Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 11 February 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, 30 Frances Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 6:00pm.

 

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor (S Nash), Andrews, Belleli, Bowen, D’Souza, Garcia, Matson, Moore, (Chairperson), Neilson, Roberts, Seng, (Deputy Chairperson), Shurey, Smith, Stavrinos and Stevenson

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members

 

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

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 3 December 2013

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Privacy warning;

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

Urgent Business

Development Application Reports (record of voting required)

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

D1/14       13 Evelyn Street South Coogee (DA/661/2012/B)...................................... 1

D2/14       30 Chapman Avenue, Maroubra (DA/723/2013)......................................... 9

D3/14       82 Macquarie Street, Chifley (DA/812/2013)........................................... 15

D4/14       489 Bunnerong Road, Matraville (DA/1003/2010/B)................................... 21

D5/14       102 Garden Street, Maroubra (DA/790/2010/B)........................................ 29

D6/14       6 Dundas Street, Coogee (DA/400/2012/A)............................................. 35

D7/14       470 Bunnerong Road, Matraville (DA/845/2013)....................................... 45

Miscellaneous Report (record of voting required)

M1/14       15 Seaside Parade, South Coogee (DA/529/2013) – DEFERRED ................. 51    

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D1/14

 

 

Subject:                  13 Evelyn Street South Coogee (DA/661/2012/B)

Folder No:                   DA/661/2012/B

Author:                   Perry Head, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96AB Review of Condition 2F of Development Consent DA/661/2012/A

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                N Lawrence

Owner:                         N Lawrence

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

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

 

Proposal

 

The application seeks the review of a condition of approval which limited the area of the awning to the approved roof top terrace of the dwelling.

 

The application is recommended for approval.

 

Site

 

The subject site is on the southern side of Evelyn Street between Malabar Road and Denning Street and is rectangular with a site frontage of 10.06m, a depth of 40.235m and area of 405m². The site falls steeply to the rear.

 

Evelyn Street falls from the east to west towards Malabar Road.


The immediate locality is residential and contains a mixture of semi detached and free standing dwellings.

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. The following submissions were received as a result of the notification process:

 

Submission

Comment

11 Evelyn Street South Coogee

-The dwellings thus far is excessive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-There is already an impact to their privacy from approved windows in the dwelling.

 

 

 

 

-Objects to the request to increase the roof size of the terrace.

 

-Objects to the redesign of the façade.

 

 

 

 

-Requests the reassessment of previous amendments to alter and install new openings which have resulted in no privacy.

 

15 Evelyn Street South Coogee

-There are concerns above the height and size of the rooftop changes which will increase overshadowing and the perceived bulk of the building in the streetscape.

 

 

The original application was considered and approval granted on the basis that the proposal satisfied the relevant objectives and performance requirements of the DCP for Dwellings and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

Matters relating to privacy have been considered and addressed under the previous application to modify the consent with a condition imposed to modify a window in the western elevation of the dwelling to maintain privacy.

 

The roof terrace area is not being increased. It is only proposed to extend the roof area.

 

The front façade is only being amended to introduce a steel balustrade to the roof terrace which well reduce the visual bulk of the front façade.

 

Issues in relation to privacy impacts have been assessed in detail under the original development application and subsequent application to modify the consent.

 

The increase in overshadowing from the increased roof area is marginal and will mostly fall on the roof of the adjoining dwellings.

 

Key Issues

 

Roof design and features

Part 4.4 of the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013 stipulates the following controls in relation to the roof design and rooftop terraces.

 

●      Terraces, decks or trafficable outdoor spaces may be provided in stepped buildings, but must not be provided on the uppermost or main roof of the building (including the principal dwelling and any outbuilding).

 

●      To ensure roof design integrates with the form, proportions and façade composition of the building.

 

●        To ensure trafficable roof space is integrated with the built form and maintains satisfactory privacy relationship with the neighbouring dwellings.

 

During the assessment of the original application the roof terrace and roof covering to the terrace were reduced in size to be more in keeping with several similar roof terraces to other nearby dwellings.   

 

The aim of those amendments were to restrict the usable area of the terrace and therefore reduce any potential impacts to the neighbour’s amenity, and by reducing the size of the roof the visual prominence of that building element within the local streetscape.

 

The previous Section 96 application which is the subject of this Review included a 3m long awning pitched 500mm below the underside of the awning to the terrace and projecting to the front of the building above the approved roof terrace. That amendment would have increased the area of roof cover to the terrace from 28m² to 39m².

 

The plans accompanying this application have amended that awning to reduce the width from 5.3m to 4.1m and site the awning 1m further from the western side edge of the building. The 3m depth of the awning remains as originally proposed.

 

The proposed awning projection from the approved roof covering to the terrace by being sited beneath the underside of that roof covering and to a lesser width is very much a secondary building element and as viewed from the street frontage and surrounds and will not be visually prominent a detract from the approved appearance of the building in the streetscape.

 

Dwelling at current stage of construction with roof to roof terrace as originally approved.

 

Dwelling at current stage of construction with roof to roof terrace as originally approved.

Privacy

Part 5.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013 provides the following objectives relating to visual privacy:

 

·           To ensure a high level of amenity by providing for reasonable level of visual privacy for dwellings and neighbouring properties.

 

·           To ensure new development is designed so that its occupants enjoy visual and acoustic privacy, whilst maintaining the existing level of privacy of adjoining and nearby properties.

 

The originally approved terrace and awning dimensions as amended maintained the residential amenity of the adjoining properties by restricting the terrace and under cover area towards the front of the building and away from the rear yard private outdoor space of the adjoining properties.

 

The addition of an awning to the front of the roof covering of the terrace is within the same roof zone towards the front of the building and will not result in the usable area of the terrace being any further towards the rear of the building and as a consequence there will not be any additional impacts to the visual and acoustic privacy of the adjoining and nearby residents.

 

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 application to review condition 2f of Development Consent DA/661/2012/A is recommended for approval as the awning extension to the roof terrace achieves a reasonable and acceptable design and will not be visually dominant and intrusive viewed from the public domain. The building will continue to integrate with the surrounding built form and will maintain privacy to the adjoining and nearby dwellings.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96AB of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/661/2012/B for permission to delete condition 2f for the development at 13 Evelyn Street, South Coogee in the following manner:

 

A.         Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

DA.02/C

Damien Madell Associates

 

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.03/E

02/04/2013

2 April 2013

DA.04/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.05/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.06/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.07/E

02/04/2013

2 April 2013

DA.08/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.09/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.010/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.11/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.12/C

13/02/2013

14 February 2012

DA.27/C

28/03/2013

28 March 2013

DA.28/C

28/03/2013

28 March 2013

DA.29/C

28/03/2013

28 March 2013

DA.30/C

28/03/2013

28 March 2013

DA.31/C

28/03/2013

28 March 2013

L.01

08/10/2012

15 October 2012

L.02

08/10/2012

15 October 2012

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received

 

441719S

8 October 2012

15 October 2012

 

As amended by the following Section 96A  plans:

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

DA.02/F

Damien Madell Associates

 

25.09.13

4 October 2013

DA.03/F

25.09.13

4 October 2013

DA.04/F

25.09.13

4 October 2013

DA.08/F

25.09.13

4 October 2013

DA.09/F

25.09.13

4 October 2013

DA.10/F

25.09.13

4 October 2013

DA.12/F

25.09.13

4 October 2013

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received

 

507417S

2 October 2013

4 October 2013

 

As amended by the following Section 96AB plans;

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received

DA.02/G

 

Damien Madell Associates

 

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.03/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.04/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.05/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.06/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.07/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.08/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.09/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.10/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.11/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

DA.12/G

14.11.13

18th November 2013

 

only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

        B.      Condition 2f be deleted

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 13 Evelyn Street, South Coogee (DA/661/2012/B)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D2/14

 

 

Subject:                  30 Chapman Avenue, Maroubra (DA/723/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/723/2013

Author:                   Adrian McKeown, Environmental Planning Assessment Officer     

 

Proposal:                     Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including a new first floor addition, the construction of a hard stand car park space to the front of the dwelling, a ground level deck at the rear and associated works

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Matt Bower

Owner:                         Matt Bower & Wendy Liu

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive Summary Report

 

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

 

Proposal:

 

The proposal involves alterations and additions to the existing semi-detached dwelling including a new first floor addition, the construction of a hard stand car park space to the front of the dwelling, a ground level deck at the rear and associated works.

 

Site:

 

The subject site is on the northern side of Chapman Avenue and is relatively level; with a rise of 460mm from the Chapman Street frontage to the rear of the site. There is an existing single storey semi-detached dwelling located on the site. The locality is residential in character; consisting primarily of single and two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings.

 

 

Figures 1 & 2:  The existing semi-detached dwelling on the site as viewed from the streetscape and from the rear.

 

Submissions:

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. Three (3) submissions were received as a result of the notification process; all were written by the owner of 28 Chapman Avenue, Maroubra (see below).

 

Amended plans were submitted to Council on 21 November 2013 and 20 December 2013. The amended plans show a 1m reduction in the length of the proposed first floor addition as well as a modified roof form at the front of the semi-detached dwelling. The amended roof form will retain the existing roof form at the south-western end of the semi-detached dwelling facing the streetscape.

 

Given that the amended plans include a reduction in the visual bulk of the proposed works and an improvement in the overall appearance of the proposed first floor addition as viewed from the streetscape, they were not required to be re-notified to the owners of neighbouring dwellings. Despite this, the owner of the neighbouring dwelling at 28 Chapman Avenue was provided with amended plans. A further submission was then received from the owner of that dwelling.

 

Issues raised by the owner of 28 Chapman Avenue, Maroubra:

 

§   Windows on the western elevation should be increased sill height. The proposed rear balcony will overlook the rear yard of my property and should be reduced in size. Privacy screens are not clear on plans and should be installed to a height of 1.8m. A proposed front window overlooks the entry way to our dwelling and should be constructed using an increased sill height.

 

Comment:

The windows on the western elevation of the dwelling are associated with bedrooms which are not intensively used areas and are offset front the windows of the adjoining dwelling which are at the ground level. The viewing angle down into the neighbouring dwelling would only occur close to the face of the windows of the proposed upper level addition and as such from most parts of the bedrooms it would not be possible to look down in the adjoining windows. A proposed rear balcony will overlook an existing garage at the rear of 28 Chapman Avenue however will not impose any significant privacy impacts on that neighbouring dwelling. Overall, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives and planning controls of the RCDCP with regard to visual privacy. See further discussion below – Key Issues.

 

§   The proposal exceeds Council’s FSR and height controls and should be setback further or articulated from the western property boundary. The proposal will overshadow the eastern elevation of my dwelling. The proposal sets an unwelcome precedent for large development in the locality.

 

Comment:

The proposed works comply with the development standard for floor space ratio and with the planning controls for setbacks and solar access. The proposal will generally be consistent with existing development which is within close proximity to the subject site.

 

§   The proposed hardstand carspace does not allow for sufficient landscaped area within the subject site.

 

 

 

Comment:

The proposed works generally comply with the planning controls for off-street parking and landscaped area. No objections were raised to the proposed parking area by Council’s Development Engineer regarding flooding issues.

 

Key Issues:

A.      Building Envelope:

Floor Space Ratio:

The RLEP 2012 allows for a merits based assessment for sites under 300m2; and it is considered that the proposal will be compatible with the existing and desired character of the locality. The proposed extensions to the semi-detached dwelling will resulting in a development with an FSR total of 0.71:1 which is similar to nearby dwellings including those opposite the site at 5 & 7 Chapman Avenue (FSR approved at 0.65:1 & 0.73:1 respectively).

 

Amended plans were submitted to Council on 20 December 2013 showing a reduction in the visual bulk of the proposed dwelling extension. The first floor addition has been relocated further towards the rear of the site (as viewed from the streetscape) and there has been an overall reduction in the length of the first floor addition by 1m. The first floor addition has been reduced in length from 17.5m of continuous wall paneling on the north-western elevation to 16.4m.

 

The proposed first floor addition will maintain a substantial portion of the existing roof line and will be located to the rear of the existing dwelling. Overall, it is considered that the dwelling extension will not contribute significantly or unreasonably to the perceived bulk and scale of the existing semi-detached dwelling as viewed from the street.

 

Setbacks:

The RCDCP 2013 includes a planning control for side setbacks, specifying that dwellings on sites which have a frontage width of less than 6m should be assessed on a merits based assessment. The proposed first floor addition will be setback 1.1m from the north-western property boundary which is line with the existing dwelling; however a nil setback is proposed to the south-eastern property boundary – that is, to the adjoining semi-detached dwelling.

 

The proposal is supported given that the development will be consistent with the objectives of the RCDCP with regard to setbacks. The resultant dwelling will be consistent with the established rhythm of street setbacks for neighbouring dwellings and the form and massing of the development will complement the streetscape character.

 

Adequate separation will be maintained between the subject site neighbouring buildings for visual and acoustic privacy and solar access; and the proposal will not impose any significant impacts on neighbouring dwellings with regard to visual privacy and view sharing.

 

The proposed development will result in a pair of semi-detached dwellings which will relate to the existing streetscape character. The proposed first floor addition will be provided with some articulation on the north-western elevation by way of a change in materials; thereby providing some visual relief for that façade and reducing the apparent mass of the dwelling as viewed from the adjoining property at 28 Chapman Avenue.

 

The proposed development respects and enhances the architectural character of the pair of semi-detached dwellings as a coherent entity; given that the first floor additions are to be setback from the principal street frontage and accommodated to the rear of the semi-detached dwellings; with a substantial portion of the existing front roof remaining intact (see Figure 1 below).

 

B.        Amenity:

Solar Access and Overshadowing:

The DCP requires that north-facing living area windows must receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June. A portion of the north-facing living area windows of neighbouring dwellings must also receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June; and the private open spaces of neighbouring dwellings must receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

 

It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the objectives and planning controls of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan with regard to solar access and overshadowing. Shadow diagrams submitted with the application show that the north-facing living room windows of the proposed development will receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June. Further, the private open spaces within the subject development will receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

 

Solar access will be maintained for neighbouring development; in that the north-facing living room windows of neighbouring dwellings will continue to receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.  The private open spaces of neighbouring dwellings will also continue to receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June:- this area being capable of supporting passive recreation activities.

 

Overall, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the objectives and planning controls of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan with regard to solar access and overshadowing.

 

Visual Privacy:

The DCP requires that habitable room windows must be located to minimise any direct viewing of existing habitable room windows in adjacent dwellings and that where a balcony is likely to overlook the private open space of the adjacent dwellings, that privacy screens are to be included. 

 

Windows W4, W5, W7 and W8 on the north-western elevation of the first floor addition are highlight windows or are to be constructed using obscure glazing and will not impose any significant privacy impacts on neighbouring dwellings.

 

Windows W3 and W6 on the north-western elevation of the first floor addition are offset from habitable room windows on the south-eastern elevation of the neighbouring dwelling at 28 Chapman Avenue; and do not have a significant capacity to impose privacy impacts on that dwelling. 

 

The proposed rear balcony at first floor level is to be constructed using 1.8m privacy screens along the north-western and south-eastern ends and a balustrade constructed using obscure glazing. The balcony is not overly large and will be accessed from a bedroom. Consequently, the balcony will not impose any significant privacy impacts on neighbouring dwellings.

 

The proposed rear deck at ground floor level is not substantially elevated above existing ground levels and consequently, will not impose any significant privacy impacts on neighbouring dwellings.

 

Relationship to City Plan:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion:

 

The proposal complies with the relevant assessment criteria and as conditioned, will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality. The application is, therefore, recommended for approval subject to the attached conditions of consent.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/723/2013 for alterations and additions to the existing semi-detached dwelling including a new first floor addition, the construction of a hard stand car park space to the front of the dwelling, a ground level deck at the rear and associated works, at 30 Chapman Avenue, Maroubra, subject to the following non standard conditions and the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report attached to this report:

 

Non standard conditions

2.     All privacy screens must be constructed of metal or timber and the total area of any openings within the privacy screen must not exceed 25% of the area of the screens.  Alternatively, the privacy screens may be constructed with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing in a suitable frame.

 

3.     No approval is granted for any front fencing; other than that which may be constructed as exempt development under the provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 30 Chapman Avenue, Maroubra (DA/723/2013)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D3/14

 

 

Subject:                  82 Macquarie Street, Chifley (DA/812/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/812/2013

Author:                   Planning Ingenuity, Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of existing garage and construction of single storey secondary dwelling and hard stand car park space to north eastern side of existing dwelling

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                Classic Plans

Owner:                         W B Housing Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application has been assessed by an external planning consultant as the Statement of Environmental Effects was prepared by a Planning Consultant prior to his current employment with Council.

 

1.    Proposal

 

Demolition of existing garage and construction of single storey secondary dwelling and hard stand car park space to north eastern side of existing dwelling.

 

The secondary dwelling is to be free standing with a total floor area of 60m2.  The new dwelling is to contain two bedrooms, a bathroom, a laundry cupboard and an open plan kitchen, dining and living area.  A reinforced concrete slab is to be laid between the new dwelling and the north east side boundary to provide parking for one car ancillary to the secondary dwelling. The driveway crossing linked to the new parking space is to be reconstructed to Council’s standards.

 

New fencing is to be installed to separate the new dwelling from the existing dwelling.  This fence is to be 900mm high within the front setback and 1.8m high for the remainder of its length.  A new masonry fence is also proposed to be constructed along the front boundary and the north east side boundary.  Within the front setback this fence is to be 1.2m high with masonry columns and base and slat infill panels.  Beyond the front setback the fence height is 1.8m to 2.0m and full brick construction.

 

Three (3) trees are proposed to be removed from within the front setback area and two (2) trees are to be removed from the rear of the site.  All but one of these trees is within 3m of the proposed building works.  New landscaping is proposed to the front and rear of the secondary dwelling including the planting of a feature Callistemon within the front setback.

 

2.    Site

 

The site is located on the north western side of Macquarie Street between the intersections with Lasseter Avenue and Forrest Street.  The site is shown on page 1 to this report.

 

The site is an irregular shape with a frontage of 32.04m and a rear boundary of 35.075m.  The south western side boundary is 26.675m long and the north eastern side boundary is 12.41m in length.  The total area of the site is 626.1m2.

 

The site is relatively flat.  The highest ground level is located at the northern corner of the site and the lowest point is the southern corner.

 

There is a single storey brick and tile dwelling on the site with a detached fibro garage in the north east corner and two small sheds in the north west corner.  There are mature trees and shrubs throughout the site.  There are two driveway crossings.  One crossing serves the existing garage (to be demolished) and is located close to the north east side boundary.  The other crossing is close to the south west side boundary and links to a concrete parking space within the front setback area.  There is a concrete pathway within the footpath reserve.

 

An aerial view of the site and surrounds is included in Figure 2 and photographs of the site as viewed from the street are included in Figures 3 and 4.  In Figure 3 the garage to be demolished is shown in the centre of the photograph and the electricity substation on the neighbouring property is shown on the right hand side.  Figure 4 shows the existing dwelling which is to be retained as the principle dwelling.

 

Figure 2 – Aerial view of No.82 Macquarie Street and surrounds

 

Figure 3 – View of No.82 Macquarie Street from the east

 

Figure 4 – View of No.82 Macquarie Street from the south east

3.    Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. No submissions were received.

 

4.    Key Issues

 

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 commenced on 31 July 2009 and aims, inter alia, to facilitate the effective delivery of new affordable rental housing by providing incentives such as expanded zoning permissibility and floor space ratio bonuses.  The provisions of this Policy override those of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan, 2012 where there are any inconsistencies.

 

Clause 23 to State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 states that a secondary dwelling is complying development if it meets specific criteria.  The proposal does not meet the criteria for Complying Development as examined in (b) above and therefore the proposal can only be considered under a development application.

 

Division 2 of the SEPP relates to secondary dwellings and applies to Zone R2 Low Density Residential.  The proposal fits the requirements of Clause 22 in that the combined floor area of the existing dwelling and the secondary dwelling does not exceed the maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1 required for a single dwelling house on the site, and the total floor area of the secondary dwelling is no more than 60m2 and no more than the maximum permissible in Randwick LEP 2012 (see Section (d) below).

 

Subclause 22(4) of the Policy states that Council cannot refuse consent if the secondary dwelling is within or attached to the principle dwelling (which does not apply to the proposal) and the site area is at least 450m2.  The site area is 626.1m2 and therefore of suitable size to support a secondary dwelling.  Council cannot refuse consent for a secondary dwelling if no additional parking is provided for the secondary dwelling.  However, one uncovered on-site parking space is proposed for the exclusive use of the secondary dwelling.

 

Clause 23 sets out the requirements of the Policy for secondary dwellings and these are:

 

-    the lot must be at least 450m2;

-    there is no basement; and

-    there is no roof terrace.

 

The proposal complies with these requirements.

 

Clause 24 to the Policy prevents subdivision of a site containing a secondary dwelling.  The proposal does not include subdivision.

 

Therefore the secondary dwelling complies with the relevant requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and is permissible under this Policy.

 

 

 

 

4.1      Setbacks

Front setbacks

For irregular shaped lots, setbacks are assessed on merit based on:

 

-      Compatibility with existing pattern of development on the subject site and adjoining lots

-      Provision of adequate private open space areas and dimensions

-      Impact on neighbours due to solar access, privacy and view sharing

 

Comments

The existing front setback is 7.5m to the façade and 5.8m to porch. The proposed 3.215m setback is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

 

-    the existing dwellings in Macquarie Street to the south west of the site do not establish a consistent setback and street pattern;

 

-    the site is located at the end of the street and close to an intersection which is angular and therefore not conducive to establishing a consistent front building line;

 

-    the dwelling will be mostly obscured from view from the north and partly obscured from view by the 1.8m high solid brick fence, and obscured from view from the south and east by the 1.2m high front fence;

 

-    the front façade is not the dominant building form on the site.  The existing dwelling will be more prominent in the streetscape and it is set back approximately 7.4m to the building façade and 5.6m to the front entry porch;

 

-    other allotments in Macquarie Street have depths which exceed the lot depth of the subject site.  Redevelopment of these sites is capable of complying with the minimum setback requirements and as such this proposal is not expected to set an undesirable precedent.

 

Side setbacks:

For irregular shaped lots, setbacks are assessed on merit based on:

 

-    Compatibility with existing pattern of development on the subject site and adjoining lots

 

-    Provision of adequate private open space areas and dimensions

 

-    Impact on neighbours due to solar access, privacy and view sharing;

 

Comments

The existing side setbacks are 8m. The proposed setback of 3.47m is considered appropriate for the following reasons:

 

-    the side and rear setbacks allow for an area of private open space on the northern side of the dwelling which is of useable area and dimensions;

 

-    the secondary dwelling will not overshadow or overlook neighbouring properties as the building is single storey and well separated from the neighbouring dwellings to the north and south west;

 

-    The floor levels of the secondary dwelling are not significantly elevated from existing ground levels; and

 

-    There are no views to be obscured or shared.

 

Rear setbacks

For irregular shaped lots, setbacks are assessed on merit based on:

 

-    Compatibility with existing pattern of development on the subject site and adjoining lots

 

-    Provision of adequate private open space areas and dimensions

 

-    Impact on neighbours due to solar access, privacy and view sharing

 

Comments

The existing rear setback is 2.5m and it is proposed to be increased to 3m. The rear setback is considered appropriate for the same reasons as listed above for side setbacks.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4(a):   Improve design and sustainability across all development.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal complies with the standards and objectives for development in Zone R2 Low Density Residential and the controls for height of buildings, floor space ratio and the maximum floor area for secondary dwellings.  The secondary dwelling also complies with the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.  The works are consistent with the relevant guidelines set out in Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 with the proposed front setback considered to be reasonable in the circumstances based on the DCP provisions for irregular shaped allotments.  There were no submissions in response to neighbour notification.

 

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/0812/2013 for Demolition of existing garage and construction of single storey secondary dwelling and hard stand car park space to north eastern side of existing dwelling, at No. 82 Macquarie Street, Chifley, subject to the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report attached to this report:

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 82 Macquarie Street, Chifley (DA/812/2013)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D4/14

 

 

Subject:                  489 Bunnerong Road, Matraville (DA/1003/2010/B)

Folder No:                   DA/1003/2010/B

Author:                   Scott Williamson, Senior Assessment Officer       

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of the approved development by addition of a new wall and service risers at ground level, addition of attic level extension to unit 11 below with alterations to roof and increase in height of building form fronting Bunnerong Road and alteration to balustrades on some balconies

Ward:                      South ward

Applicant:                K. L Special Projects Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Bassline Systems P/L

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval, subject to conditions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee given the original application (DA/1003/2010) was granted deferred commencement consent at the Planning Committee Meeting of 12 July 2011.

 

The original application of DA/1003/2010 was granted consent for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a part five (5), part three (3) storey mixed use development comprising ground level commercial tenancy, 12 residential units, two (2) levels of basement carparking with 19 spaces, landscaping and associated works.

 

1.        Proposal

 

 

Figure 1: The subject site, shown centre of frame.

Figure 2: Neighbouring development at 483 – 485 Bunnerong Road with a similar attic style addition

 

Figure 3: Montage of the approved building with proposed attic structure and service riser shown at roof level.

 

The subject application seeks to make miscellaneous modifications to the original development consent of DA/1003/2010, in the following manner:

 

Amendment location

Proposed amendment

Ground floor

 

·      New wall along south-western edge of courtyard for fire protection to commercial tenancy.

 

Levels 1 to 3

 

·      Add a service riser within floor plan;

·      Use glass blocks to infill northern edge of terrace terraces. 

 

Level 4

·      Reconfigure Unit 11 layout;

·      Provide stair access to proposed attic space;

·      Incorporate service riser.

 

Attic

·      Addition of an attic level within a roof form;

·      Within the attic, provide a bedroom, bathroom and storage area, used in association with Unit 11, below;

 

 

The application was amended on 4 December 2013. Amendments related to deletion of a trafficable rooftop terrace associated with the proposed attic addition, as well as internal reconfigurations to the attic space.

 

The revised design of 4 December 2013 forms the subject of this assessment.

 

2.        Site context

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Bunnerong Road in Matraville and is occupied by a recently constructed part five (5), part three (3) storey mixed use development approved under DA/1003/2010. The building is presently vacant as works continue.

 

The subject site has a frontage of 14.3 metres to Bunnerong Road, a northern side boundary depth of 44.24 metres, a southern side boundary depth of 44.075 metres and a total site area of 626 square metres. The subject site is relatively flat in topography.

 

 

Figure 4: Aerial view of the subject site.

 

The surrounding area comprises predominantly of mixed-use development within the Matraville Town Centre, interfaced with residential development to the north and east. The established built form within the town centre generally takes on either a two (2) storey shop-top housing form, such as the western side of Anzac Parade, or larger more recently constructed mixed use buildings of up to six (6) stories on the eastern side of Anzac Parade.

 

3.        Community consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development between 29 May and 13 June 2013, in accordance with Council’s DCP – Public Notification. As a result of this notification, no submissions were received.

 

The amendments of 4 December 2013 involved a reduction in impact from the proposal as originally notified and as such, did not necessitate re-notification.

 

4.        Assessment against key criteria of RLEP 2012 and RDCP 2013

                    

The subject site is zoned B2 – Local Centre under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012. The proposal is permissible with consent of Council.

 

4.1      RLEP 2012 – Height controls

The following controls of the LEP are relevant to the height of the proposal:

 

Clause 4.3A: Exceptions to height of buildings in Matraville and Kensington

(1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

(a)    to provide for building heights that establish the appropriate height for street frontages, buildings or groups of buildings,

(b)    to achieve well-proportioned buildings with articulated design and massing,

(c)    to achieve a transition between higher buildings in town centres and the height of buildings behind the centres on local streets,

(d)    to ensure that development can occur on a variety of lot sizes,

(e)    to achieve design excellence.

 

(3)  The maximum height of a building in the Matraville Commercial Centre on land identified as “Area 2” on the Height of Buildings Map is 22 metres if:

 

(a)    the land has a street frontage greater than 12 metres, and

(b)    all of the building that is higher than 16 metres is set back at least 4 metres from the street frontage, and

(c)    the building incorporates a supermarket.

 

RLEP 2012 adopts a height limit of 13 metres applicable to the subject site and the greater Matraville Commercial Centre. Clause 4.3A provides additional criteria through which the subject site specifically, may achieve up to 22 metres in height.

 

The approved development has a height of approximately 15.7 metres, which the present application is seeking to increase by 2.68 metres, to 18.38 metres.

 

The following table identifies the criteria of Clause 4.3A (3) of RLEP 2012, which is provided in order to claim a bonus height of over 13 metres and up to 22 metres:

 

Clause 4.3A(3)

Criteria for height bonus

Proposal

 

(a)

 

Street frontage greater than 12 metres.

 

Complies.

 

(b)

 

Where the building is higher than 16 metres is set back at least 4 metres from the street frontage.

 

 

Between 3.6 and 4.4 metres setback provided to the street frontage.

Satisfactory.

(c)

The building incorporates a supermarket.

Does not comply.         

In respect of part (a), the site benefits from a street frontage of over 14 metres and as such, complies.

 

In relation to setbacks, the angle of the front boundary introduces a varied setback of minimum 3.6 metres from the frontage. The proposed 400mm variation occurs to a small component of the roof pitch. The setback provided is sufficient to prevent the attic level becoming discernible from the streetscape and adjoining sites.

 

In respect of the supermarket requirement of part (c), the approved retail tenancy at ground floor level is of 70 square metres in floor area and as such cannot accommodate a supermarket of minimum 1000 square metres, as identified in part c) of the clause. The proposal falls short of complying with the terms of the bonus most notably due to this requirement and as such, the proposed height seeks to vary the development standard of 13 metres.

 

Despite the proposed departure from the height criteria identified in Clause 4.3A (3), an objection under Clause 4.6 of RLEP 2012 is not necessary in respect of Section 96 of the Act. Regardless, the following points are identified in assessing the proposed 2.86 metre increase in height proposed:

 

·      The proposal will remain consistent with the objectives of the B2 Local Centre zone and the intention of the height standard. In particular, the attic element provides a roof feature which does not disrupt its relationship to the streetscape;

 

·      The design of the attic is such that the structure does not pose any discernible addition to the approved bulk and scale of the building when viewed from the street or adjoining sites. The additional height is generously recessed from all boundaries such that no additional amenity impacts on adjoining/surrounding properties are anticipated;

 

·      The DCP states that attics will be considered at this level on the subject site. In the absence of any notable environmental impact from the additional height the attic structure requires, the height is considered reasonable and will remain consistent with the form intended by the DCP;

 

·      The design of the attic integrates well with the appearance and finishes of the approved building;

 

·      A number of precedents exist in the vicinity for roof level additions, sitting at similar height and as such, the proposal will not initiate any new precedents of built form to the town centre;

 

·      The proposal maintains consistency with the storey controls of the DCP and provision of an attic space connected to the apartment below is also anticipated within the provisions of Table 4, discussed below;

 

·      The LEP clearly anticipates a built form of up to 22 metres on or in the vicinity of the subject site. The non- compliance is technical and arises most notably in the absence of a supermarket, which is not feasible on this site;

 

·      It is considered that in this circumstance, preventing the addition of an attic space based upon the omission of a supermarket from the site is not entirely reasonable, given the total site area of the approved development is well short of that necessary to facilitate a supermarket.

 

Despite the variation proposed the scheme is consistent with the objectives of the height standard. The proposed height is considered satisfactory with regard to adjoining sites, the streetscape and surrounds.

 

4.1      Heights

Section 3.4.2 of the DCP identifies the height controls applicable to the site.

 

Objectives

·      To ensure an appropriate relationship between new development, street width, and surrounding dwellings.

·      To achieve a consistent built street edge height.

·      To ensure appropriate floor to ceiling height within buildings.

·      To achieve a visual transition between the heights of buildings on Bunnerong Road and the heights of buildings ‘behind’ the main street.

 

Controls

i)    Comply with the following maximum building heights:

 

Building height

Maximum Height

Building at a street edge (minimum frontage 7 metres)

4 storeys

 

ii)    If all required parking is provided at basement level on sites with a minimum frontage of 12 metres, a 5th storey may be considered with a setback from the floor below of 4 metres.

 

iii)   Comply with Table 1 which indicates:

·      minimum floor to ceiling height;

·      indicative ceiling space and floor slab height; and

·      maximum floor to floor height required to achieve the appropriate overall building height as a relationship between storeys and height.

 

iv)  

Storey 1

 
The maximum building height for a 6th storey is 18.6 metres to the underside of the topmost ceiling

 

The original application was approved with a five (5) storey building component fronting Bunnerong Road, comprising ground floor commercial and four (4) levels of residential above to achieve a maximum RL of 42.65.

 

The subject application seeks to add an additional 2.68 metres to the approved building height to facilitate a habitable attic space, to be used in conjunction with the unit below. The highest extent of the building will achieve 18.38 metres under the proposal, consistent with the above provisions.

 

The proposed attic addition is considered consistent with the above provisions that relate to sites with width of 14 metres and has been contained within a roof form to avoid the addition of a complete storey.

 

4.2      Setback

Given the angle of the Bunnerong Road boundary, the proposed roof structure has varying setback from the Bunnerong Road frontage of between 3.6 and 4.4 metres, consistent with the level below. This setback corresponds to the pitching point of a sloping roof form, which serves to disguise the attic space and locate bulk greater than four (4) metres from the front boundary.

 

The proposal involves a minor setback non-compliance to the street frontage, however this does not prevent the design achieving the intention of the control and allows that the attic form will not be discernible from the streetscape and adjoining sites.

 

4.3      Summary of built form controls

Table 4 of the DCP identifies the summary of built form controls applicable to this site, given a 14 metre frontage to Bunnerong Road.

 

Within the table, the site is defined as capable of achieving four (4) stories to Bunnerong Road, with a fifth storey considered if basement parking is provided. The original application was approved with a fifth storey and basement parking.

 

The subject application now seeks the addition of an attic space to the main street frontage building, linked to an apartment below. Such attics are anticipated in Table 4 of the DCP and are to be considered in assessment, provided the space is linked to an apartment below.

 

The proposed attic space is consistent with that anticipated by the DCP in this respect and is supported by this assessment.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal entails a number of modifications that when considered on balance with resultant environmental impacts, eventuate in a generally positive development outcome for the site, the streetscape and surrounds.

 

In view of the issues discussed above, the proposal is considered satisfactory in relation to the intent of the planning controls and the specific context of the site. The application is recommended for approval, subject to recommended conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/1003/2010/B for modification of the approved development including addition of a new wall and service risers at ground level, addition of attic level extension to unit 11 below with alterations to roof and increase in height of building form fronting Bunnerong Road and alteration to balustrades on some balconies at No. 489 Bunnerong Road, Matraville, subject to the following conditions:

 

·      Amend Condition No. 1 as follows:

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

  1. The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the following plans:

 

 

 

Plan Number

Revision

Prepared by

Plot Date

Received on

SK01

A

Mackenzie Architects

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK02

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK03

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK04

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK05

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK06

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK07

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK08

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK09

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK10

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK11

A

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

SK12

D

13 May 2011

25 May 2011

 

as amended by the Section 96 plans only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

Plan Number

Revision

Prepared by

Dated

Received on

SK03

B

Mackenzie Architects

1 May 2013

17 May 2013

SK04

B

1 May 2013

17 May 2013

SK05

B

1 May 2013

17 May 2013

SK06

B

1 May 2013

17 May 2013

SK07

B

1 May 2013

17 May 2013

SK08

C

18 November 2013

4 December 2013

SK09

D

18 November 2013

4 December 2013

SK10

D

18 November 2013

4 December 2013

SK11

D

18 November 2013

4 December 2013

SK12

C

18 November 2013

4 December 2013

 

BASIX Certificate

No.

Dated

Received on

Multi Dwelling

345880M_06

16 May 2013

17 May 2013

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

S96 Compliance Report - 489 Bunnerong Road, Matraville (DA/1003/2010/B)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D5/14

 

 

Subject:                  102 Garden Street, Maroubra (DA/790/2010/B)

Folder No:                   DA/790/2010/B

Author:                   Chahrazad  Rahe, Assessment Planner     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of approved development for retrospective approval of; changes to some windows and doors, change to roof profile, alteration to townhouse D balcony, deletion of mechanical carpark exhaust, change of balustrade for townhouse A, deletion of ensuite bathrooms for bedroom 2 in all units

Ward:                      Central Ward

Applicant:                Enarch Project Consultants Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Santosa Tanudisastro, Min Kiat Tanudisastro, Alison Tanudisastro and Calvin Tanudisastro

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The Section 96 application is referred to the Planning Committee Meeting for determination as the original application was approved by Council. 

 

Proposal

 

DA/790/2010

Original consent for Development Application No DA/790/2010 was approved at an Ordinary Council meeting on 22 November 2011 for demolition of the existing structures and construction of 3 storey multi-unit development comprising 4 residential units, basement car parking for 7 vehicles, ground level double garage and associated works. 

 

The proposal was referred to Council for determination as it contained variations to the maximum external wall height and floor space ratio development standards stipulated in Randwick Local Environmental Plan (RLEP) 1998 by more than 10%.  The SEPP 1 objections were supported.

 

DA/790/2010/A

Section 96 ‘A’ application was approved under delegated authority on 2 April 2012 for modifications to the approved development by alterations to the height of the terrace podium, change of door to window, and introduction of planter box outside townhouse B. 

 

DA/790/2010/B

The current proposal is a Section 96(2) ‘B’ application seeking retrospective approval to modify the approved development consent DA/790/2010 in the following manner:

 

§ Modification to windows and doors alterations (most size reduction and deletion);

§ Alterations to basement storeroom walls to accommodate stairs leading to townhouses;

§ Modifications to roof profile (raising the lower sections in line with the rest of roof);

§ Variation to Townhouse D balcony facing the drainage Reserve and Property No. 104 Garden Street;

§ Rainwater/detention tanks to Townhouse D has been slightly modified and setback 2.4m from the western side boundary.   

§ Revision of a mechanical carpark exhaust system to a natural ventilated outlet and deletion of vertical exhaust risers to rear between Townhouses A & B and Townhouses C & D. Construction of new opening at centre of courtyard towards Alma Road.

§ The deletion of glazed balustrade to first floor of Townhouse A Garden Street balcony to a solid masonry balustrade;

§ The deletion of mechanical exhaust requirement for internal ensuite to Townhouse C.

§ The deletion of the ensuites including windows to one ensuite within bedrooms 2 to Townhouses A, B, C & D.

§ Window W9 to Town house A is slightly enlarged combining two windows into 1 window. 

 

Note: The above modification has already been constructed without consent.  Retrospective approval can be granted under a Section 96 application for works which have been carried out without approval provided they satisfy the relevant DCP and BCA requirements.

 

The unauthorised works were identified by Councils Building Certification & Fire Safety department and have been referred to Councils Building Regulation & Compliance department for appropriate action. Councils Regulatory Building officer has advised that the unauthorised building works do not raise any significant BCA issues. 

 

Site

 

The site is located on the western side of Garden Street, on the south western corner of Alma Road and Garden Street in Maroubra. The site is on a relatively level rectangular site and is known as Lot 15 in Deposited Plan 5542 with a frontage of 13.335m depth of 52.49m and has an overall site area of 700m2.

 

The multi dwelling house is already constructed on the site and the proposed modifications under this application have already been completed. The site adjoins the following development: 

 

§  a single storey dwelling (No.104 Garden Street) to the south;

§  a block of two-storey multi-unit housing (No.100) orienting parallel to Alma Road and directly opposite to the proposed site;

§  a block of 2 storey multi-unit housing (No. 108 Garden Street) to the South

§  To the west the site is bounded by a grassed Council reserve that connects through from Alma Road to Boyce Road. 

§  Detached single storey dwellings to the east Garden Street.

§  Detached two storey dwellings to the west of subject site at Alma Road.

 

The surrounding area is residential in nature with the eastern side of Garden Street comprised predominately of free standing dwellings (R2 Zoning) and medium density development on the western side of Garden Street (R3 Zoning) characterised by a mixture of free standing dwellings, semi detached dwellings and medium density townhouse development.

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. No submissions were received as a result of the notification process.

 

Section 96 Amendment

 

Section 96(2)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 development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all), and

 

(b) it has consulted with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body (within the meaning of Division 5) in respect of a condition imposed as a requirement of a concurrence to the consent or in accordance with the general terms of an approval proposed to be granted by the approval body and that Minister, authority or body has not, within 21 days after being consulted, objected to the modification of that consent, and

 

(c) it has notified the application in accordance with:

(i)   the regulations, if the regulations so require, or

(ii)  a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and

 

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

 

The proposal does not involve a change to the categorisation of the development as approved and it is considered that the proposed would result in a development that would remain substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted.

 

Key Issues

 

Clause 5.1          Solar access and overshadowing

Due to the east-west orientation of the subject site, the southern adjoining property at No. 104 Garden Street (a single storey dwelling house) is unavoidably overshadowed to some degree by the proposed development; however the additional overshadowing impact as a result of the modified roof profile is very minor.  The additional overshadowing will be over the roof area of no. 104 Garden Street and only a very small section of the yard at no. 106 Garden Street will be overshadowed by the proposed modification which most likely would already be overshadowed by the boundary fence.

 

The north facing living room windows at no. 104 Garden Street is already impacted by the current approval.  There is only one window during midday that will not be affected by the current approved development which is to a bedroom.  The modified development will not further impact on this north facing window.

 

In addition, the southern adjoining property will continue to receive more than 3 hours sunlight to at least 50% of the principal landscaped area on 21 June.

 

The application is considered to be acceptable in this regard given general compliance with the DCP controls.

 

Clause 5.3         Visual privacy

The terrace on the first floor level to town house D will be slightly enlarged.  The continuation of the proposed planter boxes to the southern side of the terrace will mitigate privacy impacts to the rear of the adjoining property at no. 104 Garden Street.

 

The proposed window and door modifications will not result in additional unreasonable privacy impacts to the neighbouring properties as majority of the window and door openings are deleted or reduced in size. Only W9 to Townhouse A will be amalgamated into one window as a result of the deletion of the ensuite.  This window is to a bedroom and is not much bigger than the approved window opening to this bedroom. 

 

The modifications will not result in any unreasonable privacy impacts and will comply with the above control objectives in the DCP.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4: Excellence in urban design and development.

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

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposal does not significantly alter the form and nature of the approved development. Having regard to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the proposed modifications are considered to result in a development that remains substantially the same as the development for which the consent was originally granted.

 

The proposed modifications have been assessed against relevant RLEP 2012 standards and Randwick DCP 2013 controls and are considered to be acceptable.  Approval of the modifications are considered acceptable as they will not result in any significant environmental impact on neighbouring properties in terms of privacy and overshadowing; and will not detract from the integrity of the development nor its relationship with adjoining development.

 

It is therefore considered that the modifications to the original development consent are reasonable.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify Development No. DA/790/2010 at 102 Garden Street, Maroubra, in the following manner:

 

A.        Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

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

 

Plan

Dated

Received

Drawn by

101, Revision B 

6 June 2011

15 June 2011

Enarch Project Consultants Pty Ltd

103, Revision B 

6 June 2011

15 June 2011

104, Revision B 

6 June 2011

15 June 2011

105, Revision B 

6 June 2011

15 June 2011

106, Revision B 

6 June 2011

15 June 2011

102, Revision C

29 July 2011

29 July 2011

107, Revision C

29 July 2011

29 July 2011

111, Revision C

29 July 2011

29 July 2011

 

BASIX Certificate No.

Dated

Received by Council

334673M_02

19 February 2011

11 March 2011

 

As amended by the Section 96 ‘A’ plans

 

Plan

Dated

Received

Drawn by

102, Revision E 

20/03/2012

22 March 2012

Enarch Project Consultants Pty Ltd

104, Revision D

20/03/2012

30 March 2012

106, Revision D

20/03/2012

30 March 2012

 

only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, and as amended by the following Section 96 plans “B”:

 

Plan

Dated

Received

Drawn by

101, Revision E 

28/10/2013

1 November 2013

Enarch Project Consultants Pty Ltd

102, Revision I

28/10/2013

1 November 2013

103, Revision G

28/10/2013

1 November 2013

104, Revision F

28/10/2013

1 November 2013

105, Revision E

28/10/2013

1 November 2013

106, Revision F

28/10/2013

1 November 2013

 

BASIX Certificate No.

Dated

Received by Council

334673M_03

29 October 2013

1 November 2013

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 102 Garden Street, Maroubra (DA/790/2010/B)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D6/14

 

 

Subject:                  6 Dundas Street, Coogee (DA/400/2012/A)

Folder No:                   DA/400/2012/A

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of approved development by alteration to condition 2(d) to make the eastern ledge adjoining first floor living room a trafficable balcony  Original consent: Substantial alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including new roof, new pool at basement level, associated site and landscaping works

Ward:                      East Ward

Applicant:                Mr C Koudounaris

Owner:                         Mr C Koudounaris

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The Section 96 application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as the original application was determined by Council at its meeting of 25 June 2013. The approved development comprises alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including new roof, new pool at basement level, associated site and landscaping works.

 

Proposal

 

The subject proposal is made pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to modify Development Consent No. 400/2012. The application seeks to modify Condition No. 2 (d) which currently reads as follows:

 

d)  The eastern ledge adjoining the living room on the first floor shall be made into a non-trafficable roof to mitigate overlooking impacts on adjoining properties. Details of compliance finishes shall be submitted for the approval of Council’s Manager Development Assessments prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development.

 

The Section 96 applications seeks to amend Condition No. 2(d) to allow for part of the originally approved eastern ledge adjoining the first floor living room to be converted into a trafficable balcony by extending the approved northern section of balcony to wrap around over part of the approved non-trafficable ledge (see Figure 1 below). The proposed balcony will use the same balustrade materials as the approved section.

 

 

 

Figure 1: floor plan of existing non-trafficable ledge (edged in red) and the proposed balcony which will be a “wrap-around” extension of the approved north-facing balcony edged in blue. Proposed balcony edged in green. 

 

It should be noted that, there is currently a similar balcony in the same location as the proposed in the existing development on-site so that the proposal merely seeks to maintain the existing balcony as part of the overall approved development.

 

Consistent with the existing balcony on site, the proposed balcony extension will have the following design and dimensions:

 

·      The maximum width of the balcony will be 1.5m measured from the external east-facing wall of the living room inclusive of the proposed glass balustrade.

·      The northern edge of the balcony will be consistent with the northern edge of the balustrade of the approved balcony on the northern side of the living room such that it is proposed to suitably integrate both balconies via a “wrap-around” configuration.

·      The proposed balcony will have a glass balustrade that will be consistent in height, materials and construction with the balustrade of the approved balcony on the northern side of the first floor living room.

 

Site

 

The subject site is located on the western side of Dundas Street, at the south-eastern corner of the intersection of Dundas Street and Oberon Street. The subject site is rectangular in shape with a total site area of 497.04 sqm and a frontage to Dundas Street of 15.24m and a frontage to Oberon Street of 32.615m. The rear boundary of the subject site is elevated from street level by approximately 1.5m to 2m. The site slopes up towards the rear boundary relatively steeply. The rear of the site is terraced with a swimming pool located at the western section of the site. The site has a northern aspect. 

 

The subject site is bounded by residential uses and the design and age of dwellings in the area are varied and no predominant architectural character is exhibited. Immediately to the south is a two storey residential flat building at No. 8 Dundas Street containing 3 units; to the west is a 2 storey residential flat building at No. 242 Oberon Street; to the south on the opposite side of Oberon Street are a mix of residential flat buildings and dwelling houses and, similarly, to the east on the opposite side of Dundas Street.

 

http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview19769.png

Figure 2: Aerial photo of subject site

 

Submissions

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. The following submissions were received as a result of the notification process:

 

·      1/8 Dundas Street, Coogee

·      2/8 Dundas Street, Coogee

·      3/8 Dundas Street, Coogee

·      10 Dundas Street, Coogee

·      242 Oberon St, Coogee (from the owner of this rental property)

 

The issues raised in submissions are detailed below:      

 

·      Loss of privacy 

All objectors listed above state that Condition No 2(d) must be adhered to by the applicant in order to maintain the privacy of adjoining properties as originally intended. In particular, an objector in the adjoining southern property in unit No. 2 at 8 Dundas Street has raised concerns at the loss of privacy to a bedroom window facing the proposed balcony.  Privacy issues have been assessed in the key issues assessment section of this report which essentially finds that the proposed balcony will not have any adverse loss of privacy impacts in that:

 

·      The proposal effectively seeks to maintain an existing balcony in the same location on-site which currently has minimal privacy impacts. It would be unreasonable to refuse the proposed balcony given the existence of a similar balcony in the existing development on-site and given that the proposed balcony will have similar minimal loss of privacy impacts to adjoining properties. 

 

·      The proposed balcony is oriented east and north-east where views of Coogee Bay and the Pacific Ocean are available such that any view into the internal habitable space of the objector’s property will be a view oriented back towards the objector’s property (that is, against the expected east-looking view corridors to the ocean) and at an angle. This combination of the contra-view lines and off-setting angle of view mitigates any overlooking of the objector’s habitable spaces from the proposed balcony.  

 

·      The objector’s dwelling unit (unit 2) at 8 Dundas Street has an east-looking front balcony that overlooks the applicant’s balcony so that a degree of mutual overlooking exists between the two properties. In this context, it would be unreasonable to refuse the proposed balcony given that the proposal merely adopts an existing balcony arrangement that already characterises the area.

 

·      A condition will be applied to increase the separation distance of the southern edge of the proposed balcony by 750mm to further mitigate any potential overlooking into the adjoining property.  

 

The existing balcony currently overlooks the front terrace of the ground floor unit at No 1 / 8 Dundas Street. The retention of the existing balcony under the subject Section 96 proposal will not increase overlooking of this unit.

 

·      Objector at 2/8 Dundas Street not notified.

A claim has been made that no notification of the original DA was sent to the owner of unit No 2/8 Dundas Street. Council records indicate that a notification letter was sent to the owner/resident of this property on 12 November 2013. Notwithstanding this, an e-mail has now been received from the owner/resident of this property and concerns raised in this submission have been addressed in the Executive Summary Report and Compliance Report.

 

·      Increase in visual bulk and scale  and non-compliance with controls

All objectors listed above, have raised concerns regarding visual bulk and scale. The proposed balcony will look similar to an existing balcony on-site which has a glazed balustrade. The proposal will not require the construction of any vertical or horizontal walled elements so that there will be no increase in visual bulk and scale. When viewed from the street and adjoining properties, the proposal will present as a typical balcony and will not appear as visually intrusive or dominant in the streetscape. Accordingly, objectors’ concerns are not considered valid and do not form valid grounds for refusal of the application.

 

Key Issues

 

Visual bulk and scale

The proposal is assessed against the objectives of the building height control in the Randwick DCP 2013 (shown in bold below) as follows:

 

§ To ensure development height establishes a suitable scale to the street and contributes to its character.

The proposal effectively is for the installation of a balcony that already exists in the same location on-site. The proposal will not involve the erection of any walls and proposes the use of glazed balustrades which will not result in any increase in visual bulk and scale as shown in the Figure 3 below. The proposed balcony will provide additional articulation to the east elevation which will further assist in reducing visual bulk and scale of the overall approved development.

 

Figure 3 : Visual bulk and scale comparison of proposed balcony under the approved proposal and under the Section 96 modification.

 

§ To ensure development height does not cause unreasonable impacts upon the neighbouring dwellings in terms of overshadowing, view loss, privacy and visual amenity.

As discussed in relevant sections of this report, the proposed balcony will not cause unreasonable impacts on neighbouring dwellings in terms of overshadowing, view loss, privacy and visual amenity.

 

§ To ensure the form and massing of development respect the topography of the site.

The proposed balcony will be retained within the building envelope approved over the existing sloping site. Accordingly, the form and massing of the approved development remains intact and respects the topography of the subject site.

 

Visual and acoustic privacy

Section 5.3 of the DCP stipulates the following relevant control for privacy:

§ Focus upper floor balconies to the street or rear yard of the site. Any elevated balconies or balcony returns on the side facade must have a narrow width to minimise privacy impacts on the adjoining properties.

The proposed balcony will face Dundas Street with its elongated section orientated towards the ocean views to the north-east and east. This orientation away from adjoining residential properties will minimise loss of privacy impacts to these properties. As stated above, the proposed balcony seeks to reinstate a similar balcony currently existing on-site as shown in the first photo in Figure 4 below which was taken from the bedroom window of the objector’s property in the adjoining Unit No. 2/8 Dundas Street. As can be seen, the existing and proposed balcony has its longer exposed side facing Dundas Street and the ocean and Coogee Bay beyond while the shorter (1.5m) southern edge faces the objector’s window. The proposal seeks to maintain this balcony which the current DA approval has replaced with a non-trafficable ledge.   

 

Acoustic privacy will be controlled by the fact that the proposed balcony will be a maximum 1.5m wide inclusive of the balustrade which will restrict any large crowd gathering on the balcony.

Figure 4: The existing balcony viewed from the habitable room window of No 2 / 8 Dundas Street and comparison with proposed balcony.

 

§ Where a balcony, deck or terrace is likely to overlook the private open space or windows of the adjacent dwellings, privacy screens must be installed in positions suitable to mitigate the loss of privacy. Privacy screens must be permanently fixed and have a minimum height of not less than 1600mm as measured from the finished floor level. Privacy screens must achieve a minimum of 70% opaqueness and may be constructed with:

§ Translucent or obscured glazing

§ Fixed timber or metal slats mounted horizontally or vertically

§ Fixed vertical louvres with the individual blades oriented away from the private open space or windows of the adjacent dwellings

The proposal seeks to maintain an existing balcony that, as described above, has its main length orientated towards Dundas Street and the ocean and Coogee Bay and, as such, has no privacy screen on its shorter southern width facing the adjoining residential flat building at No 8 Dundas Street. It is not considered necessary to require the installation of a screening device under the proposed scheme as the balcony is primarily orientated towards the street and ocean views. Furthermore, the angle of view and slightly elevated position of the objector’s window makes it difficult to look into the objector’s window directly from both the existing balcony and the proposed balcony (see Photo 1 below).

 

Photo 1: The existing balcony (which the proposal seeks to retain) in relation to the existing first floor window of Unit 2 / 8 Dundas Street, and in relation to the east-facing balcony of Unit 2 and the ground floor terrace of Unit 1 below.

 

In this regard the applicant’s SEE states as follows:

  

 

This advice is considered reasonable and acceptable and accords with the objective of the Randwick DCP for visual privacy under Low Density Residential development which reads as follows:

 

§ To ensure development minimise overlooking or cross-viewing to the neighbouring dwellings to maintain reasonable levels of privacy.

In order to further mitigate any potential overlooking into the adjoining property, a condition will be applied to increase the separation distance of the southern edge of the proposed balcony to the objector’s property by requiring this southern edge to be setback 750mm from the rear southern building line of the existing building.

 

It should be noted that the existing balcony already overlooks the front terrace of the ground floor unit of No 1 / 8 Dundas Street so that the installation of the proposed balcony will not increase overlooking of this unit.

 

In summary, the proposed balcony is considered to comply with the relevant privacy controls and meets the objectives for privacy contained in the Randwick DCP 2013. 

 

·          View Sharing

Section 5.6 of the DCP stipulates the following relevant control for view sharing:

 

§ The location and design of dwellings and outbuildings must reasonably maintain existing view corridors or vistas from the neighbouring dwellings, streets and public open space areas.

The proposal has a location and design that will not affect any view corridors or vistas from neighbouring dwellings, streets and open spaces. The proposed balcony will be similar to an existing balcony in the same location which currently has no impacts on views to adjoining properties.

 

§ Adopt a balanced approach to privacy protection and view sharing, and avoid the creation of long and massive blade walls or screens that obstruct views from the neighbouring dwellings and the public domain.

The proposal does not involve the erection of any blade walls. It seeks only to retain the existing balcony and continue the enjoyment of views to the ocean under the proposed approved scheme and, in doing so, also maintain the privacy of adjoining and neighbouring dwellings. Accordingly, the proposal has adopted a balanced approach to privacy protection and view sharing.

 

§ To acknowledge the value of views to significant scenic elements, such as ocean, bays, coastlines, watercourses, bushland and parks; as well as recognised icons, such as city skylines, landmark buildings / structures and special natural features.

 

§ To ensure development is sensitively and skillfully designed to maintain a reasonable amount of views from the development, neighbouring dwellings and the public domain.

The proposal maximises views of the ocean and horizon from the proposed balcony while maintaining the value of these views to the neighbouring property. The proposed balcony will be similar to an existing balcony in the same location which currently has no impacts on view loss to adjoining properties.

 

Accordingly, the proposed balcony, given the circumstances, currently exists in a manner that does not obstruct significant views of the ocean from adjoining properties and, therefore, accords with these objectives of the Randwick DCP.

 

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 is considered acceptable as it will not result in unacceptable impacts to the adjoining properties. In particular, the privacy and views of adjoining properties will remain unaffected by the proposed balcony. There will also be no increase in the visual bulk and scale of the overall approved development

 

The proposed modifications have been assessed against relevant RLEP 2012 standards and Randwick DCP 2013 controls and do not result in any further variations to these standards and controls beyond that already assessed under the approved DA proposal.

 

The proposed modification to the original consent satisfies Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, in that it will constitute substantially the same development.

 

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/400/2012 by alterating condition No 2(d) to allow the use of the approved eastern ledge adjoining first floor living room for a balcony at 6 Dundas Street, Coogee, in the following manner:

 

A       Amend Condition No. 2(d) to read:

(d)             Part of the non-trafficable eastern ledge adjoining the living room on the  first floor can be a trafficable balcony with the following configuration:

 

·      The maximum width of the balcony shall be 1.5m measured from the external east-facing wall of the living room inclusive of the proposed glass balustrade.

 

·      The southern edge of the balcony shall be setback by 750mm from the southern rear building line of the existing dwelling house.

 

·      The northern edge of the balcony shall be no greater in length than the northern edge of the balustrade of the approved balcony on the northern side of the living room and shall be suitably integrated with this approved balcony.

 

·      The proposed balcony shall have glass balustrade that will be consistent in height, materials and construction with the balustrade of the approved balcony on the northern side of the first floor living room.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 6 Dundas Street, Coogee (DA/400/2012/A)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D7/14

 

 

Subject:                  470 Bunnerong Road, Matraville (DA/845/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/845/2013

Author:                   Plandev Pty Ltd, Thomas Mithen     

 

Proposal:                     Change of use of the existing premises to a learning centre

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                Mrs E Jacobs

Owner:                         Mr M N D'Souza

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval – subject to conditions

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive Summary Report

 

The development application has been assessed by an external consultant and referred to the Planning Committee as the owner of the subject site is a Randwick City Councillor.

 

Proposal

 

The development application seeks approval to use the existing shop as a learning centre. The proposed learning centre will provide a tutoring service by qualified teachers for primary and secondary school students primarily in maths and English subjects and also some HSC subjects.

 

The proposed hours of operation are:

 

·      8:00am to 7:00pm Monday to Friday

·      7:30am to 5:00pm Saturdays; and

·      10:00am to 4:00pm Sundays

 

The peak usage times are generally between 3:30pm and 5:00pm on a weekday. The arrival of students is staggered with generally between 5-10 students arriving at 3:30pm and 10 students arriving at 5:00pm. The duration of a tutoring lesson is between 45 minutes and one hour. Prior to 3.30pm on a weekday there are generally a maximum of 2 permanent staff on the site undertaking administration activities. On weekends the arrival of students is spread out during the day with generally 3-4 students on the site at any one time. 

 

The learning centre employs two full time staff and 20 part time tutors however, generally a maximum of 3-4 staff will be on the site at any one time.

 

The proposal does not involve any building works except for the installation of computer work stations, low height partitions and furniture. There will be no change to existing floorspace or the overall built form of the building.

 

Parking for 2 vehicles is available at the rear of the shop accessed from the laneway.

 

Proposed signage is to comprise awning fascia signage (5.7m x 0.4m) and a painted identification sign on the shopfront (1.85m x 2.1m) and entry door (1.75m x 2.4m).

 

Site

 

The site is located on the western side of Bunnerong Road, approximately 100m south of Beauchamp Road in the Matraville Local centre.

 

The site contains a 2 storey commercial building with a shop at ground level and residence above (refer to Figure 1).

 

The shop was previously used for storage purposes.

 

The first floor residence is used for storage purposes by the landowner of the building. There is separate access from Bunnerong Road to the first floor of the building.

 

The adjoining property to the south also contains a 2 storey commercial building with a ground floor shop used as a hairdressing salon. The adjoining property to the north contains a single storey commercial building used as a chemist.

 

The site has rear lane access. Land to the west across the laneway contains residential development.

 

Figure 1 – The subject site (white coloured 2 storey building)

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. There were no submissions received as a result of the notification process:

 

Key Issues

 

Amenity Impacts

The proposed learning centre will operate generally within standard business hours and the nature of the business (for tutoring purposes) is considered to be a low key activity.

 

The number of staff and students on the site at any one time will generally be limited to a maximum of 10 and there is not likely to be any significant adverse pedestrian movements or people noise as a result of the proposed use.

 

The proposed use will not result in any adverse noise impacts to the surrounding area.

 

Signage

The proposed signage satisfies the objectives of the Outdoor Advertising DCP; which are to ensure that signage is in keeping with the scale and character of the building to which it is attached and does not detract from the architectural style or features of the building.

 

The outdoor advertising which is proposed relates to the existing and desired character of the Matraville local centre and will not contribute significantly to the visual complexity of the streetscape. The proposed signage relates to and identifies the use of the building to which it is to be attached to and will not obscure any existing architectural features to the existing building.

 

The proposed signage is therefore acceptable.  

 

Parking

The proposed use is classified as business/retail and therefore a rate of 1 space per 40m2 applies in accordance with Council’s DCP 2012.

 

The shop has a gross floor area of 104m2 which generates a requirement for 3 car spaces.

 

The subject site has a rear yard with insufficient area to accommodate 3 car spaces for staff. It is recommended that 2 spaces be provided so that there is adequate area for waste storage.

 

It is noted that there is a public bus stop 40m south of the shop on Bunnerong Road which will encourage the use of public transport.

 

On-street parking is available along Bunnerong Road at the front of the premises which is restricted to one hour.

 

The proposal is therefore acceptable in regard to parking.

 

Mobility and Access

The existing shopfront has a small step (approx. 600mm) at the front of the shop. There will be no at-grade access for people in a wheelchair. Council’s DCP controls require entries that are flush with the footpath or a ramp as an alternative. However, the controls relate to new development and refurbishment of shops. The proposal is for a change of use which involves installation of low height partitions and furniture and therefore does not constitute a refurbishment. In any event the provision of a ramp as an alternative would remove some of the useable internal floorspace and have an adverse impact on the internal layout. It is noted that the adjoining shops also do not provide at-grade access through the front entry due to floor level constraints.

 

The proposal is acceptable in regard to mobility and access. 

 

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 learning centre is a low key activity which involves tutoring of students in a generally quiet environment. The number of students and staff on the site at any one time is generally limited to a maximum of 10. The proposal will, therefore, not result in any adverse amenity impacts to the surrounding area.

 

The site is located 40m from a public bus stop on Bunnerong Road which will encourage the use of public transport. Notwithstanding, the provision of 2 car spaces in the rear of the shop will satisfy Council’s parking requirements.

 

The proposed use will assist in activating the retail strip and add to the vibrancy of the commercial area. The proposed development will provide an important educational tutoring service to improve the learning outcomes for children in the local community. The proposed use is therefore in the public interest. 

 

The proposal is, therefore, suitable for approval subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

 That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No.845/2013 for use of the existing shop as a learning centre, at No. 470 Bunnerong Road, Matraville, subject to the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report attached to this report.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 470 Bunnerong Road, Matraville (DA/845/2013)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

  


Planning Committee                                                                                          11 February 2014

 

 

Miscellaneous Report No. M1/14

 

 

Subject:                  15 Seaside Parade, South Coogee (DA/529/2013 - Deferred)

Folder No:                   DA/529/2013

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Major Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The subject application seeks approval for construction of a timber deck over an existing swimming pool to the rear of an existing dwelling, access stairs from deck to foreshore and timber cladding around sides of remnant of pool.

 

The application was reported to the Planning Committee Meeting held on 3 December 2013. At the meeting, it was resolved:

 

“RESOLUTION: (Smith/Mayor, Cr Nash) that the application be deferred in accordance with the applicant’s request”.

 

Issues

 

Four (4) submissions raising further objections were presented to the Council Meeting on 3 December 2013 from the following objectors:

 

13 Seaside Parade, South Coogee

Maddocks Lawyers (on behalf of No. 19 Seaside Parade and No 13 Seaside Parade)

21 Seaside Parade

39 Liguria Street, South Coogee

 

Additionally, the applicant has provided an additional submission dated 20 January 2014 to address the concerns of the objectors. The submission includes an amendment to replace the proposed timber cladding with a painted finish on the southern wall of the existing disused swimming pool. As the proposed amendment to the southern wall of the existing swimming pool comprised an improvement to the development that addressed concerns raised by objectors, the proposed amended DA  was not required to be renotified.

 

The issues raised by the objectors are assessed as follows:

 

·      The objector states that the existing swimming pool encroaches the objector’s property at No 19 Seaside Parade by 0.06mm on the western side and is built on the boundary such that the proposed timber cladding along the south elevation would result in an encroachment onto No 19 Seaside Parade.

 

Comment: To avoid encroaching the objector’s property, the applicant has advised in his submission that the originally proposed timber cladding along the south elevation will be replaced with a paint finish to the existing rendered façade. The proposed use of a paint finish along the existing southern wall of the swimming pool is considered reasonable for the following reasons:

 

·      The use of a suitably coloured and textured paint finish will maintain the visual quality of the foreshore in that it will complement and visual qualities and natural elements of the coastal area in the same way that the use of painted rendered finish in adjoining and surrounding properties complements the area (see Photos 1 & 2 below).  Accordingly, the use of a paint finish on the existing rendered surface is not considered to be incongruous or incompatible with the existing visual qualities of the foreshore scenic protection area. There are numerous existing examples of rendered and painted structures in the foreshore area that are not detrimental to the aesthetic qualities of the foreshore area.

Photo 1: Existing southern façade of the adjoining northern property at No 13 Seaside Parade that has a rendered and paint-finished wall built to the common boundary and directly adjacent to the existing natural ravine.

Photo 2: Existing southern façade of the adjoining northern property at No 13 Seaside Parade that has a rendered and paint-finished wall built to the common boundary and directly adjacent to the existing natural ravine.

 

·      The proposal will retain the use of timber cladding elements on the eastern façade of the existing swimming pool facing the ocean and the northern façade facing the ravine which will complement the natural rock face elements of the subject site. In effect, the proposal will continue to apply light-toned timber cladding to the unsightly, exposed wall of the dilapidated swimming pool on the east and north elevations.

 

·      Council’s assessment has failed to consider Clause 4.1 (vi) of the Randwick DCP 2013 relating to the size and configuration of balconies, decks and terraces

 

Clause 4.1(vi) of the Randwick DCP 2013 states as follows:

 

·      Balconies, terraces and decks must be of a size and configuration that are appropriate to the proportions of the building without excessively increasing its visual bulk.

 

The applicant has chosen to re-use the existing swimming pool as a deck and seeks to apply a flat timber deck over it, as well as, cladding and rendering its sides to improve its visual presentation in the foreshore. The proposed deck is considered to be appropriate to the proportions of the building and is not considered to be excessive in visual bulk especially given that there are a large number of existing decks and terraces in the rear yard of adjoining and nearby properties that are comparable in scale and size.

 

·      Council’s assessment has failed to consider Clause 5.3 (vi) of the Randwick DCP 2013 relating to the amenity impacts arising from the size of decks and terraces on sloping sites

 

Clause 5.3(vi) of the Randwick DCP 2013 states as follows:

 

·      For sloping sites, any ground floor decks or terraces must step down in accordance with the landform, and avoid expansive areas of elevated outdoor recreation space.

 

The size and configuration of the proposed deck is determined to a degree by the shape and size of the swimming pool which the applicant seeks to retain and re-use. The existing swimming pool extends over a steep drop in the land and is located adjacent to a deep ravine. In this context, the expectation to demolish the pool and replace it with stepped terraces is considered unreasonable especially given that the proposed deck will not result in any adverse amenity impacts in terms of privacy, view loss, overshadowing and visual bulk and scale as assessed in the Executive Summary Report and Compliance Report. The proposed deck is not considered to be expansive in area compared to existing decks and terraces in the surrounding foreshore area.

 

·      Council’s assessment has failed to consider the provisions of Section B10, Part B – General controls of the Randwick DCP 2013 relating to impacts on the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area.

 

The proposal has been assessed in accordance with Clause 6.7 of the Randwick LEP 2012 and the proposal has been found to satisfy the relevant provisions of clause 6.7(3)(a) and (b). The Compliance Report has been amended to include specific reference to, and assessment of, the objectives and controls in Section B10 (Foreshore Scenic Protection Area) of the Randwick DCP 2013 as follows:

 

B10 Table:  Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

DCP Clause

Controls

Proposal

Compliance

i)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ii)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iii)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iv)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The design of buildings must consider their visual presentation to the surrounding public domain, including streets, lanes, parks, reserves, foreshore walkways and coastal areas. All elevations visible from the public domain must be articulated.

 

       

 

 

Outbuildings and ancillary structures must be integrated with the design of the main dwelling in a coherent architectural expression. They must not present as temporary or make-shift structures, nor constructed with non-durable, low quality materials.

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

The exterior colour scheme must complement the natural elements in the coastal areas. The colour palette must predominantly consist of light toned neutral hues.

 

       

 

 

 

High reflective glass in windows and doors visible from the public domain not be used

 

 

 

 

Finishing materials to buildings must be capable of properly withstanding deterioration and weathering accelerated by the coastal conditions.

 

 

Plant species selected for landscaping must be capable of withstanding the exposed and windy coastal environment. Professional landscape advice must be obtained in the selection of species.

 

Adequate soil depth must be reserved around buildings for gardens and soft landscaping purposes.

 

Any exposed coping structures of swimming and spa pools must be minimised and screened from view from the public domain.

 

 

 

Any rock outcrops, shelves and large boulders must be retained on the site and integrated into the landscape design.

 

       

 

 

 

 

Any retaining walls within the foreshore area (that is, encroaching upon the Foreshore Building Line) must be constructed or clad with sandstone

 

 

 

To protect the natural landscape qualities and aesthetic appeal of the foreshore areas.

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To encourage high quality designs for dwellings that are sensitive and sympathetic to the natural landform, colours and landscape character of the foreshore areas.

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To retain and provide an ambient landscape that is suitable to the coastal conditions and enhances the scenic qualities of the foreshore.

The proposal is not for alteration or rebuilding of the existing building. Notwithstanding this, the proposal has considered the visual presentation to the foreshore scenic protection in its use of material; its low scale nature.

 

The proposed deck and staircase will integrate well with the existing dwelling house on-site utilising the existing swimming pool structure in a way that upgrades its appearance so that it has a coherent architectural link to the main dwelling as it always has while enhancing its presentation in the foreshore scenic area.  

 

The use of timber cladding on the northern and eastern sides of the swimming pool and the timber construction of the staircase accords with the use of  natural elements in the coastal setting.

 

A condition requiring the reflectivity of finishes and materials to be minimised will be applied as part of any consent.

 

A condition requiring a schedule of suitable external materials and finishes will be applied which will verify weather proofing.

 

The proposal does not include landscaped works.  

 

 

 

 

 

The proposal does not include landscaped works.

 

 

The proposal seeks to enhance the visual presentation of a disused pool while reusing it for a timber deck.

 

The proposal will minimise disturbance to the existing rock face and outcrops and in the ravine with only the base of the staircase and supporting column breaching the rock base.

 

The walled elements encroaching the Foreshore Building Line are not retaining walls but walls to an existing disused swimming that will be cladded with timber on the northern and eastern sides.

 

The proposal will maintain the visual quality of the foreshore in that the proposed deck over the swimming pool and access staircase will be constructed in timber which will complement and protect the natural elements of the coastal area. Additionally, the proposal will retain the natural rock face elements of the subject site which will still form an important part of the subject site’s natural landscaped environment.

 

The proposal does not involve the alteration or rebuilding of the existing building on-site. However, as indicated in the Executive Summary report and Compliance Report, the proposal will use materials and finishes that will be sensitive and sympathetic to the natural landform, colours and landscape character of the foreshore area and will significantly improve the aesthetic appearance of the proposal in relation to the foreshore

 

The proposal does not include landscaped works.

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.A.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.A.

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.A.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.A.

 

 

 

·      Council’s assessment has failed to consider each of the matters for consideration under clause 6.6 Foreshore Building Line, sub-clause (3), (a)-(h).

 

The following assessment of each matter for considerations under clause 6, sub-clause (3) is made:

 

(a)      the development will contribute to achieving the objectives for the zone in which the land is located are as follows:

The relevant objectives of the zone Residential R2 in which the land is located are as follows:  

 

·      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.

 

The proposed deck and staircase are permissible and comprise outdoor elements that are typical in the rear of properties on the eastern side of Seaside Parade overlooking the sea. As such, the proposal will be consistent with other decks, terraces, pathways and stairs in adjoining and surrounding properties. The proposal will not result in increased visual bulk and scale and, given its location to the rear of the subject site, will not be readily visible in the streetscape. The proposal will deliver a development that will be compatible with the predominant and desired character of the locality. Additionally, the effect of the proposal on the amenity of neighbouring sites, as discussed in the Executive Summary report and Compliance Report, is considered to be acceptable.

 

(b)      the appearance of any proposed structure, from both the waterway and adjacent foreshore areas, will be compatible with the surrounding area, and

The proposal, essentially, is for the construction of an elevated timber and concrete deck with access stairway to the foreshore, and is suitable for the subject site and locality given the large number of decks, terraces and balconies some with associated swimming pool in adjoining and surrounding properties.  Accordingly, the proposed deck is a typical type of development along the coastline and foreshore area. The proposed works are considered to result in significant visual improvements to the applicant’s rear yard and private open space which is currently in a dilapidated and run-down state adjacent to an existing ravine within the subject site. More importantly, the proposal will have minimum physical intrusion into the existing ravine being confined primarily to the concrete deck extension and the staircase.

 

(c)       the development will not cause environmental harm such as:

 

(i)  pollution or siltation of the waterway, or

The proposed timber deck, staircase and concrete slab are considered works of a moderate scale and impact to improve the amenity of the applicant’s rear yard that will not generate any pollution or siltation of the existing ravine subject to adherence to appropriate conditions governing construction management. 

 

 

(ii)  an adverse effect on surrounding uses, marine habitat, wetland areas, flora or fauna habitats, or

The proposed timber deck and staircase and concrete slab are considered to be moderate in scale and impact intended to improve the amenity of the applicant’s rear yard such that it will not result in any adverse impacts on surrounding uses, marine habitat, wetland areas, flora or fauna habitats subject to adherence to appropriate conditions governing construction management. 

 

(iii)  an adverse effect on drainage patterns, and

Council’s development engineer raises no objections to the proposal in relation to drainage subject to a condition requiring a Structural Engineers Report which addresses the structural integrity of the deck and supporting columns and confirm they will not be affected by the stormwater flow/discharge from Council’s pipeline into the watercourse as well as not being affected by wave action from the ocean.

 

(d)      the development will not cause congestion or generate conflicts between people using open space areas or the waterway, and

The subject site, together with the adjoining allotments on the same side of Seaside Parade, are existing private properties that incorporate private sections of the foreshore (up to Mean High Water mark). Accordingly, the proposed deck and staircase will be located on private land and will be for private use. As no public access is available to the foreshore through these properties from the street front, the proposal will not cause congestion or generate conflicts between people using open space areas or the waterway.

 

 

(e)      opportunities to provide continuous public access along the foreshore and to the waterway will not be compromised, and

As with (d) above, the proposed deck and staircase will be located on private land and will be for private use such that no public access is available to the foreshore and water through these properties from the street front. As such, opportunities to provide continuous public access along the foreshore and to the waterway will not be compromised.

 

(f)       any historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic significance of the land on which the development is to be carried out and of surrounding land will be maintained, and

The land does not have any historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, and architectural significance. However, being in the foreshore, it forms part of a natural and aesthetically significant land form and feature. In recognition of this, the proposal will be constructed in timber with a minor concrete landing for the slab and staircase base to complement the natural qualities of the ravine and the overall foreshore. The staircase and decks are outdoor access and recreational elements (and not solid building structures) that are considered to be consistent and in character with the many outdoor decks, terraces and pathways/steps in the adjoining and surrounding properties.

 

(g)      in the case of development for the alteration or rebuilding of an existing building wholly or partly in the foreshore area, the alteration or rebuilding will not have an adverse impact on the amenity or aesthetic appearance of the foreshore, and

The proposal is not for alteration or rebuilding of the existing building.

 

(h)      sea level rise or change of flooding patterns as a result of climate change has been considered.

The swimming pool is an existing structure located well above the applicable Mean High Water mark of the subject site. The proposed timber deck will sit atop this existing structure such that any changes in sea level and/or flooding patterns largely will be an impact upon the pre-existing swimming pool structure below. Accordingly, the proposal is not a new and major redevelopment that will be affected by sea level rise. Notwithstanding this, the impact of any potential flooding and/or wave action on the proposed staircase will be addressed by a condition requiring the structural integrity of the deck and supporting columns and staircase.

 

·      Council’s assessment appears to be inconsistent with findings of a previous refused DA (DA/465/2012) in relation to impacts on the foreshore.

As indicated in the Executive Summary Report and Compliance Report, the current DA proposal has been assessed as acceptable and reasonable in relation to the impacts on the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. It differs from the previously refused DA (DA/465/2012) in the following respects:

 

·      The current DA proposes an improvement to the visual presentation of the existing disused pool structure involving the use of timber cladding and painted finishes having regard to the foreshore setting. Reference to the need for an improvement to appearance of the swimming pool was made in the assessment of the previously refused DA where the following comment was made:

 

“It is noted that there is an existing swimming pool at the lower level of the property which is in a somewhat dilapidated state and the existence of the swimming pool is noted as being historic. It is not an unreasonable assumption that this swimming pool and access to the swimming pool could be renovated in a sensitive manner which would not only improve the appearance of the swimming pool in this sensitive location, but also improve the amenity of the occupants by enabling this swimming pool to be again used for recreation purposes.”

 

The current proposal has, in principle, adopted this approach by including a suitable treatment to the façade of the swimming pool structure albeit for a new deck and not for a refurbished swimming pool. In short, the current proposal achieves two desirable outcomes contemplated in the previous DA as mentioned in the above extract – improvement to the appearance of the swimming pool structure and re-use of the structure for recreational purposes.   

 

·      The current DA proposes to cover only the existing swimming pool with a timber deck whereas the refused DA proposed a significantly larger deck covering both the pool and the adjacent ravine with a 900mm setback from the adjoining northern property as well as an additional encroachment further into the foreshore area. The reduction in the size of the deck also resolves amenity impact concerns upon the foreshore area as well as adjoining properties as detailed in the Executive Summary Report. 

 

·      The pool should be removed because it hides an unused and dilapidated swimming pool which is an unsuitable planning outcome for maintaining forseshore scenic protection area.

The applicant has chosen to retain the pool structure and re-use the structure as a deck while enhancing the visual presentation of the existing structure to complement the visual qualities of the foreshore scenic protection area.

The proposal is considered reasonable and acceptable subject to appropriate conditions to enhance its visual presentation. The proposal will apply timber cladding to the northern and eastern sides of the unused swimming pool and a suitably coloured paint finish to the southern side will improve the visual presentation of the existing unused swimming pool. While the objector describes the proposed development as essentially “hiding an unused and dilapidated swimming pool” in describing its purported failure to satisfy the foreshore scenic protection, such a description fails to recognise the environmental merits of avoiding demolition and re-using the existing disused pool in a way that reduces building waste and enhances the existing structure albeit not as a swimming pool but as a deck.

 

·      Deferred Commencement Conditions should be imposed on any consent to ensure the structural adequacy of the pool, timber staircase and associated supporting columns. General conditions should be applied to ensure that there will be no encroachment of any structures or building works onto neighbouring properties.

A condition will be applied requiring appropriate certification for structural adequacy of the proposed decks and staircase. Any development consent issued does not authorise entry and encroachment of adjoining land during construction as reflected in standard conditions of consent regarding these matters.

 

·      Insufficient details regarding structural adequacy of the proposal

As advise in the Executive Summary Report, no engineering details are required at DA stage as these are properly dealt with at construction certification. Furthermore, it is also possible to apply standard conditions for some engineering details/certification to be undertaken as part of the construction such as those relating to geotechnical and structural adequacy. A condition requiring a Structural Engineers Report which addresses the structural integrity of the deck and supporting columns and staircase will be applied should approval be granted.

 

·      No notification sent to No 21 Seaside Parade and No. 39 Liguria Street

A claim has been made that no notification of the original DA was sent to the owner of No 21 Seaside Parade. Council records indicate that a notification letter was sent to the owner/resident of this property on 26 August 2013.

 

Additionally, the owner/resident of No 39 Liguria Street objects to not being notified of the proposed development. The proposal was notified in accordance with the Part A3 of eth Randwick DCP 2013 – Public Notification. Specifically, the Part A3 requires that:

 

“…when notifying owners of a development proposal Council will send letters to all owners within a 40m radius measured from each boundary of the development site.”

 

The use of a 40m radius accords with the objectives of public notification which is to “ensure that members of the public are adequately informed of new development proposals… that may affect them and have suitable opportunity to comment on that proposal.”

 

No 39 Liguria Street is located more than 70m from the southern boundary of the subject site which, given, its distance and context, was not required to be notified of the proposed development.

 

Notwithstanding the claims of the owner/residents of Nos 21 Seaside Parade and No 39 Liguria Street, e-mails have been forwarded via the owner of No 13 Seaside Parade and his lawyers, Maddocks Lawyers, to Council raising objections to the proposal which are addressed as follows:

 

Loss of privacy

The rear yards and east facing balconies of No 21 Seaside Parade and No 39 Liguria Street are visible from the proposed deck. Any potential overlooking is not considered unreasonable and unacceptable for the following reasons:

 

·      Decks, terraces and balconies are evident to nearly all of the properties located along this side of Seaside Parade. These decks, terraces and balconies are generally unscreened and are located to take advantage of panoramic ocean views to the east. As such, a certain level of mutual overlooking is evident and expected in the area (see Photos 1 below). In this context, the objectors’ properties will also overlook the deck and rear yard of the proposed development. Accordingly, when assessed against the relevant considerations for visual privacy, the proposed development adopts a similar arrangement that already characterises the area.

 

Photo 1: Existing overlooking opportunities from the existing swimming pool of No 15 Seaside Parade looking south-east towards the objector’s property at No 21 Seaside Parade (brown pitched roof in the middle).

 

·      As with the closer adjoining property at No 17 Seaside Parade, any view into the internal habitable space of the No 21 Seaside Parade and No 39 Liguria Street will be a view oriented back towards these objectors’ properties (that is, against the expected east-looking view corridors to the ocean) and at a longer separation distance of approximately maximum 40m and maximum 70m to the boundaries of No 1 Seaside Parade and 39 Liguria Street respectively. As with No 17 Seaside Parade, the combination of the contra-view lines and separation distances mitigates any overlooking of the objectors’ habitable spaces from the proposed deck. 

 

Overall, the proposal will meet the objectives of the visual privacy controls in the Randwick DCP 2013. In particular, it has successfully considered how to minimise overlooking or cross viewing to neighbouring dwellings and proposes a deck that is open and exposed on all sides to capture views while maintaining relative privacy to adjoining and surrounding properties. 

 

Ugly, tall, imposing size of the structure and its impact on the environment

The proposal will not increase the visual bulk and scale of the existing swimming pool structure as it predominantly will comprise flat timber decking and light frameless glass balustrades. As described in the Executive Summary Report, the proposal will significantly improve the aesthetic appearance of the proposal in relation to the foreshore by applying a light-toned timber cladding (north and east elevation) and painted finish (south elevation) to the existing unsightly, exposed wall of the dilapidated swimming pool. The construction of concrete slab will only be applied minimally as an extension to an existing rear garden concrete slab which will abut, and be at the same level as, the proposed timber deck. The objector at No 21 Seaside Parade will not see the proposed slab which being flat will have significantly less intrusive and dominant than the existing monolithic vertical slabs in adjoining developments. The proposed stair case will be constructed in timber which will be in the ravine and below street level and will be sympathetic to the natural rock environment of the existing ravine. Compared with the bulky vertical concrete slab construction of adjoining developments, the proposed staircase is considered reasonable and acceptable.

 

Loss of views

The impact on existing views from the balconies of No 21 Seaside Parade and No. 39 Liguria Street are considered reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

·      the view from the objectors’ balconies across the proposed timber deck and existing pool structure comprises a distant view of Coogee Bay and the open ocean. The proposed timber deck on top of the existing pool will be essentially a flat horizontal timber floor with no upright vertical elements other than transparent frameless glass balustrades to all sides. As no solid wall structure is proposed, there will be minimal, if no, obstruction of existing views of Coogee Bay. Accordingly, the distant view of Coogee Bay and wider ocean largely will remain intact.

·      The expansive view of the Pacific Ocean from the objectors’ balconies looking east and the view of Lurline Bay looking south-east will remain unobstructed by the proposed development.

In summary, the view loss impact of the proposal to Coogee Bay looking north-east, Lurline Bay looking south-east and the ocean looking east will be negligible. Overall, the proposal will meet the objectives of the view sharing controls in the Randwick DCP 2013. In particular, the proposal has successfully considered how to minimise overlooking and cross viewing to neighbouring dwellings while providing for a deck for recreation and ocean viewing that also maintains views to adjoining properties.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

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 issues raised in the submissions to the Council meeting have been addressed and appropriate amendments to the proposal are considered reasonable and acceptable. The proposed amendments represent an improvement to the overall proposed development and support and reinforce the original DA assessment and recommendation. Accordingly, it is recommended that the non-standard conditions of development consent recommended in the Executive Summary Report be amended to include the latest proposed amendments offered by the applicant in response to objectors’ concerns.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.      That the Council is satisfied:

 

(i)     the applicant’s written request under clause 4.6(3) of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“RLEP 2012”) in respect of the development proposed in Development Application No. 529/2013 seeking to justify the contravention of the development standard for height of buildings in clause 4.3 of RLEP 2012 has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6(3); and

 

(ii)    the development proposed in Development Application No. 529/2013 will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the development standard for height of buildings in clause 4.3 of RLEP 2012 and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

 

(iii)   the concurrence of the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure under clause 4.6(4)(b) of RLEP 2012 may be assumed to the granting of  development consent to Development Application No. 529/2013 that contravenes the development standard for height of buildings in clause 4.3 of RLEP 2012.

 

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. 529/2013 for construction of a timber deck over pool to rear of existing dwelling, access stairs from deck to foreshore and timber cladding around sides of remnant of pool at No.15 Seaside Parade, South Coogee, subject to the following non standard conditions and the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report attached to this report:

 

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

Date Received

DA-01

KE Architects

September 2013

2 September 2013

DA-02

KE Architects

June 2013

20 August 2013

DA-03

KE Architects

June 2013

20 August 2013

DA-04

KE Architects

June 2013

20 August 2013

DA-05

KE Architects

June 2013

20 August 2013

 

 

Amendment of Plans and Documentation

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

 

·      The southern wall of the existing swimming pool that does not encroach the adjoining southern property at No 17 Seaside Parade shall be treated with a paint finish instead of the timber cladding.

 

·      The proposed timber cladding to the area of the pool that encroaches on the adjoining property shall be deleted.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

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

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

6.       The applicant shall submit to the Certifying Authority for approval and have approved (a copy to be forwarded to Council if not Certifying Authority) a Structural Engineers Report which addresses the issue of column supports for the deck. The report shall ensure the structural integrity of the timber deck over the existing disused swimming pool; the concrete slab deck and supporting column(s) and the staircase. The report shall also confirm that these structures will not be affected by the stormwater flow/discharge from Council’s pipeline into the watercourse as well as not being affected by wave action from the ocean.

 

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

7.       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.

 

Public Utilities

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

 

9.       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 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.

 

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.

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

14.     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

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

 

16.     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

17.     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

18.     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

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

 

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

 

Demolition Work Requirements

20.     All work and activities must be carried out in accordance with the relevant regulatory requirements and Randwick City Council policies, including:

 

·       Work Health and Safety Act 2011

·       Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation      2001

·       Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation     2001

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

·       Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·       The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

·       Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005

·          Relevant Office of Environment & Heritage / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW Guidelines.

·       Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005)

 

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

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

 

·       Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

·       Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

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

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

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

·       A Clearance Certificate or Statement, prepared by a suitably qualified person (i.e. an occupational hygienist, licensed asbestos removal contractor, building consultant, architect or experienced licensed building contractor), must be provided to Council and the Principal certifying authority upon completion of the asbestos related works which confirms that the asbestos material have been removed appropriately and the relevant conditions of consent have been satisfied.

 

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

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

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

 

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

 

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

g)   Adequate provisions must be made to ensure pedestrian safety and traffic flow during the site works and traffic control measures are to be implemented in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Roads and Traffic Manual “Traffic Control at Work Sites” (Version 4), to the satisfaction of Council.

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land, Excavations & Retaining Walls

24.     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.

 

25.     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.

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

Survey Requirements

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

 

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

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

·       as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Tree Management

29.     Approval is granted for the pruning of some of those minor, lower growing branches from the northern aspect of the mature Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) which is growing on the Seaside Avenue verge, to the south of the pedestrian entry, only where necessary in order to provide access during the course of the works, or, to avoid damage to the tree.

 

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

 

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

31.     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.

 

32.     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.

 

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.

 

33.     The use of the deck and staircase and the operation of plant and equipment thereon shall not give rise to an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

34.     The use of the deck and staircase and the operation of plant and equipment thereon shall not give rise to the transmission of a vibration nuisance or damage to other premises.

 

ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

A9      Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

A10     Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

A11     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.

A12     The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

A13     Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 15 Seaside Parade, South Coogee (DA/529/2013)

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

2.

Planning Committee Meeting Executive Report on 3/12/2013 - 15 Seaside Parade, South Coogee

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER