Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 11 June 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                11 June 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 at 6:00 p.m..

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor (T Bowen), Andrews, Belleli, D’Souza, Garcia, Matson, Moore, Nash, Neilson, Roberts, Seng, Shurey, Smith (Chairperson), Stavrinos and Stevenson (Deputy Chairperson)

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members

 

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

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 14 May 2013

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Privacy warning;

In respect to Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act, members of the public are advised that the proceedings of this meeting will be recorded for the purposes of clause 66 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

Urgent Business

Development Application 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.

D39/13      6 Palmer Street, South Coogee (DEFERRED) (DA/496/2012)....................... 1

D40/13      311-313 Maroubra Road, Maroubra (DEFERRED) (DA/617/1997/C)............ 109

D41/13      86 Dudley Street, Coogee – (DA/452/2010/E)........................................ 123

D42/13      31 Midway Drive, Maroubra (DA/628/2012)............................................ 133

D43/13      2-6 Goodwood Street, Kensington (DA/195/2012/A) .............................. 211

D44/13      33 Lenthall Street, Kensington (DA/249/2013)....................................... 241

D45/13      29 Dolphin Street, Randwick (DA/720/2012).......................................... 259

D46/13      JRPP report for 20 Stanley Street, Randwick (DA/702/2012) .................... 321

Miscellaneous Reports (record of voting not required)

M10/13     Proposed listing of Kamay- Botany Bay National Park on the State Heritage Register   391    

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                                11 June 2013

 

 

Development Application Report No. D39/13

 

 

Subject:                  6 Palmer Street, South Coogee (DEFERRED) (DA/496/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/496/2012

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The development application involves demolition of majority of existing dwelling and carport, construction of part 2, part 3 storey dwelling with double garage, swimming pool and associated works.

 

The development assessment report for this application was withdrawn from the Planning Committee Agenda on 14 May 2013 to allow for a peer review to be undertaken of the merits of the proposal. A peer review was subsequently undertaken by Mr Lindsay Fletcher who is an independent planning consultant and is attached to this report.

 

Issues

 

The peer reviewer was satisfied that the “conclusions reached assessment report considered appropriately consider the relevant matters for consideration under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and regulations and arrive at a considered and justifiable conclusion that the proposed development warrants conditional approval, notwithstanding the concerns raised in public submissions.” Notwithstanding, the peer review did find some “errors or inaccuracies” that should be addressed, but did not lead the reviewer to a different conclusion as to the acceptability of the proposal. In this regard, the reviewer has arrived at a different calculation of the gross floor areas of proposal to that of the assessing officer. Whilst it is acknowledged by the reviewer that the areas to be counted as floor area are open to interpretation given the definition of “gross floor area”, the report has been amended to reflect the gross floor area arrived at by the reviewer. It should also be noted that the area in question is an open deck that does not add to the bulk of the building and is acknowledged by reviewer to be “most unusual” to be included within the definition of gross floor area.  A reference to a lower FSR preferred solution and the calculation of wall height in the assessment report was also clarified in the peer review and the report has been amended consistent with the memos previously provided to the Councillors on this issue.

 

The peer review has also noted that many of the submissions to the proposal “have failed to understand the distinction between a “preferred solution” and a development standard on DCP control”. The preferred solutions are not compulsory standards but are only one way of achieving the objectives. Council’s DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies is a performance based document that sets qualitative design objectives and allows the applicant to adopt innovative responses in the manner that the objectives are achieved. The reviewer is satisfied that the “approached adopted of assessing the proposed development against the “objectives” and “performance requirements” of Council’s DCP is the correct approach and leads to a considered and justifiable conclusion that the proposed development warrants conditional approval, notwithstanding the variations from the Council’s DCP “preferred solutions”.

 

The review has also recommended some additional conditions in relation to improving the privacy impacts on the adjoining property at No. 8 Palmer Street, increasing the floor to ceiling height of the proposal at the lower ground level to achieve a 2.4 floor to ceiling height, through some minor additional excavation and confirming that there is no additional excavation proposed beyond that identified in the DA drawings. These matters have been incorporated into the attached assessment report. The additional conditions are set out below:

 

1.  That the height of the eastern balustrade immediately adjacent to the eastern edge of the pool on the upper floor level be increased to a minimum of 1.6m above the finished floor level of the terrace for the length of that balustrade located south of the northern end of the proposed pool. Additionally, if the height of that balustrade located north of the northern end of the pool is not increased, a 1m wide and 1m deep planter is to be provided inside that balustrade on the section of the terrace located north of the pool in order to limit the proximity of people to the edge of the terrace and therefore limit the ability to look down into neighbouring private open space.

 

2.  That further excavation of the lower ground floor level be undertaken in order to achieve a minimum floor-to-ceiling height in habitable rooms of 2.4m. Further, the excavated material is to be retained and reused on site for minor filling as identified on the architectural plans or for infilling within the subfloor areas on the western  side of the lower ground. Floor.

 

3.  That prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the PCA is to provide written verification to Council that the floor area of the lower ground floor level on engineering and Construction certificate plans does not extend beyond that identified on Development Application drawing DA 2-7 issue B

 

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

 

The cost of the peer review is approximately $5,000.

 

Conclusion

 

The peer review has concluded that the application was appropriately assessed and warrants approval subject to some additional conditions.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/496/2012 for demolition of majority of existing dwelling and carport, construction of part 2/part 3 storey dwelling with double garage, swimming pool and associated works at 6 Palmer Street, South Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

2/7 Issue B

Domus Homes

May 2012

26 October 2012

3/7 Issue B

October 2012

26 October 2012

4/7 Issue C

March 2013

18 march 2013

5/7 Issue B

May 2012

26 October 2012

6/7 Issue B

May 2012

26 October 2012

7/7 Issue B

May 2012

26 October 2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Single dwelling

433803S

26 June 2012

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.       The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements and details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate plans and documentation:

 

a)       The eastern side roof overhang shall be reduced to a maximum of 450mm to minimise the impacts on existing views obtained from dwellings on the southern side of Palmer Street.

 

b)       The height of the balustrade along the eastern edge of the upper floor pool shall be increased to a minimum height of 1.6m above the finished terrace level for the length of that balustrade located south of the  northern end of the pool. Additionally, if the height of that balustrade on the section of the terrace located north of the pool is not increased to 1.6m, a 1m wide and 1m deep planter box shall be provided inside the balustrade on the section of the terrace located north of the pool.

 

c)       Further excavation of the lower ground floor area shall be undertaken in order to achieve a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.4m for habitable rooms. The excavated material must be retained and reused on site for minor filling as shown on the architectural plans or for infilling within the subfloor areas on the western side of the lower ground floor.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

Floor area (lower ground)

4.       Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate for the development, the appointed Principle Certifying Authority shall provide documentary verification to Council that the floor area of the of the lower ground floor on engineering and construction certificate plans does not extend beyond that identified on development Application Drawing DA2-7 Issue B.

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

5.      

a)   An amended schedule of external colours and finishes shall be to be submitted for the approval of Council’s Manager Development Assessments prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

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

c)   All materials used within the development shall be treated so as to minimise the impact of reflectivity upon neighbouring sites prior to installation. This may be achieved through powder coating or anodizing treatments.

 

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 $1,191.556, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $11915.55.

       

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.

 

Security Deposit

8.       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:

 

·           $2000.00    -      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

9.       The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

The design alignment level/s at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate (a construction note on the plans is considered satisfactory). The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $732.00 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.

 

Driveway Design

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

 

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

    

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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

12.     Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, detailed drainage plans with levels reduced to Australian Height Datum (AHD), shall be prepared by a suitably qualified Hydraulic Engineer and be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority.  A copy of the plans shall be forwarded to Council, if Council is not the certifying authority.

 

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

 

13.     A site stormwater drainage system is to be provided in accordance with the following requirements (as applicable):

 

a)     The stormwater drainage system must be designed and constructed to satisfy the relevant requirements in the Building Code of Australia,

 

b)     Roof stormwater must be directed to a suitably designed and constructed rainwater tank, as required in the relevant BASIX Certificate for the dwelling,

 

c)     The overflow from the rainwater tank and other surface stormwater must be directed to a suitably designed sediment/silt arrestor pit which drains to Council’s kerb and gutter outside the development site.

 

d)     Details of the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system and sediment site arrestor pit/s must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority with the Construction Certificate and all works are to be carried to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

e)     Any rainwater tank overflow/stormwater runoff which cannot be directed to the kerb and gutter at the front of the property (due to topographical constraints), shall be discharged by the use of a pump out system.

 

f)      Pump-out systems must be designed by a suitably qualified and experienced hydraulic consultant/engineer and the pump-out system designed and constructed generally in accordance with Council's Stormwater Code.

 

Pump-out systems must be provided with two pumps and be installed, connected in parallel (with each pump being capable of discharging at the required discharge rate) and connected to a control board so that each pump will operate alternatively. The pump wet well is required to be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2 hour storm assuming both pumps are not working,

 

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

 

h)     Details of the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system, sediment silt arrestor pit/s and pump out pits must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority with the Construction Certificate and all works are to be carried to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

14.     Sediment/silt arrestor pit/s are to be provided within the site at or near the street boundary prior to stormwater being discharged from the site. The sediment/silt arrestor pits are to be constructed generally in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority:

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

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

·        A minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes 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 located over the outlet pipe (Mascot GMS Multi-purpose filter screen or similar)

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

·        The inlet pipeline located on the side of the pit so that the stormwater will discharge across the face of the screen.

·        A sign adjacent to this pit stating that:

“This sediment/silt arrester pit shall be regularly inspected and cleaned.”

 

Site seepage & Dewatering

15.     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 levels (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.

 

Street Tree Management

16.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $415.25 (including GST) being to cover:

 

a.    The cost for Council to remove, stump grind and dispose of the existing street tree, Hibiscus tileaceus (Cottonwood, Tree 9) from the Palmer Street verge, near the western site boundary so as to accommodate the proposed relocated vehicle crossing as shown; and

b.    The cost for Council to supply and install 1 x 25 litre street tree of the same species back on the verge, an equal distance between the eastern edge of the crossing and the power pole at the completion of all works.

 

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

 

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

 

Tree Protection Measures

17.     In order to ensure retention of the group of five feature species in the rear yard, along the eastern site boundary, between the existing house and rear (northern) boundary, being from south to north, three Archontophoenix alexandrae (Alexander Palms, Tress 6-4), a Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani, Tree 3), and a Phoenix dactylifrea (Date Palm, Tree 2) in good health as has been shown on the submitted plans, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a)     Relevant architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services) and landscape plans submitted for the construction certificate application must show the retention of these five trees, with the position of their trunks and full diameter of the crowns/canopies to be clearly and accurately shown in relation to the proposed works.

 

b)     Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar in the rear yard, must be setback a minimum distance of 3.5 metres off their trunks, measured off their outside edge at ground level. If stormwater/drainage lines do need to be installed along the eastern side setback, they must be located as close as practically possible to the proposed patio/dwelling so as to minimise root damage

 

c)     This group of five trees/palms must be physically protected as one group by installing a row of evenly spaced star pickets that shall be installed hard up against the trunks of Trees 4-6 (so as to maintain the eastern side access), then step out to a setback of 1.5 metres off the trunks of Trees 2 & 3, extending 1.5m to the north of Tree 2, and matching up with the eastern site boundary, to which safety tape/para-webbing/shade cloth or similar shall be permanently attached, so as to completely exclude this group for the duration of works.

 

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

 

e)     Ground levels within this TPZ must not be altered by more than 200mm, with no other structures such as continuous strip footings, planters boxes or similar to be located in this area, and must remain as undisturbed, deep soil.

 

f)      Within the TPZ, there is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

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

 

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

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, 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

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

 

BASIX Requirements

20.     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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

 

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

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

Demolition Work Plan

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

 

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

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

·           Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·           Method/s of demolition (including removal of any asbestos)

·           Measures and processes to be implemented to ensure the health & safety of workers and community

·           Measures to be implemented to minimise any airborne dust and asbestos

·           Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·           Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·           Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

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

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

 

Demolition & Construction Waste Plan

27.     A Demolition and Construction Waste Management Plan (WMP) must be development and implemented for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Demolition & Construction Waste

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Utilities

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

 

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

 

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

 

Landscaping

31.     Prior to the commencement of site works, the PCA must ensure that the Landscape Concept Plan by Formed Gardens, dwg no.001, job no. FG 12 157, revision B, dated 25.6.12 is amended to include the following requirement:

 

a)  1 x 100 litre (pot/bag size at the time of planting) native feature tree (not a palm) being provided within the front setback, in the area of deep soil to the east of the driveway, selecting a species which will achieve a minimum height at maturity of between 4-7m, in place of the Canary Island Date Palm which needs to be removed.

 

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

32.     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

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

 

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

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

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

 

Restriction on Working Hours

34.     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

35.     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

·           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

36.     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

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

38.     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)     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.

 

h)     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

39.     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.

 

40.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

Survey Requirements

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

 

·            prior to construction (pouring of concrete) of the footings or first completed floor slab,

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

·            as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

43.     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

44.     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 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.

·           Relevant Road / Asset Opening Permit fees, repair 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.

 

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

 

Tree Management

45.     Approval is granted for removal of the following vegetation from within the site, subject to full implementation of the approved landscaping:

 

a)  The Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm, Tree 7), within the front yard, along the eastern site boundary, close to the southern edge of the existing awning, as despite being shown for retention on the plans, is regarded as an environmental weed due to the ability of its seeds to be spread by birds and invade native bushland, with its sharp and poisonous spines along both sides of its fronds making it unsuitable for residential situations, so must be removed as part of the works;

 

b)  The semi-mature Livistona australis (Cabbage Palm, Tree 10) within front setback, along the western boundary, as it is exempt from Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to its location within 2m of the entry area of the existing house, and is also in direct conflict with the works associated with the new dwelling as shown;

 

c)  The single Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palm, Tree 1) to the northwest of this group, on the northern boundary, as it is an exempt species under Council’s TPO due to its low landscape and amenity value, and can be replaced with the evergreen screening hedge (2-3m mature height) as has been shown.

 

Pruning of neighbours tree

46.     Permission is granted for the minimal and selective pruning of only those lower growing branches from the western aspect of the Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani, Tree 8), which is growing beyond the southeast corner of the site, within the front yard of the adjoining property at no.8, only where they overhang the common boundary and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the tree; or; interference with the works.

 

47.     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.

 

48.     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).

 

Site Amenities

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

 

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

50.     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

51.     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

52.     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 issue of an occupation certificate.

 

Swimming Pool Safety

53.     Swimming pools are to be provided with childproof fences and self-locking gates, in accordance with the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and regulations.

 

The swimming pool is to be surrounded by a fence having a minimum height of 1.2m, that separates the pool from any residential building situated on the premises and from any place (whether public or private) adjoining the premises; and that is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with AS 1926.1 - 2007.

 

Gates to pool area shall be a maximum width of 1 metre, and be self-closing and latching; the gate is required to open outwards from the pool area and prevent a small child opening the gate or door when the gate or door is closed.

 

A ‘warning notice’ must be erected in a prominent position in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool, in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Regulation 2008, detailing pool safety requirements, resuscitation techniques and the importance of the supervision of children at all times.

 

Swimming Pool & Spa Pool Requirements

54.     Swimming pools (and spa pools) are to be designed, installed and operated in accordance with the following general requirements:

 

a)     Backwash of the pool filter and other discharge of water is to be drained to the sewer in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation; and

 

a)     All pool overflow water is to be drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in a nuisance or damage to premises; and

                 

b)     Water recirculation and filtrations systems are required to comply with AS 1926.3 – 2010:  Swimming Pool Safety – Water Recirculation and Filtration Systems; and

 

c)     Pool plant and equipment is to be enclosed in a sound absorbing enclosure or installed within a building, to minimise noise emissions and possible nuisance to nearby residents.

 

Notification of Swimming Pools & Spa Pools

55.     Written notification must be provided to Council advising of the installation and completion of the Swimming Pool (or Spa Pool), to satisfy the requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992.

 

Council’s “Notification & Registration of a Swimming Pool” (which can be found on Council’s website under ‘Find a Form’) form must be completed and forwarded to Council prior to any Occupation Certificate being issued for the pool.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

56.     The owner/developer must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

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

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

c)  Reconstruct the concrete footpath along the full site frontage, where required by Council, TO IMPROVE GRADES OF THE Council footpath.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

57.     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.

 

58.     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.

 

59.     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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

60.     The applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer confirming that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system complies with Australian Standard 3500.3:2003 (Plumbing & Drainage- Stormwater Drainage) and the conditions of this development consent.

 

The certification must be provided following inspection/s of the site stormwater drainage system by the certifying engineers and shall be provided to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

Landscaping

61.     The PCA must ensure that landscaping at this site is installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by Formed Gardens, dwg no.001, job no. FG 12 157, revision B, dated 25.6.12, and relevant conditions of consent, prior to issuing a Final (or any other type of Interim) Occupation Certificate/s, with the owner/s to ensure it is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

62.     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.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Use of premises

63.     The premises is to be used as a single residential dwelling only at all times and must not be used for dual or multi-occupancy purposes.

 

External Lighting

64.     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.

 

Street Numbering

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

 

Waste Management

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

 

Plant & Equipment

67.     The operation of all plant and equipment on the premises 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 & Heritage (EPA) Noise Control Guidelines.

 

Swimming/Spa Pools

68.     The pool 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 8.00pm on any Sunday or public holiday; or

·       before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on any other day.

 

Air Conditioners

69.     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.

 

Rainwater Tanks

70.     The operation of plant and equipment associated with rainwater tanks are to be restricted to the following hours if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises:

 

·       before 8.00am or after 8.00pm on weekends or public holiday; or

·       before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

A7      This consent does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the land owner or principal contractor must obtain:

§  the consent of the owners of such adjoining or supported land to trespass or encroach, or

§  an access order under the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000, or

§  an easement under section 88K of the Conveyancing Act 1919, or

§  an easement under section 40 of the Land & Environment Court Act 1979, as appropriate.

 

Section 177 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 creates a statutory duty of care in relation to support of land.  Accordingly, a person has a duty of care not to do anything on or in relation to land being developed (the supporting land) that removes the support provided by the supporting land to any other adjoining land (the supported land).

 

A8      The finished ground levels external to the building must be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised, other than for the provision of approved paving or the like on the ground.

 

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

A11     The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

A12     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

Peer Review from Planning Ingenuity

 

2.View

Development Application Report - 6 Palmer Street, South Coogee

 

 

 

 


Peer Review from Planning Ingenuity

Attachment 1

 

 










Development Application Report - 6 Palmer Street, South Coogee

Attachment 2

 

 

 

Development Application Report No. 

 

 

Subject:                  6 Palmer Street, South Coogee (DA/496/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/496/2012

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Senior Environmental Planner     

 


Proposal:                     Substantial demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new part 2, part 3 dwelling house featuring a double garage accessed from Palmer Street, swimming pool, terraces, herb garden and BBQ area the upper floor.

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Domus Homes

Owner:                         Mr R B Parsons & Mrs S M Parsons

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillors Nash, Belleli and Andrews.

 

The subject application is for the substantial demolition of the majority of the existing dwelling and construction of a new part 2, part 3 dwelling house featuring a double garage accessed from Palmer Street, swimming pool, terraces, herb garden and BBQ area the upper floor.

 

The application was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 10 – 24 August 2012 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of sixteen (16) submissions were received in response.

 

Preliminary assessment of the application and subsequent site inspections revealed that the proposal was unacceptable in its original form in relation to floor space ratio, view impact assessment, height, forms, materials, setbacks and visual/acoustic privacy.  

 

Following consultation between Council’s Assessment Officer and the applicant, the applicant provided amended plans on 26 October 2012 in response to Council’s review of the design. The revised plans were re-notified to surrounding residents from 5 – 19 November 2012. As a result of the second notification, thirteen (13) submissions were again received raising issues of bulk, scale, visual and acoustic privacy, view loss, drainage and other design matters.

 

Accordingly, the application has been subject to a detailed merit based assessment against the relevant planning controls and corresponding objectives as outlined in the RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies and deemed to be acceptable in the context of the site and surrounding foreshore area.

 

The site is identified as being within Zone No. 2A (Residential A Zone) under RLEP 1998. The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of Residential 2A Zone, in that the development will deliver a dwelling house that will be consistent with the character of other residential developments in the locality. The development will incorporate suitable design measures that minimise the visual scale and bulk of the structures especially in the context of the existing and future desired character of the area. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to have positive planning merits.

 

It is considered that the proposed dwelling, as amended, will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. The development complies with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP and is considered to be satisfactory.

 

The proposal has an FSR of is 0.71:1, which does not meet the DCP preferred solution of maximum 0.5:1 FSR. Assessment of this variation indicates that the relevant objective and performance requirement of the standard have been achieved in that the proposed bulk and scale will not be inconsistent with the existing built form of adjoining and surrounding properties. The bulk of the building is distributed appropriately down the slope of the subject site to respect the outlook of adjoining properties and preserve the privacy, solar access and view sharing for neighbouring residents.

 

The proposed development satisfies the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

2.    The Proposal

 

The application seeks approval for the following works:

 

·      Demolition of most of the existing dwelling house except for a portion of the rear external walls

·      Demolition of the existing single carport;

·      Construction of a new part 2 part 3 dwelling house featuring a double garage accessed from Palmer Street, swimming pool, terraces, herb garden and BBQ area the upper  floor level;

·      Removal of 2 trees;

·      Associated works including landscaping, paving and construction of a new driveway at the western edge of the site to service the garage. The driveway allows for retention of the existing street tree.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Palmer Street and is presently occupied by an existing two storey detached residential dwelling with subfloor garage and carport.

 

The site is known as 6 Palmer Street, Lot 15 in DP 6772. The allotment is of a regular shape, with a street frontage of 15.24m and a depth of 39.98m giving a site area of 609.3m2

 

Site topography falls from the street boundary to the north with change in level of about 3m along the western boundary and 1.2m along the eastern boundary. The site also slopes from west to east, with a change in level of about 1.2m along the Palmer Street frontage.

 

Significant vegetation is generally located adjacent to site boundaries particularly to the rear of the present dwelling, with the exception of a large palm tree positioned in the front setback adjacent to the carport.

 

The surrounding area is residential in character consisting predominantly of detached residential development.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. Existing dwelling (shown on right) fronting Palmer Street and the adjoining dwelling at No. 4 Palmer Street shown on left. 

2. Existing dwellings east comprising of Nos. 8, 10, 12 and 14 Palmer Street.  


 

3. Existing dwelling to the south across Palmer Street (Nos. 1, 3 and 5 Palmer Street). 

4. Existing dwellings across Palmer Street to the south east.

5. Dwelling to the west along Close Street  

6. Rear of the subject site. The return section shown in the foreground is to be retained. 

 

4.    Application and Site History

 

The application was lodged on 6 August 2012 and notified to surrounding properties from 10 – 24 August 2012 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans.

 

Council’s Assessment Officer, in a letter dated 13 September 2012 raised the following issues (issues have been summarised):-

 

·      The form of the proposed development and potential impacts on neighbours (view loss, privacy, building bulk) do not demonstrate consistency with the objective of the Residential 2A Zone under the Randwick LEP 1998 (Consolidation).

·      Floor area has not been calculated in accordance with the definition of Gross floor area as defined within the DCP Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

·      The design of the dwelling, at first floor level in particular, should be amended so as to substantially reduce the overall height of the dwelling. A detailed view loss analysis should be undertaken to confirm that any amended design is consistent with the principle of view sharing.

·      The proposed nil setback of the garage to the western side boundary results in a built form which does not integrate with the established setbacks of development on adjoining sites and is likely to result in a structure that would be visually obtrusive when viewed from immediately adjoining sites and the streetscape. The design of the proposed garage should be revised to address these issues.

·      The proposed orientation of openings and balconies at first floor level to the side boundary is not considered to satisfy the above objectives or meet the stated performance requirements in relation to privacy. The design of the first floor level and configuration of balconies should be revised to face north in order to address the above issues.

·      The plans provided show a “9.5m maximum building height limit line”, which is not applicable to the proposed development. A 7m external wall height line, measured vertically from ground level, should be shown on all elevations.

·      Separate plans showing all areas included in the floor area calculation should be provided.

·      All parts of the existing dwelling to be retained should be clearly annotated on plans.

·      An outline of the existing dwelling should be shown on the western elevation to assist neighbours in understanding the potential impacts of the proposal.

 

Subsequently, revised drawings were submitted to Council on 26 October 2012 in response to Council’s comments, which included the following key design amendments:

 

 Lower ground floor

·  Opening in wall to north/west terrace wall indicated as well as paving to this area. and existing subfloor area reduced

·  Deep soil planter box on south/east boundary reduced & deep soil landscaped front courtyard adjacent also reduced to accommodate garage set back

·  Door opening to guest/study room reduced to accommodate entry terrace having moved eastwards to accommodate 900mm garage setback

 

Ground floor

·  Garage set back 900mm off west boundary with deep soil landscaping increased adjacent in set back from west boundary

·  Porous driveway adjusted to suit new garage setback

·  Vehicle crossover adjusted to suit new garage location

·  Entry pathway relocated eastwards to accommodate garage setback

·  Garage access door into courtyard adjacent Bedrooms 2 and 3 removed

First floor

·  Landscaped planter box introduced to full length on eastern side of terrace

·  Pool size reduced and located closer to living area to maximise separation from No. 8 Palmer Street.

·  BBQ terrace on south and pool access terrace on north both reduced in size to accommodate new landscaped planter box

 

Roof

·  Roof set back to suit new garage location

·  Roof pitch reduced resulting in an 800mm roof pitch reduction on the east side, resulting in substantial roof bulk reduction (refer west elevation)

·  Removal of fixed glass highlights on south, east and north elevations of living area

 

General

·  Inclusion of existing house outline to elevation drawings

·  Inclusion of 7.0m wall height lines on elevations

·  Inclusion of 9.5m max building height lines on elevations (as per DCP).

 

The accompanying letter also details responses to the issues raised by Council’s Assessment Officer in relation to floor space ratio, view impact assessment, height, forms, materials, setbacks and visual/acoustic privacy.  

 

Issues with regard to privacy from the east facing terraces at the upper floor were again raised to the applicant and it was agreed that the proposed BBQ area adjacent to the first floor swimming pool would be rearranged and a herb garden be incorporated such that concerns of overlooking toward the neighbouring dwelling at No. 8 Palmer Street would be adequately addressed. 

 

As a result of further discussions and meetings between Council Officers and the applicants, a final amended first floor plan was received by Council on 18 March 2013 and together with the plans received on 26 October 2012, forms the subject of the current assessment. It is noted that the amended plans are considered to adequately address the issues raised by Council’s Assessment Officer in the 13 September 2012 correspondence.

 

The overall design, height, bulk, scale and critical features of the building have not been altered as a result of the plan amendments. The scope of changes as outlined above did not result in any material change to the nature of the proposal and therefore renotification was not required.

 

The initial public consultation process was completed on 24 August 2012. Due to the potential impacts on scenic and iconic views currently enjoyed by the adjoining and nearby properties as well as the concerns raised in the submissions, Council requested the owners to install timber poles on the site to depict the form and height of the building by email in November 2012 and again in February 2013.

 

The height poles were installed on 28 February 2013. The accuracy of the poles in terms of their locations and height levels has been checked by a registered surveyor from W. Buxton Pty Ltd – Land and Engineering Surveyors dated and received by Council on 28 February 2013 certifying the accuracy of the poles.

 

The properties likely to suffer from view loss impacts (Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Palmer Street and 7, 11 Close Street) were inspected on 4 December 2012 and again on 1 March 2013.

 

5.    Community Consultation

 

The application was notified to the adjoining and nearby properties from 10 – 24 August 2012 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of sixteen (16) submissions were received from the residents of

 

1 Palmer Street

2 Palmer Street

3 Palmer Street

4 Palmer Street

5 Palmer Street

7 Palmer Street

8 Palmer Street

9 Palmer Street

10 Palmer Street

12 Palmer Street

7 Close Street

11 Close Street

15 Pearce Street

17 Pearce Street

19 Pearce Street

Coogee Precinct Committee

 

The following issues were raised in the submissions (issues have been grouped at avoid repetition): -

 

·      Non compliance with FSR and overall/wall height controls

·      Non compliance with side setback controls

·      Non compliance with minimum landscaping controls 

·      Overshadowing to No. 7 Close Street

·      Privacy impacts

·      Visual bulk and resultant impact on the foreshore scenic protection area

Refer to section 9.1 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

The development application is considered suitable and reasonable in relation to the subject site in that it proposes a dwelling house that does not detract from the existing and future character of the neighbourhood and streetscape as exemplified in the numerous contemporary previously approved in the locality. Additionally, the proposed dwelling responds to the size, shape and topography of the subject site adequately by distributing the bulk and scale of the building and off-setting the proposed FSR and external wall height by providing adequate landscape areas and setbacks. The design of the proposed development is considered suitable and reasonable relative to the size and shape of the subject site as indicated in the proposal’s full compliance with the landscape controls and its predominantly compliant setback provisions as detailed in Section 9.1 below. In particular the height, bulk and scale of the proposal performs adequately in relation to the amenity of adjoining properties given the shape, size and topography and subject to appropriate conditions.

 

·      The proposal has a significant amount of sub-floor area that has potential to be converted into habitable space

Council cannot speculate with regard to future development applications and their potential non-compliance with planning controls. All future applications for the subject site (if any) as well as surrounding sites will be subject to as detailed merit based assessment of the information provided with the proposal at the time of submission.

 

·      Proximity of the building to the rear boundary

·      Additional bulk and scale to the rear of the subject site due to additions to the single storey structure already built to the boundary

·      The rear section of the dwelling should be demolished and appropriate side setbacks be provided

The section of the dwelling which does not meet the DCP preferred solution for side and rear setbacks is existing and currently accommodates the main bedroom of the dwelling. The proposal does not seek to change the use or building envelope of this room. 

 

It is outside the scope of the application to require the applicant to demolish existing portions of the dwelling. Whilst the rear section does not meet the preferred solutions of the DCP with regard to side and rear setback, the proposal does not seek to increase the height of this section of the dwelling. As such, the proposal is not anticipated to exacerbate any impacts to surrounding dwellings. Refer to section 9.1 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

·      The orientation of the dwelling is inconsistent with that of the established streetscape

The application has been amended such that the proposal addresses the street and is consistent with the arrangement of surrounding dwellings.

 

·      Inaccurate and misleading statements in the accompanying documentation

·      Neighbouring properties have not been shown on the respective floor plans to allow for an accurate privacy assessment

Council officers have undertaken their own analysis of the site and application and have not relied solely upon the information provided by the applicant in the assessment of the application.

 

·      Inaccurate landscaping calculations

·      Inadequate and inappropriate landscape

·      The location and planting of any palms which overhang into the adjoining site is not appropriate the trees have a large canopy spread which will result in additional overshadowing

The proposal has been referred to Council’s Landscape Engineer for comment, no objections have been raised and suitable conditions have been included to address matters regarding tree retention, preservation and landscaping provision.

 

·      Height poles should be installed on the site to demonstrate the potential impacts on the views currently enjoyed by the surrounding residents.

 

Height poles were installed on the site to demonstrate the potential impacts on the views currently enjoyed by the surrounding residents.

 

·      View loss to various properties

See section 9.2 of this report for detailed discussion and view impact assessments.

 

·      Loss of property value

Changes in property value are not a matter for consideration under Section 79C of the EP&A Act 1979.

 

·      Layout of the proposed dwelling and pool compromises the amenity of surrounding properties

·      Inappropriate location of pool and terraces and associated visual and acoustic impacts

·      Proposed upper level pool and living areas will result in noise and disturbance

·      The location of the pool and outdoor living areas will set a negative precent for future development in the street

Refer to section 9.1 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

·      The proposed garage is visually dominating and excessive in height and scale

The design and location of the proposed garages, as amended, are not obtrusive in the overall scale of the streetscape or inconsistent with parking structures in the vicinity. Refer to section 9.1 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

·      The proposal will exacerbate existing flooding/water runoff issues for adjoining sites

·      Issues of pool overflow during heavy rain events or if the occupants were away have not been addressed.

·      Reliance on a pump-out system for drainage is an inappropriate design solution the existing drainage issues

·      The property is subject to regular flooding.

·      No drainage details for the pool are provided on the Stormwater Plan.

The rear of the site is a potential overland flowpath. Conditions are be applied to any consent to minimise the potential for damage to the rear landscape yard and/or for the overland flowpath to be blocked should approval be granted.

 

Relevant conditions of consent have been included in this report to address drainage issues and ensure that the proposal does not compromise the amenity of the subject site and surrounding properties/residents. 

 

·      Impact on future development potential for nearby properties

·      Negative precent for future development

The development will incorporate suitable design measures that minimise the visual scale and bulk of the structures especially in the context of the existing and future desired character of the area. Whilst it is acknowledged that the arrangement of the dwelling’s openings and outdoor living areas is inconsistent with that of the surrounding dwellings, it is considered that the amended application adequately addresses concerns raised by Council in relation to privacy views, height and bulk/scale. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to have an adverse impact to the development potential of surrounding sites.

Further, each development application received by Council is considered having regard to its compliance with the relevant planning controls and merits. Approval of the subject application would not establish any undesirable planning precedent in this instance.

 

·      The angled metal roof should be replaced with a flat one to minimise view impacts to surrounding sites

·      Height of the roof could also be reduced

The proposed roof structure is considered to be reasonably low in profile when compared to that of the adjoining dwelling at No. 4 Palmer Street, for example. Impacts of the height and design of the dwelling upon the views and amenity of surrounding dwellings are discussed in detail in sections 9.1 and 9.2 of this report.

The amended plans provide for a revised roof treatment at the upper level. Reducing the angle of the skillion roof plane has enabled the highest point of the roof, at its eastern edge, to be lowered by 800mm to a maximum RL of RL 32.9. When assessed in conjunction with the accompanying survey plan and details, maximum height of the proposal, as amended, is 2.56m lower than the roof ridge height of the dwelling at No. 4 Palmer Street and 920mm above the maximum height of roof of the existing dwelling on the subject site.

 

·      The location of drainage and water pipes should be provided as this could result in acoustic impacts for nearby properties.

This information is not required at DA stage. Appropriate conditions are included to ensure that proposed plant and equipment does not exceed the prescribed noise levels for residential environments.

 

·      A boundary definition survey be provided and be made available as part of any renotified proposal.

·      The plans lack detail and do not show relative heights and locations of surrounding dwellings

The proposal is accompanied by a survey plan and setbacks to all boundaries of the subject site are clearly defined in the plans submitted and allow for a full and proper assessment of the application against relevant setback controls. Further, a standard condition has been included within the consent requiring the submission of a Registered Surveyor’s check survey certificate to be obtained at critical stages of construction to ensure compliance with the approved setbacks, levels, layout and height of the building to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA).

 

Second notification

Following receipt of amended plans on 26 October 2012, the application was re-notified to surrounding residents from 5 – 19 November 2012. As a result of the second notification, thirteen (13) submissions were again received detailing similar concerns raised in the first round of submissions. To avoid repetition, only new issues have been addressed below with the majority of the issues addressed in the section above.

 

·      The planter box along the eastern edge of the first floor terrace is a safety hazard as pool users can jump from the planter into the pool.

·      Maintenance of the proposed eastern side planter box is not possible.

 

The planter box (as shown in the diagram extracted from the submitted plans) is separated from the pool by the extended wall/coping such that the water is adjacent to the raised wall and cannot be used to gain access to the pool. There is also sufficient space along the eastern edge of the terrace which is not occupied by the pool for access to the planter box for future maintenance.  

 

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

6.1      Development Engineers

The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineers for comment. No objections were raised subject to conditions with any approval. The following comments were made:

 

Drainage Comments

Due to the site location being close to the rock shelf the requirement for stormwater to be discharged to a 5 sqm infiltration pit is not required.

 

Landscape Comments

While the SEE details that this development will not achieve compliance with Council’s numerical controls for landscaped area in this zone (39.1% provided – 40% required, which equates to a minor shortfall of 5.4sqm), it will exceed the deep soil landscaping requirement, with the submitted landscape plan showing a high level of detail that will result in a high quality treatment, with conditions requiring that it be fully implemented as part of the works.

 

On Council’s Palmer Street verge, in line with the western site boundary, there is a 3m x 3m Hibiscus tileaceus (Cottonwood, Tree 9, on the Existing Tree Schedule) which appeared in fair health and condition, is covered by the TPO due to its location on public property, and is part of a formal avenue planting of this species in this street and the surrounding area.

 

The plans show that the existing crossing, currently located centrally across the width of the site, will be re-positioned to the western boundary, and while the tree appears to be shown for retention, with the western edge of the crossing ‘splayed’ around its trunk, Council’s design requirements would not allow this, as it would need to be provided perpendicular to the street, which would be directly in conflict with the tree.

 

This particular tree is not overly significant to the local environment or streetscape in anyway, and as such, conditions in this report allow it to be removed at the applicant’s cost, with any impact on area amenity to be minimised through the ability to provide a replacement of the same species back on the verge, to the east of the crossing, with relevant conditions included in this report.

 

Beyond the southeast corner of this site, within the front yard of the adjoining property to the east, 8 Palmer Street, against the common boundary, there is a mature Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani, Tree 8) which while the minor pruning of some branches from its western aspect that overhang into the site may be needed for clearance reasons, it will remain otherwise unaffected, with relevant conditions to ensure its preservation having been imposed.

 

In the front yard of the subject site, along the eastern boundary, close to the southern edge of the existing awning, there is a self-seeded Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm, Tree 7) of around 5-6m in height, which while being shown for retention on the submitted landscape plan, will not be required by Council as this species is regarded as an environmental weed due to the ability of its seeds to be spread by birds and invade native bushland, with its sharp and poisonous spines along both sides of its fronds making it unsuitable for residential situations, with a condition in this report requiring that it be removed and replaced with a native coastal tree in this area of the site.

 

Still within front setback, but on the opposite side of the site, near the southwest corner of the existing dwelling, there is a semi-mature Livistona australis (Cabbage Palm, Tree 10) of 6-8m in height, which is a native species that was observed to be in good health and condition.

 

However, as this palm is already growing within 2m of the existing house, it is exempt from the provisions of Council’s TPO under clause 4.b.vii, so can be removed to accommodate works associated with the new garage and dwelling as shown, with a replacement of the same species to be provided back within the proposed side courtyard.

 

In the rear yard, along the eastern site boundary, between the existing house and rear (northern) boundary, there are a group of mature feature species that appear to have been planted for privacy and screening reasons, and comprise from south to north; three, 8m tall x Archontophoenix alexandrae (Alexander Palms, Tress 6-4), a 5m tall Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani, Tree 3), and then a Phoenix dactylifrea (Date Palm) which is a rare species of palm.

 

As the roof of the paved patio will finish only 1m to the west of Tree 5-6, and 2m from Tree 4, these three could be removed (without needing to obtain consent) upon completion of building works, as allowed by clause 4.b.vii of the TPO, but as all plans have shown this group being retained as existing site features, conditions to facilitate this have been provided. The Date Palm is a rare species, so its retention should be given priority.

 

The single Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palm, Tree 1) to the northwest of this group, on the northern boundary, is an exempt species under Council’s TPO due to its low landscape and amenity value, so can be removed and replaced with the evergreen screening hedge (2-3m mature height) as has been shown.

 

Should the application be approved the appropriate nominated conditions shall apply.

 

7.    Master Planning Requirements

 

A master plan is not required for the proposed development.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

8.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 was gazetted on 15 February 2013. Clause 1.8A of the RLEP 2012 requires that a development application lodged but not finally determined prior to the appointed day will continue to be assessed and determined under the provisions of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) that was in force immediately before the commencement of this plan. The subject application was lodged on 6 August 2012, and is therefore subject to the savings provision. Further, when determining an application to which this clause applies, the consent authority must have regard to the provisions of this plan as if it had been exhibited under the Act but had not been made.

 

The site is zoned Residential 2A under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal is consistent with the general aims of the LEP and the specific zoning objectives, in that the development will deliver a single dwelling, which is compatible with the desired lower density character of the locality.

 

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 and civil services will be required by appropriate conditions of consent.

Complies, subject to conditions

29 Foreshore Scenic Protection

Council to consider the aesthetic appearance and visual amenity impact of the proposed building in relation to the foreshore

 

 

The proposal has an aesthetic appearance that will not be detrimental to the visual qualities and amenity of the foreshore. In particular, the new detached dwelling is not atypical of previously approved new dwelling house developments in the locality in terms of architectural style, bulk and scale and external finish.

Complies

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

Clause 40 requires Council to consider the likely impact of earthworks on the existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality.

 

The site has already been modified to accommodate the existing dwelling. The application seeks to carry out minor excavation to a depth of 1.5m to create a portion of sub-floor area. The application has been referred to Council’s Development Engineer for review. It is considered that the proposal will not adversely affect the local drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to the recommended stormwater management conditions. Standard conditions are also recommended to ensure that appropriate soil retention and erosion control measures are undertaken during works on the site.

 

Subject to the above conditions, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.

Complies, subject to conditions

 

8.2      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The 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 RLEP 2012 that are of relevance to the subject development application:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

 

Zoning:

 

The site is zoned Low Density Residential R2.

Yes.

Permissible under the proposed zoning?

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Max)

0.6:1

0.55:1

 

Yes.

 

Height of Building (Max)

9.5m

8.92m

 

Yes.

 

Lot Size (Min)

No minimum for single dwellings.

609.3m2

N/A

 

It is noted that the proposed dwelling has an FSR of 0.55:1 when calculated in accordance with the definition for “gross floor area” as defined by the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012. Pursuant to clause 4.4(2A), a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6:1 is applicable to the site and is a development standard under the RLEP 2012. The FSR of the proposal when calculated under the definition applicable in the RLEP 2012 achieves compliance with this development standard.

 

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

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

 

9.        Policy Controls

 

9.1      Randwick Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

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

 

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

 

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

42% of the site is landscaped area. Complies

S1

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

The rear yard has an area of 137sqm. Complies

S1

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

The above area has minimum dimensions of 10.7m x 9.6m. Complies.

S1

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

The above area is located in the rear yard. Complies

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

39.1% of the site is permeable. Complies

 

Floor Space Ratio

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

 

The proposed development has an FSR of 0.71:1, which equates to 432.6m2 gross floor area (GFA). The preferred solution of the DCP is 0.5:1 for sites with an area of 600sqm or more and the proposal will deviate from the DCP preferred solution by 0.21:1 FSR or 127.9m2 GFA.

 

Notwithstanding this, the proposed is deemed to be acceptable in this instance for the following reasons:

·      Due to the topography of the site (sloping away from Palmer Street toward the north/rear) the proposed dwelling adopts a modest double storey scale to the streetscape and does not dominate the appearance of the dwelling or contribute to unreasonable bulk and scale when viewed from Palmer Street.

·      It is considered that the variation is acceptable and the relevant objective and performance requirements of the control have been met and the proposed bulk and scale will not be inconsistent with the existing built form on Palmer Street (refer to figures below for examples of existing dwellings in Palmer and Close Streets).

·      The proposal achieves compliance with preferred solution side setback controls at the upper floor and has the effect of visually reducing the perception of excessive bulk and scale to adjoining properties as well as to the street.

·      The proposal complies with the landscape requirement of the DCP which will ensure adequate plantings and landscaping to soften the proposed built form.

·      The proposal is an infill development in a streetscape character that is predominately two to three storeys in height. It is noted that many of the dwellings along the southern side of Palmer Street (i.e. Nos. 9, 5, 3, 1 Palmer Street) are of a 3 storey scale when viewed from the street and the slope of the subject site reduces the presence of the built form compared with surrounding buildings.

·      As indicated in relevant assessment sections below the proposal has reasonable impacts on adjoining and surrounding properties in that it will preserve the privacy and solar light access for neighbouring residents. For detailed assessment of these issues, refer to the relevant sections below.

·      The relevant objective and performance requirement of the control for floor space ratio have been achieved and the proposed bulk and scale will not be inconsistent with the existing built form of surrounding properties in Palmer Street relative to the size of the subject site. Beyond these immediate adjoining properties, and having regard to the nature of existing development in surrounding streets and the locality, numerous examples of substantial contemporary dwellings exist such that the proposed development will not be out of context in the streetscape nor inconsistent with the bulk and scale of surrounding development. It is therefore considered that the development will satisfy the overall objectives and performance requirements of the DCP with regards to floor space ratio. 

·      The exterior of the building has been well articulated with appropriate use of terraced and balcony areas, creating indentations and open areas which serve to modulate walls and articulate the building envelope will ensure its building bulk is compatible with surrounding dwellings. The proposed level of finish along with the distribution of massing and façade articulation will enhance the streetscape.

·      The proposed built form is appropriately articulated by staggered wall planes, window openings, balconies and a combination of compatible modern finishes. The façade treatment will effectively minimise the visual bulk of the building and create visual interest. The proposed roof form will also contribute to minimising the overall building height and shadow impacts on the neighbouring dwellings. 

·      The proposal exceeds the DCP preferred solution for landscaped areas. A specific condition is recommended to require adequate planting in the unbuilt upon areas of the site to create a suitable landscape ambience to the development.

·      This section of Palmer Street is predominantly characterised by two- and three-storey detached dwellings, where the lowest level accommodates parking facility with minimal setback from the property alignment with the upper habitable storeys stepped in to provide an open terrace above the garage. The dwellings do not exhibit any prevailing architectural style. There is a mixture of more traditional hipped and pitched roofed houses interspersed with modern rectilinear shaped dwellings. The buildings, however, sequentially step down the street in response to the topography of the local landform.

 

The subject site occupies the northern side of Palmer Street and is not prominently visible. As illustrated in the figures below, the scale of the proposed dwelling adopts a 2 storey scale when viewed from Palmer Street and responds to the topography of the street (sloping toward the east to Bunya Parade) by achieving a stepping down in height when compared to No. 4 Palmer Street. 

 

Streetscape elevation of the proposed development.

Nos. 7, 9 and 11 Palmer Street to the south of the subject site.

Nos. 8 and 10 Close Street to the west of the subject site.

Nos. 14, 16 and 18 Close Street to the west of the subject site.

Nos. 12 and 14 Palmer Street to the east of the subject site.

Nos. 1 and 3 Palmer Street to the south of the subject site.

No. 5 Palmer Street to the south of the subject site.

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

External wall height of the building not exceed 7m

The proposed dwelling has a maximum external wall height of 7.5m – 8.1m. Does not meet the preferred solution. See assessment below.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S3

Cut or fill does not exceed 1m.

The site has already been modified to accommodate the existing dwelling. The application seeks to carry out minor excavation to a depth of 1.5m to create a portion of sub-floor area. The application has been referred to Council’s Development Engineer for review. It is considered that the proposal will not adversely affect the local drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to the recommended stormwater management conditions. Standard conditions are also recommended to ensure that appropriate soil retention and erosion control measures are undertaken during works on the site.

 

Subject to the above conditions, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.

S3

No excavation within 900mm of a side boundary.

The lower ground/ground level section to the rear of the site has a side setback of 250mm from the western side boundary. However, this portion of the dwelling is existing and will not be altered/require additional excavation as a result of the subject proposal. The new structures proposed for the site are set at least 900mm from the site’s side boundaries.

 

S3

No excavation within 4m of a rear boundary.

The existing single storey rear section of the dwelling is set back 4.8m from the rear of the site. Complies.

S4

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

The entire southern (street facing) elevation of the proposed dwelling is 9m from the southern (front) boundary at first floor level. Complies.

S5

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

Not applicable.

 

The predominant wall height of the proposal when measured along the western and southern (front) elevations is a maximum of between 5.5m – 6.5m as is the wall height of the lower two levels along the eastern and northern elevations. The upper level is significantly setback further into the site from the walls of the lower levels and sits over the middle of the existing dwelling house. The section of the building along the eastern and northern elevations varies in height from 7.5m along the eastern elevation to 8.1m along the northern elevation, which at its highest is only 100mm greater than the maximum ridge level of the existing house.

 

The Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies DCP uses a performance approach to design guidance and development controls and design and site planning objectives. The preferred solutions are not mandatory requirements and only demonstrate how a performance requirement may be achieved. The variation in external wall height from the preferred solution of 7m as outlined by the DCP is largely a function of the site rather than a result of poor design and is not an unreasonable development outcome.

 

In this instance, the area in which the wall height exceeds 7m does not contribute to an adverse degree of overshadowing to surrounding properties due to its generous setback off the eastern boundary and its location toward the northern side of the proposed dwelling. Further, the second floor level (seen as first floor level from the street) is setback 2.97m from the western side boundary and 5.92m from the eastern side boundary maintaining a satisfactory level of spatial separation between the subject and adjoining buildings.

 

Accompanying shadow diagrams indicate that additional overshadowing created by the proposed top floor will alternately fall onto part of the front yard of the adjoining dwellings in winter mornings and afternoons. This section of the proposal does not result in excessive or additional overshadowing to the east and west facing openings of the adjoining dwellings. The proposal also maintains ample solar access to the north facing openings and private open spaces of the adjoining properties at Nos 4 and 8 Palmer Street.

 

Properties along this side of Palmer Street enjoy unrestricted northerly views to Wedding Cake Island and Clovelly Bay Headlands from the rear of their dwellings and the section of the proposed dwelling with an external wall height of more than 7m does not contribute to any unreasonable loss of views to these dwellings.

 

For properties on Close St and across Palmer Street to the south which face the southern (street) elevation of the proposed dwelling, views are obtained toward the north over the subject site. In this section, the maximum external wall height is 6.3m.

 

The proposal is considered to demonstrate compliance with the relevant objectives of the DCP in that the proposed dwelling is not excessive in height or scale, is compatible with the existing character of the locality and does not result in unacceptable adverse impacts to the amenity currently enjoyed by the surrounding properties in terms of solar access and views.

 

Building Setbacks

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

The proposed dwelling is set back 7m from the front boundary and is generally consistent with the setbacks of adjoining dwellings. Complies.

S2

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

The existing single storey rear section of the dwelling is set back 4.8m from the rear of the site. Complies.

S3

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

The proposed development has been afforded with the following side setbacks at ground/lower ground level:

East – min 1.8m (entry level (guest bedroom etc)

West – min 0.9m (garage and ground floor bedroom etc)

The existing lower ground/ground level section which is to be retained to the rear of the site has a side setback of 250mm from the western side boundary.

 

S3

Side setbacks be 1.5m at second floor level.

The proposed development is set back 1.8m from the eastern side boundary and 2.97m from the western side boundary at the second floor. Due to the topography of the site, the western elevation of the dwelling generally adopts a double storey scale. Refer to the section below for detailed discussion.

 

S3

Side setbacks be 3.0m at third floor level.

The top floor of the dwelling has been provided with side setback of 2.97m from the western side boundary and 5.92m from the eastern side boundary. Satisfactory.

 

The side setback controls aim to allow occupants and neighbours adequate natural lighting and ventilation.

 

The second floor level (seen as first floor level from the street) is setback 2.97m from the western side boundary and 5.92m from the eastern side boundary. A satisfactory level of spatial separation will be retained between the subject and adjoining buildings.

 

The strict adherence to the preferred solution, in this instance, will adversely affect the proposed architectural form without resulting in significant improvement to the amenity of the neighbouring dwellings. The proposed setbacks result in a dwelling of a reasonably modest scale when viewed from the street. 

 

As will be discussed in the above and following sections, the proposal will not generate detrimental privacy or shadow impacts on the adjoining properties. The development is considered satisfactory given its compliance with the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 


Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

The proposal includes openings to the street, rear, eastern and western elevations. 

Although the main living/dining area is proposed to be at the top floor of the dwelling, no west facing windows or openings have been included at the upper floor at the top floor. One street facing bathroom window is included at the top floor and the majority of major openings have been proposed for the northern and eastern sides of the living area, adjacent to the outdoor terrace/pool area which wraps around the northern and western side of the top floor.

East facing openings at the ground floor (which due to the slope of the site is elevated at a first floor level) are not anticipated to result in any adverse overlooking impacts for No. 8 Palmer Street as W02 and W03 which service a bedroom and bathroom, both of which are not considered to be high intensity usage areas. Windows W04 through to W08 are glass block viewing windows below the waterline of the top floor pool and are not associated with a habitable area. 

Door 19 services the ground floor master bedroom (which is elevated at a first floor level due to the slope of the site and the existing undercroft area to the rear of the dwelling). Door 15 services a north facing media room also at ground floor but elevated above the ground level as the site slopes toward the area. These doors open to an L shaped balcony at the rear of the property. The portion of the balcony adjacent to the bedroom has a depth of only 1.2m whilst the section adjacent to the media room has a depth of 2.2m – 3.6m.

Whilst these openings overlook the northern and eastern adjacent sites, it is noted that there is an existing north facing terrace in this location already capable of looking into surrounding properties and overlooking impacts are not going to be exacerbated by the proposed development (refer to figure below). Further, bedrooms are considered to be areas of low intensity usage and it is not anticipated that these openings will result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking to the adjoining dwellings.

 

 

 

Existing north facing terrace and large windows to master bedroom shown at an elevated level on the upper right hand corner.

Openings at the lower levels are screened by existing boundary fencing and most windows are adequately offset and sufficiently protect the privacy of adjacent properties.

Overall, the location and design of proposed windows to the dwelling are sympathetic to the privacy needs of adjoining dwellings and satisfactorily address the relevant objectives and preferred solutions of the DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

S1

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

Refer to discussion below for detailed assessment or privacy impacts from proposed balcony and terrace areas.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

The proposal has incorporated appropriate materials to minimize adverse acoustic impacts on the adjoining properties. Appropriate conditions have been imposed to ensure compliance with BCA provisions.

 

The Objective of the DCP is to ensure that new buildings and additions meet the occupant and neighbours requirements for visual and acoustic privacy.

 

A number of submissions have been received from neighbouring properties with regard to the location and arrangement of the proposed first floor pool and terraces. Concerns were raised in relation to the implications of the proposal on the visual and acoustic privacy of surrounding sites. 

It should also be noted that, with regard to overlooking from the proposed north facing first floor and ground floor (elevated) terrace areas, that that open decks, terraces and balconies are evident to a number of properties located in this section of Palmer Street (as well as on surrounding streets). These deck and terraces are generally unscreened (see images below) and are located to take advantage of district and ocean views to the north and east toward Coogee Bay and Wedding Cake Island. In this regard, a certain level of mutual overlooking is evident and expected in the area.  As such, the proposed development adopts a similar arrangement that already characterises the area. Any requirements for privacy screening would exacerbate potential view loss issues for surrounding sites. The proposed arrangement of open space and terrace areas are considered to be acceptable in this instance. 

 

View into the rear yards of surrounding properties from the first floor deck and rear living area of No. 4 Palmer Street.

View (to the east) from the existing elevated ground floor terrace at the rear of the subject

site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

View (to the north/north west) from the existing elevated ground floor terrace at the rear of the subject site.

The proposed pool and associated terrace areas have been provided with a 1m wide planter box along the entire eastern edge of the top floor. Further, the amended plans indicate the replacement of the BBQ area (initially proposed for the south eastern corner of the terrace) with a non trafficable herb garden and the relocation of the BBQ to the area adjacent to the eastern wall of the top floor.

 

Access to the eastern portion of the upper floor terrace would be limited as pool fences must be installed (extending from the north eastern corner of the first floor living room, perpendicular to the rear elevation). Further, the pool itself has an extended coping along the eastern side and does not allow for an occupant to stand at terrace level and overlook into the adjoining site.

 

The peer review that was conducted on the merits of the application did not consider that the height of the balustrade along the eastern edge of the upper floor terrace (proposed at 1.2m) to be adequate in fully addressing overlook concerns to the easterly direction. Accordingly, a condition has been imposed within the recommendations section of this report to require the balustrade to be increased to a minimum of 1.6m above the finished floor level of the terrace for the length of the balustrade which is located south of the northern end of the proposed pool or a 1m wide and 1m deep planter box be introduced inside the balustrade in order to limit the proximity of users of the terrace to the edge in order to minimise the ability to look down into neighbouring open space. Subject to compliance with this condition of consent, the proposal is not considered to unreasonably compromise visual amenity of the surrounding dwellings and their private open spaces.

 

The balcony associated with the proposed master bedroom is in excess of 9m from the western elevation of No. 8 Palmer Street and has a depth of only 1.2m. Further, bedrooms are considered to be areas of low intensity usage and it is not anticipated that these openings will result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking to the adjoining dwellings.

The proposed north facing media room at the ground floor (but elevated above the ground level as the site slopes toward the area) leads to an L shaped balcony at the rear of the property with a depth of 2.2m – 3.6m. There is an existing north facing terrace in this location already capable of looking into surrounding properties and overlooking impacts are not going to be exacerbated by the proposed development (refer to tables above for photos).    

 

In light of the above, it is considered that the application, as amended, adequately addresses concerns of overlooking toward the neighbouring dwelling at No. 8 Palmer Street.

 

Safety & Security

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1,2,3

Front doors of dwellings are visible from the street.

The proposed front door faces the street. Complies.

S1,3

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

The proposed dwelling has windows that overlook the street. Complies.

S2

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

Suitable condition included.

 

The Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP seek to ensure that a safe physical environment and crime prevention is promoted through design, including that buildings are designed to face the street and other public areas to provide for surveillance; dwellings and their entrances are readily identifiable by street numbering and design of front fences; and landscaped areas allows for safe access to the dwelling.

 

Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

The proposed dwelling has parking for 2 cars. Complies.

S1

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

The dimensions of the parking spaces are 5.4m x.6m. Complies.

S1

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

The proposed driveway is 5.7m wide and is set back 0.5m – 0.9m from the side boundary. Does not comply, see assessment below.

S1

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

The proposed driveway is 5.7m at the front boundary. Does not comply, see assessment below.

S1

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

The proposed driveway gradient is less than 1 in 8. Complies.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

Not applicable.

S2

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

The proposed garage is located behind the building line. Complies.

S2

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

The proposed garage occupies about 35%. Complies.

 

The Objectives of the DCP are to ensure on-site parking and driveway facilities are not visually intrusive and do not detract from the local streetscape.

Generally, the parking structure and driveway design is considered to be adequately integrated into the design of the building and does not dominate the southern (street) elevation in terms of bulk and scale. There is adequate opportunity for landscaping to satisfy the relevant objectives of the DCP. The design and location of the proposed garages, as amended, are not obtrusive in the overall scale of the streetscape or inconsistent with parking structures in the vicinity. The areas occupied by the access driveway are considered to be satisfactory and will not result in unacceptable visual impacts.

The proposal has been assessed by Council’s Development Engineers and no objections were raised on traffic or safety grounds. Suitable conditions have been included in this report.


Fences

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Existing sandstone fences and walls are retained/recycled.

Not applicable.

S1

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

Not applicable.

S1

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

The application does not include details of any proposed front/boundary fencing. A suitable condition has been included to address the future provision fencing for the site.

 

Generally, the Objectives and Performance Requirements for fences in the DCP are to ensure that front fencing is integrated with the streetscape and is compatible with the appearance of the dwelling and any established local fence form and material.

 

Foreshore Development

 

Performance Requirements

Assessment

P1

No encroachments on Foreshore Building Line at identified properties.

Not applicable.

P2

Building form, colour, materials and finishes are sympathetic.

The proposed external finishes schedule shall be amended (to incorporate more neutral tones) to minimise the reflectivity of the building upon surrounding environment. Conditioned to comply.

P3

Stepped buildings on sloping sites are articulated.

Appropriate level of articulation.

P4

Buildings incorporate sufficient setbacks to allow fair sharing of views.

Sufficient setbacks to allow for reasonable sharing of views – refer to view impact assessment section below for detailed discussion.

P5

Ancillary structures do not detract from the appearance of developments.

Not applicable.

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development and the application is accompanied with a BASIX Certificate. The provisions of the certificate indicate that compliance with the current targets set for energy and water conservation have been met by the development. Standard conditions requiring compliance with the commitments stated in the certificate have been included in the “Schedule of Conditions” section of this report. 

S2

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

The rear yard will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

S2,8

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

The proposal includes north-facing windows that will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight. Complies.

S9

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

The proposal will not overshadow solar collectors on adjoining properties. Complies.

S9

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

The proposal will not reduce solar access to less than 3 hours on north-facing windows. Complies.

S9

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

The proposal will not reduce solar access to private open space to less than 3 hours. Complies.

 

The overall Objectives of the DCP seek to ensure that development promotes and has regard to the concept of Ecologically Sustainable Development. In this respect the objectives promote energy efficiency in design and construction; encourage the use of appropriate resources and passive solar design; and protect solar access enjoyed by the adjoining premises.

 

9.2      View Impact Assessment

The proposed development has implications on the views currently obtained from the following properties and submissions from the owners have been received:

 

·      1 Palmer Street

·      2 Palmer Street

·      3 Palmer Street

·      4 Palmer Street

·      5 Palmer Street

·      7 Close Street

·      11 Close Street

 

The following paragraphs provide a four-step analysis of view loss established in the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Tenacity v Warringah Council (2004).

 

Step 1: The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (e.g. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, e.g. a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured.”

 

It is noted that the height poles shown in some of the images below are installed at the highest sections of the proposed dwelling (north eastern and south eastern corners as shown in the diagram below). The red dots denote the location of the height poles. In the photos below, the height poles have also been shown in red. 

 

 

 

 



No. 1 Palmer Street

Ground floor living room and terrace area

1. Views from inside the living room

 

2. Views from street facing terrace (ground floor with height poles) 

Current views

At present, the north (street facing) portion of the dwelling enjoys views to Wedding Cake Island over the subject site and other dwellings to the north across the street. The Clovelly Bay headlands and horizon are also visible from the terrace. Views down Palmer Street toward Bunya Parade are also visible toward the east from the side of the terrace. The views are available at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

The height poles shown in figure 2 are representative of the expected impacts.

It is anticipated that up to approximately 20% of Wedding Cake Island will be obscured following the proposed development, with the majority of the island and ocean/horizon views to be maintained.

 

Where a person deliberately leans out toward the eastern section of the living room/terrace, the view loss would be reduced to approximately 10% of Wedding Cake Island or less, depending on the height of the person.

First floor street facing bedroom and terrace

3. Views captured from first floor terrace

 

 

4. Views captured from first floor bedroom

 

 

Current views

At present, the north (street facing) portion of the dwelling enjoys views to Wedding Cake Island over the subject site and other dwellings to the north across the street. The Clovelly Bay headlands and horizon are also visible from the terrace. Views down Palmer Street toward Bunya Parade are also visible toward the east from the side of the terrace. The above elements are captured at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

The proposed development is situated at a more downhill location and none of the iconic and scenic elements in the views will be affected.

 


 


No. 2 Palmer Street

Ground floor rear (north facing sunroom and deck)

1. Ground floor deck (single storey element of the subject dwelling shown in middle with red face brick and white colour bond roof).

 

2. View from inside ground floor sunroom

 

Current views

The ground floor sunroom and deck currently obtains restricted views of the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. The above elements can be captured at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

The proposed development is situated at a more downhill location. As shown in figure 1 above, the existing rear section of the subject dwelling (containing the main bedroom) is not proposed to be built upon. The bulk of the new building will not be highly visible from this location. As such, the existing views are unlikely to be affected.

 

First floor rear (north) facing living area and deck

3. Views captured from first floor living area

 

4. Views captured from first floor deck

Current views

The upper floor living area and associated deck enjoys northerly and easterly views over existing dwellings toward the north and east. The Clovelly Bay headlands, Wedding Cake Island and horizon are also visible from the deck. Views of the horizon toward the east contain the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation

 

Anticipated view loss

Northerly views are unaffected by the proposal as the subject site is due east of No. 2 Palmer Street. As shown in figure 1 above, the existing rear section of the subject dwelling (containing the main bedroom in red face brick with white flat roof in the middle of the photo) is not proposed to be built upon. The bulk of the new building will not be highly visible from this location. As such, the existing views will remained largely unaffected with all iconic views retained.

 


No. 3 Palmer Street

Ground and first floor street (north) living areas and terraces

1. Ground floor living room window (subject site shown on left)

2. First floor living area and terrace looking toward the north

 

Current views

The ground floor living room windows are currently able to obtain restricted views of the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. Partial view of wedding cake island is available in the north easterly direction. The above elements can be captured at both standing and sitting positions.

 


 


No. 4 Palmer Street

First floor bedroom (north and east facing) doors, deck and window

1. View from the first floor east facing bedroom window over the side boundary of the subject site with height pole shown to be approximately the same height as the white building further to the east.

 

2. Panoramic views toward the west, north, north east from the upper floor rear deck.

3. Easterly views over the rear portion of the subject site are significantly restricted due to established vegetation and existing built elements. The highest (north eastern corner of the proposed dwelling is indicated by the height pole as being in between the 2 tallest palm trees in the distance.

 

Current views

The top floor bedroom and associated deck enjoys northerly north easterly views over existing dwellings toward the north and east. The Clovelly Bay headlands, Wedding Cake Island and horizon are also visible from the deck. Views of the horizon toward the east contain the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. The above elements are captured at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

Northerly views are unaffected by the proposal as the subject site is due east of No. 4 Palmer Street as shown in figures 2 and 3 above. As such, the existing views will remained largely unaffected with all iconic views retained.

 

The current partial horizon/ocean view obtained over the side boundary is likely to be obscured. 

 

 


 


Ground floor side living room window

1. View toward the east from a ground floor living room window.

Current views

A small portion of restricted horizon/water view from the ground floor east facing living room window is available over the side boundary of the subject site. The height pole indicates the south eastern corner of the proposed first floor. The above elements are captured at both standing and sitting positions. This can be viewed at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

The current partial horizon/ocean view obtained over the side boundary is likely to be obscured. 

 

Ground floor rear (east facing) living area

1. View from ground floor rear facing living area (single storey element of the subject dwelling shown on right hand side with red face brick and white colour bond roof).

Current views

Highly restricted horizon/water views are available from this part of No. 4 Palmer Street toward the north east. The height pole indicates a small increase in height of the existing roof (450mm from RL28.92 to RL29.38). This view is captured at standing level only.

 

Anticipated view loss

The current partial horizon/ocean view obtained over the side boundary is likely to be obscured.

 


No. 5 Palmer Street

Ground floor street (north) facing living area and terrace

1. Views from street facing terrace (ground floor with height poles) 

 

Current views

Highly restricted horizon/water views area available from this part of No. 5 Palmer Street toward the north. However, slightly to the east (shown on right hand side of the photo), a partial view of Wedding Cake island is available. This will remain visible following the construction of the proposal. This view can be captured at both standing and sitting levels.

 

Anticipated view loss

The current horizon/ocean view obtained over the subject site is likely to be partially obscured. However, Wedding Cake Island and the distant Clovelly Bay Headlands will remain unaffected.

 


 

First floor street (north) facing bedroom(s) and terrace  

2. View from first floor bedroom(s)

3. View from first floor terrace

Current views

At present, the north (street facing) portion of the dwelling enjoys views to Wedding Cake Island over the subject site and other dwellings to the north across the street. The Clovelly Bay headlands and horizon are also visible from the terrace. Views down Palmer Street toward Bunya Parade are also visible toward the east from the side of the terrace. The above elements are captured at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

The proposed development is situated at a more downhill location and none of the iconic and scenic elements in the views will be affected.

 

 

 

 

 


No. 7 Close Street

Ground floor bedroom (east) 

1. View from ground floor east facing bedroom.

 

Ground floor east facing kitchen/lounge and small landing

2. View from east facing ground floor kitchen and living area.

 

3. View from east facing ground floor kitchen and living area.

 

4. View from east facing elevated ground floor landing

 

Current views

The ground floor areas of No. 7 Close Street currently obtain restricted views of the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. The above elements can be captured at standing only for the bedroom and both standing and sitting at the lounge/kitchen area. 

 

Anticipated view loss

As shown in the photos above, the existing rear section of the subject dwelling (containing the main bedroom shown in red face brick with white flat roof) is not proposed to be built upon. The bulk of the new building will be in a due easterly direction when viewed from this property. Whilst a small portion of the water line immediately above the roof area of the existing single storey section of the subject dwelling will be obscured, the majority of the existing water view (shown on left) will remain unimpeded. 


No. 11 Close Street

Ground floor street (north) facing living area and terrace

1. Views from street facing terrace (ground floor without height poles) 

 

2. Views from street facing terrace (ground floor with height poles) 

 

3. View from street facing living room window at ground floor 

 

Current views

No. 11 Close Street currently enjoys a distant band of horizon/water views from the ground floor (elevated) deck facing north. This view can be captured at both standing and sitting levels.

 

Anticipated view loss

As demonstrated in figure 2 above (with height poles), the proposal is likely to result in a moderate loss of this view (approximately 40%).

 

First floor street (north) facing bedroom and terrace  

1. View from first floor terrace

 

2. View from first floor bedroom

 

Current views

At present, the north (street facing) portion of the dwelling enjoys views to Wedding Cake Island over the subject site and other dwellings to the north across the street. The Clovelly Bay headlands and horizon are also visible from the terrace. Views down Palmer Street toward Bunya Parade are also visible toward the east from the side of the terrace. The above elements are captured at both standing and sitting positions.

 

Anticipated view loss

The proposed development is situated at a more downhill location and none of the iconic and scenic elements in the views will be affected.

 

Step 2: The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.”

 

Property address

Area where view is obtained 

Is the view obtained from standing/sitting position 

View to be affected

1 Palmer Street

Ground floor living room and terrace area

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Partial land/ocean views and wedding cake island

First floor bedroom and terrace area

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Partial land/ocean views and wedding cake island

2 Palmer Street

Rear ground floor sunroom

Standing and sitting over the side boundary

Partial ocean views

Rear ground floor deck

Standing and sitting toward the north and over the side boundary of the subject site

Partial ocean views

First floor rear living area and deck

Standing and sitting toward the north and over the side boundary of the subject site

Full views of the ocean, the horizon line, the whole Wedding Cake Island and Clovelly Bay headlands.

3 Palmer Street

First floor street facing living area

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Partial land/ocean views and wedding cake island

Second floor street facing lounge and balcony

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Full views of the ocean, the horizon line, the whole Wedding Cake Island and Clovelly Bay headlands.

4 Palmer Street

First floor bedroom (side and rear view) from windows and associated rear deck

Standing and sitting north and over the side boundary of the subject site

Restricted water views to the side over the subject site and full views of the ocean, the horizon line, the whole Wedding Cake Island and Clovelly Bay headlands to the rear.

Ground floor living room

Standing and sitting over the side boundary

Restricted water views

Rear ground floor living area  

Standing north and over the side boundary of the subject site

Restricted water views and wedding cake island between 2 existing dwellings to the north

5 Palmer Street

First floor street facing living areas and associated balcony

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Partial view of the ocean, the horizon line, and Clovelly Bay headlands.

Second floor street facing bedrooms

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Full views of the ocean, the horizon line, the whole Wedding Cake Island and Clovelly Bay headlands.

7 Close Street

Ground floor east facing bedroom

Standing over the side boundary of the subject site

Restricted water views

Ground floor east facing kitchen and lounge

Standing and sitting over the side boundary of the subject site

Restricted water views

11 Close Street

Ground floor street facing living room and associated deck

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Restricted water views

First floor street facing bedroom and associated deck

Standing and sitting over the front boundary

Full views of the ocean, the horizon line, the whole Wedding Cake Island and Clovelly Bay headlands.

 

Step 3: The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.”

 

1 Palmer Street

Ground floor living room and terrace area

It is anticipated that up to approximately 20% of Wedding Cake Island will be obscured following the proposed development, with the majority of the island and ocean/horizon views to be maintained.

 

Where a person deliberately leans out toward the eastern section of the living room/terrace, the view loss would be reduced to approximately 10% of Wedding Cake Island or less, depending on the height of the person.

Degree of impact: minor

First floor bedroom and terrace area

The proposed development is situated at a more downhill location and none of the iconic and scenic elements in the views will be affected.

Degree of impact: negligible

2 Palmer Street

Rear ground floor sunroom

The proposed development is situated at a more downhill location. The existing rear section of the subject dwelling (containing the main bedroom) is not proposed to be built upon. The bulk of the new building will not be highly visible from this location. A large section of potential outlook toward the east is already obscured by the dwelling at No. 4 Palmer Street to the east. No iconic views are to be impacted.

 Degree of impact: negligible

Rear ground floor deck

As above.

First floor rear living area and deck

The whole Wedding Cake Island and majority of Clovelly Bay headlands and water/horizon view will continue to be visible.

Degree of impact: negligible

3 Palmer Street

Ground floor street facing living area

The ground floor living room windows are currently able to obtain restricted views of the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. Partial view of wedding cake island is available in the north easterly direction.

 

Given the angle of views at the ground floor toward wedding cake island and the proposal’s more downhill location, only a small section of the water will be obscured and all iconic views will be retained.

 

Degree of impact: minor

 

First street facing lounge and balcony

The whole Wedding Cake Island and majority of Clovelly Bay headlands and water/horizon view will continue to be visible.

Degree of impact: negligible

4 Palmer Street

 

First floor bedroom (rear view) from windows and associated rear deck

The whole Wedding Cake Island and majority of Clovelly Bay headlands and water/horizon view will continue to be visible.

Degree of impact: negligible

First floor bedroom (side view) from bedroom window

The existing small portion of the water elements will be obscured. No iconic views are to be impacted.

Degree of impact: severe

Ground floor living room view (front of the dwelling) over the side boundary.

The existing small portion of the water elements viewed between the dwellings on either side of Palmer Street will be partially obscured. No iconic views are to be impacted.

Degree of impact: moderate

Rear ground floor living area  

Highly restricted horizon/water views area available from this part of No. 4 Palmer Street toward the north east. The height pole indicates a small increase in height of the existing roof (450mm from RL28.92 to RL29.38). No iconic views are to be impacted. The existing small portion of water view will be obscured.

Degree of impact: severe

5 Palmer Street

 

First floor street facing living areas and associated balcony

The current horizon/ocean view obtained over the subject site is likely to be partially obscured. However, Wedding Cake Island and the distant Clovelly Bay Headlands will remain unaffected.

Degree of impact: negligible

Second floor street facing bedrooms

The whole Wedding Cake Island and majority of Clovelly Bay headlands and water/horizon view will continue to be visible.

Degree of impact: negligible

7 Close Street

 

Ground floor east facing bedroom

The existing water/horizon outlook over the side boundary of the subject site is expected to be partially obscured. All views toward the north/north east remain unimpeded and there will be no impacts to iconic views.

Degree of impact: moderate

Ground floor east facing kitchen and lounge

The existing restricted views of the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation are expected to be retained as the bulk of the new building will be in a due easterly direction when viewed from this property. Whilst a small portion of the water line immediately above the roof area of the existing single storey section of the subject dwelling will be obscured, the majority of the existing water view will remain unimpeded and there will be no impacts to iconic views.

Degree of impact: minor

 

11 Close Street

 

Ground floor street facing living room and associated deck

No. 11 Close Street currently enjoys a distant band of horizon/water views from the ground floor (elevated) deck facing north. The proposal is likely to result in a moderate loss of this view (approximately 40%). No iconic views are to be impacted.

Degree of impact: moderate

First floor street facing bedroom and associated deck

The whole Wedding Cake Island and majority of Clovelly Bay headlands and water/horizon view will continue to be visible.

Degree of impact: negligible

 

Note: Although the extent of view impact caused by the proposed development is considered to be acceptable within the circumstances of the site and surrounds, it is considered appropriate that an additional condition be imposed to reduce the eastern side roof overhang to a maximum of 450mm to minimise any unnecessary visual bulk and resultant impacts on existing views obtained from dwellings on the southern side of Palmer Street. This condition has been included within the recommendations section of the report.

 

Step 4: The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.”

 

·      1 Palmer Street

·      3 Palmer Street

·      5 Palmer Street

·      11 Close Street

The views are presently obtained from the north-facing rooms of these dwellings, which by virtue of the topography of the street are elevated above the subject site and generally feature ground floor garages/elevated ground floor terraces with living areas and bedrooms above. These areas are expected to be intensively utilised living space for the occupants.

 

These dwellings generally enjoy views over the subject site and other dwellings to the north across the street. The views include the Clovelly Bay Headlands, Wedding Cake Island, horizon views and water elements. Views down Palmer Street toward Bunya Parade are also visible toward the east from these dwellings.

 

At the upper floors, there will be no discernable impact to any iconic views toward the north.

 

The main living rooms and bedrooms at the elevated first and second floor levels will continue to capture whole or majority views of Wedding Cake Island where available and the more distant Clovelly Bay headlands and their interface with the water. The wide horizon and ocean views will be retained. Only partial view obstruction to some land and water elements will occur. There will be minimal impact to the quality of the views obtained from the living rooms and outdoor recreation terraces.

 

Overall, the development is not considered to result in any significant adverse view loss impacts on these properties.

 

Furthermore, a specific condition is recommended to require the reduction of the roof overhand along the eastern section of the top floor of the proposed dwelling to assist in reducing some of the impact to views across Palmer Street.

 

·      2 Palmer Street

The ground floor sunroom and deck currently obtains restricted views of the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. A large section of potential outlook toward the east is already obscured by the dwelling at No. 4 Palmer Street to the east. The restricted view (which does not include any iconic elements) over a side boundary, by virtue of the heads of consideration under the planning principle, is considered difficult to protect.

 

The upper floor living area and associated deck enjoys panoramic northerly and easterly views over existing dwellings toward the north and east. The Clovelly Bay headlands, Wedding Cake Island and horizon are also visible from the deck. Views of the horizon toward the east contain the horizon with partial water views which are punctuated by existing buildings and vegetation. This view will not be affected by the proposal.

 

Overall, the development is not considered to result in any significant adverse view loss impacts on these properties.

 

·      4 Palmer Street

The dwelling will continue to enjoy panoramic views of the ocean, the whole of Wedding Cake Island and the Clovelly Bay headlands from the upper floor bedroom and deck toward the north.

 

The loss of a small amount of water views and tiny section of sky view at the first and ground floors over the side boundary of the subject site is not considered to constitute a material impact. The views are obtained directly across the side boundaries of the subject site, which by virtue of the planning principle, are much more difficult to protect.

 

Highly restricted horizon/water views are available from the rear ground floor living area toward the north east. This current partial horizon/ocean view obtained over the side boundary is likely to be obscured. Again, this is not considered to constitute a material impact. The views are obtained directly across the side boundaries of the subject site, which by virtue of the planning principle, are much more difficult to protect.

 

Overall, the development is not considered to result in any significant adverse view loss impacts on this property.

 

·      7 Close Street

Although impacts to the existing views of No. 7 Close Street will be more severe than that of the properties across the street from the subject site, due to its location perpendicular to the subject site, the majority of the more bulky elements of the proposed dwelling will not have any impact upon the outlook from its east facing openings.

 

There will be no impact on the existing iconic views of Wedding Cake Island.

 

The partial water/horizon views do not constitute “whole” views as defined in the planning principle, as the majority of the headlands are already obscured by the existing dwellings to the north and east. The views do not present panoramic or wide outline of the natural landform. Given that the horizon, the overwhelming majority of the water elements as well as the whole Wedding Cake Island cannot be seen, therefore will not be affected, the proposal is considered to have achieved adequate view sharing.

 

Further, the views are obtained directly across the side boundaries of the subject site, which by virtue of the planning principle, are much more difficult to protect. The views most impacted are obtained from the bedroom area, which is less intensely utilised spaces within the dwelling than the main living room and kitchen, which will remain largely unaffected as a result of the proposal.

 

It should be noted that the existing dwelling is single-storey in height and is not considered to have realised the full development potential having regard to the preferred solutions for external wall height and FSR as contained in the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies. Where this property is altered or redeveloped in the foreseeable future, it could be reasonably anticipated that a first floor level would be constructed, and hence would “recapture” some of the lost views.

 

11. Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

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

 

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

Not applicable.

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

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

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

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

The proposal promotes the objectives of the zone and will not result in any significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal does not meet the Preferred Solutions of the DCP – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies relating to FSR, external wall height and setbacks.  These matters have been assessed in the relevant assessment sections above and have been found to be reasonable and acceptable. Relevant objectives and performance requirements are satisfied.

 

The proposal will not result in significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of the surrounding properties and heritage conservation area in terms of visual bulk and scale, view loss, solar access and privacy.

 

The proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes proposed are considered to be satisfactory. The design carries satisfactory architectural merits and is sympathetic to the surrounding Foreshore Area. 

 

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

 

 


 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No. DA/496/2012 for demolition of majority of existing dwelling and carport, construction of part 2/part 3 storey dwelling with double garage, swimming pool and associated works at 6 Palmer Street, South Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

2/7 Issue B

Domus Homes

May 2012

26 October 2012

3/7 Issue B

October 2012

26 October 2012

4/7 Issue C

March 2013

18 march 2013

5/7 Issue B

May 2012

26 October 2012

6/7 Issue B

May 2012

26 October 2012

7/7 Issue B

May 2012

26 October 2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Single dwelling

433803S

26 June 2012

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.       The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements and details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate plans and documentation:

 

a)       The eastern side roof overhang shall be reduced to a maximum of 450mm to minimise the impacts on existing views obtained from dwellings on the southern side of Palmer Street.

 

b)       The height of the balustrade along the eastern edge of the upper floor pool shall be increased to a minimum height of 1.6m above the finished terrace level for the length of that balustrade located south of the northern end of the pool. Additionally, if the height of that balustrade on the section of the terrace located north of the pool is not increased to 1.6m, a 1m wide and 1m deep planter box shall be provided inside the balustrade on the section of the terrace located north of the pool.

 

c)       Further excavation of the lower ground floor area shall be undertaken in order to achieve a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.4m for habitable rooms. The excavated material must be retained and reused on site for minor filling as shown on the architectural plans or for infilling within the subfloor areas on the western side of the lower ground floor.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

Floor area (lower ground)

4.       Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate for the development, the appointed Principle Certifying Authority shall provide documentary verification to Council that the floor area of the of the lower ground floor on engineering and construction certificate plans does not extend beyond that identified on development Application Drawing DA2-7 Issue B.

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

5.      

a)   An amended schedule of external colours and finishes shall be to be submitted for the approval of Council’s Manager Development Assessments prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

 

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

 

b)   All materials used within the development shall be treated so as to minimise the impact of reflectivity upon neighbouring sites prior to installation. This may be achieved through powder coating or anodizing treatments.

 

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 $1,191.556, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $11915.55.

       

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.

Security Deposit

8.       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:

 

·           $2000.00    -      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

9.       The design alignment level (the finished level of concrete, paving or the like) at the property boundary for driveways, access ramps and pathways or the like, must match the back of the existing footpath along the full site frontage.

 

The design alignment level/s at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate (a construction note on the plans is considered satisfactory). The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $732.00 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.

 

Driveway Design

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

 

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

    

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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

12.     Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, detailed drainage plans with levels reduced to Australian Height Datum (AHD), shall be prepared by a suitably qualified Hydraulic Engineer and be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority.  A copy of the plans shall be forwarded to Council, if Council is not the certifying authority.

 

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

 

13.     A site stormwater drainage system is to be provided in accordance with the following requirements (as applicable):

 

a)     The stormwater drainage system must be designed and constructed to satisfy the relevant requirements in the Building Code of Australia,

 

b)     Roof stormwater must be directed to a suitably designed and constructed rainwater tank, as required in the relevant BASIX Certificate for the dwelling,

 

c)     The overflow from the rainwater tank and other surface stormwater must be directed to a suitably designed sediment/silt arrestor pit which drains to Council’s kerb and gutter outside the development site.

 

d)     Details of the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system and sediment site arrestor pit/s must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority with the Construction Certificate and all works are to be carried to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

e)     Any rainwater tank overflow/stormwater runoff which cannot be directed to the kerb and gutter at the front of the property (due to topographical constraints), shall be discharged by the use of a pump out system.

 

f)      Pump-out systems must be designed by a suitably qualified and experienced hydraulic consultant/engineer and the pump-out system designed and constructed generally in accordance with Council's Stormwater Code.

 

Pump-out systems must be provided with two pumps and be installed, connected in parallel (with each pump being capable of discharging at the required discharge rate) and connected to a control board so that each pump will operate alternatively. The pump wet well is required to be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2 hour storm assuming both pumps are not working,

 

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

 

h)     Details of the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system, sediment silt arrestor pit/s and pump out pits must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority with the Construction Certificate and all works are to be carried to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

14.     Sediment/silt arrestor pit/s are to be provided within the site at or near the street boundary prior to stormwater being discharged from the site. The sediment/silt arrestor pits are to be constructed generally in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority:

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

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

·        A minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes 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 located over the outlet pipe (Mascot GMS Multi-purpose filter screen or similar)

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

·        The inlet pipeline located on the side of the pit so that the stormwater will discharge across the face of the screen.

·        A sign adjacent to this pit stating that:

“This sediment/silt arrester pit shall be regularly inspected and cleaned.”

 

Site seepage & Dewatering

15.     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 levels (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.

 

Street Tree Management

16.     The applicant shall submit a total payment of $415.25 (including GST) being to cover:

 

a.    The cost for Council to remove, stump grind and dispose of the existing street tree, Hibiscus tileaceus (Cottonwood, Tree 9) from the Palmer Street verge, near the western site boundary so as to accommodate the proposed relocated vehicle crossing as shown; and

 

b.    The cost for Council to supply and install 1 x 25 litre street tree of the same species back on the verge, an equal distance between the eastern edge of the crossing and the power pole at the completion of all works.

 

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

 

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

 

Tree Protection Measures

17.     In order to ensure retention of the group of five feature species in the rear yard, along the eastern site boundary, between the existing house and rear (northern) boundary, being from south to north, three Archontophoenix alexandrae (Alexander Palms, Tress 6-4), a Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani, Tree 3), and a Phoenix dactylifrea (Date Palm, Tree 2) in good health as has been shown on the submitted plans, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a)     Relevant architectural, building, demolition, engineering (structural, stormwater & drainage, services) and landscape plans submitted for the construction certificate application must show the retention of these five trees, with the position of their trunks and full diameter of the crowns/canopies to be clearly and accurately shown in relation to the proposed works.

 

b)     Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar in the rear yard, must be setback a minimum distance of 3.5 metres off their trunks, measured off their outside edge at ground level. If stormwater/drainage lines do need to be installed along the eastern side setback, they must be located as close as practically possible to the proposed patio/dwelling so as to minimise root damage

 

c)     This group of five trees/palms must be physically protected as one group by installing a row of evenly spaced star pickets that shall be installed hard up against the trunks of Trees 4-6 (so as to maintain the eastern side access), then step out to a setback of 1.5 metres off the trunks of Trees 2 & 3, extending 1.5m to the north of Tree 2, and matching up with the eastern site boundary, to which safety tape/para-webbing/shade cloth or similar shall be permanently attached, so as to completely exclude this group for the duration of works.

 

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

 

e)     Ground levels within this TPZ must not be altered by more than 200mm, with no other structures such as continuous strip footings, planters boxes or similar to be located in this area, and must remain as undisturbed, deep soil.

 

f)      Within the TPZ, there is to be no storage of materials, machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

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

 

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

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, 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

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

 

BASIX Requirements

20.     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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

 

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

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

Demolition Work Plan

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

 

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

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

·           Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·           Method/s of demolition (including removal of any asbestos)

·           Measures and processes to be implemented to ensure the health & safety of workers and community

·           Measures to be implemented to minimise any airborne dust and asbestos

·           Methods and location of disposal of any hazardous materials (including asbestos)

·           Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·           Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

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

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

 

Demolition & Construction Waste Plan

27.     A Demolition and Construction Waste Management Plan (WMP) must be development and implemented for the development.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Demolition & Construction Waste

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Utilities

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

 

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

 

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

 

Landscaping

31.     Prior to the commencement of site works, the PCA must ensure that the Landscape Concept Plan by Formed Gardens, dwg no.001, job no. FG 12 157, revision B, dated 25.6.12 is amended to include the following requirement:

 

a)  1 x 100 litre (pot/bag size at the time of planting) native feature tree (not a palm) being provided within the front setback, in the area of deep soil to the east of the driveway, selecting a species which will achieve a minimum height at maturity of between 4-7m, in place of the Canary Island Date Palm which needs to be removed.

 

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

32.     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

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

 

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

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

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

 

Restriction on Working Hours

34.     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

35.     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

·           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

36.     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

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

38.     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)     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.

 

h)     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

39.     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.

 

40.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

Survey Requirements

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

 

·            prior to construction (pouring of concrete) of the footings or first completed floor slab,

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

·            as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

43.     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

44.     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 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.

 

·           Relevant Road / Asset Opening Permit fees, repair 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.

 

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

 

Tree Management

45.     Approval is granted for removal of the following vegetation from within the site, subject to full implementation of the approved landscaping:

 

a)  The Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm, Tree 7), within the front yard, along the eastern site boundary, close to the southern edge of the existing awning, as despite being shown for retention on the plans, is regarded as an environmental weed due to the ability of its seeds to be spread by birds and invade native bushland, with its sharp and poisonous spines along both sides of its fronds making it unsuitable for residential situations, so must be removed as part of the works;

 

b)  The semi-mature Livistona australis (Cabbage Palm, Tree 10) within front setback, along the western boundary, as it is exempt from Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to its location within 2m of the entry area of the existing house, and is also in direct conflict with the works associated with the new dwelling as shown;

 

c)  The single Syagrus romanzoffianum (Cocos Palm, Tree 1) to the northwest of this group, on the northern boundary, as it is an exempt species under Council’s TPO due to its low landscape and amenity value, and can be replaced with the evergreen screening hedge (2-3m mature height) as has been shown.

 

Pruning of neighbours tree

46.     Permission is granted for the minimal and selective pruning of only those lower growing branches from the western aspect of the Plumeria acutifolia (Frangipani, Tree 8), which is growing beyond the southeast corner of the site, within the front yard of the adjoining property at no.8, only where they overhang the common boundary and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the tree; or; interference with the works.

 

47.     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.

 

48.     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).

 

Site Amenities

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

 

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

50.     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

51.     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

52.     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 issue of an occupation certificate.

 

Swimming Pool Safety

53.     Swimming pools are to be provided with childproof fences and self-locking gates, in accordance with the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and regulations.

 

The swimming pool is to be surrounded by a fence having a minimum height of 1.2m, that separates the pool from any residential building situated on the premises and from any place (whether public or private) adjoining the premises; and that is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with AS 1926.1 - 2007.

 

Gates to pool area shall be a maximum width of 1 metre, and be self-closing and latching; the gate is required to open outwards from the pool area and prevent a small child opening the gate or door when the gate or door is closed.

 

A ‘warning notice’ must be erected in a prominent position in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool, in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Regulation 2008, detailing pool safety requirements, resuscitation techniques and the importance of the supervision of children at all times.

 

Swimming Pool & Spa Pool Requirements

54.     Swimming pools (and spa pools) are to be designed, installed and operated in accordance with the following general requirements:

 

a)     Backwash of the pool filter and other discharge of water is to be drained to the sewer in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Water Corporation; and

 

a)     All pool overflow water is to be drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in a nuisance or damage to premises; and

                 

b)     Water recirculation and filtrations systems are required to comply with AS 1926.3 – 2010:  Swimming Pool Safety – Water Recirculation and Filtration Systems; and

 

c)     Pool plant and equipment is to be enclosed in a sound absorbing enclosure or installed within a building, to minimise noise emissions and possible nuisance to nearby residents.

 

Notification of Swimming Pools & Spa Pools

55.     Written notification must be provided to Council advising of the installation and completion of the Swimming Pool (or Spa Pool), to satisfy the requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992.

 

Council’s “Notification & Registration of a Swimming Pool” (which can be found on Council’s website under ‘Find a Form’) form must be completed and forwarded to Council prior to any Occupation Certificate being issued for the pool.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

56.     The owner/developer must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

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

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

c)  Reconstruct the concrete footpath along the full site frontage, where required by Council, TO IMPROVE GRADES OF THE Council footpath.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

57.     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.

 

58.     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.

 

59.     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.

 

Stormwater Drainage

60.     The applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer confirming that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system complies with Australian Standard 3500.3:2003 (Plumbing & Drainage- Stormwater Drainage) and the conditions of this development consent.

 

The certification must be provided following inspection/s of the site stormwater drainage system by the certifying engineers and shall be provided to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

Landscaping

61.     The PCA must ensure that landscaping at this site is installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by Formed Gardens, dwg no.001, job no. FG 12 157, revision B, dated 25.6.12, and relevant conditions of consent, prior to issuing a Final (or any other type of Interim) Occupation Certificate/s, with the owner/s to ensure it is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

62.     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.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Use of premises

63.     The premises is to be used as a single residential dwelling only at all times and must not be used for dual or multi-occupancy purposes.

 

External Lighting

64.     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.

 

 

Street Numbering

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

 

Waste Management

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

 

Plant & Equipment

67.     The operation of all plant and equipment on the premises 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 & Heritage (EPA) Noise Control Guidelines.

 

Swimming/Spa Pools

68.     The pool 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 8.00pm on any Sunday or public holiday; or

·       before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on any other day.

 

Air Conditioners

69.     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.

 

Rainwater Tanks

70.     The operation of plant and equipment associated with rainwater tanks are to be restricted to the following hours if the noise emitted can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises:

 

·       before 8.00am or after 8.00pm on weekends or public holiday; or

·       before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

A7      This consent does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the land owner or principal contractor must obtain:

 

§  the consent of the owners of such adjoining or supported land to trespass or encroach, or

§  an access order under the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000, or

§  an easement under section 88K of the Conveyancing Act 1919, or

§  an easement under section 40 of the Land & Environment Court Act 1979, as appropriate.

 

Section 177 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 creates a statutory duty of care in relation to support of land.  Accordingly, a person has a duty of care not to do anything on or in relation to land being developed (the supporting land) that removes the support provided by the supporting land to any other adjoining land (the supported land).

 

A8      The finished ground levels external to the building must be consistent with the development consent and are not to be raised, other than for the provision of approved paving or the like on the ground.

 

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

 

A11     The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

A12     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

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                11 June 2013

 

 

Development Application Report No. D40/13

 

 

Subject:                  311-313 Maroubra Road, Maroubra (DEFERRED) (DA/617/1997/C)

Folder No:                   DA/617/1997/C

Author:                   Plandev Pty Ltd, Thomas Mithen     

 

Introduction

 

The Section 96 modification application seeks to delete Condition No. 7 requiring planter boxes on roof terrace, addition of privacy screen on south-eastern edge of terrace and addition of glass balustrade above existing brick balustrade.

 

The application was reported to Council at its meeting held on 23 April 2013.  At the meeting, it was resolved:

 

“(Roberts/Shurey) that the application be deferred to allow further consideration by Councillors of a report outlining the applicant’s proposed amendments and notification of these amendments to all the objectors.”

 

Issues

 

The applicant has requested a reduction to the overall height of part of the eastern balustrade at the roof terrace by 10mm from 1.6m to 1.5m so as to improve views to the east.

 

The proposed amendment was notified to the objectors of the original application. In response, a letter was received on behalf of the property owners at Nos. 66, 68, 70 & 72 Haig Street objecting to the proposed amendment on the grounds of privacy impacts and overlooking of their rear first floor bedrooms.

 

The proposed amendment relates to the middle section of the eastern balustrade which overlooks the adjoining property to the east at No. 315 Maroubra Road. Therefore the reduction in the height of the balustrade will not result in any adverse privacy impacts to the rear of properties along Haig Street because they are located to the south of the site. The privacy impacts arising from an oblique view (standing adjacent to the proposed lower balustrade) to the rear of the southern Haig Street properties is minimal given the generous distance separation. At the southern edge of the reduced balustrade the distance to the boundary and the dwelling house at No.68 is 10m and 30m, respectively. Likewise the distance to the boundary and the rear of dwelling houses at Nos. 70 & 72 is 15m and 23m, respectively. Council’s current planning controls recommend a minimum of 9m between private open space areas of adjoining properties to protect neighbor privacy. The proposal therefore complies with Council’s privacy requirements.

 

The potential for overlooking the rear yard of the adjoining property to the east at No.315 Maroubra Road will increase slightly due to the proposed height of the eastern balustrade at 1.5m. However, the additional impact is considered to be minor given the viewer’s eye will be to the horizon and not directly down into the rear yard. In any event the 1.5m balustrade height will adequately mitigate privacy impacts to the east.

 

The proposed amendment is therefore acceptable in regard to privacy impacts. 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome: Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction: Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The balustrade along the southern and southern-eastern splayed edge and part of the eastern edge of the roof terrace will remain at 1.6m as recommended in the original planning assessment report. Therefore the proposed amendment will not result in any adverse privacy impacts to the rear of the Haig Street properties adjoining to the south.

 

The potential for overlooking to the rear of the adjoining property to the east at No. 315 Maroubra Road will increase slightly due to the reduction of part of the eastern balustrade by 10mm to 1.5m. Notwithstanding, the reduced 1.5m balustrade height will adequately mitigate privacy impacts to the east.    

 

Accordingly, the proposed amendment is supported.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No. DA/617/1997 for permission to modify Condition No. 7 as follows:

 

·              Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 9717 1,2,3,4 and dated 22 October 1997 the shadow diagrams No. SH01, SH02, SH03 and dated 3 October 1997 and the landscape drawing No. 970701 and dated October 1997 and on the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the Section 96 plans dated 15/10/12 and received by Council on 10 December 2012, with the plans to be amended to reflect the modified condition, except as may be amended by the conditions specified hereunder:

 

and

“7.         The roof terrace serving unit 5 shall have fixed planter boxes around the periphery of the roof with a minimum of 500mm and height of 500mm and shall be appropriately landscaped. The roof terrace serving unit 10 shall have fixed privacy screens comprising frosted glass at a height of a 640mm above the southern, south-eastern (splayed), eastern (for a length of 2.7m from the north-western corner of the south-eastern splay) and western masonry balustrade and frosted glass at a height of a 340mm along the northern masonry balustrade. The middle section of the eastern balustrade will be reduced to an overall height of 1.5m”.

 

Details of compliance shall be submitted with the construction Certificate application.”

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Section 96 Report on 23 April 2013

 

 

 

 


Section 96 Report on 23 April 2013

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP25/13

 

 

Subject:                  311-313 Maroubra Road, MAROUBRA (DA/617/1997/C)

Folder No:                   DA/617/1997/C

Author:                   Plandev Pty Ltd, Thomas Mithen     

 


Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of approved development to delete condition 7 requiring planter boxes on roof terrace, addition of privacy screen on south-eastern edge of terrace and addition of glass balustrade above existing brick balustrade.

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                The Owners - Strata Plan No. 64375

Owner:                         Palmpoint Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The application is reported to Council as an employee of Randwick City Council is involved in the application and there has also a submission from an employee. As such an independent assessment of this application, including preparation of this report, was completed by Plandev (urban planning consultants) at the request of Council’s Manager of Development Assessment.

 

The subject site accommodates a 3 storey residential flat building containing 10 dwellings which was approved by Council in 1998 (DA 617/1997). Condition 7 of the development consent requires fixed planter boxes around the periphery of the roof terrace to minimise overlooking of adjoining properties. The planter boxes at the periphery of the roof terrace serving unit 10 have been removed without Council’s consent.

 

This Section 96 application seeks retrospective approval to remove the planter boxes by deleting Condition 7 and installing privacy screens atop the existing masonry balustrade.

 

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s public notification requirements and issues have been raised by adjoining neighbours in relation to whether the proposed privacy screen adequately mitigates the potential privacy impacts to their properties.

 

Condition 7 also relates to the adjoining roof terrace serving unit 5 at the front of the building and therefore the request to delete the condition is not supported. However, the installation of privacy screens atop the masonry balustrade in lieu of planter boxes will mitigate privacy impacts to the adjoining properties.

 

The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to Condition 7 being modified accordingly.

 

2.    Details of the Proposed Modifications

 

The Section 96 application seeks approval to delete Condition No. 7 in DA/617/1997 which reads as follows:

 

“7.      The roof terrace shall be fixed planter boxes around the periphery of the roof with a minimum of 500mm and height of 500mm and shall be appropriately landscaped. Details of compliance shall be submitted with the Local Approval application and shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning.”

 

The Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with the application describes the changes, as follows:

 

In lieu of the approved planters, a privacy screen is to be provided along the south-eastern edge of the terrace to a height of 1.6metres above finished floor level. The privacy screen is to be constructed of framed translucent glass above the existing masonry balustrade.”

 

The proposal is also seeks to add a glass balustrade addition to the existing brick balustrade to provide a height of 1.5m above finished floor level.”

 

The location and height of the privacy screen is shown on the plans accompanying the application, as follows:

 

·           a 640mm high frosted glazed screen along the south-eastern (splayed) edge;

·           a 540mm high glazed screen along the eastern, western and southern edge; and

·           a 340mm high glazed screen along the northern edge.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

Figure 1 – Aerial Context

 

Immediately to the west is a service station fronting Maroubra Road and an adjacent side laneway known as Clio Lane.

 

To the east is a single storey dwelling house at 315 Maroubra Road. Land to the north across Maroubra Road contains a mix of older style and contemporary residential flat buildings.

 

Land adjoining to the south contains the rear yards of dwellings houses addressing Haig Street.

 

Views from the roof terrace to adjoining properties are depicted in Figures 2, 3 and 4.

 

 

 

Figure 2 – View from the eastern edge of the roof terrace showing the rear yard of

the adjoining property to the east at No. 315 Maroubra Road

 

 

Figure 3 – View from the southern edge of the roof terrace showing the rear deck of the property at No. 70 Haig Street and the rear yard of the adjoining property at No. 68 Haig Street which is partially screened by existing vegetation

 

Figure 4 – View from the southern edge of the roof terrace showing the rear yard of the adjoining property at No. 66 Haig Street (in the foreground) and No. 64 Haig Street.

 

4.    Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties and the subject building were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. A letter from No.70 Haig Street includes a statement that the concerns raised are also on behalf of the owners at No. 68, 70 and 72 Haig Street. However, it is noted that owners at No. 68, 70 and 72 Haig Street have not signed the letter.

 

As a result of this notification, the following submissions were received:

 

4.1 Objections

A pro-forma letter was signed by the owners at No. 66 and 70 Haig Street. The issues

raised are summarised in the table below.

 

Issue

Comment

Unauthorised removal of the planter boxes and landscaping has increased the overlooking potential from the roof terrace

Agreed. The removal of the planter boxes from the roof terrace has increased the potential for overlooking to adjoining properties.

Adjoining residents have asked Council that the planter boxes be reinstated to reserve privacy and amenity.

 

The original intent of the condition is to preserve the privacy for existing residents. The installation of privacy screens in lieu of planter boxes will retain the original intention of the condition.

Only the splayed section will have frosted glass and the proposed glass balustrades to the remainder of the roof terrace will afford no privacy.

Agreed. It is recommended that all privacy screens be frosted glass to  minimise privacy impacts to adjoining properties

The privacy screens along all elevations must be 640mm high and frosted glass to

prevent views and overlooking of all rear properties and the Section 96 application plans be revised accordingly

 

Agreed. When standing on the roof terrace at or near the edge of the masonry balustrade there are direct views to the private open space of adjoining properties except for the rear of

No. 68 Haig Street which is afforded some privacy due to existing vegetation. The roof terrace serving unit 10 has an area of 112m2 and potentially could accommodate large numbers of people for intensive uses such as parties. Therefore, it is recommended that the southern, eastern and western edges have frosted glass 640mm in height above the existing masonry balustrade.

 

5.    Section 96 Assessment

 

The proposal has been lodged as a S96(2) application which allows for the modification of an existing consent if the Consent Authority:

 

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

 

Prior to assessing the application in relation to the acceptability of any potential environmental impacts, it must be determined whether the proposed modifications result in a development that is "substantially the same" as that which was originally approved. The proposal seeks to delete the requirement of planter boxes in lieu of privacy screens. The proposed modification will achieve the original intent of the condition and there will be no significant alteration or increase the environmental impacts associated with the approved use, particularly in relation to privacy. The proposed development is therefore considered to be substantially the same as that approved under the original DA.

 

(b)      it has consulted with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body (within the meaning of Division 5) in respect of a condition imposed as a requirement of a concurrence to the consent or in accordance with the general terms of an approval proposed to be granted by the approval body and that Minister, authority or body has not, within 21 days after being consulted, objected to the modification of that consent, and

 

Not Applicable.

 

(c)      it has notified the application in accordance with:

(i)     the regulations, if the regulations so require, or

(ii)    a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and

 

The proposed modification request has been notified in accordance with Council’s public notification policy.

 

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

 

All submissions have been considered in the assessment of the application.

 

(3)     In determining an application for modification of a consent under this section, the consent authority must take into consideration such of the matters referred to in section 79C (1) as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application.

 

Refer to discussion in Section 8 and 9 of this assessment report.

 

(4)     The modification of a development consent in accordance with this section is taken not to be the granting of development consent under this Part, but a reference in this or any other Act to a development consent includes a reference to a development consent as so modified.

 

Noted.

 

6.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

·           Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (As Amended)

·           Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

·           Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

·           Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing

·           Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals

·           City Plan

 

(a)      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

Whilst the application was lodged prior to the 15 February 2013 (date of commencement of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012) the application is not saved under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (LEP 1998) as the savings provision only relates to a development application and not a S96 application.

 

(b)      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

Randwick LEP 2012 was gazetted on 1 February 2013 and formally commenced on 15 February 2013, replacing Randwick LEP 1998. The site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential. The relevant objective of the R3 zone seeks to protect the amenity of existing residents.

 

The new RLEP sets a maximum height of 12m for the subject site. The maximum height of the proposed privacy screen and balustrade above ground level is 9.7m, which complies with the height control.

 

As stated previously, subject to the installation of privacy screens, the proposed modification will achieve adequate privacy for existing residents of the adjoining properties.

 

6.1      Policy Controls - Draft Comprehensive

a.        Development Control Plan and Multi-Unit Housing DCP

The privacy controls in the Draft DCP and multi-unit Housing seek to ensure new development is designed so that its occupants enjoy visual and acoustic privacy and that the existing level of privacy of adjoining and nearby properties is respected. This is achieved through the implementation of design measures, including minimum floor to sill heights of 1.6m, offsetting windows and privacy screens. The application proposes privacy screens which will assist in minimising privacy impacts to adjoining properties.

 

The proposed privacy screens will not be readily visible from Maroubra Road due to distance separation. However, when viewed from Clio Lane the screen atop the western elevation will be visible. However, the glazed material will be relatively unobtrusive and complement the contemporary building style.

 

b. Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development

Proposals

Refer to Section 4 of this report.

 

7.        Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The site is zoned R3 under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 2012 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will enhance and compliment the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

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

Not applicable

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

The proposal generally satisfies the privacy controls in the Draft Comprehensive DCP and Multi Unit housing DCP.

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 proposed development 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 currently operates as a ‘residential flat 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 satisfies the relevant objective 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.

 

10.      Key Issue

 

Privacy

The unauthorised removal of the fixed planter boxes from the roof terrace serving unit 10 has increased the potential for direct views to the rear yards of adjoining properties to the east, south and west when standing at or near the edge of the terrace.

 

The potential impacts are compounded by the large size of the terrace (approximately 112m2) making it suitable for intensive activities and large groups of people.

 

It is considered the provision of privacy screens in lieu of the planter boxes is an acceptable response to mitigate the potential privacy impacts and satisfy the original intent of the condition.

 

However, the deletion of Condition 7 in its entirety, as requested by the applicant, is not supported because it also relates to the fixed planter boxes at the roof terrace serving unit 5 at the front of the building.

 

The application proposes a 640mm high frosted glazed screen atop the south-eastern (splayed) masonry balustrade creating a 1.6m high privacy screen. A 540 high glazed screen is proposed atop the southern, western and eastern balustrade walls creating a 1.5m high screen.

 

It is considered that for the privacy impacts to be properly mitigated to adjoining properties, the southern, eastern and western elevations shall have a frosted glazed privacy screen at a height of 640mm atop the existing masonry balustrade.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome: Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction: Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification satisfies Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, in that it will constitute substantially the same development.

 

The unauthorised removal of the fixed planter boxes has increased the potential for privacy impacts to adjoining properties.

 

However, the privacy impacts can be mitigated with the installation of a 640mm high frosted privacy screens atop the existing masonry balustrade.

 

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

 


 

Recommendation

 

        That Council's Coordinator/Manager Development Assessment under delegated authority from the General Manager, as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No. DA/617/1997 for permission to modify Condition 7 as follows:

 

·              Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 9717 1,2,3,4 and dated 22 October 1997 the shadow diagrams No. SH01, SH02, SH03 and dated 3 October 1997 and the landscape drawing No. 970701 and dated October 1997 and on the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the Section 96 plans dated 15/10/12 and received by Council on 10 December 2012, with the plans to be amended to reflect the modified condition, except as may be amended by the conditions specified hereunder:

 

and

 

“7.         The roof terrace serving unit 5 shall have fixed planter boxes around the periphery of the roof with a minimum of 500mm and height of 500mm and shall be appropriately landscaped. The roof terrace serving unit 10 shall have fixed privacy screens comprising frosted glass at a height of a 640mm above the southern, south-eastern (splayed), eastern and western masonry balustrade and frosted glass at a height of a 340mm along the northern masonry balustrade. “

 

Details of compliance shall be submitted with the construction Certificate application.”

 

 


Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                11 June 2013

 

 

Development Application Report No. D41/13

 

 

Subject:                  86 Dudley Street, Coogee – (DA/452/2010/E)

Folder No:                   DA/452/2010/E

Author:                   Matthew Choi, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96(AA) modification of approved development by deletion of condition 30 which required undergrounding of power and addition of highlight windows to units 2 and 4

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Brenchley Architects

Owner:                         Mrs N M McGrath

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The section 96 modification application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as it seeks the deletion of a condition requiring the removal of power poles and undergrounding of power cables which is contrary to Council policy.

 

The original application was also subject to an approval by the Land and Environment Court on a Class 1 appeal in Solitarii Developments Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2010] NSWLEC 10968 on 28 June 2011.

 

The proposed modifications involve the deletion of condition 30 to remove the requirement of undergrounding of power cables and the installation of new highlight windows to units 2 and 4.

 

The proposal was notified from 20 February 2013 to 5 April 2013 in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. Three (3) submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The issues raised in the objection primarily relate to privacy impacts as a result of the previously approved development, the colour and finish of the development, overhanging of electrical wires and concerns for pedestrian safety and traffic movement.

 

The policy for replacing overhead wires with underground cables was adopted at the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting on 8 November 2005. This policy requires that 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. The applicant seeks to remove this requirement of undergrounding of power cables by deletion of condition 30 of the original consent.

 

Condition no. 30 currently reads:

 

30.     Prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate for the development the applicant must meet the full cost for the relevant public utility authority to have the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site to be relocated underground. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be relocated. All wires cables must be relocated underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority.

 

Note: The undergrounding shall extend from the relocated power pole which is to be relocated west of the new vehicular crossing and to the power pole located on the western corner of the Dudley St /Alexander St intersection

 

Following assessment of the application, the deletion for the requirement of undergrounding of power cables is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·      Undergrounding of power cables will not result in a net benefit that will improve the overall visual amenity of the existing streetscape. The applicant has provided a recommendation from Right Way Electrics (a provider authorised to design and construct the Energy Australia Network) that should undergrounding of power cables proceed, a new street lighting pole would be required in the same location to the existing pole and a new power pole would be required at the front of 45 Dudley Street to connect overhead power cables to the neighbouring properties. Consequently, undergrounding of power lines would result in an additional power pole and would further degrade the existing streetscape. 

 

·      Aerial bundling cables are to be provided along the southern side of Dudley Street by replacing individual overhead wires with one insulated cable. Aerial bundling cables would improve the visual amenity of the streetscape along this section of Dudley Street (between nos. 82-90 Dudley Street) than existing and will minimise the potential safety hazard to pedestrians by removing uninsulated wires. Condition no. 30 will be amended to replace the requirement for undergrounding of power cables with aerial bundled cables.   

 

·      The excavation works required to underground the power cables may compromise the health of three existing street trees which contribute to the amenity of the local streetscape.   

 

It is recommended that the application be approved.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The subject section 96 application seeks to modify the approved development by the deletion of condition 30 to remove the requirement of undergrounding of power cables and the installation of new highlight windows to units 2 and 4.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is on the southern side of Dudley Street between Brook and Alexander Streets Coogee. The site has an area of 692m² and has a 10.93m frontage to Dudley Street. The site has a slight fall from the rear to street. The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of residential flat buildings and semi-detached and free standing dwellings.

 

4.    Site History

 

DA/452/2010

A development application was refused at Ordinary Council meeting on the 23 November 2010 for the demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a three storey residential flat building containing 6x2 bedroom units; and basement parking for 9 vehicles. However, an appeal to the Land and Environment Court was upheld and approved on the 5 July 2011.

 

DA/452/2010/A

A section 96 modification application was approved at a Planning Committee meeting on the 6 December 2011 to alter the internal configuration of the dwelling, reduce the western side setback of the building, changes to the size and location of terraces, windows openings on east and west elevations and roof design of the building.

 

DA/452/2010/B

A section 96 modification application was approved on the 18 January 2012 to increase the size of basement area.

 

DA/452/2010/C

A section 96 modification application was approved at a Planning Committee meeting on the 12 February 2013 to redesign the driveway in order to retain the existing power pole in the current location.

 

DA/452/2010/D

A section 96 modification application was refused at an Ordinary Council meeting on the 23 February 2013 to enclose the rear balcony for Unit 6 at level 2, increase in width of east facing balcony for Unit 6, addition of highlight windows for Units 2 and 4 on eastern side.

 

DA/452/2010/F

A section 96 modification application was approved on the 18 April 2013 to modify the external finishes and colours of the building.

 

5.    Section 96 Amendment

 

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

 

5.1      Substantially the Same Development:

In accordance with Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 the proposed changes, physically, are considered minor and will result in a development that is substantially the same as the originally approved development. As such they can be assessed under Section 96 of the Act. In light of the advice provided by the applicant’s electrical consultant, the amount of visual improvement along Dudley Street to underground power lines is negligible and will not provide any net benefit to the streetscape amenity. Consequently, given this was the intent of the Council policy it would be unreasonable in this instance to include this requirement to underground power cables within this section of Dudley Street. Alternatively, providing aerial bundled cables along the southern side of Dudley Street will remove several uninsulated wires which will improve visual amenity and public safety. Consequently, amending condition no. 30 and replacing the requirement for undergrounding of power with aerial bundled cables will achieve a better planning outcome. The proposal will continue to comply with provisions of Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005.

 

5.2 Notification and consideration of submissions

The subject application was notified from 20 March to the 5 May 2013 to adjoining and nearby properties in accordance with the Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The following submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process: 

 

·      27/84A Dudley Street, Coogee

·      88 Dudley Street, Coogee

·      33/10 Alexander Street, Coogee

 

The issues raised in the submissions have been summarized below to avoid repetition. The issues are as follows:

 

·      The colours and finishes of the approved development is white which is not in keeping with the neighbouring dwellings and the existing streetscape.

The subject section 96 modification seeks to delete condition 30 which requires the undergrounding of power lines and the installation of two new highlight windows to units 2 and 4. The issue raised above relating to the colours and finishes do not have relevance to the proposed modifications and therefore are not matters of consideration that are required to be addressed as part of this proposal. The colours and finishes were approved under the previous development consent (DA/452/2010) and amended as by a subsequent section 96 application (DA/452/2010/F).

 

·      Privacy screens have not been installed to the windows along western elevation which are directly adjacent habitable room windows.

The original development consent and subsequent section 96 modifications do not propose any new privacy screens to be installed directly adjacent window openings along the western elevation.

 

·      The overhanging of electrical wires will compromise the visual amenity of the existing streetscape and detracts from the desired character of the proposed development in the locality.

The undergrounding of powerlines will not result in a net benefit that will improve the overall visual amenity of the streetscape. It is considered that undergrounding of power lines will nevertheless require a new street lighting pole to be erected in a similar position as the existing power pole and a new power pole opposite 45 Dudley Street to connect overhead power cables to neighbouring properties. Further, the requirement for undergrounding of power cables will be replaced with aerial bundled cables along the southern side of Dudley Street which will remove several overhead uninsulated wires and improve the visual amenity of the streetscape. Therefore it is considered that amending this requirement will improve the aesthetic appearance of the streetscape the existing character of development in the locality.

 

·      The undergrounding of power lines will improve the existing street amenity and public safety of the neighbouring residential premises.

As advised the proposal will not compromise the streetscape amenity of the proposed development given an additional power pole is required to accommodate overhead power lines to 45 Dudley Street. In terms of public safety, Council recommends that the existing overhead power lines be replaced with aerial bundled cables which will remove uninsulated wires along Dudley Street. Aerial bundled cables will improve pedestrian safety and will remain within the public interest.  

 

·      Whilst the wires will still need to cross Dudley Street it will be an improvement given it will be in one location rather than 5-6 power pole locations.

The proposed section of undergrounding of power lines across Dudley Street will effectively reduce one overhead power line. This however will result in one additional power pole which will not contribute to a net benefit in improving the appearance within the existing streetscape. The proposal does not involve the undergrounding of power along the entirety of Dudley Street only a small section that passes through the subject site.

 

·      The existing power pole obstructs the view of oncoming vehicular traffic and poses a safety risk.

A previous section 96 modification was approved (DA/452/2010/C) was approved to redesign the driveway in order to retain the existing power pole in the current location. It is considered that the power pole will not significantly reduce the amount of visibility for cars to safely enter and exit the subject premises. Further, no objections have been received from Council’s Development Engineering regarding the possible reduction in visible sightlines from motor vehicles that may be impacted by the existing power pole. 

 

·      The highlight windows were refused as part of the previous section 96 application (DA/452/2010/E). The windows are directly adjacent living room areas and would result in a considerable amount of acoustic impacts to the neighbouring dwelling.

Noted. The proposed highlight windows were included as part of a previous Section 96 refusal. However, the highlight windows were refused in conjunction with the section 96 amendments that included the enclosure of the rear balcony for Unit 6 at level 2 and increase in width of east facing balcony for Unit 6, rather than being assessed on their own individual merit. The highlight windows along the eastern and western elevation at ground and first floor level are set 2 metres above the finished floor level and will not result in any visible overlooking into the neighbouring premises. They will continue to comply with the relevant objectives and controls of the Draft Comprehensive DCP and will maintain visual and acoustic privacy to the adjoining residences.

 

6.    Technical Officers Comments

 

An application has been received to modify development consent for construction of a 3 storey residential flat building at the above site.

 

The modifications to the Development Consent relate to addition of highlight windows to Units 2 7 4 as well as the proposed deletion of Condition No 30 which reads as follows:

 

30.     Prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate for the development the applicant must meet the full cost for the relevant public utility authority to have the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables located in the vicinity of the development site to be relocated underground. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be relocated. All wires cables must be relocated underground to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority.

 

Note: The undergrounding shall extend from the relocated power pole which is to be relocated west of the new vehicular crossing and to the power pole located on the western corner of the Dudley St /Alexander St intersection

 

The above Condition was included as part of Council’s Policy and thus the application will have to be referred to a Council Meeting.

 

It should be noted that reading Condition No 30 its intent appears to have the undergrounding extending in an eastern direction only.

 

Should Council determine the deletion of the above condition is warranted then the Council may consider it be replaced with Council’s Aerial Bundling requirement. This condition reads as follows:

 

Prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate for the development the applicant must meet the full cost for the relevant public utility authority to have the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables, located along the southern side of Dudley Street (between no’s 82-90 Dudley Street) are to be Aerial Bundled. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be Aerial Bundled and to the relevant service utility authorites satisfaction.

 

Note: The aerial bundling shall extend from the power pole in front of the site to the next adjacent power pole located east and west of the subject site along Dudley Street.

 

7.    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 2012

 

(a)    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The proposal does not alter the overall form and function of the development as approved and complies with the main aims and objectives of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012.

 

7.1 Policy Controls

a.    Comprehensive Development Control Plan

 

Medium Density Residential

Visual Privacy

In accordance with the Comprehensive DCP, Council is required to consider that new window openings demonstrate compliance with the objectives of the DCP in that a high level of amenity is achieved by providing a reasonable level of visual privacy for dwellings and neighbouring properties. The highlight windows to units 2 and 4 along the eastern and western elevations are set 2 metres above the finished floor level and will not result in any cross-viewing to the private open space of neighbouring dwellings or adjoining windows to habitable living areas. The windows are considered acceptable in complying with Council’s objectives of the Draft DCP.

 

7.2 Council Policies

The policy for replacing overhead wires with underground cables was adopted at the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting on 8 November 2005. This policy requires that 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.

 

The proposed Section 96 modification to delete Condition no. 30 fails to comply with provisions of Council’s policy on undergrounding of cables adopted on 8 November 2005.

 

However, the applicant has raised the following issues to support the deletion of condition 30.

 

·      The applicant has provided technical advice from Right Way Electrics (an organisation that is authorised to design and construct the Energy Australia Network) that the undergrounding of power lines and telecommunications cables will only marginally improve the visual impact of the development.

 

·      The associated costs of underground cabling will cost in the vicinity of $400,000, which equates to 16% of the total cost of works.

 

The advice provided by Right Way Electrics states:

 

“In removing the power pole in front of 86 Dudley Street, a new street pole will be required for the street light in the same location and an additional new power pole (where none already exists) will have to be installed in front of 45 Dudley Street to connect overhead power cables to adjacent properties. In essence, satisfying condition 30 will result in an additional power pole along Dudley Street, this is considered to be a worse outcome than the existing situation”.

 

Consequently, in this instance it would be unreasonable for Council to request that the applicant underground existing power lines given the proposal will not result in a net benefit of improving the visual amenity of the streetscape which was the intent of the Council policy. Given that any undergrounding of power lines within this location would require an additional power pole, it can be considered that the proposal does not achieve the desired outcome of the policy and should therefore be exempt from this Council requirement. It is recommended that this requirement be amended to provide aerial bundling cables along the western side of Dudley Street and replacing individual overhead wires with one insulated cable. In this instance aerial bundled cables provide a more practical measure than undergrounding of power given the cost of insulating wires are significantly less, will improve the visual appearance of reducing the number of overhead wires and reduces the potential safety hazard of overhead uninsulated wires. Furthermore, any associated excavation works for undergrounding of power cables would compromise the health of three existing street trees between 82 to 90 Dudley Street which would further contribute to the detriment of the streetscape if these trees were removed. In consideration of above it is recommended that Council support the amendment to condition 30 to provide aerial bundled cables.

 

8.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Refer to section 7: Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Not applicable

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

The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Comprehensive DCP, 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

 

Refer to section 5.2: Notification and consideration of submissions.  

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

The proposal promotes the objectives of the zone and will not result in any significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5: Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The modifications proposed as part of this application do not alter the form and nature of the approved residential development. Having regard to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the proposed deletion of the requirement for undergrounding of cables in condition No. 30 is considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted. It will continue to achieve the desired outcomes of the Council Policy and therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 96AA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/452/2010/E to modify the approved development by deletion of condition 30 which required undergrounding of power and addition of skylights to units 2 and 4, at No.        86 Dudley Street, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

A.        Amend Condition 1 and 30 to read:

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the     following plans approved by the Land and Environment Court Judgment on 28       June 2011, numbered 2010-005-A01 to 2010-005-A04 – all issue: E, dated      March, 2011 and received by Council on 15 March 2011, the application form         and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended    by the following: 

 

·           Section 96AA plans

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received by Council 

 

 

 

 

010-005-A01, Issue S96-H

Brenchley Architects Pty Ltd

16/11/2011

17 November 2011

2010-005-A02

Issue S96-H

2010-005-A03

Issue S96-H

2010-005-A04

Issue S96-H

2010-005-A05

Issue S96-H

08/08/2011

12 August 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·           Section 96AA plans

 

·                                              Section 96 ‘B’ plan numbered 2010-005-A01, dated 12.12.2011 and received by Council on 14th December 2011, and

 

·           Section 96 ‘C’ plan numbered 2010-005-A01, Issue S96-J, dated 25.01.2012 and received by Council on 18 June 2012.

 

·           Section 96 ‘D’ plan numbered 2010-005-A01, 2010-005-A02 and 2010-005-A04, Revision S96-L, all dated 4 March 2013 and received by Council on 4 March 2013

 

only in so far as they relate to the modifications detailed in the Section 96 applications and highlighted in the Section 96 plans as amended by the following conditions and as mane be shown in red on the attached plans.

 

30.    Prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate for the development the applicant must meet the full cost for the relevant public utility authority to have the overhead power lines and telecommunication cables, located along the southern side of Dudley Street (between no’s 82-90 Dudley Street) are to be Aerial Bundled. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the wires/cables to be Aerial Bundled and to the relevant service utility authorites satisfaction.

 

Note: The aerial bundling shall extend from the power pole in front of the site to the next adjacent power pole located east and west of the subject site along Dudley Street.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                11 June 2013

 

 

Development Application Report No. D42/13

 

 

Subject:                  31 Midway Drive, Maroubra (DA/628/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/628/2012

Author:                   Simon  Ip, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of the existing structures on the site, construction of a 3-storey residential flat building comprising 9 dwelling units and basement car parking for 8 vehicles, landscaping and associated works

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Cayz Pty. Ltd.

Owner:                         Cayz Pty. Ltd.

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


1.      Executive Summary

 

The subject application is referred to the Planning Committee as it contains variation to the FSR and external wall height development standards by more than 10%.

 

The application was advertised and notified from 17 to 31 October 2012 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The application was re-notified from 17 January to 1 February 2013 following the receipt of amended drawings, which include the reconfiguration of the attic / loft level. A total of five (5) submissions and two (2) petitions with twenty-one (21) signatures were received at the conclusion of the public consultation processes. The issues raised are primarily related to streetscape, floor area, height, bulk and scale, setbacks, privacy, overshadowing, view loss, traffic and parking generation, road safety, site suitability, accuracy of information and planning precedent.

 

The site is zoned Residential 2B under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal is consistent with the zoning objectives in that it will deliver multi-unit housing, which is compatible with the desired character for the locality.

 

The proposed development has an FSR of 0.81:1, which exceeds the LEP standard of 0.65:1 by 0.16:1. The proposed external wall height amounts to 9.2m and exceeds the development standard by 2.2m.

 

The proposed development presents a built form that contains two full storeys plus an attic or loft level on top. The attic storey is positioned in the middle portion of the building and is recessed from the external wall alignments below. The loft is finished with metal claddings and incorporates a low profile roof. The loft level would appear as light weight structures above a more solid masonry mass. With the effects of perspectives, the loft structure would not form a detracting element in the streetscape. Accordingly, the overall proportions and massing would not dominate the prevailing residential character of the locality, despite the non-compliance with the external wall height control.

 

The building facades are articulated through various architectural elements, including balconies, windows, sun hoods, screens and juxtaposition of contrasting finishes and materials, which will divide the wall planes and structural mass. The proposed development would not create a monolithic visual bulk that detracts from the existing streetscape character.

 

The proposal will not result in unreasonable amenity impacts upon the adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy and view loss.

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objections in relation to the non-compliance with the FSR and external wall height standards have been reviewed and are considered to be well founded.

 

The Randwick Multi Unit Housing DCP specifies detailed built form, setbacks and amenity controls for residential flat buildings. The proposed building height, setbacks, landscaped open space provision, façade treatment, privacy protection measures and solar access of the development are considered to be satisfactory.

 

The proposal involves a shortfall in parking provision of 1 space. However, the development has already maximised off-street parking provision due to the constraints of the site configuration. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in this regard as the site is located within reasonable distance from public transport services and the parking shortfall is minor in nature.

 

The proposal satisfies the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the EP&A Act, and is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

2.      The Proposal

 

The proposed development includes the following components:

 

 

Dwelling mix:

 

3.      State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 Development Standards

 

The proposal seeks to vary development standards contained within RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). SEPP 1 Objections have been submitted to Council.

 

(i)     Floor space ratio

Pursuant to Clause 20F(1), the maximum FSR for buildings, other than buildings erected for the purpose of a dwelling house, within Zone 2B is 0.65:1 or 395.2m2 GFA. The proposal has an FSR of 0.81:1 or 489.8m2 GFA, and exceeds the development standard by 0.16:1 or 94.6m2. The proposal entails a variation to the standard by 23.9%.

 

The proposed variation is summarised in the table below:

 

Floor space ratio (FSR)

Gross floor area (GFA)

Proposed FSR / GFA

0.81:1

489.8m2

Permissible FSR / GFA

0.65:1

395.2m2

FSR / GFA in excess of LEP standard

0.16:1

94.6m2

 

(ii)    External wall heights

Clause 20G(3) specifies a maximum external wall height of 7m in Residential 2B Zone. The proposed external wall height amounts to 9.2m, and exceeds the LEP development standard by 2.2m. This represents a variation to the development standard by 31.4%.

 

(iii)   Assessment against SEPP 1 Objections

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

 

Matter 1

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

 

Comments:

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

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

 

The stated purpose of the building height standards 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, which outline the following key justifications for the variations to the standards:

 

Comments relating to FSR:

·            The proposal is well below the 0.75:1 FSR and is compliant with the height limit under the Draft LEP which has since been gazetted and implemented. This is considered to confirm that the Draft controls should be given significant and determinative weight when assessing the proposal.

·            Compliance with the statutory controls demonstrates that the proposal will be consistent with the desired future character of the area.

·            The proposal complies with the overall height and overall landscaped area requirements which demonstrates that the proposal will sit comfortably in its context.

·            The proposal also sits comfortably among the existing established medium density streetscape along Midway Drive including that immediately to the west, to the rear and opposite to the north-east. Furthermore, the proposal will be consistent with numerous other medium density housing forms in the broader locality throughout the Coral Sea Estate.

·            The replacement of the single dwelling with the proposed residential flat development is consistent with the zoning, zone objectives and is a more efficient use of the site.

·            Importantly, the additional FSR is provided in a sympathetic manner as the variation also does not create any adverse or unreasonable privacy or shadow impacts.

·            The development has a recessed 3rd storey which minimises the apparent bulk of the proposal and adopts a building envelope and setbacks which are consistent with surrounding sites, including the part 2 part 3 storey development to the south.

·            The 3rd storey is suitably recessed and does not add considerably to the bulk of the building.

 

 

Comments relating to external wall height:

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and strict compliance with the aforementioned development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary for the following reasons:

 

3-D virtual model of the proposed development as viewed from the driveway of No. 33 Midway Drive

 

3-D virtual model of the proposed development as viewed from the carriageway of Midway Drive

 

-      The subject locality is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments. The adjoining buildings to the east and west are both double storeys in height with pitched roofing.

 

The proposal fully complies with the 9.5m building height control of the LEP, and is consistent with the general scale of developments anticipated in the locality. That portion of the building which exceeds the 7m external wall height limit is primarily the loft storey.

 

In terms of visual bulk and scale, the proposed development presents a built form that contains two full storeys plus an attic or loft level on top. The loft storey is positioned in the middle portion of the building and is recessed from the external wall alignments below. In particular, it is setback a minimum of 11m and 9m from the front and rear boundaries respectively. The loft is finished with metal claddings and incorporates a low profile roof. The loft level would appear as light weight structures above a more solid masonry mass. With the effects of perspectives, the loft structure would not form a prominent element in the streetscape. Accordingly, the overall proportions and massing would not dominate the prevailing residential character of the locality, despite the non-compliance with the external wall height control.

 

In terms of overshadowing implications, the loft storey will not have any material impacts on the rear adjoining properties at Minneapolis Crescent, as its shadows will mainly fall onto the roof of the storey below.

 

The properties that will primarily be affected are the dwelling units at No. 29 Midway Drive. It should be noted that the setback from the south-western boundary fully complies with the minimum side setback preferred solution of the DCP, being 2.5m. The maximum parapet height of the south-western wall (which is closest to the common boundary), excluding the loft, is approximately 6.2m. This is below the 7m wall height limit.

 

Based on the altitude angles, the shadows cast by the loft storey on No. 29 will be clearly noticeable and more significant at 9am and 3pm, 21 June. However, the loft will only result in limited additional overshadowing at and around 12 noon when compared to that created by the combined mass of the ground and first storeys. The original design scheme proposed a gabled roof above the first floor, with an overall building height reaching 9.5m. The submitted shadow diagrams demonstrate that the shadow impacts of the original pitched roof scheme would be more than the current design. This is due to the fact that the pitched roof sat directly above the storey below with no setback; whereas the current design has its loft level recessed 2.5m to 3.0m from the external wall alignment below. Accordingly, the breach against the external wall height standard will not result in additional shadow impacts on No. 29.

 

In relation to privacy, the loft storey only contains bedroom areas and the amount of window glazing will not cause any significant impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

Furthermore, the loft storey does not account for any view loss.

 

Therefore, the non-compliance with the external wall height control will not cause any streetscape, visual or amenity impacts on the surrounding areas.

 

-      The proposed FSR is 0.81:1 when the gross floor area (GFA) is calculated in accordance with the definition of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation).

 

The map of RLEP 2012 (which has been gazetted and came into effect on 15 February 2013, and is a matter for consideration under Section 79C of the EP&A Act) stipulates an FSR of 0.75:1. The definition for GFA under this new LEP is different from that of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). In particular, the common stairwells, voids over a storey and basement storage are excluded from GFA calculation under the new LEP. Where the floor space is calculated as per the RLEP 2012 definition, the proposal will yield an FSR of only 0.70:1 (423m2), which would comply with the development standard of the new instrument. In this context, the proposal is consistent with the housing density deemed suitable for this locality under RLEP 2012.

 

Approximately 24m2 of floor space (being storage units) is contained in the basement and will not significantly contribute to the overall mass of the building. Where this floor space is subtracted from the calculations, the resultant FSR as per the RLEP 1998 definition would be 0.77:1. 

 

The component that primarily contributes to the non-compliance with the applicable FSR standard is the loft storey. The loft accounts for 68m2 of floor space, which equates to 0.11:1 FSR. As have been discussed in the paragraphs above, the loft storey will not cause any detrimental visual or amenity impacts on the locality. 

 

-      The proposed design is contemporary and modern. The facades are articulated through various architectural elements, including balconies, windows, sun hoods, screens and juxtaposition of contrasting finishes and materials, which will divide the wall planes and building mass. The proposed development would not create a monolithic visual mass that detracts from the existing streetscape character.

 

-      The proposed development incorporates adequate landscaping, which would enhance privacy between buildings and visually soften the physical structures on the site.

 

-      Despite the fact that there are single- and double-storey dwellings in the locality, the objectives for Zone 2B also allow for medium density residential developments. The proposed land use is suitable for the area and the size and scale of the development represent an appropriate built form for the site.

 

-      The proposed development will significantly improve the streetscape by replacing an aged, deteriorated dwelling house with a contemporary residential flat building with careful articulation and modern finishes. The proposal will allow orderly and economic use of the land for urban consolidation. The proposed housing density and resultant height are justified by the site’s proximity to public open space and regular public transport services.

 

-      As will be discussed in the following sections, the proposal will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts on the adjoining residential properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy and view loss.

 

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 Objections have addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and the objectives of the Act. The objections have appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. As such, it is considered that the objection is well founded.

 

Matter 2

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Comments:

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

 

The proposal is also consistent with the relevant objectives of Residential 2B Zone in that it will allow multi-unit housing, which is consistent with the desired character for the locality.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

Comments:

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

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

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

 

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 FSR and external wall height development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary as the design scheme will achieve the underlying purposes of the standards.

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the FSR and external wall height standards is relevant to the subject proposal. As discussed above, the proposal is considered to satisfy the underlying purposes of the standards in question.  

Third

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective of the development standards in question would not be defeated or thwarted as full numerical compliance in this particular instance is unreasonable.

 

The design scheme has incorporated appropriate built form, façade articulations, exterior finishes and landscaping, and will significantly improve the streetscape character. The building structures and associated works are considered to satisfy the purposes of the development standards in question.

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

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential B zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality. The RLEP 2012 has translated the zoning for the site to R3 Medium Density Residential, which carries a similar planning intent to the current Residential B zoning.

 

 

4.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lot 406 in DP 36813, No. 31 Midway Drive, Maroubra. The site is oriented towards Coral Sea Park. The site slopes gently from the rear to the street with a fall of approximately 500mm. The land area and dimensions of the site are summarised in the table below.

 

Boundary

Length

Land Area

North-western, Midway Drive boundary

18.900m

608m2

South-eastern, rear boundary

14.020m

North-eastern, side boundary

43.645m

South-western, side boundary

39.810m

 

At present, the site accommodates a single-storey detached dwelling of brick and tiled roof construction. A driveway is located adjacent to the south-western boundary. A detached garage of fibre-cement construction is located at the rear.

 

The adjoining allotment to the east contains two separate dwellings aligned in a tandem arrangement, which have been subdivided under the Strata scheme (Nos. 33-33A Midway Drive). A driveway is provided adjacent to the common boundary with the subject site for access to the garage of the rear dwelling.

 

To the west is a recently completed multi unit housing development containing 4 dwellings with basement car parking (No. 29 Midway Drive).

 

The rear of the site adjoins another multi unit building (No. 56 Minneapolis Crescent).

 

The locality is characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi unit residential developments.

 

Existing dwelling on the subject site (middle)

Adjoining multi unit development to the west at No. 29 Midway Drive

Adjoining 2-storey dwelling to the east at No. 33 Midway Drive

Adjoining single-storey dwelling to the east at No. 33A Midway Drive

 

Aerial view of the subject site and surrounding environment

 

5.      Site History

 

5.1    Previous approval relating to the site

BA/10/1975

Construction of a garage.

Approved by Council in 1975.

 

5.2    Plan amendments

11 January 2013

Following the Design Review Panel meeting, the applicant submitted amended drawings incorporating the following key changes:

  • Reconfiguration of the loft level with a contemporary architectural character, in lieu of a traditional pitched roof.
  • Amendment to the bedroom layout of Unit 5 on the first level.
  • Relocation of the toilets to the central part of the ground floor units.
  • Widening of the planter boxes adjacent to the south-western boundary.
  •  

6 May 2013

Following meeting with Council’s assessment officer, the applicant submitted revised drawings incorporating the following amendments:

  • Reconfiguration of the basement car park to eliminate the use of mechanical platforms.
  • Reduction in the ridge height of the building from RL24.1 to RL23.42, being a total of 680mm. 
  • Amendment to the bedroom layout of Unit 5 to maintain a minimum setback of 4500mm from the rear boundary.
  • Relocation of the toilets of the ground floor units to enable natural ventilation.
  • Provision of shrubbery adjacent to the waste storage compound.
  • Inclusion of additional dimensional and reference level data.
  • Inclusion of fencing and privacy screen details.

 

Revised plan-view and 3-dimensional shadow diagrams were also submitted.

 

6.      Community Consultation

 

The subject application was advertised and notified from 17 to 31 October 2012 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. The application was re-notified from 17 January to 1 February 2013 following the receipt of amended drawings, which include the reconfiguration of the roof form.

 

The following submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation processes:

 

 

*It is noted that a number of the objectors have signed both petitions.

 

The issues raised in the submissions are addressed as follows:

 

Issues

Comments

The proposed development has an excessive bulk and scale and is not compatible with the existing character of the locality.

The scale, massing and articulation of the proposed development are considered to be satisfactory and will deliver a positive contribution to the streetscape. Refer to the body of this report for details.

The proposal will exceed Council’s FSR control. The proposed housing density is excessive and represents an overdevelopment.

A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to justify the variation to the FSR standard in the LEP. The reasons outlined in the Objection are considered to be well founded. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

The proposal will exceed Council’s external wall height control. 

 

The 3-storey scale will adversely affect the streetscape character.

A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to justify the variation to the external wall height standard. The reasons outlined in the Objection are considered to be well founded.

 

The overall height, scale and massing of the proposed development are considered to be satisfactory.

 

Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

The front setback is not consistent with the streetscape pattern and the “amphitheatre effect” to Coral Sea Park.

The front setback is compatible with the existing streetscape character. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed side setbacks do not comply with the requirements of the Multi Unit Housing DCP.

The proposed side setbacks satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of the Multi Unit Housing DCP. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

Due to the narrow side setbacks proposed, the landscaping and private open space provision is inadequate.

The proposal complies with the landscaped area standard of the LEP.

 

The landscaping and private open space provision is adequate.

 

Refer to the “LEP” and “DCP” sections of this report for details.

The proposed rear setback is inadequate.

The rear setback satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the Multi Unit Housing DCP.

The proposal does not comply with the 20m frontage width requirement of the Multi Unit Housing DCP. The site is not suitable for the proposed development.

The site has adequate size and dimensions for multi unit housing development.

The proposed development does not include adequate off-street car parking.

 

The proposal will significantly increase vehicular traffic and reduce kerb side parking in the area. The proposal will cause detrimental traffic hazard.

The proposed parking provision is considered to be acceptable. Refer to the “Parking DCP” section for details.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the access design and raised no objections on safety grounds, subject to standard conditions.

The proposed development will obstruct views to Coral Sea Park from the adjoining properties.

The proposal will not result in unreasonable view loss from the adjoining dwellings. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed building will overshadow the adjoining properties.

 

The landscape planting and fencing will exacerbate the shadow impacts.

The proposal will not result in unreasonable overshadowing on the adjoining and nearby residential properties. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The proposed building, in particular the podium courtyards and upper floor balconies, will create detrimental privacy and noise impacts on the neighbours.

The proposal will not result in unreasonable visual and acoustic privacy impacts on the adjoining properties. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The waste storage area is situated immediately adjacent to the common boundary fence and will emit odour to the neighbouring dwellings. 

The revised scheme has setback the waste storage area from the rear (south-eastern) and side (south-western) boundaries by 500mm and 600mm respectively. The submitted landscape plan shows the planting of low shrubs adjacent to the perimeter of the storage compound. The proposal is considered to have minimised odour impacts on the neighbours.

The floor space and landscaped area calculations supplied by the applicant require checking.

The architect undertook measurements with computer drafting software. The floor space and landscaped area calculations have been checked and are considered to be correct. The verified figures are stated in the body of this report.

Additional information on building dimensions and setback measurements should be included in the drawings.

The revised drawings have included sufficient dimensional information for assessment purposes.

The proposal does not comply with the planning controls for the Coral Sea Park Estate in terms of scale, massing, setbacks and provision of garden areas.

The proposal satisfies the objectives of relevant planning controls for the Coral Sea Park Estate within the Multi Unit Housing DCP. Refer to the “DCP” section of this report for details.

The approval of the subject development will establish an undesirable precedent for similar proposals in the future.

The proposed development satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of relevant planning controls. The design scheme would contribute to the streetscape character. The proposal is not considered to create any undesirable precedent.

 

7.      Technical Officers Comments

 

7.1    Building Surveyor

Council’s Building Surveyor raises no objections to the proposal, subject to standard conditions being imposed in any consent granted.

 

7.2    Development Engineer and Landscape Development Officer

Council’s Development Engineering Section provides the following comments:

 

Parking Comments

Parking Provision

Parking has been assessed adopting the rates provided in Council’s DCP-Parking which specifies the following parking rates for multi-unit dwelling;

 

1 studio unit (<40m2) = 0.5 spaces

1 bedroom unit = 1 space

2 bedroom unit = 1.2 spaces

3 bedroom units = 1.5 spaces

Visitor parking to be provided at the rate of 1 space per 4 units

Bicycle parking to be provided at 1 space per 3 units plus 1 visitor space per 10 units

1 car wash bay to be provided per 12 units (visitor spaces may be used as car wash bays)

 

The application proposes 9 residential dwellings comprising of 5 x studio + 3 x 1 bedroom + 1 x 2 bedroom units.  

 

Parking Required       = 5 x 0.5 + 3 x 1 + 1 x 1.2 + 9/4 (visitor)

                             = 2.5 + 3 + 1.2 + 2.25 (visitor)

                             = 8.95 = say 9 spaces

 

Parking Provided       = 8 spaces

Parking Shortfall       = 1 space (11%)

 

The architect has been liaising with the Development Engineer in regards to the parking provision/layout after concerns were raised in previous memo with the originally proposed 9 spaces which were dependent on the use of  a car stacker and sliding platform. This was not favoured by the Development Engineer and to facilitate a parking layout that was more workable accepted a reduction of the parking provision to 8 spaces.  The shortfall of 1 space relates to visitor parking requirements and is not considered critical in the context of the site where on-street parking was observed to be readily available.

 

Bicycle Parking Required    = 9/3 + 9/10 (visitor)

                                    = 3.9 = say 4 spaces

 

Bicycle parking Provided = 0 (No bicycle parking depicted on plans although it is noted that the basement storage areas are of sufficient size to accommodate a bicycle).

 

Parking Layout

The amended layout is satisfactory and generally compliant with AS 2890.1:2004 although a small number of spaces will require a point turn to enter. This outcome was considered more preferable than a sliding platform/carstacker and given the small number of spaces and will not present significant difficulties for vehicle access. The large aisle width allows additional room for manoeuvring well beyond what is required under AS 2890.1:2004.

 

Flooding Comments

The assessing officer is advised that the subject site lies within an entrapped low point and a council commissioned flood study for the Maroubra Bay catchment confirms that the site will be subject to stormwater inundation during major storm events.

 

The applicant has been in contact with Council’s Drainage Engineer prior to lodgement who has issued a flood report for the above site (see Trim Document No.D01546986)

 

The report states that the level for the 1% AEP (1 in 100yr flood) will be RL 14.50 AHD.

 

Council currently requires the following in regards to new developments in flood zones.

·         Floor level must be at the level of the 1% AEP flood plus 500mm freeboard.

·         If basement parking is provided a crest must be provided in the driveway 300mm above the level of the 1% AEP flood.

·         All other openings into the basement must be provided at 300mm above the level of the 1% AEP flood

 

The submitted plans indicate the proposed ground floor level at RL 15.00 and a crest in the driveway at RL 14.80 AHD and therefore comply with the flood protection measures.

 

Issues raised in previous memo regarding the pedestrian access being a path for flood waters into the basement have been satisfactorily addressed. Access to basement is now via a pathway that is provided at RL 15.00 which is 200mm above the minimum RL required. 

 

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.

Service Authority Comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Geotechnical Comments

No geotechnical report has been submitted with the application although information in Council’s possession suggest the water table is approximately  2.1m below the ground surface, As the basement floor level will also be at approximately 2m below the existing surface,  excavation for the basement may extend into the water table. Appropriate groundwater conditions   have been included in this report. 

 

Landscape Comments

In order to improve the appearance of this development to the street, as well as to assist with its integration into the area, conditions in this report require the applicant cover the costs for Council to plant two new street trees from our Masterplan on the verge, on either side of the power pole.

 

The inspection of 25 March 2013 confirmed that in the front yard, along the northeast side boundary, between the front property boundary and existing dwelling, there is from north to south, a row of small shrubs then a 6m tall Cupressus sempervirens (Italian Cypress), a slightly larger Cupressocyparis leylandii (Leylands Cypress) and then a Schefflera actinophylla (Umbrella Tree), closest to the house, which is recognised as an invasive environmental weed.

 

As none of these are worthy of retention, they can all be removed in order to accommodate the proposed basement entry ramp and landscaping as shown, with the relevant consent provided. 

 

The same also applies to the shrubs in the rear yard, along the northeast boundary, adjacent the southeast corner of the existing house, as they are not covered by the TPO, so can be removed to facilitate the new courtyards and evergreen screen planting that is shown for this same area.

 

There is a 4-5m tall Eriobotrya japonica (Loquat) on the rear (southeast) boundary, which may assist with screening between this site and neighbours to the southeast, and while it appears to be shown for retention, a stormwater pit that would involve invasive excavations that would damage its root plate is shown just to its northeast, so its removal and replacement is deemed more appropriate given that the whole site will be the subject of a new landscape scheme, with relevant conditions provided.

 

Immediately to its southeast, on the neighbouring property at 56 Minneapolis Crescent, there is an 8m tall Cocos Palm that would remain unaffected given its setback and the fact that there are no major works shown for this area, and then beyond the southwest corner of the site, on 29 Midway Drive, there is a mature, 12m tall Eucalyptus botryoides (Bangalay) whose trunk is setback about 1m off the common boundary, and appeared in good health and condition, and is also covered by the TPO.

 

Its northeast aspect overhangs the common boundary into the subject site, and while all branches are at such a height above ground level and the proposed works that they should not be in direct conflict, permission has still been granted for the minimal and selective pruning of those smaller, lower growing branches purely as a future maintenance issue only, and as this would amount to only 5% or less of its total canopy, will have no effect at all.

 

The plans show a masonry bin enclosure occupying the southwest corner of the site, close to its trunk, and then further to the northwest, a 700mm high masonry planter, which together, would result in an incursion of approximately 15% into its entire root plate.

 

As there are alternative design options that would minimise any potential damage to its roots+ which would have grown under the common boundary and into the subject site, conditions in this report require that the masonry wall on the boundary be deleted, and porous/permeable paving be provided. 

 

7.3    Design Review Panel

Refer to the “SEPP 65” section of this report for details.

 

8.      Master Planning Requirements

 

A master plan is not required for this application.

 

9.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

9.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 has been gazetted and came into effect on 15 February 2013. Clause 1.8A provides that a development application lodged but not finally determined prior to the commencement of the Plan must be determined as if it had not commenced.

 

The subject application was lodged on 28 September 2012, and is subject to the savings provision. When determining an application to which Clause 1.8A applies, the consent authority must have regard to the provisions of the new Plan as if it had been exhibited under the Act but had not been made.

 

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

 

Description

Standard

Proposal

Compliance

Zoning:

R3 Medium Density Residential

Is development permitted under zoning?

 

Land use classified as “residential flat building” and is a permissible use

Yes

Floor space ratio (maximum)

0.75:1

0.70:1 (423m2)

Yes

Height of building (maximum)

9.5m

9.2m

Yes

Lot size (minimum)

325m2

608m2 (the proposal is for multi unit housing development and is not for a dwelling house)

N/A

*Note: the GFA has been measured in accordance with the definition of RLEP 2012

 

9.2    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

The subject site is zoned Residential 2B under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposal is consistent with the aims of the LEP and the specific objectives of the 2B Zone, in that the development will deliver multi-unit housing, which is consistent with the desired character for the locality.

 

The following clauses of the LEP apply to the proposed development:

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of total site area (304.0m2)

50.2% of site area (305.1m2)

Yes

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

25% of the site is reserved as landscaped area over deep soil (152m2)

Yes

20F Floor space ratios

(1) Maximum 0.65:1 (395.2m2)

0.81:1 (489.8m2)

No,

SEPP 1 Objection submitted

20G Building heights

(1) Maximum building height 9.5m

9.2m

Yes

(3) Maximum external wall height 7m

9.2m

No,

SEPP 1 Objection submitted

40 Earthworks

Council to consider the likely impact on the 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 of up to approximately 2.4m in depth (excluding foundation footings) to accommodate a basement car park.

 

Specific conditions are recommended to ensure that suitable retaining walls and protection measures are implemented during construction on the site.

 

The proposal is not considered to adversely affect the drainage pattern and use of the land, subject to the recommended construction management and engineering conditions.

Complies, subject to conditions

 

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

SEPP 65 applies to the proposed development. The application was referred to the Design Review Panel for advice in October 2012. The Design Quality Principles stipulated in the SEPP and the key comments provided by the Panel are addressed as follows:

 

Principle 1: Context

Comments:

The proposed development is suitable for the locality.

 

Principle 2: Scale

Comments:

The scale, massing and height of the proposed development are considered to be adequate and would contribute to the streetscape character.

 

Principle 3: Built form

Comments:

The revised design accommodates the loft level within a mansard roof structure that is consistent with the modern architectural expression of the building.

 

Comments:

The adjoining residential buildings are two storeys in height with pitched roofing. The extension of the loft towards the front boundary would create a dominant feature that detracts from the streetscape. The architectural form and setback of the loft storey as currently proposed are considered to be adequate having regard to its visual presentation to the public domain.

 

Comments:

The revised design has relocated the toilet windows for Units 1 and 6 to the side elevation.

 

Comments:

The design scheme has been amended so that the two common staircases to the first level are now opened on both sides.

 

Comments:

The southern wall to the bedroom of Unit 5 has been splayed to maximise setback from the rear boundary. The bedroom has adequate dimensions for furniture placement. The bedroom layout as currently proposed is supported.

 

Comments:

The lowering of the planter boxes into the garage level would reduce headroom for the car spaces and is not supported.

 

Comments:

The revised design has reconfigured the entry pathway so that direct access is obtained from the public footpath to the ground floor ramp.

 

Comments:

A specific condition is recommended to ensure the screens / fences along the side boundaries are effective in minimising cross viewing to the adjoining properties.

 

Comments:

The original design includes a continuous canopy along the south-western boundary. The amended scheme has deleted the above element and proposed the installation of cantilevered awnings above the entries to the ground floor units and the common stairways for weather protection purposes. A sense of openness will be retained along the side walk areas.

 

Comments:

The roof over the waste storage area has been deleted. The entry to the bin area has been shifted and will not be readily visible from the street.

 

Principle 4: Density

Comments:

The proposed housing density is considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

 

Principle 5: Resource, energy and water efficiency

Comments:

The revised design provides a secondary window to the living or kitchen areas, so that the sliding glazed doors (to the balconies / terraces) can be closed at night times.

 

Comments:

All dwelling units enjoy adequate natural ventilation. The provision of ceiling fans is not necessary in this instance.

 

On the first level, the sliding glazed doors on the north-eastern elevation are protected by the louvre screens and roofing of the balconies. A specific condition is recommended to require the installation of an awning above the bedroom windows of Unit 5 and the highlight living window of Unit 6.

 

The windows on the south-western elevation have restricted dimensions and do not receive excessive amount of sunlight due to their orientation. It is not considered necessary to stipulate sun protection devices for these windows.

 

Principle 6: Landscape

Comments:

A landscape plan prepared by a landscape architect has been submitted.

 

Comments:

The planter boxes along the side walk areas have been expanded in size.

 

Principle 7: Amenity

Comments:

The entry doors to Units 1 to 4 on the ground level open to the bedroom areas. Although it is feasible to relocate the bathrooms to the central part of these units to enlarge the bedrooms, such a solution would negate natural ventilation to the sanitary facilities. In the revised scheme, the floor layouts of these units will still enable proper placement of furniture and are considered to be acceptable.

 

 

Comments:

The location of the laundry facilities in the revised design does not adversely affect furniture layout.

 

 

Comments:

The size and dimensions of the lofts to Units 7, 8 and 9 are suitable for bedroom purposes.

 

The proposed floor to ceiling height for the living areas of Units 7, 8 and 9 on the first level is 2400mm only. The design intends to minimise the building height by “sinking” the loft floor slab into the storey below. The ceiling height would comply with the deemed-to-satisfy provision of the BCA. However, to improve occupant comfort, it is recommended that the ceiling height for the first level be increased by 100mm to 2500mm via a special condition. This condition will allow the ridge height of the building to be increased by 100mm. This would contribute to the sense of space for the living areas but without significantly increasing the shadow impacts on the neighbouring properties (refer to the “DCP” section for details).

 

Principle 8: Safety and security

 

Comments:

The updated Design Verification Statement confirms that those window openings within 3m from the boundary will be protected by external wall-wetting sprinklers. Standard conditions are recommended to ensure compliance with the fire safety and protection provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Principle 9: Social dimensions

Comments:

The proposal includes a mixture of studio, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom dwellings, which will broaden housing choice for the area. The replacement of an old, deteriorated dwelling with a modern residential building will enhance territorial reinforcement of the immediate surroundings and improve community safety.

 

Principle 10: Aesthetics

Comments:

The proposal incorporates a contemporary architectural expression with suitable articulation and modern finishes, which will contribute to the streetscape character.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The applicant has submitted an updated BASIX Certificate relating to the revised design. The commitments listed in the above certificate will be imposed by an appropriate standard condition pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

10.    Policy Controls

 

10.1  Randwick Development Control Plan – Multi Unit Housing

The 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 they have not been adopted, 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.

 

Adequate site analysis information has been submitted with the application. 

P2 Development sites have appropriate areas/dimensions to allow for satisfactory siting of buildings.

S2 Sites are of regular shape with frontages of at least 20m.

The site has a frontage width and land area of 18.9m and 608m2 respectively. The dimensions and size of the site are capable of supporting a multi-unit residential development.

 

(Note: The frontage width and land area of the adjoining site at No. 29 Midway Drive are 17.089m and 578.3m2 respectively.)

 

P3 Development on corner sites responds to both street frontages.

 

 

Not applicable.

Height

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

 

A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted for non-compliance with the external wall height standard. The Objection has been assessed and is considered to be well founded. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

 

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 bulk of the building is distributed over an architectural form that incorporates appropriate articulation and façade treatment. The proposal is considered to have minimised streetscape and amenity impacts.

 

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

 

 Refer to comments below.

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 Buildings (including balconies) maintain a minimum average setback of 4m from any side boundary.

 

No part of the building is closer than 2.5m from any side boundary.

 

The maximum length of any wall section is 10m. The minimum length of any step is 3m.

Refer to comments below.

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 Buildings (including balconies) maintain a minimum average setback of 6m from the rear boundary.

 

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

 

The maximum length of any one section of wall is 10m. The minimum length of any step is 3m.

Refer to comments below.

P4  General

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

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

The projecting awnings and window hoods will not result in adverse amenity impacts on the neighbours.

Density

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

 

 

The proposed density and FSR are considered to be satisfactory. Refer to the “SEPP 1” section of this report for details.

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.

 

Refer to the “Coral Sea Park Estate” section below for details.

 

 

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.

The proposal has included adequate landscaped areas along the front (except for the driveway), side and rear setback areas. The amount of landscaping will contribute to the visual screening of the physical structures. Satisfactory.

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

 

 A turfed communal garden is located at the rear of the site.

P3  Private Open Space

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

 

 

The proposal has included private terraces or balconies that are directly accessible from the living areas of the dwelling units.

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

 

The front terrace to Unit 1 incorporates adequate soft landscaping and will allow passive recreational activities. A fence will be installed along the street boundary to provide security to the terrace.

 

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.

G/F terraces

The terraces adjacent to the living rooms of all ground floor units satisfy the DCP preferred solutions.

 

1/F balconies

The balconies to Units 6, 7 and 8 have a minimum clear width of 1100mm. The balcony to Unit 9 has a width of 700mm to 1100mm.

 

Given the small dwelling sizes, the dimensions of the balconies are considered to be reasonable and would allow passive recreational activities by the occupants.

 

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.

Refer to comments below.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

 

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

P4 Building construction transmission of noise.

 

S4  Wall / floor insulation & sound consistent with

Building Code of Aust.

A standard condition is recommended to ensure compliance with the BCA.

 

View Sharing

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

 

 Refer to comments below.

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

P3 Buildings are aligned to maximise view corridors between buildings.

 

Solar Access and Energy Efficiency

P1  Solar Access to Neighbouring Properties

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

 

 

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

 

Refer to comments below. 

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 comments 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 comments 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.

Refer to BASIX.

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 will not preclude the installation of solar collectors in the future.

Safety and Security

P1 Design allows surveillance.

 

The windows and balconies enable sightlines to the communal areas and the street. Satisfactory.  

 

P2 Approaches and entries are visible.

 

Entries to the common stairways and doorways to the ground floor units are located on the side elevation of the building. However, a clearly identifiable access pathway is provided. Satisfactory.

 

P3 High walls and structures avoided.

 

Satisfactory.

P4 Resident car parking has security grilles or doors.

 

To be required by condition.   

P5 Visitor parking spaces clearly identifiable.

 

No visitor parking is proposed.

P6 Adequate lighting for personal safety and security provided.

 

To be required by condition.  

P7 Adequate lighting is provided in common areas.

 

To be required by condition.

P8 External lighting does create a nuisance.

 

 

To be required by condition.

Parking

Required On-site Parking

1 bedroom dwelling

1 space per  dwelling

2 bedroom dwelling

1.2 spaces per dwelling

3 or more bedroom   

1.5 spaces per dwelling

Visitor parking is 1 space per 4 dwellings.

 

Refer to the “Parking DCP” section for details.

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

 

The car park is provided in the basement and will not dominate the street elevation.

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

 

Not required.

P3 Secure storage for bicycles is provided.

 

To be required by condition.

Driveways and Manoeuvring Areas

P1 Areas of driveways and manoeuvring are minimised.

 

Satisfactory.

P2 Vehicles enter/ leave in a forward direction.

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

Satisfactory.

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

S3 Long driveways provide passing bays.

Adequate driveway width has been provided.

 

The proposal includes soft landscaping along the driveway ramp to minimise adverse visual impacts.

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

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

The driveway is approximately 3.6m wide (from kerb to kerb) at the street alignment, and is setback 2.5m from the common boundary with No. 33 Midway Drive.

 

The driveway width and layout have been designed to provide adequate sightlines, grade and manoeuvrability. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.

P5 Materials and finishes are consistent.

S5 Large expanses of uncoloured concrete avoided.

Suitable landscaping is provided to visually soften the driveway ramp. 

P6 Driveway gradients safe.

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

Satisfactory.

Storage

P1 Accessible and separate storage for each dwelling.

S1 10m2 of storage space is provided for each dwelling. Minimum clearance height of 2.1m. At least 50% of storage space is within dwelling and is readily accessible from either the hallway or main living area. Storage facilities may be in basement areas, or attached to garages.

A full-height storage cage for each dwelling unit is provided within the basement level. Satisfactory.

Barrier-Free Access

P1 Design must provide access for people with special access needs as required (foyer parking open space).

S1 Publicly accessible areas comply with the Building Code of Australia for access and mobility.

To be required by condition.

Waste Minimisation and Management

P1 Waste collection and separation facilities for each dwelling.

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

Satisfactory.

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

 

A centralised waste storage facility is provided at the rear of the site, with ramped access to the kerb for collection.

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

 

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

The waste storage facility is located at the rear of the site and will not be readily visible from the street.

Coral Sea Park Estate

P1 Building materials and external finishes are consistent with the dominant themes in the Estate.

 

The proposal adopts a palette of colours and materials that deliver a modern architectural character, and would contribute to the streetscape.

 

 

P2 Site area and dimensions, particularly width, are of sufficient size to allow and maintain the existing themes of large rear garden areas and open space between buildings to continue.

S2 Sites have a minimum frontage of 20m for development of more than 2 dwellings.

The site has a frontage width and land area of 18.9m and 608m2 respectively. The dimensions and size of the site are adequate for medium density residential development.

 

Open spaces in front of buildings are not fenced off from the street. Where fencing is proposed it is no more than 1 m high.

 

The front fence has a total height of 1500mm. There is a 500mm high solid masonry base, with the upper section constructed with 55mm wide metal slats, horizontally positioned and spaced at 20mm.

 

A special condition is recommended to reduce the height of the fence to not more than 1200mm, so that a sense of openness at the street frontage will be maintained.

 

 

Front setbacks

The proposed front setback is as follows:

 

·         G/F: 4.9m to 6.5m

·         1/F: 3.8m to 5.6m (to balcony); 5.0m to 6.9m (to wall)

·         Loft: 11.1m to 13.0m

 

The front setbacks of the adjoining developments are as follows:

 

29 Midway Drive

Ground floor:

5.7m – 7m to balcony

6.9m – 8.2m to wall

First floor:

5.5m – 7m to balcony

6.4m – 8.2m to wall

[Note: the above data are based on the DA approval drawings for No. 29 Midway Drive (DA/393/2008)]

 

No. 33 Midway Drive

Minimum 6.2m

[Note: the above figure is based on the submitted survey plan]

 

Extract of the submitted Site Plan

 

 

The submitted Site Plan has clearly indicated the average front setback alignment (denoted by a red line in the site plan extracted above) taking into account the shape of the street and the existing setbacks of the adjoining properties. The proposed development is behind this desired setback line. Furthermore, the front elevation has been stepped to respect the curvilinear alignment of Midway Drive. The proposed front setback is considered to be adequate.

 

The front yard is located on deep soil. A special condition is recommended to require a canopy tree with a mature height of not less than 10m to be planted within the front yard to visually soften the physical structures on the site and to enhance the streetscape.

 

Side setbacks

The preferred solutions of the DCP state the following:

S2 Buildings (including balconies) maintain a minimum average setback of 4m from any side boundary.

No part of the building is closer than 2.5m from any side boundary.

The maximum length of any wall section is 10m. The minimum length of any step is 3m.

 

The proposed side setbacks are as follows:

 

North-eastern side boundary:

- G/F: 2.8m to 5.2m

- 1/F: 2.5m (to balconies); 2.7m to 4.2m (to walls)

- Loft: 3.7m to 5.1m

- Maximum wall length: 9.8m (G/F), 6.2m (1/F), 4.4m (loft)

 

South-western side boundary:

- G/F: 2.5m to 4.0m

- 1/F: 2.5m to 4.0m

- Loft: 5.0m

- Maximum wall length: 15.1m (G/F), 10.2m (1/F), 16.6m (loft) 

 

The proposal does not strictly meet the preferred solutions of the DCP. However, the development is considered to satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for the following reasons:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rear setback

The preferred solutions of the DCP state the following:

 

Buildings (including balconies) maintain a minimum average setback of 6m from the rear boundary.

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

The maximum length of any one section of wall is 10m. The minimum length of any step is 3m.

 

The proposed rear setback is as follows:

G/F: 4.5m to 6.8m

1/F: 4.5m to 6.2m

Maximum length of wall sections: 6.7m

 

The proposal does not strictly meet the rear setback preferred solution. However, the development is considered to satisfy the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for the following reasons:

 

 

 

 

Privacy

The performance requirements of the DCP relating to privacy are as follows:

 

P1  Visual Privacy

Windows and balconies of main living areas are located to avoid overlooking windows in adjoining dwellings and private open space.

P2 Private open space design and location ensure privacy.

P3  Acoustic Privacy

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

 

The potential privacy impacts of various elements of the proposal are addressed as follows:

 

Elevation

Element

Comments

North-east (side elevation)

G/F courtyards

The courtyards to the ground floor units are situated on the car park roof. The finished ground levels (RL15.35 for Unit 2; RL 15.00 for Units 3, 4 and 5) are approximately 700mm to 1000mm above the side walk of the adjoining property at No. 33A Midway Drive (RL14.33).

 

To mitigate against potential overlooking, a continuous strip planter box is proposed along the edge of the courtyards. A slatted fence will also be installed above the planter reaching a height of approximately 1500mm (Unit 2) to 1800mm (Units 3, 4 and 5) above the courtyard levels. The above measures will effectively minimise overlooking into the windows and private open space of the dwelling at No. 33A.

1/F balconies

The balconies to Units 7, 8 and 9 are oriented towards the side boundary and have overlooking potential.

 

Due to their elevated position, the balconies will generally overlook the roof of the dwelling at No. 33A.

 

A 1.2m wide fixed, full-height louvred screen will be installed for each of the above balconies. The drawings demonstrate that the configuration of the privacy screens would be effective in restricting downward views to the adjoining property.

 

The landscape plan shows the planting of a row of Lily Pilly within the strip planter box in the courtyards below. These shrubs have a mature height of 3m. It should be noted that these vegetation is to be grown within the raised planter box and would be able to screen the side windows of No. 33A at maturity.

 

Based on the above, it is considered that the proposal has minimised potential privacy impacts on the adjoining property.

 

1/F stair landings

The north-eastern elevation of the two stair landings are provided with full-height louvred screens, which would minimise downward views to the adjoining properties at Nos. 33-33A.

1/F bedroom windows

The windows to the bedroom of Unit 5 do not have excessive glazed areas. Given that the bedroom is a low intensity use space within the dwelling, the windows are not considered to create significant privacy impacts.

Loft windows

The loft windows are attached to the bedrooms and do not have excessive glazed areas. These windows would not create significant privacy impacts.

South-west

(side elevation)

G/F walkway

The common walkway along the south-western side boundary has a finished level of RL15.00.

 

The courtyards of the adjoining townhouse development at No. 29 Midway Drive have a finished level of RL15.15 (as per the approved DA plans), which is slightly higher than the proposed walkway. A timber screen has already been installed along the edge of the above courtyards (see photograph below).

 

Courtyard fence of No. 29

 

 

The proposal includes a continuous strip planter box along the common boundary, which will not allow a person to stay close to the adjoining courtyards.

 

A specific condition is recommended to require the installation of a timber fence above the planter box, in order to reinforce privacy protection for the neighbouring dwellings and to ensure security for the site.

 

The proposal would not create significant privacy impacts, subject to the above measures.

1/F kitchen and bedroom windows

The kitchen windows of Units 7, 8 and 9, and the bedroom window of Unit 6 will be constructed with translucent glazing, and will not result in unreasonable privacy impacts on No. 29 Midway Drive.

South-east

(rear elevation)

1/F bedroom windows

The bedroom window of No. 5 is setback over 5m from the rear boundary and will not result in significant privacy impacts on No. 56 Minneapolis Crescent.

 

The proposed development is domestic in nature and any noise emission is considered to be consistent with the 2B zoning for the area. The proposed balconies have small dimensions and would not enable congregations of a large number of persons. The basement contains only 8 car spaces and is not considered to generate an overwhelming amount of traffic in the subject residential locality. Overall, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory having regard to acoustic privacy.

 

Solar access

The DCP Performance Requirements relating to solar access are extracted below:

 

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

P1.2 Living areas of neighbours’ dwellings receive 3 hours of sunlight over part of their surface throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

P1.3 Neighbour’s principal private outdoor open space receives 3 hours of sunlight over at least 50% of its area throughout the year. If less currently available, the amount is not reduced.

 

The following provides an analysis of the expected shadow impacts on 21 June based on the submitted shadow diagrams:

 

No. 29 Midway Drive

The townhouse development at No. 29 contains 4 dwellings. The living room and courtyard of the front unit (TH1) are oriented towards Midway Drive. The terraces and living rooms of the middle units (TH2 and TH3) face the subject site. The rear unit (TH4) has its living room and courtyard oriented towards the rear. The upper floor contains bedroom and bathroom windows facing the subject site.

 

The expected overshadowing on 21 June is described in the diagrams below:

 

9am, 21 June

10am, 21 June

 

 

11am, 21 June

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12noon, 21 June

 

 

1pm, 21 June

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2pm, 21 June

 

3pm, 21 June

TH1 (front unit):

  • The living room windows and courtyard of the front unit are oriented towards the northwest, and will receive more than 3 hours of direct sunlight on 21 June due to their aspect.

 

TH2 and TH3 (middle units):

·         The majority of the courtyard areas to these units will receive direct sunlight at 12noon. They will be under full sun at 1pm. The majority of the courtyards will still be under sunlight at 2pm. They will be substantially overshadowed from 3pm onwards. Accordingly, a functional portion of the private open spaces to TH2 and TH3 will receive 2 hours of sunlight on the winter solstice.

·         The full height glazed doors to the living rooms of these units will receive sunlight at 11am and 12noon. At 1pm, part of the glazed doors will be overshadowed by the cantilevered bedrooms of the development itself. The glazed doors will be fully under shadows from 2pm onwards.

  • The upper floor bedroom windows will receive full sun at 10am, 11am, 12noon and 1pm. They will receive 3 hours of sunlight on the winter solstice.

 

TH4 (rear unit):

  • At 9am, the south-western portion of the courtyard (amounting to approximately 40% of the courtyard area) will receive sunlight. At 10am, the southern portion of the courtyard (approximately 25% of the area) will receive sunlight. At 11am, a small triangular area (approximately less than 20% of the area) will receive sunlight. The courtyard will be fully overshadowed at noon. At 1pm and 2pm, a narrow strip of land adjacent to the common boundary with the subject site will receive sunlight. (Note: the above analysis has taken into account the shadows cast by No. 29 Midway Drive itself.)

 

  • The living room windows of this unit will receive minimal sunlight on 21 June due to its south-eastern aspect.

 

Overall, the proposal is considered to be acceptable because:

·         The subject site and the proposed development are located to the north-east of No. 29 Midway Drive by virtue of the existing subdivision pattern and curvilinear road alignment. Although the positioning, footprints and massing of the development directly contribute to the overshadowing, they are not unreasonable as the proposal is constrained by the site configuration and location.

  • The ground floor living room windows and courtyards of the middle units are situated deep within the allotment and are oriented towards the subject site. Solar access is constrained by their level and position within the allotment. It is highly difficult to provide additional sunlight to these units unless there is an overwhelming reduction to the height and scale of the development, which is unreasonable.

The courtyards to the middle units will continue to receive adequate sunlight for not less than 2 hours on the winter solstice. Additionally, the glazed doors to the living areas will receive approximately 1 to 1½ hours of direct sunlight. Considering their location deep within the allotment, the amount of solar access retained is reasonable.

When considering the amount of sunlight that will be retained on the winter solstice, it should also be noted that the upper floor bedroom windows will receive full sun at 10am, 11am, 12noon and 1pm.

 

  • The restricted solar access to the courtyard and windows of the rear unit are attributed to the dwelling’s own southern aspect.

 

  • The submitted shadow diagrams demonstrate that the shadow impacts of the original pitched roof scheme would be more than the current design. This is due to the fact that the pitched roof sat directly above the storey below with no setback; whereas the current design has its loft level recessed 2.5m to 3.0m from the external wall alignment below. Accordingly, the breach against the external wall height standard will not result in additional shadow impacts on No. 29.

 

 

No. 33 and No. 33A Midway Drive

The expected impacts on these properties are described in the shadow diagrams below. The impacts of the current development scheme are represented in dark grey; whereas the impacts of the superseded design are shown in light grey and are for reference only

 

2pm, 21 June:

No. 33A

 

No. 33

 

 

No. 33A

 
3pm, 21 June:

No. 33

 

 

  • At 2pm, a small strip of shadows will cast onto the side walk areas of No. 33A. However, this impact is not considered significant as it would be commensurate with the shadows cast by the existing boundary fence.
  • At 3pm, the south-western side windows of No. 33A will be completely overshadowed.
  • It is expected that minor overshadowing of the driveway areas from the proposed side boundary fencing will occur at 3pm. This is not shown on the shadow diagrams.
  • The proposal will cast shadows on the private open space to the rear of No. 33A at 3pm. However, this impact would not be perceivable as the open space will be overshadowed by the dwelling of No. 33A itself at that time. 

 

The proposal is considered to be acceptable because:

 

  • The side windows of No. 33A are situated deep within the allotment and are oriented towards the subject site, with a setback of only 900mm from the common boundary. The retention of sunlight to these windows would not be possible unless the site remains undeveloped.
  • The proposal will not cast any shadows on the existing solar panels above the northern roof pane of No. 33A.
  • The overshadowing of the driveway areas will not cause any detrimental amenity impacts on the neighbours.

 

No. 56 Minneapolis Crescent

The rear dwelling of the multi unit building at No. 56 has north-facing windows and courtyard. The expected impacts are described in the diagrams below. The shadows created by the current proposal are shown in dark grey. Light grey only represents the impacts of the superseded scheme and is for reference only.

 

11am:

No. 56

 

 

12noon:

No. 56

 

 

 

 

 

1pm:

No. 56

 

 

2pm:

No. 56

 

 

3pm:

No. 56

 

 

  • The majority of the northern courtyard will receive direct sunlight at 10am, 11am and 12noon. At 1pm, approximately 40% of the courtyard will receive direct sunlight. At 2pm, solar access will be reduced to approximately 20% of the courtyard. It will be substantially overshadowed at 3pm.

 

  • According to the submitted 3-D shadow diagrams, the north-facing windows and balconies of the dwelling in question will receive at least 3 hours of sunlight on 21 June.

 

The proposal is considered to be reasonable as good solar access will be retained for the courtyard and north-facing windows and balconies of the unit in question.