefitting the site provides merit to medium density, representing an orderly and economic use of the land for urban consolidation.

o   Given the site circumstances, Council’s Design Review Panel promoted a greater density be pursued on the site, providing the following feedback on the size, scale and density proposed:

“The Panel considers that the proposed density of 0.76: 1 is low for a site zoned 2(c), and is an under-utilisation of prime urban land in an extremely well serviced area”.

 

2. The design of the proposed development;

·      The proposed site strategy has been appropriately considered, minimising environmental impacts upon surrounds while enhancing internal amenity.

 

·      Overall, the architectural character and form of the proposal are considered to carry satisfactory design merits, endorsed by Council’s Design Review Panel.

 

·      The proposed development does not result in any significant adverse impacts on the adjoining residential properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy or view loss, as discussed in the body of this report, subject to the recommended conditions.

 

·      In relation to floor space ratio (Clause 20F):

 

The size and scale of the proposed development enables a modest infill of the subject site, remaining below the size, scale and site coverage established to both north and south neighbours;

 

The design incorporates a central courtyard between the blocks, rather than a single monolithic mass. This strategy effectively distributes bulk, provides visual relief in avoiding continuous wall planes and provides solar access benefit to neighbours;

 

The proposed site strategy responds appropriately to the specific contexts of each street frontage:

 

·      To Wentworth Street, the design provides a sympathetic three (3)-storey scale to that of the adjoining four (4) storey flat buildings;

 

·      To Waverley Street, a contemporary two (2)-storey townhouse design sits below street level and achieves a height substantially lower than the two (2) storey terraces opposite. The proposed height allows these terraces to retain some first floor views to the CBD.

 

The setbacks incorporated into the development are consistent with surrounds and will integrate well with the character of each streetscape:

 

·      To Wentworth Street, the building is setback six (6) metres, matching the development adjoining to the north. Landscaping is proposed within the setback;

 

·      To Waverley Street, the terraces are setback between six (6) and eight (8) metres from the rear, where many structures in the street are built up to the street alignment. Screen planting is proposed within the setback. 

 

The development has been appropriately articulated and modulated. Openings, balconies, material variation and landscaping have all been incorporated to minimise any apparent external bulk and scale to the streetscape and adjoining sites. These elements also contribute to adjoining privacy and visual interest;

 

The proposed site strategy provides considerable benefit to the southern neighbour, maximising solar access from that of a single built form strategy.

 

·      In relation to wall height (Clause 20G):

Despite an isolated variation of 400mm proposed to the north-west corner of the Wentworth Street component, the remainder of the development generally complies with the wall height standard.

 

The design scheme adopts a flat roof, minimising the overall building height.

 

The Wentworth Street elevation of the building is comparatively modest in scale, with a maximum RL of 72.75:

 

·      The parapet of the 93 Wentworth Street, to the north, presents an RL of 73.89 to the street, 1140 mm higher than that proposed.

·      The parapet of 97-99 Wentworth Street, to the south, presents an RL of 75.85 to Wentworth Street, over three (3) metres higher than the proposed building;

 

The variation is minor and is not considered to have any significant impact upon adjoining sites or the streetscape. The location of the proposed 400mm wall height variation is such that no shadow or view loss increase will eventuate as a result of the variation.

 

·      In relation to landscaping (Clause 20E):

The degree of departure from the deep soil control is minor, falling 7.6 square metres short. This variation comes about in order to achieve necessary parking manoeuvrability in the basement below. Despite the numerical variation, approximately 154 square metres of deep soil is provided for the purpose of drainage and larger plantings. This figure is greater than 25% of the site;

 

The overall provision of landscaping across the site exceeds the 50% of the development standard, providing sufficient opportunity for planting, and communal open space for occupants;

 

Communal areas and landscaped open spaces have been consolidated within a number of areas, providing practicality for the purpose of planting and communal open space.

 

Given the variation relates only to deep soil provision, an unreasonable built form will not result, generally satisfying the purpose of the landscaped area standard;

 

Areas of landscaping provided over basement see a generous minimum soil depth of 800mm, allowing for larger planting and drainage than typical of above-basement arrangements.

 

Appropriate areas of private open space and deep soil are provided for the two (2) terraces fronting Waverley Street.

 

The Design Review Panel and Council’s Landscape Development Officer have reviewed the proposed landscape plan. The plan details a satisfactory landscaping outcome, with larger planting spread throughout the site to soften the built form, provide privacy and green the site. The plan is considered to appropriately compensate for the minor numerical departure proposed.

 

3.The intensity supported by the proposed development;

·      The proposed building bulk promotes an intensity of use that is reasonable in the context of the site and considers adjoining amenity, given:

 

The proposal supports a residential intensity that is reasonable for the site, with regard to context and zoning. The proposed five (5), two (2) bedroom dwellings will remain within the scope of medium density multi-unit housing development encouraged with the planning controls;

 

Amenity impacts upon adjoining sites have been appropriately addressed within the design of the development and recommended conditions of consent;

The scheme provides a suitable level of parking for the intensity proposed, in accordance with the Randwick Parking DCP. The site is also considered highly accessible to public transport and facilities.

 

4. Consistency with the objectives of the zone;

·      The proposed development promotes the objectives of the zone, given;

 

The proposal provides for an appropriate medium density housing development, as envisaged within the 2C zone;

 

The proposed built form serves to maintain the desirable attributes of the existing residential area, providing an articulated contemporary building of appropriate scale, of which will see an appropriate infill of the subject site;

 

The proposal has been designed to minimise environmental impacts upon neighbouring sites and the street through effective design measures discussed above;

 

The proposal provides for and encourages affordable housing options in an accessible location.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objections have addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. Moreover, the applicant has appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standards of Clauses 20E (3), 20F (2) and 20G (4) is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Comment:

The proposed variation of the landscaped area, floor area and building height standards is consistent with the aims of SEPP 1 and will not detract from the objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, embodied in Section 5(a) (i) and (ii). Specifically, the proposed multi-unit housing development is considered to be consistent with surrounding built form, will promote the orderly and economic use of the land, and will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts on the area.

 

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 minimum landscaped area, maximum floor area and maximum building height standards do not raise any matters of significance for State or Regional environmental planning. There is no public benefit in maintaining the controls in this instance.

 

The strict adherence to the numerical landscaped area, floor space and building height standards are in this instance, not considered necessary given:

·      The circumstances of the site provide specific merit to a strong built form given appropriate zoning, precedent of adjoining development and a high level of accessibility.

·      The proposed landscape plan provides an acceptable level screen planting, deep soil planting, communal open space and drainage to the site.

·      The proposed floor space has been effectively distributed across the site and appropriately designed to minimise any resulting environmental impacts upon surrounds.

·      The proposed building height variation is minor and isolated to single component of the development. The variation is not considered to impose any detrimental impacts upon the street or adjoining sites.

·      The proposed building bulk supports an intensity of use that is generally reasonable in the context of this site and considers adjoining amenity.

·      The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives of the zone.

 

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 subject development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary as the proposal will achieve the objectives of each 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 objectives or purposes of both standards are relevant to the subject development.

Third

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

 

Comments:

Compliance would, in this case, be unreasonable as the underlying objectives of the standards are achieved.

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

The development standards defining minimum landscaped area, floor space ratio and height, are not considered to have been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2A zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality. 

 

6.    Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. As a result of this notification, five (5) submissions were received:

17 Waverley Street, Randwick;

23 Waverley Street, Randwick;

25 Waverley Street, Randwick;

2/97-99 Wentworth Street, Randwick;

29 Waverley Street, Randwick.

Petition of 22 signatures;

 

Issue

Comment

Built form and compatibility:

The proposed development breaches DCP controls for maximum floor space, height and setbacks;

Proposal exceeds maximum FSR. The objection is not well founded:

The objection to FSR is not well founded.

The applicant has submitted a DA that exceeds FSR, demonstrating scant regard for the Council’s and the Court’s prior rulings.

Council is urged to give close scrutiny to the landscaping calculations.

The proposal gives only an estimate of wall height.

The side setbacks do not comply with the DCP and result in insufficient separation between adjoining properties, a loss of privacy and loss of solar access.

The lack of setbacks proposed result in increased impacts of amenity, views and outlook from Waverley Street.

 

The amended application proposes variation of the landscaped area, FSR and building height standards of the RLEP 1998. These variations are discussed within the “SEPP 1” section of this report.

 

The height, scale and massing of the proposed development, as amended, are considered to be generally consistent with the character of the streetscape. The development will maintain a scale that remains lower than the adjoining buildings.

 

The proposed setbacks are considered to be satisfactory and meet the performance requirements of the DCP.   The setbacks are sufficient in protecting adjoining amenity and allow for a reasonable multi unit development in the context of the 2C zone. Conditions have been recommended in responding to privacy concerns.

 

A breakdown of landscaped area was provided and has been discussed within this report. Both the provision of landscaped area and the landscape plan are considered acceptable.

The site is too narrow for the proposed development and does not comply with the setback requirements of the DCP.

The proposal acknowledges failure to meet the 12m setback requirements of the RFDC and therefore cannot be justified to provide a generous setback.  

There are no peculiarities with the site that make it unreasonable for the standards to be enforced.  

The proposal will provide for medium density housing which is promoted within the 2C zone, achieving the objectives of the zone.

View loss:

The proposal will result in total and complete loss of highly coveted view to Botany Bay and the Blue Mountains from verandah and master bed (Waverley St terraces);

The development results in unreasonable loss of amenity in respect of views currently enjoyed by Waverley St terraces.

The view loss results from a breach of a number of DCP variations.

According to the Principle of Tenacity, the proposal significantly and unreasonably reduces the amenity enjoyed by occupants of the Waverley Street Terraces.

The degree of non compliance with FSR worsens the view impact upon neighbouring properties through increased footprint and narrow separation.

 

The development does not unnecessarily obstruct views, maintaining an overall height well below the development standard of 12 metres.

 

View sharing is discussed within Section 13 of this report.

 

Visual and acoustic privacy:

View lines are available from Waverley Street terraces to and from living rooms and balconies of the proposed Waverley Street building;

Recommend full height and width privacy screens to glazed areas of east elevation;

Solid balustrades should be placed on east facing balconies for privacy;

Acoustic privacy issues will result from increased hard surfaces and loss of trees;

Unreasonable loss of privacy to the occupants of Waverley Street terraces

 

The proposal will not result in unreasonable impacts of visual and acoustic privacy. This issue is discussed further in Section 13 of this report.

 

Conditions have been recommended, where necessary, to address visual privacy between buildings.

 

Proposal does not respect the privacy of, among other properties, the Waverley Street terraces. The eastern aspect of the Waverley Street building will have direct view into the front areas of the Waverley Street terraces.

 

The development is not sympathetic to the acoustic privacy of the Waverley Terraces. The layout of the building and substantial courtyards will generate noise travelling directly toward Waverley terraces.

 

 

 

Heritage:

The area is heritage listed and renowned for this reason;

The proposal is inconsistent with and does not compliment or respect the Waverley terraces or those in Gordon Street.

Development does not respond to the unique architecture of the unique architecture of the nineteenth century workers housing opposite, in nature, size, colour, materials and style and will diminish the attributes of those existing buildings.

The proposed development is inconsistent with the key values and characteristics of the area.

Council should reject the application to maintain the integrity of the Conservation Area.

The design of the proposed development appears to be materially different from the adjacent unit blocks and the Waverley Street terraces.

Proposal does not continue patterns and forms which retain the existing themes and character of the conservation area.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Planner, who raised no objection to the proposal in relation to the nearby Conservation Area and Heritage items.

 

The proposal is not considered to detrimentally impact upon the aesthetic, historic or social significance of the conservation area or nearby heritage items. As such, the proposal is considered to be generally acceptable with regard to Clause 43 of RLEP 1998.

 

Solar access;

The proposal will block afternoon sun (to 23 Waverley Street).

The development will have a strong adverse impact upon the ground floor unit (unit 2) of the southern neighbour, providing less than the required three (3) hours. 

 

The proposal will not result in unreasonable obstruction of solar access. This issue is discussed further in Section 13 of this report.

Parking:

The proposal does not comply with the minimum requirements of Council, of which require at least 8 spaces.

Significant parking problems exist in and around the site.

No independent report prepared by a suitably qualified consultant has been made available to discuss the proposed parking situation;

The applicant notes the proposal is not compliant with visitor parking and provides no justification for this.

 

The proposal complies with the requirements stipulated in Council’s Parking DCP, requiring seven (7) spaces.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the application and raised no objections on traffic grounds.

 

 

Other:

The proposed window treatments including glazing, to the east elevation are not annotated.

No detail provided regarding Waverley Street boundary fence- it would be appropriate to require non transparent fencing to act as a privacy device.

Council should confirm the landscape plan will adequately cover the fence to provide privacy across Waverley Street.

Request Council review the tree species provided for screening in the rear courtyards fronting Waverley Street for appropriateness. The trees should cover living spaces for privacy from Waverley Street. 

The landscape plan indicates two trees on the public way of Waverley Street.

Landscaping is misrepresented in the SEE montages, showing landscaping that is proposed for removal.

Concern in relation to carelessness in the preparation of documentation relating to aspects fronting Waverley Street that were contentious in the previous application.

Property devaluation;

The development is not in the interest of local residents, the local character of the area or the public interest.

 

Window operation and glazing treatments were clarified by way of a fenestration schedule on 5 October 2012.

The Waverley Street frontage is provided with a 1.4m high open style picket fence. The landscape plan provides sufficient screen planting, while the upper balconies of the Waverley Street building are shown to have louvred privacy shutters. Additional privacy conditions have been recommended on the east elevation, where necessary.

 

Council’s Landscape Development Officer has reviewed the application and advised the species proposed are generally suitable for screen planting. No planting is proposed on the public way of Waverley Street.

 

The presence of trees being removed on the montages is noted, however does not affect the assessment of the application.

As discussed throughout this report, the development is considered to provide a considered design that minimises impact upon neighbours, while remaining sympathetic to the character of the locality.

 

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

 

 

As a result of the amendments of 5 October 2012, the application was re-notified between 26 October 2012 and 9 November 2012. One (1) submission was received in response:

 

29 Waverley Street, Randwick.

 

Issue

Comment

Reiterates points of earlier submission:

Proposal exceeds maximum FSR;

Objection to FSR standard not well founded;

Repeated attempts to exceed FSR requirements. Non compliance with the parking requirement and incorrect claims regarding street parking;

Inadequate separation.

 

The amended application proposes variation of the landscaped area, FSR and building height standards of the RLEP 1998. These variations are discussed within the “SEPP 1” section of this report.

 

The height, scale and massing of the proposed development, as amended, are considered to be generally consistent with the character of the streetscape. The development will maintain a scale that remains lower than the adjoining buildings.

 

The proposed setbacks are considered to be satisfactory and meet the performance requirements of the DCP.   The setbacks are sufficient in protecting adjoining amenity and allow for a reasonable multi unit development in the context of the 2C zone. Conditions have been recommended in responding to privacy concerns.

 

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 Engineering

An amended application has been received for demolition of all structures within the site and construction of a residential flat building containing 5 x 2 bedroom units with basement car parking for 7 vehicles.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Architectural Plans by Nexus Architecture P/L dated 02/09/12;

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by JBA Planning;

·      Detail & Level Survey by CitiSurv P/L;

·      Landscape Plan by Wendy Balafoutis Garden Design, dwg 1211/01, revision B, dated September 2012 and stamped 5 October 2012.

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention is required for this development.

 

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

 

Traffic Comments

Parking provision –

 

Residential Requirements     5 x 2 bedroom units    = 5 x 1.2   =      6.00 spaces

Visitor requirements           5 x 0.25                                   =      1.25 spaces

 

Total Car Spaces Required = 7.25 spaces (say 7.00 spaces)

Total Car Spaces Provided = 7.00 spaces     

 

Carpark layout -

The car park layout has been amended as per Development Engineerings requirements dated 9 August 2012.

 

Service Authority Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

There are no overhead wires that run along the subject side of Wentworth Street.

 

Landscape Comments

The inspection revealed that there is no established vegetation within the front portion of the site, with the self-seeded Plane Trees along southern side setback able to be removed, as can the Moreton Bay Fig along the northern side.

 

Progressing into the rear yard, the 4-5m tall Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle), along the southern boundary, adjacent the southeast corner of the existing building, is not significant in anyway, and so can be removed in order to accommodate the new building as shown.

 

Still in the rear yard, on higher ground around the free standing shed, across the width of the rear (eastern) boundary, there is a dense grouping of environmental weed trees comprising a Schefflera actinophylla (Umbrella Tree), a Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) and a Cotoneaster species (Cotoneaster).

 

While they may perform a screening and privacy function from those properties on higher ground to the east, they are all deemed undesirable, and unsuitable for retention as part of this proposal, with conditions in this report requiring that they be removed replaced with more appropriate species that have been shown for this same area of the site on the landscape plan.

 

The Landscape Plan shows both hard and soft treatments throughout the whole of the site, and while it has been slightly amended from the original submission to comply with Council’s requirements, there are still some items that need to be addressed in relation to plant selection and arrangement, with relevant conditions addressing Council’s concerns included in this report.

 

7.2      Building Surveyor

 

The Building Surveyor raised no objection to the application. A number of conditions were recommended and have been incorporated into the below schedule.

 

7.3      Heritage Planner

 

The Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site has frontages to both Wentworth Street and Waverley Street and is occupied by a single storey Californian Bungalow cottage which retains much of its original character including face brick walls, timber windows and timber gable detailing.  Surrounding development in Wentworth Street comprises a mixture of single storey and double storey cottages and three storey residential flat buildings.  Surrounding development on the western side of Waverley Street comprises rear garages to the single dwellings and residential flat buildings which front Wentworth Street with plantings in some rear gardens and on the street verge which contribute to the visual qualities of the streetscape.  The eastern side of Waverley Street comprises the Gordon Square conservation area, with two Victorian terrace groups which contribute to the heritage value of the conservation area.  The Statement of Significance for the conservation area notes that the housing stock is an interesting mixture of terraces and row houses, and detached and semi-detached cottages with a number of intrusive residential flat buildings. 

 

Controls

The Matters for Consideration included in Section 79C of the EP and A Act require Council to consider the likely impacts of a development on the natural and built environment, while Clause 43(5) of Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation) allows Council to require the preparation of a heritage impact statement for development in the vicinity on the heritage significance of a heritage item. 

 

History

A previous development application for a medium density development of three storeys over basement carparking (DA/767/2009) was refused in February 2011. 

 

Proposal

The application proposes to replace existing cottage with a medium density development having a two and three storey scale over basement carparking.  The development is to be in the form of two separate blocks, one fronting Wentworth Street and one fronting Waverley Street.  The Wentworth Avenue block will have a scale of three storeys on a low podium, while the Waverley Street block will have a scale of two storeys.  As compared to the previous proposal, the current proposal has reduced the scale of the Waverley Street block from three storeys (partially excavated below street level) to two storeys and has increased the setback of the Wentworth Street block from the northern boundary. 

 

 

Comments

The proposed development will introduce a new building envelope into the Waverley Street streetscape which currently comprises rear gardens as well as single storey garages built to the street alignment (with the higher main building on the site considerably set back).  The setback and scale of the proposed two storey block will break the predominant building line.  It is considered however that the form of the proposed development will not adversely impact on the heritage significance of the Gordon Square Conservation Area.  Surrounding buildings include rendered and painted walls to the terraces in the conservation area, and blonde and red face brickwork to the more recent residential flat buildings, so there is considerable diversity in materials and finishes with little consistency which would dictate a particular wall finish for the proposed development. 

 

The 4.8m setback of the new building from Waverley Street will comprise a 2.0m wide terrace and a retaining wall and planter box with a total depth of around 1.5m.  The remainder of the area will be available for soft landscaping.  It is considered that the width of the landscaped area is sufficient to allow for plantings to contribute to the visual quality and amenity of the Waverley Street streetscape and the outlook of the terraces in the heritage conservation area.  It would also be preferable for the existing dense plantings within the street verge area were retained as part of the proposed development. 

 

Planning comment:

 

The comments of the Heritage Planner are noted and have been considered in the assessment of the application.

 

8.    Master Planning Requirements

 

Clause 40A(1) of RLEP 1998 provides that consent may be granted to a development application made in respect of a site consisting of more than 10,000m2 only if:

 

(a)   A master plan has been adopted; and,

(b)   The consent authority is satisfied that the development is not inconsistent with the provisions of that master plan.

 

The site has a land area of 585.3m2 and a master plan is not required.

 

9.    Statutory Instruments and Controls

 

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

 

10. Relevant State Environmental Planning Policies – S79C(1)(a)

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by a BASIX Certificate, pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. Should the proposal be supported, these commitments could be required through conditions of consent.

 

10.2   State Environmental Planning Policy 65- Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)

The proposal as lodged was subject to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (SEPP 65) – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings. On this basis, Council’s Design Review Panel provided comment on the application, as below.

 

Panel comment

This is the first time the Panel has reviewed this Development Application, although the Panel reviewed a previous application for the site, most recently in March 2010. The Panel understands that the previous DA and a subsequent S82 review were rejected by the Councillors and then the Land and Environment Court, despite the positive appraisal by both Council planners and this DRP.

 

The Panel has been supplied with the Court judgement. In the Panel’s opinion, the judgement is thorough but gives too much weight to the technicalities of abstract numeric compliance, when the actual quanta of the variations sought were relatively minor. In so doing the judgement gave insufficient weight to the site’s strongly urban situation, the varied form and character of the surrounding buildings, and the merits of the proposed design.

 

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

 

1.   Relationship to the Context of the Proposal

The site extends west to east from Wentworth St to Waverley St.  Waverley St is approximately 4.5 m higher than Wentworth St.  It is surrounded by many multi-storey residential flat buildings along both sides of Wentworth Street, while Waverley Street has a distinctive frontage of closely spaced two storey terrace houses, which are at the heart of a Conservation Area. The area is mixed and of varying quality.  Some new and old buildings in the area have architectural merit, though not the immediate neighbours to the north and south. The existing dwelling and garden to be demolished do not appear to have any significance.

 

Good contextual information has been provided describing the immediate neighbours and some photography of surrounding buildings is included. Extensive shadow diagrams have also been provided.

 

The proposal has two buildings, each facing the street frontages, framing a central open space.  The two buildings have separate type, scale and character that sensibly reflect the two differing street frontages to Wentworth and Waverley Streets. Two photo montages were presented to the Panel – one from each street frontage.

 

The Panel suggests that a north/south section be prepared, and elevations along the east/west boundaries so that the wall heights and ground lines can be fully understood and impacts to neighbours known.

 

Planning response:

The comments of the panel are noted.

 

Additional sections and elevations were provided by the applicant on 5 October 2012.

 

In relation to the Context principle of SEPP 65, there are a number of merits associated with multi unit housing in this location. The amended proposal is supported by this assessment.

 

2.   The Scale of the Proposal

The Panel supports the following aspects of the submitted scheme;

·      an apartment building facing Wentworth Street, which is dominated by 3 and 4 storey apartment buildings

·      a pair of contemporary terrace houses facing Waverley Street, in character and type well suited to this narrower street

·      the street setback to Wentworth Street, and the narrow driveway

·      a landscaped court in the centre of the site

·      the proposed areas of landscape

·      the 3m south side setback to the apartment building’s wall

·      the lesser side setbacks to the two storey terrace houses.

 

In the Panel’s opinion, the scale of the proposal can be improved by the following;

 

·         the apartment building to Wentworth Street would benefit from greater height to the street frontage, to better match the taller neighbours to each side. Either the living room could be made as a more generous volume, or the top apartment could be reconfigured as a two storey apartment, with a terrace to the rear where its bedrooms are currently located. This volume should be able to largely comply with the LEP height controls (the bedroom level would only need 2.4m ceiling heights)

·         the extended balcony on the north of the Wentworth Street building should be slightly reduced in length or screened  in consideration of the neighbour.

·         the Waverley Street terraces should be brought closer to the street - the Panel recommends a maximum of 4m from the face of the balcony to the boundary. Closer would be acceptable, matching the terrace houses opposite. The Panel considers that the opinion supplied by an expert witness to the Court that this was a rear boundary, and that therefore an 8 metre setback was required, to be an absurd misrepresentation of the context, and wholly negative in effect.

·         the terrace houses should be raised to the level of Waverley Street as a minimum – 400 – 600mm higher would be preferable

·         the two buildings create a consolidated deep soil area in the centre of the site. This should be increased in area by moving the terraces closer to Waverley Street, and adopting the apartment footprint from the previous DA. The 5.7m separation between the two buildings is considered inadequate. This central garden can provide a green outlook for all 5 new dwellings, and the neighbouring buildings to the north and south. This arrangement would also minimize overshadowing on the apartments to the south, and would be a much more intelligent urban response than just mimicking the context of barrack-style (even if compliant) unit blocks

·         the stair from the basement would be better located off the ramp between the buildings, and the current stair location given over to storage or a car space. The eastern part of the car park should shift east to remain directly under the terraces. The longer ramp could be steeper, reducing excavation

 

The Panel encouraged the Applicant to refine the details of the building so that the architectural drawings and the end product could match the intended proportions shown in the photo montages.

 

Planning response:

A number of the above comments, specifically those recommending any increase in height, bulk and scale or reduction in setback, were not pursued with the applicant. This position was based on the Land and Environment Court decision of NSWLEC 1224, refusing the previous application of DA/767/2009 based on excessive bulk and scale, in addition to the potential for detrimental impacts upon adjoining sites.

 

The applicant provided privacy screens to the balconies on the north of the Wentworth Street building within the amendments of 5 October 2012.

 

In relation to the Scale principle of SEPP 65, the resulting gross floor area and consequent bulk and scale are considered acceptable in the context of the site.

 

 

3.   The Built Form of the Proposal

See comments above

 

The drawings are considered to be lacking in informative detail about the construction. The Panel has requested more detailed drawings so that there can be some surety that the building’s finishes, materials and construction detail are consistent with the illustrated design.

 

Window fire treatment, where required, should be shown on the photo montage and elevations.

 

The lower terrace to Wentworth Street is shown with retained earth and an area for planting at the top edge and base of the retaining wall.  The footings and planter construction have not been shown in adequate detail.

 

Planning response:

Additional detail in relation to the proposal was provided by the applicant on 5 October 2012. The detail provided is sufficient for the purpose of assessment.

 

In relation to the Context principle of SEPP 65, there are a number of merits associated with multi unit housing in this location. The amended proposal is supported by this assessment.

 

4.   The Proposed Density

The proposed number of apartments and town houses is acceptable as a minimum.

 

The Panel considers that the proposed density of 0.76: 1 is low for a site zoned 2(c), and is an under-utilisation of prime urban land in an extremely well serviced area. The Panel would prefer the FSR to be closer to 0.9:1. 

 

The Panel notes that, over its 10 years of operation, it has reviewed a number of satisfactory proposals on smaller sites zoned 2(c), and therefore considers that a site area of 585.30m2 is not necessarily an impediment to  good design or efficient use of such an urban site.  Nor need it have adverse effects on nearby properties.

Planning response:

The comments of the panel are noted.

 

The above comments relating to increased bulk and scale were not pursued with the applicant. This position was based on the Land and Environment Court decision of NSWLEC 1224, refusing the previous application of DA/767/2009 based on excessive bulk and scale, in addition to the potential for detrimental impacts upon adjoining sites.

 

5.   Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

The proposal has the potential to provide good passive solar design outcomes.  The Panel notes that the planning arrangements provide good natural daylight and cross ventilation to all dwellings.  Winter sun access could be improved by providing skylights

on both buildings.

 

Window and door placement and operation should be designed to;

·      allow night time ventilation without compromising security

·      accommodate different weather conditions

·      allow occupants a variety of ventilation options.

 

This is not clear on the drawings. Areas of fixed glass, and reliance on sliding doors for ventilation are not considered good outcomes. Windows to laundries could be added and a second window to bedrooms for better ventilation (possibly indented for both bedroom and bathroom windows to achieve privacy from neighbours).

 

Sunshading and weather protection (appropriate to orientation) should be added to north and south facing windows.

 

Ceiling fans should be provided in all bedrooms and clearly shown on the plans.

 

Water retention for garden watering and car washing should be provided. The position of the rainwater tank should be clearly shown. A storage tank under the driveway should be investigated.

Outdoor clothes drying areas have been provided.

 

Planning response:

Additional detail was provided on 5 October 2012, including:

An additional skylight provided to the upper floor unit of the Wentworth Street building;

Window operation and glazing treatment clarified by way of a fenestration schedule;

Bedroom windows incorporated with operable louvres to allow night time ventilation, security and weather protection;

Ceiling fans have been provided in some bedrooms and illustrated on the plans. A condition recommending installation in all bedrooms has been recommended;

Rainwater tanks have been identified in suitable locations along the northern and southern elevations.

 

The detail provided is considered sufficient for the purpose of assessment and appropriately responds to the feedback of the Panel.

 

6.   The Proposed Landscape

The landscape areas shown exceed the LEP requirements, as demonstrated in the drawing and calculation submitted by the architect.

 

A landscape design has been submitted, however it is of mediocre quality as;

·      rainwater tanks, needed for irrigation, have not been shown

·      trees to be removed have not been shown

·      the plan does not adequately differentiate between deep soil planting and that on podiums

·      the planter in the common stair is an improbable design

·      there are no sections through the planters

 

The Panel recommends that a qualified Landscape Architect be engaged to prepare the landscape design. 

 

The deep soil area should provide for the inclusion of large trees in the landscape design.

The enlarged central courtyard area should be the emblematic element of the site planning, enhancing the environment for the residents and neighbours on both sides.

 

Planning response:

Additional detail was provided on 5 October 2012, including:

An amended landscape plan, providing alternate means of screen planting along boundaries, alternate species within the internal courtyard,

Amended planter boxes to the Wentworth Street frontage;

Rainwater tanks have been identified in suitable locations along the northern and southern elevations;

A section provided illustrating deep soil arrangement within the internal courtyard;

Medium sized trees have been proposed within the setback to Waverley Street, the internal courtyard and appropriately along the site boundaries. This arrangement has been endorsed by Council’s Landscape Officer.

 

The detail provided is considered sufficient for the purpose of assessment and appropriately responds to the feedback of the Panel.

 

7.   The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

Apartments:

The Panel considers that the apartment footprint in the previous DA was slightly better than that now proposed, as it was more compact, with light from all sides to each apartment. The previous balcony also had more amenity and would be further improved if the curve widened to the north. The solid balcony balustrades to Wentworth Street provide attenuation of traffic noise and also assist with privacy.

 

Town Houses:

The generous 2 bedroom houses enjoy large living areas. However the bulkheads from the first floor bathrooms would impact on the ground floor ceilings – this should be further considered and resolved. The houses would have more amenity and options with private space at the front, side and rear.

 

As noted above, more advantage could be made in both buildings of the roof section, allowing some greater volumes and spatial interest, top lighting and ventilation.

 

With changes in line with the above comments the site planning can provide good amenity, sun, air and privacy to all units.

 

Planning response:

The comments of the panel are noted.

 

Additional detail was provided on 5 October 2012, including:

Balconies to the Wentworth Street building amended to provide increased area along the north elevation to benefit occupants and privacy measures for the benefit of northern neighbours;

The balcony balustrades fronting Wentworth Street are made predominantly solid and will contribute to attenuation of traffic noise;

Bulkheads within the Waverley Street building were clarified to have no impact upon achieving a 2700mm ceiling height to ground floor living areas;

The configuration and location of private open space provided to the Waverley Street building is considered satisfactory for the purposes of occupants and landscaping;

An additional skylight was provided to the upper floor unit of the Wentworth Street building;

Fixed highlight windows provided to the eastern elevation of the Wentworth Street building.

 

The proposal is considered to result in a high level of amenity for its occupants. Sufficient areas of open space are provided and opportunity for light and ventilation maximised where possible. 

 

8.   The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

Satisfactory. Casual surveillance of the communal spaces around and between the buildings is possible. By adopting the recommendations in this report, the presentation to the streets could be a positive aspect of the proposal.

 

Planning response:

The comments of the panel are noted.

The safety and security aspects of the proposal are supported by this assessment.

 

9.   Social issues

The mix of apartments and contemporary terraces houses is strongly supported as an appropriate use of this site.

 

Planning response:

The comments of the panel are noted.

 

10.    The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The aesthetics, as indicated in the elevations and photo-montages, are satisfactory however could be improved by the following;

 

·      The photo montage indicates that at street level the Wentworth Street frontage is dominated by rendered and painted walls that are lacking in refinement with regard to heights, stepping, car park entry, gates, balustrade and colour.  The Panel recommends that a well-regarded Landscape Architect be engaged to assist with the design of this area.

 

·      The details of elements such as planters, the roofs and balconies need to be clarified to demonstrate that the simplicity shown in the sections can be achievable.

 

Planning response:

Additional detail was provided by the applicant on 5 October 2012. The detail provided is sufficient for the purpose of assessing the aesthetics of the proposal.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Panel does not need to review this project again if the issues raised in this report are addressed to the satisfaction of the Council’s assessing officer.

 

Planning response:

The proposal, as amended on 5 October 2012, is considered acceptable and is supported in relation to the principles of SEPP 65.

 

11. Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

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

 

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

The objectives of Zone No 2C are:

 

(a)  to allow a variety of housing types within residential areas, and

(b)  to allow a range of community facilities to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, and

(c)  to enable residential development in a variety of medium density housing forms where such development does not compromise the amenity of surrounding residential areas, and

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

(e)  to enable a mix of housing types to encourage housing affordability.

 

Multi-unit housing development is permissible in the zone. The proposal will provide additional residential accommodation for the area and the proposal will have a bulk and scale that is commensurate with the adjoining development in the area and will provide a greater mix of housing types.

As such, the proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant zone objectives.

 

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

 

Clause

Required

Proposed

Compliance

22 Services

Adequate facilities for supply of water, disposal of sewage and drainage are required to support a proposed development

The provision of utility services will be required by appropriate conditions of consent.

Complies, subject to conditions

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of the site area (or 292.65m2)

 

 

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas not to exceed 50% of landscaped area required by part two (2).

60.67% (355.1m2).

 

 

 

52.6% (153.9m2)  of the landscaped area requirement is provided over podium or basement levels.

Complies

 

 

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

20F

Floor space ratio

0.65:1 for sites less than 700m2 in 2C zones

0.76:1 (466m2)

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

20G

Building height

(2) Overall height: 12m

 

(4) External wall height: 10m

Maximum height 10m

 

Maximum wall height 10.4m

Complies

 

Does not comply- SEPP 1 objection submitted.

40 Excavation and filling of land

Council to consider the likely impact on existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality, and the effects of the proposed works on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land

The proposal requires excavation to accommodate a basement car park. Suitable conditions are recommended to ensure works will not have any detrimental effect on the soil stability and environmental quality of the subject site and adjoining sites.  Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to the provisions of Clause 40.

 

Complies, subject to conditions

 

Clause 43 – Heritage provisions

Clause 43 of the LEP requires development to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views.

 

The subject site is located to the west of a number of sites in the Gordon Square Conservation Area, on the opposite side of Waverley Street. A row of heritage listed terrace houses known as “Gordon Terrace” are located in proximity, approximately 15 metres to the north-east.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Planner for comment, as outlined in Section 7, above.

 

It is considered that the form of the proposed development will not adversely impact on the heritage significance of the Gordon Square Conservation Area. Views achieved to the CBD from terraces in the Conservation Area

 

Surrounding buildings include rendered and painted walls to terraces in the conservation area, and blonde and red face brickwork to the more recent residential flat buildings. Given this, there exists considerable diversity in materials and finishes with little consistency which would dictate a particular wall finish for the proposed development. 

 

The considerable setback of the new building from Waverley Street will comprise deep soil area available for significant sized landscaping to soften and screen the development from the streetscape. These attributes will also contribute to the visual quality and amenity of the Waverley Street streetscape and the outlook of the terraces in the heritage conservation area.

 

The proposal is not considered to detrimentally impact upon the aesthetic, historic or social significance of the conservation area or nearby heritage items. As such, the proposal is considered to be generally acceptable with regard to Clause 43 of RLEP.

 

11.1   Draft Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Draft LEP)

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

 

The following table considers the proposed development having regard to the draft zoning provisions and development standards contained in draft LEP, as they relate to the subject development application:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

 

Zoning:

 

The site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential.

Yes.

Permissible under the proposed zoning?

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Max)

0.9:1

0.76:1

 

Yes. 

 

Height of Building (Max)

12m

10m

 

Yes.

 

Lot Size (Min)

325 m2

585.3 m2

N/A

Heritage:

·    In vicinity of draft heritage item and draft conservation area

The site is located in close proximity to Heritage Items and a Conservation Area. The proposed development is not considered to pose a detrimental impact upon the heritage significance of the Heritage Item or Conservation Area, as discussed in the body of this report.

 

12. Policy Controls

12.1    Development Control Plan – Multi-Unit Housing

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

 

Performance Requirement

Preferred Solution

Compliance

(Whether proposal meets Performance Requirements or Preferred Solutions.)

Site Planning

P1 Development applications accompanied by Site Analysis Plan.

 

The application was accompanied by a suitable site analysis plan reflecting the elements of the proposed development.  

P2 Development sites have appropriate areas/dimensions to allow for satisfactory siting of buildings.

S2 Sites are of regular shape with frontages of at least 20m.

The site is of regular shape with an existing frontage of 12.80m. Although this does not comply with the preferred solution for multi-unit development site frontages, it is considered that the dimension and configuration of the site is suitable for medium density housing purposes and will not compromise access to amenities for future occupants of adjacent properties. The site allows for satisfactory siting of buildings.

 

Height

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

 

The overall height of the development sits well below the 12m control of the LEP. The proposed external wall height comprises an isolated component of 400mm in excess of the standard, of which is discussed in the SEPP 1 discussion, above.

The proposal has a height and scale which is compatible with the surrounding built environment and does not detract from the prevailing character of the locality. 

 

The proposed development will not result in excessive bulk and scale when viewed from the Wentworth and Waverley Street streetscapes.

The proposal does not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining residential properties in terms of privacy, view loss, or visual bulk and scale.

P2 Variations in massing and height create visual interest, distribute the bulk of the building and minimise amenity impacts on the streetscape and adjoining properties.

 

The building distributed effectively across the site and is appropriately articulated with staggering wall alignments, a combination of materials, balconies, all contributing to visual interest.

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

Front setbacks to Wentworth Street are consistent with that established to adjoining development and are sympathetic to the character of the locality.

P2  Side boundary setbacks

Side setbacks to ensure:

 

§ Solar access maintained and overshadowing minimised.

§ Privacy between adjoining dwellings and open spaces.

§ Landscaping and private open space provided.

§ Streetscape amenity is maintained.

S2  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 5 metres.

 

 

 

No part closer than 3.5 metres.

 

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is 10 metres.

 

North (Wentworth St building): 1.8m to 3m  - Does not comply.

North (Waverley St building): 1.6m – Does not comply.

South (Wentworth St building): 2.1m - Does not comply.

South (Waverley St building): 1.6m- Does not comply.

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is approximately 14m. Appropriate openings, landscaping and materials have been incorporated for visual interest.  Satisfactory.

 

Setbacks to the northern boundary of the site do not comply with preferred solutions. This portion of the building does not contribute to overshadowing and represents minimal potential to overlook into the adjoining property as the windows and balcony areas have been indicated for provision with external louvres. Further, large openings adjacent to living areas have been concentrated towards the Wentworth and Waverley Street elevations, as well as at the ground floor courtyard/terraces areas. For detailed assessment of setbacks at the southern side, refer to below comments.

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

Ensure that:

§ Solar access and overshadowing are minimised.

§ Privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces provided.

§ Landscaping, communal recreation facilities and outdoor clothes drying spaces provided.

§ Building built across site.

S3  Zone 2C

Minimum average setback 8 metres.

No part closer than 6 metres.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation 10 metres.

Rear setback to Waverley Street – 7m (including balcony).

 

The proposed setback allows for deep soil planting and will not result in overshadowing, visual privacy or visual bulk impacts to surrounding properties or the street..

See discussion below for detailed assessment of setbacks and privacy. 

 

Maximum length of wall without articulation is approximately 9.5m. Complies.

P4  General

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

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

The proposed shading devices and design of the development will not result in significant shadow impacts on the adjoining properties.

Density

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

 

The proposed development is not inconsistent with the character of the locality and the proposed dwellings maintain even distribution of scale and form to ensure that adequate character/scale elements are afforded to the streetscape.

Building bulk has been distributed to avoid unacceptable impacts upon adjacent properties.

Fences

P1  Fences to be/have:       

§ consistent with streetscape;

§ Entrances highlighted; and

§ Planting used to soften and provide privacy.

S1 Solid front fences no higher than 1.2 metres. May increase to 1.8 metres when 50 % transparent.

 

The proposal includes fencing to both street frontages.

 

The Waverley Street frontage is provided with a 1.4m high open style picket fence with security gate and landscaping. This minimises visual bulk by maintaining an open design consistent with the open and low scale residential nature of Waverley Street. A retaining wall is proposed behind the fence featuring planter boxes and terraced areas. This will provide additional landscaping opportunities to soften the appearance of the development when viewed from Waverley Street as well as provide privacy to the occupants. 

 

The proposal also includes a number of stepped planter boxes of less than one (1) metre in height, within the front setback (which partially act to retain the courtyard for unit 1 at the ground floor) to the Wentworth Street frontage adjacent to the open driveway area leading to the basement car park. The design is considered an effective approach to softening the building and stepping down to the streetscape.

Landscaping and Private Open Space

P1  Landscaped Areas

Areas are sufficient size allow recreational activities and substantial vegetation.

S1 Minimum for landscaped area 2 metres.

Each dwelling has an allocated area for outdoor recreation with a minimum of 18sqm. Complies.

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

 

Portions of the central courtyard are communal. Courtyards, terraces and balconies have been dedicated to all units and sufficiently screened to ensure privacy and amenity to future occupants. 

P3  Private Open Space

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

 

Each unit is provided with direct access to private outdoor recreation areas. Complies.

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

 

Private open space is provided to both street frontages, central courtyard, and adjacent to the northern boundary.

The site is bounded by appropriate fencing and planting and does not detract from the streetscape. Complies.

P5  Townhouses

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

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

The townhouse style dwellings within the Waverley Street building benefit from courtyards of over 50m2 and minimum dimension of 3 x 4 metres.

P6  Flats and apartments

Each dwelling has direct access to an area of private open space.

S6 Minimum of 8 m2 and minimum dimension of 2 metres.

Private balconies and courtyards provide of sufficient dimension.

Privacy

P1  Visual Privacy

Windows and balconies of main living areas are located to avoid overlooking windows in adjoining dwellings and private open space.

S1 Offset, angle or screen windows with less than 10m separation. Sill level of 1.6 metres above floor level.

 

The proposal includes openings to the eastern (Wentworth Street), western (Waverley Street), northern and southern elevations. 

The majority of large openings at the ground floor are positioned toward the private courtyards fronting the street and balconies have been provided with solid sides to ensure reasonable levels of privacy for the existing residential flat buildings to the north and south. 

This is acceptable in terms additional overlooking and loss of privacy for adjoining dwellings.

Most windows are adequately offset and sufficiently protect the privacy of adjacent properties.

The proposal is deemed to be acceptable in this regard and screening is to be provided where overlooking is likely to occur. Suitable conditions included where necessary.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

The private open space of each dwelling is located away from that of other units. The ground floor open spaces are adequately screened/separated by planter boxes and fencing. Proposed balconies are generally directed toward the Wentworth and Waverley Street frontages. Satisfactory.

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

Satisfactory.

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

A standard condition is recommended to require the proposed works to comply with the Building Code of Australia. Complies, subject to condition.

View Sharing

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

 

View sharing is discussed within Section 13 of this report.

The development does not unnecessarily obstruct views, maintaining an overall height well below the development standard of 12 metres.

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

The overall height of the development allows some view corridors over the site to be retained where possible.

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

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

 

Refer to detailed discussion below.

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

 

The proposal will not result in unreasonable overshadowing impacts on the solar panels on the rooftops of adjoining dwellings.

P1.2 Living areas of neighbours’ dwellings receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

Refer to detailed discussion below.

P1.3 Neighbour’s principal private outdoor open space receives 3 hours of sunlight over at least 50% of its area throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

Refer to detailed discussion below.

P4  Building Layout, Design and Construction

Protect from prevailing strong winds and adverse weather.

§ Living areas are orientated to the north.

§ Larger windows are located on the north.

S4 75% of dwellings achieve 3.5star Nat HERS rating or equivalent.

No dwelling achieves less than 3 stars. The Anthers rating for each dwelling (on a typical unit basis) is provided with the application.

A BASIX certificate will be required as a condition of consent to ensure compliance with the commitments stipulated on the certificate through to the construction phase.

P5 Buildings have roofs with pitch suitable for solar collectors.

S5  Adequate area of roof between 45 degrees east and 45 degrees west or north, and a slope between 15 and 55 degrees to the horizontal for installation of solar collectors.

The proposed roof design is considered satisfactory in relation to supporting any potential future installation of solar panels.

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

Satisfactory.

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

Complies.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

Complies.

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

Complies.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

Conditioned.

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

Conditioned.

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

Conditioned.

Parking

Required On-site Parking:

 

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

 

Visitor parking is 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

The proposal provides a total of seven (7) spaces and complies numerically with the parking rates specified in the DCP – Parking.

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

 

Parking is located within a basement level, of which is well integrated into the design of the building. The proposed parking area is not readily visible from the street and will not dominate the frontage in relation to bulk and scale.

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

 

Not required as the development comprises of only five (5) units.

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

The DCP requires a minimum of three (3) bicycle parking spaces. A bicycle storage area is shown within the basement car park accommodating three (3) bicycles. Complies.

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

The areas occupied by the access driveway are considered to be satisfactory and will not result in unacceptable visual impacts.

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

The proposed parking design has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineers. No objections were raised on traffic or safety grounds.

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

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Not applicable. 

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

S4 Driveways have a minimum width of 3m

 

Driveways are at least 1m from any side or rear fence.

Driveway measures three (3) metres in width. Complies.

 

Driveway is setback one (1) metre from the northern boundary. Complies.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

The proposal does not feature any large expanses of concrete adjacent to the street frontage. Satisfactory.

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

The proposal has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineers and no objections were raised on traffic or safety grounds.

Storage

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

S1 10m2 of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1m. At least 50% of storage space is within dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area. Storage facilities may be in basement areas, or attached to garages.

Unit sizes are generous and include built-in wardrobes to each dwelling. A storage area of 5m3 has also been provided to each unit within the basement.

Complies

 

13.      Key Issues and Areas of Non Compliance:

 

13.1  Setbacks

The application, as amended on 5 October 2012, proposes the following setbacks: -

 

Elevation 

 

DCP – Multi Unit Housing preferred solution

Proposed setback

Western setback (Wentworth Street)

Setback to be consistent with that of the adjoining development

6.2m

Eastern setback (Waverley Street)

Minimum 8m (including balconies);

No part of the building closer than 6m.

7m including balcony;

8m excluding balcony.

Northern side setback (Wentworth Street building)

Minimum of 3.5m

1.8m including balcony;

3m excluding balcony.

Northern side setback (Waverley Street building)

1.6m

Southern side setback (Wentworth Street building)

Minimum of 3.5m

2.1m

Southern side setback (Waverley Street building)

1.6m

 

Section 3.3 of the DCP outlines the following objectives and performance requirements, as relevant to the subject development:

 

·      Reduce the impact of development on adjoining land.

·      Ensure adequate separation between buildings fro landscaping, visual and acoustic privacy, sunlight penetration and private open space.

·      Integrate development with desirable characteristics of the established streetscape.

 

Side boundary setbacks

P2    Buildings are set back from the side boundary to ensure that:

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

·      Reasonable levels of privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces are provided.

·      Opportunities for landscaping and private open space are provided.

·      Streetscape amenity is maintained.

 

Rear boundary setbacks

P3    Buildings are set back from the rear boundary to ensure that:

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

·      Reasonable levels of privacy between neighbouring dwellings and their open spaces are provided.

·      Opportunities for landscaping, communal recreation facilities and outdoor clothes drying spaces are provided.

 

North and south side setbacks:

The northern and southern side setbacks do not meet the preferred solution of the DCP, as outlined in the table above.

 

Notwithstanding, the development orients windows and balconies away from those of the adjoining properties where possible. Where north or south elevation windows or balconies are likely to arise in privacy issues to adjoining sites, the application provides privacy screens. The plans note this to be the case with all relevant first and second floor windows and balconies. In enforcing this commitment, a suitable condition has been recommended for privacy measures to all north and south facing windows and balconies. The proposed setbacks are not considered to result in unreasonable privacy issues.

 

Through effective variations in setback and the overall site strategy, the proposal maximises solar access to the southern neighbour, on a difficult east-west oriented site. The proposed setbacks are not considered to directly result in an unreasonable solar access impact to the southern neighbour, in the context of this site. Solar access is discussed in more depth in the following sections.

 

The proposal provides for a sufficient level of separation from both northern and southern neighbours, typical of multi-unit development density in a Residential 2C zone. The setbacks provided are sufficient for the purpose of landscaping for screening and softening purposes. The side setbacks proposed are well distanced from each street frontage (six (6) metres from Wentworth Street and eight (8) metres from Waverley Street), such that the amenity and character of the streetscape will not be unreasonably compromised, particularly when considered in the context of the neighbouring building forms.

 

Given the relatively narrow allotment width, to adopt the preferred solution would not enable floor plates with functional dimensions. In providing the proposed side boundary setbacks, the proposal does not give rise to any unreasonable amenity impacts that would not be expected in the context of this site.  Given the above and those issues further addressed in this report, the relevant objectives and performance requirements are satisfied and the average setbacks are acceptable.

 

Rear, Waverley Street setback:

The rear, eastern boundary setbacks do not meet the preferred solution of the DCP, as outlined in the table above.

 

At present, the western side of Waverley Street is characterised by a mixture of detached garages, fencing and vegetation. The garages are generally built closely to the street alignment. Opposite, a row of two (2) storey terraces located within the Gordon Square Conservation Area is built up to the footway.

 

Comparatively, the proposed eastern building component comprises two (2) contemporary terrace style dwellings, the bulk of which is substantially setback eight (8) metres and sits 1500mm below street level. The above discussed wall height variation (SEPP 1), does not apply to this elevation.

 

This eastern component of the proposal provides a considered response to the context of the Conservation Area located on the opposite side of Waverley Street. The generous extent of rear setback and low siting, in conjunction with the proposed landscaping treatment will appropriately soften the appearance of the development. This approach to built form provides a discrete response to the current context of Waverley Street, where many structures are built up to and at level with the street frontage.

 

The above design attributes will furthermore, minimise privacy impacts through sufficient separation and screening, to the terraced cottages on the opposite side of Waverley Street.

 

Figure 9: Proposed Waverley Street frontage, as lodged on 18 June 2012.

 

The proposed rear setback is further justified by the benefit of a communal courtyard located centrally within the site. The courtyard serves to break up the built form and provide direct solar access benefit to the southern neighbour, while enabling cross ventilation to all proposed apartments.

 

In light of the above, the proposed rear setback is considered sufficient and will not give rise to any significant adverse impacts to the amenity of adjoining properties or the Waverley Street streetscape.

 

13.2  View sharing

Two (2) objections were received in relation to view obstruction introduced by the proposed development. The objections were received from sites in Waverley Street, located to the rear of 95 Wentworth Street and achieving views above the aging, single storey development on the subject site, shown below.

 

Figure 10: Subject view corridor, viewed at street level on Waverley Street, through which the objecting sites achieve distant views.

Figure 11: The Waverley Street Terraces, from which view concerns originated.

 

The case of Ballas v Randwick Council  saw a proposed development of greater bulk and height fronting Waverley Street (figure 12, below). Within Commissioner Morris’s Judgment, the following response was provided to the contention of view loss:

 

To assist in the preparation of an alternate scheme, and if I am wrong in my conclusions with regard to the SEPP1 matters, I also detail my findings in relation to the remaining contention of view loss. In this regard, I concur with the evidence of Mr Harrison that the impact is to a view obtained across a side boundary and is from a building that complies with the wall height and maximum height controls for the site. For these reasons, I conclude that the loss of views is a not a reason to refuse the application but also note that the general reduction in bulk of the building as suggested by Ms Laidlaw could reduce the impact of the development on that view. A similar reduction in bulk could also provide better opportunities for deep soil planting, an aspect of this application which also warrants better consideration”.

 

- Commissioner Morris, Ballas Mendes Constructions Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1224

 

Planning principle relating to view sharing:

View sharing is considered in accordance with the planning principle established by Roseth SC pp25-29 Tenacity Consulting v Warringah [2004] NSWLEC 140, as below.

 

Assess the views to be affected and from what part of the property the views are obtained:

The views noted to be affected within the submissions received, include that of the Blue Mountains, Botany Bay and the CBD. The views are noted to be obtained from ground and first floor living spaces and bedrooms, over front and rear boundaries. The views are noted to be achieved from standing position.

 

The views are obtained through a corridor created by four (4) storey multi-unit developments on either side of the subject site.

 

Figure 12: Waverley Street frontage as refused under DA/767/2009.

Figure 13: Proposed Waverley Street frontage the subject of this assessment.

 

Figure 14: Section of the proposal. Waverley Street terraces are shown right of frame. Height and external wall height limits shown in green and blue, respectively.

 

Assess the extent of the views

Qualitatively, the view loss is considered negligible.

 

No iconic elements have been noted within the objections, only land and horizon views to elements located a significant distance away.

 

Assess the reasonableness of the proposal.

Those sites expressing concern in relation to view loss achieve distant and horizon views above the roof form an aging single storey dwelling in the Residential 2C zone. The views are achieved through a corridor hemmed by four (4) storey apartment buildings on either side of the subject site. The views achieved are not iconic, as defined by the principle.

 

The height of the proposed Waverley Street building, as illustrated in the section above, will be generally low enough to retain first floor views from the objecting sites above the proposed development. The proposed height of approximately 7.5 metres to the rear component remains significantly below the development standard of 12 metres.

 

It is acknowledged that the proposed development contains deviations from the development standards of the LEP. Notwithstanding, these aspects do not directly contribute to the view issues, as the proposal has adopted a form and scale that are suitable to the site and consistent with immediate context. Further, the proposal is considered to be reasonable and satisfies the broad performance requirements of the Multi-Unit Housing DCP.

 

A degree of view impact to sites across Waverley Street is inevitable with any reasonable development on this site. Any expectation that views in the subject circumstances will be completely retained through the ongoing development of a medium density zone, is unreasonable. View sharing in this instance does not provide any sufficient or reasonable grounds for refusal of the application.

 

13.3  Solar access

The site is oriented roughly east-west. As such, the proposal will affect solar access to the northern elevation of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street.

 

The development will not result in material shadow imposition on the terraces on the eastern side of Waverley Street.

 

In relation to shadow impacts resulting from the larger proposal of DA/767/2009, Commissioner Morris’s judgement provided the following response in relation to the southern neighbour:

 

“It is clear from the shadow diagrams submitted with the application that the overshadowing will be to rooms other than living rooms and accordingly, the controls of council are satisfied, the impact is severe in the morning and that the impact is from a building that meets the council's height controls in that location. I am however satisfied that this aspect of the application alone is not grounds to refuse the application”.

 

- Commissioner Morris, Ballas Mendes Constructions Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1224

 

The current application necessarily poses a solar access impact upon the southern neighbour, as it did in the proposal considered by the Court, above. Improvement occurs predominantly in the significantly reduced scale now incorporated to the proposed Waverley Street component, serving to provide less shadow upon 97- 99 Wentworth Street, and the communal drying area to the rear of this building.

The relevant performance requirements of the DCP relating to solar access are addressed as follows:

 

Solar access to windows and balconies:

P1.2 Living areas of neighbours’ dwellings receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

The following is noted in relation to solar access to the northern elevation openings of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street:

 

·      The majority of the surface areas of balconies / living room windows on the northern elevation of 97 -99 Wentworth Street will receive a minimum of three (3) hours of direct sunlight on 21 June;

·      The bedroom window to Unit 2 at the ground floor level is most substantially overshadowed on 21 June. Despite this, it is noted that the principal living room windows and balcony of Unit 2 are located on the western façade fronting Wentworth Street. The proposal will not affect these windows and they will receive satisfactory sunlight on the winter solstice.

·      Of the remaining bedroom windows on the northern elevation of the southern neighbour, all receive a minimum of three (3) hours of direct sunlight on 21 June.

 

Therefore, the proposal is considered to satisfy performance requirement P1.2.

 

Solar access to communal open space:

P1.3 Neighbour’s principal private outdoor open space receives 3 hours of sunlight over at least 50% of its area throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

There is an elevated concrete podium immediately to the rear of the multi-unit building at No. 97-99 Wentworth Street, which is currently being used as a clothes drying area. This podium is located adjacent to a hard paved area belonging to No. 101-103 Wentworth Street, which contains clothes drying facilities and hard stand car spaces.

 

Based on the submitted shadow diagrams, which are considered an accurate representation of the shadow impacts, the following is noted:

 

·      Greater than 50% of the hard paved areas of No. 101-103 Wentworth Street will receive 3 hours of sunlight from 12 noon to 3 pm on 21 June.

·      Greater than 50% of the elevated podium to the rear of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street will receive direct sunlight at 12 noon, 21 June. However, it will be substantially overshadowed at 9am and 3pm, 21 June.

 

The proposal is considered satisfactory in relation to the performance requirements of the DCP, as they relate to solar access.

 

13.4  Privacy

 

Wentworth Street building:

Principal living room windows and balconies are oriented to the east and west towards the streets. The northern balcony returns of the Wentworth Street building are provided with privacy screens. The southern extent of the balcony does not enable view to bedroom windows of the southern neighbour. The above measures will minimise cross viewing into the adjoining properties. 

 

Of the proposed balconies, general location away from adjoining bedroom windows is considered to maintain sufficient visual and acoustic privacy to adjoining apartment blocks.

 

The submitted landscape plan indicates the provision of screen planting along the perimeter of the site, which will enhance visual amenity and privacy protection to adjoining sites.

 

Waverley Street building:

The eastern block is oriented towards Waverley Street and has a setback ranging from seven (7) metres (edge of balcony) to eight (8) metres (building bulk). The proposed finished ground floor level of the building sits approximately 1500mm below the level of Waverley Street, lower than the terraces opposite.

 

The east facing windows and balconies at first floor level of the Waverley Street building are attached to bedrooms, a low intensity use area that will not generally result in the intensity of use equivalent to a living space. The balconies provided are of relatively small width, also encouraging low intensity use. The landscape plan identifies, amongst other plantings, two (2) medium sized deciduous trees within the rear setback for the purpose of privacy to the east.

 

In order to ensure the privacy of occupants and those within the Waverley Street terraces, a condition is recommended to require the balustrades of the first floor balconies be constructed with obscured glazing or thinly spaced louvres and the provision of a sliding louvre screens to openings, enhancing privacy protection for the aforementioned terrace houses.

 

Given these considerations, in conjunction with a generous rear setback, these openings and associated balconies are not considered to result in unreasonable overlooking of the terrace houses on the eastern side of Waverley Street, or the adjoining sites.

 

Stairwell:

The stairwell of the Wentworth Street block is substantially open on the southern elevation, and is capable of obliquely overlooking the bedroom windows of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street. A condition is recommended to require the installation of full-height privacy screens, in order to minimise adverse privacy impacts.

 

 

13.5  Development Control Plan – Parking

The DCP – Parking requires, amongst other things, car parking to be provided for multi-unit residential development at a rate of 1.2 spaces per 2 bedroom dwelling and one (1) visitor space per 4 dwelling units. Car parking provision is assessed in the table below:

 

 

Rate

Units

Required

Proposed

2 Bedroom

1.2 per unit

5 Units

 

6 spaces

7 spaces

Visitor

1 per 4 units

1.25 spaces

Total car spaces

7.25 spaces

 

The proposal generally complies numerically with the parking rates specified in the DCP – Parking.

 

The DCP also requires a minimum of three (3) bicycle parking spaces to be provided on site. A bicycle storage area is shown within the basement plan, capable of accommodating three (3) bicycles.

 

Council’s Development Engineers have assessed the application and no objections have been raised on parking or traffic grounds.

 

14.      Section 79C Environmental Assessment

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

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

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will 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

Refer to table above. 

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

The proposal generally satisfies the preferred solutions in the DCP Multi Unit Housing, 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.

 

 

15.      Section 94A Contributions

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable

Levy

S94A Levy

Development Cost

More than $200,000

$1,328,000

1.0%

$13,280

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:               Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

It is considered that the arguments presented are well founded and that the proposal will satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of relevant State and Local planning controls.

 

The SEPP 1 Objections lodged with respect to non-compliance with the landscaped area, floor space ratio and building height standards are considered to be well founded. The proposal will not result in unreasonable impacts upon the amenity of the surrounding residential properties in terms of visual bulk and scale, view sharing, solar access and privacy.

 

The proportions and massing of the development is considered to be satisfactory. The development scheme carries positive design merits and will enhance the streetscape character.

 

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

 

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/381/2012 for demolition of all structures on site, construction of a part three (3), part two (2) storey multi-unit residential development in two (2) building forms with five (5) units, basement car parking for seven (7) vehicles and associated works, at No. 95 wnetworth Street, Randwick, 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

Rev

Drawn by

Dated

Rec’d by Council

DA-01- Basement & Ground Floor

3

Nexus Architecture

2 September 2012

5 October 2012

DA-02- First & second floor plan

DA-03- Roof plan

DA-04- West & East elevations

DA-05- Sections & elevations

DA-06- Unit plans

2

30 January 2012

DA-08- External colours & facades detail sections

3

2 September 2012

DA-09- External colours & facades detail sections

DA-10- Construction detail

-

Landscaping Plan

B

Wendy Balafoutis Landscape design

September 2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received by Council

Multi Dwelling

231683M_03

16 March 2012

18 June 2012

 

 

Privacy measures

2.       Privacy measures shall be provided in accordance with the commitments detailed on the approved plans, unless amended by the following;

 

a.     North elevation:

·           Privacy screens proposed to first and second floor level windows of the Wentworth Street building shall be constructed to full height, with fixed louvers that are positioned and spaced effectively restrict viewing into the south facing windows of 93 Wentworth Street.

 

·           The proposed privacy screens attached to the northern elevations of the first and second floor balconies of the Wentworth Street building, shall have a height of not less than 1700mm as measured from the finished floor level, and be constructed with permanently fixed vertical louvers that positioned and spaced to restrict viewing into the windows of No. 93 Wentworth Street.

 

Details demonstrating compliance shall be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

b.     South elevation:

·           A full-height fixed privacy screen shall be installed on the southern elevation of the stairwell of the Wentworth Street building at first and second levels. The screen shall be constructed with fixed louvers that positioned and spaced to effectively restrict viewing into the north facing windows of No. 97-99 Wentworth Street.

 

Details demonstrating compliance shall be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

c.     East elevation:

·           Balcony balustrades facing Waverley Street shall be constructed of obscure/opaque glass to minimise overlooking toward the residential properties to the east of the site.

 

·           The proposed highlight windows corresponding to bedrooms of the Wentworth Street building shall be raised to a sill height of not less than 1500mm from floor level, to prevent cross viewing between the proposed buildings.

 

·           The proposed sliding louvered shutters attached to the first floor openings of the Waverley Street building, shall be operable and cover the full height of the opening.

 

Details demonstrating compliance shall be incorporated 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.

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

5.       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)       Ceiling fans shall be indicated on the plans for all bedrooms throughout the development and submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to the issue of construction certificate for the development.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

6.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 2 July 2007, based on the development cost of $13,280.00, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $13,280.

       

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

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

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

 

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

 

Sydney Water Requirements

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

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s waste water 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 details please refer to the Sydney Water web site at www.sydneywater.com.au for:

 

·           Quick Check agents details -  see Building and Developing then Quick Check and

·           Guidelines for Building Over/Adjacent to Sydney Water Assets – see Building and Development then Building and Renovating, or telephone 13 20 92.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must ensure that a Sydney Water Quick Check Agent has appropriately stamped the plans prior to issuing the construction certificate.

 

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

 

Security Deposit

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

 

·           $5000.00    -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Electricity Substation

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

 

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

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s waste water 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 details please refer to the Sydney Water web site at www.sydneywater.com.au for:

 

·           Quick Check agents details -  see Building and Developing then Quick Check and

·           Guidelines for Building Over/Adjacent to Sydney Water Assets – see Building and Development then Building and Renovating, or telephone 13 20 92.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must ensure that a Sydney Water Quick Check Agent has appropriately stamped the plans.

 

            New Street Tree

12.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $107.25 (including GST), being the cost for Council to supply and install 1 x 25 litre street tree, Pistacia chinensis (Chinese Pistachio), on the Wentworth Street verge, an equal distance between the proposed vehicle crossing and southern site boundary.

 

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

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

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia & Relevant Standards

13.     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).

 

14.     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) Standards 2010, relevant Australian Standards and conditions of consent, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority. 

 

BASIX Requirements

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

 

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

 

The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

Site stability and construction work

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Traffic conditions

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

 

Design Alignment levels

18.     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 be as follows:

 

Wentworth Street Frontage - match the back of the existing Council footpath levels along the full site frontage.

 

Waverley Street – match the top of the existing Council kerb level along the full site frontage.

 

The design alignment level/s at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the kerb/footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

       

19.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $614.40 calculated at $48.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

20.     The internal access driveway must be and constructed to match the alignment levels at the property boundary (as specified by Council) and the driveway must be constructed in accordance with the internal driveway gradients & distances as shown on the submitted plans (Dwg No DA-05 REV 3 dated 02/09/12). These details are to be included in the Construction Certificate.

 

Stormwater Conditions

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Internal Drainage

22.     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) either:

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

 

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

 

c)     Should stormwater be discharged to Council’s street drainage system, an on-site stormwater detention system must be provided to ensure that the maximum discharge from the site does not exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 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)      If connecting to Council’s underground drainage system, a reflux valve shall be provided (within the site) over the pipeline discharging from the site to ensure that stormwater from Council drainage system does not surcharge back into the site stormwater system.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

s)     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.

 

Site seepage & Dewatering

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

               

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

 

Groundwater

24.     Where the site is affected by groundwater or fluctuating water table (including during the course of construction), the following requirements must be satisfied:

 

a)    Groundwater and sub-soil drainage must not be connected or discharged to the stormwater detention tank or to Council’s street gutter or drainage system, unless specific written approval has been obtained from Council beforehand, and

 

b)    Groundwater and sub-soil drainage must be restricted from entering the basement level/s and the stormwater drainage system, by tanking and waterproofing the basement areas of the building, and

 

c)    Adequate provisions must be made for the groundwater to drain around the basement level/s and ensure that the basement will not impede the movement of the ground water through the development site, and

 

d)    Details of the proposed methods of managing groundwater, tanking and waterproofing must be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced Hydrogeological Engineer and be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority, prior to issuing the construction certificate.

 

Waste Management

25.     The garbage room/s shall be sized to contain a total of 7 x 240 litre bins (comprising 3 garbage bins, 3 recycle bins & 1 green waste bin) and with adequate provisions for access to all bins.  Details showing compliance are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

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

 

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

 

Certification and Building Inspection Requirements

26.     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 and the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be satisfied accordingly; and

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

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

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

 

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

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

 

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

 

 

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

·            location and construction of protective site fencing / hoardings;

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities.

 

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

 

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

 

Construction Traffic Management

30.     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 Wentworth Street for the duration of the demolition & construction works. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

a)       a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

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

·       A description of the demolition, excavation and construction works

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

·       Any proposed road and/or footpath closures

·       Proposed site access locations for personnel, deliveries and materials

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

·       Provision for loading and unloading of goods and materials

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

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

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

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

·       Measures to maintain public safety and convenience

 

32.     Any necessary approvals must be obtained from NSW Police, Roads & Maritime Services, Transport, and relevant Service Authorities, prior to commencing work upon or within the road, footway or nature strip.

 

Demolition Work Plan

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

 

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

 

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

·        Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

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

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

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

·        Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·        Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

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

·        Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

a)     Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Liability

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

 

            Public Utilities

36.     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.

 

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

 

Landscaping

38.     Landscaping at the site must be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan by Landscape Plan by Wendy Balafoutis Garden Design, dwg 1211/01, revision B, dated September 2012, and stamped 5 October 2012, subject to the following additional requirements being shown on an amended plan, which must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, prior to the commencement of site works:

a)       In order to maintain a clear line of sight of pedestrians and vehicles approaching from the north when exiting the site, the raised planter shown at the northwest corner must be deleted, with planting in this garden to be provided at grade only;

 

NOTE: Should a retaining wall be needed in order to support soil along the northern side of the basement entry ramp, it must not encroach within 1.5m of the front (western) site boundary.

 

b)       The most western screening tree (Acmena smithii ‘Cherry Surprise’) in the area described in point ‘a’ above, is to be deleted, with only low growing species that will not exceed 600mm in height at maturity to be provided in its place in this area; 

 

c)       Acacia longifolia (Wattle) shall be deleted from the planting plan and plant schedule, as despite being a native species, its use is not associated with high quality urban developments due to its untidy appearance and short life span, and is to be replaced with a more decorative and reliable, long-lived species, of similar form and function;

 

d)       In order to avoid over crowding and competition, the quantity of trees within the podium planting in the central courtyard (northern half) shall be reduced from four to a maximum of two, with other feature plantings to be provided in their place in this area;

 

e)       Soil and mulch/pebble/gravel details, irrigation, lighting, edging, paving, fencing/screening details, retaining walls and surface treatments/finishes, as well as any other elements in order to sufficiently describe the proposed landscape works;

 

f)       All planter boxes and garden beds constructed on slab must have a minimum soil depth of 600mm;

 

g)       In order to reduce the amount of storm-water generated by the site, as well as to recharge groundwater supplies, porous/permeable paving shall be used in all hard surfacing not over slab;

 

h)       To ensure satisfactory maintenance of the landscaped areas, an automatic drip irrigation system shall be installed throughout all planted areas. Details shall be provided showing that the system will be connected to the sites rainwater tanks, with back-up connection to the mains supply, in accordance with all current Sydney Water requirements;

 

 

i)        All detention tanks and below ground 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.

 

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

39.     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

40.     All work and activities must be carried out in accordance with the relevant regulatory requirements and Randwick City Council policies, including:

·           Work Health and Safety Act 2011 & Regulations

·           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

·           Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005

·           Relevant Office of Environment & Heritage / 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.

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

·            Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

·            Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

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

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

·            Asbestos waste must be stored, transported and disposed of in compliance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005.  Details of the landfill site (which must be lawfully able to receive asbestos materials) must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

·            A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (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.

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

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

 

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

 

Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring, piling or other measures are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Support of Adjoining Land

43.     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.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

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

 

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

 

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

 

Dust Control

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

 

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

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

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

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

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

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

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

·       Landscaping and revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

46.     Temporary site safety fencing or site hoarding must be provided to the perimeter of the site throughout demolition, excavation and construction works, to the satisfaction of Council, in accordance with the following requirements:

 

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

 

b)     Hoardings and site fencing must be designed to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work from falling into the public place or adjoining premises and if necessary, be provided with artificial lighting.

 

c)     All site fencing and hoardings must be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

d)     An overhead (‘B’ Class) type hoarding is required is be provided to protect the public (unless otherwise approved by Council) if:

·       materials are to be hoisted (i.e. via a crane or hoist) over a public footway;

·       building or demolition works are to be carried out on buildings which are over 7.5m in height and located within 3.6m of the street alignment;

·       it is necessary to prevent articles or materials from falling and causing a potential danger or hazard to the public or occupants upon adjoining land;

·       as may otherwise be required by WorkCover, Council or the PCA.

 

Notes:

·       Temporary site fencing may not be necessary if there is an existing adequate fence in place having a minimum height of 1.5m.

 

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

47.     Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works and the following requirements must be complied with to the satisfaction of Council:

 

a)     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.

 

b)     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.

 

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

 

d)     Access gates and doorways within site fencing, hoardings and temporary site buildings or amenities must not open outwards into the road or footway.

 

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

 

f)      Adequate provisions must be made to ensure pedestrian safety and traffic flow during the site works and traffic control measures are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Roads and Traffic Manual “Traffic Control at Work Sites” (Version 4), to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Site Signage

48.     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

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 1.00pm only

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Additional requirements for all development

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

 

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

 

Survey Requirements

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

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

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

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

·            as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

51.     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

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.

 

Traffic Management

53.     Adequate provisions must be made to ensure pedestrian safety and traffic flow during the site works and traffic control measures are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Roads and Traffic Manual “Traffic Control at Work Sites” (Version 4), to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Stormwater Drainage

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

 

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

 

55.     Any required dewatering must be monitored by the consulting Engineer/s to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority and documentary evidence of compliance with the relevant conditions of consent and dewatering requirements must be provided to the principal certifying authority and the Council.

 

The site conditions and fluctuations in the water table are to be reviewed by the consulting Engineer prior to and during the excavation/construction process, to ensure the suitability of the excavation and dewatering process and compliance with Council's conditions of consent.

 

56.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to any proposed discharge of groundwater into Council’s drainage system external to the site, in accordance with the requirements of Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

Internal Driveway Grades

57.     The internal access driveway must be and constructed to match the alignment levels at the property boundary (as specified by Council) and the driveway must be constructed in accordance with the internal driveway gradients & distances as shown on the submitted plans (Dwg No DA-05 REV 3 dated 02/09/12)

 

            Tree Removal

58.     Approval is granted for removal of the following trees:

 

a)     That small vegetation within the front setback, as well as those self-seeded species along both the northern and southern side setbacks;

 

b)     The dense group of trees in the rear yard, on higher ground around the free standing shed and garage, across the width of the rear (eastern) boundary, being a Schefflera actinophylla (Umbrella Tree), a Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) and a Cotoneaster species (Cotoneaster), as all are regarded as invasive environmental weeds.

 

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

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

 

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

 

Fire Safety Certificates

60.     Prior to issuing an interim or final Occupation Certificate, a single and complete Fire Safety Certificate, encompassing 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 copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be displayed in the building entrance/foyer at all times and a copy must also be forwarded to Fire and Rescue NSW.

 

Structural Certification

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

 

BASIX Requirements & Certification

62.     In accordance with Clause 154B of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, a Certifying Authority must not issue an Occupation Certificate for this development, unless it is satisfied that any relevant BASIX commitments and requirements have been satisfied.

 

Relevant documentary evidence of compliance with the BASIX commitments is to be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council upon issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Occupant Safety - Windows

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

 

Options may include one or more of the following measures:

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

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

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

·           Installing a fixed heavy-duty gauge metal screen over the opening (excluding openings upon the front or any street elevation of the building), such as a metal security screen or metal security mesh and frame system, but not standard fly-screen material,

·           Other appropriate effective safety measures or barriers.

 

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

 

64.     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.

 

65.     A single common television aerial, and/or satellite dish (having a maximum diameter of 700mm and not located on the front or street elevation of the building) is to be installed to serve the development.

 

Noise Control Requirements & Certification

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Security lighting

68.     Suitable security lighting is to be installed at the main pedestrian entry path to the development. The above lighting device is to be low level lighting where the light source is not located higher than 1.2m above the finished ground level, and is to be directed towards the ground. Details demonstrating compliance are to be incorporated in the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

69.     Lighting to the premises shall be designed in accordance with Australian Standard 4282-1997: Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting, so as not to cause a nuisance to nearby residents or motorists and to ensure that light overspill does not affect the amenity of the area.

 

a.   Security lighting shall be installed to common areas of the building. The driveway to the basement carpark must be illuminated by using low-level lighting (i.e. bollard lighting) from dusk to dawn.

 

Parking detail

70.     The proposed car parking bays are to be line-marked in accordance with the provisions of Australian Standard 2890.1: Off Street Car Parking. The proposed visitor car space is to be appropriately sign-posted. 

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

71.     The owner/developer must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

Wentworth Street Frontage

a)     Construct a full width heavy duty concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site in Wentworth Street.

b)     Re-construct kerb and gutter for the full site frontage except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit point in Wentworth Street.

c)     Carry out an asphalt reknit 1.00 metre wide, in front of the kerb and gutter along the full Wentworth Street site frontage.

d)     Reconstruct a concrete footpath along the full Wentworth Street site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

Waverley Street Frontage

e)     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 in Waverley Street.

f)      Provide a concrete footpath between the gate entrance and the Council kerb line, in Waverley Street.

 

72.     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.

 

73.     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 an occupation certificate being issued for the development, 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.

Landscaping

74.     Prior to issuing a Final (or any type of interim) Occupation Certificate/s, certification from a qualified professional in the landscape/horticultural industry must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, confirming that landscaping at this site has been installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan by Wendy Balafoutis Garden Design, dwg 1211/01, revision B, dated September 2012 and stamped 5 October 2012, as well as the relevant conditions of consent, with the owner/s to implement strategies to ensure that it is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

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

 

Sydney Water Requirements

76.     A section 73 Compliance Certificate, under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.  An Application for a Section 73 Certificate must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator.  For details, please refer to the Sydney Water web site www.sydneywater.com.au > Building and developing > Developing your Land > Water Servicing Coordinator or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Please make early contact with the Water Servicing Co-ordinator, as building of water/sewer extensions may take some time and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority and the Council prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate or Subdivision Certificate, whichever the sooner.

 

Stormwater Drainage

77.     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.     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.     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.

 

80.     The applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council certification from a suitably qualified and experienced professional Engineer, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority confirming that the basement tanking/waterproofing and any sub-soil drainage systems (as applicable) have been provided in accordance with the conditions of consent and relevant Standards.

 

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.

 

82.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

Fire Safety Statements

83.     A single and complete Fire Safety Statement (encompassing all of the fire safety measures upon the premises) must be provided to the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000

 

The Fire Safety Statement must be provided on an annual basis each year following the issue of the Fire Safety Certificate, and other period if any of the fire safety measures are identified as a critical fire safety measure in the Fire Safety Schedule

 

The Fire Safety Statement is required to confirm that all the fire safety measures have been assessed by a properly qualified person and are operating in accordance with the standards of performance specified in the Fire Safety Schedule.

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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

Stormwater Detention/Infiltration  System

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

 

GENERAL ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

A1      The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

 

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

 

A2      Demolition, building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

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

§  An Accredited Certifier or Council has been appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority for the development

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

 

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

 

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

 

A5      Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue Construction Certificates and be your Principal Certifying Authority for the development, to undertake inspections and ensure compliance with the development consent, relevant building regulations and standards of construction.  For further details contact Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team on 9399 0944.

 

A6      Specific details of the location of the building/s should be provided in the Construction Certificate to demonstrate that the proposed building work will not encroach onto the adjoining properties, Council’s road reserve or any public place, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

A7      This consent does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the land owner or principal contractor must obtain:

§  the consent of the owners of such adjoining or supported land to trespass or encroach, or

§  an access order under the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000, or

§  an easement under section 88K of the Conveyancing Act 1919, or

§  an easement under section 40 of the Land & Environment Court Act 1979, as appropriate.

 

Section 177 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 creates a statutory duty of care in relation to support of land.  Accordingly, a person has a duty of care not to do anything on or in relation to land being developed (the supporting land) that removes the support provided by the supporting land to any other adjoining land (the supported land).

 

A8      External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to any adjoining land.

 

A9      Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

A10     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.

 

A11     Finished ground levels external to the building are to be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised, other than for the provision of approved paving or the like on the ground.

 

A12     A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

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

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

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

 

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

 

A13     The necessary development consent and a construction certificate or a complying development certificate (as applicable) must be obtained for proposed external plant and equipment, if not included in this consent.

 

A14     An application must be submitted to an approved by Council prior to the installation and operation of any proposed greywater or wastewater treatment systems, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

 

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

 

A15     Air conditioning plant and equipment shall not be operated during the following hours if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises, or, as otherwise specified in relevant Noise Control Regulations:

 

§  before 8.00am or after 10.00pm on any Saturday, Sunday or public holiday; or

§  before 7.00am or after 10.00pm on any other day.

 

A16     The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

A17     Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                             11 December 2012

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP107/12

 

 

Subject:                  Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) for October to November 2012

Folder No:                   F2008/00122

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The NSW Department of Planning (DOP) released a Planning Circular in November 2008 advising Councils to adopt additional procedures in relation to the administration of SEPP No. 1. The additional measures are largely in response to the ICAC inquiry into Wollongong City Council. Those additional measures are:

 

1)     Establishment of a register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP1;

 

2)     Requirement for all development applications where there has been a variation greater than 10% in standards under SEPP1 to be determined by full council (rather than the general manager or nominated staff member);

 

3)     Providing a report to Council on the development applications determined where there had been a variation in standards under SEPP1;

 

4)     Making the register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP 1 available to the public on council’s website.

 

This report is in response to point 3) above. A table is attached to this report detailing all SEPP1s approved in the period from 1 October to 30 November 2012 nineteen (19) were approved during this period, with three (3) of those under delegation by Council Officer and sixteen (16) either by Planning Committee meeting or Ordinary Council Meeting.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       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 NSW Department of Planning (DOP) released a Planning Circular in 2008 advising of additional requirements Councils are required to adopt in relation to SEPP1 objections. This report is in response to one of those requirements whereby a report is provided to Council on the development applications determined where there had been a variation in standards under SEPP1. 

 

Recommendation

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

SEPP 1 between October to November 2012

 

 

 

 


SEPP 1 between October to November 2012

Attachment 1

 

 

 

SEPP 1 REGISTER BETWEEN OCTOBER TO NOVEMBER 2012

Council DA reference No.

Lot No.

DP No.

Apartment/Unit  No.

Street No.

Street name

Suburb/Town

Postcode

Category of development

Environmental planning instru-ment

Zoning of land

Development standard to be varied

Justification of variation

Extent of variation

Concur-ring authority

Date DA determined
dd/mm/yyyy

Approved by

DA/606/2011

10

 844436