Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 29 April 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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chambers, First Floor 90 Avoca Street Randwick on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 at 6pm.

 

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

Prayer

Almighty God,

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

Amen”

Acknowledgement of the local indigenous people

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

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting – 25 March 2014

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council by Members of the Public

Privacy warning;

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

Urgent Business

Mayoral Minutes

MM26/14   Waiving of Fees NSW Police Force International Student Beach Soccer and Volleyball Day....................................................................................................... 1

MM27/14   Waiving of Fees - Open High School........................................................ 5

MM28/14   Council Support for International Nurses Week ......................................... 7

MM29/14   Dementia-Friendly City Program.............................................................. 9  

 

 

 

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting required)

 

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

CP43/14    87 Storey Street, Maroubra - DA/570/2013 (Deferred)............................ 11

CP44/14    1420 Anzac Parade, Little Bay (DA/547/2011/D)...................................... 15

CP45/14    30 Mirrabooka Crescent, Little Bay (DA/550/2013)................................... 23

CP46/14    225 Boyce Road, Maroubra (DA/650/2013).............................................. 33

CP47/14    203 Darley Road, Randwick - DA/603/2013............................................. 47

Director City Planning Reports (record of voting NOT required)

CP48/14    Report variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP1) and Clause 4.6 - March, 2014................................................... 57

CP49/14    Proposed Study Tour - Future Cities Program.......................................... 61

CP50/14    Reconciliation Week 2014................................................................... 65

General Manager's Reports

GM11/14    Continuation of Community Partnership with Randwick District Rugby Football Club & Request for Waiving of Banner Fees...................................................... 67

GM12/14    Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2014-15............... 71

GM13/14    CBD and South East Light Rail Project.................................................... 77

Director City Services Reports

CS5/14      Upcoming Buildings for our Community project - Coogee Senior Citizens Centre 89

CS6/14      Environmental Management - Coogee Beach.......................................... 105

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF21/14    Review of Outdoor Dining Valuation Process.......................................... 117

GF22/14    Investment Report - March 2014......................................................... 123  

Petitions

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM36/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Response to announced tree removals in Argyle Crescent........................................................................................ 133

NM37/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Shurey - Due Diligence Assessment of Raising Sea Levels Risks to the Proposed Coogee Beach Amenities Block...................................... 135

NM38/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Concern over Absence of Climate Change on G20 Conference Agenda in Brisbane........................................................... 137

NM39/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Garcia - Light Rail........................................... 139

NM40/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Moore - Opposition to Proposed Changes to Racial Vilification.................................................................................................... 141

NM41/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Stevenson - Cost of Light Rail to the ratepayers of Randwick.................................................................................................... 143

NM42/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Neilson - Concerns about public housing in the City of Randwick.................................................................................................... 145

NM43/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Winter Solstice Celebration................. 147

NM44/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Violence towards women and children... 149

NM45/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Return of "Cracker Night".................... 151

NM46/14    Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Promotion of more not-for-profit public events/festivals in Randwick City........................................................ 153  

Closed Session (record of voting NOT required)

GF23/14    Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2014-15: Confidential Fees and Charges

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

 

Closed Session (record of voting required)

CS7/14     T11/14 - Heffron Park Central West Sports Amenities Upgrade – Maroubra (record of voting required)

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

  

Notice of Rescission Motion

NR7/14      Notice of Rescission Motion from Crs Seng, Andrews & Stevenson - Update - Major Capital Works.................................................................................. 155  

 

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Mayoral Minute No. MM26/14

 

 

Subject:                  Waiving of Fees NSW Police Force International Student Beach Soccer and Volleyball Day

Folder No:                   F2014/00096

Author:                   Councillor Nash, Mayor     

 

Introduction

 

Correspondence has been received from Detective Superintendent Gavin Dengate, NSW Police, proposing to hold beach soccer and beach volleyball games at the northern end of Coogee Beach on Sunday 28 September 2014.  This is an opportunity for Police to engage with international students and promote student safety messages.

 

Issues

 

Mr. Dengate has written to invite Council to partner the NSW Police in holding this event as he has the responsibility for the safety of the international students in NSW on behalf of the Commissioner of Police.

 

The purpose of the day is to engage with international students who are living, working and studying in Randwick City and beyond.   This event was held last year and Superintendent Dengate has advised that this event went a long way to establishing stronger and more united relationships. In addition to these games they will also be providing some low key entertainment and a small number of food stalls.

 

The Police are requesting support towards staging the event and other necessary infrastructure requirements.

 

The following support has been requested:

 

Type

In-kind/

Contribution

Amount

Waiving of fees to hire northern end of Coogee Beach

In-kind

$648.16

Application Fee

In-Kind

$158.18

Reserving of 6 car spaces for VIP’s on Dolphin St car park for the day (6 spaces @ $30/day)

In-kind

$180.00

Provision of bins and event waste removal (5 bins/ $78 each)

In-kind

$390.00

Waiving of food health application fee

In-kind

$300.00

Hire of staging, sound, power

Contribution

$2,500.00

 

TOTAL

$4,176.34

 

Subject to the Council endorsing this sponsorship, a council officer will contact Coogee Beach Volleyball licensee and advise that the beach will be booked to NSW Police for the day.

Financial impact statement

 

The amount of $2,500.00 cash and $1,676.34 in-kind is required to partner this event. If the report recommendation is adopted, this amount will be funded from the 2014-15 Contingency Fund.

 

Conclusion

 

This partnership is yet another best practice example of the local Police and Randwick Council working together in partnership and in demonstrating mutual commitment towards a safer community.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

1.   Council supports the 2014 NSW Police Force International Student Beach Soccer and Volleyball Day at Coogee Beach; and

2.   Council assist with funding the event by providing $2,500.00 in contributions and $1,676.34 in-kind sponsorship ($4,176.34) to be funded from the 2014/2015 Contingency Fund.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Letter from Detective Superintendent Gavin Dengate, NSW Police.

 

 

 

 


Letter from Detective Superintendent Gavin Dengate, NSW Police.

Attachment 1

 

 



Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Mayoral Minute No. MM27/14

 

 

Subject:                  Waiving of Fees - Open High School

Folder No:                   F2004/06257

Author:                   Councillor Nash, Mayor     

 

Introduction

 

A request has been received from Ms Suzan Dickson, Principal, Open High School, Randwick, seeking the waiving of fees associated with the installation of a banner at the intersection of Anzac Parade and Bunnerong Road, Kingsford. The banner will advertise the school’s Open Day on Saturday 24 May 2014.

 

 

Issues

 

Ms Dickson has advised Council that the Open High School at Randwick caters for students unable to access their chosen language in their own school. Whilst the school’s public profile is still quite small, they would like many more people to learn about their services and by doing so, invite members of the community to visit the school. 

 

Costing as follows:

Installation and removal of banner                       $  710.00

Hire of banner poles @ $648.00 per week x 2 weeks       $1,296.00

Total                                                                                    $2,006.00

 

 

Financial impact statement

 

Should Council accept the report recommendation, the financial implication to Council is $2,006.00. There are currently sufficient funds in the 2014-15 Contingency Fund to cover this contribution.

 

Conclusion

 

It is considered that Council should vote to waive the fees associated with the installation and dismantling of the banner and that the funds be allocated from the 2014-15 Contingency Fund.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     the fees associated with the installation and dismantling of a banner and the hire of Council’s banner poles for the Open High School Randwick at the intersection of Anzac Parade and Bunnerong Road, Kingsford be waived and $2,006.00 be allocated from the 2014-15 Contingency Fund; and

 

b)     the organisers undertakes to appropriately and prominently acknowledge and    promote Council’s contribution prior to and during the Open Day.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Mayoral Minute No. MM28/14

 

 

Subject:                  Council Support for International Nurses Week

Folder No:                   F2005/00768

Author:                   Councillor Nash, Mayor     

 

Introduction

 

As the largest health care profession in the world, Nurses play an invaluable role in our community. As a mark of respect I would like to formally endorse and support International Nurses Week which runs from 6th – 12th May, 2014. International Nurses Week begins on 6th May, marked as Nurses Recognition Day, and culminates on 12th May which is the anniversary of the birth of Florence Nightingale, who is widely considered the founder of modern nursing.

 

Issues

 

Nurses are the first line of defence that patients frequently come into contact with when they are ill. As the nurse performs an assessment, they listen, gather information, make nursing diagnoses and later also make recommendations to the doctors for the care of the patient. Nurses are involved with nearly all aspects of a patient’s care, from providing comfort and hygiene to administering injections, updating medical records, as well as many therapeutic and diagnostic procedures and processes.

 

It is impossible to put a value on the worth of nurses to our community. Nurses are the human component in the healthcare delivery system, uniquely prepared to reach out to those in need. Nurses fill the void of human caring created by clinical environments. As the most trusted profession in the world, nurses are there for those in pain, suffering and fear.

 

There are currently over two hundred nurses within the private and public health facilities in Randwick City who provide compassionate care and healing in our community and even more nurses will be needed in the future to meet the increasingly complex needs of healthcare consumers and the aging population in this community. The safe and quality healthcare services provided by nurses will be an ever more important component of our nation’s future healthcare delivery system.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

On behalf of Randwick City Council and our community, I would like to thank all our nurses for their hard work, dedication and compassion to those who need it the most.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council formally endorse and support International Nurses Week which runs from 6th – 12th May, 2014 to honour our nurses who strive to provide safe and high quality patient care and help to improve our healthcare system.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Mayoral Minute No. MM29/14

 

 

Subject:                  Dementia-Friendly City Program

Folder No:                   F2008/00556

Author:                   Councillor Nash, Mayor     

 

Introduction

 

Introduction

 

On Thursday 3 April, I was pleased to officially open the Creating Dementia-Friendly Communities Workshop.  Held in partnership with Alzheimer’s Australia NSW at the Prince Henry Centre, Little Bay, the workshop was attended by local government representatives, policy makers, academics and service providers.

 

I had the pleasure of welcoming Ita Buttrose, the Ambassador and President of Alzheimer’s Australia, and special guest speaker Rachel Litherland, UK expert in building dementia-friendly communities.

 

 

Issues

 

For the past 6 years the Council has been delivering information forums to its residents, in partnership with local dementia advisory services and Alzheimer’s Australia, to help reduce the social sigma associated with dementia, and help residents to access vital support programs.

 

However, given that dementia is likely to affect an increasing proportion of our aging residents, it is only appropriate that the Council augment its existing programs to increase awareness in our community.  This includes delivering training sessions in recognising symptoms of dementia and how to respond appropriately.  We should continue to work jointly with key stakeholders and specialist providers in our effort to successfully create a dementia-friendly City.

 

Council has developed the following initiatives to be delivered in 2014, focusing on training and awareness-raising:

 

§ Frontline training to council staff including customer service, libraries, Des Renford Leisure Centre, Life-savers etc

§ Mandatory information to annual All Stops to Randwick training

§ Training sessions for the Combined Chambers of Commerce and Surf Life-Saving Clubs

§ Expert guest speaker to deliver presentation at an Economic Leadership Forum and/or Councillor Briefing Session

§ Arrange for the Alzheimer’s Memory Van to attend major community events, where appropriate.

 

These events will be held in addition to the Council’s existing awareness raising forums aimed at consumer/carers living in Randwick City.

 

To date, responses to the Council’s initiatives have been overwhelmingly positive. I would therefore like to recommend that the Council implement a specific annual dementia awareness-raising program and related activities to be delivered in partnership with specialists, support providers and stakeholders. As new and different ideas are identified over time, each yearly program can be tailored in such a way to ensure the most appropriate, effective and up-to-date initiatives and programs are embraced and publicised to the wider community.  We need to continue to fight to end the unfortunate stigma associated with dementia.

 

To this end, I suggest that a sum of $7,000 be allocated on an annual basis to deliver the Council’s proposed training events and activities, to become a “dementia-friendly” City.

 

 

Financial impact statement

 

The cost of running an annual program to promote a “dementia-friendly” City is $7,000.  This amount will cover the costs associated with delivering this program e.g. promoting, advertising and venue hire.

 

Conclusion

 

We have an ageing population, and as such, we can expect that an increasing number of Australians will be affected by dementia.  As a responsible Council, it is important that we take the necessary steps to make our community safer and welcoming for everyone. This is particularly so for people with dementia because they often withdraw from activities they used to enjoy out of fear of the social stigma associated with this condition.

 

Therefore it is important for the broader community to know how to respond to and communicate with people living with dementia. Having this knowledge helps to reduce stigma and is an important first step towards becoming a dementia-friendly City.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the Council endorse:

 

a)   the delivery of a specific “dementia-friendly” city training program, and associated activities on an annual basis;

b)   the provision of $7,000 on an annual basis, commencing from the 2014/15 financial year.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP43/14

 

 

Subject:                  87 Storey Street, Maroubra - DA/570/2013 (Deferred)

Folder No:                   DA/570/2013

Author:                   Matthew Choi, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

 

Introduction:

 

The subject application seeks to legitimise the use of an existing secondary dwelling at the rear of the site.

 

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

 

Resolution: (Roberts/Stavrinos) that the application be deferred for the submission of amended plans and mediation with the neighbours.

 

Mediation Proceedings:

 

A mediation session was held on 13 November 2013 between the owner of the subject site and the objector from no. 29 Hannan Street, Maroubra. During the course of the mediation it was established that the objectors’ submission was not intended as an objection rather it was seeking clarification on the previously approved works to the secondary dwelling and the current application. The objector was given the opportunity to view the previously approved plans and raised no objection to the proposed development.

 

The applicant also provided amended plans to the proposal which includes the following:

 

·      Increase size of soft landscaping areas within the front setback and the eastern and western side setbacks.

 

·      Delete stairway access to the unauthorised garage rooftop and BBQ area and covert to soft landscaping.

 

·      Remove clothes line on top of the unauthorised garage rooftop.

 

Issues:

 

The proposed amendments do not adequately address the reasons for refusal that were recommended.

 

Whilst, the amendments increase the soft landscaping area to meet the minimum permeable landscaping requirements of 30%, the proposal continues to offend the purpose of the floor area standard for secondary dwellings for the following reasons

 

·      The structure does not provide any building separation from the existing dwelling to the unauthorized secondary dwelling and contributes to an increase in the level of bulk and scale and adversely impacts the appearance of the dwelling within the streetscape as viewed from Hannan Street.

 

·      The proposal exceeds the site coverage required and does not provide adequate private open space to accommodate the passive outdoor recreational needs of the occupants given the structure encroaches within the principle outdoor recreation space of the primary dwelling.

 

·      The unauthorised secondary dwelling structure is setback only 110mm from the eastern side boundary and compromises the visual amenity of the neighbouring dwelling at no. 89 Storey Street.

 

·      The unauthorised secondary dwelling structure will result in an undesirable precedent on the location, siting and size of secondary dwellings within the existing streetscape.

 

·      It is considered that the excessive size of the secondary dwelling will compete in size with the primary dwelling. As such, rather than remaining ancillary and subservient. The unauthorised extension does not achieve the intent of the floor area control for secondary 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 mediation resolved the matters in dispute between the applicant and the objector. However, the proposed amendments do not address the reasons for refusal of the development application in the first instance. The application is referred back to Council for determination.

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council, as the consent authority, refuses development consent under Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 570/2013 to legitimise the use of an existing secondary dwelling at the rear of the site at No. 87 Storey Street, Maroubra, for the following reasons:

 

·           The proposal does not satisfy Clause 22(3)(b) within the State Environmental Planning Policy for Affordable Rental Housing 2009 in that the proposal exceeds the maximum permissible floor area for secondary dwellings.

 

·          The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives and controls for site coverage as detailed in Clause 2.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan in that the subject site does not provide adequate areas for private open space in accommodating the existing dwelling house and unauthorised structures.

 

·          The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives and controls for private open space as detailed in Clause 2.5 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan in that the subject premises does not provide for contiguous private open space to accommodate the recreational needs of the occupants.

 

·          The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives and controls for side setback requirements as detailed within Clause 3.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan in that the unauthorised building works will adversely impact the amenity with respect to the visual bulk of the building as viewed from the private open space of the adjoining properties.

 

·           The proposal is not in the public interest and does not satisfy Section 79C(i)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Executive Report 87 Storey Street, Maroubra on 3 December 2013

Included under separate cover

2.

DA Compliance report - 87 Storey Street, Maroubra

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP44/14

 

 

Subject:                  1420 Anzac Parade, Little Bay (DA/547/2011/D)

Folder No:                   DA/547/2011/D

Author:                   Planning Ingenuity, Pty Ltd      

 

Proposal:                     Section 96 modification of approved development by conversion of double rooms to single rooms at eastern end of each level of new northern wing and creation of sitting area on southern side of each level, relocation of fire stairs outside building envelope, and addition of sun shading devices to new wing.

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                Thinc Projects Australia Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Norwent 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 consultant and is referred to Council as a Randwick City Council employee owns a property that adjoins the subject site and the original application was determined by Council.

 

Proposal

 

The application seeks modification of approved development by conversion of double rooms to single rooms at the eastern end of each level of the new northern wing and creation of a sitting area on the southern side of each level, relocation of fire stairs outside the building envelope, and addition of sun shading devices to the new wing.

 

Site and Surrounds

 

The subject site is Lot 48 DP 1064600 (No.1420) Anzac Parade, Little Bay as shown in Figure 2.  The site is an irregular shape with a frontage to Anzac Parade of 109 metres and a frontage to Brodie Avenue of 72.8 metres.  The total site area is 10,350 square metres.

 

The site is occupied by an aged care facility with:

 

·         a basement level containing car parking, storage and maintenance rooms, a laundry, a hydrotherapy pool and ancillary amenities;

·         three and four (4) storeys of aged care facilities including bedrooms with ensuites, common rooms for dining, lounges and recreation, a commercial kitchen (ground floor level), nursing and medical rooms; and

·         common recreational and landscaped areas.

 

The site is within the Heritage Conservation Area listed as C6 Prince Henry Hospital Site as identified in Randwick Local Environmental Plan, 2012.  There are two Heritage Items within the site being entrance gates to the former CEO’s residence (Item I178 in Randwick Local Environmental Plan, 2012) in the south west portion of the site and a sandstone shelf and cutting near the south east corner of the site (Item A6 in Randwick Local Environmental Plan, 2012).

 

Figure 2: Aerial photograph showing the location of the site.

 

Adjoining the site to the north is a four (4) storey mixed use development comprising ground floor commercial premises and residential flats above.  Immediately north east of the site fronting Brodie Avenue is the heritage item known as Henrys Trading Post and a public walkway which links Brodie Avenue to Anzac parade.

 

To the east of the site (on the opposite side of Brodie Avenue) are the heritage listed ‘Flower Wards’ which were part of the Prince Henry hospital when in operation.  These buildings are being converted into residential accommodation.

 

South east of the site there is a large multi-dwelling development featuring two (2) storey townhouses.

 

To the south west of the site is Jarrah House, a counselling and mental health facility.

 

Brodie Avenue has two trafficable lanes and unrestricted kerb side parking to both sides.  Both sides of Brodie Avenue have paved footpaths.

 

The section of Anzac Parade fronting the site has a paved footpath and four (4) trafficable lanes plus a kerb-side parking lane.  The carriageway is divided by a landscaped median strip.  The section of Anzac Parade which fronts the site contains a bus zone and a 10-minute time-limited parking between 7am and 8pm.

 

On the opposite side of Anzac Parade are single detached dwellings.

 

1.    Site History

 

On 8 November 2011 approval was granted for alterations and additions to the existing aged care facility including construction of a new 3 storey addition to the northern side of the existing building, an increase in the total number of beds from 137 to 170, reconfiguration of the internal layout, new signage and associated landscape and site works.

 

A subsequent Section 96 application was approved on 12 June 2012 for modification of the approved development by the conversion of a meeting room into a bedroom; and to convert a double room into a single bedroom and office. 

 

A further Section 96 application was approved on 25 June 2013 for addition of one bedroom to the Brodie Avenue wing and alteration to support facilities, construction of a gazebo and shade structure, new door to the northern end of the Anzac Parade wing and two additional carpark spaces in Brodie Avenue car park.

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013 from 19 February 2014 to 21 March 2014. No submissions were received during the notification period.

 

Key Issues

 

Randwick LEP 2012

 

The subject site is zoned R1 General Residential under Randwick LEP 2012. The proposal development is classified as a seniors housing (being an aged or residential care facility) and is permissible in the zone. The zoning objectives are addressed as follows:

 

“•   To provide for the housing needs of the community.

•    To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

•    To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

•    To allow the comprehensive redevelopment of land for primarily residential and open space purposes.

•    To protect the amenity of residents.

•    To encourage housing affordability.

•    To enable small-scale business uses in existing commercial buildings.´

 

The modification of Development Consent DA547/2011 is consistent with the abovementioned objectives.  The proposed modifications will not change the nature, character and scale of the development and use of the site which adds to the variety of local residential accommodation and enhances the capacity of the facility to cater for aged residents in need of care.  The modified development shall not be detrimental to the amenity of the locality and its residents.

 

The modifications comply with the development standards of Randwick LEP 2012.

 

Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings

 

There is to be no change to the building height which currently complies with the 15metre height limit.

 

Clause 4.4 Floor Space Ratio

 

The floor space is to be increased by 197 square metres.  This changes the overall floor space ratio from 0.82:1 to 0.84:1.  The maximum floor space ratio for the site is 0.9:1.

 

Clause 5.10 Heritage

 

In accordance with Clause 5.10(2) (iii) this application seeks consent to alter the exterior of a building within a heritage conservation area.  The effect of the modifications have been determined to be minor and are supported by Council’s Heritage Planner and the NSW Heritage Council as well as being consistent with the approved Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by TKD Architects dated 3 February 2014 submitted with the application.

 

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

 

The modifications are improvements to the function and utility of the approved building without adding to the perceptible bulk and scale of the development.

 

Outcome 7:       Heritage that is protected and celebrated

Direction 7a:      Our heritage is recognised, protected and celebrated

 

The modifications are consistent with the Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by TDK Architects and dated 3 February 2014.  There will be no detrimental impacts to heritage items nor the broader conservation area.

 

 

 

Financial impact statement

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The modifications are minor changes to the interior and exterior of one wing of the approved building with the potential to improve the utility and functionality of the facility for staff, residents and visitors. 

 

There will be no detrimental environmental, social, cultural or economic impacts and the resultant development will be consistent with all relevant environmental planning instruments, guidelines and policies.

 

There were no submissions in response to notification of the modifications.

 

The reasons given by the applicant in support of the modifications are considered reasonable in the circumstances of the case.

 

The modifications are in the public interest in that they are consistent with the applicable planning instruments and shall not be detrimental to the natural, social, economic and cultural environment.

 

Recommendation

 

A.        That Council as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/547/2011/C for conversion of double rooms to single rooms at the eastern end of each level of the new northern wing and creation of a sitting area on the southern side of each level of the northern wing, relocation of fire stairs outside building envelope, and addition of sun shading devices on the northern wing at 1420 Anzac Parade, Little Bay in the following manner:

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

DA.01 Issue B,  DA.02 Issue B, DA.03 Issue B, DA.04 Issue B dated 11/7/11, DA.05 Issue C dated 18/7/11, DA.06 Issue B, DA.07 Issue B, DA.08 Issue B dated 18/7/11, DA.09 Issue A, DA.10 Issue A dated 15/7/11, DA.19 Issue B, DA.20 Issue B, DA.21 Issue B, DA.22 Issue B dated 15/7/11 dated 18/7/11, DA.25 Issue A dated 18/7/11 as amended by detail plan DA.23 Issue A dated 13/10/11.

Eeles Trelease Pty Ltd Architects

Various.

Refer to plan nos.

Landscape Drawing Nos. 11016-DA01 Rev A, 110016-DA02 Rev A, 11016-DA03 Rev A, 11016-DA07 Rev A, 11016-DA08 Rev A

Aspect Studios

All dated 15 July 2011

Equinox: Shadow study isometric, Shadow study in Plan; Winter Solstice; Shadow Study in Isometric; Winter solstice Shadow Study

in Plan; Summer Solstice Shadow Study in Isometric; Summer solstice shadow Study in Plan.

 

 

 

Statement of Heritage Impact (SHI)

prepared by Graham Brooks and Associates Pty Ltd

dated July 2011.

Statement of Environmental Effect (SEE) Planning

prepared by HMUP Urban

 

dated 18 July 2011.

Visual Impact Study: Setting of Henry’s Trading Post

 Eeles Trelease Pty Ltd.

 

Traffic and Parking Report

Halcrow.

dated 15/07/2011

Storm Water Concept Plan No. 16740 Issue 1 by

Wallis & Spratt.

 

BCA Compliance Report

Blackett Maguire +

Goldsmith.

dated 14/07/2011

 

 

As amended by the Section 96’A’ plan numbered DA.03 Issue C, dated 1 June 2012 and received by Council on 4 June 2012, only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application. 

 

As amended by the Section 96 ‘B’ plans numbered DA 00, DA01, DA02, DA03, DA04, DA05, DA19, DA20, DA22, issue E, dated 22 February 2013 and received by Council on 25 February 2013, including all accompanying documentation which forms part of this consent, in particular the letter and attachments dated 23 February 2013 from Thinc Projects, the Acoustic Report by Marshall Day Acoustics, dated 23 February 2013 and the Plan of Management for Onsite Waste Storage and Handling by Thinc Projects, endorsed by Council’s approval stamp.  The plans associated with the S96B application shall prevail over the plans for the previous Section 96 A application and the original development application in the case of any inconsistency, and

 

As amended by the Section 96 ‘C’ plans numbered DA01 Issue G – Site Plan, DA03 Issue I – Ground Floor Plan, DA04 Issue G – First Floor Plan, DA20 Issue G East and North Elevation, DA22 Issue G Section A-A, LPDA 13 Pergola Details 2: stage 3 dated June 2013 and received by Council on 7 June, 2013, , including all accompanying documentation which forms part of this consent, in particular the letters dated 22 April 2013 and 4 June 2012 from Helen Mucahy Urban Planning, endorsed by Council’s approval stamp.  The plans associated with the S96(C) application shall prevail over the plans for the previous Section 96 A and B application and the original development application in the case of any inconsistency.

 

As amended by the Section 96 ‘D’ plans numbered DA 00  Issue F, DA01 Issue H, DA03 Issue J, DA04 Issue H, DA05 Issue H,  DA06 Issue D, DA07 Issue D, DA09 Issue D, DA19 Issue G, DA20 Issue H, DA22 Issue H, DA23 Issue C dated 10 December 2013 and received by Council on 10 February 2014, including the Heritage Impact Statement prepared by TKD Architects dated 3 February 2014 and all accompanying documentation which forms part of this consent, endorsed by Council’s approval stamp.  The plans associated with the S96 application shall prevail over the plans for the previous Section 96 applications and the original development application in the case of any inconsistency.

 

Add the new condition:

 

An amendment to the approved Landscape Drawing Nos. 11016-DA01 Rev A, 110016-DA02 Rev A, 11016-DA03 Rev A, 11016-DA07 Rev A, 11016-DA08 Rev A prepared by Aspect Studios dated 15 July 2011 compatible with the plans as amended in accordance with DA/547/2011/D is to be submitted to the NSW Heritage Council for approval prior to the commencement of works.

 

And add the following NOTES to the notice of determination:

 

·              The applicant must consult with a suitably qualified and experienced archaeologist if any sandstone platforms are exposed during excavation works, to ensure that any engravings or axe grinding grooves are identified and recorded; and

 

·              If detailed design of the proposed works necessitates any amendments to the approved documentation as outlined in condition 1, a S65 application under the Heritage Act, 1977 shall be lodged with the Heritage Division to modify this consent.

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Heritage of Council NSW Approval- 1420 Anzac Parade, LITTLE BAY

Included under separate cover

2.

S96 DA Compliance Report - 1420 Anzac Parade, LITTLE BAY

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP45/14

 

 

Subject:                  30 Mirrabooka Crescent, Little Bay (DA/550/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/550/2013

Author:                   Willana Associates, Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new two storey attached dual occupancy

Ward:                      South Ward

Applicant:                Residential Logistics Pty Ltd

Owner:                         Mr R G Folk & Ms L E Kelly

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

Proposal

 

The application has been referred to Council and assessed by an external planning Consultant as a neighbouring property owner is a Council employee.

 

Proposal

 

The proposal is for the demolition of an existing dwelling house and construction of a two-storey, dual occupancy (attached) development.  Each dwelling of the development will consist of 4 bedrooms, a study, single width tandem garage, rear deck, landscaping and access to appropriate services.

 

Amended plans were received by Council on 8 February 2014 to address issues raised by Council’s Development Engineers in relation to flooding and to improve the design of the front façade. They are the subject of this report.

 

Site

 

The site is on the northern side of Mirrabooka Crescent, Little Bay. It is known as 30 Mirrabooka Crescent (Lot 17 DP245315) and currently contains a single storey, brick and clad dwelling house. Vehicular entry is provided off Mirrabooka Crescent.

 

The overall site area is approximately 549m2.

 

The site adjoins residential properties to its east and west sides that each contain a single storey, residential dwelling house. To the south, on the opposite side of the road, are one and two storey residential dwelling houses. Located to the north of the site (at its rear) is a property consisting of a single storey residential dwelling house, with frontage to Woomera Road.

 

The immediate locality along Mirrabooka Crescent contains a mixture of one and two storey attached and free standing dwelling houses.

 

Photos of the site and surrounding development are provided below.

 

Photo 1: The existing single storey dwelling on the subject site as viewed from Mirrabooka Crescent.

Photo 2: The single storey dwelling to the east, at 28 Mirrabooka Crescent.

Photo 3: The single storey dwelling to the west, at 32 Mirrabooka Crescent.

Photo 4: The single storey dwelling house located   to the south, on the opposite side of Mirrabooka Crescent.

 

Photo 5: Looking west along Mirrabooka Crescent.

Photo 6: Looking east along Mirrabooka Crescent.

 

 


Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the original and amended development proposal in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 (RDCP).

 

The notification period for the amended development extended for a period of fourteen (14) days until 27 February 2014.  Two (2) submissions were received as a result, one being a letter of objection from the owner of 32 Mirrabooka Crescent, Little Bay and the other being a letter of support from the owner of 28 Mirrabooka Crescent, Little Bay.

 

Objection:

 

Issue

Comment

Privacy: The study window (W3) looks directly into the living room of the adjoining property of 32 Mirrabooka Crescent.

 

The kitchen window (W7) looks directly onto the 32 Mirrabooka, causing a privacy issue. Request to raise the sill height by at least 300mm or lower 50% of the window to be made translucent/frosted/ opaque as the window look directly through the carport into the adjoining private open space.

 

The rear deck does not appear to have a privacy screen along the western side. A 1.8m solid privacy screen is requested.

No substantial overlooking will result from the study room window subject to the provision of a raised sill height of at least 1.6m from the finished floor level or translucent glazing. A condition can be included in a consent to ensure this.

 

To minimise the impact of the kitchen window, a condition is recommended to require the window to be shifted to result in a raised sill height of at least 1.6m from the finished floor level or provision of translucent glazing.

 

No concerns are raised to the rear decks, subject to the provision of screening along the outer sides of each deck.  The decks are proposed in an elevated location that would promote overlooking into neighbouring properties plus impact on the ‘privacy’ / usability of the decks.  A condition can be included in a consent to require the screening.

Fence: It is not apparent whether the western dividing fence is to be retained or replaced. If the fence is to be retained, the plans should be amended to reflect this or a condition of consent should state that the fence is to be retained. If a new fence is going to be installed, the plans should be amended and a section plan be provided prior to a Council report being finalised.

The existing colourbond fence along the western boundary is in reasonably good condition and is able to be retained.

 

A condition of consent is included to ensure the existing fence is retained.

 

Support:

 

A letter of support was received from the property owner of 28 Mirrabooka Crescent, dated 18th March 2014, following additional alterations to the side setback along the eastern side of the property. The property owner advised there was no objection to the proposed reduction in side setback and was in full support of the proposed development application.

 

 

Key Issues

 

The original proposal for 2 x 4 bedroom dual occupancy dwellings was submitted to Council on 29 August 2013. An assessment of the original proposal found there were several issues of concern as listed below.

 

§  The design of the garages did not meet the development standards of RDCP.

§  Additional information was required in order to assess the potential flood impacts caused by the proposed development to the subject site and surrounding properties.

 

A letter was sent to the applicant advising of these issues, requesting amended architectural drawings, as well as a Flood Study to ascertain the potential flood impacts caused by the proposed development to the subject site and surrounding properties and suitable finished floor levels.

 

A Flood Study, prepared by WMAwater was submitted to Council on 11 January 2014.  This was followed by an addendum submitted on 7 March 2014, which addressed additional issues raised by Council’s Engineer.

 

Amended architectural plans were received on 8 February 2014. The main amendments included:

 

§  Changes to the front setbacks, increasing the original setbacks of each garage.

§  Increase to the floor levels of the building to cater for the concerns raised by Council’s Engineer with respect to flooding.

§  Increase to the overall building height as a result of the changes to the floor levels.

 

The amended plans and associated documentation are the subject of this report.  They have been reviewed.  The resultant key issues have been discussed in the paragraphs below.

 

Building Envelope:

 

Floor Space Ratio

 

The RLEP 2012 allows for a maximum floor space ratio of 0.5:1. The proposed development will result in an overall FSR of 0.5:1, which is similar to that of nearby dwellings.

 

Amended plans were submitted to Council on 7 February 2014 showing a reduction in the visual dominance of the front façade via the setback of the garages for each dwelling behind the front building line. The original proposal had a total gross floor area of 261.160 sqm and an FSR of 0.47:1. The amended plans propose a revised gross floor area of 274.330 sqm and an FSR of 0.5:1. Although there is a marginal increase in FSR, there is an overall reduction in the visual bulk of the building.

 

Overall, it is considered that the proposed development will not contribute significantly or unreasonably to the perceived bulk and scale of the built form as viewed from the street.  It will be compatible with the existing and desired future character of the locality.

 

 

 

 

 

Front setback/garage forward of the building line:

 

The Objectives of the RDCP for this control include:

§  ‘To ensure the configuration, scale, massing and proportions of attached dual occupancies are compatible with other dwellings in the street’, and

§  ‘To ensure parking facilities do not dominate the street elevations of dual occupancy dwellings but present as an integrated architectural element’.

 

The proposal includes garage facilities embedded in the design of the attached dual occupancy development.  The recessing and limited width will ensure a subservient visual impact. 

 

The original architectural plans provided gable elements over the garages creating emphasis to that particular aspect of the building rather than the habitable space or front entrances. It was recommended that a scheme that complies with the DCP needs to consider the gable element over the study and the alignment of the front façade of the garages at a position behind the alignment of the two studies.

 

To correct the dominance of the garages, the amended architectural plans now show the garages pushed behind the front building line, altering the front setback to 6m, and a reconfiguration of the front entrances to allow for entries to be viewed from the streetscape.

 

Amenity

 

Visual Privacy:

 

Part 5.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013 (RDCP) 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 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 be included.

 

As discussed in the table above, conditions are recommended to minimise the privacy implications of the development to the neighbouring properties and ensure that an appropriate level of on-site amenity is provided to future occupants of the proposal.  It is noted that the owner of 28 Mirrabooka Crescent has submitted a letter of support.  Since this letter mainly relates to the front setbacks, similar minimisation measures to the proposed side kitchen and study room windows facing 28 Mirrabooka Crescent as that discussed with reference to 32 Mirrabooka Crescent are recommended. Conditions can be included in a consent accordingly.

 

The openings on the northern elevation will not pose any substantial overlooking to 33 Woomera Road given the distance of separation will be way over 9m and some windows will be highlighted.   The 9m separation is a minimum standard that facilitates reasonable privacy outcomes.

 

The proposed rear decks will be elevated above the existing ground level and consequently, will necessitate side screening as discussed in the table above.  A condition is recommended to be included in a consent accordingly.

 

Solar Access and Overshadowing:

 

The RDCP requires that north-facing living area windows of proposals must receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June. It also requires a portion of the north-facing living area windows of neighbouring dwellings to receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June; and the private open spaces of neighbouring dwellings to 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 DCP with regard to solar access and overshadowing. Shadow diagrams submitted 29 August 2013 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. Due to the north-south orientation of the site, the private open spaces of neighbouring dwellings will 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.

 

NB:  No revised shadow diagrams have been submitted with the amended architectural plans. It was deemed unnecessary due to the north-south orientation of the site and similar building footprints and heights in comparison to that originally proposed.

 

Flooding

 

Under the Randwick Comprehensive DCP, Part B8 Water Management, sub-section 5 Flooding, provides objectives and controls for residential development on land below the 1% Annual Exceedence Probability (AEP) flood plus the required freeboard, and all other development on land below the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) plus the required freeboard.

 

It was identified the subject development application may have potential flood impacts directed towards the subject site and surrounding properties. There was a need to investigate the impact of the development application on flood, and adjust the design as necessary to ensure there were no adverse impacts on surrounding areas.

 

A Flood Study, prepared by WMAwater was submitted to Council on 11 January 2014.  This was followed by an addendum submitted on 7 March 2014, which addressed additional issues raised by Council’s Engineer. The amended architectural plans complied with the recommendations of the flood study and Council’s planning controls.

 

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 amended proposal adequately addresses the relevant LEP assessment criteria, objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zone and objectives and controls of the RDCP 2013 – Part C Low Density Residential.

 

The scale and design of the proposed development is considered to be suitable for the site in the context of the existing surrounding residential area. Overall, the development is considered to be consistent with the desired future character as envisaged by the RDCP 2013.  The proposed proportions, massing, colours, materials and finishes are considered to be satisfactory. The amended design carries positive architectural merits and will be sympathetic to the characteristics of the existing low density residential character. 

 

The proposed density and height will not give rise to any detrimental impacts to the surrounding residential properties. The proposal will not have a significant adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding development in terms of visual bulk and scale, solar access and privacy subject to appropriate privacy measures being adopted, as discussed above.

 

The proposed development will be satisfactory with respect with respect to the relevant matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.  Accordingly the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions outlined in this report

 

 

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/550/2013 for the demolition of an existing building and the construction of an attached dual occupancy, at No. 30 Mirrabooka Crescent, Little Bay, 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

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

 

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

 

§ The proposed duplex shall be re-orientated so that it is parallel to the western boundary (common with 32) and maintain the proposed offset of the dwelling at the front of 2.62m (as indicated on the plans), along its entire western wall rather than being parallel to the eastern boundary (common with No. 28) as currently proposed.

§ This will have the effect of reducing the boundary setback at the rear of the dwelling on the eastern side. It is currently proposed to be offset 1.58m at this point but will be reduced to approximately 1.3m after reorientation of the dwelling.

 

§ The piers shall also be offset from the western edge of the slab along the western wall’s entire length to provide further clearance to the pipeline.

§ A privacy screen having a height of 1.8m above the finished floor level must be provided to the outer side of each deck (i.e. to the west side of the deck of  Dwelling A and to the east side of the deck of Dwelling B).   The 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 screen.  Alternatively, the privacy screen may be constructed with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing in a suitable frame.

§ The following window/s must have a minimum sill height of 1.6m above the finished floor level, or alternatively, the window/s are to be fixed and be provided with translucent, obscured or sandblasted glazing below this specified height or in full:

 

- The study and kitchen room windows of both Dwellings A and B.

 

§ The existing western boundary fence shall be retained.

 

Details of the above amendments must be submitted to Council’s Manager Development Assessment for approval prior to issuing of a Construction Certificate.

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Compliance Report for 30 Mirrabooka Crescent, LITTLE BAY

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP46/14

 

 

Subject:                  225 Boyce Road, Maroubra (DA/650/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/650/2013

Author:                   Planning Ingenuity, Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                     Demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new part two & part three storey dwelling house with semi basement garage fronting Boyce Lane

Ward:                      Centre Ward

Applicant:                Mr A Nicholls

Owner:                         Mr J Blazun

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application has been referred to Council and assessed by an external planning consultant at the request of Council’s Manager Development Assessment.

 

Proposal

 

Development Application DA650/2013 was submitted to Council on 25 September 2013 for demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new part two and part three storey dwelling house with semi-basement garage fronting Boyce Lane.  The subject site is Lot B in Deposited Plan 316702 (No.225) Boyce Road, Maroubra.

 

The application has been subject to neighbour notification and one (1) submission was received.  The matters raised in the single submission can be appropriately addressed by conditions of development consent consistent with conditions contained in Development Consent DA97/2012 (which proposed a similar dwelling fronting Boyce Road).

 

The applicant was requested to provide additional information by a deadline of 31 January, 2014.  This deadline was subsequently extended to 3 March 2014 on the understanding that information was being prepared by consultants appointed by the applicant.  Additional information was received on 3 March 2014.  However, this information did not satisfactorily address all matters raised in the original request for additional information.  Further additional information was received on 31 March 2014.  This information is considered to be sufficient to grant conditional development consent.

 

The proposed construction sequence involves:

-     Partial demolition and alterations to the existing dwelling;

-     Continued occupation and use of the existing dwelling during excavation and construction of the new dwelling;

-     Demolition of the original dwelling prior to the release of an Occupation Certificate for the new dwelling.

 

It is recommended that the application be granted development consent subject to conditions as included in the Compliance Report.

 

1.    Background / Development history

 

Development Consent DA97/500 was granted on 12 February 1998 for a two lot subdivision of the site.  The consent lapsed 18 February 2003.  The consent included conditions for dedication of a 2m wide strip of land for widening of Boyce Lane, demolition of the existing dwelling and regrading of the footpath and frontage to Boyce Road for improved sight distances for drivers.

 

Development Consent DA/293/2010 was granted on 5 August 2010 for a two lot subdivision of the subject site.  This consent included a requirement for the dedication of a 2m wide strip of land for the full length of the boundary to Boyce lane in order to achieve widening of the laneway.  This consent also required the demolition of the existing dwelling as the structure spans the approved subdivision boundary.  On-site detention for the lot fronting Boyce Lane was also required.  An application for a Subdivision Certificate has not been lodged.  The consent will lapse on 5 August 2015.

 

The applicants lodged two successive applications to modify Development Consent DA/293/2010 to delete the condition requiring the demolition of the existing dwelling.  Both applications were refused.

 

Development Consent DA/97/2012 was granted on 12 June 2012 for construction of two detached two storey dwelling houses fronting Boyce Road and Boyce Lane with basement level garages and associated site works.  The consent included conditions for minor amendments to the windows to maintain privacy and for glass balustrades to protect view lines for neighbouring properties.  Conditions were also imposed for the dedication of a 2m wide strip of land adjacent to the Boyce Lane boundary for laneway widening.  This approved development does not include subdivision.

 

Development Consent DA/97/2012 was surrendered by the applicant in accordance with Clause 97(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 with a written notice received by Council on 17 July, 2013.

 

Development Application DA/650/2013 is the subject of this assessment report.  Recommended conditions of development consent included in this assessment report are consistent with Development Consent DA/293/2010 and surrendered Development Consent DA/97/2012 to the extent that they relate to the dedication of land for laneway widening, stormwater management for the dwelling fronting Boyce Lane and amendments to the design of the new dwelling to protect privacy and views for neighbours.  Additional conditions are recommended for the demolition of the existing dwelling prior to the issue of an Occupation certificate for the new dwelling. 

 

Should Development Application DA/650/2013 be granted conditional consent, the applicant will have the choice of being able to act on either DA/293/2010 to subdivide the land or DA/650/2013 to construct one new dwelling and demolish the existing dwelling.  The consents cannot be acted on concurrently and are mutually exclusive.  However, conditions of consent for both development options ensure that stormwater management, laneway widening and demolition of the existing dwelling are appropriately achieved.

 

2.    The Proposal

 

The proposal includes demolition of the existing single storey dwelling and outbuildings located in the centre of the site and construction of a part two storey and part three storey dwelling with basement storage rooms.  The new dwelling is to be free standing with a gross floor area of 290.5m2.  The new dwelling is to contain four (4) bedrooms, a study room (of dimensions suitable for use as a fifth bedroom), three bathrooms (one of which is an ensuite to the main bedroom), a laundry and an open plan kitchen and dining area and a separate living area. The basement level is to contain a double garage, two store rooms (combined area of 60m3), a toilet and a plant room with a floor area of approximately 7.9m x 5.8m.  The new garage is proposed to have direct access to Boyce Lane and a new driveway crossing and some reconstruction of the laneway will be required accordingly.

 

The new dwelling is to be constructed to address Boyce Lane.

 

It is proposed to retain the existing dwelling during the construction process and demolish the existing dwelling when the new dwelling is suitable for occupation and use.  In order to achieve this, some alterations are required to the existing dwelling to create sufficient space for the new dwelling.  Essential services connections may need to be relocated for the existing dwelling.


 

3.    The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

 

The site is located between Boyce Road and Boyce Lane as shown outlined red in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Location of No.225 Boyce Road, Maroubra

 

The site is a rectangular shape 10.975m wide and 67.07m long.  The total site area is 736.1m2.

 

The site has a high point within the north east corner and slopes downwards from this point to the west and to the south.  The southern portion of the site slopes more steeply and there is a retaining wall on the boundary with Boyce Lane.

 

There is a single storey dwelling at the centre of the site with a double carport and shed adjoining the northern side of the dwelling.  There are three (3) small trees within the setback to Boyce Road which are not significant in the streetscape but will be unaffected by the development.  A single Cocos palm is to be removed on the southern side of the dwelling.

 

Vehicle access to the site is currently only from Boyce Road.

 

Photographs of the site as viewed from the Boyce Road and Boyce Lane are included in Figures 2 and 3 respectively.

 

Figure 2 – View of subject site from Boyce Road

 

Figure 3 – View of subject site from Boyce Lane

 

The adjoining properties to the west are No.223 and No.223A and each contains a two storey dwelling above basement garages.  Photographs of No.223 and No.223A are included in Figures 4 and 5 respectively.

 

Figure 4 – No.223 Boyce Road (from Boyce Road)

 

Figure 5 – No.223A Boyce Road (from Boyce Lane)

 

The adjoining property to the east is No.227 Boyce Road and contains a two storey dwelling positioned at the centre of the site.  This dwelling is shown in Figures 6 and 7.

 

Figure 6 – No.227 Boyce Road (from Boyce Road)

 

Figure 7 – No.227 Boyce Road (from Boyce Lane)

 

The nearby properties in Boyce Road are a mix of new two and three storey dwellings and original single storey dwellings.  Boyce Road is a narrow road in the vicinity of the site with a crest and limited sight distance for drivers. At the crest the road edge is defined by a retaining wall on the northern side and there is no kerb side parking.  Figure 8 shows Boyce Road looking east with the subject site on the right side of the photo.

 

Figure 8 – Boyce Road looking east

 

Boyce Lane is a narrow public laneway.  The majority of properties that share a boundary with Boyce Lane have vehicle access to the lane and garages close to, or adjoining, the laneway (see Figure 9).

 

Figure 9 – Properties adjoining Boyce Lane

 

There are nine (9) bus stops within 250m radius of the subject site and these provide direct services to the the nearby commercial centre of Maroubra and further to Eastgardens, Coogee and Randwick.  There are several public reserves within walking distance of the subject site and the site is within 1km of Maroubra beach.


 

4.    Community Consultation

 

The owners of surrounding properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with Development Control Plan – Public Notification of Development Proposals from 18 October 2013 to 1 November 2013. One (1) written submission was received on 18 March 2014 being outside the timeframe set for submissions.  The submission objected to the height and siting of the dwelling and the potential for loss of privacy for neighbours particularly with regard to the possibility of looking into bedroom, bathroom and living room windows from the windows of the new dwelling.

 

It is relevant to note that the plans for the new dwelling is similar to the plan submitted for a new dwelling fronting Boyce Lane approved as part of Development Consent DA97/2012.  Conditions of this consent required the living room window at ground floor level and the bedroom windows to side elevations to have sill heights of 1.5m with fixed, obscured glass.  Similar conditions would address the privacy concerns raised by the most recent submission.

 

5.    Relevant Environmental Planning Instruments

 

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

 

(a)      State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 (Remediation of Land)

 

This State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) was gazetted on 28 August 1989 and applies to the whole State.  It introduces planning controls for the remediation of contaminated land and requires an investigation to be made if land contamination is suspected.

 

The site has been used for residential purposes since it was originally subdivided and there are no reasons to believe that the site is contaminated.

 

(b)      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

 

The site is within Zone R2 Low Density Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012.  Dwelling houses are permissible with consent.

 

The following Clauses of Randwick LEP 2012 apply to the proposal:-

 

Zoning table - Zone R2 Low Density Residential.

 

The objectives for development in this zone are listed below along with assessment comments specific to the proposal.

 

Objective: To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment

 

Assessment Comment:  The proposal will replace a modest-sized single storey dwelling with a larger new dwelling of similar scale and proportions to the new dwellings on adjoining and nearby lots.  The new dwelling is compatible with the low density scale and character of the neighbourhood.

 

Objective: To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents

 

Assessment Comment:  This objective does not apply to the proposal.

 

Objective: To recognize 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

 

Assessment Comment:  The new dwelling is consistent with the current low density scale and single storey detached dwelling character of the locality.

 

Objective: To protect the amenity of residents

 

Assessment Comment:  The proposal will cast shadow onto adjoining properties to the east and west.  However, no adjoining property will be affected for more than 3 hours between 9am and 3pm mid-winter.  Privacy for adjoining properties can be addressed in a similar manner to Development Consent DA97/2012 with conditions for high sill windows to the side boundaries with fixed, obscured glazing.  Aural privacy for adjoining neighbours can be protected with standard noise restrictions during construction.  The use of the dwelling is expected to generate noise levels typical of the surrounding single detached dwellings in the neighbourhood and does not require additional controls.

 

Objective: To encourage housing affordability

 

Assessment Comment:  The proposal replaces a modest single storey dwelling with a large, multi-level dwelling.  The proposal does not encourage housing affordability.

 

Objective: To enable small scale business uses in existing commercial buildings

 

Assessment Comment:  This objective does not apply to the proposal.

 

Therefore the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives for development in Zone R2 with the exception that the new dwelling does not contribute to housing affordability.

 

Detailed assessment of compliance with the relevant provisions of RLEP 2012 is provided in the Compliance Report for this development application.

 

5.1 Randwick Development Control Plan 2012

 

Randwick Development Control Plan (DCP) 2013 commenced on 14 June 2103.  The provisions of Randwick DCP 2013 that apply to the proposal are summarised in the Compliance Report for this development assessment.

 

In summary the proposal complies with most of the provisions of the DCP with the exception of the side setbacks of a small portion of the uppermost level.  The general siting and proportions of the proposed dwelling are similar to the two new dwellings immediately west of the subject site.  The variations to side boundary setbacks for part of the uppermost level are considered acceptable in the context and setting and given the steep slope of this portion of the site.  Conditions are also recommended for a minor adjustment to the approved plans to ensure that the setback of the terrace above the garage complies with a setback of 1m from Boyce Lane (after dedication of land for laneway widening).

 

5.2 Council Policies

 

The existing dwelling and detached shed are likely to contain asbestos materials and conditions would be necessary for all works associated with the demolition and disposal of these structures to be conducted in accordance with Council’s Asbestos Policy and the requirements of NSW Workcover.

 

7.  Environmental Assessment

 

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

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The site is within Zone R2 Low Density Residential under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

The proposal is consistent with the aims of RLEP 2012 and the specific objectives of the zone.

The proposal has the potential to be consistent with the relevant controls and objectives of LEP clauses as examined in Section 5 subject to recommended conditions of development consent.

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

Not applicable

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

The proposal satisfies the guidelines and provisions of Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013 subject to conditions for stormwater management, modification of the setback of the terrace to Boyce Lane and modifications to window sill height and glazing consistent with the conditions imposed in Development Consent DA97/2012.

 

The proposal does not comply with the minimum side setback requirements for a section of the uppermost storey closest to Boyce Lane.  The minimum required side setback is 1.5m and the proposed side setbacks are 1.2m to the east and west sides.  Variations are considered reasonable in the circumstances due to the steep slope of the site, the degree of excavation required to accommodate at grade parking and the fact that the scale, height, proportions and dimensions of the proposed dwelling are comparable to that of new dwellings to the west of the site fronting Boyce Lane.

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

Not applicable.

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

The potential environmental impacts of the development have been assessed and particular matters relating to the following issues are addressed in recommended conditions of consent:

-   Setbacks to Boyce Lane;

-   Stormwater management;

-   Stabilization of the existing dwelling during excavation and construction;

-   Safe and healthy occupation of the existing dwelling during excavation and construction;

-   Connection to essential services for the existing dwelling during excavation and construction.

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

The site is located in close proximity to local services and public bus transport. The site has sufficient area to accommodate the proposed new dwelling with minor design changes to address privacy and amenity for neighbours.

 

Conditions are recommended to ensure the development is compatible with the features of the site and adjoining properties including:

-   dedication of land for widening of Boyce Lane;

-   appropriate setbacks to the laneway;

-   modifications to the windows in the side elevations to protect neighbour privacy;

safe and healthy occupation of the existing dwelling until such time as the new dwelling is suitable for occupation and use.

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

 

The issues raised in the submission can be addressed with conditions relating to high sills and opaque glass to some windows oriented to the side boundaries (consistent with conditions of Development Consent DA97/2012).

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

The proposal is mostly consistent with the objectives for development in Zone R2 Low Density Residential.  Conditions are recommended to ensure the proposal will not have any significant adverse environmental impacts with regard to stormwater management, construction site management and alterations and site management for the existing dwelling to achieve BCA compliance. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The applicant was requested to provide additional information by a deadline of 31 January, 2014.  This deadline was subsequently extended to 3 March 2014 on the understanding that information was being prepared by consultants appointed by the applicant.  Additional information was received on 3 March 2014.  However, this information did not satisfactorily address all matters raised in the original request for additional information.  Further additional information was received on 31 March 2014. This information is considered to be sufficient to grant conditional development consent.

 

The matters raised in the single submission can be appropriately addressed by conditions of development consent consistent with conditions contained in Development Consent DA97/2012.

 

Recommendation

 

A.        That Council as the consent authority, grant conditional development consent for the development application No. DA 650/2013 under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling at No.225 Boyce Road, Maroubra, subject to the following non-standard conditions and the standard conditions contained in the development compliance report attached to this report:

 

Non Standard Conditions

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

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

 

a.   The terrace above the garage is to be modified to ensure that it is setback a minimum 1m from the boundary with Boyce Lane after the dedication of a 2m wide strip of land to Council for the widening of Boyce Lane;

 

b.   The first floor windows to all bedrooms in the eastern and western elevations must be fixed obscured glass to a minimum 1.5m from the floor level to minimize privacy impacts to the adjoining properties;

 

c.   The ground floor lounge room window in the western elevation must be fixed obscured glass to a minimum 1.5m from the floor level to minimize privacy impacts to the adjoining property;

 

d.   The ground floor dining room window in the eastern elevation must be fixed obscured glass to a minimum 1.5m from the floor level to minimize privacy impacts to the adjoining property;

 

e.   The balconies at the front and rear of the new dwelling must have transparent glass balustrades to maintain view lines from adjoining properties;

 

f.    Waste and recycling bins are to be stored clear of the public road and footpath to Boyce Lane (after dedication for road widening) and clear of the driveway area.  A suitable garbage storage bay is to be indicated on the plans approved with the Construction Certificate.

 

Demolition of the Existing Dwelling

53.   Prior to the issuing of any form of occupation certificate the existing dwelling on the subject site must be demolished.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 225 Boyce Road , MAROUBRA

Included under separate cover

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP47/14

 

 

Subject:                  203 Darley Road, Randwick - DA/603/2013

Folder No:                   DA/603/2013

Author:                   Matthew Choi, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                     First floor addition to existing childcare centre including outdoor play deck to provide for an additional 10 children (Heritage Conservation Area)

Ward:                      North Ward

Applicant:                Mr R Dunkley

Owner:                         N & D Joseph Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive Summary Report

 

The application is referred to the Council for determination at request of Councillors Shurey, Matson and Nielson.  

 

Proposal

 

The proposal involves the construction of a new first floor addition to an existing child care centre with associated outdoor deck play area to cater for an additional 10 children and 1 staff. At present the child care centre caters up to 19 children with 3 staff and seeks consent to increase to up to 29 children with 4 staff. No additional off-street parking provisions have been provided on the subject premises.

 

The applicant was advised to provide a Heritage Impact Assessment as additional information given the proposal is located immediately adjacent to the North Randwick Heritage Conservation area.   

 

Site

 

The subject site is located on the south-eastern corner of Darley Road and Market Street and is occupied by an existing single storey child care centre. The site has a frontage width of 12.5 metres, a side boundary depth of 26.3 metres and an overall site area of 332m².

 

Neighbouring the property to the south is a two storey detached dwelling house, to the east is an existing pizza shop and to the north and west is Darley Road and Markey Street, respectively. The immediate locality is predominately low residential in nature and consists of detached and semi-detached dwelling houses. Queens Park is also located in close proximity to the subject premises on the opposite side of Darley Road. 

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013 from the 25 September 2013 to 10 October 2013. The following submissions were received at the conclusion of the public consultation process: 

 

·      207 Darley Road, Randwick

·      217 Darley Road, Randwick

·      1A Market Street, Randwick

·      6 Market Street, Randwick 

·      18 Market Street, Randwick

·      20 Market Street, Randwick

 

The issues raised in the submissions have been summarized below to avoid repetition. The issues are as follows:

 

Issue

Comment

Traffic and Parking issues:

·        The proposal will result in a significant shortfall in the availability of on-street parking spaces in particular given the close proximity to adjoining land uses

·        The proposal does not provide additional off-street parking to accommodate an increase in staff.

 

 

 

Council’s Development Engineering and Integrated Transport Unit have assessed the application and the submitted Traffic and Parking Assessment Report. Council is satisfied that the conversion of the time restricted parking space on the corner of Darley Road and Market Street in front of the existing pizza shop is acceptable to be converted to a drop off/pick up space to accommodate the child care centre. In addition to this, there is sufficient off-street parking availability within the surrounding streets to accommodate any additional demand. Refer to Key Issues: Traffic and Parking for further details.

 

·      The proposal will result in an increase in the illegal parking of motor vehicles and will compromise the safety of the general public;

·      Increase risk of collision for cars entering and exiting the intersection of Darley Road and Market Street;

·      The off-street parking spaces located at the rear of the subject site overhangs onto the pedestrian pathway;

·      Changes to on-street parking restrictions will not improve the availability of parking within the immediate locality given the lack of available Council rangers

 

 

Visitors/users are required by law to comply with New South Wales Road Rules. If vehicles are parking illegally, the objectors should contact Council rangers.

 

The development application was referred to the Integrated Transport Unit and they have not advised of any additional traffic/speed calming measures that are required at the intersection of Darley Road and Market Street.   

 

·      The traffic report does not accurately reflect the current traffic conditions  and makes inferences to a 2005 traffic projections;

 

 

The 2005 traffic volume level results by the Roads and Maritime Services are not updated on a frequent basis. Regardless the traffic and parking assessment report has been carried out on current traffic conditions.

 

·      The traffic report was not carried out during peak parking usage;

 

 

 

The traffic report was carried out on Friday 19th July 2013 during peak hour periods of 7.30am – 8.30am and 4pm – 5pm.

 

·      The proposal does not comply with the objectives for Parking within the Comprehensive DCP 2013.

 

 

 

The relevant objectives for traffic, parking and pedestrian safety in accordance with the Comprehensive DCP 2013 for child care centres is as follows:

 

o   To ensure a safe environment for pedestrians, particularly children, motorists and cyclists in and around child care centres.

 

As specified above, the development application was referred to the Integrated Transport Unit and they have not advised of any additional traffic/speed calming measures that are required at the intersection of Darley Road and Market Street .   

 

o   To minimise adverse environmental impacts in the locality in terms of traffic generation and on street parking availability.

 

The availability of on-street parking and traffic generation has been addressed in detail within the Key Issues for Traffic and Parking. 

 

o   To ensure that car parking arrangements are designed to enhance streetscape character and have minimal visual impact.

 

The proposal does not seek to provide additional off-street parking arrangements.

 

Noise and Acoustic Amenity:

·      The proposed noise impacts will compromise the amenity of the neighbouring residential premises;

·      The use will give rise to ‘Offensive Noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations;

·      Despite the installation of an acoustic fencing at the first level deck it is not expected to significantly reduce the noise impacts;

·      Projected noise levels of>53dBA are unsubstantiated by the acoustic report. 

 

 

Noted. Council’s Environmental Health Officer has raised concerns that the location and size of the first floor outdoor play deck will not meet an acceptable noise criteria as required within the Protection of Environmental Operations Act 1997. In particular, the proposal fails to specify the operational details of the outdoor deck and the cumulative noise impacts of both the ground and first floor outdoor play areas. Refer to Key Issues: Noise and Acoustic Privacy for further details.  

 

Visual Privacy Impacts:

·      The outdoor play deck will result in overlooking into the habitable bedroom windows of the adjacent dwelling to the south at no. 1A Market Street.

 

 

 

Noted. The proposed outdoor deck is orientated towards the habitable room windows of the southern neighbouring dwelling at no.1A Market Street and the elevated nature of the deck will provide a direct outlook into the habitable room window. Refer to Key Issues: Visual Privacy for further details.

 

Solar Access and Overshadowing:

·      The development application does not include overshadowing diagrams to demonstrate the extent of the additional shadowing to the neighbouring premises.

·      The minimal side setback will further contribute to additional shadowing impacts to the southern adjoining neighbours.

 

 

 

Noted. The proposal does not include any overshadowing diagrams to demonstrate the extent of the additional overshadowing impacts to the neighbouring dwellings, in particular, the southern neighbour at no. 1A Market Street.

 

The Comprehensive DCP does not specify solar access controls from new child care centre development to adjoining development. However, it is reasonable to apply shadowing controls for low density residential development given the immediate locality consists of detached and semi-detached dwelling houses. The intent of the controls is that new additions to child care centres must be complementary to the built form, scale and character of the streetscape. 

 

Council calculations on the extent of the additional overshadowing to the upper floor bedroom will maintain the required three hours of solar access between the hours 8am – 12pm and is reduced during the afternoon. The proposal is in keeping with Council’s control with a minimum of three hours of direct solar access provided to the southern adjoining neighbour.

 

Other:

·      The proposal is considered to be an overdevelopment of the site given the site area and footprint.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·      The applicant has not identified a need for additional child care services within the immediate locality.

 

 

 

Noted. The proposal will compromise the visual and acoustic amenity to the neighbouring dwellings and the bulk and scale of the development is not compatible with the existing streetscape. Consequently, the application has been recommended for refusal. Refer to Key Issues: Building Design – Built form, scale and character for further details.

 

The broad economic and social aspects of a development, such as whether or not the community as a whole ‘needs’ a facility offered by an applicant, or speculation of apparent market supply and demand, are not relevant planning matters under Section 79C of the EP&A Act, 1979.

 

Key Issues

 

·      Comprehensive DCP 2013 – Child Care Centres

 

Building Design – Built form, scale and character

 

In accordance with the Comprehensive DCP 2013, child care centres should complement the desired built form, scale and character of that particular zone which is predominately low density residential given the dwellings within the immediate locality are generally detached or semi-detached in nature. The first floor deck extends over the entirety of the rear ground floor play area and is considered excessive in size and scale.

 

The size of the deck in meeting the unencumbered 7m2 of outdoor space per child does not justify its excessive size and scale. The outdoor play deck compromises the visual amenity given its location, siting and size and is incompatible with the depth of upper floor additions to neighbouring dwellings. Furthermore, Council’s controls also specify that physical shading devices must be provided and are integrated into the design of new play areas to child care centres. It is expected that any new shading device to the outdoor deck would further exacerbate the bulk and scale of the development and result in heritage implications which have not been addressed as part of this application. The building design would be more proportionate in terms of the visual bulk and be more complementary to the streetscape should the deck be reduced in size.

 

Rear Setback:

 

Council’s controls specify that alterations and additions to existing child care centres must comply with the rear setback controls for low density residential housing. However, the rear setback control is not applicable to corner allotments and therefore it does not apply to the subject premises. A merit assessment is still required to ensure the proposal demonstrates compliance with the objectives for setbacks.  

 

The relevant objectives for setbacks are as follows:

 

·      To maintain a consistent rhythm of development that contributes positively to the character of the streetscape and locality. 

·      To ensure adequate separation between neighbouring buildings for visual and acoustic privacy and solar access.

 

In addition to this, the Comprehensive DCP for child care centres states:

 

·      Increased setbacks may be required in certain circumstances having regard to privacy, solar access, to achieve reasonable view sharing with neighbouring properties and/or to provide the required amount of space for outdoor play areas.

 

The proposed first floor deck provides a building separation of 2.45 metres to the rear boundary and approximately 3.35 metres to the habitable room window of 1A Market Street. The minimal separation to the neighbouring dwelling together with the significant size of the outdoor deck contributes to a form and mass which compromises the appearance of the existing development within the streetscape. In addition to this, the proposal does not provide a reasonable level of visual and acoustic privacy to the southern neighbour (assessed in detail in the latter sections of this report). The proposed development, in particular the first floor deck is considered excessive and cannot be suitably accommodated without impacting on the amenity of the neighbouring dwellings and the visual appearance of the streetscape. The proposal does not comply with the above objectives and should therefore be recommended for refusal.


 

Noise and Acoustic Privacy:

 

The potential for noise nuisance generated from the new first floor addition, outdoor play deck and an additional 10 children may result in significant amenity impacts to the adjacent dwellings and an acoustic report has been prepared by Acoustic Logic (Report no: 20130758.1/03039A/R1/HP), undated and received by Council on the 16 September 2013.

 

The acoustic report predicts that the background noise level from the new outdoor play deck area operating at a maximum capacity of 10 children in addition to the existing ground floor play areas of 19 children will achieve compliance with the noise criteria as defined within the Protection of Environmental Operations Act 1997.

 

However there are concerns raised by Council’s Environmental Health Officer whether the predictive noise goals can be achieved. The proposed first floor outdoor deck play area is located in close proximity (approximately 3.5 metres) to the existing habitable room windows of the southern adjoining premises at no. 1A Market Street and will not provide a reasonable level of acoustic amenity. Subsequently, the application cannot be supported for the following reasons:

 

·      The acoustic report does not specify the operational details of the outdoor play deck or included a plan of management in specifying the types of use and the intensive/non-intensive play at the first floor level;  

·      The cumulative noise impacts of both ground floor and first floor play areas has not been addressed as part of a plan of management to ensure that activities will not cause noise disturbance to neighbouring dwellings; and 

·      The acoustic report references predicted noise levels which have been sourced from a previously approved child care facility with no details provided.

 

Consequently in considering the above, it is unclear whether the proposal will comply with the predicted noise levels outlined in the acoustic report and therefore Council cannot support the development application.

 

Visual Privacy:

 

Child care centres are to be appropriately designed and sited to ensure a reasonable level of privacy is offered to the adjoining residential dwellings. The proposed first floor outdoor deck play area allows direct upward views into the habitable room windows of the neighbouring premises and does not comply with Council’s controls. The controls of the DCP specify the following:

 

ii) Orient new buildings and extensions to minimise overlooking, overshadowing and to preserve the acoustic amenity of adjoining properties.

 

iii) Locate outdoor and indoor play areas, balconies and terraces and openable windows to minimise the direct line of site to and from neighbouring properties.

 

The elevated nature of the first floor deck allows direct overlooking into the upper floor bedroom at No. 1A Market Street. Currently, the existing outlook into the bedroom at ground floor level is screened by the rear covered pergola structure and the significant height of the rear boundary fence. The proposed first floor deck allows an upwards cross view and whilst a 1.6 metre high acoustic fence screen is provided it does not minimise the level of overlooking into the neighbouring premises. Any additional privacy measures to minimise the overlooking such as raising the height of the screens is not recommended given it contributes to the bulk and scale of the development. Whilst the deck is expected to be utilised mostly by children during the day overlooking will still be possible by staff and parents during morning and afternoon drop off and pick up periods. Privacy measures such as an increase to the height of the acoustic screens are not supported given it contributes to additional visual bulk and scale of the outdoor deck. 

 

The first floor deck does not offer a reasonable level of privacy and is orientated in a manner which promotes overlooking into the adjoining premises. The proposal does not comply with Council’s controls and objectives for visual privacy and consequently the application has been recommended for refusal. 

 

Traffic and Parking:  

 

The proposal seeks to increase the capacity of the child care centre to an additional 10 children which will take the total number to 29 children. The Council’s DCP requires parking be provided for childcare centres at the rate of 1 space per 8 children for pick-up and drop-off. The existing premise currently provides 2 off street parking spaces at the rear of the subject site and 3 drop off/pick up spaces on the western side of the dwelling along Market Street. The applicant proposes to convert the time restricted parking space in front of the take away pizza shop for use as a drop off/pick up space for the child care centre in addition to the take away pizza service. 

 

The matter was referred to the Randwick Traffic Committee and initially the drop off/pick up on Darley Road was not supported with a preference of extending the drop off/pick up spaces along Market Street by an additional space. However, further discussions with the Police and RMS members of the Traffic Committee agreed that parking controls within Market Street should remain unchanged and it would be better served to amend the parking restrictions outside the pizza shop on Darley Road to a ‘P15 min, 8am-9.30am, 2pm-10pm, Seven Days’ parking restriction.

 

In regards to the additional requirements for staff parking, the submitted Statement of Environmental Effects does not specify the number of additional staff to accommodate a further 10 children. Clarification was sort from the applicant and they have advised the proposal is for 1 additional staff. The Traffic and Parking Assessment Report advises that the existing child care centre serves 19, 2-3 year old children and the proposal is for an additional 10, 3-5 year old children. In accordance with the Education and Care Services National Regulation a rate of 1 educator per 5 children between 24 months and less than 36 months old and 1 educator per 8 children older than 36 months is required. 1 compulsory early childhood teacher is also required. Therefore 6 staff is required at a rate of 3 off-street parking spaces to accommodate the demand for the child care centre. The proposal will result in a shortfall of one off-street parking space.  

 

Council’s Development Engineers and Integrated Transport Unit have assessed the application with particular attention to the submitted Traffic and Parking Assessment Report. It is advised that the report was conducted on the requirements of 7 staff and the additional traffic demand generated from the proposal can be accommodated along Market Street and Darley Road for staff.

 

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 for a first floor addition to the existing childcare centre including outdoor play deck and increase to an additional 10 children does not adequately establish a case to indicate that the proposal will protect the amenity of existing residents in terms of noise and visual privacy. In addition to this, the oversized nature of the outdoor play deck is excessive in size and contributes to an unreasonable level of visual bulk and scale to the dwelling and the existing streetscape. The proposal fails to meet the requirements of a number of controls in the Comprehensive DCP – Child Care Centres and the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2013. 

 

Refusal is recommended.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.       That Council, as the consent authority, refuses development consent under Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 603/2013 for a first floor addition to the existing childcare centre including outdoor play deck to provide for an additional 10 children at No. 87 Storey Street, Maroubra, for the following reasons:

 

·              The proposal does not satisfy the zone objectives of the R3: Medium Density Residential Zone of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the scheme is contrary to the following objectives:

 

o   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.

o   To protect the amenity of existing residents.

 

·              The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives and controls for built form, scale and character as detailed in Clause 3.1 of the Randwick Development Control Plan in that the first floor deck is excessive in size and will adversely impact the amenity with respect to the visual bulk of the building as viewed from the streetscape.

 

·              The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives and controls for rear setbacks as detailed in Clause 3.2 of the Randwick Development Control Plan in that the minimal building separation establishes a form and mass which compromises the appearance of the existing development within the streetscape.

 

·              The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives and controls for acoustic amenity and privacy as detailed in Clause 4.1 of the Randwick Development Control Plan in that the first floor deck does not provide a reasonable level of visual and acoustic privacy to the neighbouring dwellings.

 

·              The proposal is not within the public interest having regard to the submissions received with the application.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 203 Darley Road, Randwick

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP48/14

 

 

Subject:                  Report variation to Development Standard under State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP1) and Clause 4.6 - March, 2014

Folder No:                   F2008/00122

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The NSW Department of Planning (DOP) released a Planning Circular in November 2008 advising Councils to adopt additional procedures in relation to the administration of variations to development Standard. The additional measures are largely in response to the ICAC inquiry into Wollongong City Council. Those additional measures are:

 

1)     Establishment of a register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP1 and Clause 4.6;

 

2)     Requirement for all development applications where there has been a variation greater than 10% in standards under SEPP1 and Clause 4.6 to be determined by full council (rather than the general manager or nominated staff member);

 

3)     Providing a report to Council on the development applications determined where there had been a variation in standards under SEPP1 and Clause 4.6;

 

4)     Making the register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP 1 and Clause 4.6 available to the public on council’s website.

 

This report is in response to point 3) above. A table is attached to this report detailing all SEPP1s and Clause 4.6 exceptions approved in the period between 1 to 31 March, 2014  – four (4) were approved during this period, three (3) by Planning Committee meeting and one (1) by delegated authority.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Department of Planning (DOP) released a Planning Circular in 2008 advising of additional requirements Councils are required to adopt in relation to SEPP1 objections and Clause 4.6 exceptions. This report is in response to one of those requirements whereby a report is provided to Council on the development app

 

Recommendation

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Variation to Development Standard SEPP1 and Clause 4.6 - March 2014

 

 

 

 


Variation to Development Standard SEPP1 and Clause 4.6 - March 2014

Attachment 1

 

 

 

SEPP 1 AND CLAUSE 4.6 REGISTER - March 2014

Council DA reference No.

Lot No.

DP No.

Apartment/Unit No.

Street No.

Street name

Suburb/Town

Post code

Category of development

Environmental planning instru-ment

Zoning of land

Development standard to be varied

Justification of variation

Extent of variation

Concur-ring authority

Date DA determined
dd/mm/yyyy

Approved by

DA/866/2013

1

1176219 (BEING LOTS 1-2 IN SP 86913)

 

14-14A

Houston Road,

KENSINGTON

2033

7: Residential - Other

RLEP 2012

R3 Residential

Clause 4.1B  minimum allotment size = 325sqm

Consistent with the urban character of the locality and predominant subdivision pattern.

Lot 1 = 260sqm and Lot 2 = 248sqm. The variation of 65 square metres or 20% of the minimum lot size standard to Lot 1. A variation of 77square metres or 23.6% is proposed to Lot No. 2.

NSW Dept of Planning

11-Mar-14

PCM

DA/44/2014

10

1167503 (BEING LOTS 1-2 IN SP84699

 

21

Houston Road,

KENSINGTON

2033

7: Residential - Other

RLEP 2012

R3 Residential

Clause 4.1B  minimum allotment size = 325sqm

Consistent with the urban character of the locality and predominant subdivision pattern.

Lot 1 = 241sqm and Lot 2 = 270sqm. The variation of 84 square metres or 25.8% of the minimum lot size standard to Lot 1. A variation of 55 square metres or 16.9% is proposed to Lot No. 2.

NSW Dept of Planning

11-Mar-14

PCM

DA/362/2013

9

86673

5

64-66

Bream Street

COOGEE

2034

1: Residential - Alterations & additions

RLEP 1998

R3 Residential

Clause 20F - FSR =0.9:1

Maintains compatible scale with neighbouring buildings and does not adversely impact in terms of overshadowing, privacy and views.

Existing gross floor area 0.93:1, proposed FSR increased to 0.99:1 or 11.03%.

NSW Dept of Planning

11-Mar-14

PCM

DA/45/2014,

25 Sec 5

1055

 

9

Bloomfield Street,

SOUTH COOGEE

2034

3: Residential - New second occupancy

RLEP 2012

R2

Clause 4.4  - FSR - Affordable housing

Maintains compatible scale with neighbouring buildings and does not adversely impact in terms of overshadowing, privacy and views.

FSR increased by 5m2 or 8.3%

NSW Dept of Planning

12-Mar-14

Dele-gated autho-rity

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP49/14

 

 

Subject:                  Proposed Study Tour - Future Cities Program

Folder No:                   F2004/07751

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Strategic Planning     

 

Introduction

 

An invitation from the United States Studies Centre to Randwick City Council to participate in a Future Cities Program and Study Tour was reported to the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 March 2014. At the meeting, it was resolved as follows:

 

RESOLUTION: (Bowen/Roberts) that we continue with the Expression of Interest process and bring back a report, including costs and benefits, to the April Council meeting should Randwick Council be selected.

 

Issues

 

An Expression of Interest was submitted to the United States Studies Centre on 3 April 2014 containing a brief outline of the light rail project to Randwick and Kingsford. The US Studies Centre advises that all Expression of Interests from prospective cities are currently being reviewed and confirmation of acceptance will be made by 7 May 2014. If Randwick City’s submission is accepted, the program, moving forward, will be as follows:

 

Mayor’s Forum in Sydney (18 – 20 June 2014)

This is a three day intensive strategic workshop which will be led by experts in urban design and sustainable development from Australia and the United States. The focus of the workshop will be on developing and connecting strategic thinking to planning and urban design skills and approaches. Workshop activities in the three days will focus on the real issues that each city will bring for discussion and strategy formulation. It is envisaged that the Mayor, one other Councillor and relevant staff will be attending this forum. The Centre has advised that it is possible for additional Councillors to attend subject to the discretion of the Centre having regard to overall capacity of the venue and program. 

 

Study Tour (6-13 September 2014)

 

After the Mayor’s Forum in Sydney, all participants from the selected cities will embark on a seven-day study tour of the east coast of the United States of America to experience first hand the initiatives of American counterparts to tackle planning and design issues. Of relevance to Randwick City is a planned visit to New Jersey, a region which has recently completed its long term light rail project and transformed the area.

 

Cost and Benefit

 

The US Studies Centre advises that the cost will be:

 

Mayor’s Forum in Sydney (18-20 June 2014) :  $1,900 per City Council

Study Tour (6-13 September 2014)               :  $4,000 per study participant

 

In addition, the participants need to pay for the flight to the USA.

The benefits of the overall program are detailed below and are based on findings gathered at the Open Day launch of the program on 13 March 2014 as well as conversations with participants in, and organisers of, the 2013 program.

 

1.     The program provides an opportunity for participants to apply strategic thinking to the planning and urban design of the projects that each participating City brings to the Forum. In the case of the Light Rail project, it is envisaged that the Forum will provide an opportunity to raise strategic ideas and solutions to maximise the opportunities that the Light Rail project will bring to Randwick City.

 

2      The US Study Tour will provide an invaluable study and information tour of targeted areas in the US that will have meaningful relationships to specific projects raised by participating cities from Sydney. In this regard, the proposed study tour of a recently completed long term light rail project in Jersey City will be significantly beneficial for Randwick City participants.

 

3.     Provide an opportunity to gather practical information from the experiences of another city in the US on the introduction of a light rail system and how to leverage from those experiences to not only meet any potential challenges but also maximize opportunities that such a major infrastructure project presents. Gaining an insight into what worked and didn’t work along the way would be invaluable.

 

4.     A learning process where knowledge regarding a range of planning projects that will be presented by other participating cities can be gained as well as shared in a supportive and unique learning environment and experience.

 

5.     The teaching, guidance and ideas of a range of high level professionals in related urban planning and design fields including Professor Ed Blakely of the US Studies Centre in the University of Sydney.

 

A further indication of the benefits of the program can be obtained by visiting the Future Cities web-site at http://www.futurecities.org.au/blog/page/2?q=. In particular, post project interviews with last year’s participants provide good insights into the benefits of the program. 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship to the city Plan is as follows:

Outcome 1:       Leadership in sustainability

Direction 1b:      Council is a leader in the delivery of social, financial and                                        operation activities.

Direction 10a:    Council is a leader in fostering environmentally sustainable                                     practices.

 

Financial impact statement

 

As advised previously, in the report to the Council Meeting on 25 March 2014, the Department of Planning is contributing $40,000.00 towards the cost of the participating groups attending the study and information tour to the USA. The remainder of costs for accommodation, registration, flight and transport for the duration of the study and information tour needs to be covered by Council and can be allocated from the 2013/14 and 2014/15 training budget.

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

This study and information tour provides a range of benefits especially in terms of gathering invaluable information in the lead up to the light rail project that Council is embarking upon. This study and information tour will ensure Council is armed with as much information as possible to contribute to a successful introduction of light rail into our community.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Councillors advise the General Manager of their interest in attending the Future Cities Program study and information tour.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP50/14

 

 

Subject:                  Reconciliation Week 2014

Folder No:                   F2004/06272

Author:                   Sharron Smith, Community Project Officer - Aboriginal Services     

 

Introduction

 

National Reconciliation Week celebrates the relationship between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and all other Australians. Every year, the week is held between the same dates, 27 May to 3 June. This year’s Reconciliation Week theme is 'Let's Walk the Talk', focusing on turning past conversations into actions.

The purpose of this report is to seek the Council’s endorsement for an event, Sea of Hand Installation, Bare Island, La Perouse, to be held on Monday, 26 May 2014, celebrating National Reconciliation Week 2014.

Issues

 

La Perouse is home to one of the largest Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Randwick City. Many members of local Aboriginal community can trace their family ancestry back to a time before European occupation along this coast line.  Bare Island Fort, built in 1885 in anticipation of an imminent Russian invasion, today provides a dramatic backdrop to the Botany Bay National Park. 

To mark and celebrate Reconciliation Week 2014, preparation has commenced for Council to hold an event on 26 May to install a Sea of Hands on the grounds of Bare Island Fort.  The date is also known as Sorry Day.

 

This event will be delivered in partnership with the La Perouse Local Aboriginal Land Council, ANTaR, NSW National Parks & Wildlife Services.  ANTaR is an organisation that supports justice, rights, and respect for this nation’s First People.  ANTaR will provide 11,680 Sea of Hands sticks.  It is envisaged that this Reconciliation Week event will comprise of the following activities:

 

§ Installation of Sea of Hands to be launched by Australian of the Year 2014, local resident, and Sydney Swan footballer, Adam Goodes.

 

§ An invitation has also been extended to the Governor of NSW, Marie Bashir to jointly launch the event.  A response is still pending.

 

§ After the delivery of formal speeches, invited guests and local school children to be invited to plant some of the 11,680 Sea of Hands sticks into the ground.  Refreshment will be served.  A local artist, Jordan Ardler, will be commissioned to design the colours and placement of the Sea of Hands.

 

§ The installation will be in place for the duration of Reconciliation Week, from 27 May to 3 June.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2A:     A vibrant and diverse community

Direction 2f:      Our cultural diversity is appreciated and respected.

 

 

Financial Impact

 

This Reconciliation Week event estimated to cost $4,000, will be funded under the 2013/14 Community Development budget.

 

Conclusion

 

The Fort on Bare Island is an ideal site on which to make a powerful and high profile statement of reconciliation. The act of physically planting ‘Hands’ by community members, residents and visitors is in keeping with this year’s theme of ‘Let's Walk the Talk', focusing on turning past conversations into actions.  Our local resident and Australian of the Year, Adam Goodes has agreed to be the Council’s guest of honour in this high profile event, and to plant the first piece of Hand in the ground.

 

This event is also an opportunity for Council to observe Sorry Day and give participants an opportunity to share the steps towards the healing of the Stolen Generation, their families and communities.  

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council endorse the Reconciliation event to be held on 26 May 2014 at Bare Island Fort, La Perouse.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

General Manager's Report No. GM11/14

 

 

Subject:                  Continuation of Community Partnership with Randwick District Rugby Football Club & Request for Waiving of Banner Fees

Folder No:                   F2013/00155

Author:                   David Kelly, Manager Administrative Services      

 

Introduction

 

At its ordinary meeting held 28 February 2012 Council resolved:

 

“That Council establishes a ‘community partnership’ with the Randwick District Rugby Football Club and enters into a number of initiatives with the Club to assist local schools and youth and improve the general health of the Randwick Council area and that the $10,000.00 be funded from the 2011-12 Contingency Fund.”

 

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s support to continue with this most worthwhile community partnership for a third year.

 

Issues

 

Council’s Manager Administrative Services and the coach of Randwick Rugby 1st Grade, Wade Kelly have worked together to further enhance the two main components of the proposed community partnership. Both of these initiatives were a great success last year.

 

1)      Youth Engagement Initiative

 

It is with great pleasure that I advise Council that one of the disadvantaged youth who participated in last year’s initiative is now playing with the Randwick Rugby Colts side and the improvement in his whole outlook and attitude has been remarkable.

 

This year it is proposed that in order to extract as much benefit out of the youth engagement program the Rugby Club will be introducing a new initiative called 'Week with the Wicks' which will involve groups of ten youth spending a full week as a Randwick Rugby Player. The intended schedule is as follows:-

 

Monday 6.30pm – 8.30pm – Weights, ice baths, video and selection meeting;

Tuesday 6.30pm – 8.00pm - on field session;

Thursday 6.30pm – 8.00pm - on field session;

Saturday - Game Day (Home Games)

·      9.00am - Rehab Group Conditioning; and

·      10.20am - 4th Grade warm up right through to First Grade team Song and Recovery at 5.30pm.

 

2)      Participation Program

 

After the tremendous success of both events last year it is again proposed that all primary schools within the Council area be invited to participate in two separate Randwick Council Rugby 7’s tournaments (for years 3/4 and years 5/6) to be held on separate days at Latham Park. Council may also place a banner or advertise in other forms at these tournaments.

 

The Rugby Club will assist with a coaching clinic for identified schools and other groups who are participating in the event. In addition, the Club proposed free admission to Coogee Oval for participants.

 

In addition, the Rugby Club will once again provide six free tickets to all Super 15 matches for Council to hand out via the proposed youth engagement program. Last year these tickets went to the Kooloora Soldier Settlement Community Centre for their volunteers.

 

As part of the proposed sponsorship agreement, the Club will again provide Council with a signed Galloping Greens jumper for use as Council sees fit and to provide a link between our websites.

 

Request for Waiving of Banner Fees

 

As in previous years a request has been received to assist with the fees for the hire of street banners. It is considered that, as in previous years, Council should assist in the promotion of Randwick Rugby home games by waiving the hire fee to hang twelve flags on flagpoles on Arden Street, Coogee for a period of one week on five separate occasions, subject to availability, as per Council’s standard fees & charges.

 

It is also considered that Council should again contribute half the installation and removal fee for the twelve flags on Arden Street, Coogee on five separate occasions, subject to availability, as per Council’s standard fees & charges. The level assistance may increase slightly should more than five home games be allocated to Randwick this season.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:       A vibrant and diverse community.

Direction 2c:             Strong partnerships between the Council, community groups and government agencies.

 

Financial impact statement

 

It is recommended that Council make a contribution of $10,000.00 to assist with this very worthwhile partnership program and that the contribution be funded from the 2013-14 Contingency Fund.

 

The fees for the waiving of hire, installation and removal fees for the street banners will be in the vicinity of $6,000.00 and will also come from the 2013-14 Contingency Fund. These fees may increase slightly should more than five home games be allocated to Randwick this season.

 

Conclusion

 

The Randwick District Rugby Football Club’s ‘community partnership’ with Council is based on the joint objective of both organisations to assist local schools and youth (particularly disadvantaged youth) and to improve the general health and wellbeing or residents of the Randwick Council area. The partnership was a great success last year and there is no reason why it can’t be even better this year.

 

The Randwick Rugby Union Football Club would also like to hang their flags for one week prior to each of their home games to invite members of the community to attend. It is considered appropriate that Council support this initiative to encourage members of our community to get behind their local rugby team.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council:-

 

(a)    continues with the ‘community partnership’ with the Randwick District Rugby Football Club and the tremendous initiatives with the Club to assist local schools and youth and improve the general health of the Randwick Council area and that the $10,000.00 be funded from the 2013-14 Contingency Fund; and

 

(b)    waives the hire fee to hang twelve flags on flagpoles on Arden Street, Coogee for a period of one week for all home games, subject to availability, as per Council’s standard fees & charges and contribute half the installation and removal fee for these flags.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

General Manager's Report No. GM12/14

 

 

Subject:                  Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2014-15

Folder No:                   F2012/00512

Author:                   Karen Hawkett, Coordinator Integrated Planning & Reporting     

 

Introduction

 

The pinnacle of Council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting framework is the 20-year Randwick City Plan. This Plan is the overarching document underpinned by the Resourcing Strategy and a suite of medium term plans such as An Inclusive Randwick and the Recreational Needs Study.

 

The Resourcing Strategy outlines how we will meet our obligations now and in the future, taking into account our workforce, our finances and our assets. The Strategy enables the delivery of services and projects to the community in a cohesive and sustainable way, and includes:

 

·      a Long Term Financial Plan

·      an Asset Management Strategy

·      a Workforce Plan.

 

The 20-year Randwick City Plan and Resourcing Strategy were reviewed and adopted in 2012 in line with legislation and the local government electoral cycle. We undertake a major review within each four-year electoral cycle, to measure the Plan’s progress and consider the changes in the community’s priorities, demographic information, technological advances and ongoing studies, and modify the planning documents accordingly.

 

As part of the most recent review and to align with the 2012 Local Government Election, the new Delivery Program 2013-17 was prepared. The Program was developed in consultation with our community and will be implemented through four one-year Operational Plans.

 

Each Operational Plan outlines the activities for the forthcoming year and includes key budget information. This year’s Operational Plan 2014-15 is the second plan to be derived from the current Delivery Program.

 

Towards the end of 2013, and in the preparation of the Operational Plan 2014-15, Council engaged the City’s 12 precinct committees in a series of conversations about their funding priorities. The priorities identified through these and other consultation activities were incorporated into our planning and budget deliberations.

 

The Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan 2014-15 meets the requirements of s.404 and s.405 of the Local Government Act 1993 which specify the information that is to be included in a Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

 

All actions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan are further detailed in internal departmental plans, project plans, service standards and individual work plans. The Delivery Program and Operational Plan are supported by integrated planning software which includes a clear assignment of responsibility, timeframe of projects and key performance indicators for services. All actions are reported on and accountability is observed through quarterly reporting.

 

Issues

 

The Draft Operational Plan 2014-15 is aligned to The Draft Randwick City Council Budget 2014-15, which is a detailed draft estimate of income and expenditure and the draft Statement of Fees, Charges and Pricing Policy. Each of these three documents are provided under separate cover.

 

 

The first two sections of the Draft Operational Plan explain how our planning process works and how it is translated into action. The outcomes and directions from the City Plan and the actions from the Delivery Program are used to develop our one-year operational actions.

 

This is followed by the Key Activities section, which is organised according to our six themes. As in previous years, we have outlined our long and medium-term plans related to each theme to give readers a better sense of how we implement our planning and illustrate our long-term planning in action.

 

Our Themes:

 

Responsible management

A sense of community

Places for people

A prospering City

Moving around

Looking after our environment

 

The final section ‘Our Budget 2014-15’, contains all of the statutory information required in the Local Government Act, including Council’s 2014-15 Revenue Policy.

 

We include accountability for the Buildings for our Community Program in figures for all projects across the program. We have also provided figures for all projects under the proposed ongoing Sustaining our City Program.

 

Public exhibition

 

The draft Plan is required to undergo public exhibition for a period of at least 28 days.

 

We are planning to advertise this ‘exhibition period’ in the Southern Courier, as a subject of the Mayoral column, as a media release, and online, with a click through link to Council’s webpage; on priority local bus shelters as a timetable poster; through our website; e-news and social media such as the Your Say Randwick specialised consultation website www.yoursayrandwick.com.au/budget2015, the myRANDWICK smart phone app, twitter and facebook.

 

In addition the Draft Budget and Operational Plan will be featured in the second quarter newsletter and hard copies of the documents will be available at our local libraries, the Des Renford Leisure Centre and customer service desk.

 

Budget 2014-15

 

The Draft 2014-15 Budget has been compiled in accordance with the Council’s adopted Resourcing Strategy (Asset Management Plans, Workforce Strategy and Long Term Financial Plan).

 

We have adhered to the allocation of overheads to functions and activities in accordance with the NSW Office of Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting (June 2013) Note 2(a). Furthermore, we have detailed the expenses that are directly attributable to each function.

 

The following tables summarise the use of funds and the source of funds.

 

Table 1: Use of funds

 

Expenditure type

Amount ($)

Employee costs

55,787,387

Materials and contracts

32,860,034

Net capital expenditure

31,684,804

Other operating expenses

13,888,173

Total

134,220,398

 

Table 2: Source of funds

 

Revenue type

Amount ($)

Rates and annual charges

98,062,782

User fees and charges

15,291,786

Grants and contributions

9,921,609

Other revenues

8,032,652

Interest

2,583,318

Use of Council Reserves

347,506

Total

134,239,653

 

The proposed Budget for 2014-15 is balanced and sustainable, with a surplus of $19,255.

 

The major source of revenue for Randwick City Council is rates and annual charges.

 

The major areas of rates and annual charges are outlined below:

 

Rates

 

The Council’s rating policy is structured on an ‘ad valorem’ basis and all properties within Randwick City are categorised as either residential or business. For each category, a minimum rate applies.

 

In June 2013, IPART approved a Special Variation to General Income for Randwick City of 3.59 per cent, per year, for four years, aligning with the 2013-17 Delivery Program. In line with this pre-approved variation, rates will increase by 3.59 per cent in 2014-15.

 

Environmental Levy

 

In 2004-05 the Minister for Local Government approved a five-year Environment Levy calculated at 6 per cent of the Council’s overall rates income. In July 2009 the Levy was re-approved for a further five years and this special variation will expire on 30 June 2014. The levy funds a comprehensive range of environmental programs and initiatives aimed at achieving a substantial enhancement of Randwick’s environment.

 

In February 2014, following extensive community engagement about the Levy, Council lodged its application to IPART for a Special Variation to General Income. This variation will allow Council to continue the Environment Levy for another five years, again calculated at 6 per cent of Council’s overall rates income, and allow Council to continue the environment program for another five years.

 

If Council’s application for the special variation is NOT approved, the only change in 2014-15 will be the take-up of the full pre-approved general increase of 3.59 per cent.

 

Buildings for Our Community

 

In 2010, the Minister for Local Government approved a three year s.508A Special Variation to General Income to provide funding for a seven-year capital, upgrade and replacement building program - Buildings for our Community Program. 2012-13 was the final year of rates increases relating to the Buildings for our Community Program. While there has been no increase in rates in relation to this program since 2012-13, works on our community buildings have been ongoing and will continue for the next three years under this program.

 

Domestic Waste Management Charge

 

Under s.496 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council must make and levy an annual charge for providing domestic waste management services. Under s.504 of the Act, income from the charge must not exceed the reasonable cost to the Council of providing those services. The domestic waste management charge is proposed to increase from $493.02 to $510.72 for each residential occupancy in 2014-15.

 

The increased Domestic Waste Management Charge will provide for existing services, charges for tipping to landfill, the continuation of Carbon pricing, ongoing operation of the Perry Street Recycling Centre, continuation of Council’s Contaminated Site Remediation Program and Council’s commitment to Alternate Waste Technologies in an effort to increase the amount of rubbish diverted from landfill.

 

 

 

Stormwater Management Service Charge

 

The Stormwater Management Service Charge was introduced in the 2008-09 financial year to establish a sustainable funding source for providing improved stormwater management across Randwick City. The amount chargeable has been prescribed under the Local Government Act at:

·      Residential property: $25 per annum (approximately 48 cents per week)

·      Residential strata property: $12.50 per annum (approximately 24 cents per

·      week)

·      Business property: $25 per annum plus an additional $25 for each 350m or

part thereof by which the parcel of land exceeds 350m

·      Business strata property: calculated as per a Business property and apportioned by unit entitlement for business strata lot with a minimum charge of $5.

 

The Stormwater Management Service Charge has remained the same since its introduction in 2008-09 except for business strata properties which will now be subject to a minimum charge of $5 from 1 July 2015.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1: Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1a: Council has a long term vision based on sustainability.

Direction 1c: Continuous improvement in service delivery based on accountability, transparency and good governance.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The Council is in a strong financial position with a sustainable and balanced budget, sufficient unrestricted cash and available working capital, strong liquidity, sufficient cash reserves, a good debt collection ratio and continues to be debt free.

 

Conclusion

 

The Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2014-15 have been prepared as the second subset of the current Delivery Program and outline the activities of the forthcoming year.

 

Following Council’s consideration of the Draft Operational Plan, it will be placed on public exhibition over the period from 7 May to 3 June 2014, providing the community with time and information to consider the proposed activities.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

a)       the Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan 2014-15, which includes the 2014-15 Budget and associated Fees and Charges, and attachments as outlined below, be placed on public exhibition for not less than 28 days, from 7 May to 3 June, inviting submissions from the public;

b)       at the conclusion of the period of public exhibition a meeting of the Council is held to consider any submissions made concerning the Draft Plan and consider the final Operational Plan;

c)       in accordance with the NSW Office of Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting (June 2013) Note 2(b), in respect to each broad function of council, expenses that can be reliably attributed have been allocated to that function; and

d)       the General Manager be authorised to make any minor changes if required.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan 2014-15

Included under separate cover

2.

Draft Randwick City Council Budget 2014-15

Included under separate cover

3.

Draft Randwick City Council Pricing Policy and Schedule of Fees and Charges 2014-15

Included under separate cover

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

General Manager's Report No. GM13/14

 

 

Subject:                  CBD and South East Light Rail Project

Folder No:                   F2013/00263

Author:                   Sima Truuvert, Director City Planning     

 

Introduction

 

The purpose of this report is to:

 

·      Provide an update on negotiations with Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) regarding the “Development Agreement”;

·      Seek Council’s endorsement of “Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines” which presents Council’s preferred design outcomes;  and

·      Seek Council’s endorsement for the light rail support plan measures and public domain improvements associated with the introduction and operation of light rail.  

 

Background:

 

For a number of years Council has advocated for the introduction of high capacity transport such as a light rail system within the City of Randwick.

 

Council has continually expressed its support and appreciation for the light rail project.  As such, Council has worked co-operatively with TfNSW to achieve the best possible outcomes and to ensure the project is seamlessly integrated with the surrounding community.  Council has endeavoured to provide assistance and support to TfNSW to ensure that the project delivers best practice and a world class transport infrastructure to the CBD and Randwick City.  In the spirit of this cooperation Council officers will continue to work with TfNSW to resolve any outstanding issues.

 

In 2003, as a part of the preparation of the Randwick City Plan, Council commissioned a traffic study which among other things recommended a light rail system to Kensington and beyond.

 

An outcome of Randwick City Plan 2006 was to “advocate and/or plan for integrated local and regional transport improvements including high capacity transport such as light/standard rail”.

 

This position was further reaffirmed by Council in adopting both 2010 and 2012 City Plan reviews.

 

In 2010 Council entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with our major institutions (UNSW, ATC, NSW Health, TAFE and Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust as well as the City of Sydney) to cooperate in progressing the provisions of light rail transport infrastructure to Randwick City.  Subsequent to this in 2011 a joint pre-feasibility study was undertaken which noted that the study area offers strong potential for a viable light rail system (Council’s various resolutions are at Attachment 1).

 

In December 2012 the NSW Government announced the construction of a light rail system from the Sydney CBD to Randwick and Kingsford. Council in a press release dated 13 December expressed its support and noted that Council had strongly advocated for the return of light rail system to the eastern suburbs.

 

In July 2013 Council signed a MOU with TfNSW for the CBD and South East Light Rail Project with the aim of parties working cooperatively to achieve the best possible outcomes for all stakeholders, (copy of MOU is at Attachment  2).

 

 

The MOU is a non binding document.  The parties to the MOU agreed that subject to design and other aspects of the project being sufficiently defined, they will use their best endeavours to negotiate, document and execute a “Development Agreement” as soon as reasonably practical.

 

The parties made a number of commitments in the MOU including:

 

·      The Parties agree, where possible to work co-operatively to achieve the best possible outcomes for stakeholders, the Project, those affected by the Project during delivery and any private sector participants in the Project.

·      The Parties agree to work co-operatively to deliver a comprehensive approach to community relations and stakeholder communications and engagement in the RCC LGA.

·      The Parties agree that, subject to the design and other aspects of the project being sufficiently defined, they will use their best endeavours to negotiate, document and execute a Development Agreement as soon as reasonably practical.

·      TfNSW acknowledges that the following matters are of importance to RCC in connection with the Project (in part):

No overall net loss of passenger transport services in the RCC LGA at the time that the light rail service is introduced.

The concept, nature and quality of the public domain along the route of the Project in the RCC LGA including general consistency with the relevant RCC     palette, quality standards and design standards as those items exist at the time the parties enter into the Development Agreement.

The location of any light rail stabling and/or maintenance facility in the RCC LGA and the need to reduce its impact on its neighbourhood in accordance with any conditions imposed by any planning approval.

The location and design of each light rail stop in the RCC LGA.

Protection of significant trees along light rail corridors where possible.

Corridor alignment and construction which minimise adverse impacts on businesses in the RCC LGA.

Development and implementation of business continuity measures for businesses in the RCC LGA during construction of the Project.

·      RCC acknowledges that the following matters are of importance to TfNSW in connection with the Project:

The assistance of RCC in connection with the location, relocation and connection to power, services and utilities for the Project in the RCC LGA.

The permanent and temporary land requirements of the Project in the RCC LGA.

The potential adverse impact on the Project of RCC planning approvals in respect of other projects and developments.

The timely provision by RCC of information regarding the condition of land within the RCC LGA and asset information to assist the delivery of the Project.

The timely and cost effective provision by RCC of works authorisations and permits.

 

Throughout 2013 Council and its main partners, UNSW and ATC were involved in a number of technical meetings which were the basis for the preparation of the EIS.

 

At the release of the EIS a number of issues including the Randwick and Kingsford Termini remained unresolved.  Discussions with TfNSW continued towards a satisfactory resolution of the outstanding issues during the exhibition and public submission period of the EIS.  However, in late 2013 TfNSW advised that the work on an alternative Randwick Terminus would not continue and that the TfNSW’s solution would remain at High Cross Park.

 

Council’s submission to the EIS (endorsed at the Planning Committee Meeting of 3 December 2013) highlighted Council’s main points of objection and issues requiring resolution (Attachment 3).

 

The main issues raised in the Council’s EIS submission were objections to:

 

·      Location of the Randwick Terminus (Interchange) at High Cross Park with a preference for the location of the Terminus at High Street which would also provide better accessibility for the Prince of Wales Hospital.

·      Pedestrian safety at Kingsford Terminus and issues relating to the loss of parking at this location.

·      Light rail alignment along Wansey Road.

·      Loss of significant trees along Wansey and Alison Roads.

·      Loss of parking along the light rail alignment in particular within the Town Centres.

·      Stabling location for light rail vehicles and the issues of flooding, visual, noise and vibration impacts.

·      Impact on businesses and community during the construction period.

·      Traffic impact during construction and operation.

·      Visual impact and the need for reduction in visual clutter by the undergrounding of power lines and relocation of poles.

 

Economic/Employment Benefits

 

The estimated cost of the construction of CBD and South East Light Rail (CSELR) is $1.6 billion.  The cost benefit of the project over a 30 year period has identified $4 billion of benefits which equates to a benefit of $2.50 for each dollar spent.  TfNSW notes that the majority of economic benefits relate to a faster, more comfortable and more reliable journey.  In addition, TfNSW notes the following benefits:

 

·      Road users with benefits worth $264 million from decongestion, operating savings and road safety improvements.

·      Journey time savings and amenity improvements worth an estimated $333 million for pedestrians.

·      Around $707 million in public transport operational savings, including increased revenues, reduced bus operating costs and efficiencies from integrating with the existing inner west light rail.

·      Environmental and social benefits worth $308 million, including a reduction in air and noise pollution, a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and improvements in health.

·      Wider economic benefits worth $222 million, including the sustainability benefits associated with improved urban renewal opportunities.

·      Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 700,000 tonnes of CO² over 30 years.

·      Around 77 per cent of the greenhouse gas reduction is due to a decrease in car use, with around 23 per cent due to a reduction in bus use.

 

The EIS also estimates that the project will help the creation of over 10,000 direct and indirect jobs from 2014 to 2020.

 

Within the Randwick LGA the project will:

 

·      Support the growth of 4000 jobs in research, health and education in the Randwick Education and Health Specialised Centre which employs 37% of the LGA’s workforce and contributes $1 billion annually to our local economy.

·      Provide the flow on jobs in other sectors (retail, commercial and services).

·      Support the demand for 50,000 trips per day to the Education and Health Specialised Centre.

·      Provide a more reliable service (97% reliability for light rail vs 23% for buses) for our LGA’s residents who travel to and from the CBD (11,000 residents).

 

In addition the light rail will provide:

 

·      A faster, safe, accessible and comfortable service.

·      A carrying capacity of 9000 passengers per hour.

·      Each service having a capacity of 5 buses.

·      Fully integrated ticketing.

·      Possible associated public domain improvement opportunities.

 

Development Agreement:

 

In late 2013 Council was provided by TfNSW with a draft copy of the Sydney City Council Development Agreement as a basis for the Randwick City Council’s Development Agreement.  The City of Sydney signed the Development Agreement in December 2013 and provided $220 million monetary contribution towards the project. 

 

A number of technical and legal meetings were held between TfNSW and RCC in late 2013 and the first quarter of 2014 in progressing the Development Agreement.

 

The main issues that Council officers consider to be included in the Development Agreement are:

 

Light rail design and alignment

 

·      Inclusion of Council’s Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines.

·      The re-location of Randwick Terminus from High Cross Park, to High Street opposite Prince of Wales Hospital.

·      Location and capacity of the UNSW upper campus stop and platform and pedestrianisation of High Street between Wansey Road and Botany Street.

·      The configuration of the UNSW lower campus platform to provide the required capacity and safety for the community and students.

·      The location and the resultant impacts arising from the light rail stabling facility.

·      Light Rail project not to preclude RCC’s preference for the light rail extension to Maroubra Junction.

·      Provision of a table of minimum footpath widths along Anzac Parade.

·      Track form to be used adjacent to UNSW upper campus and POW Hospital.

·      Inclusion of Public Art along the light rail alignment at Council’s cost.

 

Infrastructure and services

 

·      Undergrounding of power lines along Anzac Parade in line with TfNSW’s aim of improving the public domain and providing clutter free public spaces.

·      Undergrounding of the sub-station in High Cross Park.

·      Electromagnetic field impacts on the research and treatment facilities within the Prince of Wales and UNSW campuses.

·      Installation of conduits under the light rail alignment (future proofing).

·      NBN conduits to be installed (future proofing).

·      All street lighting installed to be energy efficient LED lights.

 

Parking

 

·      Swap the construction compound site from the Rainbow Street site to Anzac Parade south of Sturt Street to provide for an additional 50 car parking spaces for the Kingsford Town Centre and Souths Juniors. (This will replace Council’s previous position of providing temporary parking south of Sturt Street.)

·      Provision of car parking on Anzac Parade where configuration allows while maintaining 2 traffic lanes at all times (mainly in Kensington).  Augmentation of parking around town centres.

·      Provisions of sale of the Rainbow Street site to Council on a reasonable commercial term for the multi-storey car park to serve the Kingsford town centre and adjoining businesses.

 

Trees and landscape

 

·      Loss of significant trees and measures for retention of trees.

·      Agreed process to assess trees for retention along alignment (Wansey Road), instead of leaving it to the discretion of the PPP.

·      Tree replacement program of up to 8 trees to every one significant tree removed.  2 year tree maintenance and establishment program.

 

Construction and operational issues

 

·      Consideration of defects and liability period and warranties.

·      Schedule of maintenance and cleaning of the light rail corridor and public domain.

·      Access to independent certifier and inspection of work sites.

·      Consultation by TfNSW on hours of work.

·      TfNSW to provide Council with data on passenger numbers, on-time running, reliability, etc.

·      No heavy maintenance works in the light rail stabling facility at 66a Doncaster Avenue.

·      Restoration of road pavements to full lane width.

·      Input into the design of the construction hoardings to be used, to make visually attractive and interesting during the construction period.

·      Construction Parking.

·      Public access to the High Cross Park memorial at all times.

·      Input into construction staging around key events.

 

Traffic and cycling

 

·      Incorporation of well designed and safe cycle paths through the Racecourse to UNSW.

·      Provision of traffic modeling by TfNSW.

·      Provision of traffic lights at Belmore Road/Arthur Street and Botany Street/Arthur Street.

 

Liaison and consultation

 

·      Provision of a business liaison officer by TfNSW for our Town Centres.

·      Development of a business continuity plan in liaison with Council and Chambers of Commerce.

·      Input into naming rights of light rail stations within the Randwick Local Government area.

·      Assistance with RMS to approve Council’s parking mitigation measures.

·      Ongoing participation in light rail working groups:  Urban domain, utilities, business, community engagement.

 

 

A significant element of the Development Agreement would be the incorporation of the Council’s Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines which is discussed later in this report.

 

In a meeting with Councillors, the Minister for Transport advised that the Randwick Terminus would not be relocated away from High Cross Park.  Further Council was advised that TfNSW would not be agreeable to the undergrounding of the power lines along Anzac Parade.

 

Anzac Parade is a significant boulevard in the Metropolitan Sydney and a highly important transport corridor for our city.  Council’s 2006 City Plan recognised the significance of Anzac Parade by envisaging its transformation into one of Sydney’s grand boulevards.

 

The inclusion of catenary poles on each side of the footpath with wires strung across Anzac Parade to provide power for the light rail interferes and creates visual clutter within the town centres.  Kensington and Kingsford Town Centres are mixed use commercial residential areas and all efforts need to be made to provide safe, useable and a visually attractive public domain.  To ensure the area could still fulfill its function as a mix used zone along this main boulevard it is imperative that the corridor is capable of supporting appropriate urban landscape including street trees.  This would require the undergrounding of wires along the corridor as the proliferation of catenary poles coupled with electricity poles and wires significantly impacts the street scape and reduces the opportunities for street trees.

 

The TfNSW as one of its key objectives identifies improvement to the overall amenity of public spaces in the CBD and south east suburbs.  Despite this TfNSW has not agreed to the undergrounding of the power lines at this stage which is in contradiction with its urban design objectives.  Further discussion will need to be undertaken to ensure that the public domain areas are clutter free and are visually enhanced.

 

Notwithstanding the above, there are many other issues that remain significant for consideration and inclusion in the Development Agreement.  Council’s Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines will be highly significant in achieving Council’s preferred outcomes for the public domain areas associated with the light rail.

 

There has been no discussion with TfNSW since 17 March 2014 with regard to the Draft Development Agreement.  Council will be kept informed of further discussions on the Development Agreement. 

 

Should no Development Agreement be signed between the TfNSW and the RCC, TfNSW will need to compulsorily acquire Council’s assets such as footpaths and parks eg (High Cross Park) to construct the alignment, stations and to undertake the required storm water drainage works.  TfNSW also will need to comply with all conditions of consent imposed on the development by NSW Planning and Infrastructure.  As noted above, Council will be provided with information on the progress of the Development Agreement.

 

 

 

Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines

 

The Randwick City Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines have been prepared to ensure the proposed light rail design within Randwick LGA is consistent with the Council’s existing adopted strategies, design and technical standards.  The Guidelines are in two volumes.  Volume 1 outlines the urban design context and overall strategy for the light rail project in Randwick City.  It includes design concepts for the light rail alignment stops and key elements along the route.  It also provides guidelines for addressing the impact of the project on Randwick City’s urban spaces and public domain.  Volume 2 contains technical specifications (Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines Volumes 1 and 2, Attachment 4).

 

The Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines detail Council’s preferred designs for:

 

·      Randwick Terminus and the creation of an Urban Plaza with provision of facilities such as lockers, cycle facilities, coffee carts, toilets and undergrounding of substation.

·      Alternative to Randwick Terminus at High Street should Private Public Partnership (PPP) operator decide to consider this option.

·      “Nine-ways” intersection configuration at the Kingsford Terminus.

·      UNSW upper campus stop noting Council’s and UNSW’s preference for the location of the stop closer to Botany Street and the creation of a pedestrian plaza between Wansey Road and Botany Street to provide for the present and projected passenger demands.

·      UNSW lower campus stop which addresses the present and future commuter demands.

·      Options for Wansey Road alignment to enable retention of significant trees.

·      Provision of public domain design and improvements along the route of the Light Rail in particular along Kensington and Kingsford Town Centres.

 

Council’s Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines are prepared in accordance with the principles of the Urban Design Protocol (UDP) for Australian Cities prepared by the Australian Federal Government, with support from all levels of government, and are well aligned with outcomes and directions of the Randwick City Plan:

 

UDP Principle

Randwick City Plan directions and outcomes

 

Excellence

 

Enhancing

 

 

Vibrant

 

 

Comfortable

 

 

 

Safe

 

 

Context

 

 

Connected

 

Walkable

 

Achieve high quality urban design.

 

Improve the environmental performance of spaces and buildings.

 

Vibrant businesses, institutions and services that provide ongoing and diverse employment and serve the community.

 

Foster distinct neighbourhoods with commercial centres that meet the needs of our community as places to live, work, shop, meet and socialise.

 

Maximise the identity, amenity and usability of neighbourhoods.

 

Centres, streets and public spaces are safe, inviting, and clean and support a recognisable image of our City.

 

Integrated and accessible transport.

 

A network of safe and convenient walking paths and cycle ways that link major and uses and recreation opportunities.

 

 

It is also noted that TfNSW, Australian Local Government Association and the City of Sydney has adopted the principles outlined in the protocol.

 

It is recommended that Council endorse the Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines.

 

Light Rail Support Plan Measures/Public Domain Improvements

 

The introduction of the light rail would bring about loss of a significant number of on-street parking spaces along the route of the light rail.  This is estimated to be approximately 700 – 750 spaces.

 

To mitigate the loss of parking Council commissioned GHD in January 2014 to undertake a parking study to assess the potential for providing angled parking on local roads adjacent to the light rail alignment (Attachment 5).

 

The study concluded that the additional parking spaces provided by introducing angle parking within the study area would be sufficient to offset the number of parking spaces lost along the proposed light rail corridor in Kensington and Randwick.  There will be a net loss of 108 spaces in Kingsford.

 

The provision of a construction compound at Rainbow Street and Anzac Parade, Kingsford has been identified.  It is also proposed that in discussion with TfNSW that the construction compound site be swapped to RCC’s land in the middle of Anzac Parade, south of Sturt Street as this will provide approximately 50 additional parking spaces for the Town Centre.

 

At the outset Council officers requested that TfNSW ensure that the light rail project is fully integrated with the community and is in keeping with the community’s needs.

 

For a number of years Council has been collecting and allocating section 94 funds for works around the UNSW, Randwick Racecourse and the Kingsford and Kensington Town Centres.  A substantial s94 contribution has been provided to Council as a result of the recent Racecourse and UNSW developments.

 

The provision of car parking at the Rainbow Street site has also been discussed with TfNSW.  This would provide a long term solution for Kingsford’s Town Centre.

 

The support plan measures to provide additional parking, public domain enhancement and additional public works such as drainage over the next 5 years are estimated to be approximately $68 million (Attachment 6).

 

The works outlined in the table in Attachment 6 provide significant improvements for our residents, businesses and visitors within the project area.  It is recommended that the Council endorse the package of mitigation measures and public domain improvements outlined in the table in Attachment 6.

 

Further reports light rail support plan measures and public domain improvement together with funding sources will be provided to the councillors.

 

Preferred Infrastructure Report and Council Submission

 

In March 2014 TfNSW provided the Council with the Preferred Infrastructure Report (PIR) for the light rail project.  The PIR has been lodged with NSW Planning and Infrastructure (formerly Department of Planning and Infrastructure) in providing response and support plan measures to the issues raised during the exhibition of the EIS.

 

Council officers made a submission to the PIR, and while noting overall support for the light rail project, we raised issues associated with the design and implementation of the proposal (Attachment 7).

 

The main issues raised are as follows:

 

·      High Cross Park Interchange:   Noting its significance as a civic space as well as expressing disappointment with the retention of High Cross Park as an interchange due to its poor relationship to the Prince of Wales Hospital and Randwick Junction town centre.

·      Upper Campus Stop:  Requesting that the stop be further moved to the east towards Botany Street and requesting the creation of a pedestrian Plaza at High Street between Wansey Road and Botany Street.

·      Alignment along Wansey Road.

·      Design and capacity of UNSW lower campus stop.

·      Randwick light rail stabling facility and issues associated with flooding and visual, noise and vibration impacts to the adjoining residents in Doncaster Avenue.

·      Undergrounding of substations.

·      Undergrounding of power lines along Anzac Parade.

·      Retention of significant trees.

·      Parking mitigation measures along the corridor particularly Kensington and Kingsford Town Centres.

 

Future Action:

 

In recent discussions Council’s officers sought assistance from:

 

·      TfNSW to arrange a meeting with RMS, Council & UNSW to discuss the pedestrianisation of High Street.

·      TfNSW & Council’s arborist undertake a joint inspection of trees along the Wansey Road alignment to ascertain which trees may or potentially could be retained.  Further development of a form of words that we could include in the Development Agreement regarding the process for determining which trees could be retained when the PPP was engaged.

·      An indication of the possible number of car spaces along Anzac Parade that may be able to be used for on-street parking.

·      TfNSW position on the swapping of the construction compound in Kingsford from Rainbow Street to Anzac Parade.  As discussed this could potentially provide an additional 50 car spaces for the Kingsford Town Centre and South Juniors.

·      TfNSW’s feedback on Council’s Urban Design Guidelines.

·      TfNSW position on the items proposed by Council to include in the Development Agreement.

 

Discussions on these issues are continuing in parallel with the Development Agreement.  TfNSW recently advised Council that a joint arborist inspection of the trees in Wansey Road will be arranged shortly.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  4.   Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Outcome:  6.   A liveable city.

Direction:  6a. Our public infrastructure and assets are planned, managed and                        funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of                service.

 

Outcome:  8.    A strong local economy.

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

 

Outcome:  9.   Integrated and accessible transport

Direction:  9c.  Advocate and/or plan for integrated local and regional transport                      improvements, including high capacity transport such as                            light/standard rail.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The financial impact for the proposed mitigation measures/public domain improvements over the next 5 years will be approximately $68 million.  The funding will need to be made available through Council s94 contributions budget, future capital works projects and in accordance with the Council’s long term financial plan and property strategy.

 

Conclusion

 

Randwick City Council has continued to work collaboratively with TfNSW in the development of the light rail project in line with the Council’s City Plan.  The project has significant economic and social benefits for residents, businesses and visitors to Randwick. 

 

Of a paramount importance to Council is how the light rail will fit with our urban environment and serve our community and businesses as such the Council in the development of the Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines has aimed to ensure that the project will:

 

·      Be consistent with existing adopted Council plans, strategies, codes and standards.

·      Seamlessly integrate with the surrounding community

·      Achieve a high quality design

·      Enhance public spaces and streetscapes

·      Integrate with the surrounds, and be safe and accessible.

 

The light rail support plan measures are developed to integrate with the light rail project as  a whole within our city to minimise the impact and enhance the public domain along the corridor.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council:

 

1.  Note the discussions with TfNSW to date and the list of potential issues which would be incorporated in a Development Agreement.

2.  Endorse the Randwick City Council Light Rail Urban Design Guidelines which presents Council’s preferred design outcomes for the light rail corridor, stops and interchanges and authorize Director City Planning to make minor typographical, formatting and graphic corrections.

3.  Endorse the allocation of $68 million for the light rail support plan measures and public domain improvements over the next 5 years with the introduction and the operation of the light rail and request the General Manager to provide to Council reports detailing the proposed works and source of funding.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Council Resolutions Relating to the Light Rail Proposal

Included under separate cover

2.

Memorandum of Understanding between Transport for NSW and Randwick City Council for the CBD and South East Light Rail Project

Included under separate cover

3.

Randwick City Council's Submission on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the CBD & South East Light Rail Project

Included under separate cover

4.

Randwick City Council Light Rail Urban Design guidelines

Included under separate cover

5.

Proposed Eastern Suburbs Light Rail Project - On - Street Parking Appraisal (Report Prepared by GHD for Randwick City Council)

Included under separate cover

6.

Randwick City Council Estimated Capital Costs for works associated with the Light Rail Project

Included under separate cover

7.

Randwick City Council's Submission on the CSELR Submissions Report & Preferred Infrastructure Report

Included under separate cover

 

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS5/14

 

 

Subject:                  Upcoming Buildings for our Community project - Coogee Senior Citizens Centre

Folder No:                   PROJ/10665/2013

Author:                   Sarah  Harmston, Buildings for our Community Project Officer     

 

Introduction

 

Works to Coogee Senior Citizens’ Centre are planned under Year 4 (2013-14) of Randwick City Council’s Buildings for our Community program.

 

The hall is in need of a significant upgrade to meet current building standards, including the provision of an accessible bathroom and compliant entry ramp.

 

Although slated for demolition under Buildings for our Community, the building has been found to be structurally adequate and in keeping with the Coogee Oval precinct.  The scale of the existing Brook Street frontage is low, and the alterations maintain the overall height of the existing parapet wall so as to minimize the impact of the work on neighbouring properties.

 

Issues

 

Site Location

The Coogee Senior Citizens’ Centre, also known as the East Ward Senior Citizens’ Club, is located at 97R Brook Street Coogee.  The site is part of the Coogee Oval precinct, and is flanked by Coogee Oval to its east, the Oval access driveway to the south and parkland to the north.  Coogee Oval playground is nearby the site on the corner of Brook and Dolphin Streets.

 

The site on which the Coogee Senior Citizens Centre is located was declared to be for the purpose of Senior Citizens by notification on 20 May 1960 (NSW Government Gazette 60).  The site remains dedicated to that purpose and the naming of the centre reflects this fact.

 

The existing building is of face brickwork with a lightweight steel roof and was constructed in 1958.

 

Stakeholder / user groups

Data from 2013 regarding community facility occupancy rates shows that Coogee Senior Citizens Centre was hired out for 26% of its available hiring hours.  This compares favourably with the lowest occupancy rate of 10% (Totem Hall, South Coogee), but is around half of the 53% occupancy enjoyed by Burnie Park Hall, Clovelly.  Burnie Park Hall is particularly popular with children’s groups and parties due to its landscaped setting and associated playground.

 

The Coogee facility is currently regularly used by the following user groups:

-   Coogee Eastward Senior Citizens

-   Coogee Precinct Committee

-   ALP Coogee

-   Randwick Botany Greens

-   Coogee Living Sober (Alcoholics Anonymous)

-   Narcotics Anonymous

-   Jazzercise

-   Balance, Health and Wellbeing

-   Marissa Nolan Yoga + Meditation

-   Capoeira Aruanda

-   Einsteinz Music

 

Although the Centre is maintained by Council to a condition acceptable for hire, upgrade works to the building will allow the facility to be brought up to current legislative and accessibility standards.  This will include a compliant ramped entry way to the building, as well as the inclusion of an accessible toilet facility.

 

A strengthening of connection between the building and its surrounding open space is an important design outcome.  It is envisaged that the Centre will become more popular for children’s parties and the like if a strong relationship with the surrounding open spaces and nearby playground can be established.

 

Council Officers presented this proposal to the Coogee Precinct Committee.  They are happy with the proposal subject to the provision of audio-visual equipment.

 

Flood mitigation

The Coogee Senior Citizens Centre is located in an area which is subject to flooding.

The Randwick City Council Development Control Plan allows for a once only addition at the existing lowest habitable floor level of a commercial property after a flood study has been prepared, providing that the addition is limited to a maximum of 10% of the existing gross floor area.  (DCP clause B8 5.3,i,b). As only 3sqm of additional floor area is proposed, there is no requirement under the DCP to raise the floor level of the Coogee Senior Citizens Centre from its current existing level of RL 6.47.  The proposed renovation of the property does, however, offer the opportunity to mitigate the flood risk to the building through addressing this issue.

 

Modelling data from Coogee Bay Flood Study in April 2013 shows that the level of the 100 year flood reaches RL 7.03 at the northwest corner of the building, its highest point adjacent to the building before draining to the oval behind.  In order to mitigate the impact of flooding on the facility, it is proposed to raise the floor level to RL 7.10, a height of 70mm above the modeled 100 year flood height.  The existing perimeter cavity will be maintained around the east and north base of the building to provide added protection to the walls (refer attached photos).

 

As Coogee Oval acts as a detention basin, the northeast corner of the building is the first to be affected if flood levels rise on the oval adjacent to the building.  The height of the modeled 100 year flood level on this corner is at RL 6.95, with the new RL 7.10 floor level offering a freeboard to this detention basin of 150mm.

 

A planter box will be integrated to the SW corner of the building and the entry stairs and ramp located to its NW corner will offer protection from the impact of flood waters on the building from Brook Street. 

 

A flood report and assessment of the design will be included in the development application for the upgrade works. 

 

Retention of the existing building

The description of the project under RCC’s Buildings for our Community program (2013-14) is as follows:

Demolish and rebuild a single level building with an expansion of 2 metres to the northern side to accommodate the Council’s operational needs with shared usage by police when required and facilities to meet the requirements of existing and new users such as precinct committee, seniors, preschool, play groups and similar non alcohol related community activities.

 

The project has been allocated $980,052, being $355,052 from the Buildings for our Community levy and a further $625,000 from Section 94 contributions, with additional funding of $275,000 allocated in the 2014-15 draft capital works budget.

 

The existing building is no longer in the state of disrepair that was evident at the time of writing the Coogee Oval Draft Plan of Management in April 1998.  The cracking in the walls is not overly severe, and – based on current structural engineering advice – is not enough to warrant demolition of the building.

 

The existing building has stood on the site since 1958 and sits comfortably within the Coogee Oval precinct, with its face brickwork echoing the nearby grandstand.  The low scale of its Brook Street frontage can be maintained through reuse of the building, and impact on the neighbouring properties can be limited through maintaining the height of the building to its existing parapet wall.

 

The footprint of the building cannot be substantially increased without impact on either the adjacent reserve or on Coogee Oval, with resultant loss of community space.  A new building on the site would also cost substantially more than the reuse of the existing structure, and taking an adaptive reuse approach is a more sustainable outcome for our City.

 

For these reasons the proposal utilises the existing building rather than demolishing and rebuilding the structure as described under the BFOC program.

 

Design Approach

The floor level of the existing building will be raised by 630mm to address the concerns of flooding on the site.  Two new external paved terraces will connect the interior of the building to the adjacent landscaping and offer maximum flexibility of use for a variety of community stakeholders.

 

The first terrace will be located to the north of the building, facing the park reserve, with the ground level mounded up adjacent to the entry ramp to meet the new floor height.  Large doors in the north façade may be opened out to the adjacent landscaped space, providing a visual and physical connection with its setting.

 

A second terrace will be established to the east of the building, opening up a new connection with Coogee Oval. The cavity created by the raised floor area will be used to house rainwater collection tanks for use in irrigating the adjacent landscaping and potentially for toilet flushing. 

 

The entry ramp required under current accessibility standards will be integrated with new planting and landscaping to the reserve, and will form the edge for the mounded landscape treatment behind.  To accommodate the ramp requires the removal of one healthy semi mature Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia), as root pruning may render this tree unstable.  There are a number of other established public tree assets to the north and north-east of this tree, which will mitigate its loss to some degree.

 

To accommodate the raised floor level inside, the roof of the building will be remodeled to allow adequate height to the hall.  The new roof will offer weather protection for the hall users through overhangs to the north and east frontages.

 

The overall height of the building will be maintained by adhering to the existing parapet height.  The lower Brook Street frontage will house the service areas including new kitchen, storage, new bathrooms and an accessible toilet facility. 

 

Additional glazing, including clerestory louvers, will increase natural light levels in the building and provide sufficient cross ventilation to allow the existing air conditioning to be removed.

 

Randwick City Council’s Buildings for our Community team will be making contact with the community groups that currently use the building, and with the sporting groups that use the oval adjacent regarding the proposal.  This will be done prior to lodging the development application.

 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:       A Liveable City.

Direction 6a:      Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

 

 

Financial impact statement

 

A cost estimate has been prepared for the proposal, with the overall project cost (including consultants, building, contingency and authorities fees) being in the order of $1,255,052.

 

The funding source is outlined in the following table:

 

Building levy

$   355,052

Section 94 contributions

$   625,000

Draft 2104-15 Capital works budget

$   275,000

Total

$1,255,052

 

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed upgrade to the Coogee Senior Citizens Centre will provide a new lease of life for the building well into the future.  Its raised floor level will serve to connect the building with the external spaces to its north and east, whilst also providing a measure of protection for flood events.  The additional glazing will open the building out to the landscape, and provide natural light and ventilation to the interiors. 

 

Retention of the existing brick base allows the building to sit comfortably within the context of the Coogee Oval precinct. Maintaining the existing heights of the building parapet and Brook Street frontage minimizes the impact of the upgrade on neighbouring properties.

 

In keeping with Council’s previous resolution in the adopted Buildings for our Community program, the building footprint has not been expanded.  However a new pedestrian ramp for equal access to the premises has been included to comply with Australian Standard AS 1428.1-2009 Design for Access and Mobility.

 

The proposal is a suitable approach to a valuable Council asset, being a sensitive reconfiguration of the existing structure. The upgrade will significantly increase the amenity of the building for a wide range of existing and future community users.

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council adopts the concept proposal and proceeds to development application submission for the Coogee Senior Citizens Centre upgrade.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Perspective

 

2.View

Arch Drawings

 

3.View

Site Photos

 

4.View

100 Year Flood Heights

 

 

 

 


Perspective

Attachment 1

 

 


Arch Drawings

Attachment 2

 

 








Site Photos

Attachment 3

 

 



100 Year Flood Heights

Attachment 4

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director City Services Report No. CS6/14

 

 

Subject:                  Environmental Management - Coogee Beach

Folder No:                   F2004/06464

Author:                   Jorde Frangoples, Director City Services     

 

Introduction

 

Council at its ordinary meeting of 25 February 2014 resolved:

 

RESOLUTION: (Garcia/Andrews) that, in light of recent reported polluting of Coogee beach via the storm water drain at the northern end of the beach, Council:

a)     examine ways to increase public awareness among residents about:

 

(i)     the route of the stormwater pipe which drains at the northern end of

        Coogee beach;

(ii)    the impact of the dumping of pollutants into our stormwater drains; and

(iii)   who residents can contact to report incidents of pollution;

 

b)     investigate the possible standstone repair of the sandstone wall along the storm       water drain at the northern end of Coogee beach; and

c)     investigate long term alternatives for the amelioration of water pollution from the Coogee beach storm water drain at the northern end of the beach.”

 

Issues

 

Catchment Details

 

The area of the catchment draining to the main stormwater outlet at the northern end of Coogee Beach is approximately 210 ha.  The catchment is bounded by Avoca Street to the west, Dudley Street, Carr Street and Coogee Bay Road on the southern boundary and to the north by Frenchmans Road up to Fern Street and Brook Street.  The catchment area includes the majority of the promenade area just west of the beach itself.

 

Its land use within the catchment is mainly residential with scattered commercial areas, the largest being along Coogee Bay Road at the lower end of the catchment.  There is a predominance of medium to high density developments in the residential areas and limited open space.  The catchment is estimated to have an overall impervious percentage of 62%.  The soils consist predominantly of sandy soil with some rock outcrops and clay in higher sloping areas.

 

The majority of the catchment is sloping steeply with grades ranging from 2% to 12%.  The land along Dolphin Street and surrounding Coogee Oval is more gently sloping and forms a central overland flow path for runoff from the catchment.  Council records indicate that frequent flooding occurs at Coogee Oval and low lying areas along Dolphin Street between Brook Street and Carrington Road.

 

The underground drainage network consists of many pipes and pits that collect water throughout the catchment and direct the water to the main stormwater outlet at Coogee Beach.  This stormwater outlet is a box culvert (3.35m x 1.83m) which discharges directly onto the northern side of Coogee Beach.

Stormwater and Beach Water Quality

 

Coogee Beach is regularly monitored by Beachwatch and measured against beach suitability criteria. Coogee Beach together with Clovelly Beach, South Maroubra Beach, Malabar Beach and Little Bay Beach has a Beach Suitability Grade of “Good”.  Maroubra Beach has a grade of “Very Good”.

 

A “Good” rating indicates that the microbial water quality is suitable for swimming for most of the time but the water may be susceptible to pollution, with several potential sources of contamination, including stormwater.

 

The NSW Government Office of Environment and Heritage states on its website that

water quality monitoring shows that water quality is safe for swimming at most of Sydney's beaches, virtually all of the time. However after heavy rain, pollution from stormwater and sewage overflows can make ocean beaches unsuitable for swimming for 24 hours.

 

Stormwater can be polluted because of characteristics of catchments including human behavior and animal habitat. When it rains, pollutants including litter, animal droppings, cigarette butts, leaf litter, chemical pollutants (detergents, oil or fertilisers) and silt are diverted into the stormwater drains.  Other sources of pollutants may include illegal sewer connections and illegal disposal of chemicals.

 

Further, sewage can enter the stormwater system when sewers become blocked because of tree roots or during wet weather when the sewerage system may overflow.

 

The Coogee Stormwater drainage line has 2 gross pollutant traps (GPTs) located in Goldstein Reserve that capture litter and larger foreign objects washed into the stormwater system. These GPTs generally prevent gross pollutants from washing onto the beach.

 

Unlike sewage, stormwater is generally not treated in urban areas.  The flows from a major outlet in an urban environment are too high to chemically treat the stormwater and therefore, not feasible. For example, during a rain event that may occur on average once a year, the Coogee stormwater outlet will discharge approximately 18,000 litres per second in a storm of 5 minute duration and 30,000 litres per second for a storm with a 1 hour duration. 

 

Further, the option to naturally treat the stormwater by passing it through a wetland is not possible in urban environments because of the high flows and the large area of land required for a wetland.  For this catchment, the area of the wetland would need to be at least 10% of the total catchment area.  Whilst the area is still not sufficient, the only viable land where several drainage lines converge is Coogee Oval.  This land would not provide the effectiveness to warrant further investigation of this option.

 

On this basis, it is generally not feasible and on most occasions, not possible to appropriately treat stormwater for biological and microbial pollutants in urban environments.

 

Managing Pollution

 

Randwick Council currently undertakes regular street sweeping to capture leaves and general litter prior to entering the stop water system.  Throughout the catchment,  we have silt pits in key locations to capture silt and prevent silt discharging at the beach.  We also have silt pits and GPTs at the end of the drainage line to capture gross pollutants.

 

Investigation of further Water Quality Improvements

 

In order to manage risks for swimmers associated with potential pollution from the stormwater drain, several options to further improve the stormwater quality have been considered to assess long term alternatives.  These options include:

 

·      Development of an education program

·      Diversion of the outlet from the beach

·      Limit access to the stormwater drain on the beach

 

An education program

 

It is recognised that the most cost effective way to reduce pollution of stormwater and our waterways is through education and preventing pollution from entering the stormwater system.  The Department of Environment and Heritage has several initiatives available to educate school students and the general public.  These are ongoing initiatives that include the 1997 Urban Stormwater Program that brought us “The Drain Is Just For Rain” campaign.

 

To support these education programs, Council can prepare a local communication and educational plan that may include:

 

·      Notices in local papers

·      Notices/information in the community newsletter

·      Posters in bus shelters

 

Our current education activities are included in Attachment 1.

 

Diversion of the stormwater outlet from the beach

 

The stormwater drain that discharges onto Coogee Beach collects water from trunk drainage lines along Dolphin Street and Arden Street (north and south of Dolphin Street) at a junction under Goldstein Reserve. These drainage lines converge at this location because of the topography of the land.  These characteristics limit the options to divert the outlet.  One option we have investigated is to extend the drainage line under Dunningham Reserve to Dolphin Point.  This option is shown in Attachment 2.

 

The option would require construction of a tunnel through rock for approximately 117m. Without greater detail, it is anticipated that the cost for such work is about $6-$10 million.

 

To explore this option we prepared a long section of the potential pipeline extension. We set the level of the outlet above the mean high water mark and used a design minimum gradient of 1%.  We subsequently plotted the box culvert towards the existing pipeline. We selected a minimum grade of 1% to avoid silt and litter build up in the culvert as well as constructability.  This design indicates that the new culvert would be 1.3m above the invert of the existing outlet, at that point and would run above the existing beach surface level if extended back to Arden Street.  Further, we were unable to match the invert levels of the new line and the existing line prior to the major junction underneath Goldstein Reserve.

 

Even if the levels permitted, a study of the currents and tidal movement to ensure that pollutants did not wash around into Giles Baths, a popular swimming spot.

 

Other considerations for this option were to construct the outlet below water level. Without pumping assistance, this is likely to have an effect on the extent of flooding further upstream as the capacity will be greatly compromised.  Pumping is not considered feasible due the large volumes of water required to be pumped and the high costs to build a dedicated pumping station.

Overall, the initial assessment of this option indicates that it is not worth pursuing. Therefore, we have not estimated the cost in detail or assessed the option for feasibility.  

 

Limit access to the stormwater drain on the beach

 

Currently, the drain outlet is in the middle of the beach.  Subsequently, there can be a small paddle pool at the outlet and low flow creek that forms along the beach to the ocean.  Randwick Council has erected signs advising beach goers not to swim or play in this water because of possible contamination.

 

An option considered to prevent direct contact with the stormwater involves restricting access to the stormwater pool and creek by extending the length of the sandstone wall to the ocean.  It may also be necessary to increase the height of the wall or install a rail above the wall to further restrict access.  The estimated cost for this work is approximately $200,000.  However, this option restricts access to a section of the beach.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 10:      A Healthy Environment.

Direction 10b:    Environmental risks and impacts are strategically managed.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The cost of the communication and educational plan can be absorbed into existing programs.  There is no other expenditure proposed at this stage.

 

Conclusion

 

Coogee Beach has been receiving a Beach Suitability Grade of "Good" from Beachwatch.  This indicates that the beach is suitable for swimming most of the time.  Due to the stormwater outlet onto the northern part of the beach, Beachwatch advises that people should not swim for a period of 24 hours after rain.

 

Options have been considered to address the potential pollution entering the beach from the stormwater drain by considering community education that will result in less pollutants entering the drains, diverting the outlet away from the beach and restricting physical access to stormwater.

 

Unfortunately, the options to divert or change the location of the outlet are not possible due to physical and design constraints.

 

The easiest option to implement relates to changing of people’s behaviour.  This includes increasing public awareness about their actions and how they directly impact on the water quality at Coogee Beach.

 

There is also an opportunity in the mid to long term to extend the existing wall along the beach to restrict access to the stormwater before it enters the ocean.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That

1.       this report is received and noted.

2.       a communication plan be developed to expand the community’s knowledge of local stormwater pollution issues and its impacts on coastal waterways.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Current education activities

 

2.View

Option to extend outlet to Dolphin Point

 

3.View

Summary of beach watch results

 

 

 

 


Current education activities

Attachment 1

 

 



Option to extend outlet to Dolphin Point

Attachment 2

 

 


Summary of beach watch results

Attachment 3

 

 




 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF21/14

 

 

Subject:                  Review of Outdoor Dining Valuation Process

Folder No:                   F2011/07593

Author:                   Sharon Plunkett, Property Coordinator     

 

Introduction

 

Further to the Review of Outdoor Dining Valuation Process report tabled at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 25 February 2014, Council resolved:

 

“(Stevenson/Roberts) “that this matter be deferred to the next Council meeting for further consideration by councilors, in consultation with affected business owners, in particular taking into account seasonal variations in our beachside areas.”

 

Issues

 

Seasonal Variations

An independent outdoor dining valuation was undertaken by Preston Rowe Paterson. As part of this valuation, the standard market rental rate was discounted for outdoor dining rates by 50% based on consideration of contributing factors including:

 

·      The outdoor dining/footpath trading area is affected by inclement weather;

·      Outdoor dining is seasonal;

·      The outdoor dining/footpath trading area does not have facilities/amenities; and

·      The outdoor dining/footpath trading area is not secure and therefore tables and chairs must be set up and put away each day.

 

Community Consultation

Contact was made with all affected business owners through all the Chambers of Commerce. All chambers were made aware of the proposed changes throughout the Randwick City area. Formal responses were received from a number of affected businesses in support of the valuation approach.

 

Many positive formal responses were received and included:

 

Gary Melick, Café Positano “This letter is in response and support of the proposed new Footpath Dining fees for café/restaurants under Randwick Council…”

 

Andy Lim, Little Green Bean “This is to confirm that I fully support the outdoor dining review.  I believe that is fairer to our area as it reflects the nature of the business in the area.”

 

Justin Ajaka CPA, Tradewinds Restaurant Maroubra “This is to confirm that we are in support of the new proposed fee structure for outdoor dining.”

 

Tim Hughes, X74 Café Restaurant Coogee “I fully support this initiative and feel it would encourage increased outdoor/footpath dining in Randwick City.”

 

Daniel Neumann, Nooks Place “I would be in favor of this which would then allow me to use the money saved on further business developments.”

 

Carlos Da Rocha, Chair Matraville Precinct “I think its great that council has taken into account that Matraville is growing and in order to grow further fees for outdoor dining need to reflect the business the area attracts…. I think the proposed council fees are fair….Well done Randwick Council for trying to be as fair as possible.”

 

Margo Stanko, Acting President of Randwick City Tourism Inc. “I am pleased to advise that we strongly support Council in adopting the proposed policy.  We believe that the changed will encourage businesses in our area.”

 

Paula Wynyard, Maroubra & Districts Chamber of Commerce “Maroubra Chamber would like to support Council in adopting the recommendations to reduce the fees.”

 

Sam Kern, Parc Café “We fully support the new proposed categories for price structuring of outdoor seating.  We believe that this system is fair.”

 

Stan Thrasy, Andrews Lawnmowers “I wish to confirm my support for the adoption of the proposed new fee structure in relation to the current outdoor/footpath dining fee structure.”

 

Justin Pagotto, Matraville Chamber of Commerce “I am comfortable with the charge you outlined. … We are supportive of the change.”

 

Mari Yasuda, Cafe Japone “I would like to support this Council initiation to adjust the fee structure as i believe it is more equitable.  I sincerely hope it does go ahead.”

 

Truong Bui, The Bay Bakehouse “I am in favour with the new fee structure. would you please kindly let the council committee know that is really appreciate by all the business at Maroubra beach if they can apply the new fee structure.”

 

Two objections were received:

Love Coogee, President, Coogee Chamber of Commerce, Love Coogee However I am disappointed to see the new map includes other areas outside Coogee Bay Road costed at the same price. Coogee Bay Road has far more traffic than other areas of Coogee. Furthermore when weather is inclement (even weekends) Coogee is very quiet. Additionally Coogee has two days per week ie weekends that are busy.”

 

A meeting was held with Maxine Hawker, Council’s Manager of Administrative Services and Director of Governance & Financial Services to discuss the transparent valuation methodology and equity process.  A copy of the valuation was provided to Ms Hawker. The independent valuation was prepared by Preston Rowe Paterson, National Property Consultants.  A copy of the valuation is available for Councillors (from Council’s Manager Administrative Services) at the Council meeting.

 

The President Spot Business Association stated that the affected businesses disagree with the independent firm that reviewed this criteria and feel that The Spot Business community is to be unfairly disadvantaged by the proposed price increases.

·    In relation to The Spot, we have our outdoor dining/ footpath affected by inclement weather.

·    In relation to outdoor dining is seasonal, this is partly true due to seasonal winter weather, and down turn in business outside of the summer/autumn/spring seasons.

·    In relation to the dining/footpath trading are is not secure and therefore tables and chairs must be set up and put away each day. This is true of each business operating at the Spot.

The businesses consulted reported that as small business owners they feel unfairly targeted as there is no beach or shopping centre to draw customers in and the day time trade is almost nonexistent, with most business being carried out in the evening toward the end of the week and weekend.

 

It was therefore put forward that the business community would support a general increase based on the normal general cost of living rate, and that the proposed rate increase by Preston Rowe Pearson is over inflated.

 

Comparison with other Councils

A review of twenty four other Sydney Local Government Councils’ outdoor dining fees reveals our proposed fees compare very favourably to our surrounding Councils' fees. Some of the other Council's fees include City of Sydney at $670.00 per square metre per annum, Waverley Council $827.00 per square metre per annum, Willoughby Council $988.00 per square metre per annum, North Sydney Council $589.00 per square metre per annum, Mosman Council $917.00 per square metre per annum and Manly Council $1,364.00 per square metre per annum. In addition, Woollahra Council requires market valuations to be paid by the proposed business upon application and an outdoor dining fee is then charged individually. The vast majority of Councils charge a processing fee or application fee and a bond.

 

A full list of comparable Councils’ outdoor dining fees is available upon request and also included in the Preston Rowe Paterson valuation report.

 

Refundable Bond

The outdoor dining bond was first implemented and adopted in the 2009/2010 Pricing Policy & Fees and Charges to bring the property management of outdoor dining tenancies in line with all other tenancies for residential, commercial, community and recreational agreements.

 

Since the implementation of the bond Council has claimed 10 bonds or partial bonds for non-payment of outdoor dining fees.  There has been a transfer or cancellation of over 70 businesses’ outdoor dining agreements in the past four years.

 

The licence agreement requires the applicant to pay a refundable security deposit.  This ensures Council is able to recoup any unpaid fees should the licensee accumulate arrears.  Prior to the implementation of the refundable security deposit, Council was forced to write off debts for unpaid licence fees for numerous outdoor dining licensees in excess of $18,000 (a period less than 6 years).  This was due to sale to third parties or closure of business without paying for incurred debts.  The security deposit encourages licensees to contact Council at the time of sale of business enabling Council to manage the licence agreements and have current and accurate data in place for the operators/licensees.  The refundable deposit is set at a rate of $1,000 or equivalent to three months rental for any business that pays more than $4,000 per annum.

 

A comparison with all other Sydney Councils identified that the requirement for a refundable bond is common (10 Councils have bonds in place) and generally equivalent to 2 or 3 month’s outdoor dining fees; $500 to $2,000+.

 

The implementation of the bond has saved Council hundreds of hours tracking down previous business owners owing outstanding fees and new owners using the outdoor dining without approval, prevented infringement notices and fines being issued to unauthorised new operators, saved Council Rangers and staff many hours monitoring unauthorised users, ensured current contact details for business owners which in turn has ensured that correct insurances are current and in place and saved Council thousands of dollars in accumulated arrears and debt recovery costs.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:       A Liveable City.

Direction 6a:      Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

 

Financial impact statement

 

A further review of the financial impact identified a reduction in the next financial year’s outdoor dining income of $10,617.14 however, with reduced rates for outdoor dining in secondary areas it is anticipated that a greater uptake of outdoor dining should result in an increased outdoor dining/display of goods income to Council in future.

 

Attached is a summary of the new rates for all outdoor dining precincts and as you can see, the overall result is positive for most of them.

 

Conclusion

 

The revaluation of outdoor dining fees for 2014/15 better reflects foot traffic in primary and secondary areas throughout the city, considers contributing factors including inclement weather, seasonal use, lack of facilities/amenities and requirement for set up and pack up of equipment and is considered to be a more equitable treatment of outdoor dining licences. The overall result is a real win for the outlying businesses not located in the major business areas, which was one of the main objectives stipulated by Council when commencing this project.

 

It is also prudent to note here that the administration process for obtaining an outdoor dining/footway licence has been streamlined upon adoption of the changes to the State Environmental Protection Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 as at 22 February 2014. It is now cheaper to apply through Council for such a licence under the new regime.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council:

 

a)     adopts the proposed outdoor dining fees as at 1 July 2014 and the Council Pricing Policy and Fees & Charges be amended to reflect the new fee structure and valuations; and

 

b)     notifies the outdoor dining licensees of the new fee structure as at 1 July 2014 and implements the fees for new and existing license agreements entered into from 1 July 2014.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Outdoor footpath dining review

 

 

 

 


Outdoor footpath dining review

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Footpath Dining Review March 2014

Precinct /Category

Current per m2 Rate for Footpath Dining

Proposed per m2 Rate for Footpath Dining

Dollar Difference per m2

Percentage Change

Moverly

$295.45

$200

-$95.45

-32%

 

 

 

 

 

Maroubra Central (Primary)

$390.91

$300

-$90.91

-23%

Maroubra Central (Secondary)

$390.91

$200

-$190.91

-49%

 

 

 

 

 

Maroubra Beach (Primary)

$390.91

$300

-$90.91

-23%

Maroubra Beach (Secondary)

$390.91

$200

-$190.91

-49%

 

 

 

 

 

Matraville (Primary)

$295.45

$250

-$45.45

-15%

Matraville (Secondary)

$295.45

$200

-$95.45

-32%

 

 

 

 

 

Malabar

$295.45

$200

-$95.45

-32%

 

 

 

 

 

Coogee (Primary)

$600.00

$650

+$50

+8%

Coogee (Secondary)

$600.00

$400

-$200

-33%

 

 

 

 

 

Randwick (Primary)

$545.45

$550

+$4.55

+1%

Randwick  (Secondary)

$545.45

$400

-$145.45

-27%

 

 

 

 

 

Clovelly

$381.82

$400

+$18.18

+5%

 

 

 

 

 

Kingsford/Kensington

$381.82

$400

+$18.18

+5%

 

 

 

 

 

The Spot (Primary)

$509.09

$600

+$90.91

+8%

The Spot (Secondary)

$509.09

$400

-$109.09

-21%

 

 

 

 

 

La Perouse (Primary)

$318.18

$400

+$81.82

+26%

La Perouse (Secondary)

$318.18

$200

-$118.18

-37%

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF22/14

 

 

Subject:                  Investment Report - March 2014

Folder No:                   F2014/06527

Author:                   Greg Byrne, Manager Financial Operations     

 

 

 

Introduction

 

The Local Government (General) Regulation requires a written report to be provided to the ordinary meeting of the Council giving details of all monies invested and a certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

Issues

 

Council is authorised by s625 of the Local Government Act to invest its surplus funds. Funds may only be invested in the form of investment notified by Order of the Minister dated 12 January 2011. The Local Government (General) Regulation prescribes the records that must be maintained in relation to Council’s investments.

                 

The table in this report titled “Investment Register –March 2014” outlines the investment portfolio held by Council as at the end of March 2014. All investments have been made in accordance with the Act, Regulations and Council's Investment Policy.

 

Investment Commentary

 

The size of the investment portfolio may vary significantly from month to month as a result of cash flows for the period. Cash outflows (expenditure) are typically relatively stable from one month to another. Cash inflows (income) are cyclical and are largely dependent on the rates instalment due dates and the timing of grant payments including receipt of the Financial Assistance Grant.

 

Expenditure during the period was incurred for capital works, payroll and miscellaneous expenses. Main income sources were rates income, grants and miscellaneous fees and charges.

 

The investment portfolio decreased by $2.268 million during March 2014. The decrease is representative of a negative cash flow for the month as expenditure exceeded income.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The graph below illustrates the movement in the investment portfolio from March 2011 to March 2014. Peaks are representative of the rates instalment periods.

 

 

 

The investment portfolio is diversified across a number of investment types and is spread across a number of financial institutions. The various investment types may include term deposits, rolling rate investments, floating rate notes and on‑call accounts.

 

The following graph indicates the allocation of investment types held at the end of March 2014.

 

The investment portfolio is regularly reviewed in order to maximise investment performance and minimise risk. Comparisons are made between existing investments with available products that are not part of Council's portfolio. Independent advice is sought on new investment opportunities.

 

The following graph shows the investment returns achieved against the UBS Bank Bill Index and the official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate for the period March 2011 to March 2014.

 

 

 

 

 

Investment performance for the financial year to date is above the industry benchmark UBS Australian Bank Bill Index with an average return after fees of 4.49% compared with the benchmark index of 2.63%.

 

The official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate at the end of March remained at 2.50%.

 

Credit Quality of Portfolio

 

The credit quality of the portfolio is of very high quality with approximately 94% of assets rated “A” or better. The 6% allocation to “BBB” reflects the short-dated term deposits with regional banks. The recent update to Council’s Investment Policy restricts allowable investments to only Prime, High Grade and Upper Medium Grade investments. This will result in all new investments having a minimum Standard & Poors long term credit rating of A-. Council will no longer invest in any products with a credit rating of BBB+ or less. Current investments held with a rating of BBB+ or less will be held to maturity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The credit quality maximums as per Council policy and the actual portfolio holdings are shown in the table below.

 

Credit Quality

Maximum

Credit Quality (Holding)

Capacity

 

 

 

 

AAA

100%

5%

95%

AA

100%

43%

57%

A

75%

46%

29%

BBB+

0%

6%

0%

 

 

 

 

 

 

The graph below shows the actual percentage of funds held by Individual Institutions V the Maximum limits allowable under Council policy as at 31 March 2014.

 

 

 

 

Ministerial Investment Order

 

In late 2007, the NSW Government commissioned a review of NSW local government investments. The review, known as the Cole Report included eight recommendations that were all adopted by the NSW Government and incorporated into the Ministerial Investment Order dated 31 July 2008. This Ministerial Investment Order included transitional arrangements that allow councils to continue to hold investments that were made in compliance with the previous Ministerial Order dated 15 July 2005. Council’s investment portfolio contains a number of investments that fall into this category including both Managed Funds and Structured Products.

 

A revised Investment Order was issued on the 12 January 2011, which replaces the Order dated 31 July 2008 and includes changes that:

 

Ÿ      remove the ability to invest in the mortgage of land;

Ÿ      remove the ability to make a deposit with the Local Government Financial Services Pty      Ltd;

Ÿ       and includes the addition of “Key Considerations” with a comment that a council’s General Manager, or any other staff, with delegated authority by a council to invest in funds on behalf of the council must do so in accordance with the council’s adopted investment policy.

 

Floating Rate Notes

 

The investment portfolio includes $13.489 million in floating rate notes (FRN).

 

The National Australia Bank FRN was purchased at a capital price of $3,006,360.00, the premium of $6,360.00 will be amortised on payments of the quarterly coupons. The amortised amount to date is $5,784.91 bringing the book value to $3,000,575.09.

 

The ING Bank FRN was purchased on 21 June 2012 at a capital price of $1,979,713.01. The discount of $20,286.99 will be amortised on payment of the quarterly coupons. The amortised amount to date is $8,165.14 bringing the book value to $1,987,878.15.

 

The balance of the FRN’s is held by Bendigo Adelaide Bank for $4,500,000.00, CBA for $2,000,000.00 and AMP Bank for $2,000,000.00.

 

The Macquarie Bank FRN matured on 13/3/2014 for $2,000,000.00

 

Covered Bonds

 

On 11 March 2014 a Covered Bond with a face value of $3,000,000.00 was purchased with NAB for a discount at $2,983,680.00. The bond is highly rated with a AAA rating and a yield of 5.07%.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1c:      Long term financial viability is achieved.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Funds are invested with the aim of achieving budgeted income in 2013-14 and outperforming the UBS Australian Bank Bill Index over a 12 month period.  The current budget provision for investment income from this source is $2,471,084.00. Investment income to 31 March 2014 amounted to $2,042,127.85.


Following is the detailed Investment Report –March 2014:

 
Conclusion

 

All investments as at 31 March 2014 have been made in accordance with Council Investment Policy. All investments meet the requirements of s625 of the Local Government Act and the Local Government (General) Regulation.

 

Changes to the economic climate and financial markets are being closely monitored. Appropriate adjustments to the investment strategy will continue to be made as required.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That the investment report for March 2014 be received and noted.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM36/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Response to announced tree removals in Argyle Crescent

Folder No:                   F2014/07809

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward      

 

 

That Council as a matter of urgency write to the Commonwealth Government noting the recently announced removal of trees from the frontage of its Argyle Crescent property and requesting both a suspension of this action and the re-opening of dialogue with Council over the possibility of the site being returned to within the boundaries of the adjacent Randwick Environment Park.

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM37/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Shurey - Due Diligence Assessment of Raising Sea Levels Risks to the Proposed Coogee Beach Amenities Block

Folder No:                   F2011/00326

Submitted by:          Councillor  Shurey, North Ward     

 

 

That, not-with-standing our current LEP provisions, Council responds to the recent release of the 5th report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change by adopting a Council policy of carefully re-assessing all Council development applications (and specifically the proposed Coogee Beach amenities block project) against any up to date findings from creditable sources on the risks of rising sea-levels to coastal infrastructure.

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM38/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Concern over Absence of Climate Change on G20 Conference Agenda in Brisbane

Folder No:                   F2008/00363

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward     

 

 

That Council, notes the release of the 5th report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change with its’ relevance to Randwick as an urban coastal community, and as a matter of priority writes to the Prime Minister urging that he accede to European Union requests by reversing his decision to remove climate change from the agenda of the upcoming G20 conference in Brisbane.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM39/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Garcia - Light Rail

Folder No:                   F2013/00263

Submitted by:          Councillor Garcia, South Ward     

 

 

That Council:

 

1.  NOTES it has attempted to work collaboratively with the NSW State Government through Transport for NSW (TfNSW) in the development of the CBD and South East Light Rail (CSELR) to ensure the project is integrated into the Randwick community;

2.  NOTES that since December 2013, TfNSW has dismissed important issues raised by Council on behalf of local residents;

3.  NOTES that poor implementation of the CSELR increases the likelihood of adverse impacts on the Randwick community;

4.  NOTES that Council has significant reservations with the current design and implementation of the CSELR including:

a.     the High Cross Interchange

b.    the proposed Randwick Stabling Facility which is proposed to be located on flood prone land

c.    undergrounding of power along Anzac parade in line with the urban design objectives of the proposal

d.    detailed design associated with the Alison Road corner Wansey Road Light Rail Stop

e.     Location and design issues associated with the High Street Light Rail stop

f.      detailed design associated with the ANZAC Parade stop adjacent to UNSW

g.     loss of trees

h.     loss of parking

i.      construction issues

j.      continuation of line to Maroubra Junction

k.      impact on public space

 

5.  NOTES there remains a large body of work that needs to be carried out during the detailed design stage of the CSELR and Council has estimated mitigation costs to RCC could be as much as $68M;

 

6.  CALLS for the Randwick community's views on the design and implementation of the CSELR;

7.  APPROVE the conduct of a public campaign that:

a.    informs residents of Council's concerns regarding the design and implementation of the CSELR

b.    calls for Council's reservations regarding the design and implementation of the CSELR to be addressed

c.    supports residents views on the design and implementation of the CSELR

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM40/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Moore - Opposition to Proposed Changes to Racial Vilification

Folder No:                   F2004/07702

Submitted by:          Councillor Moore, West Ward     

 

 

That Randwick City Council, in acknowledging Multiculturalism has special cultural status in Australia with many policies across all tiers of Government having been initiated and adopted to support differing cultures,

 

a.)      recognises the rich diversity of cultures, beliefs and principles now firmly entrenched in our City and the wider Australian community

 

b.)      understands, values and celebrates this diversity in a variety of ways not least as evidenced in its Social Plan ‘An Inclusive Randwick City’ and its Cultural Plan ‘A Cultural Randwick City’

 

c.)      registers its opposition to the Federal Government’s proposed changes to Section 18C of The Racial Discrimination Act to remove provisions that make it unlawful to "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate" someone because of their race or ethnicity,

 

write to the Attorney General expressing its opposition to the proposed changes.

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM41/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Stevenson - Cost of Light Rail to the ratepayers of Randwick

Folder No:                   F2004/08175

Submitted by:          Councillor Stevenson, Central Ward     

 

 

That given the significant cost burden and uneven distribution of the benefits of light rail to the ratepayers and residents of Randwick, that Council;

 

1.       seek a funding commitment from the NSW Government of up to $100 million to cover any major works required as a consequence of the delivery of the light rail project.

 

2.       authorise the General Manager to negotiate with the Department of Transport  a memorandum of agreement for the funding and the delivery of major works associated with the delivery and operation of light rail in the Randwick Local Government Area.

 

Background

On the 28th of February 2014 in a meeting between Councillors and the NSW Minister for Transport, the Minister indicated that Randwick Council would not need to fund any part of the Light Rail project and rejected the suggestion by the ex-Mayor that Council would need to pay $70 million in project related works.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM42/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Neilson - Concerns about public housing in the City of Randwick

Folder No:                   F2005/00576

Submitted by:          Councillor Neilson, North Ward     

 

 

That Randwick Council: 

a)  seek assurances from the state government that the government does not have plans to sell any public housing properties in the city of Randwick.

b)  does not support public housing tenants being forced out of their dwellings.  

c)  reaffirms its support of public housing and calls on the state government to develop better strategies to support affordable housing.

d)  write to the Premier, Minister for Housing and to the State Member of Coogee regarding these matters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM43/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Winter Solstice Celebration

Folder No:                   F2007/00128

Submitted by:          Councillor Roberts, East Ward     

 

 

That Council:


1.     Note that the winter solstice is the shortest day of the year, being Saturday 21       June in 2014;
2.     Note that over many thousands of years nearly all the world’s cultures have

        celebrated this day in some capacity;

3.     bring back a report on how it can promote the celebration of this historic date on behalf of the community; and
4.     the report considers a winter festival and/ or a fireworks display allowing the    community to celebrate the return of longer days.  

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM44/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Violence towards women and children

Folder No:                   F2013/00153

Submitted by:          Councillor Roberts, East Ward     

 

 

That Council:

 

1.    write to the NSW Education Minister calling for a regular oath of non-violence towards women and children to be recited by the male students of every high school in the state.

2.    write to every high school principle in the LGA inviting them to establish a regular oath of non-violence towards women and children to be recited by their male students.

3.    that regular be defined ideally as weekly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM45/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Return of "Cracker Night"

Folder No:                   F2007/00128

Submitted by:          Councillor Roberts, East Ward     

 

 

That Council:


1.     Write to the NSW Government calling on it to bring back ‘Cracker Night’.

2.     The letter should also include the provision that any such return should include appropriate regulations that would maintain public safety;

 
3.     The letter should also suggest that the date of any such return could be the

        winter solstice.

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM46/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Motion from Cr Roberts - Promotion of more not-for-profit public events/festivals in Randwick City

Folder No:                   F2008/00528

Submitted by:          Councillor Roberts, East Ward     

 

 

That:

 

1.  Council bring back a report on how the community can more easily stage festivals.

 

2.  The report should include:

  1. The option of a ‘call for expressions of interest’ from the community for the staging of a set number of events on Council controlled land.
  2. The option that Council support these events through the waving of usage fees and the like – if appropriate to the event.
  3. Options for the streamlining of the council regulatory burden for stall holders who wish to support local events.
  4. Options for the streamlining of the council regulatory burden for event organisers who wish to stage local events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     29 April 2014

 

 

Notice of Rescission Motion No. NR7/14

 

 

Subject:                  Notice of Rescission Motion from Crs Seng, Andrews & Stevenson - Update - Major Capital Works

Folder No:                   F2010/00044

Submitted by:          Councillor Seng, Central Ward; Councillor Andrews, Central Ward; Councillor Stevenson, Central Ward     

 

That the resolution passed at the Ordinary Council meeting held on Tuesday 25 March, 2014 reading as follows:

 

“RESOLUTION: (Matson/Bowen) that Council proceed with the revised 2014-15 Buildings for our Community program    as outlined in this report, including:

 

1.     Allocate funding from the 2014-15 Open Space Capital funding totaling $806,100 towards the Heffron Park Southern Clubhouse and Amenities Building;

 

2.     Allocate $923,700 from 2014-15 Open Space Capital funding, and reallocate $3,000,000 in Buildings for our Community funding from deferred 2013-14 projects and deferred 2014-15 projects towards the Coogee Beach Amenities lower promenade building;

 

3.     The deferral of upgrade works to Clovelly Seniors Centre, Malabar Junction Amenities, Yarra Bay Bicentennial Toilets, Burnie Park Hall, Snape Park Dressing Shed, Matraville Youth & Cultural Hall and Malabar Boat Rescue Boat Storage to future years; and

 

4.     Note the removal of Kensington Community Centre from the program due to it being already expedited to Year 4.

 

5.     The Mahon Pool amenities upgrade be considered in the 2015-16 budget.”

 

BE AND IS HEREBY RESCINDED.

 

If the Rescission Motion is carried, it is intended to move the following motion:

 

That condition 5 as adopted by Council be amended to read as follows;

 

“That Council proceed with the funding of the Mahon Pool Café in the 2015-16 Buildings for our Community Program.”