Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 23 July 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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                      23 July 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, 30 Frances Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 at 6:00pm.

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

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

Amen”

 

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

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

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting - 25 June 2013

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council 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.

Mayoral Minutes

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

Urgent Business

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting required)

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

CP49/13    38 Cliffbrook Parade, Clovelly (DA/862/2009/A)......................................... 1

CP50/13    123-123A Ferguson Street, Maroubra (DA/154/2013)................................. 9

CP51/13    88-90 Botany Street, Kingsford NSW 2032 (DA/510/2012) ........................ 29

CP52/13    1 Moira Crescent, Coogee
(DA/664/2011/A)............................................................................. 107

CP53/13    5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra. ............................................................. 127

CP54/13    9-15 Ascot Street, Kensington (DA/736/2008/D).................................... 187

CP55/13    Reporting variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) between 1 to 30 June, 2013.......................................... 195

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting NOT required)

CP56/13    2013-14 Community Partnerships Grants Program - Recommended Allocations 199

CP57/13    Electronic Housing Code (EHC) for Randwick.......................................... 209

General Manager's Reports

GM14/13    Adjustment to precinct boundary........................................................ 213

Director City Services Reports

CS8/13      NSW Local Government Infrastructure Audit Report................................ 217

CS9/13      "Taste of Coogee" Event - Goldstein Reserve Coogee.............................. 223

CS10/13    Outdoor screen event - Clovelly Beach................................................. 227

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF36/13    Affixing of the Council Seal - Coogee Bowling Club.................................. 231

GF37/13    Investment Report - June 2013........................................................... 233

GF38/13    2012-13 Draft Financial Statements..................................................... 241  

Petitions

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM57/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Pending final economic analysis on a national container deposit container system (CDS)............................................ 247

NM58/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Extension of Wooden Walkway in Fred Hollows Gully.................................................................................................... 249

NM59/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - West Ward Parking ......................... 251

NM60/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Seng - Shark Patrols....................................... 253

NM61/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Seng - Shortage of Parking in Clovelly, Coogee & Kingsford   255

NM62/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Andrews – Proposed boat and trailer holding yard. 257

NM63/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Response to new Sydney Airport Masterplan 2033  259

NM64/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts – Partnership with UNSW....................... 261

NM65/13    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Child Welfare Programs....................... 263  

Closed Session

GF39/13    23-27 Adina Avenue, Phillip Bay - Eric Callaway House - Aged Care Facility

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

 

GF40/13    2 Coast Hospital Road, Little Bay - Lease of Kiosk/Cafe

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

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                      23 July 2013

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP49/13

 

 

Subject:                  38 Cliffbrook Parade, Clovelly (DA/862/2009/A)

Folder No:                   DA/862/2009/B

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification to the approved development including provision of privacy screens, the deletion of a garage gate, installation of an air conditioning unit and alterations to wall to southern boundary

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Rolf Ockert Design

Owner:                         J & M Lubotzky

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

This Section 96 application is referred to Council for determination as the original development application was determined by Council.

 

The original application was approved at Council’s Planning Committee meeting on the 23rd November 2009 for the construction of a new part two part three storey dwelling with double garage and swimming pool.

 

The proposed modifications include privacy screens and vertical blinds to the western side of the dwelling, the garage gate deleted, the installation of an air conditioning unit adjacent to the western wall of the dwelling and the relocation of the southern boundary wall adjacent to the external face of the rear steps to form the balustrade to the steps.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application to modify the consent proposes the following modifications to the approved development.

 

a)     Privacy screens and fixed external blinds are to be installed to the western side of the dwelling to the internal courtyard, the deck off the kitchen and dining area and the swimming pool area within the rear yard to provide screening from the adjacent multi unit housing development. The proposed privacy screens do not obscure any views from the adjoining property but will prevent the direct overlooking from that property and the dwellings within upon the private living areas and swimming pool area of this dwelling.

b)     Delete the garage gate to the driveway entrance.

c)     Install an air conditioning unit adjacent to the western wall of the dwelling sited 1100mm from the side boundary.

d)     Re site a portion of the southern boundary wall 700mm off the rear boundary to be against the external face of the rear access steps which cross the site to also form the required balustrade of those steps. The re siting of the boundary wall will preserve a portion of the existing rock face which is along the southern boundary of the site. The remaining wall which fronts the southern boundary will be 1800mm above ground level.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Cliffbrook Parade and is occupied by an existing part one and part two storey dwelling and attached garage at rear. The site has a frontage of 13.6m, side boundary depths of 43m/47m and a site area of 592sqm. The site falls steeply across the site of up to 10.46m. The locality is residential and contains a mixture of dwellings and multi unit housing development.

 

4.    Site History

 

The site has been the subject of  development application, DA/862/2009, for the constriction of a new part two, part three storey dwelling with double garage and swimming pool at rear. The original application was approved at the Planning Committee Meeting of the 10th August 2010.

 

The original development application has also been the subject of a previous application to modify the development consent, DA/862/2009/A, which was considered and approved at the Ordinary Council meeting of the 24th July 2012.

5.    Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  No response has been received to the notification of this application.

 

6.    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:

 

7.    Substantially the Same Development

 

The proposal will not result in any significant change to the nature of the original application for which the consent was originally granted. The Section 96 modifications essentially involve minor alterations to the approved dwelling that collectively will satisfy the definition of being substantially the same development for the purposes of a Section 96 application.

 

8.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The site is zoned R2 Low Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the proposed activity is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

The site is within the Foreshore Scenic Protection area and therefore Clause 6.7 of the RLEP applies.

 

The objectives of Clause 6.7 are as follows:

 

(a)    to recognise, protect and enhance the natural, visual and environmental qualities of the scenic areas of the coastline.

(b)    to protect and improve visually prominent areas adjoining the coastal foreshore,

(c)    to protect significant public views to and from the coast,

(d)    to ensure development in these areas is appropriate for the location and does not detract from the scenic qualities of the coast.

 

Development consent must not be granted for development on land within the Foreshore Scenic Protection area unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development is located and designed to minimise its visual impact on public areas of the coastline, including views to an from the coast, foreshore reserves, open space and public areas, and contributes to the scenic quality of the coastal foreshore.

 

The proposed modification to the wall upon the southern boundary will not detract from the existing visual and environmental qualities of the locality as the modified design of the wall will retain some of the existing natural rock face which fronts Cliffbrook Parade, rather than the originally approved rendered wall across the whole width of the southern boundary. 

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.71: Coastal Protection

The subject site adjoins the foreshore at Gordons Bay and is contained within a coastal zone and therefore SEPP 71 is relevant to the proposal. The Council is required to consider the aims of the policy and other environmental criteria when considering a development application in the Coastal zone. The aims of the policy seek to minimise the impact of development on the coastal zones and ensure their ongoing protection. The matters contained in clause 8 are as follows:

 

(a)    the aims of this Policy set out in clause 2,

(b)    existing public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability should be retained and, where possible, public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability should be improved,

(c)    opportunities to provide new public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability,

(d)    the suitability of development given its type, location and design and its relationship with the surrounding area,

(e)    any detrimental impact that development may have on the amenity of the coastal foreshore, including any significant overshadowing of the coastal foreshore and any significant loss of views from a public place to the coastal foreshore,

(f)    the scenic qualities of the New South Wales coast, and means to protect and improve these qualities,

(g)    measures to conserve animals (within the meaning of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995) and plants (within the meaning of that Act), and their habitats,

(h)    measures to conserve fish (within the meaning of Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994) and marine vegetation (within the meaning of that Part), and their habitats

(i)     existing wildlife corridors and the impact of development on these corridors,

(j)    the likely impact of coastal processes and coastal hazards on development and any likely impacts of development on coastal processes and coastal hazards,

(k)    measures to reduce the potential for conflict between land-based and water-based coastal activities,

(l)     measures to protect the cultural places, values, customs, beliefs and traditional knowledge of Aboriginals,

(m)   likely impacts of development on the water quality of coastal waterbodies,

(n)    the conservation and preservation of items of heritage, archaeological or historic significance,

(o)    only in cases in which a council prepares a draft local environmental plan that applies to land to which this Policy applies, the means to encourage compact towns and cities,

(p)    only in cases in which a development application in relation to proposed development is determined:

(i)     the cumulative impacts of the proposed development on the environment, and

(ii)    measures to ensure that water and energy usage by the proposed development is efficient.

The proposed section 96 modifications are considered acceptable and are consistent with the relevant aims of the policy given it will not result in any detrimental impact that the development may have on the amenity of the coastal foreshore and will remain suitable development given the minimal impacts the amendments will have to the original consent.

 

The amended proposal is considered to be an appropriate design and will not add any additional bulk, scale and size considering the topographical features of the subject allotment and the bulk/scale of the surrounding dwellings. The proposal is considered acceptable with respect to the matters for consideration under SEPP 71. 

 

8.1 Policy Controls

Randwick Comprehensive DCP

The Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan works towards achieving the objectives of the RLEP 2012 with regard to sustainability, biodiversity, design excellence, better integration of transport and land use(car parking, access and transport), environment, vibrant centres and a mix of uses (new site/area based controls and envelopes).

 

The current application has been assessed against the relevant objectives and or controls of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan as detailed in the table below.

 

 

 

Proposal

Compliance with Controls

Landscaping

The proposal does not significantly alter the approved landscaping to the site with the only variation being the setting off the rear boundary by 1000mm of the boundary wall to form the required balustrade to the rear walkway. This modification also preserves a portion of the existing rock face which is adjacent to the public walkway.

Yes

Visual Privacy

The modified proposal includes additional privacy screening to the private living areas of the dwelling, to the internal courtyard, the deck area off the kitchen dining area and the rear private open space which also includes the swimming pool.

Yes

Air conditioning

The proposed new air conditioning unit is to be installed to the western side of the dwelling next to the laundry and behind the dividing wall and will not be directly visible from the adjoining properties or the public domain. A condition is included with the original consent in relation to the operation of plant and equipment to the dwelling which will also apply to the new air conditioning unit.

Yes

 

9.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The site is zoned R2 under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

As noted above in Section 8 the proposed modifications to the approved development will not compromise the natural, visual and environmental qualities of the scenic areas of the coastline and satisfies the objectives of Clause 6.7 of the RLEP.

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 controls in the Randwick Comprehensive DCP except where discussed in Section 8.1 of this report.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the existing development has been assessed against the requirements of the relevant planning guidelines of the RLEP 2012 and Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan.

 

The proposed modifications are considered to be substantially the same development as that previously approved and will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/862/2009/B for modifications to the approved development at No. 38 Cliffbrook Parade Clovelly subject to the following conditions:

 

   Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 01 to 10, Revision d5, dated 29 July 2010 and received by Council on 29 July 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the Section 96 ‘A’ plans numbered 01 to 10, Revision d7, dated June 2012 and received by Council on 4 July 2012, as further amended by the Section 96’B’ plans numbered 01 to 9 Revision S2, dated April 2013, received by Council on the 29th April 2013 and plan numbered 10 Revision S3, dated 4th July and received by Council on 4th July 2013, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted in the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 applications except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                      23 July 2013

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP50/13

 

 

Subject:                  123-123A Ferguson Street, Maroubra (DA/154/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/154/2013

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to existing dual occupancy (Variation to Floor Space Ratio Control)

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                T Le, S Lama, K Woods & R Lama

Owner:                         T Le, S Lama, K Woods & R Lama

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 


1.    Executive Summary

 

This application is referred to Council for determination as it contains a variation to the maximum floor space ratio control in the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 by more than 10%.

 

The application details alterations and additions to the existing dual occupancy.

 

The main issue is the impact of the development upon the existing character of the locality.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The application details modifications to the existing dual occupancy as follows;

 

a)     The provision of a new front entrance to the building by reducing the width of the existing garage within the façade of the building.

b)     The demolition of internal walls within the rear ground floor to provide for an open plan kitchen and family room.

c)     A new landing to the northern side of the building and rear steps off the existing rear deck.

d)     The filling in of the existing doorway to the laundry within the ground floor northern elevation of the building.

e)     Within the upper level provide for new pergolas with polycarbonate roofing above the existing balconies to the front and rear of the building.

f)     Provide a new masonry balustrade to the balcony to the front of the building.

g)     Installing a new masonry and timber infill panel front fence between 1500mm and 1800mm in height.

 

The proposal will result in 5.5sqm of additional floor area to the building by way of the internal reduction to the garage to provide for the new front entrance. The total floor area of the building will exceed the RLEP 2012 and an objection under Clause 4.6 of the LEP, exception to development standards, has been lodged and is discussed below.

 

3.      Exceptions to Development Standard

 

Clause 4.6 of the Randwick LEP 2012 details exceptions to development standards and includes objectives which seek to;

 

(a)      Provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development.

(b)      Achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances.

 

Development consent may, subject to this clause, be granted for development even though the development would contravene a development standard imposed by this or any other environmental planning instrument. However, this clause does not apply to a development standard that is expressly excluded from the operation of this clause.

 

Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

 

(a)   that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and

 

(b)   that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:

 

(a)      The consent authority is satisfied that:

(i)       the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and

(ii)      the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

 

(b)      the concurrence of the Director General has been obtained.

 

In deciding whether to grant concurrence, the Director General must consider:

(a)      whether contravention of the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and

(b)      the public benefit of maintaining the development standard, and

(c)      any other matters required to be taken into consideration by the Director General before granting concurrence.

 

The proposal contravenes the maximum floor space ratio development standard contained within RLEP 2012. The applicant has submitted a written request that seeks to justify the contravention of the standard pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LEP.

 

(i) Floor Space ratio

The site area is 342m2. The duplex is already on the site. The alterations are all within the existing building footprint. Clause 4.4 of the LEP and the Floor Space Ratio Map stipulates that for the purpose of development other than a dwelling that a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 applies. The proposal details a total floor space ratio of 0.59:1.

 

The proposal details the reduction in the internal width of the existing garage within the envelope of the dwelling to provide for a new entrance and hallway within the front of the dwelling. The reduction in the internal garage width will result in an additional 5.5m² of floor area which increases the existing floor space ratio of 0.57:1, to 0.59:1.

 

The proposed variation is summarized in the table below:

 

 

Floor space ratio

Proposal

0.59:1 (203m2 )

LEP development standard

0.5:1 (171m2)

Excess above or less than the LEP standard

19% excess (32m2)

 

(ii) Assessment against the applicant’s written justifications for the contravention of the development standard

In assessing the applicant’s written justifications for the contravention of the building height standard, the principles established from the NSW Land and Environment Court case, Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 are relevant to the subject proposal. The above case specifically relates to objections to development standards pursuant to the then State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards, which has already been superseded by the provisions of Clause 4.6 Exceptions to Development Standards of RLEP 2012. Notwithstanding, the key matters for consideration are still applicable to the proposed variation to the development standard under the new LEP. The relevant matters are addressed as follows:

 

The Court must be satisfied that “the objection is well founded”. 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”.

 

Comments:

The objectives of the floor space ratio standard are as follows:

 

(a)  to ensure that the size and scale of development is compatible with the desired future character of the locality,

(b)  to ensure that buildings are well articulated and respond to environmental and energy needs,

(c)  to ensure that development is compatible with the scale and character of contributory buildings in a conservation area or near a heritage item,

(d)  to ensure that development does not adversely impact on the amenity of adjoining and neighbouring land in terms of visual bulk, loss of privacy, overshadowing and views.

 

The applicant’s written justifications outline the following key arguments for the departure from the standard:

 

a)       This proposal is to retain the existing approved use of the building whilst upgrading the functionality inside by opening up internal living areas and also by providing improved security and access to the ground floor unit by moving the entry to the front of the building.

 

b)       The proposal involves internal works which increase the numerical non compliance and does not contravene the intended objectives of the control in reducing impact on adjoining properties and streetscape.

 

c)       The floor space ratio is within the permitted residential dwellings in the R2 zone for sites under 450sqm.

 

d)       The current zoning allows for low density residential. The existing development is an approved two storey dual occupancy, which fits with the objectives of encouraging housing affordability, upgrade to fencing and patio roofing also contributed to improving the existing streetscape. By relocating the entry, security is improved to the residents. In general it would be considered in the public interest in supporting the exemption to code.

 

It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and strict compliance with the floor space ratio standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case for the following reasons:

 

The salient matter for the consideration of the request for exemption to development standards is that the proposal details an increase in the defined gross floor area because of the reduction of the internal width of the garage to accommodate the new entrance hallway to the building, and will not increase the actual volume of the building, the external appearance or bulk of the building as a result of the increased gross floor area.

 

It cannot be argued that concurrence to this objection is in conflict with the objectives of the R2 zone as the increase of the internal floor area of the building will not result in any impact to the amenity of the local residents because the overall bulk and scale of the building is not altered and will not detract from any desirable elements within the existing streetscape. The proposal will also continue to provide for the housing needs of the community and will improve the amenity and security of the residents by providing direct access for the ground floor dwelling directly from the street.

 

Based on the above assessment, it is considered that allowing for a departure from the floor space ratio standard would not alter the current building form and would not result in a more appropriate built form, scale and mass that would be any more compatible with the streetscape, and would not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts on the adjoining properties. The proposal in its current form will be in the public interest as it will remain consistent with the objectives of the floor space ratio standard and the zoning objectives.

 

Whether non-compliance with the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and the public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument.

 

Comments:

The proposed variation from the development standard does not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. The strict adherence to the numerical standard will be more conducive to the orderly use of the site and contribute to the public benefit.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

Preston C J expressed the view that a variation to a development standard may be well founded in a variety of ways:

 

First

The most commonly invoked way is to establish that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

The rationale is that development standards are not ends in themselves but means of achieving ends. The ends are environmental or planning objectives. If the proposed development proffers an alternative means of achieving the objective, strict compliance with the standard would be unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standard in question is unreasonable and unnecessary. The proposed development will still achieve the purposes of the floor space ratio standard.

Second

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

 

Comments:

The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is relevant to the subject development. As discussed, the proposal satisfies the objectives of the floor space ratio standard.

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 objective of the floor space ratio standard would not be defeated or thwarted as full numerical compliance in this particular instance is unreasonable and unnecessary. The proposed floor space ratio will remain compatible with the desired future character for the locality and will not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts on the neighbours. The resultant built form and scale represents a suitable development.

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

The development standards contained in RLEP 2012 have not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council. RLEP 2012 was recently gazetted on 15 February 2013 and the control provisions of the LEP are the result of comprehensive analysis of the development patterns in the Randwick LGA.

 

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:

RLEP 2012 was recently gazetted on 15 February 2013 and the zoning provisions of the LEP are the result of comprehensive analysis of the development patterns in the Randwick LGA. RLEP 2012 has zoned the site to R2 Low Density Residential, where the key objective is to “provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment”. The current zoning has a sound basis and is not considered to be unreasonable and inappropriate.

 

 

The proposed development satisfies the provisions of Clauses 4.6(3) and (4) of the RLEP 2012. Therefore, the applicant’s written justifications for contravening the height standard is considered to be well founded and is supported.

 

4.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is on the eastern side of Ferguson Street and has a frontage of 14.02m, a depth of 24.395m and an area of 342m². The locality is residential in nature and contains a mixture of single and two storey dwellings and dual occupancy dwellings and multi unit housing.

 

5.      Site History

 

Approval was granted for the construction of a two storey duplex style building under Building Application, BA/345/1968. There are no other relevant matters relating to this site.

 


6.         Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  No response has been received to the notification of this application.

 

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

The site is zoned R2 under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the proposal is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

8. Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The site is zoned R2 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 relevant controls in the Randwick Comprehensive DCP except where discussed in the following 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.

 

 

Randwick LEP 2012

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

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

Zoning: R2 Low Residential

Is development permitted under zoning?

Development for the purpose of a dual occupancy requires development consent and is permissible in the R2 zone.

 

The proposal details alterations to the existing dual occupancy.

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Maximum)

0.5:1

0.59:1

No, see comments above in Section 3.

Height of Building (Maximum)

9.5m

8.4m

Yes

 

Randwick Comprehensive DCP

The Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan works towards achieving the objectives of the RLEP 2012 with regard to sustainability, biodiversity, design excellence, better integration of transport and land use(car parking, access and transport), environment, vibrant centres and a mix of uses (new site/area based controls and envelopes).

 

The current application has been assessed against the objectives and controls of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan.

 


 

 

 

Proposal

Compliance with Controls

Site Coverage

The proposal does not alter the existing site coverage of the building.

 

N/A

Landscaping

The proposal does not alter the existing landscaping to the site.

 

N/A

Private open space

The proposal does not alter the existing private open space to the site.

N/A

Floor Space Ratio

0.59:1

No, see discussion above in Section 3.

Building Height

The proposal does not alter the existing building height

N/A

Setbacks

The proposal includes a new entry portico to the dwelling which protrudes 900mm from the face of the building and results in the setback of the building being reduced from 3.5m to 2.6m.

 

See discussion below.

Building Design

The proposal as amended includes a portico within the façade which will reduce the apparent mass of the building as viewed directly within the street.

Yes

Colours, materials and finishes

To be conditioned

 

Visual Privacy

The proposal does not reduce the existing levels of privacy to the adjoining properties.

Yes

Safety and Security

The alterations to the building includes a new front entrance to the ground level dwelling

Yes

Car parking and access

The proposal does not reduce the existing levels of parking on site.

Yes

Fencing

The proposal details the installation of a new front fence of masonry and horizontal timber slats 50% open to the upper two thirds of the fence.

Yes

 


Setbacks

The new portico will result in a reduction in the overall front setback of the building and the portico will project past the existing line of the subject and adjoining buildings. In this instance there are no major objections to non compliance with the control as the degree of non compliance is only to the portico portion of the dwelling and the provision of the portico adds visual interest to the building within the streetscape. In addition, the proposal will not conflict with the objectives of the DCP as the existing streetscape character is not compromised and there will not be any amenity impacts to the adjoining properties.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and, where non compliance results, the proposed development is considered to have satisfied the underlying objectives of the relevant standard. The proposed development will not result in any significant or unreasonable adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objection under Clause 4.6 of the Local Environmental Plan 2012 in relation to non-compliance with Clause 4.4 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 relating to Floor Space Ratio, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clause, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 154/2013 for alterations and additions to the existing dual occupancy at No.123-123A Ferguson Street, Maroubra subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received by Council

DA-01 Issue A

NS

30/04/2013

5th June 2013

DA-02 Issue A

NS

30/04/2013

5th June 2013

DA-03 Issue A

NS

30/04/2013

5th June 2013

DA-04 Issue A

NS

30/04/2013

5th June 2013

DA-05 Issue A

NS

30/04/2013

5th June 2013

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

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

 

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

 

Sydney Water

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

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s waste water and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if any further requirements need to be met. 

 

If suitable, the plans will be appropriately stamped.  For details please refer to the Sydney Water web site at www.sydneywater.com.au for:

 

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

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

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must ensure that a Sydney Water Quick Check Agent has appropriately stamped the plans prior to issuing the construction certificate.

 

Design Alignment levels

6.       The top of footings of any structures constructed on the boundary alignment must be at least 150mm below the existing nature strip level.

 

7.       The above footing levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineer have been issued at a prescribed fee of $135.00 (inclusive of GST). This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

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

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

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

 

Smoke Alarms

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

 

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

·           location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·           location of building materials for construction;

·           provisions for public safety;

·           dust control measures;

·           site access location and construction

·           details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·           protective measures for tree preservation;

·           provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·           location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·           details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·           provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·           construction noise and vibration management;

·           construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

Public Utilities

13.     A Public Utility Impact Assessment must be carried out to identify all public utility services located on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the building works.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

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

 

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

 

Inspections During Construction

15.     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

16.     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

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

 

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

 

Demolition Work Requirements

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

 

·           Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and Regulations

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

·           WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·           Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·           The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations

·           Relevant DECCW/EPA Guidelines

·           Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

a)     Public access to the building site and materials must be restricted by existing boundary fencing or temporary site fencing having a minimum height of 1.5m, to Council’s satisfaction.

 

Temporary site fences are required to be constructed of cyclone wire fencing material and be structurally adequate, safe and constructed in a professional manner.  The use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

f)      Site fencing, building materials, bulk bins/waste containers and other articles must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council.  Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Health, Building and Regulatory Services department.

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings, street verge

21.     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.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     That part of the naturestrip upon Council's footway which is damaged during the construction of the proposed works shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf or similar. Such works shall be completed at the applicants expense.

 

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      Underground assets (eg pipes, cables etc) may exist in the area that is subject to your application. In the interests of health and safety and in order to protect damage to third party assets please contact Dial before you dig at www.1100.com.au or telephone on 1100 before excavating or erecting structures (This is the law in NSW). If alterations are required to the configuration, size, form or design of the development upon contacting the Dial before You Dig service, an amendment to the development consent (or a new development application) may be necessary. Individuals owe asset owners a duty of care that must be observed when working in the vicinity of plant or assets. It is the individual’s responsibility to anticipate and request the nominal location of plant or assets on the relevant property via contacting the Dial before you dig service in advance of any construction or planning activities.

A9      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                      23 July 2013

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP51/13

 

 

Subject:                  88-90 Botany Street, Kingsford (DA/510/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/510/2012

Author:                   Wendy Wang, Senior Environmental Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 3 storey boarding house with 30 self-contained rooms, one manager's residence, communal space with basement and ground level parking for 14 vehicles and associated works (SEPP1 objections to landscaped area, building and wall height controls)

Ward:                      West Ward

Applicant:                Ms L L Langov

Owner:                         Ms L L Langov

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

1.    Executive Summary

 

The subject Development Application was lodged before the Randwick LEP 2012 was gazetted and is referred to Council for determination as it contains variations to the maximum external wall height, and minimum landscaped area development standards stipulated in Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) (RLEP) by more than 10%. The proposal also seeks to marginally vary the maximum building height standard of the RLEP. The applicant has submitted SEPP 1 objections to these development standards to address the non-compliance.

 

The subject application seeks consent for the following works: -

 

-    Demolition of the (2) existing dwellings on the site

-    Construction of a 3 storey boarding house development comprising 30 self contained rooms (each with kitchenette and bathroom), one manager’s residence, and 2 communal rooms.

-    On site parking for 14 vehicles, 6 bikes & 6 motorcycles (1 disabled space and 1 manager's space at street level, 11 residents spaces & 1 visitor space within the basement level.)

 

The site is located within the Zone No. 2B (Residential B Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the proposal is permissible with consent.

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Botany Street, between Middle and Meeks Streets and has an overall site area of 1293.9m². Immediately to the north of the site is a 4-storey residential flat building (No. 86 Botany Street), to the south of the site is a 2-storey attached dual occupancy (No. 92-92A Botany Street). The rear boundary of the site adjoins Botany Lane. A child care centre is located at the south-western corner of Botany and Middle Streets (No. 80 Botany Street). The immediate visual catchment of the site comprises a varying density of residential development including detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments.

 

The application was originally notified and advertised between 22 August 2012 and 5 September 2012. Sixteen (16) objections were received in response. The primary concerns raised involved that of the boarding house use and associated management issues, the proposed built form, solar access, privacy and parking.

 

The applicant was advised by Council in various written correspondence dated between November 2012 and March 2013 that design amendments were required in order to address issues relating to parking, waste, built form and minimising impacts to surrounding properties. Internal reconfiguration was also incorporated at the request of Council Officers and Council’s Design Review Panel.

 

The application was amended on 23 April 2013 and re-notified between 13 May 2013 and 27 May 2013. Six (6) submissions were received in response to the second notification of the proposal.

 

The proposal satisfies the requirements set out by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure within State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

The proposal does not meet the building height and external wall height standards as contained in the RLEP. As such, the applicant has submitted written objections under State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 1 – Development Standards justifying that the above breaches will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. These non-compliances with the height standards are deemed to be acceptable as the resultant built form is commensurate in bulk and scale with the surrounding residential development. The SEPP No. 1 Objection has been assessed and is supported.

 

The application also seeks to vary the minimum landscaped area standard of the RLEP, which requires 50% of the total site area to be provided as landscaped area by 5.8%. Despite this, the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, provide a landscaped area standard that is interpreted to succeed that of RLEP. A precautionary SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged and assessed in relation to the landscaped area component of the proposal.

 

The proposal will provide for increased affordable housing in a highly accessible location. It is considered that potential amenity impacts to adjoining sites can be addressed through recommended conditions, including the required implementation of a Plan of Management. The proposal has the ability to provide a high level of internal amenity to occupants.

 

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The subject application seeks consent for the following works: -

 

-    Demolition of the (2) existing dwellings on the site

-    Construction of a 3 storey boarding house development comprising 30 self contained rooms (each with kitchenette and bathroom), one manager’s residence, and 2 communal rooms.

-    On site parking for 14 vehicles, 6 bikes & 6 motorcycles (1 disabled space and 1 manager's space at street level, 11 residents spaces 1 visitor space within the basement level.)

 

Development overview

 

Site area

1293.9m²

Site coverage

631.66m²

Proposed ground floor area

420sqm²

Proposed first floor area

333sqm²

Proposed second floor area

242sqm²

Total gross floor area *

995m²

Maximum permissible FSR (RLEP FSR development standard for 2B zones plus SEPP bonus)

0.65:1 + 0.5:1 = 1.15:1 (1487.99)m²

Proposed FSR

0.769:1 (995m²)

Proposed landscaped area*

42.61% (551.36m²)

* Calculated in accordance with the RLEP definitions for Gross Floor Area and Landscaped Area. 

Proposed room layout summary

·         18 x Type A (double)

·         6 x  Type B (double)

·         5 Type C (single) including managers room

·         1 x Type D (adaptable)

·         1 x Type E (adaptable)

·         2 x common rooms and communal outdoor areas

·         Each room is provided with a kitchen area including kitchen bench, sink and stove top

·         Each room is provided with individual laundry and bathroom facilities

 

Additionally, the applicant advises that a Plan of Management will be implemented for the proposed boarding house addressing issues such as (but not limited to) rules of conduct, alcohol consumption, violence, anti-social behaviour and fire safety and building evacuation protocol.

 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The subject site is described as Lots A and B in DP 390271, Nos. 88 and 90 Botany Street, Kingsford.

 

The site is located within the Zone No. 2B (Residential B Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and the proposal is permissible with consent.

 

The site is located on the western side of Botany Street, between Middle and Meeks Streets. The land area and dimensions of the site are summarised in the table below:

 

Boundary

Length

Land area

Northern, side boundary

53.21m

1293.9m²

Southern, side boundary

52.935m

Eastern, Botany Street boundary

24.38m

Western, Botany Lane boundary

24.385m

 

At present, the site is occupied by two single-storey detached dwellings.

 

Immediately to the north of the site is a 4-storey residential flat building (No. 86 Botany Street). To the south of the site is a 2-storey attached dual occupancy (No. 92-92A Botany Street). The rear boundary of the site adjoins Botany Lane. A child care centre is located at the south-western corner of Botany and Middle Streets (No. 80 Botany Street). The locality is predominantly characterised by a mixture of detached, semi-detached and multi-unit residential developments.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The subject site at 88-90 Botany Street (two single storey detached dwelling houses)

2. Adjoining dual occupancy development to the south at No. 92 Botany Street


 

3. Adjoining 4 storey residential flat building at No. 86 Botany Street to the north of the subject site. 

4. Development to the south along Botany Street.

5. The rear of the subject sites.

6. View north along Botany Lane at the rear of the subject site. The existing detached garages to the rear of the subject sites are shown on right (single storey with pitched roof) 

 

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

 

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

 

(i)       Landscaped area

Clause 20E(2) of the RLEP states that development, other than for the purpose of a dwelling house, is to provide a minimum of 50% of the area of the site as landscaped area.

 

The proposed development provides 551.36m² of landscaped area, which equates with 42.61% of the area of the site and does not comply with the requirement of Clause 20E(2) of the RLEP.

 

Despite the above, the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, provide a landscaped area standard that is interpreted to succeed that of Clause 20E of RLEP 1998. The application meets the requirements of the landscaped area standard set out in Clause 29 of the SEPP and is discussed in Section 9.1, below.

 

A precautionary SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged and assessed below, in relation to the landscaped area component of the proposal.

 

Clause 20E(3) of the RLEP states that landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas not to exceed 50% of landscaped area provision

 

The proposed development provides 141.04m² of landscaping over podium, which equates to 25% of the total landscaping provision and complies with Clause 20E(3) of the RLEP.

 

(ii)      Maximum building and external wall height

Clauses 20G(2) and 20G(3) of RLEP stipulate a maximum building height of 9.5 and a maximum external wall height of 7m for building located within Residential 2B zones.

 

The proposal has a maximum building height and external wall height of 9.96m;

 

And therefore does not comply with Clauses 20G(2) and (3) of the RLEP.

 

4.1      Development standards

The proposal seeks variation to the following controls contained in RLEP 1998:

 

·      Clause 20E(2) minimum 50% of the site to be dedicated as landscaped areas

·      Clause 20G(2) 9.5m maximum building height 

·      Clause 20G(3) 7m maximum external wall height

 

The above provisions are numerical development standards contained in the statutory plan.

 

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

 

4.2      The purpose of the standards

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

 

Minimum landscaped areas:

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

 

Maximum building and external wall height:

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

 

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

Matter 1

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

 

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

Landscaped area

 

·      The landscaped area at 44.15% of the site is 75.66m² short of the 50% landscaping area prescribed under the Randwick LEP clause 20E(2).

·      However, Council cannot refuse consent for this reason because the SEPP for Affordable Rental Housing prevents refusal of the application on the grounds of any shortfall in landscaping area provided that landscaping in the front setback area is compatible with the streetscape.

·      The shortfall arises in part because the proposal incorporates basement parking, necessitating the construction of a driveway ramp that occupies an area of approximately 69m² leading to the basement carpark and hence lost from the potential landscaping area.

·      When the driveway and footpaths are included, the open space area around the building accounts for approximately 50% of the site. The ratio of built upon and unbuilt upon areas at 50:50 generally accords with the objective of achieving at least 50% open area otherwise through landscaping.

·      It is also significant to note that as the proposed FSR at 0.768:1 represents only 66.8% of the possible maximum FSR of 1.15:1, it is arguable that the lower density reduces pressure on the function and purpose of the landscaping such that non­compliance in landscaped are has less impact and strict compliance is less essential.

·      As already discussed, the SEPP for Affordable Rental Housing provides a dispensation for non-complying landscape area and considerable effort has gone into the landscaping design within the front setback area to ensure compliance with the 2009 SEPP. The existing street tree planting in front of the property is significant and cannot be ignored - 3 large trees with clear trunks to above head-height opening out above into an expanse of branches and foliage - these dominate the vista and so the on-site plantings have to compliment and fill in the space lower to the ground. This has been achieved by the proposed formation of a front boundary linear garden implanted with a selection of low shrubs of bottlebrush and protea interspersed with 4 medium height feature trees specifically magnolia, offering a burst of winter colour when flowering, giving way to dense green foliage through spring and summer and providing an appropriate in-fill of greenery shading and partially obscuring the front of the building. Behind this linear front boundary garden is an area of turf - an area of traditional front lawn -that follows the form dominant in front yards across the street and in the vicinity.

·      The landscaping treatment of the setback area on both sides is also an important contributor to compatibility with the streetscape. On the northern side within the 3m setback, turpentines have been selected being tall growing species with confined canopies (limited spreading branches) that will over time fill the gap and reduce the canyon effect between the 3 and 4 storey walls of the two buildings. The treatment on the southern side is in marked contrast, here the setback area is wide, approximately 4.6m, and it has been extensively planted out so as to restrict resident access along this side of the building thus enhancing privacy for the neighbours at No 92 , here also it is important not to block out sunlight to the neighbours at No 92 so a range of low shrubs and trees are proposed including Jasmine and Lilli Pilli.

 

Assessment Officer Comments: It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the purpose of the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following reasons:

 

·      Despite the variation of the minimum landscaped area standard of the RLEP (which requires 50% of the total site area to be provided as landscaped area) by 14.78%, the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, provide a landscaped area provision that is interpreted to succeed that of the RLEP;

 

·      The overall quality of landscape provision to the site is improved by the current proposal and results in higher quality, useable outdoor recreation space for occupants of the site. The existing open space to the rear of the dwellings proposed to be demolished does not include any form of weather protection, and although technically contributes to private open space, does not lend a high degree of amenity to occupants;

 

·      The proposed built form is noted to be appropriately screened through the implementation of a landscape plan, contributing to a positive aesthetic to the existing desirable attributes of the area and improving amenity for existing residents;

 

·      The proposed landscaping variation does not prevent the proposal providing for an acceptable amount of private or communal open space to occupants;

 

·      The overall layout and built form arrangement of the proposal results in a generally more spread out footprint, featuring an internal courtyard, varied building heights (three storeys in some areas and single storey in others) and landscaped areas to both street frontages. Although this arrangement somewhat reduces the capacity to provide a compliant landscaped area, this is offset by the positive impacts of alleviating adverse impacts to the solar access and privacy of adjoining residential development;

 

·      The proposal meets the relevant purpose of the RLEP standard despite non-compliance the statutory standard;

 

·      Landscaping has been well integrated into the street setback, which features a combination of stepped terrace, courtyards and planting, which assists in softening the appearance of the development from the street in accordance with the purpose of the RLEP landscaping standard;

 

·      Deep soil planting around the perimeter of the site will allow for vegetation to screen the development, as identified within the landscape plan;

 

·      The proposed degree of departure from the numerical landscaping standard is not considered to eventuate in an unreasonable built form, generally satisfying the purpose of the landscaped area standard;

 

·      The proposal satisfies the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, relating to landscaped area;

 

·      The proposed development provides a significant improvement to the landscaping situation currently provided on the site, allowing for more practical layout of landscaped area, with areas of deep soil for planting and permeability for drainage;

 

Maximum building and external wall heights

Building height

·      There is a section of parapet on the rear building above Fire stair 2, that stands 100mm above the 9.5m height plane for a horizontal distance of 2.2m in a north - south direction and 1.1m in an east -west direction. This is where an up-turn on the outside lip of the roof slab - a nib/hob on the perimeter of the roof - approximately 150mm wide and 100mm high encloses the roof for drainage purposes. The total area of the protrusion above 9.5m is just under 0.5m².

·      This protrusion occurs due to the practical need to enclose the perimeter of the roof with a hob for drainage purposes i.e. maintain the top of the parapet above the height of the roof to direct the roof water to outlet pipes. This is a very minor departure from the strict application of the code for height and the discrepancy is justified in our opinion in order to provide a sensible roof design and drainage. A SEPP 1 Objection has been lodged for this variation.

·      The non-compliance is minimal and necessary and reasonable in our opinion.

 

External wall height

·      The external wall heights of the building exceeds the maximum vertical height of 7m above ground required under Clause 20G(3) of Randwick LEP 1998 - the design features a perimeter parapet wall that exceeds the standard by approximately 2.5m on all external walls.

·      The 7m wall height control directs the external form and shape of the building with little or no apparent benefit in terms of either amenity or compatibility with surrounding built forms. Moreover, compliance, which could be achieved through an architectural contrivance such as a mansard roof, would only detract from the quality of the living space of 11 external rooms on the top level and would, we consider, prejudice the contextual beauty of the proposal.

·      None of the aims of the LEP set out in clause 2 bear directly on this issue and so offer little assistance in answering these puzzling questions. Likewise, the specific objectives of the zone are silent on this issue. And there are no specific development controls to provide any guidance or explanation.

·      It is apparent that compliance with this development standard can be achieved with some architectural contrivance such as for example, enclosing the upper perimeter of the building in a mansard roof. Compliance by contrivance in design would result in an architectural form which is completely out of kilter with the existing urban landscape and would be without merit.

·      Accordingly, in the absence of any clear rationale for the standard, and lack of any explanatory development controls or guidelines, in our opinion departure from the standard as proposed is justified in view of the other positive urban design considerations already discussed.

 

Assessment Officer Comments: It is considered that the proposal is satisfactory and compliance with the purpose of the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following reasons:

 

·      The context of the site provides specific merit to a generally stronger built form than typical of a low density zone given the 2B zoning of the site and its proximity to the University, hospital and Paine Reserve. There are also a number of substantial scale multi unit developments on the western side of the Botany Street, in the vicinity of the subject site;

 

·      The proposed built form, although exceeds the maximum building and external wall height standards of the RLEP, features staggered heights ranging from single to three storeys. It is also significant to note that the proposed FSR at 0.769:1 represents a significantly lower GFA than that of the possible maximum FSR of 1.15:1 permissible for the site. Given the generous site area, the lower density proposed allows for more flexibility in built form;

 

·      The building will contribute to definition of the street, without dominating the streetscape and is commensurate in scale and height with existing development with similar circumstances of lot shape and frontage;

 

·      Development within the visual catchment of the site can be best described as piecemeal, where residential flat buildings exist amongst single storey dwellings and commercial development, as such, the subject development will contribute to a transitional built form between existing and opposing scales neighbouring the site;

 

·      The proposal responds well to the existing context and provides contemporary affordable housing for the community;

 

·      Council’s Design Review Panel endorses the proposal and provided the following comment (specifically with regard to the scale of the development):-

 

The scale of this two and three storey redevelopment of a block at present occupied by two houses is compatible with its surroundings”

 

The proposed building relates well to the two and three storey structures to its north and south. The height and location of the building blocks of the development have been designed to minimize overshadowing of the two storey duplex to its south.  The shadowing that would occur appears to be within recommended limits”

 

·      The proposed building bulk and associated use have been appropriately considered, minimising environmental impacts upon surrounds while enhancing internal amenity, given:

 

The building has been appropriately articulated and modulated. Fenestration, material variation and landscaping have been incorporated in order to minimise external bulk and scale through effective design;

The building is not considered to impose unnecessary or avoidable solar obstruction to neighbouring sites, given substantial setbacks;

The proposed building bulk promotes an intensity of use that is reasonable in the context of the site and considers adjoining amenity;

The proposal supports a residential intensity that is reasonable for the site, with regard to context and zoning;

The proposal provides for and encourages affordable housing options in a predominantly residential area and does not detract from the existing level of amenity enjoyed y the surrounding residential development. 

The proposed building is sympathetic to the character of the existing low density residential context, providing a transition in built form in relation to those buildings adjoining;

The proposed built form serves to maintain and enhance desirable attributes of the existing residential built form, providing an articulated contemporary building of appropriate scale;

 

The submitted SEPP 1 Objections have addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. Moreover, the applicant has appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standards of Clauses 20E(2), 20G(2) and 20G(3) is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Conclusion

In conclusion, the submitted SEPP 1 objections have addressed the consistency of the proposed development with the underlying and stated purposes of the standards, the local planning objectives for the locality and objectives of the Act. The objections have been appropriately justified that the strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of each case. As such, it is considered that the objections are well founded.

 

 

Matter 2

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

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

 

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

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

 

The variations from the standards for landscaped area, building and wall heights 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 for suitable development which is both commensurate with the surrounding bulk and scale of buildings, as well as the desired character of the locality.

 

Matter 3

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

 

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

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

 

·      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 proposal to improve the existing residential development in an established neighbourhood.

 

The strict adherence to the numerical landscaped area standard is this instance, not considered necessary given:

 

·      The proposed building bulk has been appropriately designed to minimise any resulting environmental impacts upon surrounds.

·      The proposed landscape plan provides screening of the built form, practical space for communal uses and is sufficient for drainage.

·      The proposed building bulk supports an intensity of use that is generally reasonable in the context of this site and considers adjoining amenity.

·      The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives of the zone.

 

Ways of establishing that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary

Preston C J expressed the view that an objection under SEPP 1 may be well founded and be consistent with the aims set out in clause 3 of the Policy in a variety of ways:

 

First

The most commonly invoked way is to establish that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary because the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

 

The rationale is that development standards are not ends in themselves but means of achieving ends. The ends are environmental or planning objectives. If the proposed development proffers an alternative means of achieving the objective, strict compliance with the standard would be unnecessary and unreasonable.

 

Comments:

As discussed above, strict compliance with the development standards in question 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 standards is relevant to the subject development. As discussed above, the proposal is considered to satisfy the underlying purposes of the landscaped area, building and wall height standards. 

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 purpose of the standards would not be defeated or thwarted as full numerical compliance in this particular instance is unreasonable. The proposed landscaped area, building and wall height provisions will not result in detrimental streetscape or amenity impacts on the locality. The resultant built form and scale is compatible with the surrounding residential premises and represents a suitable development for the zone.

Fourth

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

 

Comments:

The landscaped area, building and wall height development standards have not been abandoned or discarded by any decision or actions of Council.

 

Each development application received by Council is assessed with regard to its merits. There has been no precedent established by Council’s assessment decisions, which in effect would abandon the development standards prescribed in the LEP.

Fifth

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

 

Comments:

The existing Residential 2B Zoning is not considered to be inappropriate for the locality. The RLEP (Consolidation), effective from 15 January 2010, has maintained the 2B zoning for the site.

 

5.    Site History

 

PL/34/2009 - The proposal was the subject of a prelodgement meeting held between the applicants and Council Officers on 2 November 2009. The preliminary concept design featured an FSR of 1.26:1, equating to an excess of approximately 789.3m², almost double the 0.65:1 requirement of the RLEP 1998.

The proposed floor space ratio and building mass was considered to be excessive and is likely to severely compromise the amenity of both the future occupants of the development as well as surrounding properties. Further, additional setbacks should be observed and the overall density reduced such that equitable sharing of sunlight and amenity can be achieved for site to be redeveloped in the area.

 

At the time, the recommendation provided to the applicant by both the Design Review Panel and Council explicitly advised that the building will be required to be moderated to improve neighbouring amenity and achieve a better contextual relationship with surrounding buildings.

 

DA/305/2011 – proposing the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a part 2, part 3 storey boarding house containing 40 self-contained rooms accommodating up to 78 residents, 1 manager’s flat, 2 communal rooms, parking facilities, landscaping and associated works.

 

The application was refused on 23 August 2011 for the following reasons: 

 

1.       The application does not satisfy the objectives for Zone No. 2B stipulated under Clauses 11(1)(a), (b) and (c) of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) in that the proposed building is monolithic in form with an inappropriate envelope and bulk, and that the development fails to deliver a suitable landscape ambience to the site. The development scheme will not be compatible with the desired residential character of the locality and will not protect the amenity of the existing residents.

 

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

 

3.       The proposed building height does not satisfy the provisions of Clause 29 of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and no SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted to justify the deviation from the control.

 

4.       The size of the overwhelming majority of the proposed boarding rooms does not meet the minimum standard stipulated in Clause 29 of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

5.       The proposal does not provide sufficient bicycle parking spaces and does not comply with Clause 30 of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

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

 

7.       The submitted shadow diagrams do not contain sufficient information to enable comparison with the existing situation and determination of the accurate extent of impacts on the windows of the affected neighbours.

 

Additionally, the proposed degree of overshadowing on the adjoining dwellings could have been reduced by a more skilful design that respects the character of the locality and configuration of the site.

In this regard, the proposed shadow impacts are not considered to be reasonable. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

8.       The proposed development will result in detrimental visual and acoustic privacy impacts on the neighbouring residential buildings. The proposed landscape design does not contain sufficient and adequate screen planting to mitigate the privacy impacts. In this respect, the proposal is considered to result in detrimental amenity impacts on the neighbouring residences and does not satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

9.       The application does not contain sufficient and adequate information relating to the operational management of the boarding house. Consequently, it is not possible to justify that the premises will be appropriately managed with potential amenity impacts on the neighbours minimised. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

 

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

 

It is noted that the subject application details a similar development to that of DA/305/2011, however, significantly reduced in scale. The previous application was assessed as being inappropriate for the site given its excessive bulk and mass, inadequate parking provision, lack of landscaping and unacceptable adverse impact to the amenity of surrounding development.

 

A Section 82A Review was lodged on 10 January 2012 in response to the refusal of the application and withdrawn on 2 February 2012. The Section 82A Review reflected a reduction from 40 to 30 rooms and associated improvements in massing, scale and amenity impacts. The Section 82A application did not address the issue of on site parking, which remained a critical area of concern for Council Officers and surrounding residents. 

 

The subject proposal, as amended, is considered to adequately address previous issues raise by Council and provides sufficient off street parking for the number of rooms proposed.

 

It is noted that the previous proposal was submitted prior to amendments to the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 in May of 2011. Prior to the amendment, the SEPP discouraged the provision of on-site carparking car parking on land zoned to permit flats and prevented refusal on the grounds of insufficient parking if there was provision one carspace per 10 boarding rooms. This requirement was amended to one carspace per 5 single boarding rooms in areas where public transport is accessible (as defined) and one per 2.5 rooms elsewhere.

 

The revised proposal reflects a 25% reduction in the number of boarding house rooms and a 31% reduction in the number of boarders. The current proposal is of a significantly reduced bulk and scale, decreased capacity to overlook adjoining sites (through rearrangement of private open space and balconies), and provides a two block design with a central courtyard offering visual relief and improved amenity.

 

6.    Application History

 

The subject application was lodged on 10 August 2012. The plans and supporting documentation were referred to the Design Review Panel for SEPP 65 - Design Quality of Residential Flat Development, Council’s Building Health and Building Officers and Council’s Development Engineers for comment. The application was referred to the SEPP 65 Design Review Panel on 12 November 2012.

 

Council’s Assessment Officer, in a letter dated 22 March 2013 raised the following issues (issues have been summarised):-

 

Waste Issues

Council’s ‘Waste Management Guidelines for Proposed Developments’ specify a waste generation rate for boarding houses of 9L/occupant/day for normal garbage and 3L/occupant per day for recycling. As such, 25 bins are required whilst only 20 have been provided (17 in Basement and 3 at ground level), which represents a shortfall of 5 bins. Council’s Coordinator of Waste Management has also indicated that given there is some landscaping, a minimum of 2 x 240L green waste bins will also be required, bringing the total number of bins required to a minimum of 27 Bins

 

The submitted plans only indicate the storage of 20 bins and so the waste storage areas will be unable to cope with expected amount of waste generated. Additional waste storage areas must be provided.

 

Council’s Development Engineers have also raised concerns regarding how the waste management arrangements for the development will operate and appears unable to support the proposed layout.

 

It is noted that waste is proposed to be stored in the basement carpark. As basement ramp access is solely from Botany Lane it appears waste bins will be presented here for collection. Botany Lane has a very narrow verge which will not be sufficient to accommodate the required number of bins being presented fro collection. The application will likely lead to up to 25 bins being scattered about on Botany Lane on collection days. This is not an acceptable situation to Council. The waste bins will have to be presented to Botany Street or split between the two frontages.

 

To fully assess the waste management arrangements the applicant is required to submit a Waste Management prior to the issuing of any consent.

 

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

 

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

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

·      Waste storage facilities and equipment.

·      Access and traffic arrangements.

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

·      Responsibilities of caretaker and occupants

 

The applicant is advised to liaise with Council’s Waste Management Coordinator prior to submission of the waste management plan. 

 

Access Driveway Issues

The following minor issues have been identified with the access driveway. The required changes will not affect basement floor levels.

 

·         The change of grade at the crest in the driveway high point exceeds 12.5% in breach of AS 2890.1:2004.

 

·         There are some minor miscalculations in the driveway grades For eg the transition before the first basement entrance is shown as 1 in 8 but the levels are shown transitioning from RL 43.94 tp RL 43.79 which is only a grade of 1 in 13.3 (7.5%). There is a similar error in the lower portion of the driveway.

 

·         The driveway is less than 1 in 8 within 4m of the property alignment but then steepens to about 1 in 4.83. Given there is no Council footpath in the rear lane this is acceptable but given the issues at the crest an extra transition will be required hence this length will actually be extended.

                         

In response, a final set of amended plans reflecting modifications recommended by the DRP and Council Officers were received on 23 April 2013 detailing the following changes: -

 

·      Amended waste management plan

·      Amended landscape plan

·      Proposed windows and ventilation skylights to ensuite as shown on plans (updated BASIX to reflect changes)

·      Securable fanlights above room entry doors;

·      Ceiling heights confirmed and as shown on Sections

·      Balcony doors and windows to all rooms will remain in part securely for cross ventilation

·      Ceiling fans in bedrooms and communal living rooms;

·      Proposed active roof ventilation

·      Sunshading and weatherproof awnings to North and West facing windows

·      Downpipes positions shown on plans as requested.

·      Window operations shown on elevations and sections as requested.

·      Security fence at the rear and at front confirmed

·      Concrete balustrades replaced with glass

·      Solid roof coverings proposed to top front bedroom balconies.

·      External wall paint finish to the proposed concrete walls confirmed

·      Waste bin numbers increased on Council's request; layout and collection points updated accordingly.

 

These plans form the subject of the current assessment and are considered to adequately address the issues raised by Council and the Design Review Panel.


7.    Community Consultation

 

First notification

The application was originally notified and advertised between 22 August 2012 and 5 September 2012 in accordance with DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans. A total of sixteen (16) submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process from the residents of the following properties:-

 

·      84 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      2/86 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      8/86 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      12/86 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      80 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      92 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      13/96 Botany Street, Kingsford (1 Bryan Avenue, Colac VIC 3250)

·      12/98 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      6/99 Middle Street, Kingsford

·      165 Botany Street, Randwick

·      167 Botany Street, Randwick

·      PO Box N91 Grosvenor Place NSW 1220

·      1/68 Meeks Street, Kingsford

·      3/68 Meeks Street, Kingsford

·      74 Middle Street, Kingsford

·      72 Botany Street, Randwick

 

In summary, the objections raise the following issues (the issues have been grouped to avoid repetition):

 

·      Insufficient provision of on site parking will exacerbate existing parking and vehicular movement pressures in the area

·      The development should be subject to controls for adequate provision of on site parking

·      Existing traffic conditions are hazardous due to the range of land uses in the area and the development will further exacerbate these issues.

·      The proposed location of the driveway is inappropriate and the laneway is too narrow to allow for adequate sightlines and safe maneuvering of vehicles to and from the subject and surrounding sites

Council’s development Engineers have assessed the application and no objections have been raised on parking or traffic grounds. The proposed parking provision complies with the relevant requirements under Clause 29 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. Refer to sections 8.1 and 9.1.2 of this report for detailed discussion.

 

·      Concerns that the development will become a halfway house or illegal brothel

The proposal seeks to establish a boarding house development which provides a form of low cost rental accommodation for a wide range of tenants including singles, retirees, students and young couples.

 

Further, operation of the boarding house will be managed by an adopted Plan of Management which incorporates appropriate provisions for occupant safety, general amenity, behaviour and numbers to mitigate potential amenity impacts to surrounding development.

 

The proposal is not considered to result in unreasonable detrimental environmental and amenity impacts on the locality as discussed within the relevant sections of this report and is accordingly recommended for approval.

 

·      Increase in noise and disturbance

·      Noise from boarders, rainwater tank and air-conditioning system

No air-conditioning units have been proposed. Notwithstanding this, standard conditions addressing plant and equipment noise emissions have been imposed.

 

An acoustic report has been submitted with the application and referred to Council’s Environmental Health Officers for comment. No objections have been raised and a suitable condition has been included with this consent requiring an additional acoustic report to be submitted to the satisfaction of Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, which demonstrates and certifies that noise and vibration (from any plant and equipment) from the development satisfies the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW EPA/DECC Noise Control Manual & Industrial Noise Policy, Council’s conditions of consent (including any relevant approved acoustic report and recommendations). The assessment and report is required to include all relevant fixed and operational noise sources.

 

In relation to potential noise and antisocial behaviour, appropriate operational management conditions have been recommended to ensure the boarding house will be operated in a proper manner with minimal amenity impacts on the neighbouring residential premises. The proposal does not result in an unreasonable intensity of use for the location. Refer to Section 10.2 for detailed discussion.

 

·      Boarding house development is not appropriate for the residential zoning of the area

·      Boarders are not the right people to be in an area which is family oriented

·      The development will attract transient and undesirable socio-economic groups (such as mental health patients/criminals etc)

Boarding houses are a form of residential development and are permissible in Residential 2B zones and where appropriate should be considered in the overall residential mix especially as a valuable form of affordable housing. There is, and can be, no prohibition on residents of any particular socioeconomic status as tenants in a boarding house in Residential 2B zones, and therefore they have as much right to live in the residential zoning and in the subject street. However, appropriate adherence to applicable boarding house controls combined with safeguards and controls to protect local residential amenity must be met.   

 

·      Boarding houses have poor levels of hygiene/poor living conditions and will attract vermin

There is no evidence that supports the objector’s concerns. Further, the boarding house is required to comply with the Boarding House Act 2012 which requires compliance with its provisions, including the occupancy principles relating to state of the premises (i.e. cleanliness, security and state of repair etc).

 

·      High density room sharing may exceed documented maximum per room

The applicant’s plan of management indicates that each boarding room is proposed for 1 -2 occupants. The provision of 1 – 2 single beds (to be specified by consent condition) in each room will effectively minimise unauthorised stay of guests.

 

·      Devaluation of property

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

 

·      Any deviation from Council’s development standards should not be supported

·      If approved, the development must comply with all State and Local Government controls

·      The proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site, is excessive in height and density and will reduce existing open space on this side of Botany Street

The amended application proposes variation of the landscaped area and maximum building and external wall height standards of the RLEP.

 

The variations are discussed within the “SEPP 1” and SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 sections of this report (sections 4 and 9.1, respectively).

 

The height, scale and massing of the proposed development, as amended, are considered to be generally consistent with the character of the streetscape and will provide a contemporary built form which is commensurate with established development in this section of Botany Street

 

·      The proposal is a commercial establishment which is inappropriate and inconsistent with the residential/family friendly character (with schools, childcare centres and the hospital in the vicinity) of development in Botany Street and the local area.

·      The application should be subject to the character test to ensure that it is appropriate for the community

Boarding houses are a form of residential development and are permissible within the (2B) zone.

 

Refer to section 9.1.2 (Assessment of Clause 30A - Character of the local area) for detailed assessment.

 

·      The SEE refers to No. 84 as a modern double storey dwelling, it is in fact a Californian bungalow

Noted. Council Officers undertake their own assessment and site inspection and do not rely solely on the SEE.

 

·      The landscaped area is not increased significantly. The driveway is not aesthetically pleasing and should not be calculated into the landscaped area

The driveway area has not been included in the landscaped area calculations. Refer to sections 4 and 9.2 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

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.

 

·      The location of the driveway will result in increased noise disturbance

·      The proposed location of the driveway (to access the basement carpark) will result in increased noise and privacy loss to the adjoining dwelling.

·      Speed limits for vehicles and motor bikes should be enforced

The proposed basement parking should serve not only to separate noise from vehicular traffic from the surrounding properties, but will also enclose and contain any noise sources.

 

It should further be noted that there are a number of driveways and parking areas evident to this section of Botany Lane, which features rear lane access for some properties and are the primary building frontage for others.

 

The proximity of the proposed driveway to living areas on adjacent properties would be fairly typical of medium density development in zones and any impacts from the site’s residential use as a boarding house are consistent with the zoning and not unreasonable.

 

The driveway is at grade and does not incorporate any elevated areas (such as planter boxes etc) and is to be used for vehicular access only, with separate pedestrian access provided from Botany Street and the middle of the Botany lane frontage. As such, the driveway is not anticipated to result in any adverse impacts to the visual and acoustic privacy of adjoining residential properties.  

 

The level of vehicular traffic associated with development of this scale is considered to be consistent with that of existing development in the area.

 

·      The concrete roof must not be used as an outdoor terrace, clothes drying area or the location of mechanical plant/equipment

The concreate roof is non–trafficable. A suitable condition is imposed to ensure that this area does not become a useable outdoor space or the location of plant/equipment.

 

·      The metal deck roof should be of a low reflectivity finish

An appropriate condition has been included within the recommendations to this effect.

 

·      The extensive excavation to accommodate the proposed basement is within close proximity to adjoining properties has the potential to result in disturbance and damage during construction, as well as severely compromise the structural integrity of the adjoining buildings and their ancillary structures.

The proposal requires substantial excavation to accommodate the basement parking area. Suitable conditions are imposed to ensure that adjoining properties are adequately supported and impacts are minimised. 

 

The applicant has submitted a Geotechnical Investigation Report for the site (prepared by Auswide Geotechnical Pty Ltd – report No. AW26805, dated 12 July 2012 and received by Council on 10 August 2012) indicating that the proposed earthworks will not have any detrimental effects on the soil stability and environmental quality of the subject site and locality. Suitable conditions are imposed to ensure works will not have any detrimental effect on the soil stability and environmental quality of the subject site and adjoining sites. 

 

Standard conditions are also applied to ensure that construction work on the subject site will not result in adverse impacts to the health and amenity of residents in the surrounding dwellings. Works are subject to compliance with the Building Code of Australia and other policies with regard to construction noise, hours, waste management and minimising dust and debris.

 

·      Noise, dust and vibrations during construction

·      Damage to adjoining structures during excavation and construction

Standard conditions are applied to minimise adverse impacts to the health and amenity of residents in the surrounding dwellings during the construction phase. Works are subject to compliance with the Building Code of Australia and other policies with regard to construction noise, hours, waste management and minimising dust and debris.

 

·      No operational plan of management has been submitted. POM should be requested before any approval is granted

·      The manager cannot prevent incidents of antisocial activities and adequately monitor boarder behavior

The proposal is accompanied by an Operational Plan of Management (POM) detailing some provisions for occupant safety/amenity and measures to mitigate potential amenity impacts to surrounding development. The Plan of Management is proposed to be adopted through appropriate conditions of consent. Subject to compliance with the nominated conditions of consent, it is considered the proposed development is capable of being effectively managed. Notwithstanding this, the submitted POM is not considered to adequately address the operation of the proposed boarding house or contain sufficient detail.

 

Further, there has been no evidence to demonstrate that boarding houses are a source environmental nuisance or antisocial behaviour and individual incidents of antisocial/criminal behaviour should be reported to the Police for appropriate action.

 

Refer to section 10.2 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

·      Overshadowing of surrounding properties

Refer to section 10.2 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

·      The development will have adverse impacts on the privacy currently enjoyed by surrounding residents

Refer to section 10.3 of this report for detailed assessment.

 

·      Additional bins, littering and waste will compromise existing amenity

The proposal, as amended, adequately addresses waste management issues raised by Council. The applicant has submitted amended architectural plans and a waste management plan.

 

The bin presentation is proposed to be split between Botany Lane and Botany Street. To facilitate this, an additional bin storage area is now proposed at ground level adjacent to the northern boundary and close to the Botany St frontage. A total of 32 bins consisting of 15 x 240L garbage + 15 x 240L recycling and 2 x 240L green waste are now proposed which will be adequate to accommodate the waste generated by the development.

 

The operational Waste Management Plan has also been approved by Council’s Coordinator of Waste Management.  

 

The demolition and construction waste components of waste management will be required to be submitted prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

Second notification

 

The applicant was advised by Council in various written correspondence dated between November 2012 and March 2013 that design amendments were required in order to address issues relating to parking, waste, built form and minimising impacts to surrounding properties. Internal reconfiguration was also incorporated at the request of Council Officers and Council’s Design Review Panel.

 

The application was amended on 23 April 2013 and re-notified between 13 May 2013 and 27 May 2013. Six (6) submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process from the residents of the following properties:-

 

·      8/86 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      92 Botany Street, Kingsford

·      PO Box N91 Grosvenor Place NSW 1220

·      167 Botany Street, Randwick

·      3/68 Meeks Street, Kingsford

·      13/96 Botany Street, Kingsford (1 Bryan Avenue, Colac VIC 3250)

 

The objections generally detailed 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 balcony/access way proposed at level 2 will overlook the bedroom windows of No. 92 Botany Street. These areas should be provided with the same aluminium powder coated privacy screens which have been indicated for provision to other outdoor areas proposed.  

All proposed south facing window openings (adjacent to No. 92) are highlight windows with sill heights of 1900mm above the finished floor level. Where internal walkways are capable of looking toward No. 92, appropriate screening devices have been indicated for provision. The east (street) facing balconies have also been provided with solid blade walls to their sides to prevent overlooking into the adjoining sites to the north and south. The external walkway adjacent to rooms 26 and 27 is set back 13.2m from the northern elevation of No. 92. At a second story level, combined with a 12.2m setback from the southern side boundary, direct overlooking into the bedrooms of No. 92 is not possible and an oblique view is likely. This walk way is used for access to the second floor boarding rooms only and at a width of 1.4m, is unlikely to accommodate a substantial congregation of boarders at any one time. In light of the above, it is considered that provision of a privacy screen to this area is unnecessary in this instance.

 

8.    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:-

 

8.1      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:

 

Engineering comments

An amended application has been received that includes a revised waste storage area and landscape plan, top floor aligned with lower floors, addition of windows to ensuite bathrooms, addition of awnings to north and west facing windows, alterations to balustrades, provision of solid roof awnings to front bedroom balconies and internal changes 

 

Original proposal:

Demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 3 storey boarding house with 30 self-contained rooms, manager's residence, communal space with basement and ground level parking for 13 vehicles and associated works (SEPP1 objection to maximum height control)for construction of new multi-unit housing at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Amended Architectural Plans by  DC Design & EP Architects dated April 2013;

·      Amended Landscape Plan by Benjamin Landscape Pty Ltd, dwg no 12.30.1, issue B, dated 20.4.13;

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by George Burrell & Co. dated 9th August 2012;

·      Detail & Level Survey by A.B Stephens & Associates dated 8th April 2009;

·      Geotechnical Report by Auswide geotechnical dated 12th July 2012.

 

Drainage Comments

On site stormwater detention will be required for this development.

 

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.

 

Parking Comments

Parking Provision

 

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

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

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

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

 

Accessible Area

According to the SEPP, “accessible area" means land that is within:

(a) 800 metres walking distance of a public entrance to a railway station or a wharf from which a Sydney Ferries ferry service operates, or

(b) 400 metres walking distance of a public entrance to a light rail station or, in the case of a light rail station with no entrance, 400 metres walking distance of a platform of the light rail station, or

(c) 400 metres walking distance of a bus stop used by a regular bus service (within the meaning of the Passenger Transport Act 1990 ) that has at least one bus per hour servicing the bus stop between 06.00 and 21.00 each day from Monday to Friday (both days inclusive) and between 08.00 and 18.00 on each Saturday and Sunday.

 

The site is not considered to be in an accessible area due to the restricted hours of bus services adjacent to the site. Twelve carspaces (30 x 0.4) + space for caretaker for the will therefore be required for the proposed development. Total required = 13 spaces.

 

The submitted plans indicate the provision of 12 carspaces in basement plus 2 carspaces at ground level including manager space and disabled space. The parking provision is therefore satisfactory.

 

Bicycle and Motorbike Parking

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

 

For the boarding house with 30 rooms this will require the provision of 6 bicycle and motorbike spaces.

 

The submitted plans demonstrate compliance with this requirement with the provision of the required number of spaces in the basement carpark.

 


Parking layout

The parking space dimensions, ramp grade and layout appear to comply with Australian Standard 2890.1:2004. There are no objections.

 

At the request of the Development Engineer a high point has been incorporated into the driveway access (220mm above gutter) to minimise the potential for gutter flows from entering the basement carpark during major storm events.

 

Service Authority Comments

At the Health, Building and Planning Committee meeting on 8 November 2005, it was resolved that:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Given that the proposed works will be between 1$ and $2 million the applicant would normally be required to meet all costs associated with replacing the overhead wires with aerial bundled cables in the vicinity of the development site. A site inspection however has indicated that apart from the wires servicing the dwellings there are no overhead wires on the western side of Botany Street in the vicinity of the development site or in Botany Lane. Overhead wiring is restricted to the eastern side of Botany Street only away from the development site. This condition is therefore not required in this instance.

 

Waste Management Comments

The waste management issues raised by Development Engineering in previous memo dated 22nd March 2013 have been satisfactorily addressed by the submission of amended architectural plans and a waste management plan.

 

The issue of the large number of bins being presented to Botany Lane has been addressed by splitting the bin presentation between Botany lane and Botany Street. To facilitate this, an additional bin storage area is now proposed at ground level adjacent to the northern boundary and close to the Botany St frontage. A total of 32 bins consisting of 15 x 240L garbage + 15 x 240L recycling and 2 x 240L green waste are now proposed which will be adequate to accommodate the waste generated by the development.

 

The operational Waste Management Plan has now been approved by Council’s Coordinator of Waste (see Trim document D01751987). 

 

The demolition and construction waste components of waste management will be required to be submitted prior to the issuing of a construction certificate.

 

Geotechnical Comments

The geotechnical report indicates no groundwater present on the site however during and after periods of significant rain; seepage water would be expected at the soil/rock interface which is only approximately 1m below the ground surface. Conditions have therefore been placed in this report requiring the basement to be fully tanked and waterproofed.

 

It should also be noted that excavation for the basement carpark will be predominantly in rock.

 

Engineering Response to objections

Concerns have been raised by a resident that the lane is too narrow to allow adequate vehicle access to and from the basement. An analysis of car sweeping paths using the B-85 design template in AS 2890.1:2004 has indicated the basement carpark can be accessed adequately from Botany Lane with the proposed configuration. Botany Lane is also No Stopping or No Parking on both sides of the laneway at the location of the driveway which will prevent any parked cars restricting access into the basement carpark.

 

Concerns have been raised by a resident that the development will lead to congestion problems around the exit in Botany Lane. The number of basement carspaces accessed from Botany Lane is 13 spaces with an additional 2 spaces accessed at ground level. This is not expected to cause a significant increase in traffic generation in Botany Lane.

 

Concerns have been raised by a number of residents that the development lacks an adequate amount of parking. The development actually over-complies with its parking requirements as only 13 spaces are required (under the SEPP Affordable Housing) while 15 spaces have been provided (13 in basement + 2 at ground level). Six motorcycle spaces and 6 bicycle spaces have also been provided and the development therefore fully complies with the parking requirements of the SEPP (Affordable Housing).

 

Landscape Comments

As detailed for PL/34/2009 back on 30 September 2009, there is a row of three, 6-10 metre tall Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box’s), on Council’s Botany Street nature strip, comprising one in line with the northern site boundary of no.88, then one just to its south, centrally across the width of no.88, then another one in front of the northern half of no.90 which need to be protected and retained as part of this proposal.

 

All three appeared in good health but fair condition due to past heavy lopping/topping with poorly formed and poorly attached coppicing/sucker growth throughout their canopies. Regardless, they are covered by the provisions of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) due to their location on public property, and importantly, are part of one of the most established and recognised, single species avenue plantings in the whole LGA, which is about 3 kilometres in length, extending all the way from the intersection of Alison Road in the north, to Bunnerong Road in the west, so provide a positive contribution to the respective streetscapes.

 

While there are no external works proposed along the Botany Street frontage, with vehicle access both during construction and upon completion to be gained solely from Botany Lane at the rear, Council’s Engineers are requiring a full re-construction of the public footpath, for the full width of the site, just to the west of their trunks, with the plans also showing that the existing low masonry fence will be replaced with a new, solid security/privacy fence, and for these reasons, as well as due to the significance of the trees to the ‘avenue effect’, conditions (including a bond) have been imposed to ensure they are appropriately protected.

 

There is no significant vegetation within either 88 or 90 that will pose a constraint to the works in anyway, so can all be removed as necessary.

In response to past comments from the assessing officer, the SEE details that the landscaped area has been increased from 40.4% of the total site area to 44.15%, with the main features of the submitted landscape plan being the use of flowering shrubs and feature trees fronting Botany Street, evergreen screening shrubs along the southern boundary, as well as several internal courtyards, all of which will result in a major increase in planted material compared to what currently exists, with conditions requiring that this plan be implemented.

 

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

 

8.2      Building Surveyor Comments

This is a new development and must comply with all relevant legislative requirements. An Operational Management Plan accompanies the application and should be complied with at all times and the premises must be registered as a Place of Shared Accommodation with Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate. Appropriate conditions have been included within the recommendation.

 

9.      Statutory Instruments and Controls

 

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

 

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

·      Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, as amended

·      Heritage Act 1977

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

·      State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

·      Randwick Local Environmental Plan (Consolidation) 1998

·      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

·      Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

·      Building Code of Australia

 

9.1    State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

9.1.1   Equivalent zoning test

 

Recent precedents in the Land & Environment Court have established that State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 may not be strictly applicable when being used in conjunction with a pre - Standard Instrument LEP, such as RLEP 1998. Clause 26 of the SEPP sets out land to which the Boarding House provisions of the SEPP apply:

 

26        Land to which division applies

This Division applies to land within any of the following land use zones or within a land use zone that is equivalent to any of those zones:

 

(a)  Zone R1 General Residential,

(b)  Zone R2 Low Density Residential,

(c)  Zone R3 Medium Density Residential,

(d)  Zone R4 High Density Residential,

(e)  Zone B1 Neighbourhood Centre,

(f)  Zone B2 Local Centre,

(g)  Zone B4 Mixed Use.

 

In light of the above, application of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 to the subject application would rely on the current ‘Zone No 2B (Residential B Zone)’ zone of the site being deemed an ‘equivalent’ zone to the above. Of those zonings listed above, the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone is considered to be the most applicable equivalent zone. 

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 provides the following equivalence to the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone within Clause 1.6:

 

Named land use zone

Permitted land uses

R3 Medium Density Residential

Mix of medium density dwellings with associated services and facilities

 

The present 2B Residential Zone provides for a mix of medium density dwellings with associated services and facilities, where ‘boarding houses’, ‘community facilities’ and ‘places of worship’ are all permissible. As such, the permitted land uses of the 2B zone are considered equivalent to that identified as characterising the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone.

 

Based on the above it is concluded that the 2B zone under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 is an equivalent zone to the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone under the standard instrument for the purposes of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (“Affordable Housing SEPP”).

 

9.1.2   Division 3: Boarding houses

The subject application is made pursuant to the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and requires assessment under Clause 29 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent and Clause 30 Standards for boarding houses. The following tables outline the assessment:

 

Assessment of Clause 29 – Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent

Standard

Assessment

(1)      Floor Space

 

If the development is on land within a zone in which residential flat buildings are permitted and the land does not contain a heritage item that is identified in an environmental planning instrument or an interim heritage order or on the State Heritage Register, the density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio are not more than the existing maximum floor space ratio for any form of residential accommodation permitted on the land, plus: 0.5:1, if the existing maximum floor space ratio is 2.5:1 or less.

 

Accordingly, the maximum permissible FSR for the subject site (RLEP FSR development standard for 2B zones plus SEPP bonus)

 

0.65:1 + 0.5:1 = 1.15:1

 

 

0.769:1 proposed- Complies. 

 

 

(2)      Building height

 

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

 

 

 

9.96m – Does not comply – SEPP 1 objection submitted.

 

(3)      Landscaped area

 

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

 

 

Satisfactory treatment of both front setbacks is identified on the landscape plan - Complies.

 

(4)        Solar access

 

Where the development provides for one (1) or more communal living rooms, if at least one (1) of those rooms receives a minimum of three (3) hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.

 

 

The proposal provides for 2 communal living areas. Communal room 1 is west facing and Communal room 2 is north facing. The northern side of the proposed development is largely overshadowed by the existing part 3/part 4 storey residential flat building to the north at No. 86 Botany Street. As such, only Communal room 1 will receive the minimum requirement for sunlight during midwinter - Complies.

 

(5)      Private open space

 

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

(i) one (1) area of at least 20 square metres with a minimum dimension of three (3) metres is provided for the use of the lodgers;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(ii) if accommodation is provided on site for a boarding house manager - one area of at least 8 square metres with a minimum dimension of 2.5 metres is provided adjacent to that accommodation.

 

 

(i) Open space for lodgers:

The application provides for 2 communal open spaces.

 

Area 1 - 53.1 2 (5m x 7.1m) opposite communal room 2 and is centrally located.

 

Area 2 - 43.7m² (5.9m x 7.3m) adjoins communal room 1 at the rear of the site fronting Botany Lane.

 

A third landscaped garden amphitheatre area is provided to the internal courtyard area between the 2 main built forms.

 

Complies.

 

(ii) Manager:

The on site manager’s accommodation is provided with an open space area of 16.5m² (3m x 5.5m). This area is accessed from the directly from the patio of the manager’s room. Both the patio and private open space of the manager’s room is shared with boarding room 11 - complies.

 

(6)      Parking

 

If: (i) in the case of development in an accessible area—at least 0.2 parking spaces are provided for each boarding room.

 

 

The site is not located in an accessible area. As such, 12 carspaces (30 x rate of 0.4) + space for caretaker results in a total requirement of 13 spaces.

 

The submitted plans indicate the provision of 12 carspaces in basement plus 2 carspaces at ground level including manager space and disabled space (14 in total). The parking provision is therefore satisfactory. Complies.

Accessible area

The SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, provides for parking minimums on the basis of accessibility. The SEPP provides the following definition of accessible area:

accessible area means land that is within:

(a)  800 metres walking distance of a public entrance to a railway station or a wharf from which a Sydney Ferries ferry service operates, or

(b)  400 metres walking distance of a public entrance to a light rail station or, in the case of a light rail station with no entrance, 400 metres walking distance of a platform of the light rail station, or

(c)  400 metres walking distance of a bus stop used by a regular bus service (within the meaning of the Passenger Transport Act 1990) that has at least one bus per hour servicing the bus stop between 06.00 and 21.00 each day from Monday to Friday (both days inclusive) and between 08.00 and 18.00 on each Saturday and Sunday.

 

The Passenger Transport Act 1990 provides the following definition of ‘regular bus service’:

 

regular bus service means any regular passenger service conducted by bus (including any transitway service).

 

(7)      Accommodation size

 

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

 

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

 

(ii) 16 square metres in any other case.

 

 

Boarding rooms are specified for single and double lodging purposes.

 

 

 

4 single boarding rooms are provided and have areas of 15.04m² – complies

 

24 double boarding rooms provided at 17.98m² and 18.51m² - complies.

2 accessible boarding rooms provided with areas of 20.89m² and 22.18m² - complies

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

The proposal includes private facilities in each room.

 

Assessment of Clause 30   Standards for boarding houses

Standard

Assessment

(a) If a boarding house has 5 or more boarding rooms, at least one (1) communal living room will be provided.

2 communal living rooms have been provided within the building. 

Complies.

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

The application identifies rooms having a gross floor area no greater than 19.08m² (excluding any area used for the purposes of private kitchen or bathroom facilities) – complies

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

Boarding rooms are identified as being for single and double lodging purposes only. A condition is also recommended.

Complies.

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

There are adequate private facilities in each room. An additional kitchenette is provided to common room 1 - complies. 

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

30 boarding rooms comprising 24 with two person capacity + 4 single ordinary + 2 single accessible = housing for up to a maximum of 54 persons

 

One on site boarding house manager has been provided – Complies.

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

Repealed. 

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

The land is zoned Residential 2B and does not promote commercial uses.

N/A.

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

The proposal provides for 6 bicycle space and 6 motorcycle spaces. Complies. 

 

Assessment of Clause 30A- Character of the local area

 

Character of the local area

The consent authority is required to take into consideration whether the design of the development is compatible with the character of the local area.

 

Context:

The site is located within an established residential block bound by Middle Street and Meeks Street with frontages to both Botany Street and Botany Lane. The entirety of the block is zoned Residential 2B. The eastern side of Botany Street is zoned residential 2A and is primarily occupied by detached single dwellings whilst the western side of Botany Street (2B zoning) is characterised by higher density developments.

 

Compatible urban design options for the site are informed by the mass, form, height and setback from boundaries of the two buildings that enclose the site on either side.

The site adjoins a 4 storey residential flat building to the north at No. 86 Botany Street, which is a circa 1970s red brick `walk-up' with 3 residential levels over ground level garaging (max roof RL58). Adjoining the site to the south is a double storey dual occupancy (max roof RL54.1)

 

Residential development in the general locality is characterised by a mix of detached dwellings, interspersed with low rise medium density townhouses and villa and residential flat buildings of substantial scale.

 

In addition to No. 86, there is another 4 storey RFB located at 96-98 Botany Street to the south. No. 94 is a two storey townhouse development. Toward the north there are a number of single dwellings at Nos. 80, 82 & 84 Botany Street.

 

Botany Lane to the rear (west) of the site is characterised by garages and carports with minimal setback from the lane and standard 1800mm high rear boundary fencing. The site is also located within close proximity to the intersection of Botany Lane and Centre Lane. A mixture of housing forms typical of the locality can be found on the western side of Botany Lane and along Centre Lane to the south.

 

Development to the rear of the site on Botany Lane

 

The western side of Botany Street opposite the subject site is still characterised predominately by single allotment detached housing, a mix of one and two storeys, in both directions to the north and south.

 

The immediate area within a radius of 500m includes:

·      Paine Reserve park

·      University of NSW

·      Prince of Wales Hospital

·      Randwick Girls High & Randwick Boys High

 

Retail facilities within 1 km include:

·      Randwick shopping precinct on Belmore Road

·      Kingsford shopping precinct on Anzac Parade

 

The wider area with 2km radius includes:

·      Coogee Beach

·      Centennial Park

·      Randwick Racecourse

·      The Australian, Pagewood & Eastlakes Golf Courses

 

Streetscape Elevation and 3D perspectives

 

Streetscape elevation with Nos. 92 and 86 shown on the left and right of the subject site, respectively. 

View of the proposal from Botany Street (northerly)

 

View of the proposal from Botany Street (southerly)

 

View of the proposal from Botany Lane

3D perspectives of the amended proposal, provided by the applicant.

 

Compatibility of built form:

As shown in the images above, the proposal, as amended is considered to contain a bulk and scale appropriate to that existing within the visual catchment of the site. The 3 storey scale of the proposed building provides an effective height transition from the four (4) storey RFB to the north, to the double storey dwelling adjoining the site to the south. Further, the building represents a scale within the scope of the 2B zone, similar to what may be achievable to a medium density residential flat building on the site. The floor area proposed has been effectively distributed across the site, with generous setbacks from both the street and adjoining sites. Design measures of articulation and modulation have been employed to minimise bulk. 

 

The combination of substantial scale residential flat developments in the immediate vicinity and mixture of housing forms and densities in the locality all contribute to the ability of this site to support a more substantial, modern built form and it is considered the amended proposal has found an effective balance of density and distribution of built form across the site.

 

Compatibility of use:

The bulk of the building supports a reasonable intensity of residential use, remaining within the scope of a medium scale boarding house, notably for the purpose of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. Critically, the increase in intensity posed by the development is well supported by public transport options and local services in the immediate locality. 

 

Effective measures in relation to operation and management of the boarding house have been employed. These measures are recommended for enforcement by way of condition of consent, ensuring the development poses minimal detrimental amenity impact to adjoining residents and integrates effectively into the prevailing character of the locality.

 

It is considered that through conditions, the proposal provides both a built form and operational outcome consistent with surrounding character, minimising detrimental impacts upon adjoining sites, while providing contemporary affordable housing to the community.  

 

Consistency with the objectives of the Residential 2B zone;

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone, established in part to preserve character. The proposed building is sympathetic to the character of the existing low to medium density residential context, maintaining and enhancing desirable attributes of built form, as discussed above. The development will provide for and encourage affordable housing options. The proposed development will be subject to a comprehensive Plan of Management, detailing ongoing commitment to reduce impacts upon and protect the amenity of existing residents. The Plan of Management is recommended to be submitted to Council’s satisfaction prior to the occupation of the building and will be tied to any consent issued by way of appropriate condition.

 

9.2      State Environmental Planning Policy 65- Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)

The application was referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) convened under SEPP 65. The application has been reviewed by the Randwick Waverley Design Review Panel from its meeting on 12 November 2012. The most recent comments (based on the revised plans presented to the Panel at various meetings leading up to the final submission of plans) are provided are extracted below (in italics), followed by Council’s comments where necessary:

 

PANEL COMMENTS

This is a DA and the first time the Panel has seen the proposal.  A previous proposal for this site was a Pre-DA which was reviewed in September 2009.

Panel members have visited the site and are familiar with the broader area.

 

1.      Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

The site is surrounded by a mix of residential buildings ranging from single to four stories.  The site is close to the University and the hospital and Paine Reserve is just a few metres south of the site on the opposite side of Botany Road.

 

The lane is not a typical rear service lane but has a good residential character and is the main point of entry for some residences.

 

The proposal is essentially two buildings separated by a single storey link. It should fit satisfactorily into the street. In relation its neighbours to the north it should be clarified that the proposed new north facing windows do not cause loss of privacy to living rooms of the adjoining 3 and 4 storey block of units. The window positions have been nominated however knowledge of the planning arrangements needs to be obtained.

 

Council comment: The internal planning arrangements of the southern side of the adjoining building at No. 86 Botany Street to the north of the subject site have been confirmed by Council’s building application records. The window openings located adjacent to the proposed development service bedrooms, bathrooms and kitchens. All living areas/balconies of the adjoining residential flat building are located to its northern elevation. The north facing windows and balconies of the proposed development have are highlight and frosted/frosted to a height of 1600mm above the finished floor level or have been indicated for provision with 1800mm high aluminum privacy screens. Satisfactory.

 

2.      The Scale of the Proposal

The scale of this two and three storey redevelopment of a block at present occupied by two houses is compatible with its surroundings.

 

3.      The Built Form of the Proposal

The proposed building relates well to the two and three storey structures to its north and south. 

 

The height and location of the building blocks of the development have been designed to minimize overshadowing of the two storey duplex to its south.  The shadowing that would occur appears to be within recommended limits.

 

The Panel suggests that the need for the proposed walls separating and fire isolating the stairs needs to be confirmed by reference to the BCA. The building would feel more spacious with more open stairs and it would have the other advantages noted below.

 

If the fire stair walls can be removed, the proposed windows to rooms 16, 17, 26 & 27 could be re-oriented to face east and west away from the boundary, however it is not clear whether this would be necessary.

 

The extent of the concrete roof over the access walkways could be reduced and this would allow more daylight into the lower levels.

 

A cross section through the Botany Street façade at 1:50 architectural scale should be provided and form part of the application as well as details of the metal roofs and box gutters, entry canopies, downpipe positions and clarification of finished ceiling heights.

 

Council comment: These details have been adequately incorporated into the current plans and satisfactorily address the Panel’s recommendations. The fire enclosure has been removed and a 1:50 section and roof details etc have been included.

 

4.      The Proposed Density

The proposed density of 0.768:1 is well within the 1.15:1 FSR that is permissible for boarding houses in this location and in the Panel’s opinion is satisfactory. If anything the density could be higher to more effectively use such valuable urban land as long as there are no negative impacts on neighbours.

 

5.      Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

In order for the building to be energy and water efficient the following should be provided and specified on the drawings to be approved.

 

·  Windows to bathrooms

·  Top floor bathrooms could have ventilating skylights

·  Securable fanlights above room entry doors to rooms

·  Balcony doors and/or windows to all rooms should be designed to remain in part securely open to permit cross ventilation

·  Ceiling fans in bedrooms, living rooms and communal rooms

·  Well ventilated roofs

·  Sun shading and weather protection to north and west facing windows.

·  A storm-water tank of suitable size.  Downpipes and gutters need to be shown on drawings.

·  Window operation should be clearly marked on the elevations.

 

Council comment: These details have been adequately incorporated into the current plans and satisfactorily address the Panel’s recommendations. 

 

6.      The Proposed Landscape

Satisfactory, however the spread and height of some the tree species proposed could perhaps with benefit be increased. 

It is not clear from the documents what size some of the trees would achieve when mature.  It is noted that the largest tree proposed is located above the car-park ramp - an appropriate depth of soil must provided.  Given the residential nature of the lane the Panel would prefer to see one or two larger trees placed in the deep soil zone in the north western corner of the site.  This will be important to shade the proposed area of hard pavement for car parking which will increase the heat island effect in summer afternoons.

 

Any existing trees requiring removal should be clearly marked on the plans.

 

Council comment: These details have been adequately incorporated into the current plans and satisfactorily address the Panel’s recommendations. The proposal has also been referred to Council’s Landscape Engineer for comment, no objections were raised and suitable conditions have been included to address matters regarding tree retention, preservation and landscaping provision.

 

7.      The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

The proposed building should provide a pleasing environment for its residents and in this respect is superior to other buildings of this type that the Panel has recently reviewed.

 

The provision of a sink and bench in one of the communal rooms should be considered.

 

Weather protection (rather than just a pergola) would be preferred for the upper floor balconies.

 

Council comment: These details have been adequately incorporated into the current plans and satisfactorily address the Panel’s recommendations. 

 

The First Floor Plan could incorporate a walkway to a central sundeck which could extend halfway to the north over the Communal 2 Living Room.  The sundeck could have a screen on the northern side so that overlooking to the neighbouring property was not possible.

 

Council comment: The applicants have indicated that this aspect has not be incorporated into the design as it would result in adverse impacts to the visual and acoustic privacy of the adjoining development and result in added construction costs due to the need for additional waterproofing. Council considers the current design to be acceptable in providing sufficient outdoor/open areas for the recreational purposes of future occupants.

 

8.      The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

The planning is very clear. Visibility within the building would be improved by the removal of the fire enclosure to the stairs if this proves possible.

 

It is unclear what security (if any) is proposed at entrances to the building.

 

Council comment: These details have been adequately incorporated into the current plans and satisfactorily address the Panel’s recommendations. The fire enclosure has been removed and security fences to the front and rear of the development have been confirmed.

 

9.      Social issues

The location would appear to be suitable for this type of accommodation.

 

10.      The Aesthetics of the Proposal

It is the Panel’s view that the façade to Botany Street should be simplified by bringing the top floor to the line of the lower two floors.  Rather than a pergola over the top floor balcony, a solid roof should be provided in order to achieve solar and weather protection for the glass.  These balconies would be better if a little wider. This would have the added benefit of simplifying construction and the alignment of wet areas.

 

The success of this façade will depend on the quality of its detailing.  As discussed the Panel is of the view that the three solid portions forming the balustrade to the southern façade are too fussy and that the single solid solution adopted on the northern facade would be better repeated.  Is it necessary to have a solid balustrade to the ground floor balconies?

 

Council comment: The applicant has submitted a revised detailed front façade/sections plan incorporating the above recommendations. The top floor has not been brought into alignment with the lower two floors as per the Panel’s recommendation as it is considered that setting the top floor further from the front is more effective in reducing the visual bulk of the development when viewed from the street.

 

The finish to the walls does not appear to be specified. It is assumed to be rendered and painted. Colour should be nominated.

 

Council comment: Details of external finishes have been provided with the application. 

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This is considered a good proposal.  Subject to the matters raised above being resolved to the satisfaction of the reviewing planner, the Panel does not need to review it again.

 

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

SEPP: BASIX applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by a BASIX Certificate, pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. Should the proposal be supported, these commitments could be required through conditions of consent.

 

9.4      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 10 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.

 

It should be further noted that in the NSWLEC Proceedings for Wang and Anor v Canterbury City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1098, a DA that is saved by Clause 1.8A of the new LEP requires no consideration of the new LEP in the assessment of the saved DA.

 

The site is located within Zone No. 2B (Residential B Zone) under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation). The proposed development is defined by the RLEP as a “boarding house” meaning a building or place:

(a)  where permanent accommodation facilities are provided to the residents of the building or place, and

(b)  where meal and laundry facilities may be provided, and

(c)  which is not licensed to sell liquor within the meaning of the Liquor Act 1982,but (in Part 2) does not include a building or place elsewhere defined in this clause.

 

The proposal is a permissible use in the zone, subject to Council’s consent. The zoning objectives stipulated under Clause 11(1) are addressed as follows:

 

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

Comments:

The built form, architectural style and open space provision of the boarding house is considered to be generally compatible and sympathetic with the medium density residential character of the area, which also features a variety of land uses including childcare centres and schools. 

 

The design scheme incorporates sufficient and appropriate landscaped open space and adopts reasonable setbacks which effectively minimise the building mass and provide visual relief. It is therefore considered that the proposal is compatible with the desired low to medium density residential environment of the locality.

 

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

Comments:

The built form, architectural style and landscaped area provision of the boarding house adopts the appearance and scale of a contemporary multi unit development when viewed from surrounding streets. This is consistent with the scale of the adjoining residential flat building to the north at No. 86 Botany Street.

 

The design scheme is therefore considered to maintain the desirable attributes of the local character.

 

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

Comments:

The proposed building mass, as amended, has adequately addressed previous concerns raised by Council in relation to bulk, scale and massing. The subject proposal now incorporates an appropriately sized central courtyard which is effective in reducing both visual and overshadowing impacts to the neighbouring properties.

 

The proposal further provides for a permissible residential land use in an area already characterised by residential uses whilst maintaining reasonable levels of amenity for surrounding development.

 

(d)    to allow for a range of community uses to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, and

Comments:

Not applicable.

 

(e)    to encourage housing affordability, and

Comments:

The proposed boarding house is a form of low cost rental accommodation and will contribute to housing affordability in the locality.

 

(f)     to allow people to carry out a range of activities from their homes, where such activities are not likely to adversely affect the environment of the locality.

Comments:

Not applicable.

 

The proposal incorporates a Plan of Management, detailing ongoing commitment to reduce impacts upon and protect the amenity of existing residents. The Plan of Management is recommended to be tied to any consent issued by way of appropriate condition.

 

Part 2B- Principal Development Standards

The proposal is summarised against the development standards of Part 2B of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation) within the table, below.

 

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 site has existing access to adequate utility services.

Complies.

20E Landscaped area

(2) Minimum 50% of the site area

 

 

 

(3) Landscaped areas over podiums or excavated basement areas not to exceed 50% of landscaped area provision

 

Proposed – 42.16% or 551.36m²

 

 

 

Proposed – 25.6% or 141.04m² of total landscaped area provided over podium 

Does not comply. SEPP 1 submitted.  

 

Complies.

20F

Floor space ratio

Maximum permissible FSR (RLEP FSR development standard for 2B zones plus SEPP bonus)

 

0.65:1 + 0.5:1 = 1.15:1

Proposed – 0.769:1

Complies -with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 provision

20G

Building height

(1) Overall height: 9.5m

 

(3) External wall height: 7m

Maximum height 9.96m

 

Maximum wall height 9.96m

 

Does not comply. SEPP 1 submitted.  

Clause 34 Boarding Houses

This clause applies to a building or place that is used for the purpose of a boarding house and includes any vacant building or part of a building that, when last used or occupied, was used or occupied as a boarding house.

 

As the proposal seeks to establish a boarding house on a site where one was not previously present, the provisions of this clause do not apply.  

 

N/A

40 Excavation and filling of land

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

The proposal will involve an earth-cut up to approximately 4.3m to accommodate the basement parking area. The applicant has submitted a Geotechnical Investigation Report for the site (prepared by Auswide Geotechnical Pty Ltd – report No. AW26805, dated 12 July 2012 and received by Council on 10 August 2012) indicating that the proposed earthworks will not have any detrimental effect on the soil stability and environmental quality of the subject site and locality. Suitable conditions are imposed to ensure works will not have any detrimental effect on the soil stability and environmental quality of the subject site and adjoining sites.  Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to the provisions of Clause 40.

 

Satisfactory, subject to conditions

 

The subject site is not located within a heritage conservation area or foreshore scenic protection area. Non-compliance with RLEP standards has been discussed in detail under section 4 of this report.

 

9.5      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 R3.

Yes

Permissible under the proposed zoning?

Yes

Floor Space Ratio (Max)

0.75:1 +plus 0.5:1 SEPP bonus = 1.25:1

0.7:1

 

Yes

 

Height of Building (Max)

9.5m

9.96m

 

No – SEPP 1 submitted

Lot Size (Min)

325m²

1293.9m² (existing)

N/A

 

It is noted that the proposed development has an FSR of 0.7:1 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 0.75:1 is applicable to the site and is a development standard under the RLEP 2012. With the FSR bonus of 0.5:1 under the SEPP, the maximum FSR applicable to the subject site is 1.25:1. The FSR of the proposal when calculated under the definition applicable in the RLEP 2012 achieves compliance with this development standard.

 

10. Key Issues

 

10.1    Solar access

The subject site and those adjoining to the south are oriented east to west. The shadow diagrams submitted with the application and the site orientation indicate that obstruction of solar access will be imposed predominantly upon the double storey dual occupancy to the south at No. 92 Botany Street.

 

Specifically, the impact upon 92 Botany Street comprises:

 

·      Overshadowing of the northern side elevation as a result of the proposed development. The affected elevation features 4 first floor windows and 3 ground floor windows. These windows correspond internally to: -

 

First floor, front to rear (shown left to right in Figure 1 below) – bedroom, study, bedroom, and bedroom to second dwelling (it is noted that the existing building at 92 is a dual occupancy and contains two dwellings)

 

Ground floor, front to rear – Dining area, kitchen and dining room to second dwelling

 

Figure 1. Northern elevation of No. 92 Botany Street 

 

The ground floor openings are shown to be overshadowed between 9am and 11am during midwinter, however, by 11 am, the rear ground floor window will be out of shadow. Between the hours of 12pm and 2pm, all ground floor windows will be free from overshadowing. At 3pm, these windows again move in to shade.

 

The front 2 first floor windows are overshadowed between 9am and 11am and from 12pm onwards, only the first smaller window at the upper floor is overshadowed. The back 2 first floor windows remain free from overshadowing all day.

 

Figure 2. Windows on the northern elevation of the existing double storey dual occupancy to the south of the subject site at No 92 Botany Street.

 

·       Overshadowing of the rear private open space as a result of the proposed development. The overshadowing impact of the proposal is generally to a small section along the northern edge of the site of No. 92 and at 3pm, approximately half the rear veranda is overshadowed. The majority of the rear yard of No. 92 remains largely free from any additional overshadowing due to the generous southern setback of the proposal and it’s broken up built form. The proposal will not prevent the entirety of the rear open space of 92 Botany Street from achieving three hours solar access during midwinter.

 

The following points are considered in the assessment of the above solar access impacts upon 92 Botany Street:

 

Circumstances of the site:

o   The site orientation is east to west. As a result of this orientation, a degree of overshadowing is likely to arise through any complying development on the site.

 

o   The north facing elevation of No. 92 is considered highly vulnerable to overshadowing given its double storey scale and east – west orientation. In any development circumstance, complete solar access to this elevation will be very difficult to protect. Should a standard double storey dwelling house be proposed for the site at No. 90 and be provided with compliant side setbacks under Council’s DCP – low density residential development, the potential overshadowing impacts would be equal to, or more severe than that caused by the subject proposal.

 

o   The main street facing and rear facing openings to the eastern and western elevations of No. 92 remain unaffected by the proposal.

 

Proposed built form:

o   The proposal provides generous southern side setbacks of 4.577m at ground floor, 4.577m – 8.25m at first floor and 4.577m – 12.2m at second floor in relation to No. 92. These setbacks are significantly greater than that of a DCP compliant dwelling or dual occupancy at first and second floors. The proposed design and built form arrangement provides increased separation and serves to maximise solar access to the neighbouring site.

 

o   The proposal, as amended significantly improves solar access to the southern adjoining site and no additional overshadowing is caused to any of the rear west facing windows.

 

o   The solar access impact is not considered to arise directly as a result of the SEPP 1 Objections lodged:

 

1.   The distribution of bulk is generously setback from No. 92, concentrating bulk toward the street and northern side of the subject site;

 

2.   The proposed development is considered to be compatible with the surrounding environment and is suited to the site’s highly accessible location. The proposal represents an acceptable attempt to realise the full development potential of the sites and will contribute to the diversity and affordability of housing in the locality.

 

o   The overshadowing impacts are not resultant from poor design. The proposal has been designed by a registered architect and the built form endorsed, in principle, by Council’s Design Review Panel. The proposal effectively distributes bulk and scale, is articulated and generously setback.

 

o   An alternative approach to site strategy and built form is not considered to substantially improve the likely solar access impact nor represent a reasonable imposition upon the applicant, given the merits of the proposal.

 

Applicable planning controls:

o   There is no strict numerical solar access requirement to neighbouring dwellings applicable to boarding houses that Council can enforce to require greater solar access to the neighbouring site. As a guide, the Multi Unit Housing DCP requires three (3) hours access be retained to the primary north facing elevation at midwinter. The proposal achieves this requirement and does not exacerbate existing overshadowing to the rear veranda of the site to the south. 

 

In light of the above, the proposed solar access outcome is considered acceptable in the context of the site.

 

10.2    Social Planning - Plan of Management

The proposal is accompanied by an Operational Plan of Management (POM) detailing some provisions for occupant safety/amenity and measures to mitigate potential amenity impacts to surrounding development. The POM is proposed to be adopted through appropriate conditions of consent. Subject to compliance with the nominated conditions of consent, it is considered the proposed development is capable of being effectively managed. Notwithstanding this, the submitted POM is not considered to adequately address the operation of the proposed boarding house or contain sufficient detail.

 

Accordingly, a condition of consent has been imposed requiring the submission of a revised POM addressing in detail practices and procedures for the following: -

 

o   Management;

o   Community relations;

o   Retail terms;

o   Safety and security, including fire safety;

o   House rules for the amenity of the neighbourhood and control of noise;

o   Complaint management;

o   Cleaning, waste management and maintenance;

o   Smoking and alcohol.

 

The boarding house is proposed to be managed by an on site manager as the proposed number of occupants exceeds 20 people. This arrangement is acceptable under provision of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

The application has been discussed with Council’s Environmental Health Officer and a number of conditions to address operational issues in relation to matters such as anti social-behaviour, noise and waste have been included within the recommendations section of this report.

 

In addition to the measures provided in the POM and by the Environmental Health Officer, conditions have been recommended to address the following use and operational issues in consideration of safety and amenity:

 

o   Maximum number of persons accommodated within the building;

o   Maximum number of persons occupying specific rooms.

o   The use of the common areas is required to be monitored and cleaned so as to ensure the premise does not present an unsafe/unhealthy condition.

 

Standard conditions in relation to plant and equipment, offensive noise control and pollution control have also included in the recommendations to ensure compliance with relevant legislation and guidelines.

 

10.3    Adjoining amenity: Visual privacy

Concern was raised during the assessment of the application in relation to visual privacy from the development into adjoining habitable spaces.

 

In the absence of strict planning controls relating to Boarding Houses, the guidance provided within the Multi Unit Housing DCP have been employed as rules of thumb. The DCP provides that where a separation of less than 10m occurs between habitable spaces, openings should be raised or obscured to 1600mm above floor level. Further, areas of private open space should be designed and located to ensure a high level of user privacy. Landscaping, screen planting, fences and screens should be used to prevent overlooking and improve privacy. 

 

It is noted that the majority of substantial openings/balconies etc have been directed toward the Botany Street and Botany Lane frontages to minimise any potential to overlook into the adjoining sites.

 

92 Botany Street (south of the subject site)

All proposed south facing window openings (adjacent to No. 92) are highlight windows with sill heights of 1900mm above the finished floor level. Where internal walkways are capable of looking toward No. 92, appropriate screening devices have been indicated for provision. The east (street) facing balconies have also been provided with solid blade walls to their sides to prevent overlooking into the adjoining sites to the north and south. The external walkway adjacent to rooms 26 and 27 is set back 12.2 from the shared boundary of the subject site and No. 92. At a second story level, combined with ample setbacks, direct overlooking into the bedrooms is not possible and an oblique view is likely. This walk way is used for access to the second floor boarding rooms only and at a width of 1.4m, is unlikely to accommodate a substantial congregation of boarders at any one time. The proposal is considered to be acceptable with regards to privacy for the adjoining sites.

 


86 Botany Street (north of the subject site)

The proposed northern elevation seeks to provide 15 new windows and a number of doors, stair well/walk way access areas corresponding to various internal spaces. All north facing openings have been provided with fixed obscure glazing to a height of 1600mm above the finished floor level, appropriate screening devices (to walkways and balconies etc) or highlight windows.

 

No north or south facing elevated terraces or balconies have been proposed and the proposal is considered acceptable in relation to visual privacy to adjoining sites. Accordingly, the application is considered to meet the relevant controls for privacy and separation between dwellings.

 

99 Middle Street and 68 Meeks Street (west across Botany Lane)

The development will provide minimum separation distances of 15m to 19m from the nearest habitable spaces of Nos. 99 Middle Street and 68 Meeks Street, respectively. This is considered ample separation between sites, alleviating the potential for visual privacy issues.

 

The rear habitable rooms of the proposed development overlook: -

 

·      The parking/carport area of No. 99 Middle Street (see image below), with views to the west along Centre Lane. 

 

 

·      The street elevation of No. 68 Meeks Street. The front yards and rooms of all dwellings are susceptible to some degree of overlooking. The front yards and rooms of dwellings along Botany Lane are currently visible from the street and it is unreasonable to expect that privacy the front of a dwelling already visible to passing pedestrians is maintained.

 

Overall, the proposal incorporates the following design elements to ensure adequate levels of privacy and amenity for the surrounding development:

 

·      The front entry is centrally located such that there is maximum separation distance from the adjoining dwellings to the north and south;

·      The common room proposed for the south western corner addresses the rear yard (Botany lane) and is located adjacent to the brick garage in the rear yard of No.  92, away from its habitable rooms;

·      The proposal has relocated its communal terrace (previously proposed to be located at the first floor of the south western corner of the building) to the ground floor in a central position opposite the internal courtyard. This communal room is set back 5m from the northern boundary. This rearrangement of communal/open space provides a greater degree of visual privacy by eliminating any capacity to overlook adjoining sites from a substantial open area (such as a terrace) which has the potential to accommodate a number of boarders.

 

10.4    General amenity for occupants

The proposal is considered to provide suitable internal amenity for occupants for the following reasons:

 

·      Each room is self-contained with a private bathroom, kitchenette and washing machine.

·      All rooms are catered for a maximum of two persons and the bedroom areas have sufficient dimensions for proper furniture arrangement.

·      The kitchenette is designed to contain cooking and refrigeration facilities. It has sufficient space for the temporary storage of waste materials.

·      A majority of rooms have access to a small balcony or terrace, allowing passive outdoor recreation.

·      A common room is provided at ground floor level and adjoining a communal outdoor area, promoting social interaction of residents. These communal spaces enable disabled access.

·      Communal landscaped areas are provided to the middle and rear of the site and are conveniently accessible by all residents of the boarding house.

·      The submitted Plan of Management has specified the minimum furnishing requirements for the accommodation units. A specific condition is recommended to ensure these requirements are adhered to during the operation phase of the development. Further, a more comprehensive POM has been required for submission to Council’s satisfaction prior to the occupation of the building.

·      Ventilated skylights are also indicated for provision to internalised second floor bathrooms to enable natural lighting and ventilation.

 

10.5    Communal Open Space

Clause 29 of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 encourages the location of communal open space elsewhere than within the front setback. The proposal seeks to provide communal open space to the boarding house within the front and rear setback of Botany Street and Botany Lane, as well as within the communal courtyard between the two proposed buildings. 

 

The proposed communal space arrangement provides reasonable separation from adjoining residences and is accessible directly from the ancillary common rooms. The spaces receive reasonable (albeit alternating) solar access during the day. Further, their location creates a level of separation between the two buildings on the site and landscaped ambiance to the development within the generous setbacks from the primary and secondary street frontages.

 

In light of the above, the communal open space location and layout proposed is supported by this assessment.

 

11. Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$1,892,166.50

1.0%

$18,921.65

 

12. Council Policies - Council’s Asbestos Policy 2005

 

An Asbestos survey has not been submitted with the application which states that the existing building does/does not contain materials which contain building asbestos.

 

As such, in accordance with Council’s Asbestos Policy, a number of conditions of consent have been imposed accordingly to maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety.

 

13. Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation).

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

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will not compromise 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

Not applicable.

 

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

Not applicable.

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

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

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development, which are otherwise not addressed within the body of this report, are assessed 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, subject to the application of recommended conditions.

 

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

The site has convenient access to public transport and local services. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed building structures. Associated environmental impacts of the development are considered to be capable of being addressed through the application of conditions. 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 within submissions have been addressed within the body of this report.

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

The proposal is not considered to result in significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality, subject to the recommended conditions. The development is considered to be within the public interest, subject to compliance with the conditions of consent.

 

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 subject application seeks consent for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 3 storey boarding house with 30 self-contained rooms, one manager's residence, communal space with basement and ground level parking for 14 vehicles and associated works.

 

The proposal satisfies the requirements set out by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure within State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

The proposal does not meet the landscaped area, building height and external wall height standards as contained in the RLEP. As such, the applicant has submitted written objections under State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 1 – Development Standards justifying that the above breaches will not result in significant adverse amenity or visual impacts on the area. These non-compliances with the height standards are deemed to be acceptable as the resultant built form is commensurate in bulk and scale with the surrounding residential development. The SEPP No. 1 Objection has been assessed and is supported.

 

The proposal generally accords with objective (e) of the Residential 2B zone which is to encourage housing affordability and has established a case to indicate that the proposal would adequately maintain the desirable attributes of established residential areas, and to protect the amenity of existing residents in terms of noise and waste odour. It is considered that potential amenity impacts to adjoining sites can be addressed through recommended conditions, including the required implementation of a Plan of Management. The proposal has the ability to provide a high level of internal amenity to occupants.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the objections under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 20E(2), 20G(2) and 20G(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation), relating to minimum landscaped area, maximum building height and maximum external wall height, respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/510/2012 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a 3 storey boarding house with 30 self-contained rooms, manager's residence, communal space with basement and ground level parking for 13 vehicles and associated works at No. 88-90 Botany Street, Kingsford, subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

DA01 – Basement floor plan

DC Design and EP Architects

March 2013

23 April 2013

DA001 – Site analysis plan

DA02 – Ground floor plan

DA03 – First floor plan

DA04 – Second floor plan

DA05 – Roof plan

DA06 – Sections 1 & 2

DA07 – Sections 3, 4 & 5

DA08 – Elevations east and west

DA08A – Detailed front façade sections

DA08P – Streetscape

DA09 – Elevations north and south

DA10 – Room types floor plans

Site Landscape Design - Issue B

Benjamin Landscape Pty Ltd

20 April 2013

23 April 2013

Statement of Environmental Effects

Burrell, George & Co

9 August 2012

10 August 2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Multi Dwelling

341196M_05

8 April 2013

 

2.       The roof areas of the boarding house shall not be made trafficable without the prior written consent of Council.

 

3.       The north facing windows of boarding rooms 16, 17, 26 and 27 shall be fixed to a height of 1600mm above the finished floor level (i.e. fixed to the corresponding height of the obscure glazing). Details of compliance are to be included in the Construction Certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

5.         External Colours, Materials & Finishes:

a)  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. This may be achieved through powder coating or anodizing treatments.

 

c)  The colours, materials and surface finishes to the development must be consistent with the relevant plans, documentation and colour schedules provided with the development application (External colour schedule dated December 2010 and received by Council on 10 August 2012).

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

6.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 12 July 2012, based on the development cost of $1,892,166.50, the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $18,921.65

       

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.

 

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

 

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:

 

·           $4000.00    -      Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Electricity Substation

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

       

        Sydney Water

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

 

The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent, to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s waste water and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if any further requirements need to be met. 

 

If suitable, the plans will be appropriately stamped.  For details please refer to the Sydney Water web site at www.sydneywater.com.au for:

 

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

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

 

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

                

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

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

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia & Relevant Standards

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

 

BASIX Requirements

12.     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.

 

Access & Facilities

13.     Access and facilities for people with disabilities must be provided in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia, Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standard 2010, relevant Australian Standards and conditions of consent, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

Traffic conditions

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

 

15.     The vehicular access driveways, internal circulation ramps and the carpark areas, (including, but not limited to, the ramp grades, carpark layout and height clearances) are to be in accordance with the requirements of AS2890.1:2004. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with these requirements.

 

Design Alignment levels

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

          

Ground Level Parking and Pedestrian Access

·           120mm above gutter levels at all points opposite

 

Vehicle Access to Basement

·           In accordance with the approved driveway levels (Drawing DA01 and stamped by Council 23rd April 2013).

 

The design alignment levels at the property boundary as issued by Council must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. The design alignment level at the street boundary, as issued by the Council, must be strictly adhered to.

 

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

 

17.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $1127 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.

 

18.     The internal access driveway must be designed and constructed in accordance with the approved basement plan (Drawing No. DA01) and stamped by Council 23rd April 2013.  

 

Stormwater Drainage

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.        Roof areas

ii.       Paved areas

iii.       Grassed areas

iv.      Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

b)     The stormwater must be discharged (by gravity) either:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

e)     Should a pump system be required to drain any portion of the site the system must be designed with a minimum of two pumps being installed, connected in parallel (with each pump capable of discharging at the permissible discharge rate) and connected to a control board so that each pump will operate alternatively. The pump wet well shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2 hour storm assuming both pumps are not working.

 

The pump system must also be designed and installed strictly in accordance with "Section 8.4 PUMP SYSTEMS" as stipulated in Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

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

 

g)     A sediment/silt arrestor pit must be provided within the site near the street boundary prior to discharge of the stormwater to Council’s drainage system.

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Site seepage

21.     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 seepage water to drain around the basement carpark (to ensure the basement will not dam or slow the movement of the ground water through the development site).

 

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

 

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

               

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

 

Waste Management

Demolition & Construction Waste

22.     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.

 

23.     Operational Waste Management provisions must be implemented in accordance with the Waste Management Plan submitted with the development application stamped by Council 23rd April 2013 and approved by Council’ Coordinator of Waste.

 

24.     The basement waste storage area is to be provided with a tap and hose and the floor is to be graded and drained to the sewer to the requirements of Sydney Water.

 

Tree Protection Measures

25.     In order to ensure retention of the row of three Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) on Council’s Botany Street verge, comprising one in line with the northern site boundary of no.88, then one just to its south, centrally across the width of no.88, then another one in front of the northern half of no.90 in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show the retention of these three trees, with the position and diameter of their trunks and extent of their crowns/canopies in relation to the proposed works to be clearly and accurately shown on all drawings.

 

b.       Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar over public property along this frontage must be installed either in line with the southern site boundary, or, an equal distance between each of their trunks so as to minimise the potential for root damage.

 

c.       Where roots are encountered during re-construction of the Botany Street footpath or during any re-turfing or re-grading works on the verge, they must not be damaged or disturbed, with Council’s Landscape Development Officer to be contacted on 9399-0613 (giving at least 2 weekdays notice) to perform an inspection of the size, location and quantity of roots.

 

d.       Where Council grants permission for root pruning in order to accommodate the approved works, they must be cut cleanly by hand (using only hand-held tools), with the affected area to be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible so that roots are not left exposed to the atmosphere.

 

e.       Where major roots are encountered which need to be pruned, Council may require that the applicant cover the cost for Council’s own contractor to perform the root pruning so as to ensure adherence to best practice.

 

f.        Each of these three street trees must be physically protected by installing evenly spaced star pickets at a setback of 2 metres to their north and south (measured off the outside edge of their trunks at ground level), matching up with the back of the kerb to their east, and against the footpath to their west, to which safety tape/para-webbing/shade cloth or similar shall be permanently attached so as to completely enclose each tree for the duration of works.

 

g.       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".

 

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

 

i.        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.

 

j.        A refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card or cheque for an amount of $5,000.00 must be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and ultimately, preservation of the trees.

 

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on the site.  The necessary documentation and information must be provided to the Council or the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’, as applicable.

 

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

 

Certification and Building Inspection Requirements

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

c)     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

 

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

 

e)     the relevant requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 (as applicable) must be complied with and details provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council.

 

Dilapidation Reports

27.     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 buildings, additions to existing buildings which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of a building located upon an adjoining  premises,

·           buildings sited up to shared boundaries (e.g. terraced or attached buildings),

·           excavations for new buildings, additions to existing buildings which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any building 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 the relevant building/s located upon the adjoining premises, which may be affected by the subject works.  A copy of the dilapidation report is to be given to the owners of the premises encompassed in the report/s before commencing any works.

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

 

·          location and construction of temporary site fencing / hoardings;

·          location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·          location of building materials for construction;

·          provisions for public safety;

·          dust control measures;

·          details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·          site access location and construction

·          details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·          protective measures for tree preservation;

·          location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·          provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·          construction noise and vibration management;

·          construction traffic management details;

·          provisions for temporary sanitary facilities.

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

29.     A Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Guidelines for Construction Noise and Assessing Vibration, by a suitably qualified person, is to be developed and implemented prior to commencing site work and throughout the course of construction.

 

a)     Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents. 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Liability

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

 

Construction Traffic Management

31.     An application for a ‘Works Zone’ and Construction Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to Councils Integrated Transport Department, and approved by the Randwick Traffic Committee, for a ‘Works Zone’ to be provided in Botany Street for the duration of the demolition & construction works. 

 

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

 

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

 

32.     A detailed Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to commencement of any site work.

 

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

·       A description of the demolition, excavation and construction works

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

·       Any proposed road and/or footpath closures

·       Proposed site access locations for personnel, deliveries and materials

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

·       Provision for loading and unloading of goods and materials

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

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

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

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

·       Measures to maintain public safety and convenience

 

          Public Utilities

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

 

34.     Documentary evidence from the relevant public utility authorities confirming they have agreed to the proposed works and 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.

 

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

 

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

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

 

Building & Demolition Work Requirements

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

 

·          Work Health & Safety Act 2011 & Regulations

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

·          WorkCover NSW Requirements, Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·          The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

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

·          EPA Waste Classification Guidelines

·          Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

 

·          The requirements of WorkCover NSW and Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·          A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority upon completion of the asbestos related works which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately and the relevant conditions of consent have been satisfied.

 

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

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

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

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land

40.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 E of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that the adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times.

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

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

 

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

 

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

 

Dust Control

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

 

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

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

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

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

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

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

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

·      Landscaping and revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

43.     Temporary site safety fencing or site hoarding must be provided to the perimeter of the site throughout demolition, excavation and construction works, to the satisfaction of Council, in accordance with the following requirements:

 

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

 

b)     Hoardings and site fencing must be designed to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work from falling into the public place or adjoining premises and if necessary, be provided with artificial lighting.

 

c)     All site fencing and hoardings must be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

d)     An overhead (‘B’ Class) type hoarding is required is be provided to protect the public (unless otherwise approved by Council) if:

 

·       materials are to be hoisted (i.e. via a crane or hoist) over a public footway;

·       building or demolition works are to be carried out on buildings which are over 7.5m in height and located within 3.6m of the street alignment;

·       it is necessary to prevent articles or materials from falling and causing a potential danger or hazard to the public or occupants upon adjoining land;

·       as may otherwise be required by WorkCover, Council or the PCA.

 

Notes:

 

·       Temporary site fencing may not be necessary if there is an existing adequate fence in place having a minimum height of 1.5m.

 

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

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

 

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

 

d)     Access gates and doorways within site fencing, hoardings and temporary site buildings or amenities must not open outwards into the road or footway.

 

e)     Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council.  Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Health, Building and Regulatory Services department.

 

f)      Adequate provisions must be made to ensure pedestrian safety and traffic flow during the site works and traffic control measures are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Roads and Traffic Manual “Traffic Control at Work Sites” (Version 4), to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Site Signage

45.     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

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 1.00pm only

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Additional requirements for all development

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

 

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

 

Survey Requirements

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Traffic Management

50.     Adequate provisions must be made to ensure pedestrian safety and traffic flow during the site works and traffic control measures are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Roads and Traffic Manual “Traffic Control at Work Sites” (Version 4), to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Stormwater Drainage

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

 

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

 

52.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to any proposed discharge of ground/seepage water into Council’s drainage system external to the site, in accordance with the requirements of Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

            Tree Removal

53.     Approval is granted for the removal of all existing vegetation within the site due to their small size and insignificance, as well as to accommodate the proposed works as shown, subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan.

 

Landscape Plan

54.     The Amended Landscape Plan by Benjamin Landscape Pty Ltd, dwg no 12.30.1, issue B, dated 20.4.13 must be revised to comply with the following items:

 

a)       So as to avoid poor performance as well as future concerns over maintenance and upkeep, the turf shown for the internal courtyards and drying courts shall be deleted and replaced with either low maintenance ground covers and plants; or; decorative pebbles/gravel; or; a combination of both;

 

b)       The Syncarpia glomulifera (Turperntines) shall be deleted from the narrow garden bed along the northern boundary as their large size at maturity (20m x 10m) rather than the 6m x 4m dimensions as shown, will result in future structural damage and a reduction of solar access, with more appropriate screening species to be selected here.

 

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

55.     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

56.     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.

 

57.     An amended Operation Plan of Management shall be submitted to the satisfaction of Council prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate. The revised Plan of Management must address in detail practices and procedures for the following: -

 

·    Management;

·    Community relations;

·    Retail terms;

·    Safety and security, including fire safety;

·    House rules for the amenity of the neighbourhood and control of noise;

·    Complaint management;

·    Cleaning, waste management and maintenance;

·    Smoking and alcohol.

 

NB. Refer to the general requirements and format outlined in the Management Plan section in Part B9 – Management Plan & Part C4 – Boarding Houses (Clause 3 – Management Plan) of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in the preparation of your revised Plan of Management.    

 

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

 

Fire Safety Certificates

59.     Prior to issuing an interim or final Occupation Certificate, a single and complete Fire Safety Certificate, encompassing all of the essential fire safety measures contained in the fire safety schedule must be obtained and be submitted to Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.  The Fire Safety Certificate must be consistent with the Fire Safety Schedule which forms part of the Construction Certificate.

 

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

 

Structural Certification

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

 

Noise Control Requirements & Certification

61.     A report or correspondence must be obtained from a qualified Acoustic Consultant if new plant and equipment is installed to the building which is located within 20m of a dwelling.

 

The report/correspondence is required to demonstrate that noise emissions satisfy the relevant noise criteria specified in Council’s conditions of consent and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (EPA) Industrial Noise Policy.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

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

a)     Construct a full width concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrances to the site in Botany Lane.

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

c)     Carry out a full depth, 1 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full site frontage in Botany Lane.

d)     Re/construct a 1.3m wide concrete footpath along the full site frontage in Botany Street.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

63.     Prior to issuing a final occupation certificate or occupation of the development (whichever is sooner), the owner/developer must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway.

 

64.     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.

 

Service Authorities

Sydney Water Requirements

65.     A section 73 Compliance Certificate, under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.  An Application for a Section 73 Certificate must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator.  For details, please refer to the Sydney Water web site www.sydneywater.com.au > Building and developing > Developing your Land > Water Servicing Coordinator or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Please make early contact with the Water Servicing Co-ordinator, as building of water/sewer extensions may take some time and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority and the Council prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

       

Stormwater Drainage

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

Notes:

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

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

 

67.     A works-as-executed drainage plan prepared by a registered surveyor and approved by a suitably qualified and experienced hydraulic consultant/engineer must be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority and the Council. The works-as-executed plan must include the following details (as applicable):

 

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

·      Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·      Volume of storage available in any detention areas;

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

·      The orifice size/s (if applicable);

·      Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

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

 

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

 

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

 

69.     The applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council certification from a suitably qualified and experienced professional engineer, confirming that the walls of the basement have been fully tanked and waterproofed to prevent the entry of all groundwater in the basement level/s and that any required sub-soil drainage systems have been provided in accordance with the conditions of this consent.

 

Landscaping

70.     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.

 

71.     Prior to issuing a Final (or any type of interim) Occupation Certificate, certification from a qualified professional in the landscape/horticultural industry must be submitted to the PCA, confirming that landscaping at this site has been installed substantially in accordance with the Amended Landscape Plan by Benjamin Landscape Pty Ltd, dwg no 12.30.1, issue B, dated 20.4.13, and relevant conditions of consent, with the owner/s to implement strategies to ensure that it is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity.

 

Waste Management

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

 

73.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Fire Safety Statements

74.     A single and complete Fire Safety Statement (encompassing all of the fire safety measures upon the premises) must be provided to the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000

 

The Fire Safety Statement must be provided on an annual basis each year following the issue of the Fire Safety Certificate, and other period if any of the fire safety measures are identified as a critical fire safety measure in the Fire Safety Schedule

 

The Fire Safety Statement is required to confirm that all the fire safety measures have been assessed by a properly qualified person and are operating in accordance with the standards of performance specified in the Fire Safety Schedule.

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

77.     The operation of plant and equipment associated with the rainwater is 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.

 

            Operation of the premises

78.     The boarding house premises shall be operated in accordance with the definition of “boarding house” as stipulated in Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998. Accommodation is not to be provided on a temporary basis to persons whose principal place of residence is elsewhere and/or for tourism purposes.

 

79.     The use of the premises is to comply with the requirements of the Boarding House Act 2012 at all times.

 

80.     The use of the premises is to comply with the Operational Plan of Management for the subject premises at all times.

 

81.   The following occupancy rates shall apply to the ongoing use of the premises:

 

Room Number

Maximum occupancy

(One (1) Ocucupant)

Room Number

Maximum occupancy

(Two (2) occupants)

01

Accessible - One (1) occupant

02

Two (2) occupants

03

Two (2) occupants

04

Two (2) occupants

05

Two (2) occupants

06

Two (2) occupants

07

Two (2) occupants

08

Two (2) occupants

09

Accessible - One (1) occupant

10

Managers room - One (1) occupant

11

One (1) occupant

12

Two (2) occupants

13

Two (2) occupants

14

Two (2) occupants

15

One (1) occupant

16

Two (2) occupants

17

Two (2) occupants

18

Two (2) occupants

19

Two (2) occupants

20

Two (2) occupants

21

Two (2) occupants

22

One (1) occupant

23

One (1) occupant

24

Two (2) occupants

25

Two (2) occupants

26

Two (2) occupants

27

Two (2) occupants

28

Two (2) occupants

29

Two (2) occupants

30

Two (2) occupants

31

Two (2) occupants

 

 

Total

Maximum 54 boarders and 1 on site manager = 55 occupants

 

The above occupancy rates and adopted final Plan of Management shall be enforced by the appointed Manager at all times.

 

Any variation of the above occupancy rates or provisions detailed within the adopted Plan of Management shall be subject to Council approval.

 

The manager / caretaker shall be responsible for ensuring that this requirement is adhered to by validating relevant personal details before admission. This condition is to ensure that strangers are not sharing the units and potentially altering the approved use of the premises.

 

82.     The on-site manager for the boarding house must be available at all times (i.e. 24 hours; seven days per week) and must be a responsible person over the age of 18 years.

 

83.     The manager shall ensure that a notice is placed near the entrance to the property in a visible position to the public advising of the manager’s name and after hours contact number.

 

84.     Each occupant shall be furnished with a set of house rules (i.e. the Plan of Management) and that no variation shall be permitted without the further approval of Council.

 

85.     The manager shall maintain a record of all residents with details of their names, length of stay & number of persons in each room. This information shall be stored for a minimum of 12 months on site and made available to Council Officers upon request.

 

86.     All residents in the boarding house accommodation are to sign a lease or licence agreeing to comply with the adopted Plan of Management (PoM) for the boarding house, with the length of the lease to be determined by the management. 

 

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

 

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

 

89.     The individual rooms, common areas, shared facilities and yard are to be maintained in a clean and tidy state and individual’s rubbish is to be placed in the appropriate receptacles.

 

90.     Adequate provisions are to be made within the premises for the storage and removal of waste and recyclable materials, to the satisfaction of Council and the location, collection, storage and removal of wastes generated within the premises must not result in a public health nuisance or cause pollution.

 

Stormwater Detention/Infiltration  System

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

 

Environmental Amenity

92.     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.

 

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

 

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

 

GENERAL ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

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

 

Failure to comply with these requirements is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million.  Alternatively, Council may issue a penalty infringement notice (for up to $3,000) for each offence.  Council may also issue notices and orders to demolish unauthorised or non-complying building work, or to comply with the requirements of Council’s development consent.

 

A2      Building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

 

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

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

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

 

Council’s Building Approvals & Certification team can issue your Construction Certificate 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 on 9399 0944.

 

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

 

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

 

A5      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).

 

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

 

External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to any adjoining land.

 

A9      Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

A10     A Local Approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Approvals & Certification team prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:

 

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

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

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

 

For further information please contact Council team on 9399 0944.

 

A11     There are to be no emissions or discharges from the premises, which will give rise to an environmental or public nuisance or result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

A12     A separate development application and construction certificate or a complying development certificate (as applicable) must be obtained if the premises is to be used for any of the purposes detailed below:

 

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

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

·       Licensed premises, places of public entertainment and hotels

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

·       Cooling Towers or Warm Water Systems

·       External plant and equipment not encompassed in the consent

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

 

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

 

A13     The applicant/owner is advised to engage the services of a suitably qualified and experienced Acoustic consultant, prior to finalising the design and construction of the development, to ensure that the relevant noise criteria and conditions of consent can be fully satisfied.

 

A14     Underground assets may exist in the area that is subject to your application. In the interests of health and safety and in order to protect damage to third party assets please contact Dial before you dig at www.1100.com.au or telephone on 1100 before excavating or erecting structures (This is the law in NSW). If alterations are required to the configuration, size, form or design of the development upon contacting the Dial before You Dig service, an amendment to the development consent (or a new development application) may be necessary. Individuals owe asset owners a duty of care that must be observed when working in the vicinity of plant or assets. It is the individual’s responsibility to anticipate and request the nominal location of plant or assets on the relevant property via contacting the Dial before you dig service in advance of any construction or planning activities.

 

A15     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.

 

A16     Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                      23 July 2013

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP52/13

 

 

Subject:                  1 Moira Crescent, Coogee
(DA/664/2011/A)

Folder No:                   DA/664/2011/A

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification to the approved development by altering the internal layout of the dwelling at lower ground floor level including new window openings on elevations and new entry stairs, deletion of car stacker in garage and provisions of bicycle and motorcycle spaces.

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Solutions Zane Landuse Planning Service

Owner:                         The Owners - Strata Plan No. 35891

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.      Executive Summary

 

This section 96 modification application is referred to Council as the original application (which detailed alterations and additions to the existing multi-unit housing development including partial excavation of subfloor area and extension at lower ground floor level to provide for a new 2 bedroom dwelling, new rear timber deck with awning at ground floor level, alterations to the existing garage to accommodate double car stackers and regrade driveway, new landscaped roof above the garage, reshape and repave existing driveway on adjoining site at No. 17 Marcel Avenue) was approved subject to conditions at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 24 July 2012.

 

The proposed modifications involve amendments to the approved development by altering the internal layout of the dwelling at lower ground floor level including new window openings on northern and western elevations and new entry stairs adjustment to the living room, deletion of car stacker in garage and provisions of bicycle and motorcycle spaces. An amended plan (Sheet 3) was received on 21 May 2013 to relocate the proposed motor cycle space to a spot adjacent to the porch for Unit 3 with the northern end of the space in line with the front wall and away from the driveway as requested by Council development engineer.

 

The Section 96 application was notified and advertised from 3 April to 17 April 2013 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans and the EPA Act 1979. Two (2) submissions were received in response to this notification and advertising. One objecting to the proposed modifications raising issues relating to potential overshadowing, deficient car parking and fire safety.  These issues are addressed in further detail within section 5 of this report. The second submission was a letter of support response to the notification and advertising of the application.

 

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant standards of the Randwick LEP 2012 and found to be reasonable and acceptable especially given that the proposed modifications do not involve any variations in the approved FSR and building height.

 

The proposal also meets objective and requirements of relevant controls in the Comprehensive Development Control Plan, except the proposed deletion of the car stacker in the garage will result in a shortfall of 1 car parking space. Notwithstanding, the proposed has been assessed on its merits and found to be justified and supportable in Section 9.1 of this report.

 

The proposed modifications will improve the overall amenity for future occupants of the development whilst generally maintaining the physical massing of the approved development. The modified development will not result in detrimental environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality, and is considered to be within the public interest.

 

The proposal is considered to be substantially the same development as was originally approved and satisfies Section 96 of the Act. Accordingly, the proposal is recommended for approval.

 

2.      The Proposal

 

The subject application seeks to modify the original development consent in the following manner: 

 

 

 

 

2.1      Changes to the approved plans

 

      Changes to conditions of consent

 

The proposal also seeks to delete the following conditions of the original development consent:

 

Condition Nos. 4, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52, which currently read as follows:

 

“4.      The walls of the garage are to incorporate a string course (projecting around 10mm) to provide a clear separation between existing and new face brickwork.  Amended drawings are to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director City Planning, in accordance with Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Right of Way

48.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, the proposed right of way must be registered on the title of No.17 Marcel Avenue (Strata Plan 55558) in accordance with the draft survey plan by Lawrence Group Surveyors and Consultants dated 28th February 2012 and received by Council on the 21st March 2012.

 

Car stacker

49.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, a sign shall be displayed at the entrance to the car-stacker stating the following “Maximum vehicle length = 5.0m” .

 

50.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, certification shall be submitted to the PCA stating that the proposed car-stacker has been installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications and requirements and relevant Australian Standards. 

 

Fire rated roller door

51.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, certification shall be submitted to the PCA that the garage has been installed with a fire rated roller door to achieve fire protection and compliance with the BCA

 

52.     A report, prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, shall be submitted to the Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, which demonstrates and certifies that noise and vibration emissions from the development comply with the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW EPA/DECC Noise Control Manual & Industrial Noise Policy, Council’s conditions of consent (including any relevant acoustic criteria) to the satisfaction of Council.”

 

The applicant claims that the subject conditions all relate to the approved car stackers which, under the proposed modifications, are no longer applicable.

 

3.      The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is on the western side of Moira Crescent south of Marcel Ave. It has frontage of 19.81m, an area of 518.5m2 and tapers to a width of 9.145m at the rear boundary. It slopes moderately on a westerly aspect with a sandstone outcrop forming a natural terrace toward the rear. Adjoining to the west there are semi-detached dwellings with frontage to Ritchard Avenue. There is a freestanding dwelling to the south at 3 Moira Crescent and a building with 3 units to the north at No 17 Marcel Avenue. The site is zoned 2B Residential and is part of the Moira Cr Heritage Conservation Area. A right of way on the site services a single car park on 17 Marcel Avenue to the north.

 

Photographs of the site and surrounds

1. The existing residential flat building at No. 1 Moira Crescent.

2. Adjoining residential flat building to the north at No. 17 Marcel Avenue

3. Detached dwelling house adjoining to the south at No 3 Moira Crescent.  

4. Existing garage on-site

 

http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview57150.png

Figure 1: Aerial Photo of subject site and surrounding area

 

4.      Site History

 

DA/664/2011 – approved at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 24 July 2012 for alterations and additions to the existing multi-unit housing development including partial excavation of subfloor area and extension at lower ground floor level to provide for a new 2 bedroom dwelling, new rear timber deck with awning at ground floor level, alterations to the existing garage to accommodate double car stackers and regrade driveway, new landscaped roof above the garage, reshape and repave existing driveway on adjoining site at No. 17 Marcel Avenue

 

DA/664/2011/B – Section 96 (1) modification of the approved development to correct numbering of conditions in original development consent was approved on 18 June 2013.

 

Prior to approval of DA/664/2011, the subject site was also the subject of the following earlier development applications:

 

DA/951/2006 – for alterations and additions including new rear timber decks was approved by Council in January 2007. 

 

DA/39/2010 - for alterations and additions including subfloor excavation, a rear extension and an attic addition was refused by Council in November 2010

 

5.      Community Consultation

 

The current Section 96 application was notified and advertised from 3 April to 17 April 2013 in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council Plans and the EPA Act 1979. As a result of this notification, one (1) objection and one (1) letter of support were received in response.

 

5.1 Objections

One (1) objection from following property was received:

 

·      3 Moira Crescent, Coogee

 

§ Deletion of double car stacker and deficiency of car parking spaces sets a precedent

 

§ Should council approve the deletion of car stackers and resulting deficiency in car parking Council should ensure similar approval for all future DAs.

 

All development application proposals are assessed on their merits having regard to relevant and applicable statutory standards and policy controls. The current modification to delete the car stackers results in a shortfall of 1 car parking space which has been assessed on its merits and found to be justified and supportable in Section 9.1 below. As detailed in Section 9.1, the merit assessment is specific to the subject proposal and should not be read as setting planning precedents or principles for other proposals in the locality in the future. In effect, any future DA proposal that the objector on the adjoining allotment may lodge will be assessed on its merits; will have regard to statutory standards and policy controls and will need to demonstrate minimal adverse impacts on the amenity of adjoining and surrounding developments.

 

§ Installation of pitched roof results in additional overshadowing

 

The proposed modification does not involve any installation of a pitched roof as the applicant advises in the SEE that there will be no change to the approved envelope of the main building containing the previously approved 2 bedroom dwelling unit. Accordingly, no additional overshadowing will be generated by the proposed development.

 

5.2 Letter of support

One (1) letter of support was received from the 1/1 Moira Crescent with a request that the following concerns be addressed:  

 

§ Fire escape route not to be compromised

 

In a separate process, the applicant’s fire consultant is working with Council’s building control section to ensure BCA assessment and compliance is achieved in relation to fire safety, including the relevant egress requirements. Any recommendations arising from this process will be required to be incorporated into the construction certificate for the proposed development.

 

§ The size of the ground floor unit Apartment 1 must not be reduced

 

The plans submitted with the Section 96 application indicate that there will be no reduction in floor area for the ground floor Apartment 1 and first floor Apartment 2 which both remain at 119.5 sqm each as originally approved. However, there will be a reduction of 3 sqm in the lower ground floor apartment (that is the subject of the current modification to a 1 bedroom unit).

 

6.      Technical Officers Comments

 

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

 

6.1    Development Engineers

Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows:

 

A Section 96(2) application has been received which seeks to modify the approved development by altering the internal layout of the dwelling at lower ground floor level including new window openings on elevations and new entry stairs, deletion of car stacker in garage and provisions of bicycle and motorcycle spaces.

 

Original consent: Alterations and additions to the existing multi-unit housing development including partial excavation of subfloor area and extension at lower ground floor level to provide for a new 2 bedroom dwelling, new rear timber deck with awning at ground floor level, alterations to the existing garage to accommodate double car stackers and regrade driveway, new landscaped roof above the garage, reshape and repave existing driveway on adjoining site at No. 17 Marcel Avenue  (Heritage Conservation Area) (SEPP1 Objection to landscaped area control).

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

·      Statement of Environmental Effects by Solutions Zane dated March 2013

·      Amended Ground Floor Plan stamped by Council 21st May 2012

 

Parking Comments

Parking Layout

The initial location of the proposed motor cycle space was not supported by Development Engineering as it encroached into the existing driveway resulting in a non-compliant driveway width (<3m) when assessed against AS 2890.1:2004.  In addition upon site inspection it was noted that the proposed location of the motor bike space was the present location for waste bin storage and an alternative location for the waste bins had not been indicated on the submitted plans.

 

Amended plans have now been received which address this issue by shifting the motorcycle space to adjacent to the porch for Unit 3 with some minor changes to landscaping. This is satisfactory to Development Engineering as it also maintains a 3m minimum width driveway. The bicycle spaces are also satisfactory.

 

Parking Provision

The site currently provides two off-street carspaces located within the existing double garage.

 

The approved development (DA/664/2011) proposed an additional 2 bedroom unit thereby increasing the parking demand generated by the site by 1.2 spaces. This was to be met by the installation of a double car-stacker within the existing garage providing 4 carspaces in total when operational. Hence an additional carspace beyond what was required would have been provided thereby decreasing the site’s parking deficiency by one space. This arrangement was acceptable to Development Engineering subject to conditions.

 

This Section 96 application proposes reconfiguring the new lower ground unit to 1 bedroom only, thereby decreasing the additional parking demand generated by the development from 1.2 to 1.0 space. With the proposed deletion of the carstacker however, the total parking provision will revert back to 2 spaces only, resulting in no vehicle parking being provided for the new unit and increasing the parking deficiency being experienced by the site by 1 space.

 

The shortfall is acknowledged by the applicant and in support of the application a Traffic & Parking Assessment report by Varga Pty Ltd has been submitted. The report attempts to justify the shortfall by the noting the following;

§ The site is located in close proximity to bus stops on Clovelly & Carrington roads providing regular services to the City, Bondi Junction, Coogee & Maroubra

§ The site is located in close proximity to shops and services on Clovelly Road.

§ The parking survey indicated that 15-20 vacant on-street spaces were available overnight increasing to 50-60 spaces during the day.

§ To partially compensate for the loss of the carstacker the applicant proposes a motorbike space and two bicycle spaces. .

 

Development Engineering notes that the site is situated in a locality where there is a relatively high demand for on-street parking since a significant number of unit blocks and single dwellings in the vicinity do not provide any off-street parking. Contributing further to this already high demand by the approval of a parking deficient development as well as the issue of setting an undesirable precedent was of concern to Development Engineering. 

 

Upon further consideration it is noted that the increase in parking demand will be relatively minor (1 space) and the shortfall has been partially addressed by the provision of motor bike and bicycle parking so the establishment of an undesirable precedent is unlikely. Furthermore in consideration of all factors it is considered that the 1 space deficiency would not be sufficient grounds to justify refusal of the application.

 

It should also be noted the site is in close proximity to a number of car-share pods which in combination with the points raised above provides a number of alternative transport options. Development Engineering will therefore not object to the parking deficiency of 1 space in this instance.

 

Should the S96 application be approved the following engineering conditions shall be deleted as they relate to the installation of the carstacker:

 

Driveway/Car stacker Design

10.     The gradient of the amended internal access driveway must be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 2890.1 (2004) – Off Street Car Parking. Details of compliance are to be included in the construction certificate documentation.

 

11.     Plans submitted for the construction certificate shall demonstrate the proposed car-stacker fully complying with the manufacturer’s specifications and requirements.

 

Car stacker

58.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, a sign shall be displayed at the entrance to the car-stacker stating the following “Maximum vehicle length = 5.0m” .

 

59.     Prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate, certification shall be submitted to the PCA stating that the proposed car-stacker has been installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications and requirements and relevant Australian Standards. 

 

The following engineering condition shall be added to the section Requirements prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

 

1.       The motorbike and bicycle spaces shall be fully installed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and approved plans. 

 

6.2    Heritage Planner

Council’s Heritage Planner advises as follows:

 

“The Site and Surrounding Area

The site is within the Moira Crescent heritage conservation area and occupied by a two storey face brick Interwar duplex.  The building appears to be in very original and good condition and features brick and render detailing around a deeply inset terrace, and bay windows with timber boarded spandrels and leadlight windows.  There is a detached garage towards the rear of the site.  The Statement of Significance for the conservation area notes that “the area includes the best preserved and most consistent grouping of Inter-war flat buildings in the City of Randwick, which were so characteristic of the City’s development in that period.”  The building makes a positive contribution to the heritage values of the conservation area. 

 

Background

The site has been subject to a number of development applications, the following being the most recent:

 

DA/951/2006 for alterations and additions including new rear timber decks was approved by Council in January 2007. 

 

DA/39/2010 for alterations and additions including subfloor excavation, a rear extension and an attic addition was refused by Council in November 2010.

 

In relation to the initial 2010 application, heritage concerns were raised in relation to the reconstruction of the existing roof to accommodate the proposed attic floor space including provision of three large dormer windows.  Amended drawings were subsequently received, reducing the extent of change to the existing roof. 

 

The original application proposed alterations and additions at lower ground, ground floor and first floor level.  At lower ground floor level subfloor excavation was proposed and a rear addition to provide a new 2 bedroom apartment with rear deck.  At ground floor level a rear deck was proposed.  Internal alterations were proposed at ground and first floor level to provide a new laundry.  The existing garage was to be modified to incorporate a car stacker.  It appears that work on the approved lower ground level addition has not yet commenced. 

 

The Proposal

The current application proposes internal and external changes, generally at lower ground floor level.  At lower ground floor level internal and external changes are proposed replacing the two bedroom unit with a one bedroom unit.  The footprint of the rear addition is to be altered to enlarge the living area and a new entry stair is proposed for the lower ground floor unit.  A number of changes are proposed to openings in the rear addition in order to improve the amenity of the unit.  At ground floor level two “bicycle” parking spaces are proposed and a motorcycle space. 

 

Submission

The original application was accompanied by a Statement of Environmental Effects which includes a section on Heritage Conservation, referring to the heritage comments which were made in relation to the previous development application. 

 

Comments

          Internal changes

The proposed internal changes at lower ground floor level generally comprise changes to new walls which were proposed as part of the original application, with no significant changes to original walls. 

 

          Alterations and additions to rear

The proposed reconfigured rear addition will be hidden from view from the street, will not affect the appearance of the building from the public domain and will not affect the streetscape or the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area.  The proposed changes will in any case simplify the footprint of the addition.  Similarly the proposed change to existing rear openings will not be visible from the street.  It is noted that the rear wall of the building has been rendered and painted, facilitating changes to existing openings in this wall. 

 

          Bicycle and motorcycle parking

The proposed (uncovered) bicycle and motorcycle parking space along the northern driveway side of the building will not be visible from the street.  The proposed (covered) bicycle space within the front porch area will also be screened from view.  It is assumed that some sort of fixture will be provided to allow the bicycles to be chained up for security purposes, although no details have been provided (the spaces will not be used otherwise).  A consent condition should be included requiring that any bicycle rack or security chaining fixture which is to be installed, be carefully attached to avoid damage to original building surfaces including floor tiles and brickwork. 

 

Recommendation

The following conditions should be included in any consent:

 

Any bicycle rack or security fixture which is to be installed (so that the bike can be chained up), is to be carefully attached to avoid damage to original building surfaces including floor tiles and brickwork.”

 

7.      Section 96 Assessment

 

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

 

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

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

(c)     it has notified the application

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

 

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

 

7.1      Substantially the Same Development:

The Section 96 modifications essentially is for internal and external modifications to the proposed modifications involving alterations to the internal layout of the dwelling at lower ground floor level to convert the approved two bedroom unit to a single bedroom; installation of new window openings on elevations and new entry stairs; deletion of car stacker in garage and provisions of bicycle and motorcycle spaces, all of which are not considered to substantially alter the proposal from that originally approved. Additionally, the proposed changes do not result in any new appreciable additional impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining properties beyond that previously considered for the approved DA proposal especially as assessed in relation to resident submissions in Section 5 above. As discussed in the relevant sections of this report, the proposed modifications do not give rise to unreasonable adverse impacts to the amenity enjoyed by surrounding residential development in terms of visual/acoustic privacy, parking, visual bulk and scale and overshadowing. Further, the proposed modifications improve the overall amenity for future occupants of the development whilst generally maintaining the physical massing of the approved development. The modified development will not result in detrimental environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality, and is considered to be within the public interest.

 

7.2      Notification and Consideration of Submissions:

The application has been notified and advertised in accordance with Council’s DCP – Public Notification.  Two submissions were received and the issues raised are addressed in Section 5 above.

 

8.      Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

·      Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended

·      Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, as amended

·      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

·      Building Code of Australia

 

Specifically, the provisions of the Randwick LEP 2012 are addressed below.

 

8.1    Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 was gazetted on 15 February 2013. The subject application was lodged on 20 March 2013; however, it is not saved by Clause 1.8A of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012. As such, the subject section 96 application is assessed below against the relevant aims, objectives and development controls as contained in the RLEP 2012.

 

Under the RLEP 2012, the subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential. The existing approved residential flat building is permissible with development consent. The following clauses of the Randwick LEP 2012 are of relevance to the current proposal:

 

·      Clause 2.3 Zone objectives and Land Use Table (R3 Medium Density Residential)

Clause 2.3 of the RLEP 2012 provides objectives for the R3 Medium Density Residential zone. Under the Land Use Table section of the RLEP, the relevant objectives of the zone R3 are as follows: -

 

·      To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment.

·      To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment.

·      To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

·      To recognise the desirable elements of the existing streetscape and built form or, in precincts undergoing transition, that contribute to the desired future character of the area.

·      To protect the amenity of residents.

·      To encourage housing affordability.

·      To enable small-scale business uses in existing commercial buildings.

 

The proposed modifications will maintain a development which contributes to the variety of housing types within the existing medium density residential environment. The application, as modified, will result in a residential development which remains well integrated with the existing streetscape, as indicated among other things, in the retention of the proposal’s visual presentation in the heritage conservation area.  The impacts of the proposed modifications upon the amenity of adjoining residents and public space have been addressed within this report and are considered to be acceptable. The proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant objectives of the zone and recommended for approval accordingly.

 

·      Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings

The relevant objectives of this clause include: -

 

(a)     to ensure that the size and scale of development is compatible with the desired future character of the locality,

(b)     to ensure that development is compatible with the scale and character of contributory buildings in a conservation area or near a heritage item,

(c)     to ensure that development does not adversely impact on the amenity of adjoining and neighbouring land in terms of visual bulk, loss of privacy, overshadowing and views.

 

This clause also applies a maximum building height of 9.5m. The approved development has maximum building height of 10.2m (to pitch of existing RFB and max 4m (to pitch of existing detached garage).  No changes to these approved building heights are proposed so that the height of the proposed building as assessed and approved originally will continue to be compatible with the desired future character of the locality as well as the scale and character of contributory buildings in a conservation area. Additionally, the building height will not significantly impact upon the amenity of surrounding neighbours in relation to privacy, view loss and solar access and is considered to satisfy the development standard under this clause.

 

·      Clause 4.4 Floor Space Ratio

This clause applies a maximum Floor Space Ratio standard of 0.75:1. The approved development has an FSR of 0.608:1 (319.1 sqm) which complies with the standard. The proposed modification will reduce the floor area by 3.1 sqm as a result of deletion and relocation of walls on the lower ground floor thus yielding a lower proposed FSR of 0.6:1. 

 

·      Clause 5.10     Heritage Conservation

Clause 5.10 requires Council to consider the likely effect of the proposed development on nearby heritage items and conservation areas. The subject site is located within an existing heritage conservation area as listed in the Randwick LEP 2012. The proposal has been assessed by Council’s Heritage Planner and considered to adequately address the potential heritage impact on the conservation area. In essence, the proposed modifications will be consistent with the original DA proposal with no significant changes to the original walls of the existing building. Furthermore, the proposed reconfigured rear addition will be hidden from view from the street; will not affect the appearance of the building from the public domain and will not affect the streetscape or the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area.  Additionally, the proposed (uncovered) bicycle and motorcycle parking space along the northern driveway side of the building will not be visible from the street and the proposed (covered) bicycle space within the front porch area will also be screened from view. A consent condition will be applied requiring that any bicycle rack or security chaining fixture which is to be installed, be carefully attached to avoid damage to original building surfaces including floor tiles and brickwork, should approval be granted. 

 

·      Clause 6.2 Earthworks

The objective of this clause is to ensure that earthworks for which development consent is required will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land. The proposal will be consistent with the nature and extent of excavation works proposed in the original approved development. Accordingly, subject to compliance with the conditions applied to the original approval, the proposed modifications are not anticipated to result in any significant impact on the topography of the site, is unlikely to interrupt the drainage patterns of the site or result in soil instability and will not adversely impact upon the scenic quality of the site and locality. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in relation to the provisions of this clause.

 

9.      Policy Controls - Comprehensive Development Control Plan

 

The Comprehensive DCP which was adopted as an interim planning policy to coincide with the commencement of the RLEP 2012 on 15 February 2013. The proposed modifications are assessed against the relevant provisions of the DCP.

 

Particular reference is made to: -

 

·      Part B7 General Controls - Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access

·      Part  C4 Medium density Housing

 

9.1    Part B7 - Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access

The relevant objectives of the DCP in relation to parking and access include: 

 

·      To promote sustainable transport options for development, particularly along transport corridors, in commercial centres and strategic/key sites.

·      To manage the provision of car parking within the broader transport network.

·      To support integrated transport and land use options which can demonstrate shared and effective car parking provision with car share facilities, motorbikes/scooters, bikes and links to public transport.

·      To ensure car parking facilities, service and delivery areas and access are designed to enhance streetscape character and protect pedestrian amenity and safety.

 

Section 3.2 of Part B7 of the DCP requires, amongst other things, car parking to be provided at the following rate for dwellings: -

 

·      1 space per two studio dwelling;

·      1 space per 1 bedroom dwelling or bedsit unit over 40m2;

·      1.2 spaces per 2 bedroom dwelling;

·      1.5 spaces per 3 or more bedroom dwelling.

·      Visitor parking: 1 space per 4 dwellings or part thereof, but shall not be required for a development containing less then 4 dwellings.

·      Bicycle parking: 1 space per 3 units, plus 1 visitor space per 10 units.

·      Business premises 1 space per 40sqm GFA

 

Four (4) proposed car parking spaces were approved in the original assessment based on the following calculation:

 

 

Rate

Requirement

Proposed

Studio

1 per two dwellings

0

0

1 Bedroom

1 per 1 bed or bedsit over 40m2

0

0

2 Bedroom

1.2 per dwelling

1.2

1

3 + Bedroom

1.5 per dwelling

3

3

Visitor

1 per 4 dwellings

0

0

Bicycle

1 per 3 dwellings and 1 visitor per 10 dwellings

1

Adequate.

Carwash bay

1 per 12 dwellings

0

0

 

Accordingly, the original proposal provided the requisite number of on-site parking spaces primarily through the use of mechanical car stackers in the existing garage.

 

The current section 96 application proposes to delete the originally approved car stacker and retain the existing double garage effectively deleting two car parking spaces. With the proposed deletion of the car stacker however, the total parking provision will revert back to 2 spaces only, resulting in no vehicle parking being provided for the new unit and a parking deficiency of 1 space for the development.

 

The loss in two car parking spaces is considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·          This Section 96 application proposes reconfiguring the new lower ground unit to 1 bedroom only, thereby decreasing the additional parking demand generated by the development from 1.2 to 1.0 space. This reduction is considered reasonable   having regard to the lower occupancy rate of the reconfigured unit and the potential for a lower demand for car parking from a smaller household.

 

·          Council’s Development Engineer raises no objection to the shortfall of 1 car parking space noting that the increase in parking demand will be relatively minor (1 space) and that the shortfall has been partially addressed by the provision of motor bike and bicycle parking so that the establishment of an undesirable precedent is unlikely.

 

·          The subject site is significantly accessible to regular and frequent public bus services on Clovelly Road and Carrington Road which are within approximately 500m of the subject site.

 

·          In consideration of all factors above, including the close proximity to a number of car-share pods which provides another form of alternative transport option, it is considered that the 1 space deficiency would not be sufficient grounds to justify refusal of the application.

 

·          The shortfall is acknowledged by the applicant and in support of the application a Traffic & Parking Assessment report by Varga Pty Ltd has been submitted. The report attempts to justify the shortfall by the noting the following:

§ The site is located in close proximity to bus stops on Clovelly & Carrington Roads providing regular services to the City, Bondi Junction, Coogee & Maroubra

§ The site is located in close proximity to shops and services on Clovelly Road.

§ The parking survey indicated that 15-20 vacant on-street spaces were available overnight increasing to 50-60 spaces during the day.

§ To partially compensate for the loss of the carstacker the applicant proposes a motorbike space and two bicycle spaces. .

 

The modified proposal is considered to adequately meet the relevant objectives of the Comprehensive DCP with regard to parking.

 

9.2    Part  C4 Medium density Housing

Part C4 of the Comprehensive DCP addresses medium density residential development. The proposed modification largely involves minor internal changes and primarily retains the existing approved building envelope and configuration. Notwithstanding this, the proposal is assessed against the following relevant controls of the DCP:

 

Section 2.2        Landscape open space and deep soil area

The DCP requires minimum 50% of site area to be landscaped and a minimum 25% of site area should be deep soil area. The proposal provides for an approved  maximum landscaped area of 38% (198 sqm) all of which is deep soil area. Whilst non-compliant with the landscape open space control, the landscape provision will remain unchanged in the subject modification proposal. Furthermore, the proposal will meet the objectives of the landscape open space control in that:

 

·      The proposed landscaped area will comprise entirely of deep soil area reasonably distributed between the front and rear sections. Combined with a moderate site coverage of approximately 42%, the landscape area will function adequately in terms of screening, passive recreation and run-off. 

 

·      The proposal will still provide for a substantial rear yard that will contribute and maintain the distinct pattern of existing back-to-back green rear yards of properties in Moira Crescent and Ritchard Avenue.

 

·      There will be no increase in visual bulk and scale of the existing development to Moira Crescent and the overall heritage conservation area, so that visually it will remain unaltered to the streetscape in the context of the existing landscape area at the front.

 

·      The overall quality of landscape provision to the site is improved by the current proposal and results in higher quality, useable outdoor recreation space for occupants of the site. The refurbished elevated private terraces have good weather protection, and although technically, not included as landscape area, does contribute to a high degree of amenity to occupants.

 

·      The proposal meets the relevant objectives of the standard despite non-compliance the statutory standard primarily in that the retained landscape area will continue to provide a landscaped ambiance for the front existing section and the new rear addition.

 

Section 3.1        Floor Space Ratio

The DCP applies the ma FSR standard of the Randwick LEP 2012 and this has been addressed in Section above. Essentially, the proposed modification will reduce the floor area by 3.1 sqm thus yielding a lower proposed FSR of 0.6:1 which will comply with 0.75:1 max FSR standard. 

 

Section 3.2        Building Height

The DCP applies the max building height standard of the Randwick LEP 2012 and this has been addressed in Section above.  Essentially, the proposed modification will not change the approved building envelope so that the height of the proposed building as assessed and approved originally will continue to be compatible with the desired future character of the locality as well as the scale and character of contributory buildings in a conservation area.

 

Section 3.3        Building Depth

The DCP applies a max building depth of 12m from front window line to rear window line. The proposal has an approved building depth of approximately 21m. Whilst non-complying, this approved building depth will remain unchanged in the subject modification proposal. Furthermore, this existing approved building depth will meet the objectives of the building depth control in that the proposed building will still allow for adequate solar access and natural ventilation for occupants of the dwelling units within the development.

Section 3.4 Setbacks

The modification proposal retains the approved setbacks of the original proposal which, although non-compliant, will achieve relevant objectives of the setback controls primarily as follows:

 

·    Solar access to approved living area is maintained to the adjoining southern property.

·    Privacy is adequately maintained between adjoining dwellings.

·    Streetscape amenity will be maintained especially given that the modifications largely will occur internally.

·    There will be negligible changes to the existing front building such that the proposed modifications do not create any visual intrusion in the existing streetscape.

·    The modified proposal will continue to provide the approved landscaped area within setback areas which will comprise entirely of deep soil area reasonably distributed between the front and rear sections and function adequately in terms of green screening, passive recreation and run-off. 

 

Section 5.1        Solar Access and overshadowing

The applicant’s SEE advises that the modification proposal will not increase the approved building envelope such that the overshadowing impact of the approved building will remain unchanged. The original DA assessment included a comprehensive assessment of the shadow impact of the existing approved building which remains integral and valid under the subject modification proposal.

 

Additionally, the retention of the existing garage structure under the current Section 96 proposal will generate less overshadowing than the approved pitched roof configuration.

 

Section 5.2        Natural ventilation and Energy Efficiency

The applicant advises that the modified proposal will continue to meet, as well as improve upon, the energy efficiency and water conservation targets established in the BASIX Certificate. As such, the proposal will also meet the objectives of the natural ventilation and energy efficiency controls in the DCP in that adequate solar access and natural ventilation for occupants of the dwelling units within the development will be achieved.

 

Section 5.3        Visual privacy

The DCP contains a number of visual privacy controls for the location of windows and terraces as well as the separation of habitable rooms and living areas from adjoining properties. The controls are applicable to the modification proposal to the extent that a number of new windows are proposed as part of the subject Section 96 application. An assessment of these new windows against the DCP controls indicates the following:

 

·      The reconfigured dining area of the lower ground floor unit will have a new window opening on the north elevation that will have minimal privacy impacts because this opening will be a high sill window with translucent glazing. 

 

·      The new west-facing window to the reconfigured dining room of the lower ground floor unit will have minimal privacy impact because it is oriented obliquely to the closest residential boundary to the north some 7.5m away.  Furthermore, this new window faces the existing garage.

 

·      The new north-facing window at the western end of the living room of the lower ground floor unit will have minimal privacy impacts as it faces the existing garage and any view line into the adjoining northern property will be blocked by this existing structure.

 

·      The new north-facing window at the eastern end of the living room of the lower ground floor unit (adjacent to the entry) will have minimal privacy impacts as it partially faces the existing garage such that any view line into the adjoining northern property will be filtered by this existing structure. Furthermore, this proposed window will be separate from the building line of the adjoining northern property by approximately 10m

 

Section 5.3        View sharing

The DCP contains relevant controls to promote view sharing. The modified proposal will not increase the existing approved building envelope so that there will be minimal, if no, impacts in terms of view loss to surrounding properties. 

 

10.    Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential zone under RLEP 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 built form, as amended will not compromise the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

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

Not applicable

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

Refer to the DCP section of this report for details.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

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

 

The proposal maintains a development which 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.

 

10.1  Deletion of relevant conditions

 

The applicant’s SEE nominates condition Nos. 4, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52 of the original development consent for deletion claiming that these conditions relate to the approved car stacker which is now proposed to be deleted. The original consent has now been modified via an approved Section 96 “B” application (DA/664/2011/B) to correct numbering errors and renumber the conditions in the original consent. Having regard to this amended development consent, assessment indicates that the correct Conditions that need to be deleted are Condition Nos. 4, 10, 11, 58 and 59.

 

The applicant has requested that Condition No. 49 relating to the registration of a proposed right of way on the title of the adjoining property at No.17 Marcel Avenue (Strata Plan 55558) also be deleted (this condition is now renumbered to Condition No. 57 in the DA/664/2011/B approval). Council does not support the applicant’s request to delete this condition as it does not relate to the provision of car stackers and, more importantly, the condition is necessary to ratify the existing access arrangements between the two adjoining properties being the subject site and No 17 Marcel Avenue. 

 

The applicant has also requested the deletion of Conditions No. 51 and 52 in the original consent (now renumbered condition Nos. 60 and 61 under DA/664/2011/B approval) relating to the fire rating/protection and noise control of the roller door for the garage. These conditions are not considered to relate to the proposed deletion of the car stackers. Rather, they relate to the fire protection of the opening of the existing garage through the use of an appropriately fire-rated garage roller door as original approved and the control of noise emission from the use of the roller door regardless of whether a car stacker is installed within the garage. As such, the deletion of these conditions is not supported.

 

In summary, only conditions Nos. 4, 10, 11, 58 and 59 of the consent issued under the amended consent being the Section 96 “B” approval (DA/664/2011/B) are to be deleted.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 12:     Excellence in urban design and development – The proposal has a good architectural quality in that it maximises the potential of the subject site whilst minimising impacts on adjoining and nearby residential properties.

Direction 4a:      Improved design and sustainability across all development – The proposal will achieve a good design in conjunction with a significant sustainable outcome for the proposed development.

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the original development consent satisfies Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and approval of the modification will not result in any significant additional impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable.

 

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant standards of the Randwick LEP 2012 and found to be reasonable and acceptable primarily as proposed modifications do not involve any variations in the approved FSR and building height.

 

The proposal also meets objective and requirements of relevant controls in the Comprehensive Development Control Plan. The proposal contains minor variations in relation to the numerical requirements of Part B7 - Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access provisions of the Comprehensive DCP. These variations have been addressed and found acceptable in the relevant section of this report.

 

Approval of the modification will not result in any significant environmental impact and will not detract from the integrity of the development nor its relationship with adjoining development. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to modify Development Consent No DA/664/2011 by altering the internal layout of the dwelling at lower ground floor level including new window openings on elevations and new entry stairs, deletion of car stacker in garage and provisions of bicycle and motorcycle spaces and deletion of relevant conditions of consent at 1 Moira Crescent, Coogee, in the following  manner:

 

A       Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 046/11, Sheets 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 7A, all Issue C, and 14 February 2012 and stamped received by Council on 21 March 2012, the application form, and on any supporting information including BASIX Certificate No. A121525, dated 29 August 2011, received with the application, except as may be amended by the Section 96 “A” plans numbered 046/11, Sheets 1,2,4,5 and 6, all Issue A, all dated 27 February 2013 and all received by Council on 20 March 2013; and Sheet 3, Issue A, dated 27 February 2013 and received by Council on 21 May 2013, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application including BASIX Certificate No. A158927, dated 21 March 2013 and except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

B       Delete Conditions Nos.  4, 10, 11, 58 and 59 

 

C        Add new Conditions as follows:

 

66.   Any bicycle rack or security fixture which is to be installed (so that the bike can be chained up), is to be carefully attached to avoid damage to original building surfaces including floor tiles and brickwork. 

 

67.   The motorbike and bicycle spaces shall be fully installed prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and approved plans. 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                      23 July 2013

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP53/13

 

 

Subject:                  5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra (DA/621/2012)

Folder No:                   DA/621/2012

Author:                   Scott Williamson, Senior Assessment Officer       

 

Proposal:                     Construction of second floor addition to the existing multi-unit residential building to create an additional three (3) bedroom unit, provide a single garage at ground floor level, addition of balconies to streetscape elevation, various landscaping and retaining works across the site

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Classic Plans

Owner:                         C Coulits

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval, subject to conditions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan

 

1.        Executive Summary

 

The application is reported to Council at request of Councillors Andrews, Stavrinos and Nash.

 

Proposed is a second storey addition to an existing walk-up flat building, providing a three (3) bedroom penthouse style unit with single garage at ground floor. Alterations to the Bellevue Street façade including addition of balconies and landscaping works across the site are also proposed.

 

The site is known as 5 Bellevue Street and presently contains an aging part two (2) part three (3) storey walk up flat building of four (4) units. No onsite parking is provided to existing units. The lot is presently a construction site.

 

The site is located on the south-eastern side of Bellevue Street and falls sharply to the east. Roughly seven (7) metres elevation difference occurs between front and rear boundaries. The vicinity is of mixed character, with numerous walk-up style flat buildings occurring amongst single and two (2) storey dwellings.

 

The site and it’s surrounds are zoned Residential 2A under RLEP 1998 and R2 under RLEP 2012. The existing multi-unit building predates 1942 and presents a non-conforming use in both present and future zones. The continued presence of the building entitles the site to ‘existing use rights’ under Section 106 and 108 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. Under the Act, Council’s planning instruments do not have strict application where existing use rights apply. 

 

Since 2002 a number of applications have been approved in relation to this site, most notably for additional floor space and balconies to the rear of the building, façade works and amendment of building materials and finishes. Much of these works are currently underway.

 

Notification and advertising originally occurred between 10 and 24 October 2013. Nine (9) individual submissions were received in response. Primary issues raised related to the location and intensification of a multi-unit building in the 2A zone, privacy, shadow and parking.

 

In response to feedback of the Design Review Panel and Council Staff, amendments were made on 25 February 2013, in effort to improve internal amenity, external impacts and presentation. Amendments were also made in respect of privacy, landscaping and a single garage provided.

 

Following amendment, the application was re-notified between 1 and 15 March 2012. Four (4) individual submissions were received in response. Issues raised generally reiterated issues raised previous, as well as view loss and affordable housing issues.

 

The proposal achieves a scale commensurate of the varied character of surrounding development. The proposal is consistent with Council’s ‘Guidelines for the Rejuvenation of Residential Flat Buildings’, facilitating an appropriate upgrade of the aging walk-up flat building. The proposal is considered to present a preferable planning and streetscape outcome for this site, in respect of the aged and dilapidated condition the building has fallen into in recent years.

 

The development is considered to satisfy the relevant heads of consideration of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and is consequently recommended for approval, subject to the conditions recommended within this assessment. 

 

2.        Site context

 

The subject site is located on the south-eastern side of Bellevue Street, close to the intersection of Bellevue Street and Sackville Street. The parcel is of regular shape and the following dimensions:

 

Boundary

Length

Site area

North-western, Bellevue Street boundary

15.24m

613.1m2

Northern-eastern, side boundary

40.235m

South-eastern, rear boundary

15.24m

South-western, side boundary

40.235m

 

Topographically, the site falls sharply in an easterly direction. A roughly seven (7) metre level difference occurs between the front, Bellevue Street boundary and the rear boundary of the site.

 

The subject site is presently occupied by a part two (2), part three (3) storey flat building containing four (4) apartments and constructed prior to 1942. Construction works are presently being undertaken on the site in accordance with previous approvals, discussed below. Works have ceased in anticipation of potential changes to the built form, as proposed within the subject application.

 

According to documentation submitted by the applicant, the building has been vacant since October 2007.

 

Figure 1: The subject site (left of frame) and the adjoining building, as viewed from Bellevue Street. 

Figure 2: The subject site (right of frame) and the adjoining building, as viewed from the rear, eastern neighbouring site. 

Figure 3: The eastern side of Bellevue Street. Adjoining northern neighbours to the north shown centre.

Figure 4: Bellevue Street, as viewed from the north. The subject site can be seen left of frame.

 

The subject site and those surrounding are zoned Residential 2A under RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and R2 Low Density Residential, under RLEP 2012. The existing building represents a non-conforming use under both zonings.

 

Bellevue Street and the block containing the subject site have a varying character of single dwellings interspersed with aging three (3) storey residential flat buildings, all in the present 2A zone. Single dwellings of one (1) and two (2) storeys exist predominantly to the north-east and north-west of the subject site. A number of three (3) storey flat buildings are sited to the south and south-east.

 

The subject site presents circumstances that are particularly unique, in that existing use rights apply to a multi-unit building of two (2) stories, in an area where numerous three (3) storey flat building anomalies exist, amongst single dwellings. The character of the block is as a result, highly varied.

 

The site and those surrounding are not noted to have any heritage significance under RLEP 1998 or RLEP 2012.

 

Figure 5: Aerial view of the subject site, highlighted in red. Apartment buildings in the vicinity highlighted blue.

Figure 6: Subdivision pattern of the vicinity, the subject site highlighted in red. Apartment buildings in the vicinity highlighted blue.

Figure 7: RLEP 1998 zoning context of the subject site.

Figure 8: RLEP 2012 zoning context of the subject site.

 

3.        Proposal

 

The application, as most recently amended, proposes miscellaneous alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building, including a second storey addition with additional dwelling.

 

The specifics of the application are detailed as follows:

 

New dwelling

·      Construct an upper floor addition to the existing flat building, at second floor level;

·      Provide a three (3) bedroom penthouse style apartment at the proposed second floor level. Two (2) north-west facing balconies and a large south-east facing terrace are proposed in association with the dwelling;

·      Provide a single garage at ground floor level to the new dwelling, with access via Bellevue Street. The garage is contained within the footprint of the present Unit 1.

 

Miscellaneous alterations and additions:

·      Internal alterations to ground level Units 1 and 2, involving:

Additional access to Unit 2 along the northern boundary;

Additional ensuite to Unit 2;

Relocation of a bathroom in Unit 1;

Provision of storage space and laundries to both units;

·      Alterations and additions to the existing first floor level Units 3 and 4, involving:

Wrap-around balconies facing Bellevue Street;

Additional ensuite to each unit;

Enlargement of windows to the front and rear elevations;

Provision of storage space and laundries to both units;

·      External alterations and additions:

Cosmetic upgrade of the building involving changes to colours materials and finishes to each elevation of the building;

Provide tiered planter boxes and landscaping to the front setback of the building;

Landscaping to the rear of the site;

Changes to levels and stairs along the south-western side boundary, facilitating access;

Provide a driveway to the southern edge of the site accessing the proposed single garage.

Figure 9: Montage of the amended proposal as viewed from Bellevue Street.

Figure 10: South-west elevation, proposed additions in red.

Figure 11: North-east elevation, proposed additions in red.

Figure 12: South-east (rear) elevation, proposed additions in red.

Figure 13: North-west (Bellevue St) elevation, proposed additions in red.

 

The following assessment is conducted in accordance with the plans, as amended on 25 February 2013 and additional information received from the applicant up to 5 June 2013.

 

Site inspections were carried out on 12 November 2012, 19 April 2013 and 28 May 2013.

 

4.        History

 

4.1      Site History

·      DA/876/2001 – 5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra

DA/876/2001 was granted consent on 22 November 2001 for alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building, including internal alterations and erection of rear balconies.

 

·      DA/83/2002 – 5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra

DA/83/2002 was granted consent on 12 September 2002 for alterations and additions to the existing flat building, including internal alterations and extension of the building to the rear to provide new living rooms and balconies.

 

A key issue during the assessment involved the application of SEPP 10 to the site, relating to required retention of affordable housing stock in the area.

 

A number of conditions were applied to the consent involving retention of affordable housing in the building. Specifically, one (1) unit was required to be retained for availability of the open market for a minimum three (3) years from the date of an occupation certificate. Rent was restricted to $280 plus CPI for each year. A positive covenant was required to be created in enforcing these requirements.

 

As works are underway presently, an occupation certificate has yet to be obtained for the site and the above conditions will become applicable upon issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

·      DA/83/2002/A – 5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra

DA/83/2002/A was granted consent on 8 October 2010 for modification of the approved development including internal alterations, alteration to materials and openings, extension of living rooms, removal of external stairs and extension of bathrooms at first floor level.

 

·      DA/318/2003 – 5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra

DA/318/2003 was granted consent on 20 May 2003, to remove the external brick and rendered walls of the existing residential flat building and erect new face brickwork external walls.

 

·      DA/1094/2003 – 5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra

DA/1094/2003 was granted consent on 13 February 2004, to modify the façade of the existing multi unit housing development, increase height of the existing front fence, construct new rear retaining walls and landscaping.

 

The application involved an FSR of 0.768:1. Conditions were applied in respect of height to the proposed rear retaining wall and landscaping to ensure privacy to those properties to the east of the site. 

 

·      DA/637/2010 – 5 Bellevue Street, Maroubra

DA/637/2010 was granted consent on 15 October 2011 to make alterations and additions including changes to the external walls, extension of the entry foyer and stairwell areas, new balconies to front, increase in height of existing front fence, new retaining walls in rear yard and associated landscaping works.

 

4.2      Current application DA/621/2012:

o 12 November 2012 – Council’s Design Review Panel reviewed the initial proposal, raising a number of issues to be addressed in order to satisfy SEPP 65.

 

o 30 January 2013 – It was requested the applicant amend the proposal to respond to a number of issues raised by the Design Review Panel, Council staff and residents during the notification process.

 

o 25 February 2013 – The applicant submitted amended plans, involving:

 

·      Amendment to the roof form and increase in wall height,

·      Provision of garage at ground floor level for proposed additional apartment and deletion of originally proposed hard stand car spaces;

·      Submission of a landscape plan detailing landscaping works to the front and rear of the site;

·      Addition of balconies to street elevation at first and proposed second floor level,

·      Increase the size upper floor terrace associated with new unit;

·      Various internal alterations.

 

o 4 March 2013 – The Design Review Panel reviewed the application for the second time, providing the comments discussed below.

 

o 5 June 2013 – The applicant submitted evidence regarding the tenancy history of the building, for the benefit of assessment against SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

The following assessment is conducted in accordance with the amendments made on 25 February and additional information received from the applicant up to 5 June 2013.

5.        Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the application between 10 and 24 October 2012 in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. As a result of this notification, submissions were received form the following sites:

 

·      23 Sackville Street, Maroubra;

·      6/14 Bona Vista Ave, Maroubra;

·      25 Sackville Street, Maroubra;

·      18 Bona Vista Ave,  Maroubra;

·      8/18 Bona Vista Ave, Maroubra;

·      9/14 Bona Vista Ave, Maroubra;

·      6-8 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

·      6/7 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

·      10 & 12 Bona Vista Ave, Maroubra

 

Issues raised within submissions are summarised as follows:

 

Issue

Comment

Character:

·    Proposal is not consistent with existing neighbourhood character.

·    To the north of the site, all the buildings are 1 and 2 storey single dwellings;

·    Medium density development should not encroach on the 2A zone;

·    The fall of the land to the east magnifies bulk and scale of the proposal.

 

The scheme has been designed to maintain consistency with that existing in the vicinity, where numerous examples of multi-unit development exist. The scheme provides appropriate response to impacts on surrounding development, particularly single dwellings.

The fall of the land is noted and has been considered in the assessment of relevant impacts of the development.

Planning controls:

·    The proposed height and FSR do not comply with Council’s development standards;

·    Owners have purchased on the basis that the planning controls will be implemented.

 

The site benefits form existing use rights. Council’s planning instruments do not have strict application where existing use rights apply. A merit assessment has been conducted within this report and has found the proposal to be generally acceptable in the context of this site.

Privacy:

·    Privacy will be compromised to the adjoining sites by proposed windows and balconies;

·    Soil conditions will make it difficult to establish significant vegetation for privacy to 12 Bona Vista Ave.

 

Privacy is discussed below in Section 9.

To protect adjoining sites, additional privacy measures have been recommended through conditions of consent.

A landscape plan has been submitted detailing native plantings to the area that are capable of being accommodated around the rock outcrop at the rear of the site, facilitating screening.

View loss:

·    7 Bellevue Street will lose north-east sea views.

 

View loss is discussed in Section 9, below.

 

The proposal is considered to present a reasonable outcome with respect to view sharing to the south-western neighbour at 7 Bellevue Street, which will retain substantial views to much of the building under the proposal.

Traffic and parking:

·    Parking provided is insufficient;

·    More on street parking will be lost due to the driveway crossing with little onsite benefit;

·    Concern over reduction in landscaping within the front setback due to parking layout.

 

Parking is discussed in Section 9, below.

Subject to conditions, the additional dwelling is capable of providing two (2) stacked parking spaces, consistent with the rate required under the Parking DCP and requiring minimal parking reduction from the street.

Improved landscape treatment of the front setback has been provided through the amended proposal of 25 February 2013.

Solar access:

·    Solar access will be obstructed to:

o   14 Bona Vista Ave, windows and garden;

o   18 Bona Vista Ave, gardens and clothes lines;

o   7 Bellevue Street; north-east elevation.

o   6-8 Bellevue Street in the morning hours.

 

Solar access is discussed further in Section 9, below.

The design provides an effective response to the impacts of shadow to the adjoining sites. The proposal is considered satisfactory in relation to the intentions of Council’s planning controls, as they relate to solar access, generally retaining three (3) to adjoining windows and open spaces.

 

As a result of the amendments of 25 February 2013, the application was required to be re-notified in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. Re-notification occurred between 1 March 2013 and 15 March 2013. As a result of this notification, the following submissions were received:

 

The following submissions were received in response:

 

·      23 Sackville Street, Maroubra;

·      25 Sackville Street, Maroubra;

·      6/7 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

·      Boston Blyth Fleming Town Planning, on behalf of:

2 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

3 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

4 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

6 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

9 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

10 Bellevue Street, Maroubra;

12 Bellevue Street, Maroubra.

 

Issue

Comment

Bulk and scale:

·    The proposal still appears to exceed the height limit.

·    The proposal must be assessed on the impacts its presents and should not be assumed to be automatically entitled to another building of the same or greater FSR.

 

The site benefits from existing use rights. Council’s planning instruments do not have strict application where existing use rights apply. A merit assessment has been conducted within this report and has found the proposal to be generally acceptable in the context of this site and the impacts that arise as a result, subject to conditions.

Legislative:

·    Concern over whether SEPP 65 requirements are adequately satisfied;

·    SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 applies, given alteration to the fabric of the building.

 

The proposal is discussed in relation to both SEPP 65 and SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, in the sections above.

The application satisfies the requirements of each policy.

View loss

·    Request height poles be erected for neighbours on the western side of Bellevue Street.

 

The necessity for height poles was investigated and in the absence of any significant view corridors existing, height poles were not deemed to be necessary to effectively consider the proposal.

Privacy:

·    Request privacy screens be installed along the northern edge of the upper floor terrace to protect northern neighbours;

·    South facing bedroom window proposed will compromise adjoining privacy.

 

Privacy is discussed below in Section 9.

Additional privacy measures have been recommended to be applied through appropriate conditions of consent, in response to these concerns.

Landscaping:

·    Proposed landscaping to the front boundary is insufficient for drainage and fails to address tree removal.

 

The submitted landscape plan provides for a sufficient amount of permeable surface across the site within planter boxes, for the purpose of both vegetative screening and drainage.

Parking:

·    Parking remains of concern to neighbours. Any parking that can be provided would be desirable.

·    The application fails to address availability and convenience of alternate parking facilities in the vicinity.

 

Parking is discussed in Section 9, below.

Subject to conditions, the additional dwelling is capable of providing two (2) stacked parking spaces, consistent with the rate required under the Parking DCP and requiring minimal parking reduction from the street.

Other:

·    The addition of balconies to the front of the building will block light and air to 7 Bellevue Street.

 

The location of balconies to the front of the building is not considered to result in any unreasonable environmental impacts from the perspective of the streetscape or adjoining residential amenity.

 

6.        Technical Officer’s Advice

 

6.1      Development Engineer:

Parking Comments

The original application showed proposed off-street parking for 2 vehicles which has now been amended to show 1 off street parking space. The applicant has advised that the reduction in off street parking has been due to a request from Council which reads as follows:

 

The proposed parking area requires treatment in order to soften the impact of the hardstand. Recommend the hardstand be constructed of a porous material such as loose gravel. The parking area should be screened within a landscape plan;

 

Within the requested landscape plan, means of screening the parking area from the street should be provided.

 

Development Engineering advises that 2 off street parking spaces is preferred and this may be achieved by classing the internal driveway in front of the garage as a car space. To provide a stacked car space in front of the garage it is preferred that the driveway opening as shown on Dwg No 48/12 Issue B be relocated at least 1.00m further north.

 

Should the Planning Officer not object to the relocation of the driveway entrance at the front fence 1.00m to the north then the following condition should be included in any Development Consent, it has not been included here:

 

Prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate the plans are to be amended to shown the driveway entrance at the site frontage being relocated 1.00m north of its proposed location.

 

6.2      Landscape Development Engineer:

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

 

6.3      Building Surveyor

Council’s Building Surveyor reviewed the application during assessment. No objection was raised subject to the imposition of a number of conditions, of which have been included in the schedule below.

 

7.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

7.1      Existing use rights assessment

The site is zoned Residential 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation). The current multi-unit-housing development is a non conforming use within the zone.

 

Within Section 106, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 makes provision for the continued use of a building, work or land, where consent was lawfully granted and commenced prior to an environmental planning instrument having the effect of prohibiting the use.

 

Section 107 of the Act provides further direction for existing uses, identifying the use is presumed to have been abandoned, unless the contrary is established, if the use ceases for a continuous period of 12 months.

 

The building can be seen in aerial photography dated as early as 1942, having continually existed on the site as a multi-unit development and according to Council records, constructed in 1928 as a four (4) unit flat building.

 

Figure 14: Aerial view of the subject site from 2011. 

Figure 15: Aerial view of the subject site from 1984.

 

Figure 16: Aerial view of the subject site from 1955.

Figure 17: Aerial view of the subject site from 1942, showing the existing building.

 

The application of existing use rights to the site under S106 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 has been established under previous applications, notably DA/83/2002 and DA/673/2010 and is not disputed under this application. In view of this history, assessment is carried out with regard to Section 107 and Section 108 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

7.1.1   Abandoning of existing use rights

Section 107 of the Act establishes that a use is considered to be abandoned where it ceases to be actually so used for over 12 months:

 

(3) Without limiting the generality of subsection (2) (e), a use is to be presumed, unless the contrary is established, to be abandoned if it ceases to be actually so used for a continuous period of 12 months.

 

Arguments made below by the applicant in respect of affordable housing contributions, establish the building has not been tenanted for a period of approximately five (5) years, or since October 2007.

 

Despite the absence of the building being tenanted, the site has continued to be subject to an active development consent (DA/83/2002 and CC/39/2003) throughout this period of vacancy. The consent pertains to the continuation of the existing non conforming use. Prior to the vacancy period, the consent was activated and is presently being implemented.

 

Given the above, the use cannot have been ceased or abandoned with regard to Section 107 of the Act and therefore continues to enjoy existing use rights.

 

7.1.2   Fodor Investments v Hornsby Shire Council, 2005

Assessment under Sections 106 and 108 of the Act identifies that the provisions (controls or standards) of an environmental planning instrument (such as the RLEP 1998) that would restrict the redevelopment of the site, do not apply.

 

In the absence of such provisions, the Land and Environment Court has established a planning principle for urban development (Fodor Investments v Hornsby Shire Council, 2005) which identifies criteria for the assessment of proposals on land with existing use rights. The principles are addressed as follows:

 

·      How do the bulk and scale (as expressed by height, floor space ratio and setbacks) of the proposal relate to what is permissible on surrounding sites? While planning controls, such as height, floor space ratio and setbacks do not apply to sites with existing use rights; they have relevance to the assessment of applications on such sites. This is because the controls apply to surrounding sites and indicate the kind of development that can be expected if and when surrounding sites are redeveloped. The relationship of new development to its existing and likely future context is a matter to be considered in all planning assessment.

 

Both the present 2A zoning of RLEP 1998 (Consolidation) and future R2 zoning of RLEP 2012 contemplate the development of dwelling houses and dual occupancies on this site and those surrounding. Multi-unit housing is a prohibited use.

 

As discussed above, the character of this block is mixed, comprising dwellings to the north-east and north-west of the subject site and a number of flat buildings of similar scale to that proposed, sited to the south and south-east.

 

Flat buildings adjoining the subject site similarly benefit from existing use rights and therefore, an answer of permissibility on these sites is not found in the planning controls. Accordingly, a merit based assessment of environmental impact upon these buildings is undertaken in the assessment below. In short, the proposal maintains commensurate scale to these adjoining flat buildings, with reasonable impacts.

 

Occurrences of flat buildings are highlighted in blue in the figure below. The scale achieved by the proposed addition relative to the adjoining flat building at 7 Bellevue Street is also shown.

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 18: Subdivision pattern of the vicinity, the subject site highlighted in red. Apartment buildings in the vicinity highlighted blue.

Figure 19: Proposed Bellevue Street Streetscape view with 3 & 7 Bellevue Street shown adjoining.

 

Given the above, the question of permissibility identified in the principle is relevant only to those sites that do not already contain flat buildings. Single dwelling developments exist to the north-east and north-west of the proposal and remain subject to Council’s planning controls for low density development. Such developments could be generally expected to be of a two (2) storey scale, eventuating in dwelling house or dual occupancy development

 

The proposal will result in a building of three (3) stories to the street and four (4) stories as the land falls to the rear. While a second floor is not typical of low density development, the design has recessed this element within the present building footprint to both the side and rear elevations, allowing that existing setbacks to the building are generally maintained. Conditions requiring height of the addition be minimised are also discussed below.

 

When coupled with recommended privacy conditions, the proposal can be reasonably accommodated within the site without imposition of significant environmental impacts upon surrounding low density development. Importantly, the proposed additional floor does not pose impacts that would prevent adjoining sites achieving compliance with controls, in order to recapture attributes of reasonable residential amenity such as solar access or privacy.

 

It is considered the proposal will suitably relate to and have minimal impact on permissible development on surrounding sites and as such, this question posed within the principle is considered satisfied.

 

·      What is the relevance of the building in which the existing use takes place? Where the change of use is proposed within an existing building, the bulk and scale of that building are likely to be deemed acceptable, even if the building is out of scale with its surroundings, because it already exists. 

 

The additions are consistent with the use of existing building, including the multi-unit residential purpose for which the building appears to have been originally constructed and various extensions approved around the building. The proposed additions will not be significantly out of character or scale with the surrounding uses and buildings or the approved development.

 

·      What are the impacts on adjoining land? The impact on adjoining land should be assessed as it is assessed for all development. It is true that where, for example, a development control plan requires three hours of sunlight to be maintained in adjoining rear yards, the numerical control does not apply. However, the overshadowing impact on adjoining rear yards should be reasonable.

 

The proposal performs reasonably in relation to environmental impacts. The scheme addresses bulk and scale presented to the site’s immediate northern neighbour, a single storey dwelling, through centralising additional bulk within the existing footprint and recessing the second storey to effectively reduce wall height. Subject to recommended conditions, including height reduction, the proposal will present minimal impact to the dwellings that exist to the north-east and generally characterise the northern component of this block.

 

The south-eastern and south-western flat building anomalies adjoining the site will see some privacy and shadow implications arising from the second storey addition, of which are discussed further in this assessment with suitable conditions recommended. These impacts are typical of a medium density residential environment, which clearly exists in the relationship between south-western and south-eastern neighbours to the subject site.

 

Where overlooking issues are likely to arise to the adjoining sites, suitable conditions have been recommended to further facilitate reasonable levels of residential amenity and privacy, discussed further in this assessment.

 

The proposal entails a number of merits and when considered on balance with resultant environmental impacts, eventuates in a generally positive development outcome for the site, the streetscape and surrounds.

 

·      What is the internal amenity? Internal amenity must be assessed as it is assessed for all development. Again, numerical requirements for sunlight access or private open space do not apply, but these and other aspects must be judged acceptable as a matter of good planning and design. None of the legal principles discussed above suggests that development on sites with existing use rights may have lower amenity than development generally.

 

The proposed additional unit has been designed in accordance with SEPP 65, meets modern requirements for internal amenity and will enhance the environmental performance of the building, typical of modern expectations. The proposed additional building bulk also allows upgrade of the existing aged and dilapidated building, involving benefit to internal amenity of existing units and upgrade of communal areas.

 

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

The site has a long history of residential use and has not been identified as including any contaminated land or having sustained any previous uses which may have resulted in contamination.

 

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

The development application is accompanied by a BASIX Certificate. The commitments listed on the BASIX Certificates will be imposed by appropriate standard conditions pursuant to Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

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

The proposal is subject to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (SEPP 65) – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings. On this basis, Council’s Design Review Panel provided comment on the application on two (2) occasions. The most recent comments provided by the panel relate to amendments made by the applicant on 25 February 2013, as below.

 

A Design Verification Statement was provided by the applicant on 25 February 2013.

 

PANEL COMMENTS

It was noted that this was a Development Application and the second Panel review of the proposal with the Applicant.

 

The Panel is aware that building works are underway in relation to previous approvals. The previous works were considered to be not subject to SEPP 65, even though the building contains 4 apartments and was effectively 3 storeys in height at the rear. The additional storey proposed unambiguously triggers SEPP 65, and requires the input of an architect.

 

Following the Panel’s report in November 2012 the Applicant has appointed a registered architect who is responsible for the design. 

 

Panel members have visited the site and are familiar with the area.

 

Principle 1: Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

A third floor on this building would not be inappropriate in the context of Bellevue Street and the stated FSR of 0.917:1 is considered to be acceptable if it meets the requirements of SEPP 65.

 

The Applicant has addressed the Panel’s concern about the loss of the front yard and soft landscaped area by removing the hardstand spaces and integrating one car space in the front of Unit 1.  This is an improvement however the curved driveway across the nature strip is not considered beneficial and the Panel would prefer to see a simple straight driveway of minimum dimensions, possibly with a central grass strip. Alternatively a pergola’d carport space could be considered as this would not make necessary the removal of an existing bedroom. Adequate screening would need to be provided.

 

The raised and stepped brick planters are also not considered necessary and the Panel encourages the Applicant to improve the design by reducing retaining walls and footings and increasing the area for planting.  Large trees could be introduced in the footpath area to improve the character of the street and provide more shade.

 

Planning response:

Conditions have been recommended to require the driveway be straight, serving to provide an additional parking space within the front setback of the site and simplify the design.

 

The planters are proposed in conjunction with a landscape plan that provides for a reasonable landscaped outcome within the front setback. The planters are low in height and the landscaping provided within will assist in softening the impact of the parking area. The treatment of the front setback is considered reasonable and will benefit the streetscape. 

 

Principle 2: The Scale of the Proposal

Bellevue Street has predominantly one and two storey houses however there are a few residential flat buildings which, in this location, is appropriate.  Buildings varying in height and style characterize Bellevue Street.  The proposed additional storey would be in scale with the varied stock in the block.

 

Planning response:

The proposed scale is considered satisfactory, reflecting a number of built form precedents evident within the vicinity.

 

Principle 3: The Built Form of the Proposal

The Applicant has improved the proposed built form in response to the Panel’s previous report however the character remains a little mismatched and bulky.  Improvements should be pursued in line with the following:

 

·             The upper floor to the street should have a continuous terrace and fine roof edge to simplify the overly-awkward forms of the west facade. The overhanging roof would also improve amenity and environmental performance. Light to the central stair can still be achieved through a ventilating skylight.

 

·             To the common stair which faces west, the provision of operable glazing behind metal louvres is commended however the operation of the glass needs to be documented on the drawings.

 

·             The entry at ground level should have some weather protection.

 

·             Finer edges, shadow lines and the provision of drip ledges are details that could improve the presentation of the building and reduce weathering.

 

·             The extent of operable roof louvres to the first floor east balconies could be reduced as it compromises acoustic and visual privacy between the first and second floors.

 

·             The ‘sunroom’ glazing needs to be more carefully considered. Louvres next to the latch-side of doors can be a security issue.  This area would also benefit with privacy screening until the landscape provides sufficient cover.

 

·             Louvres are excellent windows for achieving air flow however high banks of glass louvres are difficult to manage and clean.

 

·             There is more opportunity to design the downpipes from the upper roof rather than wind them over to posts and across elevations

 

Planning response:

The amended built form provides a satisfactory response to the streetscape and that of adjoining sites. Given this, further amendment to the façade has not been pursued with the applicant.

 

Weather protection to the ground level entry has been recommended to be required by condition.

 

The detail of the first floor balconies is not subject to the current proposal, being approved under a previous application. Amendment of the roof louvres is not within the scope of the current application.

 

Privacy screening to the ground floor sunroom has not been pursued. The window to this room encourages casual surveillance of the streetscape and as noted by the panel, will benefit from some screening once vegetation is established.

 


Principle 4: The Proposed Density

Satisfactory, provided the design is of good quality

 

Principle 5: Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

A rainwater storage tank has been provided under the lower north east balcony and one on the new east terrace of the penthouse.

North and west facing windows have been provided with solar shading.

Ceiling fans have been provided and shown on the drawings.

Natural light via a ventilating skylight could be introduced into the centre of the deep penthouse plan.

 

Planning response:

Additional conditions have been recommended requiring the installation of skylights to provide more light within the penthouse plan.

 

Principle 6: The Proposed Landscape

A landscape plan has been provided which is generally satisfactory. The Panel has the following comments for consideration:

·        The proposed hard landscape works such as decks and retaining walls need to be coordinated with the architectural drawings.

·        The privacy screening to the ground floor western sunroom needs treatment until landscape reaches some maturity.

·        Street trees could be provided

·        Brick planter retaining walls (and required footings) may be able to be eliminated and mounding techniques used instead.

 

Planning response:

The above comments are noted.

 

Planters are proposed within the front setback in conjunction with a landscape plan that provides for a reasonable landscaped outcome. The planters are low in height and the landscaping provided within will assist in softening the impact of the parking area. The treatment of the front setback is considered reasonable and will benefit the streetscape.

 

Principle 7: The Amenity of the Proposal for its users

The existing building already has deep and internalised circulation with no direct daylight or ventilation.  Added new living areas to the east have increased the problem.  However this is beyond the scope of this application, as it was the subject of an earlier approval.

The new penthouse apartment has the opportunity to be excellent design.  The Panel considers that the planning currently has the following deficiencies:

·        The Entry could be a more interesting space, at present it faces directly into a storeroom

·        The laundry faces out into the main eastern area - a more appropriate position could easily be found. For example the laundry and storage area combined could be entered from the kitchen.

·        East and west bedrooms could have two windows to aid cross ventilation.  Bedroom 1 appears to only have a sliding door for ventilation.

·        Light, ventilation and winter sun could be made available to the centre of the plan via a well placed ventilating clerestory window.  Bedroom 3 could possibly access this as it is currently indented with a large overhang on the window.

·        The kitchen seems very conventional given the opportunities of space - it may be good to have the kitchen serving directly onto the terrace.

 

Planning response:

The above comments are noted and the applicant has been made aware of this feedback.

 

The application satisfactorily meets the SEPP 65 requirements for internal amenity. While a number of preferable layout options may exist, the proposed floor plan is a preference of the applicant. Given minimal impacts arise as a result, the layout is considered to remain at the preference of the applicant.

 

Additional windows to bedrooms have not been pursued given privacy implications and a clerestory window would further increase the height of the development. Skylights have been recommended as conditions of consent to improve light and ventilation to bedrooms.

 

The application is considered satisfactory in relation to the amenity principle of SEPP 65.

 

Principle 8: The Safety and Security Characteristics

Satisfactory.

 

Principle 9: Social issues

The provision of additional housing in this location is desirable.

 

Principle 10: The Aesthetics of the Proposal

The aesthetics have improved since the previous scheme however there is a need to tidy and refine the elevations as recommended above in this report.

 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposal has progressed and it is the Panel’s opinion that, if the issues noted in this report are addressed appropriately the scheme could make a reasonable contribution to the Bellevue Street area.  If the applicant makes these changes to the Council Officers’ satisfaction the Panel does not need to review this proposal again.

 

Planning response:

Where necessary, conditions have been recommended to ensure the proposal meets the above recommendations of the Design Review Panel. It is considered the proposal is satisfactory with regard to SEPP 65 and, subject to recommended conditions, is supported by this assessment.

 

7.5      State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

Application of SEPP 10 to the site

Under previous applications including DA/83/2002 and DA/83/2002/A, the site was subject to the provisions of SEPP 10, a state level affordable housing policy that was repealed for the current SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

 

Notably, DA/83/2002 has specific conditions applied to the consent requiring retention of affordable housing in the area. Conditions 4, 5, 6 & 7 of DA/83/2002 read as follows:

 

4.       One unit in the proposed building shall be retained in rental tenure on the open market for a period of three (3) years from the date of issue of the Certificate of Occupancy.

5.       Rent level for the unit referred to above (sic.) shall not exceed $280.00 per week for the first year and, for each year thereafter, the rent shall not exceed $280.00 per week plus CPI adjustments.

6.       A positive covenant shall be created under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act, to give effect to Conditions 4 & 5. Such a covenant shall not be revoked or modified without prior approval of Council. The covenant shall be submitted for Councils approval prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

7.       Statutory declarations shall be submitted to Planning New South Wales annually and a copy forwarded to Council from the date of registration of the covenant referred to in Condition 6 for a period of three years documenting rent levels changed including rent receipts.

This consent has been activated and works are currently underway. An Occupation Certificate is yet to be issued for the development to satisfy the above conditions.

 

Application of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

The building has not been strata subdivided and as such, the SEPP (ARH) 2009 is a matter for consideration in assessment of the application.

 

On 5 June 2013, the applicant provided written evidence from the Department of Fair Trading, advising the most recent rental bond held for 5 Bellevue Street was released on 8 October 2007, five (5) years prior to the lodgment of the subject application. The site has been vacant since.

 

Part 3 of the SEPP (ARH) 2009, identifies provisions for the retention of existing affordable rental housing. The application of Part 3 of the SEPP (ARH) 2009 is identified in Clause 49, stating;

 

(1) This Part applies only to those buildings that were low-rental residential buildings as at 28 January 2000, and does not apply to any building that becomes a low-rental residential building after that date.

 

The following interpretations are provided:

 

low-rental residential building means a building used as a residential flat building containing a low-rental dwelling or as a boarding house and includes a building:

 

(a)   that, at the time of lodgment of a development application to which this Part applies, is lawfully used as a residential flat building containing a low-rental dwelling or as a boarding house, irrespective of the purpose for which the building may have been erected, or

(b)   that was used as a residential flat building containing a low-rental dwelling or as a boarding house but that use has been changed unlawfully to another use, or

(c)   that is vacant, but the last significant use of which was as a residential flat building containing a low-rental dwelling or as a boarding house.

 

low-rental dwelling means a dwelling that (at any time in the 24 month period prior to the lodgment of a development application to which this Part applies) was let at a rental not exceeding the median rental level for that time (as specified in the Rent and Sales Report) in relation to a dwelling of the same type, having the same number of bedrooms and located in the same local government area.

 

With regard to the evidence provided by the applicant, the existing building does not contain any defined low-rental dwellings (given vacancy exceeding the 24 months prior to lodgment) and therefore does not meet the definition of a ‘low-rental residential building for the purpose of the SEPP. For this reason, Clause 49 of the SEPP does not trigger the need for consideration of the subject application against the provisions of Part 3 of the SEPP.

 

The subject building no longer meets the legislative prerequisites for which affordable housing contributions can be imposed. Further assessment against this SEPP is not considered necessary.

 

Affordable housing conditions applied to the previous consent of DA/83/2002 discussed above, remain applicable from the date of an Occupation Certificate being issued.

 

7.6      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Consolidation)

 

7.6.1   Clause 10 – Zone No 2A (Residential 2A Zone)

(1)  The objectives of Zone No 2A are:

            

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

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

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

(d)  to allow for a range of community uses to be provided to serve the needs of residents, workers and visitors, and

(e)  to encourage housing affordability, and

(f)  to allow people to carry out a range of activities from their homes, where such activities are not likely to adversely affect the environment of the locality.

 

Multi-unit housing of the nature proposed is not permissible in the 2A zone. This issue is addressed above in respect of ‘existing use rights’, of which this site benefits from. Existing use rights effectively deem the provisions of the RLEP 1998 not applicable.

 

The scheme has been designed with consideration of the zone objectives. The proposal:

 

·          provides a reasonable outcome in relation to retaining the residential amenity of neighbouring sites;

·          remains sympathetic in scale and form to the streetscape, providing an improved aesthetic outcome to that of the vacant and aged building;

·          will contribute positively to the variety of residential accommodation options in the accessible area.

 

Regardless of the site’s claim to existing use rights, the proposal is generally capable of maintaining consistency with the relevant zone objectives.

 

7.6.2   Clause 29 – Foreshore Scenic Protection

The proposal will not present departure from the aesthetic appearance of the foreshore scenic protection area. Several examples of three (3) storey flat buildings exist in the immediate visual catchment, achieving similar scale to that proposed.

 

The proposed additional building bulk allows the upgrade of the existing aged and dilapidated building, involving aesthetic benefits to the Bellevue Street streetscape, as well as internal amenity to occupants of the building and enhanced environmental performance of the building.

 

7.7      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

As is the situation with LEP 1998, existing use rights deem the provisions (controls or standards) of any environmental planning instrument that would restrict the redevelopment of the site, do not apply. Despite this, Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 remains a matter for consideration in the assessment of the development application, pursuant to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended).

 

The following table considers the proposed development having regard to the zoning provisions and development standards contained within RLEP 2012, as they would relate to the subject development application:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

 

Zoning:

 

The site is zoned Low Density Residential R2.

The site presently benefits from existing use rights and will continue to under RLEP 2012.

Permissible under the proposed zoning?

No.

Floor Space Ratio (Max)

0.5:1

0.86:1

 

No, merit assessment conducted in Section 8 below, given application of existing use rights.

 

Height of Building (Max)

9.5m

13m

 

7.8      Design Ideas for Rejuvenating Residential Flat Buildings

The Design Ideas for Rejuvenating Residential Flat Buildings guideline, dated November 2006, provides case studies of refurbishment concepts using flat buildings in the Randwick Local Government Area. It aims to encourage refurbishment proposals that improve:

 

·      The liveability of the units to meet current lifestyle needs;

·      The environmental performance and sustainability of the building; and

·      The appearance of buildings within the streetscape.

 

The proposed development has been designed with regard to the principles in this guideline. The proposal is consistent with the recommended design ideas in the following manner:

 

·      Retention of the existing residential flat building rather than complete demolition;

·      Appropriate integration of the old and new built elements;

·      Improvements to environmental performance through BASIX commitments;

·      Improvements to useable private open space;

·      Improvements to the relationship between indoor and outdoor living;

·      Installation of high quality finishing materials to deliver an upgraded architectural character.

 

The proposal will rehabilitate and reuse an existing residential building, contributing to the sustainable utilisation of resources, which is consistent with this Council policy.

 

7.9      Randwick Multi-Unit Housing DCP

The application of existing use rights to the subject site omits the strict application of Council’s Planning controls. Regardless, the key performance indicators of the proposal including bulk, scale height, shadow and privacy are tested below against the DCP to inform a merit-based assessment.

 

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 deviation results, assessment is made against the relevant Objectives and Performance Requirements. 

 

 

Performance Requirement

Compliance

Site Planning

P2 Development sites have appropriate areas/dimensions to allow for satisfactory siting of buildings.

The site is rectangular, with frontage of over 15 metres and substantial depth. Additional bulk is located above that existing, centralised within the building footprint. The scheme allows for acceptable siting of additional bulk with sufficient setback.

Height

P1 Heights of walls, their location and orientation do not cause substantial adverse impacts on streetscape or adjoining properties.

The upper floor addition adds to wall height of the existing building. The addition is stepped in from side and rear boundaries to minimise impacts of bulk, scale, shadow and privacy to neighbours.

Facade amendments will assist in articulating and modulating the building when viewed from the streetscape. Varied materials and balconies will contribute to visual interest.

The proposed maximum height eventuates largely as a result of the sharp fall in topography to the east. Despite this, there exists room to improve impacts of height through reduction in ceiling and parapet heights, as recommended through conditions. Appropriate design measures have been incorporated in offsetting impacts of height to a reasonable degree.

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.

Building Setbacks

P1  Front boundary setbacks

The front setback consistent with streetscape /adjoining dwelling.

The proposal locates balconies to the front of the building.

The setback remains generally consistent with that of adjoining development and is sufficient in minimising imposing bulk and scale on the street. The streetscape elevation is appropriately articulated for visual interest to the street, with landscaping also facilitating screening.

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.

The proposed second storey incorporates the following side setbacks:

North east elevation setbacks:

·    2.3 metres to building bulk;

·    1200mm to balcony.

South west elevation setbacks:

·    2.2 metres to building bulk;

·    2.3 metres to balcony.

 

First floor alterations, inclusive of wrap around balconies to the front of the building, will provide the following side setbacks:

North east elevation setbacks:

·    1200mm to balcony.

South west elevation setbacks:

·    1100mm to balcony.

 

The scheme incorporates reasonable setback of additional bulk, with minimal adverse impacts arising as a result.

P3  Rear Boundary Setbacks

Ensure that:

§ Solar access is reasonable and overshadowing is minimised.